In Praise of Perverts

If anyone wonders why society is in such a mess, they simply need to look at our ruling elites. Many of our opinion makers, judges, movers and shakers, and intellectualoids tend to promote ideas, values and worldviews which are not only contrary to the sensible majority, but are often perverse, irrational and ungodly.

Our elites, in other words, are often quite happy to defend the indefensible, and to promote that which should in fact be shunned and censored. They advocate radical causes and push immoral and amoral agendas which simply lead to civilisational decline and social dysfunction.

There is never a shortage of examples of these secular activists who push all the wrong causes, and delight in all the wrong ideologies and lifestyles. Consider a report found in the current Weekend Australian. It concerns a former High Court judge of Australia who has given a speech in America, praising one of the most notorious sexual perverts in recent history.

This is how the article begins: “Michael Kirby, the first High Court judge to declare his homosexuality, has paid emotional tribute to the father of modern sex research Alfred Kinsey. In a speech in the US today, the retired judge will tell graduating students of Kinsey’s alma mater, Indiana University in Bloomington, that he felt less alone as a young homosexual when he heard of Kinsey’s bold work documenting the sheer variety of human sexual experience.”

It also says, “Mr Kirby says he visited Bloomington a decade ago to ‘repay my personal debt’. He serves on the board of the Kinsey Institute, which boasts collections of Asian erotic art, peepshows and historical stag films. ‘Use of the film archive is by appointment only,’ the website says. The Kinsey Confidential pages there invite questions from the bemused. One reader confesses: ‘I’m currently having sex with a professor.’ … Today, Mr Kirby will become an honorary graduate of Kinsey’s university.”

Our elites of course think that Kinsey was a saint, and a major Hollywood film even featured his life and work. The film, like that of most portraits of Kinsey, amounts to little more than hagiography. But this man was no saint. The truth is, he was a sleazeball big time.

One of the most important exposes written of this evil man was Kinsey, Sex and Fraud by Judith Reisman and Edward Eichel (Huntington House, 1990). This book demolishes the many myths surrounding the sexologist, demonstrating that he was in fact little more than a low-life pervert.

But instead of me repeating this documentation, let me reprint a large part of an article I wrote five years ago when the film came out. My article makes it clear that there is nothing to celebrate about this man, but much to condemn and deplore.

kinsey 1Kinsey of course is the notorious American sexologist (1894-1956), whose agenda was to soften up the public to the view that any and every sort of sexuality is permissible. He sought to convince us that there is no norm when it comes to human sexuality, and that we should embrace any sexual expression whatsoever. Here are some of his “findings”:

-All orgasms are “outlets” and are equally valid – whether between husband and wife, boy and dog, man and man or adult and child – for in sexual expression, normal is individually determined.
-The more “outlets,” the healthier the person – and beginning as early as possible is better than waiting.
-Human beings are naturally bisexual. Religious bigotry and prejudice force people into chastity, heterosexuality and monogamy.
-There is no medical or other reason for adult-child sex or incest to be forbidden.

People like Hugh Hefner of Playboy fame of course helped to carry out this agenda. And today we see the result of this social and sexual revolution: broken families, marriage disintegration, a tsunami of pornography, including child pornography, an epidemic of promiscuity and sexually transmitted diseases, skyrocketing abortion rates, a crisis in teenage pregnancies, an explosion of rape and sexual assault, and a culture that believes that hedonism is the highest good, and self control and restraint the greatest evil.

The 60s sexual revolution was the bitter fruit of the agenda being promoted by Kinsey. But the film, instead of questioning his research and giving it a critical examination, instead sugar coats the whole story, seeking to turn this committed atheist and social revolutionary into a saint.

Most people do not know that Kinsey collected data from imprisoned sex offenders, criminals, pedophiles and prostitutes. He took this obviously skewed data and tried to make the result appear to be normal and mainstream. But perversion masquerading as science is still perversion.

Many of the lies of the sexual revolution are based on Kinsey’s flawed conclusions, such as that children are sexual from birth, that sexual promiscuity is the norm, and that 10 percent of the population is homosexual. Indeed, the homosexual revolution owes much to Kinsey. As one reviewer in a homosexual paper puts it, “For the queer community in particular, Kinsey is a must-see film. Without this man, it’s seriously likely that the developing acceptance of gays and lesbians by society would not be anywhere near as progressed as it is today” (MCV, 14 January 2005, p. 8).

Thus a whole range of sexual activity that used to be frowned upon has become normalised because of Kinsey. But it is not only the fruit of his research that was dangerous; so too was the research itself. We know that Kinsey and his associates used children ranging from 5 months to fourteen years in his sex experiments.

For example, in Table 34 of his Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948), Kinsey sought to show that the youngest of children could be sexually active. He said that even “the youngest males, as young as 5 months in age, are capable of such repeated reactions [orgasms]”. In the table, four-year-old boys, for example, were sexually stimulated for 24 uninterrupted hours.  A five month baby is said to have produced 3 orgasms in an unspecified amount of time.

