Those who would protect the children

By Sylvia Thompson

I heard recently on the news that the Middle Tennessee Council for the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) has decided not to bend to the pressures of the homosexual lobby. They will not allow avowed homosexuals to jeopardize the health and well-being of the boys entrusted to them. That is, after all, what it boils down to – protection of children.

News outlets have been all abuzz with the recent decision of the BSA national headquarters to weigh the issue of allowing open homosexual influence into the Scouts. Not because there is any legal obligation to do so (the Supreme Court has already ruled on this issue). And most certainly not because Almighty God, the creator of sex and sexuality, has suddenly changed His position on all deviant sexual behaviors, including homosexuality. But because amoral corporate entities have been pressured by activist homosexuals to withdraw funding from the BSA, or suffer their wrath. That wrath is often vile, pernicious, and hateful.

The activist homosexual lobby has done a good job of pushing the lie that homosexual behavior is natural (from God, if you will). The ludicrousness of this position is clear to any but those guilt-ridden people who feel a need to punish themselves for the ills that have befallen some homosexuals in the past. Mind you, ills have befallen all kinds of groups throughout human history, yet homosexuals are somehow supposed to be special.

Rational thought, at least for a Christian, says that God would not condemn an activity over which a human has no control. He has judged homosexual behavior to be sin, as He has judged all sexual behavior outside of His norm (sex between a man and woman) to be sin. And He will judge the behavior of all Christians in regard to how we accept or reject what He establishes as sin. That includes Christians who excuse homosexual behavior on the premise that "we cannot judge."

In addition to the lie that the homosexual lobby spreads about God's acceptance of and the naturalness of their behavior, they have done a darn good job of hijacking the Civil Rights agenda of black Americans. I am a black American who resents highly that insult to my ancestry.

There is no valid argument to suggest that a "behavior" (any behavior) becomes a "right," because its practitioners want it to be so. Behavior is changeable; immutable race is not. And if homosexual behavior is a right, every other sexual behavior must also be a right: pedophilia, bestiality, incest, adultery, and whatever else can come from a corrupt human mind.

Many people have left the homosexual lifestyle. It is obvious that activist homosexuals and their minions feel threatened by those decisions. They often intimidate and vilify those who have chosen to follow Christ or who have left to avoid the severe harm that the behavior can cause medically and psychologically – the disease of AIDS being among the worst consequences.

In regard to the Middle Tennessee Council's decision to follow their motto of keeping young men "morally straight," I also heard in that news report that one Scout leader had chosen to resign his post. He was displeased with the decision. Naturally, a fawning news media chose to announce his position, as though it is of some import that one disgruntled supporter of homosexuality has taken a stand. No doubt, there are more liberal and libertarian types out there chomping at the bit to voice their opposition to that decision (and what I hope will be many more like it in the future). Never will you hear, however, about the thousands more Americans who applaud the Council's decision in favor of protecting the well-being of young boys over advancing a pernicious political agenda.

© Sylvia Thompson