GAY TRUTH

In what has to be a new low for the  New York Times , the Gray Lady (or should we now say the Bearded Lady?) has published an op-ed piece titled “ Is God Transgender? ” by a New York rabbi named Mark Sameth. Cousin to a man who “transitioned to a woman” in the 1970s, Sameth contends that “the Hebrew Bible, when reading in its original language, offers a highly elastic view of gender.” He marshals many purported examples of gender fluidity in the Hebrew scriptures, in order to argue that religion should not be put in service of “social prejudices” against transgendering. But his treatment of the Bible amounts to propaganda, not scholarship. Proposing that the God of Israel was worshipped originally as “a dual-gendered deity,” the rabbi asserts, untenable, that the etymological derivation of Yahweh is “He/She” (HUHI). His argument requires that the Tetragrammaton be read, not from right to left (as Hebrew always is), but from left to right: The four-Hebrew-letter name of God, w

The tragic madness of gender ideology is on full display at the  New York Times  with the publication of an opinion article by a “trans” man who blithely reveals that that his “sex reassignment” treatments are making him more miserable, and even tempting him to kill himself – but that’s no reason to stop them. In fact, the writer argues, the notion that such operations are justified by the psychological needs of the patients is itself a form of discrimination and oppression. In his  essay , “My New Vagina Won’t Make Me Happy,” a troubled man who calls himself “Andrea Long Chu” informs us that any psychological benefit he might gain from the hole that will be carved between his legs – which is meant to simulate a vagina and which his body will interpret correctly as an injury – has nothing to do with the legitimacy of the surgery. Concerning his new “vagina,” which he will shortly receive, Chu admits: “Until the day I die, my body will regard the vagina as a wound; as a result

Amid the fiery backlash against the Trump administration’s stated intent to legally define sex as either male or female, an expert in neuroscience has claimed, “The concept of sex is, by definition, binary.”   After  The New York Times  leaked a memo describing how the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) plans to reverse the Obama administration’s guidance allowing students to use restroom and locker room facilities of the opposite sex based on which sex students "identify" as, media outlets and activist organizations unleashed relentless attacks on the Trump White House, claiming it seeks to harm “transgendered” people.    In two recent articles, one written for  RealClearPolitics  and the other for  Playboy ,  Debra W. Soh , who holds a Ph.D in sexual neuroscience research from New York University, doused the raging firestorm with facts.   “As much as I understand the public’s concern, it’s important to offer a fact-based approach to the issue,” wrote So

NEW YORK TIMES TAKES AIM AT BIBLE, SAYS BOOK OF LEVITICUS USED TO CONTAIN PRO-HOMOSEXUAL VERSES IN ‘EARLIER TEXTS’ The authorship of Leviticus by Moses is confirmed by Jesus Himself in Luke 5:14 and Matthew 8:4 in your King James Bible. Additionally, the apostle John confirms that Moses wrote Genesis in John 7:22. So the idea of there being other authors of some non-existent version of Leviticus or any other of the books of the Pentateuch authored by Moses is laughably ridiculous. A quick word search for ‘moses’ shows us that his name appears 848 times in 748 verses, with hundreds of references proving beyond the shadow of any doubt that God used him to author the first 5 books of the Holy Bible. There is no other group of people more apt to destroy your confidence in the Holy Bible, than that gaggle of textual critics known as bible scholars. They don’t believe that God has preserved His word, they don’t believe in its authority, and they have no compunctions about revising history

From the op-ed pages of the New York Times comes “ The Secret History of Leviticus ,” an improbable essay by Idan Dershowitz. A scholar of the Hebrew Bible and a junior fellow at the Harvard Society of Fellows, Dershowitz has written for the Times a popular version of the academic argument he published recently in the journal Hebrew Bible and Ancient Israel . The Book of Leviticus contains two prohibitions against homosexual acts, the first of which (18:22) states: “You shall not lie with a male as though lying with a woman; it is an abomination.” According to Dershowitz, “before Leviticus was composed, outright prohibitions against homosexual sex … were practically unheard-of in the ancient world.” But he proposes that “an earlier version of the laws in Leviticus 18 permitted sex between men,” albeit tacitly. Supposedly, the laws were revised by a later editor so as to include the prohibition, and to “obscure any implication that same-sex relations had once been permissible.” Dersho

Same Sex Marriage (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) What the  New York Times  correctly calls “the steady march of judicial approval for same-sex marriage over the past year” hit a speed bump, if not a road block, this week as the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit heard arguments in six same-sex marriages cases appealed by four states. Judges have been marching in lock-step to overturn democratic laws which define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. More than more than two dozen lower courts and two appeals courts have ruled that gay couples have a right to marry. Some states have fought back, including Kentucky, Michigan , Ohio and Tennessee, whose cases came before three judges of Sixth Circuit this week. “Who gets to decide what the definition of marriage is?” asked Aaron D. Lindstrom, solicitor general of Michigan. And for once, it seems, a judge thought it was a good question.  The Times  reports: Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton , one of the B

English: Angry woman. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) As  I recounted Monday at The Daily Signal , The New York Times reporter Josh Barro thinks some people are “unworthy of respect.” Yesterday Barro doubled-down and tweeted back at me that “some people are deserving of incivility.” He argued that I am such a person because of my views about marriage policy. You can see the entire exchange  on my twitter page . What Josh Barro says or does doesn’t really affect me. I’m not a victim, and I’ll keep doing what I do. But incivility, accepted and entrenched, is toxic to a political community. Indeed, civility is essential for political life in a pluralistic society. It also has deep roots. The Hebrew Bible tells us that all people are made in the image and likeness of God and have a profound and inherent dignity. Sound philosophy comes to a similar conclusion: as rational beings capable of freedom and love, all human beings have intrinsic and inestimable worth. And so we should al