An eleven month baby is reported to have had 14 orgasms in 38 minutes. The book also examines some of the reactions to such “experimentation.” These ranged from “extreme tension with violent convulsion … gasping, eyes staring … mouth distorted, sometimes with tongue protruding … whole body or parts of it spasmodically twitching … groaning, sobbing, or more violent cries … more or less frenzied movements … extreme trembling, collapse, loss of color, and sometimes fainting … of subject.”  These reactions, recorded with cold, clinical precision, are nothing less than descriptions of criminal child abuse.

Remarkably, however, the study of the reactions concludes by noting that the subject “will fight away from the partner and may make violent attempts to avoid climax, although they derive definite pleasure from the situation.”  Does that sound like pleasure?  It sounds like child sexual assault of the worst kind.

And as one paediatrician noted, “these children had to be held down or subject to strapping down, otherwise they would not respond willingly.” Thus it is amazing that Hollywood should come out with this hagiography on Kinsey.

We have such huge problems with child pornography right now, and our entertainment capital will simply compound the problem. Indeed, the film will cover up a lot of details about Kinsey. For example, decades ago Kinsey renamed paedophilia as “cross-generational sexual contact”. And as mentioned already, Kinsey was quite happy to use paedophiles in his research on human sexuality.

Yet our former High Court judge sings the praises of this monster. And he was one of our leading judges. Is there any wonder why the culture wars are in full swing, and the attacks on faith and family and morality are so fierce? With elites like these, no wonder things are going down the gurgler so rapidly.,,25451204-30417,00.html

[1310 words]

39 Replies to “In Praise of Perverts”

  1. I am really unsure as to why you think you are qualified to call Kinsey a “low life pervert” nor am I sure why you feel this is important to the current state of the world, or actually why it is the world is “in such a mess” in your opinion. I completely respect your right to express you opinions although it amazes how so many “religious commentators” completely lack an understanding of the role of the judiciary, surely you are aware of John Howard’s attempt to oust Kirby by accusing him of “trawling for boys”, yet you are ultimately peddling the same ridiculous swill. Kirby was not the sole High Court judge, nor did he have the power to somehow chart the world “down the gurgler”.
    Aaron Wyllie

  2. Thanks Aaron

    Anyone without an ideological bias would come to the same conclusion concerning Kinsey as I have. The evidence speaks for itself. You simply shoot the messenger here. Instead of rambling on about “ridiculous swill” why don’t you actually speak to the facts as presented here?

    Of course one doesn’t have to be religious to be appalled and disgusted at the sorts of things Kinsey was involved in, which I document here. The fact that Kirby seems so interested in defending the guy tells us a lot about where he is coming from. Ditto concerning your comments.

    And of course I did not say that he was the only High Court judge, nor did I say he single-handedly is responsible for the mess we are in. But your objections simply make my case. Indeed, anyone who can read the facts presented here and still come out with a comment such as yours simply proves my point. We are indeed in a moral freefall if people can defend the indefensible.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  3. Also, Aaron doesn’t even have his facts right concerning the claim that John Howard accused Kirby of “trawling for boys”. That was of course a claim made by Bill Heffernan not John Howard. John Howard actually defended Kirby and rebuked Heffernan over that issue. Howard should have done more to try and remove Kirby when he had the chance – just one more example of why Howard was never the extreme conservative that the Left made him out to be.

    Ewan McDonald.

  4. Aaron, did you read the article? Did you read this?

    “An eleven month baby is reported to have had 14 orgasms in 38 minutes. The book also examines some of the reactions to such “experimentation.” These ranged from “extreme tension with violent convulsion … gasping, eyes staring … mouth distorted, sometimes with tongue protruding … whole body or parts of it spasmodically twitching … groaning, sobbing, or more violent cries … more or less frenzied movements … extreme trembling, collapse, loss of color, and sometimes fainting … of subject.”

    Kelly Williams

  5. What is the matter with you Aaron? Are you so dead that you feel nothing reading these awful things about this man? It is people like you that allow people like him to be invented in this world. Are you so dead in your heart that you feel nothing for these defenseless children and the monster that he is?
    Siti Khatijah

  6. Hi Bill,

    What also disturbs me here is the complicity / ignorance? of the mainstream press in upholding the reputation of these perverts. The Australian article you reference is entirely complimentary of both Kinsey and Kirby.

    Having accepted many other types of evil as normal, we are fortunate that our society still reviles paedophilia. I therefore think there is particular mileage to be had in exposing the extreme evil of Kinsey’s “research” by quoting from his very works. Not only will this force people to revise their opinion of this pervert, but more importantly may lead them to be more circumspect in believing what comes out of Hollywood or the mainstream press in the future.

    Have you considered writing a letter to The Australian responding to their positive portrayal of Kinsey in their article, Bill? I would write one myself, but not having a copy of Kinsey’s book, I would be reluctant to quote details from his works without actually having it in front of me.

