David versus the Bolsheviks: The Battle of Lexington Green in the Year 2005

On April 27th of this year, the heavy hand of Bolshevism clamped down upon David Parker, a Lexington, MA. citizen and father of a six year old son. David was arrested on trumped up charges, handcuffed like a dangerous felon, and led off to jail. His heinous crime? Parker is guilty of being a morally principled man with the courage to request that he and his wife be given advance notification when issues of sexual unnaturalness and perversion (transgenderism, sodomy, and same-sex headed relationships) were going to be discussed in his son's classroom. Said Parker, "certain authorities insist that I agree that my children must be taught that gay relationships and transgender transformation are acceptable and normal. When I firmly, albeit patiently, objected and then finally insisted to be notified when and how my own children were to be exposed to these issues, I was arrested and hauled off to jail." Freedom of conscience has been made a hate-crime in Massachusetts.

Among the communist goals listed on the Congressional Record—Current Communist Goals (pp. A34-A35, Jan. 10, 1963) are these: 17) Get control of the schools…use as transmission belts for socialism, 25) Break down cultural standards of morality, 26) Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as 'normal, natural, healthy."

These goals are affirmed by the Communist Textbook of Psychopolitics. It is written, "Degradation and conquest are companions. In order to be conquered a nation must be degraded. By attacking the character and morals…by bringing about contamination of youth, a general degraded feeling (will facilitate) command of the population."

Lexington Bolshevik commissars are actualizing invidiously evil stratagems devised to effectuate moral decay and collapse within America. In their capacity as school board officials and as teachers, they are spreading propaganda designed to "destroy the home." By "creating continuous juvenile delinquency, forcing upon the state all manner of practices to divorce the child from it (the family) will in the end create the chaos necessary to Communism. Creating a greed for drugs, sexual misbehavior and uncontrolled freedom (will) bring about our alignment." (Communist Textbook of Psychopolitics)

David Parker, a morally principled man, devoted father, and courageous dissident of their evil devices has been stamped: "Enemy of the State."

In a speech before his supporters, Parker stated, "I stand before you banned from attending my son's first day of school…banned from voting, teacher-parent conferences and school committee meetings. The Lexington school administration demands that I ask permission for these rights. What free U.S. citizen must ask for permission to vote, or to be in the presence of his son? The school administration…is attempting to put themselves in the role as parents."

Facing off against Parker and his supporters was a malevolence-fueled rabble gathered together to spit and spew venom. Among the venomous hissing snakes were commissars Helen Cohen, Chairman of the Lexington School Committee; Tom Griffiths, a School Committee member; and Jeanne Kreiger, member of the Lexington Board of Selectmen. Also in attendance were three Marxist 'liberation theology' preachers: Rabbi Howard Jaffe of Temple Isaiah, Rev. Judy Brain, Pastor of Pilgrim Congregational Church, and Rev. Bill Clark, Senior Pastor of the First Unitarian Parish in Lexington. (Article8.org)

Of the venom-spewing rabble, one witness commented, "You could see the look in their eyes, even the kids. It was eerie. They really can't stand us, as if we're polluting their town just by being here." (Article8.org)

In speaking of commissars, Balint Vazsonyi (America's Thirty Years War) observed that, "commissars of 'social justice' demand conformity in our most private thoughts, our innermost sentiments. Conformity—not only to their failed theories, but to their every whim."

"In the predawn light of April 19 (1775), the beating drums and peeling bells summoned between thirty and fifty militiamen to the town green of Lexington. As they lined up in battle formation the distant sound of marching feet and shouted orders alerted them of the Redcoats approach. The British troops approached…rapidly in platoons…a general officer on horseback at their head. The officer came up to within about two rods of the centre of the company…swung his sword, and said, "Lay down your arms, you damned rebels, or you are all dead men. Fire!" Thus began the "confrontation that would launch a nation." (EyeWitnessToHistory.com)

David Parker has been ordered to 'lay down his arms' and surrender. But he, a valiant modern-day Paul Revere, not only cried out the alarm, but courageously fired the first volley, so to speak, when he bravely vowed:

"Let the call go forth from Lexington, across Massachusetts, and throughout the United States to the world - Parents stand your ground!

But if they mean to have a war over parental rights, Battling for the hearts and minds of our children,

And with regard to the Lexington School administration banning a father's will and presence from all schools,

No powers or principalities on this earth or beyond shall separate the Father from his Son!"

