A Scottish pastor reviews a film that exposes elite ugliness.

David Robertson, a Scottish pastor whose blog  I follow and recommend hhttps://theweeflea.com/2018/01/30/three-billboards-outside-ebbing-missouri-a-brilliant-film-i-hated-it reviewed Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri, a film beloved by Hollywood and progressive elites. He hated the film, and explains how it exposes the ugliness in the hearts of these self-appointed elites:

“The values that are shared are themselves ugly....equality for women is an equality that allows everyone to be equally crude, violent and foul mouthed. Sex is recreational; the mouth is for swearing and the body for beating. I have read reviews that rejoice that in the name of equality there is at last a tough woman who can use violence as sickeningly as any perverted man. Is that really a reason for rejoicing? There is one scene where the middle aged Mildred kicks one schoolboy in the crotch and just for equality does the same to a schoolgirl. Oh how the audience laughed! At the kind of behaviour that would have anyone locked up in jail and accused of child abuse.

“That’s where my real problem lay. The people around me in the cinema – doubtless impeccable middle class liberals all – who would regard Donald Trump as the Devil and capital punishment as evil – laughed at jokes about capital punishment, rape, abuse and racism. The film tried to be clever by tying together the darkness of these subjects and the quirkiness and humour of humanity. For me, it just did not work. The same people who shriek in horror at the crudeness of Trump; smiled and laughed at something far worse.

“This is not a film about ‘us’ – it is a film about them. As the Hollywood elites gather for their self-congratulatory party, they will virtue signal like mad about how they have forgotten their Weinsteinian ways (although not their Polanskian apologetics) and are now all for equality and diversity, but meanwhile they will continue to look down their noses at anyone who does not share their values. They will wear their slinky black dresses and their #MeToo badges and yet honour a film that exalts the kind of crudity and violence that would make Donald Trump blush. Why is it that small town America is where you make these kind of ‘them’ films, not the liberal communities in California or New York? Why is it that it is always white working class Americans (usually males but often the hard bitten sour faced drunken women) who are portrayed as the untermenschen underclass? Is it because you can watch the savages in the Coliseum, and get to peer at their violence, crudity and dysfuntionality, whilst thanking yourselves that you are not like them?

 “Three Billboards is a signpost. A signpost to an ugly world where violence, rape and racism are subjects of humour, and where the good and virtuous can thank God that they are not like the dumb peasants who inhabit the world they do not live in. Christianity is so different. We recognize that we are as much sinners as anyone. And the signposts we raise are there to point, not to the ugliness and twistedness of humanity, but to the beauty of Christ, who came to give us beauty for ashes and the oil of joy for mourning, the spirit of praise, for the garment of heaviness.”

He understands both small town America, which he likes and respects, and the Hollywood/media complex, which he, and I, feel nothing but pity and contempt for.

Wicked rulers are the judgment of God on a wicked people…

“Wicked rulers are the judgment of God on a wicked people, the goal being to urge God’s people to repent and turn again toward Him.” This quote of John Calvin was repeated in a letter to the authorities of China by pastor Wang Yi, who was arrested December 9, 2018, along with his wife and 100 members of his Christian congregation. My previous post was the text of his letter, which is the perfect model of how a true Christian responds to real unjust persecution. I decided that sentence is worth a blog post of it’s own and is applicable to our country as well. As you read this, you probably have someone in mind for the appellation “wicked ruler”. But President Trump is not the only ruler in our system, and most of the evil we have allowed to flourish in our land predates his administration, though his personal behavior still qualifies. Other qualifiers could be Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Maxine Waters, the judges of the 9th circuit court in San Francisco…..it’s my blog, so I get to choose the wicked rulers. It isn’t just civil rulers either. I would include church officials and pastors who have supported or failed to speak out against wickedness, and fathers who have abandoned their families.

What do I classify as wickedness? Actions and laws which violate: the sanctity of human life, the clear evidence of God’s design for human sexual relations and gender expression, private property rights, the parent-child bond and the authority of parents to raise their children to love God. Examples of acts which violate those principles include: abortion, adultery, homosexual sex, transsexual surgery, eminent domain, government redistribution via tax and zoning policies, CPS seizure of children without credible evidence of abuse, government penalization of home schooling.  That’s certainly a wide net, isn’t it? Why do I call these practices wicked? As diverse as they appear, all are a violation of God’s design: for family government, for the sanctity of life, for sexuality, and for the limits of civil authority.

