Two months before his tragic death on November 9th, Dr. Myles Munroe spoke out against homosexuality in a press release entitled “Homosexuality: Phobia or Principle” (Aug 31st). He stirred controversy in Bahamas when he made comments in that press release by asserting that people have “hijacked” and “raped” the civil rights movement with efforts to fight for the rights of those in the LGBT community.
Munroe’s statement was from a response to a gay pride event that took place in the last weekend of August 2014. Former lecturer at the College of the Bahamas, Joseph Gaskins accused Dr. Munroe of “rank hypocrisy” in light of Munroe recent visit to Polygamist South African President Jacob Zuma.
Previously in March 2014, Munroe was criticized publicly in a press statement by the Foreign Affairs of Bahamas, Fred Mitchell who apparently has never been married nor has any children! Munroe had stated that Mitchell’s support of LGBT persons in the Bahamas does not “represent the majority of the convictions of the Bahamian people.”
Mitchell responded by claiming, “Once again Dr. Myles Munroe has returned to a theme he does not understand and obviously which he has no knowledge.” Mitchell went on in the statement to reference what he regarded as Munroe’s “…absolute stupidity and willful deceit is parading around in the pulpit disguised as theology.”
Mitchell warned Dr. Myles Munroe not to mess with him charging that:
Just because someone sits on a pulpit and hides behind theology does not give them the right to make vile, slanderous statements…. It is Dr Munroe’s right to disagree with anything he says, but to attack him and impugn my character is not only wrong, but goes against the principles of Christianity….I want people to look at me. I am not blinking on this at all. It doesn’t matter to me whether you agree or disagree with what I say, that is your right, this is a free society, just don’t impugn in a personal way. If you do that then I only have one response and that is to answer in kind….Just don’t mess with me…….
Dr Munroe responded in love by extending an olive branch to Foreign Affairs minister by saying:
He found it “disappointing” that Mr Mitchell would think his comments were a personal attack, especially since he “loves and admires” Mr Mitchell “like a brother”. I would be happy to speak with Mr Mitchell, I would be happy to meet with him, talk with him. He is my brother. That’s what I would like to do and I hope that we can do that very soon….
I can say that Mr Mitchell is one of the most intelligent, one of the smartest politicians in this country, his record shows that the people who have re-elected him prove that he is also a good server of the people of his community. So I respect and love him as brother. I appreciate his contribution to the Bahamas.
Nothing I have ever said was a personal attack, so I do not know what he is talking about in regards to that. I respect him. We are mature men, I would assume, and I would never say anything negatively about him, anything I said was specific to the subject that I talked about, that’s it. I love this guy, I respect him, I honour him as a Member of Parliament. But I always remind us that we are all human, but just because you may be elected to office does not mean you are superior; it just means you are a superior servant.
Dr Munroe wasn’t the first to address the issue of equating same-sex marriage with the Civil rights movement, Dr. Jacqueline C. Rivers, Director of Harvard’s Seymour Institute for Black Church Studies, did the same when she said:
Marriage was stolen from Blacks during Slavery therefore the material, moral, and spiritual consequences have been devastating. Across the United States and Europe, sexual partnerships between persons of the same sex [and] of the same gender are being legally recognized as marriage, thus abolishing in law the principle of marriage as a conjugal union and reducing it to nothing other than sexual or romantic partnerships or domestic companionship.
The unavoidable message is a profoundly false and damaging one — that children do not need a mother and a father in a permanent and complementary bond… In the United States, those who promote what they call marriage equality have unjustly appropriated the language and mantle of the black struggle in the United States — the Civil Rights Movement. But there can be no equivalence between blacks’ experience of slavery and oppression and the circumstances of homosexuals.
God has called us to a sacred duty to defend the innocent and the disadvantaged, the children and the poor. The religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows who are in distress and keep ourselves from being polluted by the world as it says in James 1:27…….
Watch the highlights from Dr. Jacqueline C. Rivers’ address at the Vatican’s Humanum Colloquium on Marriage and the Family
After Dr. Munroe’s death, according to Brazilian evangelist Julio Severo, the Press Release document was summarily removed from his website. Julio reposted it again but first he had to give his thoughts:
“……Some homosexualist individuals called his position on homosexuality “hypocritical” in light of Munroe’s then-recent visit with polygamist South African President Jacob Zuma.
