Is Phil Robertson right or wrong?

Is Phil Robertson right or wrong?

Phil Robertson is quoted in his interview with GQ magazine, Gentleman’s Quarterly, a male directed magazine, as saying that he does not understand why a man would not prefer a vagina to an anus. He then says what has already begun to happen in drawing a line from the perversion of homosexuality to other forms of perversion. In fact just this week Utah’s law banning polygamy was overthrown and the laws regarding Same sex marriage were the exact example used by the judge to justify his ruling. He in fact opened the door for pedophilia, multiple forms of group marriage and yes bestiality. So Phil’s comment is not so far off after all, but what has the activists so alarmed and what you may have already missed if you have read this far is what he specifically said about the anatomies involved in this sexual choice. The vagina versus the anus. That is what is really at issue here. The homosexual agenda has tried for so many years to make the conversation about ice cream. Some people like vanilla and some people like chocolate. Some like whipped cream and others like nuts. They have portrayed the homosexual as a loving and warm and normal individual by removing the picture of the act of the sex itself. Folks, there is no other way for a man to penetrate a man except through the anus. That is the only orifice available that is comparable to a womans vagina. But that is the problem. As you read this you are reacting. You are thinking I am being vulgar. You are offended at the thought of it. You are repulsed and that is why there has been such a vitriol attack on Phil Robertson. Because he has brought attention to the very thing that the homosexuals know the average heterosexual can not get their minds around. Anal sex is violent. It has always been viewed as violent and as a deviant act. Sodomy is not an act that draws a great deal of sympathy or empathy. If you ask the average American if they think sodomy is a good thing, they are likely to tell you no. They are likely to conjure image of little boys and girls being victimized by sick and demented men. Men like Jerry Sandusky or Jeffrey Dalmer. These are hardly the images that the LGBT community wants the public to think about, especially when they have worked so hard to convince us it is about the flavor of ice cream we like. When they have spent so much time and money on television shows, movies and theatre productions lobbying to make us look the other way while they indoctrinate our children to accept what Phil Robertson has simply pointed out. Why would a man prefer a male anus to a female vagina? It is really a simple question so why all the fuss? Because they know the answer and they don’t want you to think about it.

This entry was posted in blog and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Is Phil Robertson right or wrong?

  1. Someone says:

    Wow for a straight christian preacher, you sure know a lot about anal sex. I guess that’s what god wants you do do right, spending time thinking about other mens’ penises and anuses. Nevermind what Jesus told us to do…

    View Comment
    • admin says:

      This comment simply illustrates the point of my observation. Jesus told us to speak the truth and to set the captives free. When the enemies plan is exposed all he has is vile remarks. As a Christian Preacher before God my responsibility is to expose the darkness so people who are bound can see it for what it is and recognize the enemies lies. Then they might exchange the lie for the truth. I am praying for you whoever you are to come to the truth. If you already really know it and can be an influence to set people free then I pray you will have the courage to speak that truth and help rather than cowering behind bogus email addresses and allowing your friends who you claim to love to go to a place of eternal torment.

      View Comment
  2. Dean Bailey says:

    The gay activists certainly do understand this point, and so do a lot of other “left-wing” activists. The most obvious, aside from homosexuality, are the “pro-choice” people. They’ve come up with a nice, medical sounding term like “abortion,” knowing full well that “murder of an unborn child” or “infanticide” would be socially unacceptable terms, just as “pro-infanticide” would be. But the truth is still the truth!

    As for the topic at hand, their deceptions began with the hijacking of the word “gay” itself, which use to mean a festive form of happiness, rather than representing this deviant form of sexual behavior. It moved on to their hijacking of the civil rights movement in order to legitimize their behaviors through guilt tactics and manipulations. And then there’s the hijacking of the otherwise biblical rainbow as a symbol of “pride…” What a blatant mocking of God’s grace!

    Perhaps the biggest public deception of all, however, is calling their behavior “love.” Who wants to be accused of being against two people “loving” each other, after all? I mean, doesn’t the Bible say that “God is love?” Yes it does! But this perverse homosexual ideology that suggests that “love” by any means is God—that is a selfish distortion of biblical love which completely ignores the sacrifice of Christ, and the call of Christ toward a higher love which includes repentance (turning away) from our sins.

    You can’t call it “love” when you embrace the very behaviors that “Love” calls you to turn away from!

    View Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *