Why Do Homosexuals Have More Mental Health Problems?

Why Do Homosexuals Have More Mental Health Problems?

James R. Aist

“You cannot prove a point by appealing to an assumption. Proof requires objective evidence.”

(NOTE: The numbers in parentheses refer to specific references listed at the end of the article)

Introduction

Homosexuality is associated with significantly elevated levels of mental health problems compared to heterosexuality, including a wide range of mental disorders, depression and suicide (1, 3). Gay activists have assumed that these differentially elevated mental health problems are a result of social and structural stigmas aimed at homosexual people by a heterosexual, homophobic society (e.g., 12), rather than anything having to do with the homosexual experience per se. Let’s have a look at the “scientific” “evidence” regarding this claim.

The “Science” of Homosexuality

Before I get into the details of this research, it is necessary to put the “science” of homosexuality into perspective. In the world of science, there are at least three categories based on the precision and reliability of the results obtained by scientific inquiry. Roughly speaking, the natural sciences are considered “hard” while the social sciences are usually described as “soft”. Features often cited as characteristic of hard science include: producing testable predictions, performing controlled experiments, relying on quantifiable data, a high degree of accuracy and objectivity and applying a purer form of the scientific method. Scientific disciplines can be arranged into a hierarchy of hard to soft, with physics and chemistry typically at the top, biology in an intermediate position and the social sciences at the bottom (click HERE). The “science” of homosexuality is squarely at the bottom of this hierarchy, being within the social sciences.

Let me illustrate briefly, with examples, how these three categories of scientific inquiry can produce different degrees of precision, accuracy, objectivity and reliability. The freezing point of water in a glass can be determined with a great deal of precision, reproducibility and objectivity (physics). The water has no control over the experimental result. The effect of temperature on the growth rate of a fungus in a Petri dish can be measured with precision as well (biology). The fungus has no control over the result. But to study homosexual behavior (social science), one must deal with a myriad of uncontrollable variables, many of which are not even known to the scientist, because people can think, emote, forget, imagine, interpret and decline to answer when they are being interviewed or completing questionnaires related to their sexuality, and they may bring their own personal agenda (bias) to the process as well. Therefore, the human subject has a great deal of influence on the data, and the outcome is necessarily “subjective” and often highly variable. This subjectivity and relative lack of control of the variables, which is characteristic of the “science” of homosexuality, can make it difficult or impossible to draw scientifically valid inferences and conclusions. And that is why the “science” of homosexuality is considered to be one of the “softest” of all the sciences.

Social Stigmas

The body of research purporting to validate the assumption that social stigmas cause the elevated levels of mental health problems in sexual minorities — by documenting associations between perceived discrimination of sexual minorities as reported in questionnaires soliciting individual responses, on the one hand, and negative mental health outcomes on the other hand — suffers from fatal flaws and limitations. While this research has managed to generate evidence of possible associations between social stigmas and elevated mental health problems in sexual minorities, Keyes, et al. (9) pointed out that results based on subjective, self-report of perceived discrimination could be confounded with mental health status, which may, in turn, lead to biased associations between social stigmas and mental health outcomes. They further stated that there are alternative pathways to mental disorders in homosexual people, such as social disadvantage and social norms. These are serious flaws that are not accounted for in these studies. Then they discussed what is called the “minority paradox”, where racial/ethnic minority groups (including Blacks, Hispanics and Asians) not only do not experience elevated levels of mental health issues in the presence of social stigmas, but they actually have lower rates compared to Whites. Thus, the theory that social stigmas cause mental health issues in minorities is apparently not valid for most large minority groups and is therefore suspect as a de facto explanation for mental health issues in sexual minorities.

In 2011, a study published by Chakraborty et al. (1) represented the first time that the association of perceived discrimination with mental health issues of sexual minorities was investigated using a random sample of the population, rather than responses from targeted minorities. But, once again, the results were based on the subjective responses of perceived discrimination and are subject to the flaws of such an experimental design, as discussed above. Moreover, the low magnitude of perceived discrimination (only 4.9% of the homosexuals in the study reported discrimination) was not only indicative of a very small potential effect of discrimination, but it left the vast majority of the mental health problems of the homosexuals in this study to be explained by other factors that were not identified. In a scientifically reviewed response to this report (2), psychiatrist  Dr. Mohinder Kapoor pointed out that cross-sectional studies like this can only raise the question of an association, rather than test a hypothesis (i.e., the cross-sectional experimental design does not allow scientifically valid cause-and-effect inferences to be made). He further concluded, boldly, that one cannot test whether psychiatric problems are associated with discrimination on grounds of sexuality.

In another recent study, concerning purported effects of the social environment on suicide attempts in sexual minority youth (4), there were also fatal flaws: 1) the cross-sectional design of the study did not permit valid inferences or conclusions to be drawn regarding causality; 2) although the data base used contained information on such things as “physical abuse by a romantic partner”, “sexual contact with an adult” and “ever being forced to have intercourse involuntarily” (11), these potentially confounding factors were mysteriously omitted from the study; 3)  the difference found was not statistically significant (i.e., not shown to be real); and 4) the magnitude of the difference found was so small as to be functionally inconsequential (i.e., not a significant factor, even if real (11). Thus, this study of social stigmas also failed to provide any scientifically valid conclusions regarding the cause of mental health problems of sexual minorities.

