Refuse Their Double Standard, And Don't Forget to "Use" It! Part II

Now back to my original challenge.  Adherents of the pro position (for definitions of “pro” and “con” see my previous blog) need to come to terms with the logical obligations of toleration.  If they insist on tolerance on the part of the cons, (a challenge which I accept according to the correct definition of the term) then by their own standards it is required that they endeavor, in turn, to tolerate our position.  It is high time every party, not just the cons but also the pros, publically agree to abide by the very same standard of tolerance.  That they should settle for less than a tolerant stance themselves betrays insincerity about a central tenet of their professed agenda.  Of course the consistent practice of tolerance is not an easy challenge for anyone.  But the attempt will significantly improve understanding across the board, even as it raises the level of discussion on this very challenging matter.

The second matter poses a far more substantial challenge to the pro position since it cannot be resolved merely by working “to play more fair.”  The pro-position is entangled in a fundamental self-contradiction.  The driving force behind the pro position is not the affirmation of another, higher, morality, but instead the denial of morality in any traditional sense.  The primary objection posed by the pros is not specifically that the con vision of sexuality is immoral, but to the contrary, that the con position is grounded on a moral vision that has no transcendent reality at all.  So the pro homosexual movement seeks to have its cake and eat it too.  It is usurping the emotional weight of moral indignation to advance an agenda which dismisses morality as mere illusion.  The logical dilemma for the con position is as follows.  If it is true that no one is obligated to obey the moral vision of sexuality, then it follows that no one is morally obligated to embrace the a-moral (or immoral) view of sexuality either.  This means that the expressions of “moral” outrage by the pros are worse than wrong.  They are founded on a house of cards that can only be maintained by suppressing the voice of logic.

As I have urged from the beginning of my blog, Christians are obligated by the Gospel, and under the authority of our Lord, to treat others (including homosexuals) with dignity, and to love others with the same love God has exercised in His receiving all sinners (including ourselves) into His gracious kingdom.  The Apostle John declared in his first letter, “Beloved, if [since] God so loved us, we also ought to love one another” (1 John 4:11).  Indeed, God’s gracious love extends to homosexuals to come into His kingdom by grace alone through faith alone in the same way He calls all sinners (including ourselves).

This however, does not mean that the methods of the pro-homosexual propaganda must be received without criticism.  To the contrary, their central strategies ought to be challenged, and wherever appropriate, resisted.  It also requires taking the opportunities that are handed to us under the reality of logic and truth.  Their attempted imposition of a double standard in the debate at hand is extremely vulnerable to collapse in the face of exposure and challenge.  That this should happen, however, depends on Christians who embrace God’s vision of sexuality, holding up the standard of truth with a Godly boldness.