    Mansel Rogerson

  7. Thanks Mansel

    I find that it is getting harder and harder to get anything into the MSM lately. Not all that long ago I could get both letters and full-length articles in. I even had an article on Kinsey published by The Australian some years ago. But as the MSM moves more and more in a secular left direction, it gets more difficult for our point of view to get in there. But we must nonetheless keep trying.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  8. It bothers me that so many people are in denial about the outright wrongness of Kinsey’s “experiments”. Try googling “Kinsey was a pedophile” and you’ll see exactly what I mean. Obviously these know-it-alls have never actually read his book, otherwise they wouldn’t be defending him so fiercely.
    James Swanson

  9. By the way Aaron, I come from a family involved in the law that is not the role of a person elevated to a Judgeship. Endorsing evil at its core is not the role of the Judiciary. Kirby is now complicit in allowing this evil to permeate by endorsing this man.
    Siti Khatijah

  10. Kinsey was a disgrace. He should have been jailed for his research not praised. Kirby (and anyone else for that matter) supporting him is also a disgrace. If people cannot see that plain and simple, I fear that there is no hope for them.

    George Kokonis

  11. It is so refreshing to have people like you guys who are unashamedly telling the truth and standing up for what is right. What courage you have shown in presenting this information to us. Please don’t ever give up. Thank you. Gal.6v9
    Chris Clarke

  12. This only strengthens my belief that there are moral decadents in high places. I have never considered such people as having much credibility more the fool those who place them on a pedestal.
    Pat Abrams

  13. Alfred Kinsey used to invite Uni students back to his home to have sex with his wife, and then film it. Makes the NRL footballers seem a bit tame, doesn’t it?
    In Isaiah chapter 3 we are warned of 13 supports which Father God will take away from a nation that refuses to walk in His ways. One of these is “the judge” (vs 2). I believe this refers not to these people actually being absent from the nation, but not fulfilling their God-given function. Justice Michael Kirby has of course, been replaced with a lesbian. Watch this space for more of the 13 supports of a civil society that will be taken from us if we as a nation don’t repent.
    Ian Brearley

  14. ‘Thanks’ Bill for this infomation – it makes you shudder. It brings into focus what’s happening in the present moment here in Fremantle WA with a by-election on Sat 16/5 and the worring possibility that the Greens could grab the seat. This Letter to The Australian examples the end result of some of Kinsey’s corrupting influence. Hope it’s okay to include it here:

    As Fremantle WA faces a by-election and the real possibility that the Greens could gain their first ever Lower House seat ending Labor’s 80 year domination here, it’s important for parents to know about the Greens unannounced agenda to introduce into primary schools, a curriculum to teach young children lesbian, homosexual, bisexual, transgender and intersex lifestyles. I hope your paper will share this concerning information.

    Also in view of the recent devastation caused by Victoria’s bush fires, the Greens need to be held accountable for their extreme ‘plants before people’ style policies that had a direct impact in helping to fuel the fire storms that destroyed people, homes and habitats in that State.

    The Greens failed policies and their tragic consequences need to be exposed and Generation Y and other ‘greenies’ should be encouraged to look critically at their hidden agenda of ‘multisexuality’, driven largely by ‘gay’ activists who’ve hijacked this party. They promote the image that the’re all about the environment , (while the cameras are rolling) when in reality they are largely about promoting their self serving sexual agenda (oh yes – there’s still that problem of there being no cure for AIDS, a given threat to this lifestyle). Hiding behind their ‘eco friendly’ mask, they now push their perverse sexual agenda to even our children! Where does it stop and why won’t they leave our kids alone?

    If they’re really about the environment they’d have taken responsible steps to control, back burn and manage the powder keg of eucalyptus forests that helped fuel Victoria’s Black Saturday fires. But they did just the opposite and their feral policies largely contributed to Victoria’s carnage. WA doesn’t need a repeat of this in our tinder dry state. The Greens are an indulgent, social experiment people and the environment can no longer afford.

    Their ‘green’ image has been burnt and their failed environmental policies lie ‘in ashes’ a testimony to their real agenda which has proven to protect neither people nor plants. Perhaps they should now be know as – ‘The Charcoal Party’ or ‘alternatively’ ‘The Brown’s Charcoal Party’ – either way their true colours are beginning to emerge.

    Michelle Shave

  15. PS, Just for the record, Julie Hollett a 2004 “Australian of the Year” nominee is an endorsed candidate with the Christian Democratic Party for the Fremantle By-Election. Julie’s ‘leadership in Fremantle’s Jubilee, an initiative to pay/cancel debts for Fremantle residents’, is an example of her caring concern and practical approach in helping to breath new life into Fremantle. She’s a lady for ‘good’.

    Thanks Bill for this forum and making in-depth information on a plethora of issues, easily accessible – it helps to restore much needed balance to our ‘integrity challenged’ world. God bless you.