David Parker has sounded the battle cry. Now it's time for all good men to unite and join the fight, for as Edmund Burke cautioned, "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."

About the writer: Linda Kimball is a writer and author of numerous published articles and essays on politics, culture, and worldview.

Both are fair questions.

You consider Mr. Parker's approach to be grandstanding and therefore wrong. Is the wrongness of his approach equivalent to the wrong of GLSEN's activities in public schols - Gay/Straigh Clubs, Day of Silence, Approval cirricula, and much, much more? IOW, do you consider the activities of GLSEN and Parker to be equivalently wrong?

Both are guilty at different levels. Parker is guilty of using his children as bait in an effort to catch a bigger fish than he might otherwise. He is guilty of manipulating facts to support a goal different from what he stated. That's a more personal wrong between him and his family, disgusting as it is to a fair observer.

GLSEN is wrong to target schools to push an agenda that clearly goes farther than their stated goal to simply want all children to accept all people regardless of gender orientation.

So I can easily reject both without any concern. I've never been asked to consider who I disaprove of more, a bank robber or a murderer. For many reasons they are not equal in their results, but both are to be rejected.

Also, just an aside, what do you think about Ann Coulter? Her editorials also use very sharp hyperbole to make her points. And sometimes bludgeon hyperbole. Do you think her approach or message wrong?

I have all of Ann's books. I have never read anything that indicated her goals and her approach were not congruent, nor am I aware of any cheap use of children to make her point. Yet at times I disagree with both her hyperbole and her goals. During the election, she had an opportunity to write columns for USA Today, but her test column was so over the top that she lost the job, and the chance to educate a lot of people. That happens from time to time. Parker lost uncounted opportunities to interact with the school and his children there, and when he threw the dice he came up with snake eyes. He lost.

The debate's over.

MAC says that David Parker's wrong (in his eyes) of a wrong approach is morally (or rather, immorally) equivalent to the massive GLSEN push to promote homosexuality in schools all across the country.

Freakin' slam dunk.

'No Name Calling Week' Cited As Misguided Gay Activism (GLSEN at it again?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1328874/posts

GLSEN LA--Curriculum for Kindergarten ^
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1142620/posts

Same-Sex Marriage and Schools: A Critical Review of the GLSEN Same-Sex Marriage Curriculum
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1119744/posts

GLSEN Boston's 14 Annual Conference: Beyond Boundaries (Fistgate V)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1067832/posts

GLSEN (Gay and Lesbian Educational Network) Assault on Broward County Public Schools!!!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/668271/posts

NEA And GLSEN Seek To Stifle Free Speech
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/627219/posts

NEA And GLSEN Seek To Stifle Free Speech
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a9be92c26df.htm

Just a few of the many, many articles on FR detailing the plans, goals and methods of the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network to indoctrinate and recruit schoolchildren all across America into the "gay" life.

And MAC says that David Parker's effort to keep his son out of pro-homosexual teaching sessions is morally equivalent to the massive efforts of GLSEN.

MAC, you've been revealed for what you are - a deceitful promoter of the homosexual agenda.

No Mac, it's YOU who have revealed the rotteness that exists in your heart and pours forth from your mouth. A casual analysis of your response to LJ reveals te invidious envy that clogs the arteries of your mind & heart. To wit:

Mac: Little, you have been revealed for what you are, a deceitful pathetic "little" as in your name, mind. Does God give you permission to lie to try and make a point where your intelligence fails you?

A pathological liar, in rationalizing his childhood & hatred of his parents once said to me: "I never lied. In fact, I was always trying to tell the truth but they prevented me from doing so." His twisted logic is---->yours Mac. You've been engaging in slimy deceptive tactics from the beginning,and now, just like the liar, you are shifting blame & guilt onto the innocent.

Mac:I thought you capable of reasoned debate, but you are simply a small minded minion of the radical right, incapable of any thoughts but those bored into your brain by whatever cult you associate with.

You really enjoyed saying those nasty little things, didn'nt you Mac? Vengeance-seeking goes hand-in-glove with envy.

I suspect that if God mistakenly gave you any children, you would have used them much the same as Parker. You need

Doubtless you received great pleasure out of fantasizing that you were "sticking the knife in and turning it" right Mac? Hurting people feels good, eh? This too, goes hand-in-glove with envy.

You outed yourself Mac. But this was totally expected. Why? Because narcissism also goes hand-in-glove with envy. It was just a matter of time before you revealed your hand.

