Telling the story from our point of view

Blog Archive

November 16, 2005

Sexual Orientation Overload

Homosexual gossip binges surrounding who's "straight" and who's "gay" unfortunately may be here to stay, but what's the real deal on this orientation overload?

The *only* result of black gay activist Keith Boykin's innuendo campaign disguised as "outing" of select black pastors, was a week of titillating gossip. When the high gays get from overindulgence with sexual preference isn't enough, they drop it a couple of notches and obsess over who's really "straight" and who's really "gay". Why is determining where an individual is on the straight-o-gay meter so important to activist homosexuals? Why must they know exactly what type of sex, how many times a week and with whom a person is having sexual relations with? The "interest = involvement" argument has been leveled so many times by activists at myself and others, I guess using it against them would be like returning the favor.

I've said many times before, the homosexual movement, despite its fruitless attempts to paint and portray itself as normal, has never risen above being defined by the unnatural sex act. Its their one claim to dubious fame. By adopting an identity shaped and cultivated by the manner of sexual expression homosexuals exchange the truth of God for a lie. It is a debasing reduction of the uniqueness of humanity in the image of God to a level with animals who mate on mere instinct[cf Romans 1:22-24]. Indeed, gay activists have cited everything from monkeys to rams to penguins as evidence that homosexuality is "normal". Ron Schlittler, president of Parents and Friend of Gays and Lesbians (PFLAG) made such an unbecoming comparison in his response to an email critic. But the real problem is that homoSEXuality is only about sex. Not love, not identity, only sex. The case made using animals is problematic no matter how it is spun. On one hand, it points to unnatural behavior, but does not prove so-called orientation. A number of scientists have argued that, for example, in the case with female monkeys, the alleged "sexual" activity is nothing more than greeting, not pleasure as homosexual activists contend. One wonders why animals are even cited.

Maybe that's why activists at sex exgaywatch are currently gabbing over sexual determinants. Exgaywatch's current gossipfest is about newly ungayed author K. Godfrey Easter. Easter recently openly denounced his homosexuality. This is a funny story, but they don't get it. Its also indicative of how evil the homosexual movement can be when someone leaves its clutches, no matter how immersed in it they were before. Before I continue with K. Godfrey Easter, let me share two little scriptures from the Bible relative to my above point (1 Peter 4:3,4).

"For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do: living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry."
Former homosexuals know what this means. It really was and still is the sum and identity of "gay" life.

They think it strange that you do not plunge with them into the same flood of dissipation, and they heap abuse on you."
Do the research on the gay community's hatred and malicious character assassinations of former homosexuals and you'll see that this scripture is chillingly accurate of what happens to men and women who leave homosexuality. Check out a few examples here, here and here.

Easter Changes

If anybody was defined as a gay activist, it was K. Godfrey Easter. He's black which may explain why some of the white gays at XGW are already questioning his past homosexuality. When we were in the heat of the 2003 marriage wars in Georgia, Easter showed up with hundreds of other angry homosexuals. He carried a large, white sign which read: "GAY & GODLY". Before he relocated to Georgia, Easter was creating serious church problems in Tacoma, WA. Since we had common backgrounds, I interviewed him for an article I wrote here. Easter also wrote several times for the gay Christian webzine Whosoever and several other homosexual oriented publications. Strangely, Whosoever has deleted all of Easter's prior commentary from their site. If you google, you'll see Easter was there. I guess the "whosoever" is just a catchy phrase. He described himself as an "openly gay minister of music for a mainstream, Pentecostal church located in the greater Seattle area". He was honored at the Detroit's 2002 black gay pride. He has spoken at numerous homosexual events in the past. Is that gay enough for you?
According to Easter's new press release everything changed and he no longer embraces homosexuality. In fact, he intends to become just as active proclaiming change as he was proclaiming the "born gay theory".

But for the skeptics at sexexgaywatch, Easter's change is a either hoax or...a hoax. This is how they insulate themselves from the reality of change. Be forewarned: the sexual orientation experts at XGW are a hard crowd of bonified (snicker) gays to please. Says "Christine":
"I don't think the issue is so much was he ever really gay (most people who are straight don't write books about being gay and christian and have photos and old pro-gay press releases available on their website)...While I realize that's [Jesus changed me] the popular definition of "ex-gay" within ex-gay circles, it's not my definition of ex-gay."