    Michelle Shave

  16. It is staggering that Aaron and others can defend the indefensible.

    Kinsey was a pervert in a lab coat. The fact that most people don’t know about his real activities just show how powerful The Ideologues really are.

    Louise Le Mottee, Hobart

  17. Hi Michelle, Fred Nile has long referred to the Greens as the “watermelon party” – Green on the outside and red (socialist) and pink (homosexual) on the inside. Your letter said that “gay activists” have hijacked the Greens, but was there ever a time when the Greens were not full of people pushing sexual perversity?

    And it’s just as well the CDP is running a candidate in the Freemantle by-election given that the Liberal Party are not even standing a candidate in this Labor stronghold. At least conservatives will have someone to vote for.

    Ewan McDonald.

  18. Thanks Ewan for your comments. I agree, and as a long standing member of CDP and a candidate in several elections here in WA, I know/agree with Fred’s comments on the Greens.This article was originally written mostly to inform the general non Christian public about the covert operations of the Greens as the majority of people really think they’re about trees and the environment – especially here in Fremantle which is a real stronghold for everything alternative. Refering to the Greens being hijaked is a way of alerting people to the fact that even though there are those in this party who are genuinely concerned about the environment (and attract Christians and others as a result) it’s not what their hidden agenda is about and its this that is dangerous and people need to know about.

    Refering to them as the Brown’s/Charcoal Party is a tongue in cheek reference to Bob Brown/his h/sexualtiy and the outcome of their extreme ‘green agenda’ of not backburing etc that helped to fuel the Black Saturday fires in Victoria leading to further ‘browning’ of the environment. Here in Fremantle people just don’t know. Please pray their eyes will be opened in time to prevent this Labor stronghold seat falling to the Greens – the worst case scenario.

    It’s a shame the Liberal Party isn’t running a candidate but ‘all things work together for good’ and we’re praying Julie Hollett, who with her husband Wayne are pastors in one of Fremantle’s biggest churches, will be able to attract many of the conservative voters. There are 11 candidates running including predictably socialist alliance etc. Julie’s leadership in Fremantle with the Fremantle Jubilee – an iniatiative launched to pay and cancel debts for Fremantle residents can be viewed online (

    Michelle Shave

  19. Hi Ewan,

    Thanks for passing on that gem from Fred Nile. I’ll be referring to the Watermelons from now on!

    Mansel Rogerson

  20. Hi everyone,

    I am a Christian.

    I think it is important to not elevate ourselves above this guy. For myself, the bible says if I look lustfully at a woman, I have committed adultery, so in the eyes of my perfect God, I myself am a “low-life pervert” or “sleazeball”. I thank God however, that he is at work in my life, and through prayer, reading God’s word and God’s holy spirit, he is sanctifying me to become more like Christ, one day at a time.

    If I didn’t have Christ or God in my life, I could easily see myself doing whatever this guy has done.

    It is a very hard thing to discuss, but the Bible does say that there is no one who does good, not even one. So no one here can say that they are any better than this guy. In actual fact, if anyone here is a Christian, they should be saying that they are just as bad, if not worse than this guy.

    “Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost.” 1 Timothy 1:15

    “I came not to call the righteous, but sinners” Matthew 9:13

    Absolutely, let’s highlight the sexual immorality in the world. We should be light in a dark world, but let’s remember that we were once part of the dark world, and we are no better than anyone else.

    Peace out
    James Ellery

  21. Thanks James

    But with all due respect, your remarks are not all that helpful. They reflect some sloppy thinking and some sloppy use of Scripture.

    Are we all sinners in thought, word and deed and therefore deserving of a lost eternity? Absolutely. So you are quite right as far as you go. But you don’t go far enough, and you seem to simply reflect the spirit of the world, with its faulty emphasis on tolerance and non-judgementalism.

    We have obligations to reflect God’s righteousness and justice in this world. It is simply foolish to make unnecessary moral equivalence here, in suggesting that there is no difference at all between you and I and child sex offenders. What Kinsey did was horrendous child sexual abuse. It must be condemned in the strongest of terms. It is ridiculous to say, ‘yes, but I have some lustful thoughts, so I am no better, so I guess I shouldn’t say anything about Kinsey’.

    By this sort of fractured reasoning, Nathan was wrong to rebuke King David for his adultery and murder (‘after all, Nathan is a sinner like everyone else, and he would have lusted and hated’). So by your train of thought, Nathan should not have made these moral judgments.

    And for that matter, the Allies were wrong to say Hitler was bad and needed to be stopped (‘after all, we are all sinners, so I guess I should not judge and condemn those concentration camps and gas chambers. Who am I to judge?’)

    And Wilberforce would have been wrong to condemn slavery (‘yes the slave owners were wrong, but surely Wilberforce had sinful thoughts and attitudes as well, so he should have really just shut up and minded his own business’).