I do not know if Munroe was critical of the Marxist ideology of Zuma or his depraved lifestyle or his pro-sodomy and pro-abortion ideology. Even though prominent English papers attacked him because of “Homosexuality – Phobia or Principle,” this excellent article seems to have completely disappeared from his website.
I do not know what could have prompted its disappearance or if it happened before or after his death. Was the leftist pressure too much on him and his ministry?
I remember that in 2008 Munroe praised Obama’s victory. While he was looking only at the color of Obama’s skin as a reason for pride, I saw the colour of Obama’s character……. Of course, Munroe’s last message was a hard blow on the Obama administration’s ideology.
Could this message have suffered a demise from all Munroe’s official channels because the powerful political elites who liked him hated his last and most powerful message to this world? Why did God have want such last message from Myles Munroe, who was one of the most prominent advocates of the theology of prosperity?
Here is the text if at all you are interested to know Munroe’s last provoking thoughts on the issue of same-sex marriage.
Press Release: “Homosexuality: Phobia or Principle” By Dr. Myles Munroe August 31, 2014
In the guise of “Civil Rights” and “Human Rights” the LGBT minority community have decided to ‘celebrate’ the civility of their very uniquely chosen lifestyle and sexual preference publically. I am not sure what their mission or goals are in this effort, but obviously they have received enough incentive and motivation to attempt something that 90% of The Bahamas and Bahamians consider unacceptable and violates their collective convictions, moral standing and values.
Perhaps it may be helpful to first ask a simple yet profound question: “Is it civil, right, reasonable, logical, sane to promote a cause, lifestyle or practice of a behavior that could in its ultimate conclusion cause the extinction of the human race? It is insanity to demand the ‘celebration’ of your own extinction.I am not sure what role is being played by Government, Government Leaders, Ministry of Tourism, or other parties that may have provided, if any, the incentive for this defiant social act, but I believe this must be addressed from the perspective not from any religious position, but rather from the concern for our very small fragile social fabric being held together by values and moral standards that provide the framework for a healthy Bahamian society.
Concern is also raised concerning the assistance, support and promotion of these efforts by international organizations and in individuals including travel agencies and tourism promotion entities such as gaytravel.about.com. The citizens of the Bahamas have a legitimate right to be and express their concerns in these matters. I think it is dangerous, inappropriate, immature and disingenuous to accuse anyone with a deep concern about any attempt to impose, force or establish a set of values, standards, moral trends or lifestyle that could and would drastically change and in a very real way destabilize the foundations of a society, as have a phobia – or fear.
THE BLESSING OF PHOBIA
One of the greatest natural competent of human mechanism for survival and safety is the element of fear. Without the ability to embrace ‘fear’ or ‘panic’ the human species cannot protect himself against threats. The beauty of fear is that is an in inherent human quality that protects against danger and extinction. Phobia is inherently good.
HOMOPHOBIA MISCONCEPTION AND DECEPTION
There is no greater harm to human dignity than deception. Throughout history the power of deception has ruined millions of lives, started world wars and even changed the climate of nations. In our postmodern world there is a massive deception invading the very moral fabric of nations and dismantling the very core of the natural existence of humanity. As matter of fact this deception is threatening the extinction of mankind. What is amazing is that this deception is not a new one, but it emerged in the context of human existence on the planet as long ago as five thousand years.
However, despite the reality of its existence, it has historically always kept its place at the fringes of mainstream society. What is this deception? It is the unnatural attraction and relations between human species of the same sex or gender attempting to normalize the unnatural under the guise of being normal. Even though this unnatural behavior disguises itself under many labels, it is generally described as Homosexuality. The word itself incorporates its basic premise and that is, it is primarily sex driven.
Those who have decided to embrace, practice, encourage, and surrendered and succumb to its passions, and they desire to dignify, promote and civilize this “lifestyle” over the past generation have become more aggressive even to the point of violence in some instances. This strategy seem to be one of fear mongering, psychological battery, and the selling of self-pity and abuse. Terms like bigot, hate crime, closed minded, conservative, anti-human, anti-civil, bulling, and the most common, phobia, are used to isolate the mainstream of humanity painting them as unloving, insensitive, ungodly, human haters, unsympathetic and uncivilized.
It is my view that this accusation of ‘homo-phobia” is the greatest deception of all. Its intent is to make those who are considered ‘normal’ feel guilty for being normal. This deception is unfair, dishonest and dangerous. Its affect is to make the majority of humanity feel guilty for not accepting, glorifying and dignifying this ‘unnatural’ human behavior.
