It is truly saddening and sickening to read that this is what has been being done to our youth and starting at such a naive and impressionable age. Lesbian teacher: How I convince kids to accept gay ‘marriage’, starting at 4-years-old | News | LifeSite.
What that article shows is brainwashing especially by omission. What isn't discussed with those young children is most revealing. All the supposed similarities are placed front and center. The differences are boiled down to that a mom and dad are simply replaced by two men or two women. None of the other very real differences are revealed. That's intentional. It is also completely unfair to the children and dangerously and harmfully misleading.
The children are generally considered too young for thorough explanations about the sex act and its basic reason for existing. As a consequence, they are not informed about the statistics showing the problems clearly and causatively associated with deviations from the true normal intention and best situation, all other things being equal: one man and one woman, preferably as biological father and mother.
Then the article reveals a 5th grader's (10-year-old?) instinctive reaction to homosexuality subjected to brainwashed peer-pressure to conform or be held to be the problem rather than homosexuality itself knowingly remaining the problem that it most clearly is and truly will remain. No amount of obfuscation by grade-school teachers or others will alter that.
There are those who wrongfully state that only negative stigmatizations generally cause bad statistical outcomes. Arguing against such people is a never-ending process, as no matter what evidence is presented, nearly all of them duck and dodge and obfuscate while a number of the most hardcore activists lie (the article itself shows the pattern of lying to get a foot in the door and that after sufficient brainwashing, the truth is revealed once the conditioning is assumed to be irreversible enough).
We've had the "10% of the general population is homosexual" lie exposed.
We've had the all are "born that way" lie exposed.
We've had the "we aren't trying to indoctrinate children" lie exposed.
We've had the "change isn't possible" lie exposed.
We've had the "homosexual sexual-abuse doesn't cause unwanted same-sex attraction in heterosexuals" lie exposed.
They cite statistics based upon faulty methodology while they turn around and complain of weaknesses in studies showing general problems where one man and one woman are shown to be best. They do that while blocking collaborative research where the research design could be deliberately molded to avoid such weaknesses, weaknesses typically stated right in the research reports.
If you want to simply buy all the lies of the homosexualists, there's not much that can be said here to dissuade you. However, if you are the least bit interested in having your eyes opened, then stop listening solely to the one side, the homosexualists' side, and start researching the problems associated with homosexuality. Don't allow cognitive dissonance to stop you.
Homosexuality truly is confusion. It is an error. You cannot possibly look at all the research findings and honestly conclude otherwise. Frankly, if you simply apply the fundamentals, fundamentals that are obvious from the family structure resulting from the natural physical design of the human species, you can't honestly conclude otherwise.
A male's penis is not meant for or designed for another male's anus or rectum. It's not for a female's rectum either. It's as simple as that.
The hedonist will say it feels good. The hedonist is shallow. The rectum and anus are for defecating. Bowel movements are relieving. That's what's going on concerning the sensations in anal intercourse. The intelligent mind will know the difference and not be fooled and allow itself to become habituated to the negative. The intelligent, informed mind will not succumb to any temptations to "test" or "experiment" but will take the obvious as reason enough to say no.
No good comes from anal intercourse. It is a fundamental error. Everyone is better off not engaging in it. Engaging in it is fraught with risks. The more it is done, the worse it gets. The same logic applies concerning female homosexuals. The issue is what's best for children versus choosing behaviors that are not best.
If the mother dies except in the most extraordinary situation, it's not the choice of the father. Going into why parents die is a very deep subject, but suffice it to say that homosexuals choose what is less than best.
It also doesn't matter for this point that there are risky behaviors associated with heterosexual sex. The issue here is with what form of sexual behavior is what is naturally best given how we got here as a species. For instance, I'm not condoning adultery. Errors by heterosexuals don't render homosexuality a non-error.
It's sad that I have to explain such obvious logic and do so over and over and over while the mainstream pushes its opposite, engages in the brainwashing.
Have you been brainwashed by the homosexual movement? If you agree with it, you have.
Don't allow childish psychological ploys stop you from finding out the truth about the inherent evil, sin, error that is the homosexual movement. Once you learn it, don't back down no matter what.
Your soul is on the line. You'll notice that all of the above can be read without reading religion into it. However, I raised the soul. There's plenty I have written on the subject from a religious and Christian standpoint, including the who, what, where, when, and why of Jesus's anti-homosexuality. I won't restate it all here.
Ordinarily, I focus on the express words of Jesus. This time I want to leave you with something from the Old Testament. The reason I don't focus on the Old is because it is so often misunderstood.
See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand. For I lift up my hand to heaven, and say, I live for ever. If I whet my glittering sword, and mine hand take hold on judgment; I will render vengeance to mine enemies, and will reward them that hate me. I will make mine arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour flesh; and that with the blood of the slain and of the captives, from the beginning of revenges upon the enemy. (Deuteronomy 32:39-42 KJV)
It is difficult for the uneducated to read that in light of the Christian-Gospel message and to understand what it is saying with which Jesus agrees, the same Jesus who teaches to love one's enemies.
No, God is not a hypocrite. Jesus teaches to love one's enemies but also that the door will be shut. It is love that informs us of that. The message is of inescapable consequences of bad choices and behaviors not repented of in a timely manner. The homosexuals are getting their perverse pleasures while they can. It won't last. They try to pretend otherwise, but they are on the wrong side of history because they are on the wrong side, period, the wrong side of God, of Jesus, of the Holy Spirit. Don't you be.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)