Last Monday, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for
African Affairs Linda Thomas-Greenfield said the
U.S. Government will seek to ‘press’ Nigeria to
repeal the law against same-sex marriage enacted
by former President Goodluck Jonathan’s
government in January 2014. She said the Obama
administration has placed the protection of lesbian,
gay, bisexual and transgender community as part
of its foreign policy agenda.
“As a government, it is one of the highest priorities
and strongest values that discrimination against
anyone based on their sexual orientation and
gender identity is wrong. We believe human rights
should be available to everybody,” she said. “As a
policy, we will continue to press the government of
Nigeria as well as other government who have
provided legislation against the LGBT community.”
So, what has America got to do with
homosexuality? They now say it is a human rights
issue. But how? First, it should be accepted that
homosexuality is a freely chosen vice; therefore,
no homosexual can excuse his decadent behaviour
by claiming that he is “born that way.” Second,
homosexuality is a contagion that preys on
innocent victims, especially the poor and children;
and so it is and remains a menace to society and
a clear and present danger. Third, because of
Western-aided propaganda, homosexuals have
now come out; and after losing their shame, they
are now flaunting their depravity in everywhere,
thereby polluting society.
They said it was hereditary-it was there in the
genes; then they said it was all the result of
aberrations in childhood-an unresolved Oedipus
complex or the Electra, according to the new
gospel-bearer; or, it might in fact be the result of
the interplay of all of these different factors-
genetics, hormonal, psychological, environmental
and social.
But the despised and universally condemned
sodomy of Sodom and Gomorrah has been
replaced by the sexual orientation of modern
America; from Foucault’s temporary aberration, it
has now graduated into respectable specie. And
science has finally liberated man from the shackles
of hated religion: so, absolved of all responsibility,
man can now do as he pleases-and blame genes,
childhood, God or whatever. The new argument
has dethroned God and deified science. “Why is it
that none of the prophets invented psychoanalysis?
Why did it have to wait for a completely godless
Jew?” Sigmund Freud, the new secular prophet,
asked.
They used to burn them at the stake. Then they
decided to look away, especially when it became
the pastime of the high and mighty. Then they
invented a whole science for it; and using the
theory of evolution and randomness, the science of
genetics and the voodoo of psychoanalysis, they
absolved humans of responsibility for the sin of
homosexuality. It then became an orientation and
now it is a civil right; and the worst human vices
are inscribed in law as human rights.
But since the main purpose of marriage is
procreation in order to ensure the continuity of the
human race, it follows that same-sex couples, who
cannot procreate, should not be allowed to marry.
Throughout history, the only socially and
religiously acceptable sexual conduct has been
relationship between members of the opposite sex;
therefore sexual relation between same-sex
partners is immoral, unethical and unacceptable. It
is a sign of the irrationality and untenability of
same-sex marriage that all the arguments in its
support can be used to justify bestiality.
Scientific studies have established that children
born through in-vitro fertilization or surrogate
motherhood grow up with great hunger for
parents. Children also need mothers who give
emotional security to them; and especially for girls,
they give crucial counsel to them while they
undergo rapid physical, sexual and emotional
development. They need fathers who alone can
moderate tendencies to antisocial behaviour in
boys and control sexual promiscuity in girls. In
addition, children raised by lesbians or
homosexual men are more likely to grow up into
homoerotic relationships.
This is what the West is now trying to impose on
our world. Despite threats by Western powers,
some African leaders have been blunt in their
criticisms of homosexual conduct. Foremost
among these are President Robert Mugabe of
Zimbabwe and President Yoweri Museveni of
Uganda.
Coming across a stall erected by the Association
of Gays and Lesbian of Zimbabwe at the 1995
Zimbabwe annual International Book Fair in Harare,
President Mugabe exploded: “I find it extremely
outrageous and repugnant to my human
conscience that such immoral and repulsive
organizations, like those of homosexuals, who
offend both against the law of nature and the
morals of religious beliefs espoused by our
society, should have any advocates in our midst
and elsewhere in the world.”
Later, he situated them where they belonged. “It
degrades human dignity. It’s unnatural, and there
is no question ever of allowing these people to
behave worse than dogs and pigs. If dogs and pigs