I am sure the question will arise, “What is ‘unnatural’ and who defines ‘natural’?” It is essential to understand that natural cannot and does not need to be defined. Natural is simply the normal state of creation which manifests itself by its natural essence. In other words, nature defines itself. What is defined by nature is also what is considered as ‘normal’. Normal is that which is the result of the natural course of life as nature or creation works in sustaining itself. Therefore the source of ‘natural’ or ‘normal’ is creation itself and any opinion of attempt of human genius cannot change what is natural.
Perhaps at point is it may also be important to note that the root word from which we derive our modern word ‘Law’ is the word ‘norm’. The obvious implication is that all nature is the source of natural law and therefore defines what is the reference for the creation of any human law that attempts to interfere with nature itself? It is also important to note that any law made by man is ignored by nature.
Human sexuality is a product of natural creation and is rendered as normal, thus does not need definition. Any deviation from the natural is generally considered as ‘unnatural’ or ‘abnormal’. In nature there will always be exceptions and these must be recognized as such. But even exceptions must be properly defined, for even in nature there is a natural inherent response to safe –guard its survival by minimizing the impact of the exception. All exceptions in nature are natural and not by choice.
In light of this natural reality why should homosexuality be considered ‘unnatural’ and perhaps ‘abnormal’? Perhaps the answer is in the very description of homosexuality as ‘a lifestyle’. Being an heterosexual is not a lifestyle but a natural by-product of nature and not by choice. Lifestyles are ‘chosen’ or a result of ‘circumstances’ but never a product of nature. We can choose lifestyles but never our nature.
The natural definition of ‘unnatural’ is that which is not a product of nature itself is, and that which cannot naturally reproduce in creation naturally. Perhaps this is the greatest challenge of the great deception of homosexuality, the natural fact that members of the same sex can come together, live together, express intimacy, and even be deeply emotionally involved with each other, but the reality and truth is they can never naturally reproduce after their kind. It is this fact, truth and reality that renders this lifestyle ‘unnatural’.
It is this simple truth that make those who wish to perpetrate this unnatural ‘lifestyle’ of ‘orientation’ dishonest and deceptive. I am not against nor will attempt to prevent any human deciding to practice a specific ‘lifestyle’ or are inclined to follow a certain ‘un-normal’ behavior, but my concern and contention is their attempt to impose that decision on those who by nature are considered normal.
THE LIE OF HOMOPHOBIA
It is amusing that when the majority of the human community respond, express their disagreement with, or their deep honest concern about the attempt of those who embrace and practice this lifestyle to impose this ‘unnatural’ human lifestyle on society response this is interpreted a Phobia or fear.
If this accusation was levied by ignorant, uninformed persons perhaps it would be laughable, but one when intelligent individuals make this claim of phobia to a responsible intelligent person, one must take personal offence. Maybe the real fear is that one I would call ‘truthphobia’ or ‘realityphobia’. Could it be that those who wish be considered normal, acceptable, natural, and civil, fear that self-evident truth that what they are claiming, demanding, promoting and fighting for is by nature unnatural and abnormal?
However, I agree with their accusation from one perspective; and that is yes, I am afraid of any lifestyle, orientation, preference or behavior that threatens that very survival of the human race. Could it be that the homosexual harbor an unspoken heterosexual phobia? Heterosexual never attempt to impose itself on society nor does it need to fight for or recognition any defense.
THE HIGHJACKING OF CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENTS
The lifestyle of homosexuality and all the other names and labels it has come to be described as, is as old as the biblical character Abraham, and was practiced by members of communities of his contemporary over four thousand years ago. Many of the minority who are still involved in this lifestyle seem to act as if this is a new cause for which they were born to fight for. In the early sixties some individuals in high profile positions in society began to venture out of what they called ‘the closet’ to expose themselves to the larger community as if to test the waters. The reaction from that time by the majority of the population was one of resistance and discomfort which still exist today despite the claims to the contrary.
This resistance has been so strong that those involved in the LGBT lifestyle changed their strategy for social acceptance from imposing by exposure demanding their social rights, and resorted to making the issue one of civil rights. It is interesting to note that after over 4000 years of the recorded existence of the this lifestyle and unnatural behaviour the social resistance still exists and I’m sure will continue, no matter how social and so-called civic society attempts to disguise it socially acceptable attire. Nature will never disagree with itself and common or legislative law can ever change natural law.
