“Spiritual Superstar” says “send’em back.”

In a recent interview with the BBC, the Dalai Lama has warned that Europe could become “Muslim or African” if refugees who have been taken in are not then sent back to their home countries. The Tibetan Buddhist spiritual leader, who has been living as a refugee in India since fleeing Tibet in 1959, said only a “limited number” of migrants should be allowed to remain. He added that refugees who have fled to Europe should be given skills before being returned. He said Europe was under an obligation to take in those who needed help, but ultimately they should be returned to their homelands.

When asked what should happen to those who want to stay in their adopted countries, he replied: “A limited number is OK. But the whole of Europe will eventually become Muslim country-impossible. Or African country, also impossible. They themselves, I think are better in their own land. Better to keep Europe for Europeans.” It is not the first time he has made such comments. In a speech last year in Malmo, Sweden, the D.L. said refugees should return to help rebuilt their own countries. The statistics said that 2.4 million migrants entered the EU from non-EU countries in 2017. There are thought to be around 70 million refugees worldwide.

This Buddhist monk has made India his home since fleeing the capital Lhasa in 1959 during the Tibetan uprising. He set up a government-in-exile in Dharamsala in northern India and launched a campaign to reclaim Tibet from China, which gradually evolved into an appeal for greater autonomy – known as the so-called ‘middle way’ approach. India, which granted him asylum in 1959, has supported the Tibetan leader but of late the government has maintained a distance, citing diplomatic sensitivities.

In 2015 he said that if he was succeeded by a female Dalai Lama she would have to be attractive, despite declaring himself to be a feminist. Speaking to the BBC he again said while laughing: ‘If a female Dalai Lama comes, she should be more attractive.’ On international Women’s Day this year in March he called for more women to be given leadership roles instead of men who are ‘celebrated for killing their opponents’. He posted: ‘Women have been shown to be more sensitive to others’ suffering, whereas, warriors celebrated for killing their opponents are almost always men. When asked in the BBC interview about President Donald Trump he replied that his time in the White House ‘lacked moral principle’ and that his America first policy was ‘wrong’.

Can you be logically inconsistent (a kind way of describing a hypocrite) and willfully blind while being a “spiritual leader”, even a superstar one? Duh, I think we can find ample examples. If President Trump’s “America first” policy is wrong, what about Dalai’s “Europe is for Europeans” policy? Sounds suspiciously similar, to my ignorant ears. He calls himself a feminist, but has said multiple times that if he’s succeeded by a woman, he wants her to be attractive. Isn’t emphasis on looks the bane of feminists? Wanna bet he is attended by more than a few attractive women in his exile?

What attracts, what repels.

San Francisco City Hall lit with rainbow lights for Pride

In a recent hit single, “You Need to Calm Down,” Taylor Swift mocks people who stand firm in their beliefs about sexuality, asking that they stop their bigotry and “calm down.” The music video, which went viral, depicts conservatives as ignorant hicks who reject homosexuals and are driven by animus. They are ugly, dated, and lack basic hygiene. By contrast, the LGBTQ folks in the video are bright, happy, and boast perfectly coiffed hair. Moreover, the angry hicks are portrayed as a dwindling minority, while the upbeat LGBTQ folks are shown to be ascendant.

Whether it’s lawsuits for “bathroom rights” or lawsuits against Christian bakers who refuse to craft messages which violate their conscience, the LGBTQ agenda is not advocating “equal rights” but special rights that marginalize everyone else’s. This aggressive push for LGBTQ “equality” may actually be backfiring, causing even young people to feel discomfort and alienation. The LGBTQ agenda is now defined by fighting the truth of biological sex, demanding that gender-bending become an accepted new normal, and filing lawsuits so that biological males can use women’s restrooms. This kind of aggressive, entitled behavior is difficult to acquiesce to, especially when it infringes upon the rights of others who would rather not participate. Instead of hoping people would become more “comfortable” around the LGBTQ “community”, it may be worthwhile for GLAAD and the like to consider the effect their campaign is having on other people. Maybe they’re the ones that “need to calm down.”

Case in point, from Psychology Today, Karen Blair, Ph.D.: Under these hypothetical circumstances, which of the following people would you consider as a potential dating partner (check all that apply):

  • a cisgender1 woman
  • a cisgender man
  • transgender woman
  • a transgender man
  • a person with a non-binary gender identification

“Recently, my colleague and I asked this question of just under 1,000 participants and we published our findings in the Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. Our results indicated that 87.5% of the participants who were asked this very question only checked off the cisgender options and excluded transgender and non-binary individuals from their hypothetical dating pool.” 1 Note: ‘cisgender’ refers to someone whose current gender identity is the same as the one they were assigned at birth, while ‘transgender’ refers to someone whose gender identity differs from the one they were assigned at birth.)

What does the author think about this? For a huge hint, look at how she defines cisgender. Using the term “gender identity” rather than biological sex, she calls gender “assigned at birth.” How did it get “assigned?” The parents and the delivery team looked at the sexual organs! How then, does separating sex from gender make sense? The author and her ilk condemn normal people for responding to their natural biological cues about what is attractive and what is repellant. Is it my fault that I am attracted to women who clearly value their femininity? Am I supposed to find a person of indeterminate sex attractive?

Answers In Genesis comments on that research: “The author writes that social support, namely romantic partnerships, are very important in overall health and longevity, and, therefore, it’s also important that society as a whole not exclude transgender people from the ‘dating pool.’ But, ultimately, what these individuals need is not someone to date or marry them. They need the new life that the Lord Jesus Christ brings! Only by realizing they (like everyone else) are sinners and only through repenting of their sin and trusting in Christ alone for salvation, can they find true hope, meaning, and purpose. The answer isn’t more people being willing to date transgender individuals—the answer is trusting Christ for salvation, receiving his gift of new and eternal life and building their thinking on God’s Word.”