By Tim Bloedow

New York Times writer, Jesse McKinley, denigrated the lives of homosexual teens who committed suicide by turning to a “sex columnist” as a spokesman for his article, “Several Recent Suicides Put Light on Pressures Facing Gay Teenagers” – and not just any sex columnist; he cited Dan Savage, a Christophobic homosexual fanatic. Mr. McKinley even cited Mr. Savage’s militant comment of hatred against Christians, despite its complete irrelevance to the story: “In an interview, Mr. Savage, who is gay, said he was particularly irate at religious leaders who used ‘antigay rhetoric’. ‘The problem is that kids are being exposed to this rhetoric, and then they go to the school and there’s this gay kid,’ he said. ‘And how are they going to treat this gay kid who they’ve been told is trying to destroy their family? They’re going to abuse him’.”

That is a stunningly fraudulent assertion. Mr. Savage is a dishonest, militant Christian-hater. Let him produce the evidence to back up such a brazen assertion. He’s a hater. He doesn’t have any evidence. I have had a standing offer to people for over two years to produce a story where responsible Christians were to blame for any assaults and incidents of harm against homosexuals. Homosexualists and other liberals repeatedly smear Christians by condemning Christian opposition to homosexuality whenever there is an incident of harm against a homosexual, yet they can never produce evidence that Christians and Christian criticism has anything to do with this harm.

Homosexualists will try to defend themselves by claiming that the constant criticisms of homosexuality by Christians creates an environment of hate. That’s just more fraudulent foolishness. If you want that argument to hold up among anyone besides the leftwing political and Hollywood crowds, you have to produce evidence that those who have attacked or harassed these homosexuals are regular church attendees (of particular churches because barely any church addresses homosexuality week after week) or Fox News or religious TV viewers. Most of those reported recently as the alleged attackers of homosexuals don’t look like the typical Fox News viewer.

Homosexuals can’t produce any such evidence. In reality, they are depending on the “Pixie Dust” theory of education – the idea that once a statement is made, it somehow goes out into the ether, weaving and winding through homes and down alleyways, influencing people in some kind of yet-to-be-discovered fashion even though they never actually heard the auditory comments. Otherwise, how else could these people who don’t go to church or watch religious programming get the message from these religious and social conservative leaders that homosexuality is bad?

Of course, this is nonsense. What we are seeing is militant anti-Christian bigotry – fraudulent anti-Christian bigotry – by Dan Savage and his ilk and abusively promoted by gutter-media outlets like the New York Times. Why Mr. Savage – a “sex columnist” – was even quoted in the first place is baffling.

Let’s go back to the article to demonstrate how fraudulent, malicious and deceptive this Savage reference to Christians is.

The article lists several teens who have recently committed suicide over homosexuality. In not one case was any of the harassment they faced linked to Christians. The article cited several people, and not one but Mr. Savage is cited as making any reference to Christians or Christianity.

In fact this comment by Mr. Savage is the only reference in the entire article to Christianity. It was simply a drive-by smear and a comment that was completely irrelevant to the evidence and to what everyone else was saying in the article.

With this kind of ongoing harassment of Christians by these homosexualists and other liberals, we can expect to see an increase in the level of attacks and harassment on Christians by vigilante liberals who erroneously think that Christians are to blame for harm against homosexuals. Homosexual activists have not identified any other easily identifiable group as their enemies, except perhaps skinheads and the odd other fringe anarchist group. But Christians are the most visible, so they are the easiest target for people who want to take out their anger against those they think are responsible for harm against homosexuals. Dan Savage had better wash his mouth out with soap or he might be the next person charged as an accomplice in an assault due to his work at fomenting hatred against Christians.

The reality is that Christians love people, that’s why they want to warn people about the dangers of homosexuality and offer them help to escape the clutches of that dangerous addictive behavour. It is homosexualists who seem to hate homosexuals, exploiting them as political pawns to advance their ideological agenda. Why else would they fight so hard to suppress the truth about the possibility of deliverance from homosexual behaviour and addiction? Why else would homosexualists treat verbal and moral criticism of homosexuality with harm and assault? Homosexual activists have focussed so much on making the simple verbal opposition to homosexuality illegal by way of hate crime laws that they have done barely anything in recent years to address genuine assault and harm against homosexuals, including much that is committed by other homosexuals with the very high rates of “domestic violence” among homosexual couples. Those aren’t the priorities of those who are genuinely concerned for the physical security and protection of homosexuals. Perhaps homosexualists like Dan Savage are so militant in attacking Christians because they need to distract people from their lack of serious effort to combat real sources of harm against homosexuals?

At the end of the day, this article – and the recent cases it covers – once again vindicates Christians as the enemies of homosexuals. But it’s unfortunate that the New York Times, unable to find the evidence it wanted to target Christians as responsible for any of these cases, used Mr. Savage’s drive-by smear to try to link Christians to the fatal harassment of homosexuals in the minds of readers.