You heard it folks! Exgays cannot define themselves, only gays who are currently gay.

  • Tommorrow: Exgaywatch and the Alan Chambers Bible mystery
  • 15 comments:

    Regan said...

    There are such things, and they were a very few...
    Jewish Nazis and a noted Jewish Klansmen.

    These characters were part of a situation and rare examples of what can happen to a human being surrounded by a larger group taking control of your identity through brutality against your brethren.

    DL, we are a society not informed fully about gay people, otherwise arguing about who and what gay people really are wouldn't be done.
    The most reliable sources for information ARE gays and lesbians, who have to continue to fight to have their OWN voices heard, not those of heterosexuals who never and don't want to understand them.

    And your blog is fraught with opinion.
    And that is far from what facts are or what truth is.

    Holy writ is exclusively created by males. The chronicles there (not a design for living necessarily) are also rigidly male centric and ignorant of the role or value of things not precisely male/female or sexually neutral-like sterility, masturbation or homosexuality.

    Gay voices are vital to the discussion of homosexuality. Honesty is, and if honesty isn't allowed there is no truth that can be claimed here or anywhere else with the decidedly heterosexual point of view.

    Gender isn't fixed or rigid and never was. Not over time, not among groups or individuals.
    Holy writ fights to identify and restrict people according to gender.
    That is an unnatural social construct.
    Just as categorizing human beings by color and complexes to that color.
    You might continue to follow the party line of which human grouping is more superior to another according to a biological station.
    But as bigger minds have grasped and proven-there is no such thing and never was.
    And no holy writ you bring up is proof or standard of that whatsoever.

    DL Foster said...

    The most reliable sources for information ARE gays and lesbians

    Let's put you to the bigot test.

    True or false:
    The most reliable informational sources about exgays ARE exgays themselves.

    A side note: I think people who write excessively long comments, even after they have been told they write excessively long commentary, have attention deficit disorder. They dont get any recognition in other areas so they feel the need to overly exercise themselves in debate. I notice that you not only do it here, but everywhere youve been it seems to be a "trait" of yours. It may explain why you only receive minimal responses to your comments.

    Regan said...

    Ex gays become that way because of the specter of threat and coercion or mental and emotional exhaustion and isolation.
    These are not naturally voluntary conditions.
    Sexual orientation, gay or not, is a powerfully inherent part of what a person is, not just what they do.
    The abdication of homosexuality is mostly through religious discipline, not scientific, medically or socially necessary means.
    When a human being is forced to change for no other reason than prejudice, it's rooted in something already known to be evil and undesirable.
    I hate the prejudice and social restrictions that produces ex gays, not ex gays themselves.
    You asked, I answered.
    Short answers are difficult for complex issues.
    You don't seem to be able to keep your articles short either.

    DL Foster said...

    1. Your answer could have been much shorter by simply answering true or false. So by default its apparent, you are a bigot.

    2. Its my blog. I can write as long or as short as I desire. You dont have that option. If you want it the answer is VERY simple.

    Scott said...

    So DL, are ex-ex-gays such as Peterson Tuscano supremely qualified to speak about the ex-gay movement as well as the gay movement?

    Robert said...

    Rev. Foster -
    you wrote:
    "But the real problem is that homoSEXuality is only about sex. Not love, not identity, only sex"

    I want to be clear on this, since misunderstandings can lead to needless acrimony.
    Since homosexuality is only about sex, and not love, would that mean that my ten years with my husband have not been based on mutual love and respect, but sex and sex alone?

    DL Foster said...

    So DL, are ex-ex-gays such as Peterson Tuscano supremely qualified to speak about the ex-gay movement as well as the gay movement?

    Anybody with head knowledge can speak about something, but are they qualified to speak FOR me? I doubt it. Its no great feat that Tuscano speaks about LIA. Thats really the EXTENT of his experience which I would say is narrow at best. Maybe you can answer the question I posed to Regan since she didnt want to. Tuscano perhaps can speak for "xxgays" but not for me. We went different paths.