Speaking of which, here’s an item from from NBC News: Last week, the West Point School Board in Virginia voted unanimously to fire Vlaming. They said that the teacher was insubordinate.  How?  A female student “transitioned” (changed of outward appearance) to male and demanded the use of male pronouns. It’s not suggested that the 47-year-old West Point High School French teacher deliberately referred to the student using female pronouns in the student’s presence, but in conversations with others. Witnesses described a “slip-up” when the student was about to run into a wall and Vlaming told others to stop “her.” During a discussion with administrators, Vlaming told superiors that his Christian faith prevented him from using male pronouns for the student (he had the student in class the year before when she identified as female). Vlaming’s attorney, Shawn Voyles, says his client offered to use the student’s name and to avoid feminine pronouns, but Voyles says the school was unwilling to accept the compromise.

“Vlaming’s discrimination leads to creating a hostile learning environment. And the student had expressed that. The parent had expressed that,” said West Point schools Superintendent Laura Abel. “They felt disrespected.” Nondiscrimination policies were updated a year ago to include protections for gender identity, but didn’t include guidance on gender pronoun use. Voyles notes Vlaming has constitutional rights. “One of those rights that is not curtailed is to be free from being compelled to speak something that violates your conscience,” Voyles said. Peter Vlaming said he loves and respects all his students but when a solution he tried to reach based on “mutual tolerance” was rejected, he was at risk of losing his job for having views held by “most of the world for most of human history.”“That is not tolerance,” Vlaming said. “That is coercion.” Note to Mr. Vlaming: “Mutual tolerance” doesn’t exist for militants, be they Islamic or Transgender.

After the end of World War II, many Americans have feared a takeover by a totalitarian regime. We worried about Russian tanks rolling down our streets. School children were drilled to hide under their desks in the event of an air raid. Even in the 1980’s, many popular movies such as Red Dawn featured the theme of invasion. As it turns out, the totalitarian regime never needed tanks and air raids. Instead, they marched in under the guise of tolerance and compassion. But, what is often labeled as tolerance by the commanding officers in the Sexual Revolution Army is actually coercion. Equality Virginia, an LGBTQ-rights group, said the situation reveals the need for “statewide guidance” that will protect all students from discrimination at school. Sure, they will stop at “statewide”. I say they want a complete journey from tolerance (years back) to acceptance (the present) to acquiescence (to their whole agenda) to applause. Wickedness knows no stopping point.

I will continue my faithful disobedience.

Pastor Wang Yi

The communist regime of China has arrested about 100 Chinese Christians. Among those arrested was Pastor Wang Yi. Realizing that the Chinese government was going to soon be going after his church, Pastor Yi wrote a letter in September explaining why he disobeys the rulers God has placed over him. He instructed members of his church to release the letter if he was detained for more than 48 hours. I will not water down anything in this precious message by adding comments to it. We privileged people of the United States bandy about such words as “oppression”, “persecution” and other victim claiming figures of speech, while never having experienced a real example from their ruling authorities. In China, it’s different. It’s real oppression. Jail, beatings, starvation, more beatings. When he says “I will serve my sentence, but I will not serve the law. I will be executed, but I will not plead guilty”, he is ready for beatings to force confession. Read and take it to heart.

“On the basis of the teachings of the Bible and the mission of the gospel, I respect the authorities God has established in China. For God deposes kings and raises up kings. This is why I submit to the historical and institutional arrangements of God in China.

“As a pastor of a Christian church, I have my own understanding and views, based on the Bible, about what righteous order and good government is. At the same time, I am filled with anger and disgust at the persecution of the church by this Communist regime, at the wickedness of their depriving people of the freedoms of religion and of conscience. But changing social and political institutions is not the mission I have been called to, and it is not the goal for which God has given his people the gospel.

“For all hideous realities, unrighteous politics, and arbitrary laws manifest the cross of Jesus Christ, the only means by which every Chinese person must be saved. They also manifest the fact that true hope and a perfect society will never be found in the transformation of any earthly institution or culture but only in our sins being freely forgiven by Christ and in the hope of eternal life.