To summarize, studies purporting to demonstrate that social stigmas, operating at the level of individual experience, cause mental health problems in sexual minorities suffer from fatal flaws and limitations, such as the use of “perceived discrimination”, failure to account for plausible alternative explanations, a “cross sectional” design, and minute and statistically insignificant differences, any one of which is sufficient to make valid cause-and-effect inferences impossible from a scientific standpoint. Thus, this body of research has failed to provide any scientifically valid conclusions upon which to base new public policy measures (e.g., legalization of “gay marriage”) aimed at reducing the disparate levels of mental health problems found in sexual minorities.

Structural Stigmas

The failure of earlier studies to validate the theory that social stigmas and discrimination cause elevated levels of mental health problems in sexual minorities has spawned a new research initiative using a different research design (5-8). The strategy here is to use more objective “structural stigma” and “structural remediation” as measures of discrimination, rather than the subjective measure using self-reported perceptions of discrimination. The specific mental health issues included in these studies were various mental health disorders, depression and early mortality (including both suicide and murder).

The basic aim of this relatively new research strategy is to show that certain governmental and institutional actions or religious viewpoints that target the homosexual community in selected geographic regions (e.g., a ban on “gay marriage”, exclusion of “sexual orientation” from anti-discrimination laws, and labeling of homosexual behavior as “sin” by Christian denominations) represent structural stigmas that cause the mental health problems that affect homosexuals differentially when compared to geographic regions that have gay-affirming policies in place (e.g., legalization of “gay marriage”, inclusion of sexual orientation in anti-discrimination laws and more liberal Christian denominations that do not view homosexual behavior as sin).

While these studies have succeeded in documenting possible associations between structural stigmas and elevated levels of mental health problems of sexual minorities, I found that all of these research studies, much like their predecessors, have fatal flaws and limitations that preclude the drawing of objective, scientifically valid, cause-and-effect inferences or conclusions: 1) all but two of these original research articles admit that the “cross-sectional” nature of the data precludes the drawing of any cause-and-effect inferences or conclusions; 2) the authors also admit that, in every case, their results could be easily accounted for by “differential mobility”, whereby the stigmas under study would prompt relocation of the healthier portion of the homosexual minority population to a more gay-friendly geographic region prior to the gathering of the data; and 3) all of these studies failed to take into account several potentially important “confounding factors” that could have produced the differences reported (i.e., the authors don’t really know what may have caused the results they obtained).

The two studies that were “longitudinal” (i.e., data were collected at two different times), rather than “cross sectional” (i.e., data were collected at only one time), deserve further consideration, because the problems associated with a cross-sectional design were avoided. The first of these two studies (6) purported to show that structural stigmas cause increased psychiatric disorders in sexual minorities by using a data base that included data collected at two different times. Serious limitations included the following: 1) the data set was too small (some of the results were not statistically significant and therefore not shown to be real); 2) sexual orientation was assessed only for the second period of data collection, not for the first, making any perceived increases due to sexual orientation suspect; 3) there was a 48% increase in psychiatric disorders among sexual minorities living in states without gay marriage bans (conflicting results); and 4) they did not rule out differential mobility as an alternative explanation for the results. For these reasons, the authors were not able to draw any clear cut conclusions from the results of the study. The second of these two longitudinal studies (7) purported to show that legalizing same-sex marriage reduced both the use of and the expenditures of gay and bisexual men at health care clinics. The most serious limitations of this study included the following: 1) there was no comparison to a control group of heterosexual men (a requirement of properly designed scientific studies); 2) failure to consider the likely effects of a declining economy on the parameters studied (N.B.- the AMA’s Council on Science and Public Health noted that such correlations were due to economics, cf. 10); and 3) billing record data were not subjected to statistical analysis to determine whether or not the differences reported were real (also a requirement of properly designed scientific studies). For these reasons, the authors did not draw any clear cut conclusions from the results of the study.

In addition, in another of these studies (8), missing data were “imputed” (i.e., artificially generated and then added to the database) to obtain statistically significant differences (only in the “soft sciences” would such a procedure be permissible)!

Therefore, it can be fairly stated that this newer body of research is so riddled with fatal flaws that, at best, it “may suggest the possibility that structural stigmas could account for some of the negative health outcomes for sexual minorities in some cases.”

Conclusions

My conclusions, based primarily on scientific perspectives and concessions of the scientists who conducted the original research on social and structural stigmas, are that 1) at the most, this may be a worthwhile area of research for more objective and scientifically sound investigations in the future, if and when that becomes possible; and 2) for the time being, the jury is still out concerning what really causes the elevated levels of mental health problems in sexual minorities. Hatzenbuehler et al. (8) actually admitted that no study has shown that either social or structural stigmas cause mental health problems! Thus, this entire body of research has failed to provide any scientifically valid conclusions upon which to base new public policy measures (e.g., legalization of “gay marriage”) aimed at reducing the disparate levels of mental health problems found in sexual minorities.

