Is Homosexuality Defensible?

I realize full well the sort of backlash and misunderstanding the very hint of non-approval of homosexuality can generate. Homosexuality is the sacred cow of the sexual revolution. By daring to suggest any opinion that is less than all-embracing of homosexuality, I will open myself up to hate and vitriol and accusations of intolerance and homophobia. And if I throw in the fact that I’m a Christian…

Well, just try it on a college campus, if you think I’m exaggerating.

In any case, I will attempt to clarify that I do not hate homosexuals. I will try to help you to understand that I think it’s wrong, unnatural, medically dangerous [if not suicidal] and sinful, but that there is hope for change. I would invoke the old “Love the sinner, hate the sin” mantra, but you’ve already stopped listening.

Now, we know the official position of the Church. It’s a sin. Specifically, it’s the sin Sodom and Gomorrah were burned to the basement for. It’s condemned in the Old Testament. It’s condemned in the New Testament. Only liberal “Christians” — who don’t really believe in miracles, hell, sin, the Resurrection, God or anything else Christians believe [In fact, they really don’t believe much of anything except some fuzzy notion of love and social activism and that fundies are the devil!], but somehow believe they still deserve to be called Christians! — try to defend homosexuality from a Biblical standpoint and their efforts are some of the worst Sciptorture imaginable. They just don’t have a plain case.

So homosexuality isn’t defensible from a biblical standpoint.

What about a scientific standpoint?

Well, I hate to bring it up, but species with an attraction for the same sex are something of an evolutionary dead end. They can procreate naturally, but their desires are such that they have been naturally selected for extinction.

Is this an admission of a “gay gene?” No. A gay gene hasn’t been found. I don’t think it ever will be. Homosexulaity was originally diagnosed as a psychological disorder. It’s no longer viewed as such by the psychiatric community at large, but it’s significant to note that it changed it’s mind as result of peer pressure from radical activists, not from scientific study.

It’s reversible. It’s not a biological or psychological imperative.

But suppose there were a gay gene. Scientifically, it would be an evolutionary defect, like sickle cell disease or a genetic tendency toward alcoholism. It would require our sympathy and treatment, not our acceptance and celebration. From the Biblical POV, it would be an effect of the Fall, like any other harmful mutation.

I’ll say it again, it’s not a biological imperative. Homosexuals go straight every day – and their children are born straight!

Why do we defend aberrant behavior with such medical risks to the participants’ mortality rate and over-all health? Why do we celebrate a psychological disorder which places such a financial burden on the world in health care and insurance costs that must be shared by people who do NOT engage in such dangerous behavior? Should we seek a cure for AIDS. Yes, but we should ask why they won’t seek treatment and desist in the behavior that spreads it!

Christians should be empathetic to the plight of homosexuality, as D. L. Moody was sympathetic to the plight of “fallen women” [prostitutes]. But this practice should never be condoned, much less celebrated. It is a lamentable fact that homosexul behavior drastically reduces lifespans and quality of life. Why would we celebrate for such suicidal behavior? Have they no advocate, no one who will shout out a warning and toss them a life line? They need help, not affirmation. If we celebrate homosexuality, we may as well celebrate alcoholism, schizophrenia or depression! We may as well celebrate the Black Death, tuberculosis, cancer and AIDS itself, for if we celebrate one disease, why not another?

In the end, we must conclude that homosexulaity is indefensible.

Can they change? Yes, there is hope, for Christ can make a new creation of anyone. if you are bound by the chains of homosexuality, you can start the change today!

–Sirius Knott 


26 Comments Add yours

  1. Eric Kemp says:

    Wow, Sirius, you’re going to get it for that one.

  2. SuperJesus says:

    I guess God really does hate those fags eh? Did you know that in 2007 God killed 21,000 people in North America with AIDS. That’ll show those raging homos a thing or two! Oh sure, some of them were children and many caught AIDS even though they weren’t gay, but ours is a vengeful God and he isn’t so concerned about the collateral damage caused by blood transfusions and the like. Screw the gays with AIDS!

    Oddly women only make up 30% of the total AIDS cases out there. God obviously has a thing for watching lesbians get their sin on but. But can you really blame Him, I mean, don’t we all?

