Whose right is right?
This is a question I asked in my post during the time a sensitive topic became controversial. And currently, it's become, again, a question since different groups have their own opinion about Manny Pacquiao's bold answer to an interview question, which required him to give his own stand/opinion about the issue of "Same-Sex Marriage". A lotta people gave their comments and expressed disappointment on how, as they say, he maligned the LGBT group. They are calling for RESPECT. Known media icons violently reacted. A great number called Manny uneducated and idiot. Even some Christians did not approve of what he did. Then, of course, there are still those who supported Manny and came to his defense.
But the question remains whose right is right?
Have we forgotten that the person we hailed as our National Hero said this line, "He who does not love his own language is worse than an animal and smelly fish"? And this line is widely accepted and taught in schools. Must we, then, vote this person out as our National Hero as he did not acknowledge and respect "freedom of choice" and furthermore offended not only the people in his time but also the current generation of Filipinos who are mostly English speakers? Just what is the comparison between people who practice their freedom to choose what language to use and an animal and a smelly fish? I mean, do Philippine animals love Filipino language and actually loyally use it that's why Jose Rizal had to say they are better than Filipino people who do not patronize their own language? Does it degrade, in anyway, the Philippines as a country if its citizens rather use another language as their medium of communication? But, I believe Jose Rizal only had such great passion for the country that he expressed his nationalistic point of view in this manner, and not necessarily because he "hates" people who do not speak the Filipino language. In the same way, Manny Pacquiao has such great zeal for the Law of God and he expressed it using an analogy, which if you come to think of it makes a lotta sense.
If we are just not bias about Manny's statement, we will find that he's actually talking about the "natural order of things" based on God's design. An animal's "natural" instinct is to search for "opposite" gender to satisfy its sexual need/urge. Plain and simple. His statement is NOT idiotic but factual. There may be records of certain animals observed to display "homosexual behavior", yes. Yet, it is UNNATURAL in a sense because the intention for copulation is reproduction. Mating is intended
for multiplication. And if homosexuality behavior should become a practice,
every animal species will decline in number. Again, it is against the
natural order of things. Research what causes certain animals do what they do, and may we all be judges as to whether their behavior must be considered acceptable and should be practiced by humans. (Read: Are There Homosexual Animals? Note the subtitle: Lots of animals engage in homosexual behaviour, but whether they are truly homosexual is another matter entirely.)
In fact, the LGBT groups' argument that homosexuality is natural because it exists in the animal kingdom makes them concede to what they say is condemnation to them because they compare their own selves to animals by justifying, "if animals do it, it is natural... therefore we also can." But animals do not have sense of right and wrong. They cannot read the Bible. They go by instinct. Humans are created to make proper judgment. Why must we follow practices that animals do? Homosexual behavior among animals is not even a lifestyle choice. And animals do not operate within any moral context. Just because animals have certain practices does not mean those practices must be embraced and observed by humans. Some animals eat their young, but this does not permit humans to be cannibals. Some insects after mating devour their partners, yet it is unacceptable for any human to do the same. We cannot, and must not, use animal behavior as basis to justify our chosen behavior.
Here's another additional fact. homosexual is also different from "hermaphrodite". To highlight a bit the difference, hermaphrodite is "natural". Meaning, the organism is naturally created the way it is — having both male and female reproductive organs. While homosexual is more of a preference or what is commonly known as sexual orientation. No matter how anyone asserts that it is biological or has scientific basis, each gender still remains to have only one reproductive organ and have no option to change later on. Except through surgical means. We know from sex education for which these organs are intended.
Manny did not say the things he said out of hate, but out of passion for God's Word. He was asked what's his stance and he answered from his strong conviction. Does he hate LGBT by answering a question in the manner he did? Did Jose Rizal hate Filipino English speakers when he composed his poem? I believe, they are only fighting coming from their own positions. Besides, the topic is clearly NOT about LGBTs but SAME-SEX MARRIAGE. It is not people Manny referred to, but the ACT or PRACTICE. He is against the ACT/HUMAN LAW...whatever you call it... NOT the people. How come people react violently as if they ARE the act? ...So, why did he have to compare humans to animals? — To remind us all the "natural order of things" — "opposite"-sex as designed by the Creator of the universe and NOT "same"-sex. There's purpose why it is male and female. It is not for humans to re-order the design of God. That makes us violators of His design. Read excerpts from my post, Let's All Stand Firmly Together Against the Many Faces of Hate:
"If artists are protesting that their designs are being copied, therefore, their lawful right to their masterpieces is violated, how much more the Creator of all things has the right to also make a stand?...""...as advocates of God's Law, Christians will speak of what the Law says. Christians act as Law enforcers or policemen. What does a law enforcer or a policeman do? They have the duty of maintaining law and order. In their (Christians) case, they are maintaining the Law of God to keep everything IN "order". Must they be charged for doing what they're supposed to be doing? They are fighting NOT for what they want, or feel, or think. They are fighting for what has long been established―God's Law and Decrees."
Mr. Pacquiao is an advocate of God's Law. He did not speak in front of camera out of nowhere just to shout out his firm belief and to provoke anyone. He was asked. So happened that his opinion is not widely accepted by everyone. Because many have chosen self-rule. “In the last times there will be people who laugh at God and do only what they want to do—things that are against God.” [Jude 1:18] People will fight for what they hold as their rights. And as we all uphold convictions and advocacy, it is inevitable that we will offend others. It is given. But, which right must we uphold, ours or God's?
You hate those prophets, who go to public places and speak against evil,even though they teach good, simple truths. [Amos 5:10]The time will come when people will not listen to the true teaching.But people will find more and more teachers who please them.They will find teachers who say what they want to hear. [2 Timothy 4:3]
But, Manny is not one who says what people want to hear just to please them and win their votes. Of course, he knows he will lose a large number of voters for sticking to his stance. But, just like Jesus, he chose to please God by advocating the Truth than fearing the judgment of men. Now, is Manny without sin? Is he faultless? Did he never commit sin? We all know he did, and surely, he still commits certain violations against God. No one is righteous. Pointing out sin does not require one to be without sin. But must he stop speaking the Truth only because he isn't perfect?
Christians only act as police officers maintaining/enforcing God's Law. They're not perfect. They also commit certain violations just like policemen, judges, politicians do. But, they still ought to do their duty as God's servants, nevertheless. [Let's All Stand Firmly Together Against the Many Faces of Hate]
People wanted only to do evil. So God left them and let them go their sinful way. And so they became completely immoral and used their bodies in shameful ways with each other. They traded the truth of God for a lie. They bowed down and worshiped the things God made instead of worshiping the God who made those things. He is the one who should be praised forever. Amen.Because people did those things, God left them and let them do the shameful things they wanted to do. Women stopped having natural sex with men and started having sex with other women. In the same way, men stopped having natural sex with women and began wanting each other all the time. Men did shameful things with other men, and in their bodies they received the punishment for those wrongs. [Romans 1:24-27]
And may we not also forget that Jesus made statements like, "you brood of vipers!" Vipers are venomous snakes. He called some people snakes. He referred to gentiles as dogs. He calls His people sheep. Jesus used metaphors and they can all be found in the four Gospels. If we do not want to be compared to animals, then let us behave like humans and not pattern our actions on their behavior and practices.
.png)
No comments:
Post a Comment