We must not live by lies. We must instead—if we are to rightly love our neighbors—live for and by the truth because “love rejoices with the truth.” If we fail to do these things in ourselves, our churches, and our societies, our blurring of biology will blur justice to the detriment of all.

[Christians] are part of a human history that is destined for confrontation and conflict with pagan spirituality^[1]

“Homosexuality must make its moral case . . It must show the deep spirituality of homosexual love.”^[2]

Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex, sexuality, and family, and in the process transforming the very fabric of society…^[3]

“I’m just a man who has a vagina”^[4]

Worldviews are at war. The LGBTQ advocates understand this clearly. They advance a totalistic agenda, seeking to transform “the very fabric of society.” This is no benign political preference clamoring for “equal rights”—rather, it’s a pursuit for cultural domination, if not extinction, of Christian cosmology.

Christians should understand this too. Scripture sets forth numerous metaphors describing and alerting us to this clash: light v. darkness; wheat v. chaff, sheep v. goats; sheep v. wolves; the wise v. the foolish; found v. lost; heaven v. hell; the City of God v. the City of Man.^[5] Too often, however, Christians seem dull in understanding and lethargic in responding. The LGBTQ activists in contrast work ceaselessly; so should Christians and their pastors.

The LGBTQ activists are currently deploying Gender Ideology to advance their conquest. In doing so, the LGBTQ agenda attacks the Word of God. It does this often by using “words”—words undermining the Word. The abuse of language changes culture, because it creates the context for abusing power.^[6] How so? Let’s get to the gist.

Language as a Political Tool

Consider a common term deployed today: “sexual orientation.” Understand that this is not a biological term, but a political one, aimed at changing how we think about sexual behavior. The idea is that being a homosexual is “hard-wired,” and immutable, a matter of one’s being and fundamental identity.^[7] The Left’s cultural army deployed this term for legal and political purposes, not because it reflects reality. It doesn’t. Here’s their political purpose: They are seeking to analogize their sexual behaviors as being in the same category as the status of being black, Asian, or female. They did this hoping to garner legal protection for this new “suspect class.”^[8] This commits a category mistake: equating chosen behavior, that is, sexual conduct, with an unchosen inherent characteristic, ethnicity.

The Faux Legal Angle

They nevertheless pressed this notion in law and pop culture contending that just as one cannot wrongly discriminate against blacks, one should not be able to wrongly discriminate against homosexual behavior. Because people of good will are rightly repelled by racist ideations, they often swallow this analogy and retreat from opposing—or even support—the LGBTQ agenda as a matter of “fairness” or “fundamental justice.” This analogy, however, withers under informed scrutiny. Don’t be duped by this attractive, but poisonous tactic. Instead, think Christianly.

First, let’s pose a fundamental question: Is being a homosexual truly an identity rooted in metaphysics, or rather does it describe those who choose certain sexual behaviors, an ethical category? Is someone “born that way” in the same way someone else is born “black” or Chinese or male? Activists tried to bolster this claim by rooting it in “science,” asserting that homosexuality is genetic—“born that way”—but the actual science rebuts this. As researcher and LGBTQ sympathizer Simon LeVay noted:

“I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn’t show that gay men are born that way—the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain.”^[9]

Moreover, even if a so-called “gay gene” exists and thus is “natural”, (albeit natural in a fallen world), that does not mean that a person’s genetic status is to be favored or celebrated. Certain “natural” genetic markers are rightly deemed pathological thereby needing both care and cure: cystic fibrosis is genetic as is sickle cell anemia. No one thinking rightly would jump for joy for those possessing these genetic maladies. Something “occurring naturally” supplies no moral solution. One still must undertake a moral evaluation based on some standard other than something being “natural.”

