MLK: Homosexuality A ‘Problem’ With A ‘Solution’





Race Industry MLK Memory SC

This past week, America honored both the life and noble work of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., a Bible-believing Christian minister who did more to advance the cause of race-based civil rights than perhaps any other person in recent history.

Regrettably – and as they do each year – the same flock of opportunist “LGBT”-activist vultures quickly swooped in, picking the live flesh from MLK’s character-based “dream” to advance their own behavior-based nightmare.

In what amounts to a sort of soft racism, this mostly white, left-wing faction has, over the years, disingenuously and ignobly hitched its little pink wagon to a civil rights movement that, by contrast, is built upon the genuine and noble precepts of racial equality and humanitarian justice.

What was MLK’s position on the homosexual lifestyle and so-called “gay rights”? While he said little in public on the issue, what he did say made his viewpoint abundantly clear. Unlike the “LGBT” lobby, I’ll let Dr. King speak for himself.

In 1958, while writing an advice column for Ebony Magazine, Dr. King responded to a young “gay” man looking for guidance. To avoid being accused of “cherry-picking,” here is the exchange in its entirety:

Question: My problem is different from the ones most people have. I am a boy, but I feel about boys the way I ought to feel about girls. I don’t want my parents to know about me. What can I do? Is there any place where I can go for help?

Answer: Your problem is not at all an uncommon one. However, it does require careful attention. The type of feeling that you have toward boys is probably not an innate tendency, but something that has been culturally acquired. Your reasons for adopting this habit have now been consciously suppressed or unconsciously repressed. Therefore, it is necessary to deal with this problem by getting back to some of the experiences and circumstances that led to the habit. In order to do this I would suggest that you see a good psychiatrist who can assist you in bringing to the forefront of conscience all of those experiences and circumstances that led to the habit. You are already on the right road toward a solution, since you honestly recognize the problem and have a desire to solve it.

No amount of leftist spin can muddy Dr. King’s lucid position on the homosexual lifestyle. He recognized it as a “culturally acquired” “problem” in need of a “solution” – a “habit” stemming from a series of negative “experiences and circumstances.”

Although homosexual activists desperately cling to the fact that, after his death, Dr. King’s wife, Coretta Scott King, did voice some level of support for the homosexualist political agenda, the undeniable reality remains that, based upon his own words, Dr. King supported neither homosexual conduct nor “LGBT” political activism.

Indeed, it strains credulity to suggest that MLK would have thrown his weight behind a political movement hell-bent on justifying sexual appetites and behaviors that he properly identified as “a problem” demanding a “a solution” – a “type of feeling” that requires “careful attention” – up to and including “see[ing] a good psychiatrist.”

No, MLK was a Christian minister who both embraced and articulated the biblical “love the sinner, hate the sin” model on homosexuality. Every Christian should follow his lead. After all, it is the lead set by Christ Himself.

Gary Glenn is a candidate for the Michigan State House. He is also president of the pro-family group AFA Michigan. Of Dr. King’s public position on homosexuality, Glenn recently noted a glaring – if not utterly twisted – irony: “If homosexual activists had been holding awards ceremonies back in 1958,” wrote Glenn, “they would have labeled Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. a bigot for his published views on homosexual attraction.

“And under today’s Orwellian ‘hate crimes’ laws in Britain and other countries of Europe,” he concluded, “Dr. King would have faced criminal investigation, or worse, for publicly expressing those views.”

Indeed, were he still alive today, and when judged against today’s empty, politically correct standards, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. – quite literally the “King” of civil rights – would be perpetually smeared as a “bigot,” “hater” and “homophobe” by the ever-”tolerant” left.

The polls are unequivocal. The vast majority of African-Americans resent the left’s comparison of sexual sin to the color of their skin. They understandably find such dishonest parallels both repugnant and highly offensive.

And well they should.

The left has hijacked MLK’s dream. For decades now, this pleasure-based, sex-centric political movement – delineated by deviant sexual appetites and behaviors – has ridden his coattails. They’ve dared to equate demands for celebration of bad behavior to Christian notions of racial equality. They’ve perverted the genuine civil rights movement to fit their own disingenuous designs.

It’s disgusting, and it needs to stop.

Dr. Alveda King is the niece of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. She agrees. Alveda has picked up her like-minded uncle’s civil rights mantle, dedicating her life, primarily, to achieving equality for pre-born children.

Still, in the years since his death, Alveda has poignantly articulated how, arguably, based upon his published position on homosexuality, Dr. King might feel about “LGBT” activists’ misappropriation of his Christian legacy for their counter-Christian purposes.

“To equate homosexuality with race is to give a death sentence to civil rights,” said Alveda in 1997. “No one is enslaving homosexuals … or making them sit in the back of the bus.”