    I’m just glad he isn’t even more angry about the gays, I mean remember how he killed all those innocent animals and infants in the great flood. But I digress.

    Of course now that I think about it, in 2007 God decided to kill 42,000 people in traffic accidents. That’s twice as many as he killed with AIDS! Obviously God hates driving twice as much as fags…unless all those killed in traffic accidents were fags too. Do you think there is any scripture to back that up? Never mind, I’ll do things like you and just make that one up and say God just told me ALL of them were gay! AIDS wasn’t working fast enough so God obviously decided to take them out the old fashioned way and made those evil people die the proper death of the homo…a horrible car wreck. So clearly everyone who dies in a traffic accident is Gay!

    Keep spreading that good Christian love and understanding!

    Evangelically yours (in a completely heterosexual way),
    Super Jesus

    1. WeiXiong says:

      You are very insensitive! GOD doesn’t hate gay people! GOD hates the sin and not the person itself.

      I feel that you should tone down your message a little. There are other non-christians reading this blogs.

      I believe GOD really cares for them and he’s not just angry with them but He has compassion on them. Why don’t you work for the recovery of this people and help them overcome their emotional or mental barriers instead of wishing they will just die!

      Sin is still sin, GOD doesn’t lighten the judgement on lesbian, gays or even you and I when we sin. Truth is “We are deserve to go to hell, we are all sinners.” But JESUS did such an wonderful thing to even die for us. Your not more righteous than them, I’m not more righteous than you

      Don’t tell me you have never lusted before, if you have its a sin too. So why don’t I wish GOD give AIDS for going on porn sites or maybe even undressing a woman in your mind?

      Where is your compassion? View things the way GOD views them!!!

      1. Sirius says:


        I see you didn’t bother reading either my post or the subsequent comments.

        I NEVER stated that God hates gay people.

        I stated that God hates the sin and loves the sinner.

        I offered a link where they could get help at the end of the article.

        I actually also stated in a comment afterward that we Christians should all be able to look at the chiefest of sinners and say both, “There go I” and “There but by the grace of God go I.”

        And I never stated that I wanted ANYONE to get GRIDS/AIDS.

        Where is your integrity? READ what your opponent ACTUALLY believes BEFORE you answer him next time instead of bearing FALSE witness against him. You’ve jumped to conclusions and are guilty of beating the stuffing out of a Straw Man of your own thatching.

        Yet since you remind me to view things the way God views them, I forgive you and ask Him to also to forgive you for you know not what you do.

        -Sirius Knott

    2. MadMaximus says:

      God doesn’t kill anyone, Jesus died so that we could make all the bad choices on our own, so we could chose to live with him in the spirit or against him in the flesh. By the way, the fleshies get reap what they sow!

  3. Sirius says:


    I’ve been to your site. Your blog style is all shock jock and no substance. This comment is an excellent example.

    Firstly, you’ve gone off on a rant, beating a straw man in which I’ve said that God hates fags and that He has sent AIDS to destroy them, BUT I HAVEN’T SAID ANYTHING OF THE SORT. I’ve haven’t said it because I don’t believe it.

    Also, your false analogy regarding God and traffic accidents… In your haste to be caustic, you’ve not taken into account that people who die in car accidents do so because of the poor decisions and actions of… other people. Whether by the driver’s stupidity, drunkenness or distraction [hang up and drive!], by a pedestrian’s mistake or distraction or by some other driver’s mistake, traffic accidents happen every day, mostly due to people. Sometimes it’s by negligence, other times out of malevolence and still others out of dumb luck or ignorance, but the root cause of these deaths are people.

    The same holds true of those who contract AIDS. People doing something rather stupid and dangerous to themselves and others are spreading AIDS. People. It is passed from one person to another predominantly by sexual activity between homosexual men. It is primarily spread in this fashion and amongst this demographic because the body was not designed for anal intercourse; the resulting ripping and tearing leaves homosexuals more prone to illness and infection and, yes, AIDS.

    This is not propaganda. It is not hate speech. It is TRUTH… perhaps unwelcome and unbearable, but TRUTH.