do not do it, why must human beings? We have
our own culture, and we must re-dedicate
ourselves to our traditional values that make us
human beings,” Mugabe said. “What we are being
persuaded to accept is sub-animal behaviour and
we will never allow it here. If you see people
parading themselves as Lesbians and Gays, arrest
them and hand them over to the police!”
And when President Museveni signed the anti-gay
law in Uganda, Western countries threatened to cut
off aid, and he lashed out at them. “Outsiders
cannot dictate to us. This is our country. I advise
friends from the west not to make this an issue,
because if they make it an issue the more they will
lose. If the west does not want to work with us
because of homosexuals, then we have enough
space to ourselves here,” he said. “Uganda does
not need aid.”
But today, the world is called upon to accept the
fact of homosexual acts and homosexual
relationships as morally okay and the celebration of
this conduct as something natural, normal, modern
and even desirable in order to receive aid from the
West. Instead of hurrying to the defence of the
family, upholding the sacredness of the marriage
institution, protecting the dignity of human life,
promoting the practice of sexuality within the
context of married life-a marriage between man
and woman, and mounting fierce and implacable
opposition to these so-called same-sex unions, we
are once again caught vacillating.
And it is not something that has been accepted
even in the nations that are forcing it on us. A Fox
News poll found that Americans oppose same-sex
marriage by an overwhelming 66 to 25 percent
margin. Another Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll
conducted in August 2003 found almost 60 per
cent, and a Gallup poll found 53 per cent, of
Americans supporting a constitutional amendment
to ban gay marriage, with 34 percent opposing. A
Zogby poll conducted the following year found that
more than half of all Americans agreed that a
constitutional amendment should be passed to
limit marriage to a man and a woman.
The West is able to do what it has done because it
has already overthrown religious values. We
should attach no value to Western opposition to
religion in general or even to its aversion to
Christianity in particular, fuelled and controlled as
it is by unrelenting propaganda by the worldwide
homosexual activist movement. Just because
America leads the world in technology doesn’t by
itself mean it leads it in morality; or because the
world needs to copy from their technological
advancement doesn’t mean that the world must
adopt every of America’s many [im]moral codes of
conduct.
But if science developed in opposition to Church
teachings, in our sympathetic ignorance, we
recognize this historical opposition to science as
the measure by which early Church Fathers have
departed from the sublime teachings of Christ [AS].
Because we believe and affirm that Jesus [AS]
never preached anything that was, or is, contrary
to, or incompatible with, established scientific
truths.
It is not impossible that the clash between the
Church and science was in part made inevitable by
pious interpolations into scripture and by the
adoption and defence of a popular cosmology that
was without divine sanction, and the general
obscurantist attitude of the clerical order to the
new men of science.
Neither the encyclicals of those eras, nor the
Protestant ethic that developed as a reaction to it;
and nor yet even the subsequent fundamentalism
of classical Pentecostalism, told the story that
science wanted to hear. With the coming of the
Reformation and the Enlightenment, the gulf
between science and religion only got wider.
Thereafter, science took the atheistic route and the
door of the hereafter was firmly closed.
But this reaction by the West should on no
account be allowed to colour or affect our own
attitude to religion, or accept the conclusions that
the West reached after its rebellion to the Word of
God. If after rebelling against Christianity it arrived
at same-sex marriage, why should the rest of the
world that is still loyal to God be made to accept
this outrage?
But they are able to silence the world with their
control of the media, which they utilize to adorn a
perversion with the robe of moral blamelessness;
they are able to sponsor the passing of a variety of
so-called hate-crime laws that disentitle society to
the defence of its own values; and they are able to
sponsor non-discrimination laws with respect to
employment in which they sell their so-called
sexual orientation as a valid category for civil
rights protection. It is not. Homosexuality is not a
category: it is a disease and a sin against God and
against the essential nature of the human person.
And on this, we should tell President Barack
Obama off.

www.dailytrust.com.ng/daily/index.php/columns/friday-columns/60226-sodom-and-gomerica

Who is this freeman that stole my position?

America, the reason Africa refuses to grow!