Does God smile on the expulsion of a child of lesbian parents from school? Why should she be punished? Is it perhaps a fear of the reality of such relationships being spoken of by the children? Cruelty can take on many faces.

You have whined endlessly about Parker supposedly using his children as propaganda points when that is precisely what these two deviant parents did.

A Christian school has the mission of communicating Christian values to its students. Lesbians who send their child to a Christian school do so in full knowledge that this school has the moral responsibility to teach that child that the way its parents live is wrong and sinful and will result in damnation. To do less would be to cease teaching Christian principles for fear of offending anyone's "feelings".

Those deviants were obviously setting up a situation where they could sue the school the moment it taught that child the Biblical position on homosexuality. They were in effect demanding that the Christian school stop teaching Christianity to respect their "feelings". And they do not have the right to do that.

Jesus did not water down his condemnation of the scribes and Pharisees to spare their "feelings". Elijah, the greatest of Old Testament prophets, flatly told Ahab that for his sins he would die, his family would die, and buzzards and dogs would eat their corpses. Not exactly warm and fuzzy, was it ? God isn't Santa Claus.

You have whined endlessly about Parker supposedly using his children as propaganda points when that is precisely what these two deviant parents did.

One thing's for sure. You have no idea of why the parents sent their child to the school, other than for a good Christian education. We know for sure that Parker used his children simply as pawns. But we are making progress here. At the beginning of this thread, many here would not have referred to them as parents.

Those deviants were obviously setting up a situation where they could sue the school the moment it taught that child the Biblical position on homosexuality.

I trust you have some documentation to support this. You wouldn't be just assuming it now, would you?

Jesus did not water down his condemnation of the scribes and Pharisees to spare their "feelings".

It's a good thing that Mary Magdalene wasn't in that "Christian" school or she would have been stoned to death for sure. I always thought that Jesus said "Suffer the little children to me", but certainly he must have meant only those of straight or sinless parents. Your "Christian" school certainly has its restrictions to the "suffering the children to me" philosophy. But heck, in this day and age, I'm sure they have to be more particular than Jesus was.

God isn't Santa Claus.

Yes, I'm sure He is smiling down on that school....

You have no idea of why the parents sent their child to the school, other than for a good Christian education.

People who are choosing to live in rebellion against God's laws hardly sent their child to the school for "a good Christian education". They knew perfectly well that their way of living was in willful defiance of God's laws, so why should they send their child to learn what they have themselves completely rejected ? They knew that at some point their child was going to be told God's position on the way her "whatevers" were living and she was going to come home in tears which is exactly what they were waiting for.

All are sinners. But these two "whatevers" has reached a point of being "reprobates" (i.e., where you really don't give a damn about even trying to live a godly life and are living in open rebellion against God). So why should they send their child to a Christian school except that a very well funded activist group wanted to trigger a legal confrontation ? And as I recall, that is exactly what happenned. They tried to sue to demand that Christian schools, in effect, stop teaching Christianity on the grounds that it would "offend the feelings" of non-Christian students. Apparently it was not enough to remove Christianity from public schools and public buildings. Now deviants seek to remove it from Christian education as the cutting edge of Satan's war against all that is holy.

They knew that at some point their child was going to be told God's position on the way her "whatevers" were living and she was going to come home in tears which is exactly what they were waiting for.

Not exactly. She was expelled. Your memory may serve you as to what you think their intentions were, but the child was the victim of nothing more than a hate-filled school. It can teach all the Christian love it wants, but the world knows it for what it is...a hate factory.

For anyone who questions evolution, simply look at how Christians like those in that school have evolved from the love that Christ taught.

Perhaps God will stand in judgment over the parents, but that school principal best move up to the pearly gates with a flak jacket on!

They tried to sue to demand that Christian schools, in effect, stop teaching Christianity on the grounds that it would "offend the feelings" of non-Christian students.

I presume you have some links for me on that.

Now deviants seek to remove it from Christian education as the cutting edge of Satan's war against all that is holy.

Was the child a deviant in God's eyes? Would the school have expelled a child if the parents had had an abortion? What other sins of the father are sufficient to expel the child? Inquiring minds want to know.

Like all pro-deviants you believe that the Christian position on sodomy is based on hate. It isn't. You idiotically invoked Mary Magdalene. She came to Christ in sorrowful repentance. Those two deviant were in proud defiance of God's laws (like those Rainbow Sashers who came not as Christians to seek God's face but to get in God's face in a Satanic spirit of prideful defiance). Jesus told here to sin no more. The response of those two deviants would have been unprintable.