    You may sarcastically imply that my criticism of homosexuality defies Christian love and understanding, but by doing so you betray a fundamental misunderstanding of Christianity. Christendom stands for love AND truth. Because we love and understand, we WARN others of the destructiveness of the path they’ve chosen and tell them of a remedy. If a man decides that he wants to jump off a bridge or put a gun to his head to end his life, we do not affirm him and try to show understanding; out of love, we try to stop him! Your view of understanding isn’t love at all; it’s APATHY born of self-centeredness, which may as well be hate. How does your “understanding” benefit anyone? You demand that we turn a blind eye to the consequences of this willful sin; not only that, but you demand we affirm a lifestyle of death! Preposterous!

    Tell me how YOU love the homosexual by allowing him to continue in a lifestyle that is patatently suicidal. You would intervene if a man was destroying himself with drugs or alcohol, but you would affirm someone for killing himself with homosexulaity! Hypocrisy!

    Next time, trying listening to what I’m actually saying.

    –Sirius Knott

    1. WeiXiong says:

      Goodness, Sirius I wasn’t talking about you!!! I was talking about superjesus!!! I agreed with what you said. What you wrote really encouraged me!!!

      I wasn’t talking about you but about SUPERJESUS. Don’t you agree with me that his comments are quite hurtful? I’m so sorry if you mistook it. I was replying to superjesus. Don’t take it personally!!! I’m a christian facing the same problem that you were writing about! IF Superjesus were to stand in my shoes he will understand things much better!!!

      And yet I say again, my comment are directed to superjesus. Please forgive me, I’m so sorry that you have mistook my comment as being directed to you!!!

      I did read what you have written!!! Do continue to write and encourage other people!!!

      1. Sirius says:


        Sorry. I completely had no idea you were talking to SuperJesus. One of the downsides of WordPress’ Comment Admin is that it doesn’t give you much clue into that sort of thing.

        A bit of advice, respectfully. You might want to consider using an @ and the name of the commentor at the beginning of your comments [example: @Sirius or @Superjesus] in future posts. It’s standard posting etiquette on several other blogsites [though I haven’t made it mandatory here or anything] & seems to help clear up this sort of confusion.

        On another note, I’m glad to hear that you found this post encouraging and, I hope, useful. And I do agree that SuperJesus’ comments were hurtful, but that’s his modus operandi. If memory serves me correctly, SuperJesus isn’t a friendly. To put it bluntly, he’s not a Christian. He exists to mock Christianity.

        He blogs from aka The Gospel of the Super Jesus where he describes himself thusly:

        “Not to be confused with that other Jesus character, I am a character who is trying to bring you the good news of skepticism, rational thought, and reason.”

        His tagline is:

        “Faith doesn’t give you the answers, it just stops you asking the questions”

        All-in-all, he’s a maudlin mockstar who blasts random misotheistic hate-screed and hides behind the old faith versus reason canard.

        I would gently advise that not all that glitters is gold. In other words, Supe’s not likely to care how God views things anytime soon, but we can always pray to the contrary. There was, after all, this fellow named Saul who happily jailed and persecuted Christians… until he got a ways down the Damascus Road anyway.

        -Sirius Knott

  4. DavidG says:

    Ouch! This subject hits home. For whatever reason, many of the friends my youngest sister hung around with in high school “came out of the closet” as homosexuals– including my sister. We shared the same parents, same home environment, same food, same childhood, same church upbringing and same public education. The simple and clear explanation is that her homosexual life style is a matter of choice. I too have made unwise and destructive choices in my own life.

    Therefore I consider homosexuality to be in the same category as fornication, immodesty, adultery and promiscuity– it is a sin. Without Jesus Christ, everyone is in bondage to sin and is incapable of saving themself. There is no singular “homosexual gene” or “chemical dependency gene” or “pride gene” as sin itself is our common genetic defect. All mankind are born sinners– homosexuals and heterosexuals and alcoholics and Oxycontin addicts and liers and hypocrites alike.

    None of us– and I place myself on top of the list– merit salvation from sin. Yet while lost in our sin, God esteems each of us to be so valuable that He sent His Son, Jesus Christ, to pay the death penalty for our sin. Jesus alone cleanses us from sin and cloaks us with His own righteousness. There is no other name by which we can be saved from sin.

