Pro-Family Cannibalism?
By Julio
Severo
C-Fam
has been doing a nice work of exposing pro-abortion and pro-sodomy activities,
groups and individuals around the world. But now, its director Austin Ruse did
a recent un-nice work of exposing one of our people — namely, Dr. Scott Lively —,
accusing him as a “boogeyman” used by homosexualist groups. In his article “Anatomy
of a Mythical Boogeyman,” Ruse employed indeed a mischievous
ruse to justify a moral cannibalization of Lively and his reputation.
 |
| Scott Lively |
Gay activists
are not really afraid of Scott Lively. They know he’s had little to no effect
overseas. He is their invention, a vehicle to keep their base riled up and the
direct mail checks flowing.
Based
on rumors, Ruse also belittled Lively:
He has bummed
around the pro-family movement for many years but has never really been
accepted by the mainstream groups. I am told he does not work well with others.
One major pro-family figure told me that Lively is just as happy attacking
other pro-family people as he is going after the LGBTs.
A
Catholic attacking an evangelical. Something new?
So if
gay activists choose a valid victim (Catholic Ruse) to trash, we are supposed
to defend him. But if they choose an invalid victim (evangelical Lively), are
we supposed to trash him too?
Last
year, Matt Barber (who is not an unknown leader in the pro-family movement)
wrote an article
published on WorldNetDaily (which also is not unknown in the pro-family
movement) defending Lively:
“As did Christ, Scott Lively speaks
absolute truth, in absolute love, with absolutely no fear of personal
destruction or even death. He loves everyone, whether friend or foe, Christian
or pagan, straight or gay. For example, Scott and his family took
into their home and nursed, both physically and
spiritually, the late Sonny Weaver, a former homosexual who died, as so many
have, from AIDS – a natural consequence of unnatural behavior. Sonny became
homosexual after being raped at 7 years old by a gay man in a local YMCA. He
became a former homosexual after accepting Jesus as Lord of his life.”
Ruse’s
boogeyman piece received an intelligent answer from a fellow Catholic named “bonaventure,”
who said:
Dear Austin
You do realize that the homofascist
organizations like HRC, GLAAD, etc., refer to you no differently than they
refer to Scott Lively?
Maybe Lively is “marginal” (i.e.,
has a small, unconventional, protestant/fundamentalist ministry, etc). And
maybe he doesn’t get along too well with the more mainstream pro-life
ministries (many of which opposed various state level Personhood amendments).
So what? So what if he doesn’t share your humor, or doesn’t appreciate
listening to Timothy Dolan’s “jokes” on different pro-life organizations’ board
meetings?
You should have shown Scott Lively
under a better light in your article, rather than scoff at him — which is no
better than elevating him to be the chief boogeyman. Because, on the other side
of the culture war, you are as much a boogeyman as Scott Lively is. In fact,
you may even have your own “crimes
against humanity” federal lawsuit badge of honor soon…
Seriously and without sarcasm:
rather than presenting Scott Lively under the negative light as you did in your
article (correct me if I am reading too much into it), you should have rather
contacted him somehow, and joined him on a common front with whatever force and
influence you actually HAVE.
Another
reader, Nicola M. Costello, commented:
Why gratuitously trash Scott
Lively, a leader on our side of the issue Mr. Ruse?
Homosexualist
group GLAAD has a malicious bio sketch of
Ruse, basically describing him as a version 2 of Scott Lively.
Should now we treat Ruse as boogeyman 2?
Homosexual
blog JoeMyGod, in a post titled “Austin
Ruse To Scott Lively: You Can’t Sit With Us,” said about the
Ruse-Lively imbroglio: “Delicious, delicious, delicious.”
In
their ruses against Lively and in their “Crimes
Against Humanity” lawsuit against him, homosexualist groups want a cannibalization
of Lively and much more. Now will they use Ruse’s boogeyman piece as an
evidence that pro-family groups are destructive and self-destructive?
In
his answer titled “Taking
‘Friendly’ Fire,” Lively said:
“Marxist strategist Saul Alinsky
taught his followers to 1) pick a target to be the symbol of their opposition,
2) freeze the target in place through unceasing propaganda, and 3) publicly destroy
the target to set an example to those who oppose them. I’ve somehow become that
target: the sacrificial scapegoat of the LGBT movement. And, short of a miracle
of God, I will be publicly destroyed, if not through the ‘Crimes Against
Humanity’ lawsuit then by some other means. If we have learned nothing else
about the agitators of the modern LGBT movement, we know they are as relentless
and implacable as their ancient counterparts in Sodom, who would not desist
from their siege of Lot’s home even though they were struck blind by God.”
Above
all, Catholics and evangelicals know, in their Bibles, that Jesus said that a
house divided against itself cannot survive. He said:
“Every kingdom divided against itself is
laid waste, and a divided household falls.” (Luke 11:17 ESV)
What
about a pro-family kingdom cannibalizing itself? Can it
survive?
Portuguese
version of this article: Canibalismo pró-família?
Source: Last Days Watchman
Articles by or on Scott Lively:
Posts
1 comment :
“Whoever derides their neighbor has no sense, but the one who has understanding holds their tongue.”
Proverbs 11:12 NIV
Post a Comment