Michael Brown began his July 29 WorldNetDaily column this way:
For the last 20 years, when it comes to LGBTQ+ people and issues, I have followed this simple directive from the Lord: “Reach out and resist,” meaning, “Reach out to the people with compassion; resist the agenda with courage.” Or, put another way (and now in the title of a forthcoming book), we should have hearts of compassion and backbones of steel.
In keeping with that spirit, I do not demonize those who identify as LGBTQ+, as if all of them were devious sexual predators who gloried in BDSM practices and delighted in displays of public perversity.
That’s not true at all. We have repeatedly documented how Brown attacks LGBTQ people, even as he hides behind his faux compassion claims to justify it. Indeed, he went on to portray any display of LGBTQ pride — illustrated here by a brief scene during the Olympics opening ceremony, joining the freakout by others at WND — as de facto perverse:
Why, then, have gay pride events for decades been marked by these very perverse displays? And why were the opening ceremonies of the Olympic Games, intended by the planners to draw attention to France’s LGBTQ+ community, marked by such perversity?
We can put aside for a moment the debate as to just how offensive the ceremonies were, in particular, the degree of intentionality behind the despicable mockery of DaVinci’s “Last Supper” painting, with a drag queen, wearing a crown, taking the place of Jesus.
I will say, though, that the ultimate, ironically tone-deaf comments have come from those celebrating the “inclusivity” of the event, as if mocking something sacred to Christians was being inclusive to them. To quote the Associated Press directly, “In an unprecedented display of inclusivity, drag queens took center stage at the Paris Olympics opening ceremony, showcasing the vibrant and influential role of the French LGBTQ+ community – while also attracting criticism over a tableau reminiscent of ‘The Last Supper.'”
[…]In the end, sarcasm aside, however you slice the cake, the ceremonies were perverse, with the celebration of drag queens and transgenders and a scene featuring a throuple (in this case, two men and a woman), apparently ready to do their thing behind closed doors. Yes, this showcased “the vibrant and influential role of the French LGBTQ+ community.”
In the words of Le Filip, who recently won the “Drag Race France” competition, “The (French) government knows what it’s doing. They want to show themselves in the best way possible. They showed no restraints in expression.”
And this leads me to back to my opening question: Why is this the way that France’s LGBTQ+ community wants to be seen and known?
Then it was back to his faux compassion schtick:
As I have interacted with LGBTQ+ identified individuals over the years, the vast majority of them have been quite normal in terms of their interests and lifestyle. They are our co-workers, our neighbors, our family members, our friends, working their jobs, having their relationships, some of them raising kids too.
Yet many that I have interacted with have also had no problem with little children attending absolutely vulgar gay pride events, even with some events featuring public nudity. Something does not add up.
In my 2011 book “A Queer Thing Happened to America,” I noted that, “Gay activists are so careful to utilize carefully crafted language to communicate their points, using ‘gay’ rather than ‘homosexual,’ speaking of ‘gay and lesbian civil rights’ rather than a ‘gay agenda,’ and referring to ‘sexual orientation’ rather than ‘sexual preference,’ just to name a few. This makes it all the more ironic that such public, self-exposing, and self-denigrating displays have been standard fare in major gay pride events.”
Then he was back to smearing any public display of LGBTQ pride as “perverse”:
Who in their right mind would associate any of this with Black Pride or Asian Pride or Hispanic Pride or Jewish Pride? But it is standard fare when it comes to the celebration of LGBTQ+ Pride. Why?
The answer is that, fundamentally, homosexual relationships and transgender expression represent a violation of God’s design for humanity, both in terms of the meaning of marriage and the meaning of sex-gender.
In the end, regardless of the degree to which every gay or lesbian or trans person on the planet is a fellow human being, created in the image of God and the object of His love, there is something fundamentally amiss with their desires and expression. In short, this comes down to a sexual deviation, expressed either in same-sex attraction or a confused gender identity (and in writing this, I recognize that in the overwhelming majority of cases, this deviation was not asked for or desired).
When this deviation is celebrated, it brings the perversions to the surface, also providing fertile ground for satanic expressions. These would include a devil-horned drag queen reading to little children, celebrated on Pride.com with the caption, “This Drag Queen Dressed as a Satanic Goddess to Read to Kids” in honor of LGBT History Month and Halloween.
We can now add to this list the Paris 2024 opening ceremonies, now declaring to the entire world the fundamentally disordered nature of all sexualities and expressions that deviate from God’s original design.
May He have mercy and may He redeem.
If Btown is dismissing LGBTQ people as “disordered” and a “deviation,” he cannot be taken seriously as someone who shows compassion for them. His hatred is just too great.
Brown returned to this theme in his Aug. 5 column:
It is one thing to talk about an LGBTQ+ “agenda.” It is another thing when the fruits of that agenda hit you in the face – literally. But that is exactly what we are witnessing today as a result of radical LGBTQ+ activism, which itself represents some of the worst fruit of the sexual revolution.
Much of the world was shocked by the perverse displays at the Paris 2024 opening ceremony. But those of us who have been following the trajectory of LGBTQ+ activism for years were not surprised at all. This is the natural fruit of a tree that is disordered from the roots up.
Yet as offensive as this massive media event was, it did not directly affect our lives.
Things were different at a recent women’s cycling event in Washington, where three biological males, teamed with three females in a two-way relay race, took first, second, and third place.
This led to a rant about transgender athletes, which inevitably invoked another Olympics controversy:
This is not a game, my friends. In some cases, it is a matter of life and death.
Now, the whole world is outraged as an Olympic boxer with XY chromosomes and elevated testosterone levels has demolished the first opponent, despite failing a gender test last year.
To be sure, the case of Imane Khelif does not appear to be a matter of a fully biological male, like Bruce “Caitlyn” Jenner or Will “Lia” Thomas, claiming to be a woman. Khelif is said to suffer from “Differences of Sexual Development, which is a set of conditions that involve reproductive organs and hormones,” sometimes including “women with DSD have XY chromosomes.”
So, Khelif grew up as a girl and has always identified as a woman. But when it comes to playing sports, especially combat sports, Khelif does not pass the gender test and cannot be classified as a female. (As it is often said, you “play” football or soccer or baseball. You do not “play” boxing.)
We can have compassion on Khelif, then, as an intersex individual. But we do not give Khelif a license to hit women in the face.
Not surprisingly, the Olympic Games have wrestled with similar situations in the past, most notably in the case of multiple gold medal winner Caster Semenya. Reportedly, “she was born with a vagina and internal undescended testes, but … she has no uterus or fallopian tubes and does not menstruate. Her internal testes produce natural testosterone levels in the typical male range.”
It is one thing, though, when the question comes down to the sex of a runner. It is another thing when it comes down to the sex of a boxer, and it is only the irrational, extremist views of radical trans activism that made it possible for a boxer with clear male advantages to pummel the female opponents in the face.
As we’ve pointed out, the organization that claims Khelif failed a “gender test” is “a discredited organization, mired in financial opaqueness and compromised by ties to the Russian leadership,” and it has refused to make that test public, further raising questions about its legitimacy. It then held a mess of a press conference in which it promised prize money to boxers defeated by Khelif and another female boxer it has attacked.
Still, Brown concluded:
Will this, at last, be the straw that breaks the camel’s back, when society as a whole finally says, “Enough is enough”? Or will a woman have to die at the hands of a male competitor before reality sets in?
I surely hope it is the former rather than the latter. The madness must stop.
One might say that Brown’s seething hatred of LGBTQ people is madness — even as he does it behind a cloak of faux compassion.