    I trust you see my point here. Of course we are all sinners. That goes without saying. But your extrapolation of that fact is faulty in the extreme. It is quite silly – and unbiblical – to suggest that because we are all sinful we can never pass moral judgment on anything, let alone heinous crimes and gross public sin. By that sloppy reasoning, we should abolish all police and courts as well. After all, they make moral judgments all the time.

    Finally, I have written elsewhere about unbiblical and unhelpful understandings of judgment:

    Have a look at those articles if you like, see what you think, then come back to us and share some more.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  22. Thanks Rebecca for your encouraging comment. Sad to say, to my knowledge, it wasn’t published in the several papers I sent it too, but I guess that’s par for the course when dealing with the left leaning MSM. So it’s great to have such outlets as CultureWatch to counter their efforts and enable us to be a voice for the voiceless.
    Michelle Shave

  23. Funny thing, the guys I play soccer with on the weekend would unreservedly call this guy a slimeball – even they recognise the depravity of such a man. It’s about time Christians started calling a spade a spade.

    I remember Jesus using some pretty strong names for people – where has to moral backbone gone from Christianity?

    Garth Penglase

  24. I think that one of the reasons for many Christians today being hostile or reluctant in calling a spade a spade is because of the new ‘theology’ doing the rounds. This new ‘theology’ is psychological and self-conscious in outlook. It seeks to mirror the secular world in a vain attempt to transform and convert it to Christ however the secular world will not convert, and in fact, will mock and despise Christians who seek to be just like them in many respects.
    What the secular world has always needed is clarity and for Christians to be humble yet firm disciples of the Lord Jesus. I.e. saying yes when we mean yes and no when we mean no- without quirming or wiggling.
    Michael Webb

  25. Having a homosexual on our highest court in the land, is one area where Australia is actually leading (if you can call it that) the USA. But amazingly it seems that Focus on the Family has no problem with a nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court being a homosexual! See this article.

    Ewan McDonald.

  26. I bear the same surname (by marriage, no relation of Alfred) and I am a practicing psychologist. Alfred Kinsey was not, he was a biologist and specialised initially in some kind of wasp species. I was born and educated in Poland and I am a Catholic. In my professional life I take every opportunity to debunk the myth of A Kinsey being a blessing for our “cultural (sexual) liberation”. I have read the book by J Reisman and E Eichel (please, if you borrowed it from me and are reading this, return it to me, I wont be upset over how long it has been).

    I wanted to answer to the comment of Aaron Wyllie: “Kirby did not push the world ‘down the gurgler'”. How about a few “Kirbys”? I am talking about the judgement delivered by a homosexual judge Justice Sundberg (July 2000) on allowing the lesbian couples access to IVF services funded from the public purse. In the name of “abolishing all forms of discrimination against women”… how about the discimination against a female child growing without a father as a result of two women “obtaining” a baby in this way? People like Kirby and Sundberg do not live in the same reality as us: their views and decisions are influenced by their immoral, aberrant conduct which they pass on as “in the normal range” thanks to people like A Kinsey. By using thier positions of power and influence they inevitably push our culture to the brink of madness. Thank you for an excellent site, Bill.

    Elizabeth Kinsey

  27. Please tell me from original Hebrew/Greek where it says Sodom was destroyed because of homosexuality.
    If Lev 18:22 & 20:13 apply today, tell me how you obey every OT law as Lev 19:37 says.
    The Gk for homosexuality was arrenomanes & is not in NT. Why did Paul create new word arsenokoitai in 1 Cor 6:9 and 1 Tim 1:10 if he wanted us to translate it as homosexuals? We DO NOT get arsenic from arsen.
    2 things are against nature. Practicing gays Rom 1 and men with long hair 1 Cor 11:14 – Why do you not villify long haired men?
    The WHOLE POINT of Rom 1 is Rom 2:1 “You therfore have no excuse you who pass judgement on someone else” Why do you judge homosexuals when scripture forbids you to do that?
    David Turner, Retired Baptist Pastor – Conservative Evangelical

  28. Thanks David

    But there is nothing conservative or evangelical about your comment whatsoever. You not only deny the clear teaching of the Bible, you also simply parrot the usual arguments from the homosexual lobby. It seems clear that you are merely trying to rationalise the homosexual lifestyle – perhaps your own or that of someone close by.

    Your theological revision has been roundly answered time and time again. No objective reader of Gen. 18:20-19:29 can understand the sin to be anything other than homosexuality, which of course is confirmed by Jude 1:4-8, for example, which speaks of “sexual immorality and perversion” (NIV). The Greek is clearer: they “went after other flesh” (sarkos heteras). The sexual nature of the sin is clearly affirmed here, as in the Genesis text, and the parallel in Judges 19.

    And any real Baptist pastor would know that continuity and discontinuity runs between the Testament. But one need not even appeal to the book of Leviticus to make the case against homosexuality. From Genesis to Revelation it is clear that God’s intention for human sexuality is heterosexual marriage.

