Here is a comment by an online rag (Business Insider-The Wire), “Cameron was very clear that he felt homosexuality was not only sinful but ‘unnatural’ and ‘ultimately destructive to so many of the foundations of civilization’.” There are numerous other examples I could use, but for brevity I only use Business Insider for demonstration purposes.
If one listens to the entire interview dialogue, as cited on the “BI” website, it becomes clear to honest people that liberty was taken with Cameron’s comments, by the business rag. I will explain. Pier Morgan asked Cameron the question if homosexuality was a sin. Cameron carefully avoided that description emphasizing that in his view, as a christian, homosexuality was “unnatural” and “ultimately destructive to so many of the foundations of civilization”.Kirk Cameron emphasized that it was not his place to judge, he simply explained his view. Yet, Piers and company immediately decided to claim that Cameron was directly calling homosexuality a sin. Again quoting the Business Insider, “he felt homosexuality was not only sinful but…”
Even if Kirk Cameron intended to convey that homosexuality was a sin, which the readers must decide for themselves, let’s put his only comment about sinfulness in perspective. Said Cameron, when Piers insisted that Kirk MUST categorize his comments as accusing people of being sinful, “Piers, you are speaking to a man who is Christian, and, I believe all of us are sinful.” He further clarifies that he is not being judgmental at all, but expressing that we all could be better people. That is a far reach from him saying that being gay is a sin. I am not suggesting it is not a sin, because that is not the issue. The issue is the blatant misrepresentation of Kirk Cameron by the media and special interest groups supported by the media.
Let’s go back to Mr. Cameron’s actual statement. “I think that it is unnatural. I think that it is detrimental, and ultimately destructive to so many of the foundations of civilization.” Morgan attacks Cameron on this point by misdirecting the conversation, a favorite tactic of the entertainment news in general. Piers running helter-skelter goes off the reservation when he tries to introduce legal actions into a discussion of Christian principle. Piers tries to focus the conversation on the point that seven states have approve civil unions (gay marriages), and by implication suggests that Christianity is errant for adhering to traditional Christian values.
In all candor, Piers Morgan was desperately trying to mix sour grapes and oranges. His conduct was weak by any professional interviewer standards, and he was completely rude by the standards of common decency.
Now, no good opinion piece would be worth writing without the author’s opinion.
I hold Kirk Cameron’s comments to be completely accurate. Homosexuality is the process of acting out sexual attraction between people of the same gender. Sexual attraction, as enjoyable, pleasant and appealing as it may be ultimately has one biological purpose. That purpose is procreation. It may be used as a game, a fantasy, as nothing more than a personal satisfaction through sexual release. Yet, none of those intents are in sync with the ultimate intent of procreation. Now, here is the clear undeniable fact, without significant unnatural alteration to the human body NO TWO PEOPLE of the same gender will ever procreate. That, my good readers, makes homosexuality, without all of its hype, a very unnatural act. Of that there is no debate.
If, and nobody should conclude by my remarks that I believe this will ever be the case, the whole of society turned to homosexuality than within a single generation humanity would cease to exist. That could be describe by any number of rational beings as extraordinarily destructive to the foundations of human civilization. Now, that is the extreme scenario. But, whereas the majority may only consist of combinations of the minorities, any flaw to the whole stems derives from a flaw to some of its minorities. So, although the scope of my example was in the extreme any portion thereof naturally extends to, in some measure of influence, a smaller segment. Sexuality, as a natural causation, is detrimentally effected by homosexuality.
Thus, the summation of my opinion is that homosexuality is simply dumb. It flows from nothing but self-centeredness, and ends with self-indulgence in a self and socially destructive result. Or in the conclusion of Piers Morgan speaking about his own child advising him that they were gay, “That’s great, if it makes you happy.”
There is a very real difference between gaiety and being happy. Should Mr. Morgan desire to know the difference I will be more than willing to provide him with a dictionary. In the interim, as Christian scripture says “Adam fell that man might be, and man is that he might have joy”. Joy and happy go hand in hand. Gaiety (being gay) is not implied, except for those choosing to attempt to redefine Christianity according to the dictates of their own conduct, of which none of us are entitled.