  5. Sirius says:


    If we Christians cannot look at the chief of sinners and personally and honestly say, “There am I” and “There but by the grace of God go I,” we’ve alost all true perspective.

    ’nuff said.

    –Sirius Knott

  6. SuperJesus says:

    Nice that you filter comments.


  7. Sirius says:


    If you are idiot enough to approve every comment someone offers you simply because they had the time and inclination to do so, that’s your business.

    You might want to take a look at the About Sirius page, specifically the portion about Commenting on this Blog. I don’t entertain blather and screed spouted according to someone’spreconceived stereotypes. Nor am I into allowing mockery on my blogsite. Be civil or shut up. I realize this may be difficult for a shock troll such as yourself. [Especially given the evidence that you have chosen to advertise your Christophobic antagonism with such a blasphemous moniker.]

    Now, in fairness to my dear readers, Soup posted some hubris trying to impugn me as homophobic. He tried to make some sort of red herring that AIDS does not have as its root cause homosexual sex between males simply because agood portion of Africa and many children NOW have it.

    These are lamentable effects of the root cause. AIDS was orinially dubbed as GRIDS [Gay-Related Immuno Deficiency Syndrome]. Politically correct activists changed the name. From the male homosexual community, it has spread primarily via bisexual activity, pregnancies involving infected mothers and dirty drug habits. But the root cause remains male homosexual sin.

    It is reprehensible that the homosexual community continues to use children infected with AIDS as a smokescreen instead of showing some SHAME and RESPONSIBILITY for their culpability in these Crimes Against Humanity.

    We should find a cure for the sake of the children and those who have contracted AIDS through no fault of their own, but should we not hold homosexuals accountable for the effects of their own irresponsible and pernicious actions?

    Especially since they will not take this responsibility upon themselves?

    –Sirius Knott

    P.S. If you can behave, Soup, I’ll consider your future comments.

  8. Patrick says:

    AIDS started in Africa, and spread to the rest of the world from there. It is primarily a heterosexual disease there, not a disease of drug users or homosexuals. My experience of Africans – I lived there – is that they hate homosexuals. HIV is a simian (primate) disease. There is no need to infer zoophiliac activity; humans could have caught the disease through blood contamination through hunting accidents. Given that it infects monkeys, drug users, unborn babies, homosexuals, the faithful and faithless, wives and husbands, heterosexuals, rapists and their victims it’s difficult to see that AIDS could be a divine instrument of punishment. My God is not so cruel as to punish the clearly innocent along with the wicked.

    1. MadMaximus says:

      Half of South Africa’s young have AIDS from rape

  9. Sirius says:


    You’ve concentrated on the effect [who catches it] without much consideration for the cause [who bears primary responsibility for its spread]. Will you ignore statistical fact for political ideaology?

    Now, I’ve no idea who your God is, but the Biblical God could allow us choice and we could be so evil and irresponsible as to spread a lethal sexual disease to innocents. This says nothing whatsoever as to whether AIDS [or GRIDS] is an instrument of divine punishment OR whether it is simply the natural recompense for a sinful lifestyle coupled with fallout upon the innocents.

    Take responsibility.

    –Sirius Knott

  10. Patrick says:

    Dear Sirius,
    Thanks for your comment. Your instruction to me to take responsibility suggests you think I don’t already, and your view is I think genuinely at odds with mine. Your focus seems to be primarily on the sinner rather than victims; would that be a fair assessment? You seem to be more concerned about wrong-doers than their innocent victims. Someone could have been infected with HIV from birth and innocently given it to her husband. Neither person in this scenario is a sinner in this scenario, yet you are more concerned about the original perpetrators of sin. I think my concern is what you call “political ideology”. Christ was not political yet He hated the sin and loved the sinner, and He was full of love for innocents. And at the same time He warned of the dangers of sinning against God. He had no trouble taking a rounded view; why do you?
    Kind regards,

  11. Sirius says:


    Respectfully, you could not be more wrong when you assert that Christ was not political. In his day, religion and politics were intertwined as the political ruling body of the Jews, the Sanhedrin was also primarily a religious body.