If Not Stigmas, Then What?

I suggest that it remains a real possibility that the elevated levels of mental health problems among sexual minorities is caused primarily by the unwanted, dreadful realization — during the emotionally charged and very sensitive pre-teen and teen years — that one is sexually attracted to members of the same gender, instead of to members of the opposite gender, and that this realization is psychologically and mentally devastating to individuals because it dashes their deeply held and cherished hopes and dreams of leading a normal, healthy, heterosexual adult life that includes a wife and children. In other words, maybe the elevated levels of mental health problems experienced by homosexual people are primarily an indirect result of being homosexual in a heterosexual world, rather than a result of social and structural stigmas created by heterosexual “homophobes.” For example, because homosexual people are only about 1.5% of the general population (click HERE), feelings of isolation and loneliness could very well account for part of the disparity in mental health problems, as could the high levels of promiscuity and relationship breakups that are characteristic of the homosexual population (11, 13). King and Nazareth (2006) put it this way: “There are a number of reasons why gay people may be more likely to report psychological difficulties, which include difficulties growing up in a world orientated to heterosexual norms and values…” (2). And, as mentioned above, Keyes, et al. (9) stated that there are alternative pathways to mental disorders in homosexual people, such as social disadvantage and social norms. Unfortunately, in our politically correct, liberal, social climate, blaming the heterosexual majority for the problems experienced by the homosexual minority always takes precedence over anything that might, instead, be innocently inherent in the basic nature of the homosexual experience itself.

Potential Influence on Social Policies and Laws

Despite the lack of any scientifically valid conclusions in any of these studies, they are being used to shape the development of public opinion, social policies and laws and to weigh in on law suits regarding such things as “gay marriage” and “hate crimes” (3, 5, and click HERE ). You should be aware that this is the kind of so-called “scientific” research that is fueling the advancement of the “gay agenda.”

After Word

The elevated levels of mental health problems in sexual minorities, compared to levels found in the heterosexual majority, are very real and represent a serious public health problem that deserves continuing efforts to understand and eliminate this disparity, insofar as possible. Regardless of what the causes of this disparity may be, Christians should be at the forefront of efforts to eliminate mistreatment of homosexual people, including, but not limited to, teasing, bullying, name-calling, unnecessary discrimination, beating and, of course, murder. We are always to “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you…” (Matthew 7:12).

And yet there are concessions that cannot be made while remaining true to our Christian, religious convictions as prescribed in the Bible, and to biological realities. In all honestly, we cannot and should not abandon the biblical views concerning the immorality of homosexual practice (Genesis 19:5 with Jude 1:7; Leviticus 18:22; Leviticus 20:13; Romans 1:26-27; I Corinthians 6:9-10; and I Timothy 1:10), including “gay marriage” (click HERE). Nor should we remain silent about these matters; the Bible requires that we warn against the spiritual result of unrepented sins (Ezekial 33: 8-9), and it warns us to refrain from encouraging and/or approving of sin (Leviticus 19:1; Isaiah 5:20; Malachi 2:17; Matthew 5:19-20; Matthew 18:6; Romans 14:22). And we should be willing to be condemned by the world for discriminating against practicing homosexuals who want to be church members and leaders and/or employees of churches and para-church organizations (click HERE). Moreover, we should not lose sight of the fact that the practice of homosexuality is statistically abnormal (wherever it may be found in nature), biologically unnatural (wherever it may be found in nature) and medically unhealthy (click HERE). To deny these self-evident, and well-documented facts that characterize homosexual practice just to try to make homosexual people feel better about themselves would be both dishonest and counter-productive. Physical and mental health will not result from living in a make-believe world that denies reality. And finally, Christians should encourage dissatisfied homosexual people to seek and obtain counseling and ministry that is bible-based, to help them deal effectively and honestly with their unwanted homosexuality, and, hopefully, to abandon it (click HERE).

In standing our ground, however, we should always treat homosexual people with all appropriate expressions of love, kindness and respect, as these are defined in the Bible. And we should always be quick to share the good news of the Gospel of Jesus Christ with homosexual people if and when the opportunity presents itself, keeping in mind that we are all made in the image and likeness of God and are all dearly loved by Him. Once a homosexual person becomes born-again, the Holy Spirit will make sure that conviction comes and homosexual sins are repented and abandoned (click HERE). “The Lord is … not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.” (2 Peter 3:9). And, as Christians, that must remain our desire as well for homosexual people.