In 1998 at the University of North Carolina, she said, “Homosexuality cannot be elevated to the civil rights issue. The civil rights movement was born from the Bible. God hates homosexuality.”

And in 2012, Alveda publicly chastised the NAACP for abandoning its founders and constituents, saying, “Neither my great-grandfather, an NAACP founder, my grandfather Dr. Martin Luther King Sr., an NAACP leader, my father, Rev. A. D. Williams King, nor my uncle Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. embraced the homosexual agenda that the current NAACP is attempting to label as a civil rights agenda. …”

Indeed, it is high time that all supporters, from all races, of the historical civil rights movement stand together and demand that “progressive” propagandists stop misusing and abusing the language of genuine civil rights to propagate self-interested moral wrongs.

It’s time for the left to begin honoring the true beliefs, work, life, and legacy of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

 

Matt Barber (@jmattbarber on Twitter) is an author, columnist, cultural analyst and an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. Having retired as an undefeated heavyweight professional boxer, Matt has taken his fight from the ring to the culture war.





MLK’s Legacy Hijacked To Sell ObamaCare





Photo credit: UIC Digital Collections (Creative Commons)

Each January, America takes time to remember the lasting impact Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. made during a dark period of this nation’s history. As racial tensions reached a fever pitch, King embraced a non-violent approach toward civil rights that was completely at odds from the views of contemporaries including Malcolm X.

In the decades since his assassination, however, King’s legacy has been misused to insinuate he would have supported any number of leftist causes. One of the latest – and most egregious – examples came during Health and Human Service Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ recent comments in recognition of Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

In a thinly-veiled plug for the monumentally unpopular ObamaCare law, Sebelius made a clumsy attempt to equate King’s fight for equality to the federal government’s dismantling of the nation’s healthcare system.

“As we celebrate the inspirational life of Dr. King,” she said, “please join us in this historic effort by helping your friends, neighbors, and loved ones get covered through the Marketplace.”

This was not the first time King’s memory was used by the Obama administration to sell socialized medicine to an unreceptive public. Last year, in recognition of the 50th anniversary of the famous civil rights march in D.C., Barack Obama himself suggested King would have been a supporter of the law.

Now, as the push to salvage ObamaCare has escalated, Sebelius is returning to that well in an apparent effort to convince wary citizens that, if he were alive, King would be a vocal supporter of the boondoggle.

“Dr. King memorably described inequality in health care as the ‘most shocking and inhumane’ form of injustice,” Sebelius claimed, suggesting “there is nothing more essential to opportunity than good health.”

Proponents of ObamaCare have already resorted to calling on leftist celebrities to pressure their fans to sign up for coverage. With the results of those efforts obviously lacking, the administration is now using the memory of an iconic civil rights leader to hawk the troubled law.

For the rest of the nation, however, it is a day to acknowledge the selfless, faith-driven mission King carried out during his quest to achieve equality for all Americans.

–B. Christopher Agee

Have an idea for a story? Email us at tips@westernjournalism.com

Photo credit: UIC Digital Collections (Creative Commons)





The False Claim Of Civil Rights





It was only a little over seventeen minutes in length, but it is said to be the most remembered and the most memorized speech in American History.

Fifty years ago, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. addressed a crowd of 250,000 people gathered in Washington, DC. He called on the people of the various states, and the government of these United States, to live up to the principles espoused in the Declaration of Independence.

But it was not, as many have falsely claimed, a call for “civil” rights. In fact, in my view, Dr. King was not a champion of “civil” rights. He was a champion of God-given rights.

Dr. King made clear in his famous address that the liberty and equality before the law that he was demanding did NOT originate in human government. The right to equality before the law is not a “civil” right. It is a right ordained by God, and therefore a right that civil government has a duty to protect and defend.

Dr. King quoted from the Old Testament Books of Amos and Isaiah. He also made subtle references to Psalm 30 and the New Testament Book of Galatians. When he said that he hoped his children would be judged not by the “color of their skin but by the content of their character,” he was applying God’s fixed, eternal standard – not a malleable man-made one.

Unlike many modern day welfare state proponents, Dr. King’s demands were right because they were based on a righteous pretense.

In both private and public policy, we must remember that God created only one race – the human race. Therefore, all elevation or denigration of individuals or groups based on skin color is immoral and shameful because it violates the Law of Nature and of Nature’s God.

 

Learn more about your Constitution with Michael Anthony Peroutka and his Institute on the Constitution and receive your free gift.