“As a pastor, my firm belief in the gospel, my teaching, and my rebuking of all evil proceeds from Christ’s command in the gospel and from the unfathomable love of that glorious King. Every man’s life is extremely short, and God fervently commands the church to lead and call any man to repentance who is willing to repent. Christ is eager and willing to forgive all who turn from their sins. This is the goal of all the efforts of the church in China—to testify to the world about our Christ, to testify to the Middle Kingdom about the Kingdom of Heaven, to testify to earthly, momentary lives about heavenly, eternal life. This is also the pastoral calling that I have received.

“For this reason, I accept and respect the fact that this Communist regime has been allowed by God to rule temporarily. As the Lord’s servant John Calvin said, wicked rulers are the judgment of God on a wicked people, the goal being to urge God’s people to repent and turn again toward Him. For this reason, I am joyfully willing to submit myself to their enforcement of the law as though submitting to the discipline and training of the Lord.

“At the same time, I believe that this Communist regime’s persecution against the church is a greatly wicked, unlawful action. As a pastor of a Christian church, I must denounce this wickedness openly and severely. The calling that I have received requires me to use non-violent methods to disobey those human laws that disobey the Bible and God. My Savior Christ also requires me to joyfully bear all costs for disobeying wicked laws.

“But this does not mean that my personal disobedience and the disobedience of the church is in any sense “fighting for rights” or political activism in the form of civil disobedience, because I do not have the intention of changing any institutions or laws of China. As a pastor, the only thing I care about is the disruption of man’s sinful nature by this faithful disobedience and the testimony it bears for the cross of Christ.

“As a pastor, my disobedience is one part of the gospel commission. Christ’s great commission requires of us great disobedience. The goal of disobedience is not to change the world but to testify about another world. For the mission of the church is only to be the church and not to become a part of any secular institution. From a negative perspective, the church must separate itself from the world and keep itself from being institutionalized by the world. From a positive perspective, all acts of the church are attempts to prove to the world the real existence of another world. The Bible teaches us that, in all matters relating to the gospel and human conscience, we must obey God and not men. For this reason, spiritual disobedience and bodily suffering are both ways we testify to another eternal world and to another glorious King.

“This is why I am not interested in changing any political or legal institutions in China. I’m not even interested in the question of when the Communist regime’s policies persecuting the church will change. Regardless of which regime I live under now or in the future, as long as the secular government continues to persecute the church, violating human consciences that belong to God alone, I will continue my faithful disobedience. For the entire commission God has given me is to let more Chinese people know through my actions that the hope of humanity and society is only in the redemption of Christ, in the supernatural, gracious sovereignty of God.

“If God decides to use the persecution of this Communist regime against the church to help more Chinese people to despair of their futures, to lead them through a wilderness of spiritual disillusionment and through this to make them know Jesus, if through this he continues disciplining and building up his church, then I am joyfully willing to submit to God’s plans, for his plans are always benevolent and good.

“Precisely because none of my words and actions are directed toward seeking and hoping for societal and political transformation, I have no fear of any social or political power. For the Bible teaches us that God establishes governmental authorities in order to terrorize evildoers, not to terrorize doers of good. If believers in Jesus do no wrong then they should not be afraid of dark powers. Even though I am often weak, I firmly believe this is the promise of the gospel. It is what I’ve devoted all of my energy to. It is the good news that I am spreading throughout Chinese society.

“I also understand that this happens to be the very reason why the Communist regime is filled with fear at a church that is no longer afraid of it. If I am imprisoned for a long or short period of time, if I can help reduce the authorities’ fear of my faith and of my Savior, I am very joyfully willing to help them in this way. But I know that only when I renounce all the wickedness of this persecution against the church and use peaceful means to disobey, will I truly be able to help the souls of the authorities and law enforcement. I hope God uses me, by means of first losing my personal freedom, to tell those who have deprived me of my personal freedom that there is an authority higher than their authority, and that there is a freedom that they cannot restrain, a freedom that fills the church of the crucified and risen Jesus Christ.

“Regardless of what crime the government charges me with, whatever filth they fling at me, as long as this charge is related to my faith, my writings, my comments, and my teachings, it is merely a lie and temptation of demons. I categorically deny it. I will serve my sentence, but I will not serve the law. I will be executed, but I will not plead guilty.

“Moreover, I must point out that persecution against the Lord’s church and against all Chinese people who believe in Jesus Christ is the most wicked and the most horrendous evil of Chinese society. This is not only a sin against Christians. It is also a sin against all non-Christians. For the government is brutally and ruthlessly threatening them and hindering them from coming to Jesus. There is no greater wickedness in the world than this.