    And your juvenile understanding of the Greek leaves a lot to be desired. Joining koitos (sexual relations) with arsen (males) is a perfect term for what Paul is condemning here. And it is further amplified with malakoi in the Corinthian passage.

    And Paul‘s argument against homosexuality fits in with the overall purpose for human sexuality which I have already mentioned. Going against nature is just one aspect of it.

    You are of course quite wrong about the “whole point” of Romans 1 being 2:1. Romans 1-3 gives Paul’s account of how all men are guilty before God. In Romans 1 Paul uses homosexuality as the supreme example of those who rebel against their creator and their created place in God’s economy. In 2:1-4 Paul uses the moral argument, showing that as we judge otherwise, while doing the same thing, we further exhibit our guilt before God.

    Scripture nowhere forbids me to judge homosexuals or any other sin. Indeed, I am told just the opposite. Paul clearly condemns it, and we are to do the same. Such people will not inherit the kingdom of God unless they turn from their sin and repent – just as a thief or an adulterer must do.

    Sorry but your pro-homosexual massacre of Scripture simply will not do. It is the standard fare of the homosexual activists and the theological revisionists. I have written this up elsewhere, for example here:

    But I have the feeling you have long ago allowed experience to judge theology and Scripture, instead of the other way around. That is a very dangerous place to be in, especially if one claims to be a Christian pastor.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  29. Bill,
    I notice you have a nice well planned and practiced response to David Turners claims about the real meaning of scriptures regarding homosexuality but you completely ignored his comments regarding men with long hair, why is this? If we do not allow experience to judge theology and Scripture we would be stoning people in city squares, furthermore you quote the relevance of Genesis but what is the CultureWatch perspective on incest, Genesis 38:8-10 for example?
    Aaron Wyllie

  30. Thanks Aaron

    I did of course answer his remarks. I spoke to them, saying that the argument from nature is only a small part of the biblical case against homosexuality. And the section from 1 Corinthians 11 – like all biblical passages – must be read in context. Paul is simply using the custom of short hair on men so prominent during his day as an analogy in his wider discussion of propriety in worship.

    So the length of hair is not the main issue Paul is addressing here. And he of course offers no command here or anywhere against long hair on men, and may even have had long hair himself at one point (Acts 18:18). But Scripture – in both Testaments – is clear and unequivocal in its condemnation of homosexuality. So you and David are simply mixing apples and oranges here big time.

    As to Genesis 38, the background of course is the long-standing and common practice of levirate marriage in the Ancient Near East. If brothers lived together, and a married one died without leaving any children, a surviving brother married the widow and helped provide offspring. That offspring took on the name of the deceased man, and eventually inherited the family estate. It was Onan’s refusal to carry out this levirate duty that displeased God. So this passage has nothing at all to do with incest.

    And I have no idea what your red herring about stoning has to do with anything here.

    Any other lame excuses that we can call your bluff on Aaron? At least you are not claiming to be a retired Baptist pastor, evangelical and conservative as well. But given that you started this thread, seeking to defend the indefensible (Kinsey’s perversion), I guess we can expect such misinformed and reckless comments from you and your buddies.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  31. I am conservative evangelical because I believe the original Hebrew and Greek scriptures are divinely inspired. The translations are definitely not inspired. All I did was to leave all homophobia at the front gate and exegete this topic using exactly the same lexicons and principles of exegesis as any other topic. Let me make it very clear. I studied the scriptures FIRST on this topic and then let my ministry to gays GROW OUT OF THAT.

    I wrote a paper called “What the Bible Actually Says About Homosexuality” and in the first month after it was published on the internet, 7700 sent in emails to the publisher and 7000 (90%) agreed with what I wrote. More importantly, in that one month 350 gays wrote to say they planned to commit suicide over this and decided against it. Many said in similar words “I never knew God loved me. I always thought He hated me.” This issue is THAT SERIOUS.

    There is a movie called “Prayers for Bobby” that is based on the true story of a young gay man who committed suicide as the result of his famiy’s religious beliefs and how they tried to come to terms with it. It is available to watch on the web and is particularly moving. Gays are people…people who matter to God. Did Jesus judge them?

    Bill, the lies from the Hebrew and Greek have got to stop. They really do. Gays commit suicide at 6 times the national average because we lie from scripture. How many of them are in cemetries right now because of what you have said? The thing that just makes my heart ache is how many of those have gone to a lost eternity without Christ as a result of what you have said? How many are contemplating suicide right now as a result of what you saying, no matter how much you feel you are justified in saying it? This is real, Bill.

    Let both of us align our ministry with what Jesus wants to do with the gay community.

    A sign of how spiritually mature I am is how much like the Lord Jesus I have become. If we are in any doubt about what to say on this topic, why don’t we just say what Jesus said?