God hates sin. When Jesus ate with sinners it wasn't to approve of their "lifestyle" but to get them out of it. As he said, the sick need a doctor, not the healthy.

As Christians we do not have the right to say that evil is good and that is what the pro-deviant position demands. Those two deviants demanded that a Christian church proclaim that sin is good. It is one thing to sin. It is something else entirely to try to set a whole different standard of good than God's.

A Christian school has every right to demand that its members accept God's definition of "good". If a Christian community is to remain Christian it must, as St Paul was clear, expel those who have no intention of living according to God's laws. They weren't demanding perfect people. Just not people living in open rebellion against God. Those two deviants were proudly living in a state of mortal sin. So what were they doing there at all ? Obviously they wanted to create grounds for a suit to de-Christianize Christian education. Obviously because they wanted to use the courts to demand that God's holy church "tolerate" deviance and sin.

You cannot have a deviant couple in a Christian school. And there is no reason why a deviant couple should send their child to a Christian school except that they wanted to trigger a legal confrontation. None.

"..And there is no reason why a deviant couple should send their child to a Christian school except that they wanted to trigger a legal confrontation. None."

I agree with you that logically there is no such reason, except if the couple seeks for their child not make the same mistakes they had made,...however, as soon as one understands that meaning and the state of mind for 2 lesbians to finance such a commitment, ..their human nature would have placed as a priority their separation and/or rejection of homosexuality prior to their commitment of their 'daughter' to the Christian school. Accordingly, any claim by homosexuals/gays/lesbians to want to become members of a Church strictly on the basis of studying His Word are also immediately suspect.

In order to avoid the argument of illegitimacy of homosexuality for a moment, so as to communicate this point, let's posit a different group of people who also possess a common trait which we are told in Scripture that such people will not inherit the Kingdom of God.

Let's consider a group of murderers, who avidly attest to their proclivity to murder, and simply justify themselves by claiming the mighty will inherit the world. If such a group, then claimed they wanted to send their child to a Christian environment as opposed to an environment that condoned their behavior, one would have to imply either the group had misgivings about their murderous tendancies or they were trying to get somebody on the inside of a group which they opposed for ulterior motives.

If the former reason, the murderous group would find it more immediate to change their image than to send their child to the opposing environment. In order to change their perspective, they nee to change their thinking or change what controls their thinking or soul.

Those who shift control of their thinking are usually associated with being preoccupied with that central tenant of change, rather than immediately performing good works. This is, in part, due to the nature of our soul and studied in doctrines regarding sanctification. In part this is a learning process, where the soul, our thinking facilities, intakes a good faithful thoughtline, and then allows the good part of the thinking faculties to process those thoughts, and send the consequence to the thinking part that activates decisions and behavior.

This is referenced in Bible doctrinal studies as the soul inbreathing Bible doctrine, the Holy SPirit indwelling the Soul processing that doctrine and growing the spirit and heart of the thinker. The heart then manifesting that divinely good spirit in its divinely good works, not to be confused with human good works (which are divinely good for nothingness).

I've encountered a number of homosexuals recently, both men and women, on different situations, different persons, but all are manifesting strong indications that they have been planning, deciding and now acting to attack the Church, Scripture, and the Trinity from within. There is a homosexual movement to rewrite the Bible so as to justify homosexuality (and who knows what else). There has been a homosexual movement to rewrite the standards of marriage that is openly manifest. There is a movement by homosexuals to rewrite laws and codes associated with the family. Many homosexuals today have been working the adoption mechanics for the last decade to become foster parents and guardians of divorced parents' children.

It is poignant that the homosexual movement has identifiably targeted three of the four divinely established institutions created for believer and unbeliever alike so society may continue to survive in God's blessings and policy of grace. Those institution being free will or personal dominion, marriage, the family, and national governance. In each of these institutions, homosexuals have sought to rewrite the codes of those institutions to accomodate their perverse lusts in an attempt to legitimatize their perversion.

One such random encounter I had with a homosexual evolved where the homosexual brought up the topic of Christ and proceeded to declare that homosexuals would be advanced above Christ in heaven and Jesus Christ was no match for their power. Now this reveals a considerable amount regarding the homosexual movement. It strikes me as being much more Satanic in nature. Perhaps homosexuals are simply more prone to demon possession and such outlandish comments were made by a demon rather than the homosexual, but they nevertheless didn;t seem to flow as naturally as most homosexuals would allude to their freeflowing lifestyle.

