Mr. Horowitz Owes Christians an Apology

Concerned Women For America ^ | 5/21/2003 | Robert H. Knight

[ZGuy]

Latest conservative to distort Jesus' teachings and slam 'religious right'

In “Pride Before a Fall”, David Horowitz informs us in his FrontPage Magazine.com webzine that Jesus did not mention homosexuality in the four Gospels. The implication is that Jesus did not think it was any big deal, so we shouldn't, either.

By Mr. Horowitz’s reasoning, since Jesus didn't bother condemning rape, Jesus must be indifferent to that, too. Jesus was not recorded in the New Testament speaking directly about incest or child pornography, either. Does that make them okay?

The Torah and Jewish tradition clearly forbid sodomy. If Jesus had meant to contradict this, He would have said so.

Likewise, Mr. Horowitz distorts a point made by Gary Bauer. Upon hearing Republican National Committee Chairman Marc Racicot defend meeting with homosexual activists by saying he would meet with “anybody and everybody,” Mr. Bauer noted that Mr. Racicot would not meet with the Ku Klux Klan. Mr. Bauer made it clear that he was not comparing homosexuals to the Klan, merely observing that Mr. Racicot would pick and choose with whom he meets knowing that meetings impart legitimacy. Mr. Racicot himself agreed that, well, yes, he does exclude some groups for that reason. I am surprised that Mr. Horowitz, a guy who has shown tremendous courage taking on his former leftist comrades and championing conservative principles, would employ a common logical error to question Mr. Bauer’s integrity and compassion.

Mr. Horowitz writes:

A delegation to the chairman of the RNC to demand that he have no dialogue with members of an organization for human rights is itself intolerant, and serves neither your ends nor ours.

Just because HRC says it's an "organization for human rights" doesn't mean it is. HRC’s goal is to gain special legal status for men or women who have oral or anal sex with each other. Perhaps the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) should change its name to the Human Rights Coalition for Men and Boys. Then Mr. Horowitz might someday tell us we're bigoted for objecting to child molestation, about which Jesus said absolutely nothing. Also, would Mr. Horowitz be sanguine if the GOP were meeting with the extreme “black reparations” groups that are trying to silence him on the nation’s college campuses? All in the name of “outreach,” of course.

Finally, Mr. Horowitz’s assertion that “the very term ‘homosexual agenda’ is an expression of intolerance” is unfathomable. Christian conservatives have an agenda. Environmentalists have an agenda. Homosexual activists have an agenda. Mr. Horowitz has an agenda. What’s wrong with having an agenda, or pointing out that another group has one? The Human Rights Campaign’s agenda of radical social change – “gay” marriage, adoption of children by “gay” couples, “hate crimes” laws, “gays” in the military, “gay” propaganda in schools – is clearly listed on its website and in its literature.

Mr. Horowitz’s agenda here seems to be to accuse Christian conservatives of bigotry, pure and simple, as if they could have no valid reasons for opposing the political agenda of homosexual activists.

On Monday, the Human Rights Campaign supported “Gender Lobby Day,” in which men in dresses stormed Capitol Hill to demand that lawmakers sign pledges not to discriminate based on “gender identity.” These are the same folks who are advising confused teenage girls at HRC-backed conferences to have their healthy breasts amputated in their tragically misguided quest to become "men."

The idea that there is a "respectable" gay movement that will go only so far and that will help the GOP win elections is a dangerous fiction. As a veteran of leftist revolutions, Mr. Horowitz should know better.

If the “real issue here is tolerance of differences in a pluralistic society,” then Mr. Horowitz should oppose the “gay rights” movement with his whole being. It is transforming Canada into a totalitarian country. If you don’t believe that, ask that country’s broadcasters, who are forbidden to air anything critical of homosexuality, including Scripture readings. Or ask two Ontario mayors who were hauled before “human rights commissions” and charged with failing to issue proclamations celebrating “gay pride week.” Or ask Christian professor Chris Kempling of the British Columbia College for Teachers, who was suspended by his university for merely writing a letter critical of homosexuality to a local newspaper. Writing about the case, Edmonton Sun columnist Ted Byfield warns: “You see emerging [in Canada] the Western world's No. 1 totalitarian state, all developed in the name of human rights.”

It is already happening in the United States. Just ask the Boy Scouts of America, who are being treated as pariahs by some communities and United Way chapters for insisting that homosexual men not don Scoutmaster uniforms and take young boys camping. Or ask employees fired by corporations for not wholeheartedly embracing homosexual “diversity” training.

Christian conservatives and Torah-believing Jews oppose homosexual activism for three basic reasons:

1) The Bible and God’s natural design say it is wrong;

2) homosexuality is extremely unhealthy and hurts individuals, families and communities; and

3) homosexual activism threatens our most cherished freedoms of religion, speech and association.

Our agenda on this issue is to dissuade people from becoming trapped in homosexuality and to offer a helping hand to those who seek to change and pursue a fuller life.

With all due respect, Mr. Horowitz owes Christians an apology for his crude distortion of Jesus’ teachings, and for his implied charge of bigotry.

[anniegetyourgun]

Thank you, Mr. Knight, for setting the record straight. (No pun intended.)

[Cicero]

Horowitz's remarks were pretty dumb for a generally smart guy.

[HatSteel]

Christian conservatives and Torah-believing Jews oppose homosexual activism for three basic reasons: 1) The Bible and God’s natural design say it is wrong; 2) homosexuality is extremely unhealthy and hurts individuals, families and communities; and 3) homosexual activism threatens our most cherished freedoms of religion, speech and association.

OUTSTANDING summary. Well worth memorizing these points. They are not bigoted. They are a position on an issue.