“If this regime is one day overthrown by God, it will be for no other reason than God’s righteous punishment and revenge for this evil. For on earth, there has only ever been a thousand-year church. There has never been a thousand-year government. There is only eternal faith. There is no eternal power.

“Those who lock me up will one day be locked up by angels. Those who interrogate me will finally be questioned and judged by Christ.  When I think of this, the Lord fills me with a natural compassion and grief toward those who are attempting to and actively imprisoning me. Pray that the Lord would use me, that he would grant me patience and wisdom, that I might take the gospel to them.

“Separate me from my wife and children, ruin my reputation, destroy my life and my family – the authorities are capable of doing all of these things. However, no one in this world can force me to renounce my faith; no one can make me change my life; and no one can raise me from the dead.

“And so, respectable officers, stop committing evil. This is not for my benefit but rather for yours and your children’s. I plead earnestly with you to stay your hands, for why should you be willing to pay the price of eternal damnation in hell for the sake of a lowly sinner such as I?

“Jesus is the Christ, son of the eternal, living God. He died for sinners and rose to life for us. He is my king and the king of the whole earth yesterday, today, and forever. I am his servant, and I am imprisoned because of this. I will resist in meekness those who resist God, and I will joyfully violate all laws that violate God’s laws.”

The Lord’s servant,

Wang Yi

“Over 100 members of Early Rain Covenant Church in Chengdu, China, were arrested beginning Sunday, December 9,” China Partnership wrote. “At the time of publication of this translation, arrests are still being made. Among those taken away were Pastor Wang Yi, senior pastor of Early Rain, and his wife, Jiang Rong, who have not been heard from since Sunday.”

TRANSition to Health.

TRANS. A snippet of a word, yet I bet every reader of mine knows the snippet is shorthand for transsexual or transgender. Before I go further, I want to expose the agenda behind enforcement of this distinction. The agenda of the trans activists is: 1. Push the concept that gender is primarily a cultural construct, and reinforce the message by creating a new word for people who identify with their natural sex, that of cisgender; 2. Blur any distinction between sex and gender until people become comfortable with gender replacing sex in word usage, with the goal of disappearing the concept of biological sex; 3. Argue that once cultural pressure is removed, everyone is free to determine their own gender; 4. Reinforce #3 by desensitizing the public via insistence on unisex bathrooms; 5. Demonize objectors in every form of media, but especially Twitter, by the usual slurs: transphobic, insensitive, right wingers, selfish, uptight; 6. Pressure corporate boards to go along or risk the fury of every LGBTQ group and negative tweetstorms; 7. Introduce transfriendly educational materials into every possible school, and consult behind the scenes.

How do I know this is the agenda? It’s already taken place, with astonishing rapidity. What is the endgame, the true goal of replacing biological truths with a cultural agenda? I don’t pretend to know how such perverse thinking works, but read the previous sentence a few times. Perhaps power? Perhaps destruction of the species Homo sapiens? Perhaps an entire overhaul of civilization as we know it? Whether or not it’s ultimately successful will depend on how thoroughly you and I can be indoctrinated to accept #1 of the agenda. If that foundation goes, the rest will crumble.

Webster’s online dictionary defines medical gender as: the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex. This is the SECOND definition. The first definition is simply: sex. At first glance, we might be inclined to agree with trans advocates that gender and sex are different, as long as we confined ourselves to only the second definition. But the whole equation changes when a person of one sex transitions, a polite word meaning changes outward appearance of sex via drugs, hormones and surgery. They are still biologically and genetically either male or female, but now they look like the other sex, and so they are transgender, they changed only the appearance. However, by the trans advocates insisting on using transgender rather than transsexual, aren’t they tacitly admitting that only the outward identifiers of gender have changed, but the biological sex has not changed? This truth is very different than what activists are pushing, that gender is ONLY a cultural construct and therefore sex is only a construct. If sex is only a construct, it can be reassigned. If sex is biological, then God has spoken.

If in truth, both sex and gender are interchangeable words, according to the first definition of gender, why the insistence on using transgender rather than transsexual? If the activists truly believed that sex could be reassigned, they should be describing the after-surgery person as transsexual, NOT transgender. Because the culture does present some norms for the expression of a person’s sex, it’s easier to accept that gender can be altered than sex can be altered, and accepting, then promoting sex change is the nature of the game. If individual choice rather than biology determines sex, choice becomes god. That worked for awhile for abortion, why not for sex itself? At least if the trend continues apace, there will be much fewer abortions.