Summary

Homosexuality is associated with significantly elevated levels of mental health problems compared to heterosexuality. Gay activists assume that these differentially elevated levels of mental health problems are a result of social and structural stigmas aimed at homosexual people by a heterosexual, homophobic society, rather than having anything  to do with the homosexual experience per se. Scientists have attempted to prove that this assumption is true by conducting studies that generate an apparent association of either social or structural stigmas with elevated levels of mental health problems in sexual minorities. However, all of these studies have fatal flaws and limitations that prevent scientifically valid cause-and-effect inferences or conclusions to be made, leaving us with the original assumptions still untested. Even the leading researcher in this field admitted that no study has shown that either social or structural stigmas cause mental health problems! Therefore, it remains a real possibility that this phenomenon is caused primarily by the unwanted, dreadful realization — during the emotionally charged and very sensitive pre-teen and teen years — that one is sexually attracted to members of the same gender, instead of to members of the opposite gender, and that this realization is psychologically and mentally devastating to individuals because it dashes their deeply held and cherished hopes and dreams of leading a normal, healthy, heterosexual adult life that includes a wife and children. In other words, could it be that the elevated levels of mental health problems experienced by homosexual people are simply an indirect result of being homosexual in a heterosexual world, rather than a result of social and structural stigmas created by a homophobic, heterosexual majority? Regardless of why sexual minorities have elevated levels of mental health problems, we should always treat homosexual people with appropriate expressions of love, kindness and respect, as these are defined in the Bible. And we should always be quick to share the good news of the Gospel of Jesus Christ with homosexual people when the opportunity presents itself, keeping in mind that we are all made in the image and likeness of God and are dearly loved by Him.

References Cited

1. Chakraborty, A., et al. (2011). Mental Health of the non-heterosexual population of England. British Journal of Psychiatry 198:143-148.

2. Collingwood, J. (2011). Higher Risk of Mental Health Problems for Homosexuals. Psych Central (click HERE).

3. Hatzenbuehler, M.L. (2010). Social Factors as Determinants of Mental Health Disparities in LGB Populations: Implications for Public Policy. Social Issues and Policy Review 4:31-62.

4. Hatzenbuehler, M.L. (2011). The Social Environment and Suicide Attempts in Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Youth. Pediatrics 127:896-903.

5. Hatzenbuehler, M., et al. (2009). State-Level Policies and Psychiatric Morbidity in Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Populations. American Journal of Public Health 99:2275-2281.

6. Hatzenbuehler, M., et al. (2010). The Impact of Institutional Discrimination on Psychiatric Disorders in Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Populations: A Prospective Study. American Journal of Public Health 100:452-459.

7. Hatzenbuehler, M., et al. (2012). Effect of Same-Sex Marriage Laws on Health Care Use and Expenditures in Sexual Minority Men: A Quasi-Natural Experiment. American Journal of Public Health 102:285-291.

8. Hatzenbuehler, M., et al. (2014). Structural Stigma and All-Cause Mortality in Sexual Minority Populations. Social Science and Medicine 103:33-41.

9. Keyes, K., et al. (2011). Stressful Life Experiences, Alcohol consumption, and Alcohol Use Disorders: The Epidemiologic Evidence for Four Main Types of Stressors. Psychopharmacology 218:1-17.

10. Menzie, N. (2014). Study Linking Marriage to Gay Men’s Health ‘Flawed’, Say Experts. The Christian Post (click HERE).

11. Schumm, W. (2011). Replies to “The Social Environment and Suicide Attempts in Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Youth.” (click HERE)

12. Tracy, N. (2013). Homosexuality and Mental Health Issues. Healthy Place: Trusted Mental Health Information (click HERE).

13. Whitehead, N. (2002). Homosexuality and Mental Health Problems (click HERE).

(To find more articles about HOMOSEXUALITY, click HERE)

What the Bible Tells Us about “Gay Marriage”

What the Bible Tells Us about “Gay Marriage”

James R. Aist

 Introduction

Recently, a gay activist reacted to my biblical definition of “gay marriage” (click HERE) with something like this: “The Bible doesn’t say anything about gay marriage. Show me where the Bible mentions gay marriage. You can’t.” That reaction inspired me to write this article for my website, because I sensed right away that a good response on my part would require more than a passing comment.

The fact is, the Bible often infers or implies (i.e., teaches) us much more than it says explicitly with a definitive word or phrase. For example, the doctrine of the “trinity” is wholly derived from what the Bible says in many related passages, but the word “trinity” is not to be found anywhere in the Bible. Likewise, the doctrine of the omniscience of God is based upon many things that the Bible tells us about God, but the words “omniscient” and “omniscience” are not used in the Bible. When it comes to “gay marriage”, the Bible says many things about marriage and homosexuality that tell us all we really need to know in order to realize that God does not approve of it, without actually using the term “gay marriage” or its biblical equivalent, whatever that would be. Now, let’s move on to develop this topic in some detail.

The Inspiration of the Bible

It is important to grasp the unique nature of the Holy Bible in order to understand that what the Bible tells us about “gay marriage” is divine truth and is, therefore, definitive, unequivocal and final. So, let’s first lay the foundation for the “inspiration” of the Bible.

