A BLOG BY ALAN CHAMBERS

Michaelangelo Signorile

For those of you who missed it, I was a guest on Michaelangelo Signorile's radio show this afternoon. I found Mr. Signorile intolerant of my views and unwilling to allow healthy conversation and debate. Like many pro-gay talk shows the agenda was more important than the guest. Below are some of the points that Mr. Signorile brought up that I didn't have time to affirm or comment on:

1). That the Christian community has made out homosexuality to be an issue and a sin that is worse than other issues or sins.

The word that comes to mind is hypocritical. For many years the Church has been hypocritical when it comes to condemning one sin and overlooking another. Homosexuality conjures up more anger and offense in some people than other sins do and that ought not be. Homosexuality is but one of many sexual sins running rampant in our world (and Church) today. God does not favor one sin over another nor would He have kept Jesus from dying for our sins if there hadn't ever been a homosexual. Jesus would have had to die anyway. It is true, there is sin in the Church and it needs to be addressed.

2). Exodus founders fell in love, left Exodus and are still together.

Two men who were apart of the original Exodus conference, one as a volunteer and the other as a true founder of what would become Exodus did meet, have an affair and leave their wives. They were together until one of them died of AIDS in the 1980's.

3). Exodus' forces it's opinion on people and that is hateful and causing people to kill themselves.

I was one of those gay teens who contemplated and attempted suicide on a number of occasions. I wanted to die after I was told that I had to be gay and that there was no alternative. Having no choices made me want to die. I wanted to change.

I hear people tell me all the time that I shouldn't be so hateful by saying that homosexuality is a sin. Well, then that means that I should not quote the Bible when it references such. And, if I shouldn't quote that part of the Bible then I shouldn't quote any of the Bible. Follow it to their logical conclusion and there is no basis for the Bible or Christianity or even God.

Truth hurts. No child wants to be told that they are in the wrong or that the shouldn't do something because it is wrong. There are many people who kill themselves because they just don't believe they can do whatever it is they think they should do (ie: lose weight, stop drinking or doing drugs, make good grades, etc.) But, does that mean that we should stop talking about the risks of obesity or alcoholism or drug addiction or that we should let our kids fail out of school? NO. We must always promote the highest standard and do so in the most truthful and loving ways.

Conclusion
Many homosexual people are bitter, angry and intolerant of Christians because they have been hurt, sometimes devastated, by them. More than ever before we, the Church, need to be quick to apologize for areas where we have fallen short, while standing firm on the word of God.

As I said above, truth hurts. Homosexuality is a sin and that truth needs to be told---but homosexuality does not deserve more condemnation than other sins. Most of all, we as Christians need to be promoting what God is for more than what He is against. If we spend all of our time talking about what is bad then what is good gets lost.

One of the Reasons I Oppose Same-Sex Marriage

I remember being a lonely 18 year old searching for Mr. Right. I remember the ache to have a man hold me, protect me, love me and devote his life to me. I remember thinking that I would do anything to fill that insatiable need. I did everything short of praying for my knight in shining armor to show up on my doorstep. I was certain that the missing piece of my life’s puzzle was going to be found in the man of my dreams.

Nearly 14 years later I am happy, content and satisfied emotionally, physically, spiritually, sexually and relationally. Indeed, my needs were met by a man who has filled my life with the greatest security, intimacy and love imaginable. The man I met, however, was Jesus Christ. Because of Christ my needs were met, my life was changed and this month I celebrated my 6th wedding anniversary with my wife, Leslie.

Had same-sex marriage been legal in 1990 I am certain that I would have tested that option. I met men whom I wanted to “marry”. Yet, as I look back as a mature adult, I realize that I wasn’t searching for a man as much as I was searching for an answer, a drug if you will, to numb the pain and make me feel better about who I was. The law kept me from making one, if not many, huge mistakes. And while honoring and preserving the sanctity of heterosexual marriage is the bedrock of my opposition to redefining marriage to suit a few, I believe a positive bi-product of keeping same-sex marriage illegal is that it will save tens of thousands of hurting young people like me from the biggest mistakes of their lives: looking to man to meet a need that only God can meet.

I encourage you to take a stand for today’s gay youth by opposing same-sex marriage; they may not thank you today, but protecting them now provides them with a better chance of being around to thank you later.

