Earlier today, a severely-liberal friend posted a link to an article on a LGBT march, and added his comment, “There’s nothing wrong with love!”
It shouldn’t surprise me that he’s blindly equated lust with love – liberals have been making strange connections for years (violent unrest = justice, communism = freedom, etc), but it is disgusting that the greater part of society also mis-equates “lust” with “love”. (Note: In this part I am not particularly picking on the LGBT community – this perversion of definition extends to most people of any affiliation, including some married folks).
I was blessed enough to be born to righteous parents. They were not perfect, but they played an active role in raising my siblings and I. They concerned themselves with the “abstract essentials” that nowadays are pretty much scoffed at: knowing right from wrong, understanding the importance of work (rather than “freebies”), being cautious in the kinds of people we hung out with, and how to discern the differences between different kinds of feelings, obligations, and emotions. To even attempt to make most of these points concrete enough to include here would be impossible, but there is a really good newspaper column that puts Love vs. Lust into good perspective in an oft-repeated article, and I am going to share it here (lust’s aka being “infatuation”):
"Is it love you’re feeling or just an infatuation?"
by Ann Landers
"Infatuation is instant desire – one set of glands calling to another. Love is friendship that has caught fire. It takes root and grows, one day at a time.
Infatuation is marked by a feeling of insecurity. You are excited and eager but not genuinely happy. There are nagging doubts, unanswered questions, little bits and pieces about your beloved that you would just as soon not examine to closely. It might spoil the dream.
Love is the quiet understanding and mature acceptance of imperfection. It is real. It gives you strength and grows beyond you – to bolster your beloved. You are warmed by his presence, even when he is away. Miles do not separate you. You have so many wonderful little films in your head that you keep replaying. But near or far, you know he is yours and you can wait.
Infatuation says, "We must get married right away. I can’t risk losing him." Love says, "Be patient. Don’t panic. Plan your future with confidence."
Infatuation has an element of sexual excitement. Whenever you are together you hope it will end in intimacy. Love is not based on sex. It is the maturation of friendship that makes sex so much sweeter. You must be friends before you can be lovers.
Infatuation lacks confidence. When he’s away, you wonder if he is cheating. Sometimes you check.
Love means trust. You are calm, secure and unthreatened. He feels your trust, and it makes him even more trustworthy.
Infatuation might lead you to do things you will regret, but love never steers you in the wrong direction.
Love is elevating. It lifts you up. It makes you look up. It makes you think up. It makes you a better person than you were before."
Because of loose morals and self-serving attitudes, titillating movies and television, and the pervasiveness of sexually-laden material everywhere we turn, it’s difficult not to think of lust as “love”. You’d be hard-pressed to find a movie in which the characters don’t end up sleeping together after their first date, for example, and where are the television shows about a fat, buck-toothed girl hooking up with a strong young farmhand? I can guarantee you can’t walk one block through a city’s shopping district without seeing more instances of suggestive clothing, seductive prancing and sexually-charged advertising than you could count on both hands.
The devil whispers the secrets of his craft into the minds of advertisers, designers and directors. As a former entertainment industry worker, I know how easily one can succeed if they just look for ‘shocking’ and ‘sexy’ ways of promoting things. These angles have their own allure, and they touch the same parts of our soul as the damning addictions they lead to. It is much more difficult to ‘make a name’ when you eschew these tactics and are forced to rely on true talent, education and practice. Part of this is because most minds are attuned to evil and degradation (whether or not they can see it), and therefore seek after the food of sin. The other reason is that righteousness – the Lord’s way – is a very narrow passageway, and often it seems to be the more difficult option because initially the rewards are hard to see through the thick cloud of materialism and selfishness that covers our world.
We should not hate “the sinner”, but rather, “the sin”, and I apologize in advance if it seems I am attacking any particular person. I mean to reveal and dissect the actions of these individuals.
I’ve spent a lot of time throughout my life in association with individuals who choose a “gay”, “lesbian”, “bisexual” or “transgender” lifestyle. The acronym LGBT is used because no two of these acts or mindsets are alike. Within each, there are further subdivisions: transvestitism (wearing another gender’s clothing) may or may not lead to transgender attitudes (sex change), and either may be present or at the opposite end of the spectrum from same-sex attraction (gay & lesbian). Though many of these individuals may identify having had these thoughts or inclinations since childhood, some believe very few probably have, while others believe the predisposition that allows a person to eventually act on these inclinations is as much a part of who we are as a predisposition to alcoholism, violence, or hard work. Despite studies claiming to have identified “the gay gene” or “physical proof” of being “born that way”, there still exists no definitive scientific proof that this is the case.
In personal experience, I estimate that, of people I’ve known who claim to be LGBT, nearly all women can trace the beginning of their lifestyle to bad interactions with men: physical, sexual, or emotional abuse, absence of a father parental figure, being mocked because of weight or disability. Most gay men have a similar genesis: physical or emotional abuse by a father, molestation by a male or female, or rejection (real or perceived) by a women or women. Most men who choose the lifestyle later in life began after a difficult divorce or other major life event, while those who started in high school or college usually cite rejection or experimentation as a primary factor. Most transgender lifestyles are rooted in gender inequality perception at a young age (one or both parents treated the other gender more favorably) or in being taunted by a parent or other children (a boy being called a “girl”, a girl being called a “tomboy”), often as a result of a missing parent of the same gender and other siblings being of another gender (boy with no father or brothers, etc). When only one gender is available as a role model and the outside world his hostile and labels the child of the gender of those who are available as role-models, the child will run to the only place they can find comfort and protection, and transgender leanings are inevitable.