I suspect we are only witnessing a tip of an iceburg which has been deliberately kept occultic. In God's grace, He may have let them obtain their desires to keep such plans hidden, all the while His Word shines on all.

We need to be cognizant, though, that when the Grieving of the Holy SPirit, (normally associated with our actions of sin), naturally advances when unchecked to the Quenching of the Holy Spirit (moving from disobedience to Him to attacking Him), Divine discipline also advances as His perfect righteousness demands perfect justice, and those who attempt to deny His grace to those who have not heard the Word or received the call will receive the consequence of His Divine Justice.

From the perspective of those who are out of fellowship with God, His Divine Justice will appear as though He hates and harms the recipient of His wrath, whereas those in fellowship will understand He disciplines those whom he loves so they might return to Him and grow in His grace.

Unfortunately for those in close proximity to disobedience, God not only judges by person, but by groups and by nations. An outstanding reason to distance oneself from homosexuality, homosexuals, their groups and their machinations.

Like all pro-deviants you believe that the Christian position on sodomy is based on hate. It isn't. You idiotically invoked Mary Magdalene

Permit me to share my posting philosophy with you. I will always post in a respectful manner assuming the other does the same. I will not accept ad-hominem attacks and will return the same ten times over. Others have found that out also. OTOH, I will be happy to discuss any issue including this one on its merits alone, not on the personal characteristics of the posters. Finally, you respond to my posts and I will respond to yours. In other words, if you can keep it on an intellectual basis, we can debate the issue.

The response of those two deviants would have been unprintable.

I would like to see their response if you are doing more than just speculating. The news reports I have read indicate they plan on just accepting the decision of the school.

God hates sin. When Jesus ate with sinners it wasn't to approve of their "lifestyle" but to get them out of it. As he said, the sick need a doctor, not the healthy.

And I don't disagree with that. Just what sin did the little girl commit? Would the school take similar action against any sinning parent?

As Christians we do not have the right to say that evil is good and that is what the pro-deviant position demands. Those two deviants demanded that a Christian church proclaim that sin is good.

Again I ask you to provide me some documentation or linkage to support that. Did they place any demands on the school as you said in an earlier post?

If a Christian community is to remain Christian it must, as St Paul was clear, expel those who have no intention of living according to God's laws.

Have you any information leading to the conclusion that the daughter chose not to live by God's laws? If living with sinful parents indicates an intent to live outside of God's laws, then shouldn't every child be expelled, since every parent is a sinner?

Obviously they wanted to create grounds for a suit to de-Christianize Christian education. Obviously because they wanted to use the courts to demand that God's holy church "tolerate" deviance and sin.

Perhaps, but do you have any information leading to this conclusion? And if so, so what? The school would simply be punishing the child for the actions, or presumed plans, of the parents.

You cannot have a deviant couple in a Christian school. And there is no reason why a deviant couple should send their child to a Christian school except that they wanted to trigger a legal confrontation. None.

Well, whether you accept it or not, millions of homosexuals are in fact Christian, and a number of Christian religions accept homosexuals in their congregations and even in their leadership. So I would once again ask you to provide any support for that statement.

I have asked you a number of questions in the past few threads that you have simply ignored. I know it's much easier to turn the argument around to the parents, not the school, just as the only defense you and others here had for Parker's absurd actions was to rail against the advances of homosexuality in general. But what about the little girl? Why is the school expelling her? Did they not miss a good chance to give her a good Christian indoctrination? Again you ignored my question about Jesus' statement to "Suffer the little children unto me"....Did He mean only those of non-sinning parents? Perhaps He did not mean for those following in His footsteps to do the same?

And of course, the command most forgotten by some on this board: "Judge not lest ye be judged".

My, all those secularist arguments in one post !

You keep whining about "what sin did the girl commit" ? The girl had a choice to make. She could either support her "whatevers" deviant values and lifestyle or submit to God's laws. God's laws are clear. Homosexuality is an abomination in His eyes on the level of incest, bestiality, or child human sacrifice (not two different kinds of cloth, as sodomite apologists proclaim). The chapter where God condemns it ends in a death threat. I take death threats seriously.

The girl cannot be a Christian without it severely impacting her relationship with her "whatevers". If she is to be a Christian living according to God's laws she must reject her "whatever"'s relationship and values. It became apparent obviously that she publicly chose her "whatevers" and almost certainly began spouting their cultural left relativist values. So she made her choice and had to go. This sounds hard, but that is the price of discipleship. Jesus told us that the cost of discipleship can be the love of those close to you.