Second, for purposes of legal analysis, how would a court know who comprises the “homosexual class?” Who’s in and who’s out? Who benefits from that classification? Is it simply a matter of self-selection? Is it someone who once had homosexual ideations? Is it someone who engaged in homosexual behavior, if so, how frequently? Is it someone who previously engaged in homosexual behavior, but no longer does so? Is it someone who engages is such behavior for pay, the so-called “gay for pay” entrepreneurs^[10]? Is it someone who privately engaged in lesbianism, but worked as a heterosexual prostitute—who then murdered her “customers?”^[11] The law is ill-equipped to process and protect “homosexuality” as a legally recognized suspect class. And the Supreme Court, though repeatedly invited to do so, has politely and rightly declined this invitation on every occasion.

Third, the claim that homosexual behavior is “immutable” like ethnicity is empirically falsifiable. Just consider notable celebrities who publicly “flip-flopped” their sexuality: Anne Heche, Julie Cypher, Sinead O’Connor, Ellton John, and WNBA star Sheryl Swopes.^[12] If homosexuality is unchosen and immutable, how can these flip-flops occur?

The LGBTQ Great Commission

More important to understand is the worldview component to this agenda. The homosexual agenda comprises a totalistic agenda with a particular eschatological focus or telos: obliterating marriage as designed by God:

Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex, sexuality, and family, and in the process transforming the very fabric of society….We must keep our eyes on the goals of providing true alternatives to marriage and of radically reordering society’s view of family. ^[13]

This is their “Great Commission.” LGBTQ activists designed and implemented a plan to bring this eschatological vision into reality. They fashioned strategies—evangelistic tracts, if you will—for realizing their “Great Commission.” Hunter Madsen and Marshall Kirk penned an article in 1987 entitled Overhauling Straight America, which in many ways is their version ofEvangelism Explosion.^[14] They expanded their “how to” thesis in their 1990 book, After the Ball.^[15] There, they outline a six-point strategy to leaven the culture for achieving their utopian aims:

1. Talk about Gays and Gayness as Loudly and as Often as Possible
2. Portray Gays as Victims, not aggressive Challengers
3. Give Homosexual Protectors a “just” Cause
4. Make Gays look Good
5. Make Victimizers look Bad
6. Solicit Funds—involve corporate America and Business

Here are some of the recognizable ways they implemented these strategies. These should sound familiar: (1) Labeling unused sodomy and adultery laws as anachronistic and on the “wrong side of history”; (2) Portraying homosexuals favorably in media and entertainment by (i) multiplying references to homosexuals in proportions far exceeding the actual percentage of the LGBTQ population; (ii) portraying homosexuals as victims or heroes in the media; (iii) urging “the famous” to “come out”; (3) “partnering” with other “victims” both real and constructed, pressing faux analogies to blacks and other bono fide minorities; (4) partnering with business and Corporate America by pressuring them to (i) extend medical and other benefits to same-sex relationships; (ii) erect “safe zones”; (iii) mandate sensitivity and “implicit bias” training and other HR grifts predicated on Critical Theory premises; and (iv) suggest and then mandate affirmation action—under the guise of “diversity”—aimed at hiring LGBTQ personnel.

They, in their hubris, believe they have vanquished all their cultural opponents, except for one: Christians who stand for Christian ethical orthodoxy:

“We rule the world these days. Everybody except orthodox religious sects has either been cowed by gay activist intimidation or softened by the politics of victimology and oppression and the doctrines of tolerance, diversity, and inclusion.”^[16]

The LGBTQ Agenda and Spiritual Subversion

The LGBTQ activists use a two-fold strategy against their perceived orthodox religious opposition which stands in their way. On the one hand they directly attack these views by transgressive conduct and badgering ridicule. On the other hand, they seek to coop and subvert the orthodox. Bad Cop and Good Cop. For this latter tactic they understand that they need to make the religious and spiritual case for homosexuality. As Chris Hinkle, a purported Roman Catholic, ^[17] noted during his doctoral studies at Harvard:

“Homosexuality must make its moral case, not merely its civil-social rights [case]. It must show the deep spirituality of homosexual love.”^[18]

Read More