A Letter to the Lithuanian People|
from the 'International' topic
Author: Scott Lively
A warning to Lithuania of the goals of homosexual movement, which has just begun to organize there.
[ send this resource to a friend ]
A Letter to the Lithuanian People
I am Dr. Scott Lively, an American attorney and President of Defend the Family International, a human rights NGO. I hold a Doctor of Law and a Doctor of Theology, as well as special credentials in International Human Rights. I am the author of the Riga Declaration on Religious Freedom, Family Values and Human Rights (see www.defendthefamily.com), and an international lecturer on these topics.
I came to Lithuania to warn the Lithuanian people about the threat posed to your society by the global homosexual political movement, which has begun to organize in your nation. At the outset, let me say that I advocate a high tolerance for the people who define themselves by their choice of a homosexual lifestyle, even while I promote a low tolerance for homosexual conduct.
Homosexual activists would have you believe that tolerance for them requires total acceptance and approval of their lifestyle, but that is not obligatory, nor prudent. In fact, discrimination against homosexual behavior is necessary to protect your society from the consequences of “gay” culture, which always pushes for greater and greater liberalism in sexual attitudes, especially among young people. To see the danger of this we need look no further than Holland, where sexual liberalism promoted by the homosexual movement has led to the creation of a pedophile political party, whose right hold seats in parliament, to advocate for the legalization of adult/child sexual relationships, has been approved by the Dutch courts.
We should not, however, discriminate against persons who define themselves as homosexuals. They should be free to label themselves as they choose, no less so than other groups whose beliefs or goals are disapproved by the majority. Indeed, we can compare homosexuals to their chief adversaries, the radical nationalists. Both groups hate each other, and would like to do away with the other. Neither side is embraced by the majority, but both deserve the right to freedom of their beliefs and to freedom of speech within reasonable limits. The rest of us must be willing to tolerate these difficult neighbors to preserve civility for society as a whole.
The chief danger of the homosexual movement is that it always seeks to take away the freedom of speech from anyone who disapproves of homosexuality. In Canada, where homosexual activism has enjoyed considerable success, there are now so-called Human Rights Tribunals which have the power to punish anyone who publicly opposes homosexuality by making the offender pay a monetary fine. The money is then given to the homosexual who filed the complaint. The most recent incident involved a Catholic member of the City Council of Kamloops, British Columbia. His offence was to call homosexuality “unnatural.” One wonders if Pope Benedict himself would face arrest in Canada since he has repeatedly affirmed that homosexuality is “intrinsically disordered.”
Religious opinions are also silenced wherever homosexuals gain the power to do so. We can recall a case from Sweden. On June 29, 2004, Pastor Ake Green was sentenced to one month in jail for showing “disrespect” against homosexuals in the sermon he delivered in his pulpit in Borgholm. The title of his sermon was “Are people born with homosexual orientation or is it the result of influence by evil powers?” Pastor Green was eventually exonerated by the Swedish Supreme Court, but only over the vigorous objection of the “gay” activists in that nation (would the result have been the same if the judges were “gay“?).
Just this week In Britain, the House of Lords approved a bill to prohibit private Christian schools from teaching their students that homosexuality is wrong.
Could such anti-family fascism ever occur in Lithuania? It already has. On Thursday, March 21st I gave a lecture at the Kaunas Police Academy. I taught about the importance of preserving family values in society and contrasted the effects of marriage-centered sexual morality with the effects of sexual “freedom” that is promoted by the homosexual movement. During my talk a homosexual instructor from another university stood up and in a loud and angry voice accused me of inciting hatred against homosexuals and tried to stop my lecture. Then at the end of the lecture, when I called for questions from the audience, he came forward and began to speak out against me to the students, calling me a criminal and promising to have me arrested at the airport on my way out of the country. He then went out and filed a false police report against me, claming that I had discriminated against him. (Fortunately, my lecture had been filmed and so the police could see the truth for themselves.)
The homosexual movement has come to Lithuania. There has already been at least one “gay” strategy conference held at VDU in Kaunas. It included homosexual activists from several countries. From what I have seen they are following the same plan they have used across the world. It begins with promoting the idea that homosexuals are “born gay” and cannot change (a fact that is proved false by the thousands of ex-homosexuals that now speak out against the “gay” movement). It advances by casting homosexuals as victims needing a special new law prohibiting discrimination based on “sexual orientation.” It is this new law that gives the homosexual activists the power to begin silencing and punishing their detractors as they work to implement the rest of their plan.
Many people will be reluctant to accept the idea that the long-held traditional values of their society are threatened by a tiny group of people who act like victims, not conquerors. I didn’t think it would happen in my country either. One helpful indicator is found in the way they use the language of victims as a weapon of aggression. The best example is the word “homophobia.” Homophobia is an American word, in which the active part, “phobia,” means intense fear at the level of mental disorder. Thus, a “homophobe” literally means person filled with such fear and hatred of homosexuals that he is mentally unbalanced. One might be able to accept this definition if it was applied only to Nazis and street thugs, but who does it really describe? It describes everyone who disapproves of homosexuality for any reason: me, you, Pope Benedict, anyone who opposes “gay marriage,” therapists who help homosexuals recover, ex-”gays, and on and on.
The next time you hear a pro-homosexual person use the word homophobia ask them to define the difference between homophobia and legitimate opposition to homosexuality, and you will see. To the homosexual movement there is no legitimate basis for disapproval, and thus everyone who disagrees is a homophobe who must be silenced.
You will also see that homosexual activists are not truly victims but aggressors. They demand tolerance but will not give it. They insist on freedom of speech but deny it to others. And they invent words like homophobia that appear scientific but have no purpose except the psychological manipulation of the public.
The answer to the homosexual challenge is not to censor homosexuals the way they want to silence you, it is to have an open and honest public discussion about family values vs. “gay” culture and the real meaning of words like tolerance. In the mean time, Lithuanians should remind themselves what it means to be a marriage-centered society with healthy sexual morality. If they are successful in this process, perhaps that can set an example for the rest of Europe -- instead of falling prey to the destructive homosexual plan.