While some people may have an inclination toward any of these lifestyles, most do not act upon them, just as most do not act on other inclinations (violent crime, drug use, promiscuity, etc), unless such activity is socially accepted or promoted. One indicator that these behaviors are unnatural is their increase in times/locales where such activity is accepted, and their minimal appearance in such places where such behavior is not accepted or promoted. Proponents of the LGBT lifestyles claim this is because such activity “goes underground” and can’t accurately be reported, but in my street-research (personal conversations with numerous individuals who have chosen or flirted with such lifestyles), I believe that, while a small number may exist anyway, many of these behaviors do not exist when information about them is not readily available. If this is true, it indicates that joining one of these lifestyles almost always requires knowledge that it exists … just as being an alcoholic requires knowledge and proximity to alcohol. This has some very serious implications for “sex education” programs around the world, because it suggests that learning about it increases the likelihood of doing it. Even in the early part of last century, the “underground cases” had a knowledge of the lifestyle – they didn’t magically turn on their “gaydar” and find each other by chance.
In addition to the knowledge of the three primary trigger-factors (abuse, rejection and curiosity) and the rise in adherents in areas where culture promotes it, there are other factors that are easily identified as evidence that the lifestyle is chosen and fabricated, rather than “natural”. The first of these evidences exists in the peculiar attraction to abusive stereotypes. Among most groups of “persecuted people” (the poor, ‘nerds’, races and religions), there is usually a greater desire to distance themselves from the stereotype and “fit in” than to openly embrace it and inflame it further. With very, very few exceptions, you don’t see the poor bragging about how poor they are & trying to dress dirtier, nerds going out of their way to dress unfashionably, or races and religions exaggerating their mocked identifiers. In Gay culture, however, you have men adopting lisps, flamboyant gestures, choosing certain vocational affiliations (fashion, interior decorating, theater), and wearing certain kinds of extreme clothing. I once heard it said, “The moment a man decides to become gay, he instantly develops a love for disco music and musical theater”. Gay men rarely begin to grow their hair to look like women, but lesbians often go “butch” to look masculine. Their own stereotype involves motorcycles, tattoos, and leather. More “dykes” than gay men are likely to also adopt some amount of “transgender” or at least transvestite habits and actions. Indeed, when taken overall, “coming out of the closet” is second only to “gay pride parades” in being an indicator of the choices involved in the lifestyle, and undermines the myth that persons following these lifestyles are unable to control who they are, and were “born that way”.
From a gospel perspective, we know that any predisposition or weakness we are born with is able to be subdued. It is against God’s purpose in our mortality to leave us with “no choice” or “no control”, and it is equally the adversary’s greatest goal to fool us into giving up or being unaware of our individual choices and agency. The “father of all lies” must be particularly proud of the false doctrine of “it’s who we are” and the ease in which mammon’s psychologists and culture usher individuals into their roles as victims of this lie.
I would suppose, also, that those who are aware of the truth, yet choose to stay the crooked course, do so because it is to their benefit to avoid the piercing truths and reminders of impending condemnation. These persons are aiding and abetting the adversary of all mankind, and they will be held accountable for their hand in spreading this disease to new victims, and their hand in luring additional souls away from God.
Yes, scripture tells us to love our neighbor. It does not tell us to lust after our neighbor, to be infatuated with our neighbor, or to seek neighbors who will participate in carnal perversions with us. It tells us to ‘turn the other cheek’ and to ‘forgive’, but in no place suggests we seek out others who will forgive and look the other way so that we can do evil without consequence. Further, we are commanded not to “take the name of the Lord in vain”. Do you know what that means? We are not to place “God’s stamp” on our activity in an effort to gain some kind of edge, especially when that ‘edge’ is sin or transgression. Abusing scripture is abusing the word of God, and using sophistry to foolishly claim the Creator approves of very specific sin He has expressly condemned is sure to bring about great and terrible judgment to those who cheekishly mocked Him.
"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." (Leviticus 18:22):
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet." (Romans 1:25-27)
These lifestyles are not natural parts of character, and those who wrongfully claim these lifestyles to be the “next frontier of human rights” are dangerously wrong. A mindset that drives a weakness or flaw to action is vastly different than a race, a gender, an age or an ethnicity. It is not equal to religion, as that – despite the smirks on its detractors’ faces is not a failing of the human condition. The drive to put perverse aspects of human sexuality into the mainstream is more like the drive to lower the drinking age, to remove smoking from bars, or to legalize gambling. It is vice of no good substance.
Those who seek a new human rights issue ought to look at a greater ungodly violation of human life. With millions of defenseless persons being slain in a gruesome daily genocide – one meant to further the “happiness” and lifestyle of other persons in society –abortion is more accurately the “new frontier of human rights”. If we can give special protections to domesticated animals, endangered plants, people who commit murder, children and invalid adults … why can’t we provide any rights to a baby in development? They look like people, move like people, are helpless now but are necessary to society’s well-being. Why is it ok to kill them? More children are murdered this way daily than cats or dogs are euthanized. Why?
"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
Woe unto them that are mighty to drink wine, and men of strength to mingle strong drink:
Which justify the wicked for reward, and take away the righteousness of the righteous from him!"
(Isaiah 5: 20-23)
I’ve quoted this scripture before, because it is especially pertinent in this time: a time where we can’t have a cross on a hill, the ten commandments in a park, a prayer in a school, or any religious symbolism in public; a time where it is but it is “closed-minded” to follow the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ but “open-minded” or “progressive” to kill, to take the name of the Lord in vain, to covet, to fornicate, to commit adultery, to disobey and hate parents, to steal, to lie, to cheat, and to hate those who follow God.