Rev. Art Cribbs and Official Board
San Marino United Church of Christ
San Marino, California
Dear Rev. Cribbs, et al:
We saw you on the news today in opposition to Proposition 8, apologizing on behalf of all Christians everywhere who oppose gay marriage.
We know this is nothing remarkable for the UCC, as they have long had such a stand in favor of gay marriage. It is presumptuous of you, however, to apologize on behalf of ALL Christians in the Bible-believing, Bible-following churches which the UCC is not--when it comes to social issues.
Perhaps you are under the false impression that homosexuality is genetic, an untruth that has fueled the gay agenda for years. Now the American Psychological Ass’n. has reversed itself and admitted that there is no proof to date for a gay gene.
Surely you see that it just isn’t true that any two people who love each other should be allowed to marry. E.G. we have laws against incestuous relationships, bigamy and polygamy, pedophilia and so on. There are limits to sexual intimacy. NO limit on love –but on sex? Yes. For the public good we have many laws regarding sexual union, such as outlawing prostitution, statutory rape, marriage between close relatives. Pedophiles, incestors, rapists and adulterers also feel “compelled” to “love” whomever they please; but we have outlawed and at least discouraged (in the case of adultery) some couplings for the common good. No pride parades for ALL love relationships. Homosexuality is one of those unions which we should likewise not encourage by celebration.
NO one is saying any two people can’t “love.” In fact, it would be greater love if they didn’t draw potential straights into their affliction –but they do, enticing youth when they are most vulnerable and sexually volatile. Real love is not inevitably or necessarily sexual love. Your advocacy overlooks the fact that homosexuality is unnatural and typically quite promiscuous in the beginning, causing many STD infections and much expense to sustain their lives. It deprives us of children for the future of national security, social security, welfare. The fewer children we co-create and raise to be responsible, tax-paying, procreating, faithfully married citizens, the more difficult to sustain government help for all.
We need to be teaching parents how to raise kids with normal gender identity and attractions. It can be done. The broken home has contributed to the gender identity crisis in our country --along with Oprah and others promoting transgendering and movie stars and comedians promoting gay marriage –like Wanda Sykes and Ellen DeGeneres.
Gay advocacy is a path we should abandon –and not only because God says so but for common sense, public health, and for “the common good.”
Sincerely,
"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
"Perhaps you are under the false impression that homosexuality is genetic"
What scientific proof do you have that homosexuality is NOT genetic? Medical Journals / Scholarly research only please? Otherwise you are just stating an unproven biased oppinion.
The American Psych Ass'n admits it--reluctantly because they were politically in bed with the gay agenda at their leadership levels. Too many pscyhs. even their presidents--disagreed and felt their gay inevitability promotion was political and not scientific.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=528376
the POSSIBLY genetic factors that play a role might be timidity, scholarly bent or lack thereof, frailness, body size and time of maturation, athletic prowess or lack thereof, appearance --things that affect a secure gender identity as ultra-male or ultra-female among one's peers or even within one's family could be genetic factors --but certainly not determinates.
the APA is admitting that there is no gene for homosexual orientation and that there are very likely environmental factors (e.g. teaching, experiences and exposure.)
You can't find any scholarly journals that tell you they have identified any genetic factor exclusive to homosexuals. Even if they find one that is common among homosexuals it could be for a trait like artistic/musical interests common to them --but not exclusive to them.
Dean Hamer,gay researcher at NCI, tried to say that gay uncles had gay nephews --thus a maternal genetic link -but he forgot to include the possible role modeling influence of a gay uncle on a fatherless nephew --or to factor in the possible sexual relationship of the uncle with the nephew. He was called on the carpet for problems in his research methods --details were not revealed.
This same researcher also announced his theory of a gene for religiosity a few years back. Anything to get in the news and get a research grant.
I guess a gene for religious belief would be evidence in favor of pre-destination, wouldn't it?
The APA is admitting that there is no gene for homosexual orientation and that there are very likely environmental factors (e.g. teaching, experiences and exposure.)
I should've said the APA is concluding there is no research to date verifying a gay gene--you asked for research that there is no gay gene; more correctly stated, there is no research proving there IS a gay gene.
I really believe homosexual orientation is conditioned --and not inevitable. That parenting, cultural promotion, teaching, role modeling, exposure to homosexuality, molestation, relationships with parents in all the formative years, respect for hetero parents as heteros --all are influences on gender identity and thus orientation.
granted the rare cases of genetic abnormality with the extra chromosome --but even in those cases, the person is considered male and will usually lack confusion about his maleness and not be "homosexual."
AS FAR AS I KNOW, (and how could I know? it's not something the parents or the child would talk about) I don't know anyone with ambiguous genitalia as a birth defect, though those with the extra chromosome typically have under-developed genitalia -- and these would be people with some confusion and choice in the matter, I should think. If God doesn't make your sexual assignment clear, allowing a deformity, then medical science appropriately helps with sex assignment and how one identifies sexually would be more of a choice.
That's not a factor in homosexuality or even in most transgendering.
Hey Barb, you quote psychologists? That is what many scientists consider soft science, not the actual reseachers who deal with genetic structure on the cellular and molecular level.... And if you want to discuss Christian values, what about not judging others??? Everything I have read from the Bible that is directly related to Jesus is with the message of loving each other and NOT judging lest you be judged.
I really do not understand the lack of tollerance with some people. So, you are saying that homosexuality is a mental disease? If that is the case, aren't their rights still protected under the Americans with Disabilities act? This is such a pathetic attitude, and where is the so called freedom from religion in this so-called free country.
That is what many scientists consider soft science, not the actual reseachers who deal with genetic structure on the cellular and molecular level.
Francis Collins, former head of the human genome says the same thing. Genes don't determine sexual orientation.
Everything I have read from the Bible that is directly related to Jesus is with the message of loving each other and NOT judging lest you be judged.
.
.
Jesus taught right from wrong. Jesus taught that some people and the way they behave is wrong. If that is identical with judgment, then Jesus contradicted himself. So either Jesus contradicted himself, or you are misinterpreting him. I choose to believe the latter.
If that is the case, aren't their rights still protected under the Americans with Disabilities act?
.
.
Mental diseases and disabilities are two distinct things. And neither are the basis of marriage.
Homosexuals have every right to marry --persons of the opposite sex --despite their mental affliction.
And there is evidence that many homosexuals have found happiness in heterosexual marriages --often through Christian conversion.
there just isn't any legal right to sodomy historically speaking. It's unnatural, injurious, inherently unsanitary and those who do it seem to be inherently promiscuous --at least in youth.
Barb,
I know this is off topic, but since it is several days that nobody has commented here, I thought I wouldn't be interrupting a conversation by saying something off topic.
I'm asking a serious question to you on PP. It's on the "Amnesty International appeal for Roxana" article, and it's comment n°532.
Greetings from Paris,
Valérie
Valerie, I have to run now --but will look at your question when I can.
I have been active on the Religion Clause blog lately, more than anywhere else.
Post a Comment