All of this is beside the point for those unhappy souls who are really ambivalent about their birth sex/gender. As I mentioned in my post called love is love, unless it’s hatred, there are over 6,500 genetic differences between men and women, so wanting to be the other sex is a serious problem. The title of this post, TRANSition to health, contains the real issue for gender confused youth. When you can’t reconcile your emotional gender with your physical gender, that’s a serious problem. Why isn’t it being treated as an illness, rather than promoted and even celebrated as a choice? If it were an illness, the compassionate goal would be restoring health. Cancer is an illness, but not because of disease organisms. It is the rebellion of cells within the sufferer’s own body, in which abnormal cells divide uncontrollably and destroy body tissue. It is an “abnormality”, but being considered an illness, allows research and resources to be allocated to find a cure and alleviate suffering. “Gender dysphoria” is also an abnormality, but it seems to me that far more resources are being allocated to promote it and bully the rest of us to adjust, than for seeking a cure!

Who is helped? The confused young child who is given drugs and hormones to block puberty? The young teenager who is surgically altered, and years later regrets their action and realizes they were used and their parents were complicit? The adult who thinks they are making an informed decision, and after the transition finds themselves an oddity, and is comfortable only among the LGBTQ subculture? The woman who can never give birth? The man who can never procreate? Or the trans agenda pushers, who revel in their power to elevate choice over God’s design, no matter how much damage they caused?

Who is pulling the levers of opinion?

Chad Felix Greene, writing for TheFederalist website, says “the stigma against my conservative politics is worse than the stigma of being gay.” That’s the headline. It’s worth reprinting here some of his thoughts. “Why would a person choose a life where they will be hated, judged, and rejected by society?”

“This was one of the first arguments I learned to defend myself against in arguments about my sexuality. In the late 1990’s, it was perceived as a powerful call to the humanity of those who opposed gay rights under the notion that it was merely a lifestyle choice. The idea was that if we could appeal to others’ sense of compassion for our social plight, perhaps they could understand the effects of their intolerance. I often fantasized about breaking through the walls of prejudice and somehow speaking to the heart of someone who did not yet realize I was just a person like them.”

He says it was easier to do that with his homosexuality than with conservative politics. To be a conservative means to be forced to choose when to speak and when to remain silent, since offending someone on the left, even mildly or by accident, is a social battle you may not be able to win. Even to bring up the subject is to invite taunting and disdain from the very people we attempt, in vain, to reach out to. While I always hoped that I could break through to a person who saw me as a sinner, I find today that it is impossible to even hold a conversation with someone who sees me as a bigot. Our concerns are mocked and our moments of frustration are viewed as weakness. We find no compassion from our adversaries. In fact, we see them champion silencing us permanently. I never truly experienced hate until I came out as a conservative.”

A similar perspective was presented by law professor F. H. Buckley, writing for the NY Post: “My walks with my dog take me to a quiet off-street, with middle-class houses made expensive because they’re inside the Beltway. Two of the homes feature ‘No Hate Here’ signs. What’s up with that, you might wonder. This is a peaceful, upscale, decidedly un-diverse neighborhood. There’s nothing to suggest that anyone is a racist or bigot. Someone came up with the label “virtue signaling” to describe the psychological impulse behind these signs. The idea is that people who put them up want to tell you how noble they are. But that doesn’t sound right. Virtue-signalers aren’t in any way in doubt about their own virtue. What they really want to do is signal how depraved others are. It’s about vice signaling, not virtue signaling.

“A couple of people on the block are Trump supporters. Those signs are likely meant for them. There’s no interaction between the two groups, and the signs are meant to keep it that way. Vice signaling is a defense mechanism, meant to displace liberal guilt.  There was a moment, shortly after the 2016 election, when liberals realized that ordinary Americans had turned against them, and that they had reason to do so. Allied to the teachers unions, the liberals had permitted our schools to descend to Third World standards. They supported an immigration system that imported economic immobility. They welcomed a regulatory morass that gave elites jobs but that placed a stumbling block in the path of those who sought to get ahead.

Liberals saw all that — and then they forgot it. Rather than blame themselves, it was much easier to transfer the guilt to conservatives. That’s how vice signaling became the language of liberal politics. When the Supreme Court legalized gay marriage, there were no great protests from social conservatives. What is curious, however, is how social liberals turned on a dime to take up transgender rights. After their victory, they immediately took up the cause of a tiny number of Americans, the better to blame their opponents. In the permanent cultural wars against conservatives, there’s always one more river to cross.

