Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) activists would have us believe that the issue of marriage is about the “rights” and “equality” of homosexuals. But in reality, the push to redefine marriage is about demanding public approval and celebration of homosexuality.
There is a difference. Slot machines are legal in some areas, but if the chief operating officer of Chick-fil-A had expressed a personal disapproval of gambling, would slot-machine supporters have demanded a boycott of his restaurants? What about smokers? Would they have lambasted Dan Cathy for expressing that he personally does not approve of smoking?
No. Because at the end of the day, gamblers want the right to gamble, and smokers want the right to smoke cigarettes. Both groups, however, have accepted the fact that not everyone approves of their choice to do these things. But LGBT activists are not satisfied with being able to “love whomever they want.” California public schools have already altered their curricular requirements to begin mandatory discussion of LGBT lifestyles beginning in kindergarten. If homosexual marriage becomes the law of the land, you can expect such curriculum mandates to pop up in every state.
If you need more proof that LGBT activists want more than just a marriage license from you, look no further than the mandatory LGBT “sensitivity” training programs that are appearing all over the nation. Not only are countless corporations holding training for their employees to affirm and welcome the LGBT lifestyles, but universities are also using their power to force their students to sit through similar sessions. There is nothing wrong with teaching students and employees to treat all individuals with respect and dignity, but these training programs typically go far beyond that.
At the heart of virtually all “sensitivity” training is the assumption that sexual behavior is an inborn instinct, not a choice for which one is accountable. Anyone who believes otherwise is deemed homophobic and pressured or bullied to change his or her opinion.
In July, Georgetown University expelled Jarrett Roby from their Community Scholars Program, which, according to the university, “provides Georgetown students with the unique opportunity to thrive. Scholars are carefully selected during the admissions process based on their academic achievement, impressive co-curricular accomplishments and commitment to the transformative power of education. They typically represent diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds, and are often first-generation college students.”
And Jarrett Roby was a perfect candidate for CSP: a graduate of Urban Preparatory Academy in Chicago, the all-black male charter school which has achieved a 100 percent college acceptance rate for its students three years in a row.
What did Roby do to get expelled from the program? He was uncomfortable attending the LGBT sensitivity training; when he approached his resident assistant privately about his discomfort, his concerns were dismissed and he was informed he would be punished for not attending the seminar.
Later, a few other students confronted Roby, calling him close-minded for not wanting to attend. Roby spoke in his own defense, and the debate died down on its own. Three RAs, however, reported Roby to the program directors the next day, testifying that they felt physically threatened by Roby, resulting in his expulsion.
Roby said in an email to blogger Kira Davis: “I never mentioned anything remotely violent or did anything violent. Also I am confident that all of my peers would support the fact that I have never showed an ounce of violence and any such claims are flawed.”
Since they never gave Roby a fair hearing to speak in his own defense, it sure looks like Georgetown pulled one of the oldest racist tricks in the book by condemning a black male because he appeared “threatening.” Other scholars were understandably hesitant to speak out on Roby’s behalf, fearing the loss of their scholarships.
Meanwhile in Georgia, graduate student Jennifer Keeton is suing Augusta State University for allegedly forcing her to change her beliefs about homosexuality before they would award her a degree. According to the lawsuit being brought on her behalf by Alliance Defending Freedom, “[Keeton] believes sexual behavior is the result of accountable personal choice. … Further, she has expressed her view that homosexuality is a ‘lifestyle,’ not a ‘state of being.’ In certain personal conversations away from the classroom with friends and colleagues, Miss Keeton has shared her Christian faith, and commended its virtues and benefits. In the course of such discussions, she has also communicated Christian viewpoints on matters related to sexual ethics.”
This is apparently too much free speech for the LGBT Thought Police, and Miss Keeton has been ordered to attend mandatory sensitivity training and to write papers reflecting on the content of that training. She has also been told to spend more time among homosexuals at events such as the Gay Pride Parade.
Still believe the fight over marriage is just about gay couples who want the rights and benefits of marriage and nothing more?
Changing the legal definition of marriage to include homosexual relationships is tantamount to conferring societal approval on homosexuality. If gay marriage becomes law, there will be no legal barriers to keep institutions from forcing students to suppress their deeply held religious beliefs. Religious freedom is a hallmark of our nation. Let’s keep it that way.
Bishop Harry R. Jackson Jr. is the senior pastor of Hope Christian Church, a 3,000-member congregation in the Washington, D.C., area. He is also founder and president of High Impact Leadership Coalition, which exists to protect the moral compass of America and be an agent of healing to our nation by educating and empowering churches, community and political leaders.
See an error in this article?
To contact us or to submit an article
