Are they discriminated against or are they
seeking preferential treatment?

“Equal rights for everyone; special rights for no one” (George W. Bush, Presidential Campaign, 2000).

[To find out who’s to blame for the AIDS epidemic, read Section 2.]

Section 1

Satisfy My Curiosity
I’m curious. If I were to usher in a civil rights movement in favor of voyeurs, exhibitionists, pedophiles, and those who have sex with animals (bestiality), would you support the movement? Or would you discriminate against these minority groups by denying them their civil rights? And if they solicited preferential consideration, would you cater to their demands? After all, they were “born that way,” weren’t they?

In case you missed it, I’ve just described the cry of the homosexual and lesbian communities, commonly referred to as “gays” (a misnomer, for there’s nothing gay about sexual perversions). They cry out in the ears of politicians, school boards, college presidents, mayors and other civil officials:

“We were born this way! We can’t help it! We want recognition and acceptance. We want to teach your children and legislate your laws. We want to help select your school’s curriculum. We insist on giving your children the option of choosing between homosexuality and heterosexuality; therefore, we want to present them with information about the homosexual lifestyle. We are normal. We want to sit on School Boards and help make decisions that will affect your children for generations to come.”

I say, this is the cry of the homosexual community. And America has given in to them. The homosexual movement is similar to the demands of a political dictator in that the more you give him, the more he insists on having. So I pose the question again: If voyeurs, exhibitionists, pedophiles, and those who enjoy sex with animals were to make the same cry as homosexuals, would you give in to them? And if you did not give in to them, would you then be guilty of denying them their civil rights? No, you would not. Yet, supporters of homosexuals yield to their ultimatums on the assumption, “We don’t want to deny them their civil rights.” Let’s have a clear understanding of the homosexual’s civil rights.

The homosexual’s civil rights must not extend any farther than your civil rights and my civil rights. To grant the homosexual preferential treatment to any extent and in any form is to discriminate against heterosexuals.

Is All Discrimination Wrong?
What about this “discrimination” charge from the homosexual community? Is it a legitimate charge? No, it isn’t. Not all discrimination is constitutionally wrong. When I decided to move to the Southwest, I discriminated against the Northeast. When I purchased a particular brand of automobile, I discriminated against all other car manufacturers. Did I violate their civil rights by not buying their automobiles? Absolutely not! My decision was based on choice and desire.

School Boards may decide not to hire homosexuals to teach their students. They prefer that sexual debasers not be placed in a position that might influence their students toward immorality or aberrant sexual activity, just as the same School Boards may prefer that voyeurs and exhibitionists not be placed in a position that might sway their students toward abnormal forms of sexuality. The principle works both ways. In either case, no one’s civil rights are breached, and no one is constitutionally discriminated against. School Boards and employers must be granted the freedom to choose, else their civil rights are violated.

Prisoners And Discrimination
Homosexuals live under the same constitutional rights as all other Americans. So do voyeurs and exhibitionists. But rights can be abrogated because of behavior. Does our Constitution discriminate? Yes, in the sense that it differentiates between certain kinds of behavior. It does not prejudicially differentiate. Prisoners are a prime example. Because of behavior they have surrendered many of their rights and privileges. Active alcoholics and drug addicts can be denied certain rights, such as the right to teach in our public schools, to legislate laws, to sit on the judicial bench, or to serve on the City Council. This is justifiable or lawful discrimination, the kind our country’s Constitution approves.

In the same vein, homosexuals can be denied the same rights, not because of prejudice or hatred, but because of behavior. Voyeurs and exhibitionists fall into the same class. If we by legislation make homosexuality morally and socially acceptable, by the same process of law voyeurism and exhibitionism can be made socially and morally acceptable.

The Homosexual’s Aberrant Behavior
But the homosexual responds, “Homosexual behavior is a preference, not a perversion.” Not so! Dr. Paul Cameron, Chairman, Family Research Institute (POB 2091, Washington, D.C. 20013), reports:

“Homosexuals have oral sex with almost all of their sexual contacts, and ingest semen from about half of these. Surveys indicate that about ninety percent of gays have engaged in rectal sex, and about two-thirds do it regularly. Tearing or ripping of the anal wall is very common during anal-penile sex, but some go much farther and insert fingers or hand or arm (called ‘fisting’). There are other gay sex practices equally repulsive, but this gives some idea of why they are called ‘queer.’ ”

Dr. Melvin Anchell writes:

“Never before have children and youngsters been so continuously exposed to perverted sexual activity as they are today. Worsening these seductions is a culture that regards perversion as normal and in which the rights of sexual perverts are upheld at the expense of those who are not perverted.”

Inborn Or Learned?
Are homosexual desires inborn? This is a difficult question. We might ask the same question about voyeurs, exhibitionists, pedofiles, and those who have sex with animals. It is apparent that the vast majority of perverted sexual desires are developed and cultivated by fallen man, not instilled by a righteous God who destroyed whole cities that had been taken over by homosexual perversions (Genesis, chapter 19). Homosexuality is not acceptable behavior, as the “politically correct” try to tell us. Most of it is learned behavior, and what is learned can be unlearned.

