Hot damn here we go again. After spouting his view that homosexuality is unnatural, detrimental and destruction to the foundation of society on Piers Morgan last week and rightly receiving an avalanche of criticism for it, Kirk Cameron has responded with a statement.
"I spoke as honestly as I could, but some people believe my responses were not loving toward those in the gay community,” Cameron says. “That is not true. I can assuredly say that it’s my life’s mission to love all people. I should be able to express moral views on social issues, especially those that have been the underpinning of Western civilization for 2,000 years — without being slandered, accused of hate speech, and told from those who preach ‘tolerance’ that I need to either bend my beliefs to their moral standards or be silent when I’m in the public square.” Cameron adds, “I believe we need to learn how to debate these things with greater love and respect. I’ve been encouraged by the support of many friends (including gay friends, incidentally).”
Let's break this BS down bit by bit, shall we? First of all, Kirk just because you say being gay is unnatural with a smile on your face like you've just had a lobotomy doesn't mean it's any less anti-gay than the Crypt Keeper (a.k.a Fred Phelps) and his pitiful crew shouting "God Hates Fags" and picketing funerals. True, the latter may be more offensive and in your face, but calling my and other LGBT people's sexuality detrimental and destructive to very foundations of society isn't exactly a pat on the back.
Secondly, why is it every time a public figure, usually a religious leader or conservative politician/activists, says something and is criticized for it, they automatically pull the "I'm being persecuted" card? Why do they expect to just cough up word vomit in a vacuum with no consequences? Freedom of speech goes both ways. But back to Kirk. Hon, this is not 1960, (or 1970 or 1980 for that matter). If you spew unfounded crap about the gays and your only justification is a book written by desert nomads who thought the world was flat and who endorse stoning disobedient children, stoning rape victims who didn't scream loud enough, slavery and other assorted atrocities, people are going to call you out on it. You exercised your First Amendment right and now others are doing the same. So cut the martyr crap, m'kay? Save that for tithing time.
Also, debate? Modern psychology has pretty much come to the conclusion that while sexuality is not 100 percent understood, people do not choose their orientation, and attempts to change it do more harm than good. And science, which you seem allergic to (this is the same man who wanted to put an argument for intelligent design in Origin of Species so readers "could be get both sides") acknowledged that homosexuality is widespread in the animal kingdom, of which we are a part. Sorry to burst that bubble. Of course, I'm not saying we should pattern all of our behavior from animals--they sometimes eat their young, rape and kill as well--but only to make the point that homosexuality, far being from unnatural, actually occurs in nature, with neither the act nor attractions having any tangible negative consequences unique to it. The keyword being tangible. So unless you've got some concrete evidence outside of scriptures or bad, debunked ex-gay research, there is no debate. The show is over, say goodbye.
Finally, you just had to whip out the gay friends (notice how they always come from the shadows after a backlash) didn't you? Not that I'm calling you a liar. I'm sure you've got loads of gay friends--queens who sashay up the church aisle like they're in Milan or a few macho man deacons. Maybe a couple of lesbians that teach Sunday school. You know, the kind who've been brainwashed to feel who they are is a sin, but with enough prayer and throwing themselves at the altar for "forgiveness" they can find that magical vagina or enchanted penis that will make them hetero. Or at the very least they can squeak on by into heaven despite their abominable nature, if Joel Osteen's to be believed. No tea or shade to those friends, if they exist. I've been there, done that, got the fab fitted tee. But there's a hell of difference the gay "friends" you sight and the gals I know.
Or even the ones you may know. Like Oral Robert's grandson Randy Roberts Potts, who said, " Kirk may feel that he is defending the ‘underpinning of Western civilization’ through his words, but in reality they are harming those whom he claims to love. I hope that he will continue to study and pray on how he can demonstrate true Christian love toward gay and lesbian people."
I'm sure all of this like talking (or typing) to a brick wall. I get it: you've got your mind made up, you're souled out and all that jazz. But don't pretend your faith in what's most likely an imaginary Sky Daddy automatically gives you credibility and immunity from any criticism. Lastly, a word of advice: if you're going to pull some gay friends out of thin air, how about letting them speak? I mean if they support you they should have no problem being quoted. Unless of course, they're imaginary too.
Comments