    Yet even if we put that historical context aside, we have Jesus calling Herod “that fox” and telling his disciples to render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God.

    In any case, your scenario is far-fetched. While such cases might exist, they do not represent the majority. It reminds me of the rape invocation used by pro-abortionists. Rape represents the smallest statistical reason for abortion cases, but pro-choicers hide behind it like it ought to cover everything. So too with the innocent victims of the fallout [AIDS/GRIDS] of homosexuality.

    Now, I’m not concerned with the original perpetrators of this sin, so much that it is undeniably the original and still remains the primary causality of AIDS/GRIDS cases. It is mere political ideology that makes a defense of homosexulaity, given the harm it results in. In fact, given their apparent lack of concern for their fellow men, be they party to the sin or innocent by-products of their selfish acts, it seems fair to characterize homosexuality as a hate crime.

    One thing about Christ you placed under the radar: His stand for truth. And who loves you? The one who embraces your suicidal lifestyle or the one who tells you it is a sin against God, but that He has made a way of escape?

    –Sirius Knott

  12. Patrick says:

    Fair points Sirius. I am interested in your views, but I cannot drop concern for the individuals – no matter how rare they might be. By chance I watched a program last night about a man who wanted to find out about his homosexuality. Various tests proved he was deeply attracted to men, there was no attraction to women at all. He explored his past and he and his family concluded he was not nurtured into homosexuality. He did demonstrate feminine-typcial behaviour from a very early age, and the brain development that leads to these is developed in the womb. The likelihood of homosexuality increases with increasing number of elder siblings; he had two. As far as I know he has never infected anyone. Let us assume he and millions of other gay men only indulge in consensual sex and take precautions – so their lifestyles cannot be described or suicidal or homicidal. I understand that, even so, you would consider homosexuality a sin (being it or practising it?) So my question is if God detests homosexuality why does he create homosexual children? Some, at least, have no choice in the matter – it is decided for them in the womb (although I cannot imagine why anyone whould choose to become a homosexual). I do realise homosexuality is probably multi-causal. Genetics, too, seems rather out of our control. Would you argue that God decided to make some people homosexual to test them, and that those who succomb to temptation are damned?
    Best wishes,

  13. Sirius says:


    God does not create homosexual children. He has, biblically speaking, finished His creation– and it was very good. Until the Fall. When Adam and Eve sinned, mankind inherited [as a people inherit the ill effects of the decisions of their king] that sin, and the death and decay that are its fruit. From that point, creation, including man, has degenerated [physiologically and morally] to progressively match man’s spiritual state.

    Now, you really are assuming a gay gene here, yet you make note that a sociological factor [older siblings] makes one more likely to become homosexual. [btw, isn’t it lovely that a family simply decided they had done nothing to cause the fellow to be gay].

    What I’ve already written bears repeating:

    A gay gene hasn’t been found. I don’t think it ever will be. Homosexulaity was originally diagnosed as a psychological disorder. It’s no longer viewed as such by the psychiatric community at large, but it’s significant to note that it changed it’s mind as result of peer pressure from radical activists, not from scientific study.

    It’s reversible. It’s not a biological or psychological imperative.

    But suppose there were a gay gene. Scientifically, it would be an evolutionary defect, like sickle cell disease or a genetic tendency toward alcoholism. It would require our sympathy and treatment, not our acceptance and celebration. From the Biblical POV, it would be an effect of the Fall, like any other harmful mutation.

    I’ll say it again, it’s not a biological imperative. Homosexuals go straight every day – and their children are born straight!

    I say again, God does not create homosexual children, so why would it be a test. You’re painting God out as a mean-spirited kid lording over an ant hill with a magnifying glass and mortal tests beyond the poor ants’ comprehension. He doesn’t operate that way. He gave man a choice [and still gives them a choice] and man made a choice against God, against life itself and certainly against the optimum plan for our design. One doesn’t go to hell for failing a test, but because one refuses the remedy for the pre-existing condition of damnation. [cp. John 3:17-21]

