The Homosexual Agenda Does Not Belong in a Human Rights Campaign



When you think of human rights, what do you think of? Perhaps you think of Black Americans being given freedom from slavery in Lincoln-age America. Or, perhaps you think of women being given the right to vote. Perhaps you think of political prisoners being freed as a result of international pressure placed upon a regime. These would all be good examples of human rights being championed. However, imagine adding to this list a man's plight to get his surrounding culture to accept, affirm and applaud his sexual disorder and sexual involvement with another man. This falls short of human rights.

Human rights have been fought for, and achieved, in all arenas of life. They have been fought for in families, in schools, in courts and in parliaments. Courts and parliaments owe it to the citizens that they serve to protect their human rights. They also owe it to their citizens to keep a respectful distance from issues that are not in the sphere of human rights but do directly challenge and contradict the faith convictions and consciences of people. When courts and parliaments do cross this line and do call on their citizens to violate their moral consciences, they unravel the very fabric of society. It is a violation of human rights to insist that people accept gender identity disorder as being an acceptable sexual orientation. To use the legal, or governing, system to achieve this end is to take away people's freedom. It is to take away their freedom to believe, their freedom to think, their freedom to feel and their freedom to follow conscience.

Governments that support gay activism have not considered enough how much harm this does to citizens when it supports gay activist causes. By taking sides with the gay movement, many governments directly oppose the beliefs, and statements of faith, of Christian Churches, maintaining that the Churches are wrong and that gays are right. I realize that current laws in Canada allow Churches to refuse to preform marriages for gays and lesbians and that our freedom of speech is protected to voice objections to the gay lifestyle, on grounds of religion. Still, how long can we count on current legal protection? Current laws and current positions can be amended to take away the religious freedom of Christians. To prevent this from happening, governments should not entertain supporting gay legislation. Once laws have been passed legitimizing gender identity disorder, it spreads quickly in society, in our school systems and in other forms of public life. Then the Church and individual Christians have to stand against social institutions, both governmental and private, which oppose our faith position. We are then forced to have to defend our beliefs in our very places of work. Governments should never put a citizen in this position. Governments should, instead, protect the right of citizens to object to the gay lifestyle. The right to object to such a lifestyle is deeply based in a person's right to follow their own conscience and their sacred cherished faith. This is the moral sphere of faith, conscience and creed and governments should not tamper with their citizen's rights in this way.

The Bible states in no uncertain terms; “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” (Leviticus 18.22). Opposing legislation such as same-sex marriage as well as other bills which give political support to the same-sex lifestyle is not about denying equality or denying rights. It is not about discriminating against a people group. It is not about intolerance of people. It is not about being homophobic. It is not about denying human rights. Opposing same-sex lifestyles and same-sex marriage is about obeying God. It is also about preserving values and protecting families.

Propagation of sexual disorders should not be considered a human right. Rather, governments, legal systems, institutions and places of employment should encourage and protect the rights of people to object to lifestyles that violate their conscience and their sacred beliefs.

Shawn Stevens

 REFERENCES :

George, Robert P. And Jean Bethke Elshtain, The Meaning of Marriage. Dallas: Spence Publishing, 2006.

Scripture references taken from the King James Version.