Let’s place the blame for evil desires and their results on Satan, not on our Holy God. The prophet Zechariah says it is the Lord “who forms the spirit of man within him” (12:1). If man is instilled with evil desires, such as a tendency toward homosexuality, he has an evil spirit—even before he is born. And since God forms the spirit within him, the conclusion follows that God forms an evil spirit within man. I cannot accept this premise.

Battle Between Two Forces
In reality, our opposition to homosexuality translates into a battle between the forces of morality and the forces of immorality—a struggle between the forces of good and the forces of evil. It is a matter of giving or not giving preferential treatment to, or enacting or not enacting special rights ordinances for, the homosexual community. It is not a question of unlawful discrimination, nor a question of denying them their constitutional rights. Let’s pinpoint it:

The issue is whether or not we single out a particular minority group and grant them rights that are denied to other minority groups, such as the voyeur and exhibition communities.

Let it be understood that it is because of principle, not hatred, that many of us are doing battle with the homosexual community. We deplore the perversion, not the perverter; the act, not the actor; the practice, not the practitioner.

Let’s Revisit The Homosexual Controversy
You may recall that in September, 2008, on Good Morning America, Diane Sawyer interviewed singer Clay Aiken, a homosexual. The interview prompted me to revisit this controversial issue. Aiken “came out of the closet” recently and announced to the world, “I am gay!”

During the interview, I observed that Aiken looked more feminine than masculine and had the voice of a female. His speech and gestures were “lady-like.”

It is common knowledge that homosexual behavior is often blamed on environmental causes, such as a daughter being raised without a mother or a son being brought up without a father. During their early teenage years, the daughter is likely to direct her affections toward females, as though seeking a motherly relationship, while the son directs his “tenderness” toward males and becomes sexually attached to them. In the long-run, he adopts homosexual behavior while the daughter embraces lesbianism. This truism, of course, is not applicable to all daughters without a mother or relevant to all sons without a father. But research has shown that these factors are widespread among homosexuals and lesbians.

Missing Factors
In Aiken’s case, however, environmental factors seem to be missing. Clips of his family were played during the interview, and they seemed to depict a “normal family.” There are other homosexuals like Aiken. So where do we go from here? If environmental factors were not present, and played no role in his sexual attachment to other males, and if he carries far more female genes than male genes, is he living a life of immorality by going to bed with and indulging in sexual activities with other homosexuals—even some male he might be “married to”?

Of interest is that according to various medical sources, the “female gene” argument is highly questionable and is no more valid than the “rapist gene” or the “pedophile gene” or the “gene” asociated with lying.

So, do I believe all homosexuals and lesbians are “born that way”? No more than I believe pedophiles, voyeurs, and exhibitionists, liars, and thieves are “born that way.” That a small segment of the homosexual community is born with sexual aberrations or defects, no knowledgeable person will deny. A good estimate, I think, is that 99.9 percent of homosexuals are that way because they have chosen that lifestyle.

Satan is having a heyday, just as he had a heyday in Sodom and Gomorrah before God literally destroyed both cities. No one in these cities survived the destruction except righteous Lot and his family, who fled to the mountains (Genesis 19). Do you suppose there were a few homosexuals in Sodom and Gomorrah who were “born that way” and who claimed, “I can’t help being what I am”?

Normal Behavior Or Immorality?
But let’s get back to Aiken. May his sexual outlet be of the homosexual variety without angering a righteous God, even though he may be “married” to another male? If yes, how do we reconcile such behavior with the many scriptures that condemn homosexuality, in both the old and new covenant scriptures? In the Christian community at Corinth, Paul wrote that practicing homosexual will not “inherit the [eternal] reign of God” (1 Cor. 6:9-11). He added, “And such were some of you.” In the Corinthian congregation, there were recovering alcoholics, recovering revilers, recovering liars, recovering swindlers, recovering thieves, and recovering homosexuals.

In light of all of this, how do we judge a “male” like Aiken? After all, his sexual dilemma may be a genuine case of “I can’t help being what I am.” But will the same excuse equally apply to the alcoholic, the pedophile, the voyeur, the drug addict? May Roman Catholic clerics who sexually abuse little boys rightfully claim, “I can’t help being what I am”? If one form of sexual perversion—homosexuality—can “get off the hook” by its practitioners making this claim, why not the Roman Catholic cleric? Or do we discriminate against certain forms of sexual deviations?

Many people are predisposed to certain behaviors or, better still, strongly susceptible to certain behaviors. I once had a brother-in-law—now deceased—whose biological system was so susceptible to alcohol that to even get a whiff of it sent him on a long drinking spree. True, he had no control over his susceptibility to alcohol, but he did have control over his behavior or reaction to it. Just so with the average homosexual.

