I recently visited a website which has been plagiarized quite extensively in the past couple weeks by one particular Gather member, because I wanted to see for myself just what kind of narrow-minded, homophobic, paranoid articles were featured there.
The site is called "Biblical Family Advocates" and is managed by a husband and wife team named Phil and Diane Magnan. It is a pro-life, pro-family, anti-abortion, anti-gay Christian website which deals mainly with pro-family issues. Anyone interested in checking it out can do so by going here:
www.bfamilyadvocates.com/who%20we%20are.htm
By writing this article, my intention is not to attack or deride this website, nor to write anything which would insult or offend Mr. & Mrs. Magnan or anybody here at Gather who happens to read it.
My intention is to address the article, written by Phil Magnan, which has caused a lot of uproar and anger among many members of Gather recently and express my personal opinion about some of the things this article goes into. I am not very good at writing an article like this, so I hope you will cut me a little slack.
Mr. Magnan's article is titled "15 Reasons Why Homosexuality Is Wrong And Hurts Society" and can be found at the web address I have posted above. Because the article is long and deals with several different facets of this issue, my attempt to address it will probably need to be divided up into two or three individual articles.
But, I feel very strongly about what's being said here and what's at stake and, whether anyone reads this article or any additional articles I may write, is irrelevant to me at this point. So, for the sake of clarity, I will call this article:
"Is Homosexuality Wrong & Does It Hurt Society??---PART ONE"
So, without further ado, I will begin with the first paragraph of Mr. Magnan's article. All references and excerpts are the exclusive property and work of Phil Magnan and he alone must receive credit for them.
Mr. Magnan's article begins with this paragraph:
"A societal acceptance of same sex relationships gives vulnerable children the impression that same sex relationships are good, moral and healthy. Not only does the Bible condemn such behavior, but medical professionals have affirmed that these kinds of sexual relationships are unhealthy. A society that accepts immoral relationships cause children to stumble into immorality. Jesus Christ said that "if anyone causes one of these little one's to stumble, (sin) it would be better if he put a mill stone around his neck and throw himself into the sea." Matthew 18:6 Acceptance of these unnatural acts sets a society up for gender and sexual confusion, which brings about widespread immorality, which tears the family down."
In the first sentence of his article, Mr. Magnan makes the assumption that same-sex relationships are neither good, moral, nor healthy. He goes on to state that a society that accepts "immoral" relationships causes children to stumble into immorality. While this sentence seems a bit redundant, it is obviously based on the biblical belief that homosexual relationships are "immoral." Mr. Magnan has already begun to push a biblically-biased and unfairly-presented agenda by using specific adjectives such as "immoral," "unhealthy," and "unnatural."
He has also included a Scripture reference to convey the ominous idea of harsh and terrible retributional punishment. Not just upon anyone who might engage in such "immoral, unhealthy, and unnatural" relationships, but upon any society which might offer acceptance of these practices. And, by including this reference, he has once again demonstrated that his viewpoint and ideas originate from a strict, biblically-biased platform.
Because, where does Mr. Magnan even get he idea that homosexual relationships are "immoral" or "unnatural" to begin with?? What is his primary authoritative source for making such claims?? He uses words like "immoral" and "unnatural" as if they were already a verifiable and unquestionably proved foregone conclusion. While the only "proof" he really offers is his own biblically-inspired moralistic perspective on the rest of the world.
(CONTINUED IN PART TWO)
www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977406743
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 15
Actually, some of the statements made therein go against fact. Also, I am opposed to using religion as a means to persuade others that an activity is wrong for those not members of that religion. Realistically, it's questionable to subject a person who is not a member of a particular religious group to that group's dogma and beliefs.
But, when we remove the biblical references, the remaining arguments are quite convincing.
It is unfortunate that so many people don't see that publicly condoning homosexuality has grave consequences on any society. This truth transcends ALL religious groups.
Homosexuality is unnatural as it goes against the purpose of the reproductive organs. As such, it is immoral. We don't need religion to see that.
Further eroding our society from wholesomeness, to one driven by personal pleasure without purpose, is really asking for trouble.
Yes, homosexuality is wrong, and yes, it hurts society - even if not all of us are aware of that.
I have some scripture to quote back to the man who wrote the original essay you're discussing... "You cannot get the speck out of his eye, until you have removed the plank from your own."
Leviticus 18:22 says, "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." Another translation says it's "detestable" and the TLB says "it's an enourmous sin." The next verse mentions not having sex with animals and calls that a perversion. Then the next few verses say that we should keep God's decrees and laws and not defile ourselves or our land.
The Wycliffe Bible Commentary says about these verses, "The perversions mentioned here (in verse 22) and in verse 23 can not produce offspring, and thus they defeat the purpose for which mankind was given such responsibility and capability. This, therefore, is rebellion both against God and against a God-ordered society."
Unnatural means, "contrary to the laws or course of nature" (according to dictionary.com). We know that God created man and woman to be together. That's found in Genesis. We also can observe the animal and human world and know that the NATURAL behavior is for a male and female to be together.
Immoral means, "violating moral principles; not conforming to the patterns of conduct usually accepted or established as consistent with principles of personal and social ethics."
If one reads the Bible, it's easy to see where the terms "immoral" and "unnatural" originated.
This is not judging people, it's merely stating what is in the Bible. If God has determined that having sex with someone of the same sex is a sin, or if having sex outside marriage is sin, then we cannot change that.
Phil Magnan's article gives the impression that a homosexual lifestyle is unhealthy compared to a heterosexual lifestyle.
There are health risks asscoiated with any sexual orientation. Lifelong celibacy is the safest "sexual lifestyle."
Homosexual lifestyles are not necessarily more dangerous than heterosexual lifestyles. For instance, it appears that lesbians (women who have never had sex with a man) are at a lower risk for STDs than women who have had sex with men.
Once again, Phil Magnan is misrepresenting science in order to further his own agenda.
"Sexual Risk in Lesbians and Bisexual Women" by Morrow and Allsworth. This article was published in Journal of the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association in December 2000. This journal is a legitimate, peer-reviewed medical journal.
Marilyn, homosexual activity is not uncommon among animals. I've seen plenty of it in my pets, and it occurs in the wild as well.
And, Jesus never brought the topic up, himself.