The Passion of the Christ

Dear Friends: Mel Gibson was in town yesterday at my church where he spoke briefly about The Passion of the Christ.  Later that night 5,000 of Christendoms biggest names stayed to view the film.  I wouldn't consider myself a big name, but I was there and I was deeply moved---meaning I have been thinking about what I saw and it has caused me to be incredibly introspective and contemplative about my relationship with Christ and His call on my life to be a slave to Him.  His sacrifice was real and it makes me want to give myself fully to Him every second of every day.  You have to see this film and take everyone you know with you.  It opens February 25....Mel said if your theater isn't showing it, ask them to reconsider.  I have no doubt that this will be the catalyst for millions of people to give their hearts to Jesus.  Alan Please read Paul Harvey's comments on The Passion of the Christ below: Paul Harvey's review of The Passion I really did not know what to expect. I was thrilled to have been invited to a private viewing of Mel Gibson's film "The Passion," but I had also read all the cautious articles and spin. I grew up in a Jewish town and owe much of my own faith journey to the influence. I have a life long, deeply held aversion to anything that might even indirectly encourage any form of anti-Semitic thought, language or actions. I arrived at the private viewing for "The Passion", held in Washington DC and greeted some familiar faces. The environment was typically Washingtonian, with people greeting you with a smile but seeming to look beyond you, having an agenda beyond the words. The film was very briefly introduced, without fanfare, and then the room darkened. From the gripping opening scene in the Garden of Gethsemane, to the very human and tender portrayal of the earthly ministry of Jesus, through the betrayal, the arrest, the scourging, the way of the cross, the encounter with the thieves, the surrender on the Cross, until the final scene in the empty tomb, this was not simply a movie; it was an encounter, unlike anything I have ever experienced. In addition to being a masterpiece of film-making and an artistic triumph, "The Passion" evoked more deep reflection, sorrow and emotional reaction within me than anything since my wedding, my ordination or the birth of my children. Frankly, I will never be the same. When the film concluded, this "invitation only" gathering of "movers and shakers" in Washington, DC were shaking indeed, but this time from sobbing. I am not sure there was a dry eye in the place. The crowd that had been glad-handing before the film was now eerily silent. No one could speak because words were woefully inadequate. We had experienced a kind of art that is a rarity in life, the kind that makes heaven touch earth. One scene in the film has now been forever etched in my mind. A brutalized, wounded Jesus was soon to fall again under the weight of the cross. His mother had made her way along the Via Della Rosa. As she ran to him, she flashed back to a memory of Jesus as a child, falling in the dirt road outside of their home. Just as she reached to protect him from the fall, she was now reaching to touch his wounded adult face. Jesus looked at her with intensely probing and passionately loving eyes (and at all of us through the screen) and said "Behold I make all things new." These are words taken from the last Book of the New Testament, the Book of Revelation. Suddenly, the purpose of the pain was so clear and the wounds, that earlier in the film had been so difficult to see in His face, His back, indeed all over His body, became intensely beautiful. They had been borne voluntarily for love. At the end of the film, after we had all had a chance to recover - a question and answer period ensued. The unanimous praise for the film, from a rather diverse crowd, was as astounding as the compliments were effusive. The questions included the one question that seems to follow this film, even though it has not yet even been released. "Why is this film considered by some to be "anti-Semitic?"  Frankly, having now experienced (you do not "view" this film) "the Passion" it is a question that is impossible to answer. A law professor whom I admire sat in front of me. He raised his hand and responded "After watching this film, I do not understand how anyone can insinuate that it even remotely presents that the Jews killed Jesus. It doesn't." He continued "It made me realize that my sins killed Jesus" I agree. There is not a scintilla of anti-Semitism to be found anywhere in this powerful film. If there were, I would be among the first to decry it.. It faithfully tells the Gospel story in a dramatically beautiful, sensitive and profoundly engaging way. Those who are alleging otherwise have either not seen the film or have another agenda behind their protestations. This is not a "Christian" film, in the sense that it will appeal only to those who identify themselves as followers of Jesus Christ. It is a deeply human, beautiful story that will deeply touch all men and women. It is a profound work of art. Yes, its producer is a Catholic Christian and thankfully has remained faithful to the Gospel text; if that is no longer acceptable behavior than we are all in trouble. History demands that we remain faithful to the story and Christians have a right to tell it. After all, we believe that it is the greatest story ever told and that its message is for all men and women. The greatest right is the right to hear the truth. We would all be well advised to remember that the Gospel narratives to which "The Passion" is so faithful were written by Jewish men who followed a Jewish Rabbi whose life and teaching have forever changed the history of the world. The problem is not the message but those who have distorted it and used it for hate rather than love. The solution is not to censor the message, but rather to promote the kind of gift of love that is Mel Gibson's filmmaking masterpiece, "The Passion." It should be seen by as many people as possible. I intend to do everything I can to make sure that is the case. I am passionate about "The Passion." You will be as well. Don't miss it!

No Room for Lukewarm Voters or Presidents: It's Either Bush or Dean

Hopefully like most Americans, I have grown weary of politicians who will say anything just to secure a vote. We live in a culture littered with passive, wishy washy, mushy middle of the road politicians who do not know the meaning of honesty or personal conviction. However, two presidential contenders do serve as energizing exceptions to this trend, the only clear leaders for their respective parties and as candidates for our consideration: Republican incumbent, President George W. Bush and Democratic frontrunner, Dr. Howard Dean.

I must confess I am a staunch conservative, yet anti-death penalty, opposed to homosexual rights but for a new era of compassion and understanding towards homosexual people, pro-Iraq War, pro-life member of the Republican National Committee who did once and will again vote for George W. Bush. I am adamantly opposed to most every social position that Dr. Howard Dean holds. And, while I disagree with Dr. Dean on 99% of the issues, I find him a refreshing alternative to the other Democratic candidates for president. I readily admit that if I was a partisan Democrat I would see no other viable candidate for the Democratic nomination for President. And, if I can be so bold to speak a word of advice to partisan Democrats: if you don’t choose Dean over the other nominees you are being hypocritical.