God is omniscient: This means that God is all-knowing, that He has knowledge of all things past, present and future. What is unknown to man is known to God. And, God knows the end from the beginning. Thus, whatever will exist or will be done in the future is not a surprise to God; He already knows about it and always has. Consider the biblical witness:

  • “If our hearts condemn us, we know that God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything.” (1 John 3:20)
  • “Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account.” (Hebrews 4:13)
  • “Who then is like me? Let him proclaim it.
    Let him declare and lay out before me
    what has happened since I established my ancient people,
    and what is yet to come—
    yes, let them foretell what will come.”(Isaiah 44:7)
  • Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.” (John 21:17)

The Bible Is Inspired by the Omniscient God: The Bible – all of it – is inspired (i.e., God-breathed) by the Holy Spirit. As such, it is the infallible Word of God Himself and, therefore, it is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training. We have God’s word on it that the Bible is truth, and “God is not human, that he should lie, not a human being, that he should change his mind.” (Numbers 23:19). Here is the biblical witness:

  • “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16)
  • “First of all, the Jews have been entrusted with the very words of God.” (Romans 3:2)
  • “Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things.  For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” (2 Peter 1:20-21)
  • “This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words.” (1 Corinthians 2:13)
  • “The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.” (John 14:10)
  • “Sanctify them by your truth. Your word is truth.” (John 17:17)

Implications for Same-sex Marriage

God Approves of Non-sexual Same-sex Relationships: The Bible speaks well of several non-sexual, same-sex relationships, including Jonathan and David (1 Samuel 20), Ruth and Naomi (Ruth 1) and Jesus and John (John 13:23, 19:26, 20:2 and 21:20). There is no valid evidence whatsoever to support the speculation of gay activists that any of these relationships were homosexual in nature. The Bible speaks only of their relationships as involving what we would refer to today as “brotherly love”, without even a hint of “sexual love.” God’s disapproval comes into play when same-sex relationships become sexual.

God Condemns Homosexual Behavior In Any Context: Homosexual behavior is unequivocally and consistently portrayed in the Bible as sin (Genesis 19:5 with Jude 1:7; Leviticus 18:22; Leviticus 20:13; Romans 1:26-27; I Corinthians 6:9-10; and I Timothy 1:10). The biblical witness on this point could not be any clearer. Moreover, nowhere does the Bible indicate approval of homosexual behavior in any context. Gay activists speculate that the condemnation of homosexual behavior in the Bible could not apply to modern, loving, committed, faithful and long-term same-sex relationships because the (human) writers of the Bible knew nothing about such relationships. But that speculation does not take into account that the writers of the Bible were writing under the inspiration and direction of the Holy Spirit of the omniscient God, the God who has knowledge of all things past, present and future. The omniscient God of the Bible has always known everything there is to know about all homosexual relationships, past, present and future, including the “modern” ones, and yet He made no accommodation whatsoever for any of them in the Bible. The fact is that the Bible condemns all homosexual behavior as sin, without exception, regardless of the context. And that is God’s word on the matter.

God’s Definition of Marriage Excludes “Gay Marriage”: In Genesis 1:27-28, the Bible says “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it”. And in Genesis 2:23-24, “The man said, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ for she was taken out of man.” That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.” We see here that God’s original design for human sexuality was heterosexuality, since He created them male and female and gave them the task of filling the earth. Then He defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman, as evidenced by His referring to Eve as Adam’s wife. And in Matthew 19:4-6, Jesus confirmed the definition of marriage in Genesis 2: “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” Thus, the biblical definition of marriage, first recorded in the Old Testament and later confirmed by Jesus in the New Testament, is as follows: a lifelong, exclusive commitment between one man and one woman. Therefore, so-called “gay marriage” is excluded and invalidated by God’s definition of marriage, regardless of how loving, committed, faithful and long-term the same-sex relationships may be. If the omniscient God of the Bible had intended for modern, loving, committed, faithful and long-term same-sex relationships to qualify for marriage, then He would not have excluded them by definition.

Summary

The God of the Bible is omniscient (i.e., all-knowing). He has knowledge of all things past, present and future, including all things homosexual. The Bible – all of it – is inspired (i.e., God-breathed) by the Holy Spirit. As such, it is the infallible Word of God Himself. God approves of non-sexual same-sex relationships, such as Jonathan and David, Ruth and Naomi, and Jesus and John. His disapproval comes into play when same-sex relationships become sexual. In fact, God condemns homosexual behavior in any context. God’s definition of marriage — a lifelong, exclusive commitment between one man and one woman — excludes and invalidates “gay marriage.” If the omniscient God of the Bible had intended for modern, loving, committed, faithful and long-term same-sex relationships to qualify for marriage, then He would not have excluded them by definition.

(For more articles on HOMOSEXUALITY, click HERE)

Satan’s Sinister, Sister Attacks on Humanity

Satan’s Sinister, Sister Attacks on Humanity

James R. Aist

“The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.” – Jesus (John 10:10)

Introduction

On the sixth day of creation, “…God created mankind in his own image; in the image of God he created them.”(Genesis 1:27). It was only after Adam and Eve were created that God said of His entire creation, “it is very good.” (Genesis 1:31b). When God had created Adam and Eve, He said to them “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth.” (Genesis 1:28a). God’s first instruction to Adam and Eve was to reproduce, to replicate the crown jewels of His creation, human beings.