If living with sinful parents indicates an intent to live outside of God's laws, then shouldn't every child be expelled, since every parent is a sinner?

All Christians are sinners. But what God demands of us is repentance for there to be forgiveness and reconciliation. As I explained to you earlier, two sodomites living together openly obviously are without any repentance whatsoever. They have completely rejected the authority of God. God will forgive the repentant. He will not forgive the defiantly disobedient. Had they ceased their way of living and come seeking His forgiveness everything would have been fine. But they obviously had no intention of doing so.

Well, whether you accept it or not, millions of homosexuals are in fact Christian, and a number of Christian religions accept homosexuals in their congregations and even in their leadership.

No Christian church that respects the Bible as the word of God has unrepentant sodomites in its congregations and certainly not in its leadership. Only places that have completely been taken over by left wing activists in clerical collars who are nothing more than groupies for the secularist left (because they want to get their hands on all that mainline Protestant endowment money). And as a result, such places are dying because there is no place in them for Bible believing Christians. Episcopalians, United Church of Christ, and Unitarians are dying out. Bible based churches that echo Gods condemnation of sin and care nothing about political correctness are growing exponentially. Moral clarity works.

Again you ignored my question about Jesus' statement to "Suffer the little children unto me"....Did He mean only those of non-sinning parents? Perhaps He did not mean for those following in His footsteps to do the same?

The girl had a choice to make. And she made it.

I guess it is clearly her fault. A child at any age should have sense enough to leaving loving parents if they are in a state of sin (as all are). I sense, Sam, that there is only one sin that bothers you.

But what you have failed to explain is what sin the girl is guilty of, other than guilt by association. Again, aren't all children then guilty by association?

It became apparent obviously that she publicly chose her "whatevers" and almost certainly began spouting their cultural left relativist values

I will ask you again what information you have to support this?

They have completely rejected the authority of God. God will forgive the repentant. He will not forgive the defiantly disobedient. Had they ceased their way of living and come seeking His forgiveness everything would have been fine. But they obviously had no intention of doing so.

Again for the umpteenth time, this is about the girl, not the parents.

No Christian church that respects the Bible as the word of God has unrepentant sodomites in its congregations and certainly not in its leadership.

So you have some sort of first hand knowledge that God rejects these congregations?

Bible based churches that echo Gods condemnation of sin and care nothing about political correctness are growing exponentially.

Do you have any references for this?

Perhaps the child is guilty of something, though you have not indicated what (other than rejecting her sinful parents), and God may ultimately judge her thusly, but there are a few I have run into here on this board that are also quite guilty of wrath and pride, both of which I suspect God will equally judge when the time comes. Have a good day.

Funny how you secularists can't tell the difference between human lapses that all Christians commit and open defiance of God's laws which is what the sodomite lifestyle is. It is like the difference between mutiny and dereliction of duty. There is a big difference and they are punished differently. That is the distinction pro-deviants cannot understand. Christians slip but accept that God is the boss and repent while pro-deviants completely reject all divine and Biblical authority. Human weakness God will forgive if we are repentant. Deliberate defiance (like putting political correctness and personal likes or dislikes ahead of God's laws) he will damn for all eternity. THAT is the difference.

And yes, the parents are most definitely a factor. To maintain a Christian environment the school quite correctly demanded that the parents demonstrate a committment to Christian values in their lifestyle. So yes. The parents are most definitely an issue. What is the point of teaching at school values that are not lived or taught in the home ? They rejected the children of people shacking up just like the children of deviants. They rejected the children of people living in open, unrepentant rebellion against God, which goes way beyond human frailty.

The core of the sodomite movement is the Satanic rejection of divine authority. For a "Christian" church to proclaim that sodomy is politically correct and even to be elevated to positions of leadership is to proclaim that the Bible is to be ignored and God's definition of sin subordinated to "niceness" and "feelings". That is not human frailty. That is open rebellion against God. It is willful apostasy because they want the approval of cultural elites more than they want God's righteousness. That is why this issue is the dividing line between left wing activists in clerical collars and Bible believing Christians.

It is no accident that the left wing "churches" that have betrayed Bible truth are dying. God has cursed them and they are withering like the fig tree Jesus cursed. The blue cities where sodomy is celebrated are withering, dying as population exits. The Europe that has turned its back on God and chosen sodomy is withering, dying. Where sodomy has triumphed, God's blessings vanish.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.