Political freedom for pastors; No gay gene

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Bryan Fischer, Executive Director

TERRIFIC NEWS FOR PULPIT PROPHETS

America’s pastors, who week and in week out instruct the faithful in the truths of the Scripture, are the hope of America’s future. If they recover their prophetic voice, and teach their flocks that God’s truth is true in all places at all times, including in the political arena and at the ballot box, America has a future.

On the other hand, if pastors succumb to the temptation to play it safe, dumb down the gospel to attract a larger audience, and take all the edges off the message of the word of God, where will America hear a clarion call on behalf of the truth?

Perhaps America’s pastors, who tend to be a timid lot by nature, will take courage from ruling released yesterday by the IRS that ministers do not risk losing their tax-exempt status for engaging in public policy advocacy of traditional values.

Many pastors have been intimidated into silent acquiescence because they themselves have believed that the mythical wall of separation between church and state makes it illegal for them to discuss things such as the definition of marriage, the sanctity of life, and the immorality of the homosexual lifestyle from the

pulpit.

Or out of fear, they don’t want to speak to such issues, desperately afraid someone in their pews will be offended, apparently having forgotten that the gospel message itself, properly presented, is an offense to those who have adopted the worldview of cultural elites. What the Bible teaches about marriage, life and sexuality is as much a part of the “gospel,” the “good news,” as what it teaches about salvation.

The IRS told the Niemoller Foundation of Houston yesterday that it did not violate its tax-exempt status when it brought together pastors and politicians to champion moral issues during the 2006 campaign for governor in Texas and when it organized rallies in Texas and Florida in support of constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage.

While churches still are prohibited from endorsing particular candidates and spending substantial portions of their budgets on lobbying, churches are in fact free, according to the IRS, to engage in political activity on behalf of traditional moral values. And they are free to urge their congregations to get out the vote based on moral issues and values.

Naturally, the nattering nabobs on the left are appalled, and responded by saying the IRS ruling allowing churches to “us(e) faith as a political weapon is sleazy.” Conservative legal scholars happily pointed out that the ruling is “the liberals’ nightmare,” and that the effort of liberals to get the Niemoller Foundation in trouble with the IRS backfired big-time.

Lutheran pastor Lawrence White, the director of the Niemoller Foundation, said, “The IRS has unequivocally affirmed the right of pastors nationwide to come together as spokesmen for the Word of God, to interact with political leaders, historians and scholars in discussing the moral issues under debate within our culture, to assert their Biblical responsibility, to address such issues from their pulpits.”

Here’s the question of the day: now that pastors know they can fearlessly proclaim the truth on the pressing moral issues of the day, will they? America’s future hinges on the answer to that question.

Moral-values groups hail tax ruling - Washington Times

GREAT NEWS: EVEN LEFT ADMITS THERE IS NO ‘GAY GENE’

Homosexual activists have searched long and fruitlessly for the “gay gene,” the genetic marker that would prove homosexuals are “born that way,” and simply can’t help themselves.

The truth is that while sexual inclination may be complex, sexual behavior – that is, acting on sexual impulses – is always a matter of moral choice. One man’s “inclination” may be to same-sex interaction, while another man’s impulse may be to have sex with anyone in a skirt.

But the inclination itself, no matter how strong it is, can never serve as an excuse to act out on dangerous, unhealthy and immoral impulses. Part of living in a civilized culture is learning to master sexual impulses and reserve sexual energy for the marriage relationship.

I have felt for some time now that advances in gene therapy would make homosexual activists a bit queasy about the discovery of a gay gene if in fact it existed. With advances in pre-natal genetic screening, which can identify the Down syndrome gene in a pre-born baby, for example, gays certainly cannot be blind to the likelihood that the identification of a gay gene would quickly prompt screening for that gene.

They fret that increasing numbers of parents would abort a child with the gay gene, just as parents kill 90% of Down syndrome babies before they even get the chance to be born.

Assuming just for the sake of argument that a gay gene does indeed exist, the brave new world homosexual activists claim to love – a world that includes abortion on a demand as a sacred and unalienable right - would lead to their own elimination in short order.

In point of fact, science has developed to the point where clear-thinking homosexual activists don’t want a gay gene to be discovered even if it exists.

In a hugely significant development, the American Psychological Association is now admitting that there is no “gay” gene, after touting its existence in published materials since 1998.

Since 1998, the APA has said that “considerable recent evidence” suggests a biological role in shaping an individual’s sexuality.

Now, however, in its most recent publication the APA says, “There is no consensus among scientists” about a genetic or hormonal cause of homosexuality. It adds, “[N]o findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors.”

The new brochure no longer refers readers to homosexual advocacy organizations such the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force for readers wanting further information.

Now that the “gay gene” claim seems to be disappearing into the ashbin of medical science, it’s time once again to focus on the nature of homosexual behavior itself and to ask whether its obvious health risks make it a lifestyle any sane society should endorse, legitimize and support. The answer to that question is a clear and unequivocal “No.”

'Gay' gene claim suddenly vanishes