A recent conversation showed me how unprepared I was to weigh into the most hotly contested battle for truth of our time.
I’m reminded of Martin Luther’s words, “Where the battle rages, there the loyalty of the soldier is proved”
The LGBT debate is the battle of our time, and this book makes the overwhelming case – through careful and exhaustive research – that homosexuality is not only harmful to the people who engage in it but to society as a whole. Through well formulated argumentation and Biblical exegesis the author dismantles the entire idea that a Biblical loophole exists and shows how homosexuality undermines the family and ignores the complementarity of the sexes.
I finished this book with tears in my eyes because of the author’s humble, thoughtful and powerful conclusions about what is at stake and what Christians are called to do in the face of a culture that does not want to listen.
This book isn’t a light read, it is exhaustively researched and well put together. The footnotes and bibliography will dispel any notion that the author inflated or distorted the facts. He goes so far as to exclude all Christian and secondary sources for the statistics he cites and even challenges the reader to cut the figures in half and see that his points are well founded.
“…since the reigning value of modern culture is not truth but tolerance, anyone who takes a stand disapproving of another’s behavior is bound to lose the debate.”
“and here’s the rub – gradually remove the notion of a universal standard by which to evaluate behavior (the Judeo-Christian tradition), and people are left to evaluate their own behavior, which is all equally moral because it is all equally legal. The flip side of this is that it become immoral – and it could actually become illegal – to express intolerance, and the definition of intolerance could extend to any challenge to a legally protected behavior or opinion.”
“Plato predicted that democracy would crumble and pave the way to dictatorship because a foolish majority would turn liberty into license (Republic 562-65).”
“we cannot ignore or discount the physical aspect of complementarity, that the way the sexes fit together has consequences that carry implications.”
“To honor our reproductive capacity and to honor our male-female complementarity is to honor God.”
“…there is more to sexuality than what’s in it for me or what’s in it for the two of us. We must consider what’s in it for everyone.”
[Homosexual Practice] “…is unaccountable to the implications of creation for the body and for the partner; and perhaps most important, it is unaccountable to the human community. As a variant expression of sexuality, homosexual acts do not advance the good of heterosexual union, nor do they remain neutral. Instead, they undermine heterosexual union and the family.” [argument goes on to quote homosexual activists Michel Foucault and Michael Swift and their distain for the family]
“It is also unworkable: the homosexual population continues to rely on the procreative population for familial support, patterns of relationship and of course the production of more homosexuals. It is as if someone’s spleen had declared its independence, departed through an incision in the abdomen, and then periodically returned, leechlike, to draw nourishment from the same body. Are the critics spleenophobic, or is this misplaced organ living in a dream world?”
[for the homosexual] “…symmetry is an illusion, both relationally and sexually, and simulation of complementarity is a hollow substitute for the real thing.”
“…the number of homosexual men who experience anything like lifelong fidelity becomes, statistically speaking, almost meaningless. Promiscuity among homosexual men is not a mere stereotype, and it is not merely the majority experience – it is virtually the only experience.”
“…many pedophiles deny that it is a problem and demand full inclusion in the homosexual liberation movement.”
“…it is unrealistic in the extreme to expect that public relations efforts and legal requirements will rewrite the entire human literary and religious heritage, reverse majority attitudes thousands of years in the making, a nd sustain all of this for the time required to reduce the disdain for homosexual practice to a quaint memory. Human sexuality is not like the flat earth.”
“…societal repression fails to account for the radically different patterns of sexual behavior between male and female homosexuals,…”
[health considerations] “alone would constitute a compelling argument against homosexual practice. Our bodies must not be martyrs to our desires.”
“We could easily apply the “just that way” defense to a number of social problems that may involve deeply ingrained (even biological) causes – violence, substance abuse, racism, schizophrenia, pedophilia – but we do not, because we recognize that an explanation for the behavior is not a justification for the behavior.”
“The construction of the condition [homosexuality] made it possible for increasing numbers of people to identify with it, and eventually to react against its pathological status.”
“…but sexual satisfaction does not meet the underlying need. For many homosexual men the cycle of need, temporary fix through sexual gratification, and deeper frustration sets the psychological stage for obsessive and compulsive sexual behavior, most often in the form of promiscuity.”
“…many think that orientation indicates what a person is – and of course, the argument goes, we must act according to who we are. Thus, in two easy steps, it becomes not only morally justifiable but almost morally obligatory for a person with a homosexual orientation to engage in homosexual activity.”
“…the desire for sex is neither central nor necessary to anyone’s being. It should not control the person.”
“I hope that my effort [in writing this book] will stimulate others to raise the level of debate to a clash of arguments rather than personalities, to a common concern for people rather than causes.”
“…to the extent that homosexual desire involves a need to absorb maleness (or for lesbians, femaleness) from one’s partner, the inevitable frustration of that need will lead to a search for another partner, and then another. Other causes or reasons may account for promiscuity. Whatever they may be, there is reason to doubt that major changes will result from legal recognition of homosexual unions. Why should financial incentives succeed where the probability of disease and death have failed?”
“…it is only an aberration of our own sorry generation to equate the absence of sexual gratification with the absence of full personhood, the denial of being or the deprivation of joy.”
“…it is not the nuclear family that we need to promote but the hospitable family. We do not need people who love family values nearly as much as we need families who value love for people.”
“…our culture will move rapidly away from the notion of absolute truth in the next thirty years, as the last modern generation fades and the first postmodern generation gains power. People will see truth and morality as subject to the changing whims of those in power, and accusations of relativism will fail to sting because people will no longer perceive them as accusations but rather as accurate descriptions of the way truth and morality work.”
“…tolerance is valued more highly than truth. The reason for this is that the only absolute truths are those of religion, and religion is considered a private matter; therefore public morality leaves tolerance as the only virtue. There may come a time when even tolerance is recognized as an arbitrary value, paving the way for rule by the mob or the tyrant.”