If you have read even a few posts on my blog, and if they are correct, the lynch mob should be coming for me any day. My blog has some followers, and I’ve experienced a tiny bit of minor disagreement, though mostly it is “likes”. Perhaps the reasons my experience is so different than Mr. Greene’s, are that I don’t have a wide or well known platform, and blogs have more freedom of expression by their nature than other forms of media, or perhaps my arguments are so cogent that I’ve scared off the opposition. Whatever the reason, Mr. Greene comes off to me as whining, though I will concede he’s probably right.

That brings up an important question: Who cares? President Trump is more outrageous than me, but somehow he got elected President. He is endlessly bombarded with slurs, threats, pure vitriol on national television and news media. He still does what he does. I dislike his tweetstorms, but on balance I favor most of his actual policies. He is living proof that you can get worthwhile stuff done if you don’t heed the “nattering nabobs of negativism”, an expression coined by William Safire but frequently attributed to Spiro Agnew. Then there’s Rush Limbaugh. It takes courage to refuse to back down. I don’t fear the critics. Teddy Roosevelt is famous for saying this, and living it: “It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”  AFTER ALL, CRITICISM IS HARDLY “DUST, SWEAT AND BLOOD!’

”Love is love”, unless it’s really hatred.

Proverbs 13:24 says “Whoever spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is diligent to discipline him.” So discipline, even if painful, can be love, and sparing discipline can be hate. Exploitation of a sufferer is hatred, no matter whether the exploitation masquerades as love. If someone is afflicted with a painful and disfiguring skin condition, and wants only relief, is parading them on tour to garner sympathy, love, or a form of hatred? What if that skin condition might be melanoma, and you delayed informing the sufferer or gave them false hope by calling it a wart? Love, or hatred? You know your teenager is hanging around with druggies and drinking heavily, but you don’t want to be unpopular with him or her, so you smile and say nothing. Love, or hatred?

I hope it’s obvious from these examples that often what looks like love is motivated by cowardice or greed or misguided sympathy, while truth and discipline, though painful at the time, is motivated by true love.

The ruling, removing gender identity from the list of “sex discrimination”, represents the views of more than 30,000 physicians who all understand that gender identity is a very real threat to modern health care, according to Dr. Michelle Cretella, head of the American College of Pediatricians. “Transgenders are saying, ‘I think and feel this way, therefore, I am.’ And it’s one thing for us to, as physicians, [to] treat the person with respect and honor their name change, but it would be a complete malpractice to treat them as the opposite sex.” As she explains, there is nothing any of us can do to change our binary, biologically-determined-at-conception sex. “A man on estrogen is not a woman. He is a man with a male physiology on estrogen, and that’s how a physician must approach him.” The very serious problem, she points out, is that people are so ideologically-driven that they want to ignore the medical research.

More than ever, Cretella says, “Medicine is at the point now where we understand that men and women have—at a minimum—6,500 genetic differences between us. And this impacts every cell of our bodies—our organ systems, how diseases manifest, how we diagnose, and even treat in some cases.”Treating a person differently based on their feelings isn’t just harmful, she argues, but deadly. In cases like heart disease, certain drugs can endanger women and not men. Even diagnoses present differently in men and women. The symptoms for certain diseases, she explains, can manifest themselves in completely opposite ways. “And these are nuances that medicine is finally studying and bringing to light. And it’s actually ironic that the transgender movement [is] so anti-science.”

“There is absolutely no rigorous science that has found a trait called ‘gender identity’ in the brain, body, or DNA. Now sex—I can show you that. It’s in our chromosomes. It’s in the body. It’s in the reproductive organs. Over 99.98 percent of the times, our sexual development is clearly and unambiguously either male or female.” The sex differences, she explains, are real and consequential.

Perhaps the point I was sliding towards in my first paragraph is now obvious. But I want to go further. I assert that the real agenda of promoting trans pronouns, trans lexicon and trans surgery, while trying to punish any transgressions of the agenda, and silence any criticism, is this: POWER! If the trans express can foist such an unhealthy, destructive, and perverse set of expectations on the 99.98%, THAT my friends, is power. All it takes to succeed is cowardice from the rest of us. Telling impressionable and confused kids that they can choose their sex is NOT love, it is HATE!