[adam_az]

You are a bigot.

As a conservative, you should be ashamed for wanting to regulate peoples personal behavior based on your personal religious beliefs.

Do you think homosexuality should be BANNED? Should there be a prison sentence for people consensually sodomizing each other?

What are you so scared of?

[conservativecorner]

While I agree with Mr. Horowitz on many things, I do indeed think he's owes christians an apolopy. Bump for the article!

[George W. Bush]

Apparently, you're another pro-sodomy infiltrator here at FR, making the usual PC charges of the Left. We have waves of them. They come and go.

You'd find the commentary more agreeable over at that Underground place. But maybe you already know that.

[Rodney King]

Whether or not Mr. Horowitz is wrong, he doesn't owe anyone an apology. I'm sick of every group playing the victim and demanding apologies from everyone who disagrees with them.

[adam_az]

You can oppose neo-Marxist "gay rights" organizations agendas and still be tolerant of homosexuality practiced by consenting adults.

Homosexuality is unhealthy? DO you support banning anything deemed unhealthy? How about fried food, or maybe meat? How about cigarettes? Cars kill people and so does pollution, so do you support Greenpeace, too?

Oh right, you like those things, so they shouldn't be banned. You don't like homosexuality, so you think it should be banned. I understand now.

Homosexual "activism" seeking to get federal state or local funds for fruitless (or fruity? bad pun) spending can be opposed without demonizing homosexuals.

Homosexuality it's self doesn't threaten anything except for people like you.

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

Horowitz

[adam_az]

Take a look at my posting history. I'm far from a "pro sodomy infiltrator" and "closet DUer."

Funny that you respond by ad hominem insults instead of responding to my point. True sign of a dimwit.

Personally, I think that the conservative position is to keep the government out of peoples private lives unless they attempt to harm the property or freedom of another.

You want to regulate peoples behavior to meet YOUR personal norms, sounds like a leftist attitude to me.

[binreadin]

While I don't agree with Mr. Horowitz's conclusions absolutely, I do think he has a right to his opion, and I don't see why he has to apologize to anyone for his thoughts. I am also offended by the radical homosexual agenda, but demonizing people who happen to believe differently than I do is hardly in keeping with Christian values. I believe Jesus came to us to teach us love, tolerance and forgiveness. To use his teaching to preach hate and intolerance is downright wrong, and I'm sorry to say that many Christians are the meanest people I know because they hide their vitriol and narrow-mindedness behind a shield of religion. If any of you are offended, well, that's OK, because we are allowed to disagree in a free society.

[adam_az]

Whether or not Mr. Horowitz is wrong, he doesn't owe anyone an apology. I'm sick of every group playing the victim and demanding apologies from everyone who disagrees with them.

MEGA BUMPS

Fundies can be bigger crybabies than Democrats sometimes. Pathetic. Taliban Republicans.

[Steve_Seattle]

Homosexuals often use the "argument from silence" to claim that Jesus did not oppose homosexuality. But the reason Jesus did not mention homosexuality is that homosexuality was not a point of contention in Jewish society, it was universally condemned; there was no need to mention it. References to homosexuality only appear in the New Testament in the epistles, when the Christian movement was moving beyond its Jewish roots into the Gentile world where homosexuality was tolerated and even celebrated.

[adam_az]

While I don't agree with Mr. Horowitz's conclusions absolutely, I do think he has a right to his opion, and I don't see why he has to apologize to anyone for his thoughts. I am also offended by the radical homosexual agenda, but demonizing people who happen to believe differently than I do is hardly in keeping with Christian values. I believe Jesus came to us to teach us love, tolerance and forgiveness. To use his teaching to preach hate and intolerance is downright wrong, and I'm sorry to say that many Christians are the meanest people I know because they hide their vitriol and narrow-mindedness behind a shield of religion. If any of you are offended, well, that's OK, because we are allowed to disagree in a free society.

You hit the nail on the head.

The Spanish Inquisitors used similar reasoning to these guys - that they weren't really torturing non believers - they were SAVING them.

[ZGuy]

Apparently something's amiss with the search mechanism. The earlier post (and even this post) do not appear when searching for "Horowitz" or "apology." Thanks for the link to the original post.

[reasonseeker]

It was either "universally condemned" or it was "tolerated and even celebrated" in the Gentile world. You can't have it both ways.

[plain talk]

zguy just posted an article. You attacked the wrong person. Also not sure why you are asking questions which have no revelance to the article. Adhering to Christian principles of what is right and wrong and hating the sin but loving the sinner is not bigotry. You obviously do not understand Christianity.

[adam_az]

The Neither the Torah nor New Testament should be used to ban behavior that you might see as self destructive, but is a victimless "crime" practiced by consenting adults in our country. I despise the ACLU, but this isn't an ACLU position, it's a conservative position to be against unnecessary regulation.

What alternative is there, a War on Gayness, modelled on the War on Drugs?

Late night jackboot police breaking in to your house to see if your penis is inside you girlfriend, boyfriend, or wifes mouth or anus... and if so, OFF TO JAIL?

What policy are you really supporting here? (This question goes out to all of you whining like a democrat about Horowitz.)

[Steve_Seattle]

"You want to regulate peoples behavior to meet YOUR personal norms, sounds like a leftist attitude to me."

I think a lot of Christians (correctly) view the homosexual movement as very aggressive, demanding acceptance and validation rather than simply wanting to be "left alone." They clearly want to punish and stigmatize those who disagree with their view of themselves, as evidenced by the succesful campaign to de-fund the Boy Scouts. So I think many Christians see themselves in a defensive posture, which is not the same as wanting the government to police what goes on in the bedroom.