    DL Foster said...

    Since homosexuality is only about sex, and not love, would that mean that my ten years with my husband have not been based on mutual love and respect, but sex and sex alone?

    Yes. That's why I emphasized homoSEXuality. Sex with someone of the same gender. What's love got to do with that? Im not ridiculing what you perceive to be love, just stating the obvious. I've been there before: I thought I loved another man. But blindness makes you accept falsehoods, even celebrate them.

    Scott said...

    My point regarding Peterson is simply that you seem to know what's going on in the heads of all gays (because you've been there).

    Peterson has "been there" as well and so have a lot of the people at Ex-gay watch (which you despise).

    Aren't "xxgays" living proof of the limitations of ex-gay programs?

    In 1998 Exodus ran a much ballyhooed ad campaign that claimed that "Ex-gays are living proof that people do walk out of homosexuality"

    Aren't, by extension, Ex-ex-gays "living proof that quite a few skip on back"?

    Robert said...

    Rev. Foster -
    I appreciate the sincerity of your response, but in reply, may I say
    "Anybody with head knowledge can speak about something, but are they qualified to speak FOR me? I doubt it."

    I came home last night, and my husband and our eight-year-old son had decided to surprise me by cooking dinner (usually my chore).
    I can think of no sexual motivation for my husband's having come up with the idea - frankly, after ten years of marriage and raising a child together, sex _qua_ sex is a very small part of our very large life together.

    Falling asleep beside him every night, and waking up next to him every morning - that's far more important. Have you been _there_ before?

    DL Foster said...

    Have you been _there_ before?

    What kind of crank question is that? Sexual relationships, whether once a year or 10 times a day, which are outside of the biological male/female model covenant marriage instituted by the Creator are wrong.
    That means no matter how you "feel" and how long you have felt the way you feel about the man you are living with, youre wrong. All I can say is get out of the matrix before its too late.

    DL Foster said...

    I think Toscano, xxgays, et al are living proof that people can fail in overcoming homosexuality. The extent of their experience unfortunately is marred by failure. It seems they want to blame everybody but themselves for that.

    Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden said...

    11 17 05

    Gee DL you come at the opposition HARD!!! Interesting post. I do think that xgays obviously are more qualified to discuss these issues because they have been there.

    One of the biggest obstacles in the mental health field is diagnoses. Why is that DL and Regan? SELF REPORTING. Self reporting is actually quite biased and only points to qualitative factors that need to be checked by the scientific method. If someone is active in the gay lifestyle, don't you think their answers would be necessarily biased? Whilst an xgay has seen both sides of the fence and perhaps might have a more well rounded view... I will give you a GREAT example of a study that was biased due to SELF REPORTING: it is the Rind et.al study, due to the ERRONEOUS conclusions and faulty analysis in self reporting, these fools actually said that adult- child sexual relations (i.e. childhood sexual abuse) may not necessarily "cause harm" to a child. Hmmm screw that nonsense! Regan your reasoning is flawed. DL I have talked enough thx for the interesting perspective.

    DL Foster said...

    Mahndisa, hey and welcome back.
    Well, maybe a wee bit hard at times.
    I will discuss tomorrow the apples and oranges of spirital/secular approaches to same sex attractions. Is suspect it won't make a difference to the naysayers, they just want to throw stones. Regan and the crowd she runs to for affirmation when her hissy "Im a married heterosexual woman" fits dont work here, are classic pharisees. Remember they always tried to entrap Jesus with misleading questions. Most times he either ignored them or got so far off in their bizness, they ran away crying. Sound familiar? They have been egging for a Bible discussion, I say bring it. Just make sure you know your word. Unless you scared. That's to "grantdale" from the newly minted gospel thug.

    DL Foster said...

    hi Mahndisa,
    Regan wanted to let you know that I like you better than I do her so that's why I cant "handle" her because she is a "strong" black woman and you dont disagree with me and I am scared to engage her or answer her questions and blah, blah, blah.

    I deleted her remarks and sent her back to sissyville where faghags find ultimate acceptance.

    Just thought I'd let you know.