Now, God had already created Satan, but only mankind was made in the very image and likeness of God, and only mankind was given dominion over His creation (Genesis 1:28). This made Satan, who wanted to exalt himself above God (Isaiah 14:13), exceedingly jealous and hateful of mankind. In Genesis 3:15, after Satan had convinced Adam and Eve to disobey God’s command to not eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, God said to Satan, “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head and you will strike his heel.” And in John 8:44, Jesus said that “… the devil… was a murderer from the beginning…” Peter also referred to Satan as “our enemy” (1 Peter 5:8). Clearly, Satan is the archenemy of mankind and seeks ways to satisfy his jealousy and hatred toward us. And what better way to do that than to prevent human reproduction, or, failing that, to get mothers to murder their own children in the womb. So, let’s look into this matter further and see if homosexuality and abortion are, indeed, tools of Satan to undermine God’s command to “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth” and to satisfy his hatred toward us.

Homosexuality

I have already shown that God would not and does not create anyone to be homosexual (click HERE). Like all other sins, homosexuality came into the world through the “original sin” of Adam, after God had finished His six days of creative activity. And it was Satan who enticed Eve (and through her, Adam) to disobey God (i.e., to sin) (Genesis 3:1-6). From that moment on, all of mankind has been born with a proclivity to sin. Therefore, Satan is the root source of all sins and of all temptations to sin, including homosexual temptations and sins.

Now, human beings are among the “animals” that reproduce sexually by the union of a male’s sperm with a female’s egg. Thus, homosexuality renders one incapable of reproducing naturally, because, to reproduce, one has to want to have sex with the opposite gender. And, that is how we can know that homosexuality is one strategy that Satan has used to thwart God’s plan for human sexuality, that is, to “be fruitful and multiply.” Moreover, from the human perspective, by destroying the natural, human sexual desire for the opposite gender, homosexuality steals from men and women their ability to fulfill one of their most basic, fundamental and precious human desires; that is, to conceive naturally and bear children (cf. John 10:10a).

Abortion

Since homosexuality prevents only about 1.5% of the general population from reproducing naturally, Satan isn’t satisfied to stop there. Abortion has become so common that it has greatly eclipsed homosexuality as the number one enemy of human procreation. About 3,200 babies are aborted in the U.S. alone each day (click HERE)! For this satanic strategy to be most successful, pregnant women have to believe the lie that their unborn child is not really a human being at all. Enter the pro-abortion lobby, led by Planned Parenthood, the largest provider of abortion in America. They are doing everything they can to persuade pregnant women to believe that their unborn child does not become human until some arbitrary point in the gestation process has been reached. But the fact is, there is no identifiable point in this continuum of pre-natal development at which an unborn child becomes suddenly human; the unborn child, having the full complement of human chromosomes – one set from each of the two parents —  is, biologically speaking, a human being from the moment of conception (click HERE). Now, recall that Jesus said of Satan, “… He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies” (John 8:44). This is how we can know for sure where this lie comes from!

Abortion violates not one, but two, God-given commands: 1) the sixth Commandment, “Do not murder” (Exodus 20:13); and 2) “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth” (Genesis 1:28a). And, being murder in its very nature (click HERE), abortion is an obvious way that “The thief comes to…kill…” (John 10:10a; cf. John 8:44). What more evil assault on humanity can there be, than to convince a mother to murder her innocent, helpless child in the womb?! Moreover, abortion is not pro-woman, as the abortion lobby claims. In fact, just the opposite is true. Perhaps the most distinctive human function that defines and exalts a woman is her God-given privilege to carry, nurture and deliver a new human life. Abortion directly attacks the very essence of womanhood. And that is anti-woman, not pro-woman!

Conclusion

Jesus said, “…I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.” Nothing could represent more direct attacks against this goal and purpose of Jesus than homosexuality (by preventing human reproduction) and abortion (by murdering unborn children). Satan, on the other hand, “…comes only to steal and kill and destroy” mankind’s natural sexuality (via homosexuality) and progeny (via abortion). These two strategies, homosexuality and abortion, are Satan’s sinister, sister attacks on humanity.

After Words

Through it all, let us be quick to treat homosexual people with respect and dignity and to share the Good News of the Gospel of Jesus Christ with them. And may we not let our hearts become darkened with hatred towards homosexual people, just because we hate their homosexual lifestyle. As the Apostle Paul said, “For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.” (Ephesians 6:12).

And, regarding abortion, it’s important to keep in mind that there is no sin that is so big and so bad that God will not forgive it. In fact, God wants to forgive you and bring you peace. He has made this promise to you: “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.” (1 John 1:9). He is “faithful” to forgive you because He has promised to do so, and God does not lie or break His promises (Numbers 23:19); He is “just” to forgive you because Jesus paid the full price for your sins when He suffered and died for them, in your place, and, therefore, it would be unjust of Him to not forgive you! And He doesn’t stop there. He will also cleanse you from the stain of your sin and of the guilt and shame associated with it; God will separate your sins from you “as far as the East is from the West” (Psalm 103:12), and he will not keep bringing it up and holding it against you (Isaiah 43:25). You have God’s word on it (Numbers 23:19), so take Him at His word, receive His forgiveness and move on with the peace of Christ.

