Wednesday, April 17 2019
It was the entire premise behind the repeal of sodomy laws.
It was the entire premise behind the judicial decree of gay marriage.
It was the entire premise behind Lady Gaga’s magnum opus.
It was the entire premise behind the fining and government censure of private businesses whose owners hold religious convictions.
It was the entire premise behind the extension of non-discrimination laws based on sexual orientation.
It was the entire premise behind the jailing of counselors who wish to help people battle or overcome their unwanted attractions and desires.
But as it turns out, the “born that way” proposition for homosexual behavior wasn’t scientific after all. No doubt that conclusion will be controversial and criticized by LGBT activists, but oddly enough it is the tireless efforts of LGBT researchers and pioneers in the fields of sexuality and gender that have brought us to such an understanding.
In essence, had it not been for the ongoing sexual revolution and the relentless demands of those associated with it, the notions of sexual, gender, and orientation “fluidity” might never have surfaced. But it has, and with it, the notion of immutable (unchangeable) sexual proclivities has sunk like a rock.
It’s simple science: if something as biologically-based as sex and gender can change fluidly, it is the height of absurdity to suggest that something as emotionally-based as attractions and feelings can never change. Yet that has remained the persistent supposition of the “born that way” movement. Rational minds understand they simply can’t have it both ways.
And as I mentioned before, thenow accumulated, says as much:
One of the saddest realities of the sexual revolution has been witnessing the societal and cultural abuse of those who have chosen to walk away from their sexual attractions in obedience to the Gospel of Christ. They have been slandered, “othered,” isolated and ostracized, called liars, deceivers, and frauds. Every time one of them has fallen back into same-sex sexual temptation, they have been mocked, posterized, and seen their struggle become a weaponized taunt at others attempting obedience to Christ’s will rather than their own.
It’s been sick. And it’s been truly revealing to anyone paying attention (which has been remarkably few) precisely who it is that bullies, intimidates, and refuses to tolerate the sexual choices of others.
But now the vindication belongs to those “ex-gays.” The change they knew was possible is, of course, possible. Predisposition and attraction are informed by a number of contributing factors. But sexual orientation is not innate, it is not inborn, and it is not immutable. If social progress is marked by accepting and tolerating those who choose to indulge their current orientation, shouldn’t it also include accepting, tolerating, and helping those who choose to change theirs?