Why are Christians so afraid of the LGBT community?
We see that the hatred of homosexuals (and also against non-believers, other religions, other nations, etc.) comes from the Bible. Yahweh, the angry, jealous, and vengeful god, demands and commands the faithful to kill such persons. From this divine rage comes the Muslim jihad and the Italian omertà – blood revenge. Believers are charged to hate homosexuals and others on the list of dissenters and to fight them in every possible way. If possible, they should be condemned, imprisoned, and even killed, just as Hitler did in Nazi Germany.
You can read on Slovenian web page https://www.domovina.je/kako-se-je-v-zahodnem-svetu-razbohotila-lgbt-teorija-in-kaj-je-o-tem-dobro-vedeti/
in the article How LGBT theory has permeated the Western world and what is good to know about it, we learn about the cross-thian view of homosexuality and other forms of gender identity:
“The roots of today’s developments go back a long way, to the pre-modern era, when so-called moral rigorism prevailed in much of Europe. By this term we mean the social climate that prevailed in many places until the 1960s, characterized by a multitude of sexual taboos and, in moral theology, by an extraordinary, almost obsessive preoccupation with the “de sexto”, that is, with the sixth commandment of God. A glance at a pre-Conciliar handbook of moral theology will suffice. Not infrequently they contained heavy condemnations of sexual practices that went beyond “morality”: heterosexual sexual intercourse within the bounds of canonically contracted marriage. Anything outside this framework was condemned as “an intrinsically evil act” and “a crime that screams to the heavens”. The most critical sexual sins were same-sex intercourse and masturbation.
Our ancestors, even before the Second World War, did not know much about sexuality, but it was clear that it was primarily a male domain and that it was intended to procreate children. In other words, sexuality was defined in rather ‘animalistic’ terms, while at the same time being obscured by a multitude of taboos.
Since the 19th and especially the 20th century, however, this old, “biologistic” system has been in crisis. The ancient-stoic conception of sexuality, with reproduction as its main goal, began to erode, and the consequences are still being felt today. This understanding of sexuality was based on a gender binary that no one had questioned, but suddenly the discoveries of modern science began to raise questions.
To generalize, the biological sciences have redefined sexuality, sexual intercourse, and, above all, the necessity of conception, with the fatal impact of the invention of the contraceptive pill in 1956; the human sciences have gradually redefined gender relations and the link between marriage and sexuality.”
For the Church, the contraceptive pill is a particular sin of human interference with God’s will – there should be as many children as God gives – and a sign of enlightened and rational thinking with one’s mind, of free choice and decision-making about one’s own body, partnership, sexuality and family, which for religions is a mortal sin. God is the Head, He thinks, decides, and commands and believers are mere limbs who must meekly nod and do the Boss’s bidding. Everything else is sin, shame, and disgust.
“The sexual revolution as a tectonic shift
The aforementioned sexual revolution was a real tectonic shift in this sense. Contraception offered Western man the “freedom of desire” separate from procreation and thus completely changed the way we think. Today’s man no longer associates sexual intercourse, unless he explicitly chooses to do so, with fertility at all. This has cut into our mentality of the divide between nature (sexual intercourse) and autonomy (“I manage my body”). The second divide has been created in the course of the “emancipation of women”, whereby the divide has cut between femininity and motherhood. Criticism of the traditional family grew, saying that it was limited and ossified within the rigid framework of tradition, social customs, and expectations.
The pendulum of history has swung, to generalize to the extreme, from moral rigorism to the other extreme, and so far it has not stopped, but is pushing to even greater extremes.
Instead, a new view of sexuality has taken hold, marked by the favoritism of eros, of instincts, and the abolition of all taboos and prohibitions. The sacred law, previously based on a clear structure of sexuality that cares for the procreation of children, has been overthrown; human sexuality has been left without order and meaning.”
This is another important distinction, along with the Enlightenment and atheism, between the faithful and the unfaithful, the former remaining in the reactionary and mythological tradition of the Bible, the latter moving freethinking forward, questioning, testing, and trying out the old, abolishing it, and selecting and creating the new, which is another sin for the faithful. There is nothing new as the Bible has already said it all. Religious ones must not question the »Word of god«, let alone doubt, just humbly obey and serve the Lord.
“The emergence of the sex/gender divide
After the lines had been cut between sexuality and fertility, between wife and mother, and between husband and wife, it was only a matter of time before the lines began to appear within the human being itself. The development of psychoanalysis and research in the field of sexuality made this happen.
Even before the sexual revolution, ideas about the distinction between “sex” (natural, biological sex) and “gender” (cultural, social sex) were emerging.”
That means that the old saying “if it looks, quacks, and walks like a duck, it is a duck” is no longer valid; now a duck can be a drake (male duck), although it still walks like a duck. This is another expression of freedom and a new sin for the religious who cannot tolerate freedom and freethinking – the Bible is the Law and the Law must be obeyed without objection. A duck is a duck and a drake is a drake, everything else is a sin.
“But gender theory gives a bad, wrong, and destructive answer to this question. It answers the serious question of the role of men and women in society by negating the natural distribution of the sexes; it proclaims everything to be a social construct and – paradoxically – puts instead an even greater construct: itself. The separation between nature/biology and the person, which was introduced into the Western mentality with the invention of contraception, is further exacerbated and this separation is also introduced in the sphere of the individual human being. Gender theory takes a schizophrenic, two-part view of the human being, whereby the natural endowment – the body – becomes a slave to human freedom. This is hidden under the slogan ‘man is not nature, he is freedom’.
And so today we are on the threshold of a new view of man, new anthropology, which we can call ‘trans-sexual’ or ‘sexual pluralism’. While the distinction between sex and gender was made through scientific discoveries concerning so-called “intersex” persons, i.e. persons who are already born with a combination of male and female biological traits (e.g. hermaphroditism), this professional basis has since been ignored and an ideological version has been introduced which advocates the existence of a plethora of genders, which is, of course, far from being professional.”
Here we are with a new sin: the freedom to decide about one’s own body. For believers, god is the creator of their lives and the owner of their bodies, and only he can decide about it. If God has said that a woman must conceive, and give birth, and she has no business interfering in the Lord’s affairs, let alone disrupting his plans. A woman must be obedient and submissive and, as a true handmaid of the Lord, serve the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and, in addition to these three “holy” men, her husband, her Earthly lord.
For the faithful, pornography is also a sin because it provides pleasure outside of the commanded partnered sexuality, and is not for procreation and the creation of new believers and priests, but pure pleasure. Believers must suffer, not enjoy. Life on Earth must be as difficult as possible so that they can then enjoy paradise. All worldly pleasures are just Satan’s temptations, by which God tests them to see if they have reformed and improved themselves so that he might bring them back to paradise.
To be continued.
All the best to all.
P. S. If you know any LGBTQIA+ person, couple or group, send them a link to my articles, as they will benefit greatly from knowing the truth. Thank you.
Cover: photo time.com
Read more about the fantastic future waiting for us after we end the karmicons blockade of Earth in my book series Letters to Palkies Messages to my friends on another planet. You can get them here, the whole series or single titles (below):
Here are my other books for personal development:
I invite you to join my readers awakening community and subscribe to my free awakening newsletter for personal, partnership, and family development and you will get 2 nice gifts:
On the first day you will get a free e-book Where are Don Juan and Carlos Castaneda?
The next day you will get superb exercises for awakening and releasing your harmful partial personalities or the false Ego personality.
You are very welcome.