(To read more articles by Professor Aist on HOMOSEXUALITY, click HERE; and on ABORTION, click HERE)

A Homosexuality DICTIONARY for Born-again Christians

English: Gender symbols, sexual orientation: h...

A Homosexuality DICTIONARY for Born-again Christians

James R. Aist

Introduction

The homosexual movement is advancing by way of a massive and ongoing propaganda campaign, fueled by the liberal media, to win over the hearts and minds of the heterosexual majority to their cause, the “gay agenda” (click HERE). One of the strategies employed by gay activists is to control the definitions of key words and terms so that their “gay agenda” can be convincingly marketed to the general public, including born-again Christians (click HERE). A few examples of this strategy should help to illustrate more clearly what I’m talking about: 1) the term “homosexual” is defined by gay activists as a person’s identity, thus making it seem, by definition, that disapproval of homosexuality is a personal attack on who they are, rather than merely disapproval of what they do sexually; 2) a homosexual person who has been substantially transformed to heterosexual but has even the slightest, residual recurrence of same-sex attractions is still identified as “homosexual” by gay activists, rendering it impossible, by definition, for them to ever be seen as the truly “ex-homosexual” or “straight” people they have become (click HERE); and 3) a male pedophile who abuses children of the same gender is categorized by gay activists as a heterosexual pedophile if he has ever had sex with an adult female, regardless of whether or not he also has had sex with adult men, making it appear, by definition, that there are no homosexual pedophiles, and thus, that there is no link between homosexuality and pedophilia (click HERE).

In order to counteract this self-serving “name game” employed by gay activists, and to help born-again Christians navigate intelligently the rhetoric of the homosexuality debate, I have developed a new a set of definitions that more accurately reflects the realities of homosexuality from a more “biblically correct” — as opposed to a “politically correct” – point of view.

Many of the new definitions I propose here may seem, at first glance, to be virtually equivalent to the old ones, but, in practice they are really quite different. Please be sure to read the ADDENDUM for a further explanation of these distinctions.

The Definitions

PERSONAL IDENTITY

Person: a human being. God does not categorize people as “heterosexuals” or “homosexuals”. He sees us as human beings created in His image and dearly loved. This is our true identity. What people do sexually is not really who they are. Although we are all sinners, we are so strongly loved by Him that He offered His only begotten Son, Jesus, to die for us, in order to reconcile us to Himself. No one is outside the scope of His love.

SEXUALITY

Heterosexuality: Refers to the condition of wanting to have sex with human beings of the opposite gender.

Homosexuality: Refers to the condition of wanting to have sex with human beings of the same gender.

Bisexuality: Refers to the condition of wanting to have sex with members of both the opposite gender and the same gender.

SEXUAL PERSONS

Heterosexual person: A human being who wants to have sex with members of the opposite gender.

Ex-heterosexual person: A human being who used to want to have, and is not having, sex with members of the opposite gender. Whether or not they still have some opposite-sex attractions is not determinative; this is about choice of sexual behavior (see ADDENDUM).

Homosexual person: A human being who wants to have sex with members of the same gender.

Ex-homosexual person: A human being who used to want to have, and is not having, sex with members of the same gender. Whether or not they still have some same-sex attractions is not determinative; this is about choice of sexual behavior (see ADDENDUM).

Bisexual person: A human being who wants to have sex with members of both the opposite gender and the same gender.

Ex-bisexual person: A human being who used to want to have, and is not having, sex with members of both the opposite gender and the same gender. Whether or not they still have some bisexual attractions is not determinative; this is about choice of sexual behavior (see ADDENDUM).

ORIENTATIONS

Sexual orientation: Refers to the gender (opposite, same or both) with which a human being wants to have sex.

Heterosexual orientation: Wanting to have sex with members of the opposite gender.

Homosexual orientation: Wanting to have sex with members of the same gender.

Bisexual Orientation: Wanting to have sex with members of both the opposite and the same gender.

ATTRACTIONS

Sexual attractions: Refers to the sexual feelings or desires or urges of a human being toward members of  the opposite gender and/or the same gender.

Opposite-sex attractions: Refers to the sexual feelings or desires or urges of a human being toward members of the opposite gender. If such attractions are toward a person other than your spouse, then they are temptations to sin sexually, in any context.

Same-sex attractions: Refers to the sexual feelings or desires or urges of a human being toward members of the same gender. These attractions are always temptations to sin sexually, in any context.

Bisexual Attractions: Refers to the sexual feelings or desires or urges of a human being toward members of both the opposite and the same genders. These dual attractions are temptations to sin, in any context.

PEDOPHILIA

Pedophile: An adult human being who wants to have sex with children. Such a person has two sexual orientations; one toward the gender of the victims (gender based) and another toward children (age based) (click HERE).

Heterosexual pedophile: An adult human being who wants to have sex with children of the opposite gender.

Homosexual pedophile: An adult human being who wants to have sex with children of the same gender.