    Academic arguments on what the Scriptures actually say is very important, but the main thing that drives me is to reach the gay community for Christ and grow them as His disciples. Isn’t that what Jesus would do? What did Jesus say?

    John 3:16,17 “For God so loved the world (gays) that he gave his only son that WHOSOEVER (gays included) believe in him, should not perish but have eternal life. For God sent not his son into the world (to gays) to condemn
    the world (gays) but that the world (gays) through him might be saved.” That is what Jesus is on about. That is what matters to Him. Shouldn’t we be aligning all we say and do with what Jesus would say and do in the gay community if He were here in person?

    In Him
    David – Retired Baptist Pastor and yes I am a conservative evangelical.

  32. Thanks David

    Sorry, but we are not convinced that you are some Hebrew and Greek scholar who has finally come to set the record straight on this topic. The cults say the same thing: ‘the church has got it wrong all these centuries, but we are here to tell everyone the truth’. I don’t know of any respected Greek or Hebrew scholars who follow your tortured understanding of the texts.

    And imagine if I wrote a book saying God really does not regard adultery as sinful, and all adulterers should feel just fine about themselves because God made them that way. I am sure 7000 adulterers would tell me how wonderful that is to hear. And some adulterers, on the verge of suicide, would probably reconsider because of such a book.

    Since when is truth determined by numbers David? I don’t care if 100 percent said they loved your stuff. Zillions of people love the Koran or the Da Vinci Code – so what? The Bible informs us that the love of the truth will grow cold in the last days, and people will believe a lie.

    And spare me the implication that somehow a firm biblical stance on this issue leads homosexuals to suicide. There are above average rates of suicide even in places where homosexuality is celebrated and glorified, such as San Francisco. It is not “homophobia” which is causing suicide, but a dangerous, high-risk lifestyle. Indeed, it is just as Paul says in Romans 1 – they know what they are doing is wrong, but continue to do it anyway. That will certainly lead to guilt and suicide.

    I don’t want anyone to suicide, but I will not give homosexuals or anyone else false hopes which will lead them to a lost eternity by watering down the clear teaching of Scripture. Jesus loves everyone as they are, but loves them too much to leave them as they are. That is the good news homosexuals – and all of us sinners – desperately need to hear.

    You are not offering homosexuals or anyone else any hope at all when you refuse to tell them biblical truth. You are deceiving people and leading them down a false path, one that certainly will lead to a lost eternity.

    Sorry I am not buying your guilt-tripping either. People go to hell because they are sinners who refuse to acknowledge they are sinners in need of a saviour. And the classic example Paul uses of this very point is the sin of homosexuality in Romans 1.

    No unrepentant homosexual will enter the Kingdom of heaven as Scripture clearly tells us. But they will enter into it when they agree with God about their sin, renounce it, seek forgiveness and God’s help to live a new transformed life.

    I personally know of many former homosexuals who have been radically transformed by the power of God, and some have gone on to heterosexual marriage and family. Why are you trying to rob homosexuals of this wonderful good news David? Why keep them enslaved in their sin? Jesus came to set the captives free. You want to keep them in their chains.

    Of course God loves homosexuals just as he loves all sinners. But God hates the sin that drives us away from God, whether that is homosexuality or heterosexual fornication or any other sin. If you mess around with that most basic of understandings of the biblical Gospel, then you have no gospel at all, except a false gospel.

    Sadly and tragically, all you are doing is telling homosexuals what they want to hear, not what they need to hear. If you really love homosexuals, or anyone else, you will tell them the truth. Telling a person there is nothing wrong with homosexuality – or adultery or fornication or theft – is not the truth. Telling them they can be set free from their sinful addiction is the most loving thing we can do. It is time you started doing that.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  33. Aaron Wylie’s comments are extremely disturbing. I read some of Judith Reisman’s work, too. Having been fed propaganda growing up, what I read was a real eye-opener. Anyone defending such an abusive monster molesting under the guise of science has completely lost his moral compass.

    According to p.134 (paperback) of Kinsey: Crimes and Consequences (Institute for Media Education, 2000), Kinsey “used 1888 boys, to time the speed of reaching orgasm. These boys were ages 5 months to adolescence, and were timed with a stop watch. He also used 147 girls. That’s 2035 children he willingly and knowingly had molested.

    According to a witness (p. 135), “If you read those words, what he’s talking about is kids who are screaming. Kids who are protesting in every way they can the fact that their bodies or their persons are being violated.”

    Yet, Kinsey decided these were responses to arousal and wanted the age of consent lowered. He claimed that children’s screams of pain and struggles to escape from their “partners” were evidence of the children’s pleasure.

    Kendra Mallock, USA

  34. David, the issue originally raised was about Judge Michael Kirby praising a man that promoted not only Homosexuality, but Bestiality and Paedophilia. Kirby praised Kinsey for giving him hope as a young gay boy and made him feel normal.