I have with great disappointment stood on the balcony of history and watched with horror and shock the high-jacking and raping of what we have come to know as the Civil Rights Movements. What made it more distressing was to see many individuals who were actively involved in these historic resistance movements, abandoning the sacrifice of many who died for the noble causes of human dignity for the majority who were being abused, to use their blood to cover the demands of minority sectors of society to justify and civilize their selfish and unnatural preferences.
I have tasted the negative impact of civil oppression by a regime that devalued my humanity, but this was not because of a lifestyle I chose, or a behavior that was by orientation, or a disposition preferred, but rather a reality that was ‘natural’. I was as victim of by inherent pigmentation……I was born black and had no choice in the matter. In The Bahamas I and my family along with the majority of the Bahamian population were discriminated against, devalued as humans, disenfranchised, and oppressed by a minority regime.
I have with all my logic and sought to understand, but still cannot equate the Philosophy, ideology or purpose for the Civil Rights movements with the agenda of the Homosexual LGBT community. I think the attempt to equate the historical Civil Rights movements with the demands for the right to dignify, glorify and accept as normal the practice of a lifestyle that could render the human race for which they sacrificed extinct, is illogical, dishonest, and is the abuse of the blood and imprisonment of many. It’s a high jacking of the gains paid for by the blood of honourable men and women for an unnatural human-destroying behaviour.
THE OPPRESSION OF THE MAJORITY
The fundamental principle of the Civil Rights movements was the freedom and restoration of the dignity and value of the Majority of an oppressed humanity. As a matter of fact, historically it was usually the imposition of the values, prejudices and inhumane ideology of the minority on the majority that was the context and source of oppression and devaluation of humanity. The context of the present LGBT movement could be considered in the same light where a small percentage and minority segment of the population are attempting to impose their unnatural ideology, values, morals and personal sexual preference on the common culture, moral convictions, standards and values of the Majority.
Perhaps, this could be considered the new 21st century regime of oppression. This idea seem to be further enforced by the encroaching influence and demands of globalization, the United Nations and other world bodies and agencies who have now conditioned their offer of national economic assistance to national social and cultural conformity that embraces moral and values-based compromises.
THE MEDIA AGENDA
The most powerful and dangerous partner to deception is perception. The world of media is really about the business and management of perception. The power of the media cannot be calculated and must not be miscalculated or minimized in its impact for creating perception. This is why throughout history anytime there was a need to control the mental environment or to create a perceived reality, the use of the media has always been engaged as the critical tool in exporting, importing and disseminating deception. It is therefore important that in our modern democracy the demand for truth, transparency and objectivity in the media be a primary concern to all responsible citizen.
We must always be on our guard as civilly minded citizens to watch for the collective agenda and bias in the media. It has been my observation that in recent times the print and electronic media both nationally and internationally seem to favor the prominent and multiple placement, and preoccupation with stories that promote or glorifies this lifestyle. There seem to be many times and Imbalance of opinions and views. It is my hope that all media would make an effort to also publish the views of the majority.
INTELLECTUAL AND ECONOMIC BLACKMAIL
There also seem to be the increase use of economic and political blackmail in the area of manipulation by the LGBT minority forces, which also includes an intentional smear campaign of the majority as bigots, human haters, intolerant, and bullies. This is a dishonest and grave misrepresentation of the facts. There is also the misuse of un-substantiated claims by the minority regarding changing trends and attitude to boost their own positions. This is incredible. In fact, there seem to be massive plague on intellectual, social and physiological and logical dishonesty. There is no conclusive scientific confirmations that verify claims that the minority who practice this lifestyle, that their condition is matter of biology or genetics rather than a habitual learned behaviour which become a lifestyle they prefer.
Let us reiterate once again that the majority of the population in most countries throughout history and in our contemporary society, are not ignorant of the existence of abnormal behaviour or unnatural preferences of the homosexual lifestyle. This lifestyle and behavior is really an old story with a new twist. What the majority does not appreciate is the dishonesty and deception that have been engaged by those who wish to impose their will on them. Every human has the right to choose his or her unnatural lifestyle, but must not demand that we accept it as natural. They are free to prefer any unnatural sexual orientation they desire or crave, but they must not, cannot and should not require that we the majority dignify it by promoting or glorifying it as normal. All the majority want are Honesty and the Freedom to express our concerns, opinion and positions without being labelled ignorant, intolerant, unsophisticated, or homophobic.