Bisexual pedophile: An adult human being who wants to have sex with children of both genders.

PRACTICING SEXUALITY

Biblical marriage: a lifelong, exclusive commitment between one man and one woman. There is no other valid kind of marriage (click HERE).

Practicing heterosexual: A human being who is having sex with a member/members of the opposite gender. Outside of the bounds of biblical marriage, this is always sexual sin, in any context (click HERE).

Practicing homosexual: A human being who is having sex with a member/members of the same gender. This is always sexual sin, in any context (click HERE).

Practicing bisexual: A human being who is having sex with members of both genders. This is always sexual sin, in any context.

Practicing pedophile: An adult human being who is having sex with children. This is always sexual sin, in any context (click HERE).

NAMING AND CLAIMING

“Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.  Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.” – Jesus (Matthew 5:10-12)

Anti-gay: a misleading charge used by gay activists to attach a negative label to anything a born-again Christian says that opposes the “gay agenda.” We are anti-sin (of all kinds) and pro-people (of all kinds). It is a blessing to be called “anti-gay” by a gay activist.

Bigot: a born-again Christian who steadfastly refuses to deny anything that the Bible says about homosexuality. It is a blessing to be called a “bigot” by a gay activist.

Born that way: a hoax perpetrated by gay activists to gain sympathy and support for the “gay agenda.” Homosexual people develop homosexually post partum, due, primarily, to “environmental” influences; no one is “born that way” (click HERE).

Cherry picker: a born-again Christian who realizes and understands that only the moral laws of the Old Testament (along with the moral laws of the New Testament) are binding today (click HERE). It is a blessing to be called a “cherry picker” by a gay activist.

Created that way: slander against the God of the Bible. God does not tempt anyone to sin by creating them homosexual (click HERE).

Fundie: a born-again Christian who refuses to deny anything that the Bible says about homosexuality. It is a blessing to be called a “fundie” by a gay activist.

Gay bashing: a false charge used by gay activists to attach a negative label to anything a born-again Christian says that opposes the “gay agenda.” We bash sin, lies and pretense, but not people. It is a blessing to be accused of “gay bashing” by a gay activist.

Gay “marriage”: a fantasy created by gay activists in a vain attempt to confer dignity and pride to homosexual couples. According to the God of the Bible, there is no such thing as “gay marriage” (click HERE).

Hate: a false charge used by gay activists to attach a negative label to anything a born-again Christian says that opposes the “gay agenda.” We hate sin, not people. It is a blessing to be accused of “hate” by a gay activist.

Homophobe: a charge used by gay activists to attach a negative label to a born-again Christian who says anything that opposes the “gay agenda.” We’re not afraid of homosexuality; we just don’t like sin. It is a blessing to be called a “homophobe” by a gay activist.

Homosexuality is immutable: a hoax perpetrated by gay activists to gain sympathy and support for the “gay agenda.” Numerous studies have shown that both religiously and secularly mediated change in sexual orientation occurs in highly motivated, dissatisfied homosexuals at success rates of around 25%-30%, which is comparable to the success rates generally achieved by therapists and counselors for treatment of psychological disorders and behavioral problems, such as alcoholism (click HERE).

Hypocrite: a charge used by gay activists in a vain attempt to convince born-again Christians that they are not qualified to weigh in on homosexual matters. It is a blessing to be called a “hypocrite” by a gay activist.

Liar: a charge used by gay activists to attach a negative label to any born-again Christian who speaks out against the “gay agenda.” It is a blessing to be called a “liar” by a gay activist.

Love: Love does not delight in evil, but rejoices with the truth. To a gay activist, love means you hold up a mirror in front of someone and help them like whatever they see. It is a blessing to be called “unloving” by a gay activist.

After Word

Above all, let us be quick to treat homosexual people with respect and dignity and to share the Good News of the Gospel of Jesus Christ with them. And may we not let our hearts become darkened with hatred towards homosexual people, just because we hate their homosexual lifestyle. As the Apostle Paul said, “For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.” (Ephesians 6:12).

ADDENDUM

Some may protest that “wants to have sex with”, as used here, is equivalent to “has same-sex attractions”, but the two are not interchangeable. While it is probably true that most consensual sex occurs between two people who find each other “sexually attractive”, a person may find someone to be sexually attractive without really wanting to have sex with them. Here are some examples to illustrate this point: 1) a teenage boy discovers that he is sexually attracted to men, but he doesn’t want to have sex with men because he wants to, instead, get married to a woman and father children; 2) a straight, married man who wants to have sex with his wife may see another woman, notice that she is “sexually attractive” and let it go at that, without wanting to actually have sex with her too; and 3) an ex-gay man who no longer wants to have sex with men may see a man, notice that he is sexually attractive and let it go at that, without wanting to actually have sex with him. Thus, people, whether they experience opposite-sex attractions or same-sex attractions, do not necessarily want to have sex with everyone they meet whom they find to be “sexually attractive.” And that is why “wants to have sex with” is not equivalent to “has same-sex attractions.”

(For more articles about HOMOSEXUALITY, click HERE)