    –Sirius Knott

  14. Patrick says:

    Dear Sirius,
    OK, that’s clear. So one more thing. You say God gave man a choice, but he really only gave one man and one woman a choice, and all the evils of the world have descended on the billions of descendants since then, whether they deserved them or not (genetically inherited disease etc). OK, so the descendants have a choice as to how they deal with those evils. But what induced Adam and Eve to make that single, wrong decision? You’ll say God gave them free will, but God created them in their entirety – he gave them whatever it was that made them decide one way and not the other. If they were too weak to withstand temptation then that’s God’s fault for making them that way. If it was down to a random flick of an internal decision switch then that’s hardly their fault either. However you reduce it, the Fall ends up being God’s fault, since He created man in his entirety (and he created the Devil as well). It’s like someone creating a robot then punishing them when their electronics lead to an action they don’t like. And what was God doing when he created an enternity of suffering (including of innocents) when he could have so easily avoided it and created perfection? Please don’t think I am challenging your beliefs; I am exploring them. I have never quite understood why God would create something, then challenge it and punish it for failing.
    Best wishes,

  15. Sirius says:


    You’ll forgive me, but I’ve answered this series of objections – and rather in depth at that! – before. You may read my explanation of The Cost of Free Will, which addresses the question of punished robots and what.

    The short answer is that God did create perfection; however, He also gave us free will. In order to create a perfect world with free will, there has to be the potentiality that man will reject God [which is to choose death instead of life!]. And you must admit, the choice only to pick item A is no choice at all!

    I hope you’ll read the rest of that discussion.

    happy hunting,
    Sirius Knott

  16. Eric Kemp says:


    I’d like to chime in here. I will read the post Sirius recommended to read after I respond to this. You are comparing the human brain to a robots’ electronic circuitry. Do you really think that comparison holds up?

    If you do then you are suggesting that humans don’t have free will and are merely reacting to the biochemical processes of the brain. Are you suggesting this?

    If you’re not, then humans made a choice and you are basically blaming God for giving us free will. Is this fair to blame our just, loving Creator God (who CHOSE to create us and continually chooses to sustain us)? Remember, this is the same God who has actively sought reconciliation with mankind by first giving us the Law so that we may know what He expects of us then giving us an opportunity for salvation by His Son dying on the cross to redeem the sin of Adam and Eve.

  17. Gynophile says:

    Ah, the KKK is alive and well, I see.

    1. Sirius says:


      I am not a member of the KKK. Nor would I ever consider membership in said racist group. If you’ll read the following post on my position concerning Interracial Marriage, you’ll see that I’m not a racist at all:

      Having said that, homosexuality should not be confused with ethnicity. There’s no evidence to suggest that homosexuality is genetic. If it were, well, I’ve gone over that in my post.

      But I think it’s reprehensible for gays to appropriate the rhetoric of a legitimate civil rights group to try to give themselves an air of legitimacy. It’s a slap in the face of the MLK and every other civil rights activist. Black activists were asking for the same rights and freedoms granted to every other USAmerican. Gays have been denied no rights granted to any other US citizen – instead they are pleading for special rights.

      If you’re accusing me of being like the KKK because in addition to being biggoted racists, the KKK is also notoriously anti-gay, you should re-read this portion of my post [if you ever read any of it to begin with]:

      In any case, I will attempt to clarify that I do not hate homosexuals. I will try to help you to understand that I think it’s wrong, unnatural, medically dangerous [if not suicidal] and sinful, but that there is hope for change. I would invoke the old “Love the sinner, hate the sin” mantra, but you’ve already stopped listening

      Try not to hate, Gynophile!

      -Sirius Knott

    2. MadMaximus says:

      I don’t think democrats like being called that anymore!

  18. MadMaximus says:

    I’ve read most of the comments on this subject and am going to first say that I do not know all of the words of god or claim to understand everything recorded in the Bible, that being said, from what I do think I understand, we as people died along with Jesus, the spirit then came down and washed us of sin making us righteous, from that point on we either lived in the spirit and in righteousness or we ignored all the rules and lived in the flesh and fell away from grace. I think that the responsibility of the flesh lies on each individual and whoever they follow here on earth, if it’s false teaching or an abomination the end is the same either way, asking for forgiveness is a way to get back into grace, but for it to hold you’ll have to walk the walk and talk the talk

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s