I mean, Howard Dean absolutely represents what the Democratic Party has been reduced to: pro-abortion, pro-homosexual rights, liberal, anti-war, anti-conservative Christian and pro-big government party for the politically and socially correct. Howard Dean is the only Democratic candidate who will admit his firm stance on the issues I mentioned. While I do not hold to his views, I respect his honesty and willingness to be real. He loses his temper because of his passion for what he believes. He lives his beliefs and makes no apologies for them. Why can’t we find more people on both sides willing to be as vulnerable and courageous?

This presidential race, more than any other in history, is indicative of the kind of nation the United States of America is and is going to become. Are we a Christian nation that believes in biblical family values or are we a pagan nation that is no longer going to allow for the interjection of faith into the running of government? Howard Dean has said that politics shouldn’t be about things like abortion, guns and gays—yet a substantial part of his platform involves these social issues. I think that the laws enacted regarding these issues by the people we elect are the pulse of who we are as a society.

In my opinion, President George W. Bush has stood firmly, honestly and unabashedly for what he holds dear: the preservation of family values and the system of government that our forefathers originally intended. President Bush has not wavered on his platform issues and has courageously defended his positions, decisions and values. He, like Howard Dean, is unrestrained in defining his convictions.

So, when November 2004 rolls around I hope that America will choose to be hot or cold on all of the issues mentioned in this article. I hope that George Bush and Howard Dean are the two that we will choose from and that Americans will decide to get off the couch and the fence and vote for what is best for all. It is time for the lines to be drawn clearly.

Seattle Times Reports on HIV Controversy

Quote:
The King County manifesto's most controversial line is: "Transmitting HIV knowingly is an act of violence." When Jim Blodgett read that line, it caused him pain. "It's an act of stigma, confusion or shame," says Blodgett, 49 and HIV-positive for nearly a decade. "Rarely is it an act of violence."

Alan's Comment:
Knowingly transmitting the HIV virus is a crime--a wreckless, thoughtless, irresponsible crime against our entire society. The one knowingly transmitting it to another (whether that person knows it or not) is putting whomever comes into contact with that person, sexually or medically, at risk. Additionally, spreading HIV adds to the crisis that is "supposed to be" so horrible. And, it ends up costing companies and individuals money when it comes time to pay for insurance, prescription drugs and even taxes.

Anyone who knowingly and wrecklessly passes along HIV isn't a victim they are a criminal deserving to be charged with a crime. Anyone who knowingly allows themselves to be infected deserves to face prosecution, as well. It is time we hold the these people (regardless of sexual orientation) accountable for their crimes.

I encourage all of you to read the Seattle Times article.

Animal Farm: Coming to America?

Unfortunately, George Orwell might have been prophetic--his book, Animal Farm, sure reads like a modern day interpretation of life in the politically correct new millennium. After all, it seems that some animals have become more equal than others.

Case in point, in a media interview this past November an Anglican Bishop (see Catholic World News article below) happened to share his personal opinion that homosexuals can change their sexual orientation and found himself at Cheshire Police Headquarters being interrogated about his violation of a 1986 Hate Speech Law. His opinion was steeped in biblical, historical and modern day fact as there is 2,000 year old evidence that homosexuals can and have changed. I Corinthians 6:9-11 gives an account of this saying first that a number of sinful people groups won't inherit the Kingdom of God; the passage goes on to give the good news that all of those groups had hope because change was possible and had actually happened for some. Additionally, there is NO refuting the personal story of people like me who once were gay but are no longer.

We are living in a time when simply believing that homosexuality is sinful can land you in jail. Indeed, there is a different set of rules for those who criticize homosexuals--even the Ku Klux Klan (a true hate group) can openly demonstrate and speak out against black people and get away with it--after all that is freedom of speech. However, exercise that same freedom and simply state that homosexuality is a sin and can be changed and you will find yourself publicly whipped and possibly even jailed.

Of course, it isn't illegal---YET--to speak out against homosexuality in this country, but there is a precedent for abuse if you dare to even think negatively about the issue of homosexuality or homosexual people. The media, many in the gay community and liberal politicians showed us what can and will be done to anyone who offers anything other than praise for homosexuality when they viciously and wrongly victimized Dr. Laura for sharing her thoughts on why homosexuals are not sexually attracted to the opposite sex. Dr. Laura simply said, "...it is a biological error that inhibits you from relating normally to the opposite sex" (Bruce, The New Thought Police). She didn't call anyone a biological error as so many claimed, she called the inability to relate sexually to the opposite sex the error. But, a smear campaign is never based on all the facts--not even ones waged on gay and lesbian people.

We are living in dangerous times. We have left the terrible days when gay and lesbian people were dehumanized, misunderstood and ridiculed only to enter a day where the oppressed have become the oppressor. There is a balance but I wholeheartedly believe the majority wouldn't like it--someone always has to have the upper hand.