“(In regards to AIDS) the priorities of the public health establishment, who after all are bureaucrats as well as ‘scientists,’ would appear to be (1) to protect the ‘community’ of deviants from public outrage and discrimination; (2) to pursue heroic curative and preventive measures to save the deviant ‘community’; and (3) to protect the decent public, insofar as it does not conflict with Priority 1….
We are all sinners and fall short of perfection, and we are enjoined to stand ready to extend our hand to our repentant fellow creatures. But I do not detect very much repentance, as opposed to regret and resentment, among the representatives of the ‘lifestyle’ that has put us all in danger. In fact in heeding the admonition not to stigmatize (this ‘lifestyle’), we are all actually throwing up obstacles to repentance.”
Dr. Clyde Wilson
From Union To Empire — pp. 234-235
1.) The disease of AIDS and the ‘lifestyle’ that is associated with it has become a politically protected disease and ‘lifestyle.’ This in turn has made it a culturally protected disease and ‘lifestyle.’ Culturally, it is considered bad form to stigmatize perverted behavior. Indeed, one who does attempt to put a stigma upon perversion is more often than not the person who becomes stigmatized by our culture.
2.) The pursuit of the legitimacy for homosexual marriage is really just a cover for the pursuit of the legitimacy of all homosexuality. Homosexuals aren’t really interested in marriage. The whole idea of monogamy is completely counter intuitive to the desire for the complete removal of all sexual norms that so many in the pervert community desire. What Homosexual marriage achieves is the not the normalizing of monogamous homosexuality but rather the normalizing of homosexuality in all its expressions. When homosexuals get the right to marriage then just as unfaithfulness is no big deal for heterosexual marriages so unfaithfulness will be no big deal for homosexual marriages. Homosexuality, in all of its multifaceted expression of perversion will be normalized with the institutionalizing of homosexual marriage.
3.) The necessity to decry the perversion that is homosexuality does not come from a sense of inherent righteousness or superiority from those who decry it but rather from a realization that certain taboos in cultures must be maintained lest individuals in the culture be exposed to things that would not otherwise be exposed to were the taboos to remain strong. Since Wilson is correct in noting that, “we are all sinners,” it must be the case that if public standards of decency are to obtain then it must be sinners, seeking to uphold the standards of Scripture, who are the ones who raise the banner of decency in the face of those who would redefine decency.
4.) We must hold out Christ as the only hope for those who have been wounded by perversion. Christ came to rescue all types of sinners from all types of sin and we must be forward not only in proclaiming God’s hatred of perversion but also His willingness to forgive who sue for peace.
5.) We do perverts no favors by trying to making peace between their perversion and the Christian faith. In many quarters of the Church today there is a mad rush to prove how acceptable the Church can be towards unrepentant perverts. We accept the sinners at the cost of rejecting the Savior. It used to be the case that we would only accept changed sinners but now it is the case that we will only accept a changed Savior. Jesus must change to get over His previous hang up against unrepentant perverts, and if He won’t … well, we can always find a different chap, who is more amenable to these perversions, to hang the “Jesus” name tag on. The new chap wearing the “Jesus” name tag will have the good sense to accept perverts and reject those who reject perverts.