Keeping Secrets
Singer Aiken’s statement to Diane Sawyer is quite intriguing and revealing. Listen to what he says: “I can’t raise a kid and teach him how to lie, teach him to hide things. I can’t raise a kid and teach him to keep secrets. And at the same time, I also don’t ever want to raise him in an environment where it’s not OK for him to be exactly who he is, no matter what.” And on that note, I’d like to ask Aiken a question or two:

Suppose your son grows up to be a pedophile? Would you then say, “I also don’t ever want to raise him in an environment where it’s not OK for him to be exactly who he is, no matter what.”

How can you raise a male kid—who was born heterosexual—in a homosexual environment and expect him not to grow up without leaning toward homosexuality? Will not his early exposure to homosexual activities influence his future behavior?

I’ll leave the questions for you to ponder. The bottom line is that God will be the final Judge. And He will judge righteously and justly—and, I might add, mercifully. In the meantime, consider this: The word “detestable” is the most negative adjective used in heaven’s testimony, the scriptures, as well as in the English language. It means to dislike intensely. Here is how God feels about homosexuality:

“If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable” (Leviticus 20:13).

Acting Upon Our Desires
One of my readers said she has been attracted to other women since before puberty, but she does not act upon the attraction. She noted that she has chosen to be married and have sex with her husband. I believe such cravings for and attractions to the same gender are developed at a young age, mostly because of environmental factors. Those attractions, however, do not have to be acted upon—as this lady has decided not to do. The urge to lie, to steal, to hate, and to commit adultery is developed, as I think all of us will agree. Why, then, is it so difficult to see that the urge to have sex with the same gender is developed and/or learned?

In closing, I want to reiterate what I touched upon earlier. That a small segment of the homosexual community is born with sexual aberrations or defects, no knowledgeable person will deny—aberrations which seem to spur their sexual thoughts in the direction of the same gender. There’s some question whether a mix-up or mixture of genes is the culprit. I don’t believe that factor has been solidly and medically established. Some medical researchers affirm it, others deny it. There is strong evidence that genes are not the cause of sexual perversions.

My heart leads me to believe, however, based upon my many years of confrontations, contacts, and dialogues with homosexuals and lesbians, that 99.9 percent of them are that way because they have chosen that lifestyle. If you know of a family member or close friend who is homosexual, ask yourself, “Is he that way because he has voluntarily adopted that lifestyle or because he was forced into it because of his biological disposition?

Section 2


As most of you probably know, the homosexual community attempts to place the blame for the AIDS epidemic upon the shoulders of the heterosexual community. Such is not the case, however. Listen up.

According to medical sources, the origin of AIDS has been traced to a French-Canadian Airline Steward by the name of Gaetan Dugas, who led an active life of sodomy. In “And The Band Played On,” it is revealed that he spent many nights at bathhouses and had at least 250 sexual encounters a year. He was active in homosexuality at least 10 years and had at least 2,500 sexual partners (page 83).

When research was completed, it was established that Dugas could be linked to 40 patients with AIDS in 10 cities. He was marked on the chart as “Patient Zero” of the GRID plague. What does GRID stand for? You might be interested in knowing that AIDS was originally called Gay Related Immuno-deficiency Disease, or GRID. Homosexual lobbyists and the liberal press managed to get it changed to AIDS, which in turn lifted some of the blame off the shoulders of homosexuals.

The report says that at least 40 of the 248 homosexual men diagnosed with GRID in the USA, as of April 12, 1982, “either had had sex with Dugas or had sex with someone who had” (page 147). “A CDA statistician...figured that the chance [of Dugas being the first carrier] did not approach zero—it was zero” (page 147). I recommend that you purchase the book, whose author is journalist Randy Shilts.

Dugas has long since died, but AIDS is raging and has now penetrated deep into the heterosexual community. Central and southern Africa are losing a big percentage of their population due to this plague. Two-thirds of the world’s known AIDS cases are found in central and southern Africa. Medical scientists are now alleging the AIDS virus can be traced to the chimpanzee. Regardless of its genesis, the truth remains that homosexuals and homosexual behavior introduced and dispersed the plague to the human population. I’m inclined to agree with a fellow author who recently researched AIDS. He said before the epidemic loses its punch of its own accord, only a few million people will be left in America. “And the band played on.”

“Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality...will inherit the [eternal] reign of God” (I Corinthians 6:9-11).

Compassion For The Homosexual
Lest I be accused of lacking compassion for those caught up in the web of perversions, let me say that I have ministered to homosexuals—and shall continue doing so, as opportunity affords. They, too, are in need of help and heaven. The man Jesus died for them, as He died for everyone else. The homosexual should note, however, that attending a homosexual church will not soften the perversion. It only delays the inevitable—God’s judgment. It will take a “turning around” and a “turning against” and an acceptance of Jesus to tread the road to recovery. Good luck, and God bless.

To connect to the third Feature on homosexuality, click on...

“Touched By An Angel”

If you’d like to receive my weekly Reformation Rumblings, or otherwise make contact, click on
the address below.