Who’s in charge of the lexicon?

I just read a piece on the Desiring God website called Homophobia has no place in the church, by Nick Roen. His definition follows: “Simply put, homophobia means a fear of homosexuality and, more specifically, homosexual people. And while it is not the same as loving, biblical opposition to certain behaviors or beliefs, this fear-based attitude often leads to unhelpful stereotypes, prejudice, and even cruel mistreatment.” As long as we are Simply putting Nick, I will say that the word homophobia is thrice damned: the word was created by homosexual activists in order to try to shame those who oppose it, thus your definition buys into the deception; the word treats phobias inaccurately and too casually, as if they are mere distaste or prejudice, rather than incapacitating fears; since we all know that phobias are irrational, use of the word in that context tacitly accuses opponents of homosexual sex of being irrational. So Nick’s definition is wrong, wrong, wrong.

He goes on: “we love this way because this is exactly how Jesus first loved us. He wasn’t threatened or repelled by us; he wasn’t afraid to enter a relationship with us, sinners that we were (and still are), and to even graciously speak the truth about our sin. Instead, he loved us so lavishly that he died for us to present us clean and whole before his Father. When we love in this manner, we expose homophobia for what it really is: pride. It is an attitude that puts beneath us others whose sins and temptations we deem ‘more depraved’ than our own…” I disagree. Distaste for homosexual sex and lust is not about pride, it’s about honesty in describing the actual actions. Nick admires Jesus for speaking the truth about our sin, and that’s exactly what homosexual activists never do. If homosexuality is not more depraved, then why is the sexual aspect NEVER addressed by activists? Their marketing pitch is always about love, or equality, or their persecution, but never mentions the sex part.

Speaking for myself, what I object to is the pridefulness of homosexuality. Nick says “homophobia” in the church is about pride. Pride, as in “I am better than you”, is number one on Jesus’ whip list. What are “Gay Pride” parades? Have you ever seen what goes on during them, especially in cities like San Francisco where anything goes. Nick says “sin is sin”, and while I agree in theory, pridefully sinning is worse than shamedly sinning. The title of my post bespeaks one of the biggest underlying issues: Who will control the lexicon? Had Nick called his piece, Why the church should find ways to love homosexuals, I would have had no objections. We Christians should love everyone, if possible just the way Jesus Christ did. He saved an adulteress from being stoned, pardoned her, but finished with “go and sin no more.” He drove out the moneychangers from the temple with a whip he made from cords. I’ll bet that hurt! He called the Pharisees hypocrites, but ate with sinners. Basically, Jesus’ example to us was to hate hypocrisy and love repentance. The biggest problem I have with the lexicon of LGBTQ is that repentance is missing and pride takes center stage.

Speaking of which, is there a statute of limitations in the LGBTQ Hall of Shame(ful) tweets? Kyler Murray, the transcendent sports talent at Oklahoma, just won the Heisman trophy, and what should miraculously surface but a “homophobic” tweet from him at age 15, six years ago! What did it say? “Cole is getting salty he’s a queer.” That’s it. Age 15, we don’t even know if he’s joking, but as noted pundit Jon Gabriel puts it: “The new secular religion has mortal sins and eternal punishment, but no means of forgiveness.” The homosexual supporters are calling the use of the word queer “homophobic tweets.”

Jim Treacher from PJ Media: “Hey, wait a second. LGBTQ stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and… queer. The very word that got Kyler Murray in trouble. Well, I guess that’s how identity politics works. The same word can be either a slur or a badge of honor, depending on who’s saying it. N-word, c-word, q-word, whatever. It’s all about the identity of the speaker.” Aren’t you tired of being lectured and hectored by these self righteous hypocrites who feel free to either invent (homophobic) or co-opt (gay) words to intimidate or guilt trip the rest of us into silence about their lusts they pursue with pride, while claiming victim status? Since Kyler Murray is black, but he used a verboten word years ago so now he’s a target, methinks that homosexuality has been elevated over race in the victimization sweepstakes!

I can be friend and colleague of anyone, regardless of sexual orientation, gender, race, religion, as long as they have a sense of humor about themselves, are truthful and willing to rationally work out any differences we have. I can forgive a transgression like Jesus said to Peter, 70 times 7, as long as that person repents. But if that person thinks they can silence or intimidate me with invented slurs and threats, I know how to make a whip of cords!