MLK On Freedom And Our Founding Principles





MLK Black President Destroyed Me

There have been too many relatively young men and women who have struggled for causes greater than themselves and whose lives have been cut short, leaving us, and their causes, prematurely. Oftentimes, their contributions and lives are embellished nigh unto sainthood by adulating adherents. Such is the case with Martin Luther King, Jr. But it shouldn’t be; for his example and teachings are of such grandeur and durability that they stand as monuments to his memory, requiring no inflation beyond the reality.

Perhaps the greatest lesson to be learned from MLK is validation of the principle behind Thomas Jefferson’s immortal citation, “One man with courage is a majority.” One person can make a difference, especially if truth and justice are on their side. When so principally armed, one person can affect an entire nation for good.

The nation that was divided by racial issues in MLK’s era is now polarized ideologically. Yet the precepts he espoused, and the doctrine he taught, can apply with as much pertinence and relevance to the ideological chasm that seems to be schismatically separating the right from the left today.

How ironic it is, therefore, that the principles he most ardently proclaimed are so demeaned by the left and the mainstream media in the context of today’s ideological divide. If MLK is to be extolled and praised for his principles, we must embrace all of those teachings that are at once indelibly impressed on our minds as self-evident truths.

Of those, his most oft stated were the appeals for morality and freedom. “If we are to go forward, we must go back and rediscover those precious values – that all reality hinges on moral foundations and that all reality has spiritual control…When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

Values, life, and liberty are perhaps the most repeated catchwords of the contemporary Tea Party movement. If those principles are self-evident truths, and accepted as such by MLK in the context of a civil rights movement, they are no less viable in the context of the current ideological movement, attempting to throw off the yoke of slavery of an omnipotent and omnipresent government.

MLK’s teachings were framed in a culture of racism and racial discord, but they apply universally to all Americans in the quest for individual liberty. As he said, “Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.” Certainly, those are wise words of encouragement to those of us who object to the usurpation of individual freedom by a government seeking to micromanage its citizens.

He continued, “Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle. And so we must straighten our backs and work for our freedom.” Individual and universal freedom was fundamental to him. Not just freedom from racism, but freedom, period. Subservience to any form of societal or governmental despotism is anathema to a nation founded on individual liberty.

He reaffirmed this basic tenet when he declared, “I say to you that our goal is freedom, and I believe we are going to get there because however much she strays away from it, the goal of America is freedom. Abused and scorned though we may be as a people, our destiny is tied up in the destiny of America.”

These founding principles should be applied universally, not selectively or discriminately. But to do so, it is requisite that we collectively rise above the politics of self-interest. For as he said, “An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity.” And as if to underscore this notion, “Every man must decide whether he will walk in the light of creative altruism or in the darkness of destructive selfishness.”

Sounding very much like Edmund Burke, MLK declared, “History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people.”

Yes, one person can make a difference, when armed with the truths of freedom, life, and morality. MLK made such a difference; and every American can likewise stand for, and uphold, those eternal verities.

It’s rather disruptive to conventional ideological classifications when we realize such advocacy for individual freedom and liberty are met with as much animus and bigotry today as it was 50 years ago. Considering that our nation was founded on these precepts, they should be unifying, rather than divisive principles.

 

Associated Press award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, Idaho and is a graduate of Idaho State University with degrees in Political Science and History and coursework completed toward a Master’s in Public Administration.  He can be reached at rlarsenen@cableone.net.

 





The Law, Lawmaking, And Morality





Martin Luther King Jr. SC

All law and lawmaking is “religious” in the sense that it derives its authority to act from something outside of — above — itself.  In this country, that “something” that our law is based on is the Bible.  This is clearly apparent not only in the text of the Declaration of Independence, but it is also demonstrated in the texts of our earliest covenants, constitutions, law-codes, compacts, and charters.

And this fact is known and recognized by Christians and non-Christians alike.  For example, a 1982 “Newsweek Magazine” cover story headlined “How the Bible Made America” said that historians were discovering that the Bible is our founding document.

Indeed, it is this founding on Scripture that made America an exceptional country — a people called by God to establish a model society, a beacon to the world.

In our country, until relatively recently, God’s Word (His Law) was the standard by which to judge whether man-made statutes were just or unjust.  This view is taught in Scripture itself.

It is also taught in the Writings of St. Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, the great British jurist Sir William Blackstone, and by the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.

In his famous “Letter From A Birmingham Jail,” Dr. King said, “A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law of God.  An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law.”

Dr. King went on to remind us that we should never forget that everything that Adolf Hitler did in Germany was “legal.” The word “legal” he placed in quote marks because, of course, what Hitler did was not legal since it violated God’s law.

Please remember:  It’s not legal if it’s not moral.  And it’s not moral if it’s not Biblical.

Learn more about your Constitution with Michael Peroutka and his “Institute on the Constitution” and receive your free gift.