If President Obama and the White House desire to be known for tolerance, they’re discrediting themselves by acquiescing to the radical agenda of militant homosexuals. Be assured that there are homosexuals who agree with this and who do everything possible to disassociate from the radical fringe group.
Joe Carter over at TheGospelCoalition exposed the ugly act of intolerance toward Pastor Giglio.
The Story: Louie Giglio, pastor of Passion City Church in Atlanta and founder of the Passion Conferences, an organization that brings college students together in prayer and worship, was selected by President Obama to deliver the benediction at his inaugural this month. He was disinvited, though, after it was discovered he had delivered a sermon about homosexuality in the mid-1990s.
Al Mohler also exposed the extremism when he wrote:
“….anyone who has ever believed that homosexuality is morally problematic in any way must now offer public repentance and evidence of having “evolved” on the question. This is the language that President Obama used of his own “evolving” position on same-sex marriage. This is what is now openly demanded of Christians today. If you want to avoid being thrown off the program, you had better learn to evolve fast, and repent in public (see: The Giglio Imbroglio — The Public Inauguration of a New Moral McCarthyism).
I just wrote about the same concern in my column for our local Sunday News (without knowing about this act of intolerance). I wrote the following:
“The notion that Christians are only or mainly interested in opposing abortion or gay marriage is a propaganda myth I’ll expose in another column. The reason I’ve been vocal in opposing the agenda to force gay marriage on the country is not because I desire to tell other consenting adults how to order their private lives. They have the freedom to live in open homosexual relations and I’ve never suggested that this freedom should be changed. My emphasis has consistently been on the intolerant methods being used to force others to affirm a lifestyle that opposes their moral convictions. And I am suggesting that the desire of liberals to be known for tolerance has been hurt by their alignment with a radical homosexual agenda.
The hateful name-calling and condescending slurs aimed at anyone who opposes gay marriage is a violation of the kind of civil and rational debate we need. This kind of divisive social manipulation should be rejected no matter the issue.
Have you noticed that even if you respectfully oppose gay marriage, you’re accused of having irrational phobias? You’re labeled a hate-monger and a bigot. You’re actually accused of discrimination as if you were opposing race or gender. I am genuinely confused as to why liberals support this kind of schoolyard bullying? Why have liberals acquiesced to a militant agenda that has given them a bad name?
It’s ironic that the intolerance and bigotry once wrongly aimed at people who chose a gay lifestyle is now shown to anyone who dares to oppose homosexual behavior.
I don’t view homosexuality as the only or primary social issue of our times. But I firmly oppose the judicial coercion and social manipulation used to promote gay marriage. I think we should all be able to agree that these methods will hurt us. I have absolutely no hate for or fear of homosexuals. Projecting hate or fear on someone for opposing the morality of homosexual behavior is the problem. Let’s at least agree on this.”
For a variety of perspectives, 8 Top Blog Posts