    Your response to this issue shows us where your ethics lie. The same man that you defend as a homosexual is the same man who promotes these other evil and abhorrent acts.

    Please, do not use God’s Word as your authority when you mishandle it. Yes, with all compassion, mercy and love we should accept and care for all people as God’s children, but ethically and biblically, we cannot accept or carry their sinful life. Just like we accept a murderer, but do not allow them to carry on murdering people. We accept Paedophiles with mercy when teaching them about Jesus, but do allow them to carry on in their sin.

    Jesus did not mention homosexuality because he didn’t need to. This law that was set by God still stood. In regards to men with long hair, that was simply a cultural context at the time. Gay men at that time often wore long hair. In today’s biblical cultural terms, it is ethically wrong for men to dress like women because that is something that is associated with homosexuality.

    Lucas King

  35. Ah just a quick one for Lucas King, I know you will not post this Bill because it would be far to affront to your ownership of the Truth, so really just a quick one for you, “Michael Kirby praising a man that promoted not only Homosexuality, but Bestiality and Paedophilia” seems rather as far fetched as someone’s comments into homosexuals and ah labradors was it…? Is this perhaps the reason behind the attack on the judiciary, little bit of a history? Either way this website continues to present me with fascinating reasons to stay well away from Christianity, I truly hope you understand that this website is soaked in a great deal of hatred…and of course endless hilarity.
    Have a good night Bill.
    Aaron Wyllie

  36. Thanks Aaron

    Another classic case of shooting the messenger. Thanks for displaying yet again the hypocrisy of your camp. Homosexual activists are always to be believed – except when they say something embarrassing to the cause. Then simply turn around and shoot the messenger who highlights what was said.

    Homosexuals having sex with animals? Yes of course only a right-wing bigot would say such a thing. But what happens when this is a direct quote from a very popular and much-touted homosexual book? I can easily supply chapter and verse here. Thus it is your side, not mine, that was quite happy to talk about animal sex as but one more option in the homosexualist world.

    And you perfectly encapsulate the illogic of hate crimes legislation. Whenever someone stands up and proclaims truth, simply label it as hate. It sure beats actually having to deal with the arguments.

    And it is not my website that will keep you from Christianity. What keeps all of us away from Christ is our sin and selfishness, of which homosexuality is only one expression. The first step in coming to Christ is to agree with God that we are indeed sinners in need of forgiveness, cleansing and new life. We each must make that decision for ourselves. No cheap excuses will be allowed when we stand before our Creator on the final Day of Judgment.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  37. I think that we could drill down a little deeper here and examine the role of the church for the past 150 years or so. The church pretty much retreated from having any say in the wider society. The fruits of this are now being clearly seen. It’s about time that the real church, that is the people in the pews, real Christians rose up and started to take an interest in and participate in every area of society. Politics, the judiciary, finance, the bureaucracy etc. They need to rise to the top and supplant the perverts currently residing there who are setting the moral agenda of our time. It will be outright war, they won’t let go of the handles of power easily and of course we have competition from Islam who are currently doing their utmost to capture the same ground.

    Phil Box

  38. To Aaron, Kinsey’s “work” was very powerful. He wrote a book that was a best-seller. Some of his research was conducted in war time so this means that men may have been separated from their families and been unfaithful. His books have been used in court cases. They are regarded as “scientific research”. His research has been treated as a serious reference on human sexuality. His books were used in legal cases for social issues like contraception and divorce. There are current organisations that are based on Kinsey’s work. He thought that incest, homosexuality and pedophilia were no big deal. There is now a program running throughout the world called “Comprehensive Sexuality Education”. It certainly is comprehensive! This program treats homosexuality as being equal to heterosexuality. There are numerous references to abortion. It is treated like any other medical procedure. They seem to think that abortion is like getting a tooth extracted. They think that it is nothing at all! I have seen a video about it. There are some very young girls in a classroom. They look like they are aged between 5-7 years old. They are standing around a table with plastic penises mounted on little platforms. They are being taught how to use a condom in junior primary! In some countries they do not have plumbing or sewerage systems. But surprise, surprise there is enough money for CSE. So there is no plumbing but you can have CSE. The UN has printed a book for youth with AIDS. They say that a youth with AIDS has the right to have sex with someone else who does not have AIDS. They say that the person with AIDS does NOT have to tell someone they are going to sleep with that they have AIDS. They say that the right to privacy for someone with AIDS is more important than protecting another person from getting AIDS. This is in the book called “Happy, Healthy and Hot”. It is very dangerous advice. Michelle Wolf broadcast a performance praising abortion. She was throwing glitter around and saying abortion was wonderful. These things were influenced by the work of Kinsey. He has brought about a lot of problems. His work has been extremely powerful. He has influenced other people. He has ruined society. The UN is promoting CSE and abortion. The UN seems to have an obsession with abortion. They want all countries in the world to legalise abortion. Kinsey has ruined society. To say that what he did was not important or harmful is just not true.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *