Home > Editorials > Heathens at the Gate: Homosexual Advocacy Group Protests Christian College in Kansas

Heathens at the Gate: Homosexual Advocacy Group Protests Christian College in Kansas

August 25th, 2011 Leave a comment Go to comments

Paul A. IbbetsonLow-brow activity, dirty deeds done by daylight, these can only be the beginnings of the words needed to describe the strong-arm tactics of homosexual activists here in the state of Kansas. The gay advocacy group Flint Hills Human Rights Project, which has been on the losing end of a push to gay-ify the heartland, has decided to protest Christianity in a very direct fashion. As reported by Brad Dornes in the Manhattan Mercury, members of the organization recently staged a protest at the Manhattan Christian College on enrollment day. Students attempting to enroll in classes at the Christian college had to wade through gay activists carrying homosexual advocacy signs and others from the organization offering students informational paraphernalia on the lesbian, gay, bi-sexual and transgender lifestyles.

Ted Morgan, the co-chair for the Flint Hills Human Rights Project, said that the protest was simply to “raise awareness” for the LGBT community. This kind of hypocrisy is troublesome and depicts the true nature of the homosexual push here in Kansas and across the nation. If we wish to bring some honesty to the discussion, the entire city of Manhattan as well as the state of Kansas are well aware of the homosexual agenda, as the recent city election of conservative Tea Party candidates brought about the repeal of an anti-discrimination ordinance alteration that created one of the most liberal ordinances in the country. The ordinance alteration, with its arbitrary and capricious impact on traditional Kansans, was a product of the strong-arm tactics of homosexual advocacy groups here in the state. The gay community worked diligently to bypass citizens of Manhattan, Kansas, from having a voice in an ordinance alteration that would have an economic, social and cultural impact on the entire state.

In my interview on March 8, 2011, on the Conscience of Kansas radio program with Flint Hills Human Rights Project media representative Josh McGinn, I voiced my concern at his determination that Kansans outside the gay community should be left out of the decision-making process on how people should live in their own state. I made a prediction in that interview, which was proven true, that the bill alteration would be revoked. The basis for that prediction was based on my belief in two factors that encompass the overwhelming majority of the people of Kansas. First is that many of the people of the state, while very diverse, share a common belief in Judeo-Christian values. The anti-discrimination bill alteration was a personal affront to these values. Second is the simple fact that Kansans don’t like to be strong-armed, knocked about or pushed around. This is what the gay community was doing then and as recent facts show, this is what they are doing now.

Despite the “light and cheerful” spin given by organizational leaders, the protest at Manhattan Christian College was meant first and foremost as a strong-arm tactic against President Kevin Ingram and others within the college’s administration who stood with the majority of the community in championing Christian values on this issue. This is bad enough as these individuals should have the freedom to stand for their values without persecution, but to protest Manhattan Christian College and heap homosexual propaganda on incoming students takes legal protest and drags it to levels of inappropriateness found in organizations such as the Westboro Baptist Church. It doesn’t get much worse than that.

What we can see from the depths of such actions is an illumination of the truth in that some groups that claim victimhood are really ruthless bullies, and that some victories for conservative values are just battles won in a much more protracted war. What is certain, among the many uncertainties of this cultural war, is that those who refuse to get into the fray will find the gates of their communities crushed by marauders ranging from heathens to Hannibal. We can truly see that in this battle no quarter will be given, and no ground shall be treated as holy. If we are going to continue to keep Kansas a state of traditional Christian values we will have to continue to fight for it.

Share Button
Categories: Editorials Tags:
  1. avatar
    Josh
    August 26th, 2011 at 17:47 | #1

    Thank you, Mr. Ibbetson, for your always insightful commentary on the goings-on of the gay and religious communities in Manhattan, KS.

    I am no longer on the board of the Flint Hills Human Rights Project, so I cannot really speak for the organization. I was aware of their planned protest/outreach at Manhattan Christian a few weeks ago, and while I was concerned that some persons affiliated with the college would perceive any event that FHHRP would do as an attack, I was reassured that FHHRP would go to great lengths to make the event mostly informational in purpose.

    I was not at the event as I am normally only in Manhattan on the weekends to work, but after looking at the signs at the event and reading the flyer that was distributed, I had hope that the event would not have offended the Manhattan Christian Community. The flyer and a few pictures can be viewed here:
    http://www.fhhrp.com/blog/fhhrp-visits-mcc

    It is unfortunate that you perceive even such neutral protest messages as those carried on the signs and and the fliers distributed to Manhattan Christian students and family as equivalent to “ruthless bullying” and go on to use militant language to describe our differences.

    It seems quite clear that your opposition to the Flint Hills Human Rights Project goes beyond repealing the recently passed Non-Discrimination Ordinance which prohibited businesses and landlords from firing or evicting people for their sexual orientation or gender identity. It seems, with your condemnation of the many good, hard-working, law-abiding, and often Christian individuals who think LGBT people should be granted an equal opportunity in public life as “heathens,” that you will only be satisfied when we surrender our political rights to advocate on behalf of equal treatment or renounce our efforts to improve equal treatment.

    We, on the other hand, do not disagree with you or MCC’s right to practice its faith. But in the words of Thomas Jefferson, “No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.” All law-abiding Americans should have an equal opportunity to be judged according to their merits in employment and housing. This opportunity should not be infringed merely because a business person or landlord religiously disagrees with a person’s sexual or gender identity. For one thing, neither of these qualities necessarily prevents a person from doing any kind of work (including the selling of Christian books). For another, to say that religious freedom trumps all other rights would necessarily protect discrimination against other classes. For instance, in the 1960s, there were still many pastors who justified segregation and discrimination against Blacks based on their interpretation of Noah’s curse on Ham. Judeo-Christian interpretations of scripture have also been used to deny equal treatment to women and other minorities.

    If the most intolerable aspect of nondiscrimination legislation that may protect Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender individuals is that it forces religious persons to tolerate beliefs and practices that are different than theirs, then how can Jews, Muslims, nonbelievers, and even different kinds of Christians be asked to tolerate and not discriminate against one another? They all certainly disagree with one another’s beliefs and practices. Thankfully, Jews, Christians, Muslims, and nonbelievers are prohibited from discriminating against one another in Manhattan, the state of Kansas, and the United States. I hope one day the same can be said of heterosexual, homosexual, transgender, and male and female individuals.

    If you are a Christian who thinks all persons who are homosexual, bisexual, or transgender should spend their entire lives denying their sexual and emotional attractions and their gender identity, and either live single lives or marry the opposite sex, then you should make that case without relying upon the threats of joblessness, eviction, or refusal of public accommodations. Jesus invited himself to Zacchaeus’s house and then Zacchaeus freely repented of his sins. He did not make repentance a condition of his company and neither should those who follow him.

  2. avatar
    sunflower
    August 26th, 2011 at 19:37 | #2

    Paul,
    Gay-ify the Heartland. Seriously. When you speak like this with such hate and misinformation I see no trace of the decent educated man I thought you were. Homosexuality and Christianity are not mutually exclusive. Perhaps your privileged position as a white, heterosexual, man (and you do have privilege Paul no matter how much you want to deny it) does not allow you to see the value in equal rights and protections and overall respect for diversity and difference. When you speak of traditional Christian values you speak of ignorant and intolerant interpretations of faith that hold value to you only because you lack the strength of character to accept something that is different from what you know. Something that falls outside of your comfort level.

  3. August 27th, 2011 at 18:05 | #3

    It is sad that it isn’t good enough for people to simply live and let live – without the opinions and lifestyles of others forced in their face, such as at this demonstration. It is hypocritical for those defending the “rights” of the protesters at this Christian college to pass out propaganda for their cause in the face of those who these protesters know will be offended. What happened to the “rights” of the college attendees who simply want to continue their education, hand-in-hand with their faith, and instead are confronted in the street?

    This reminds me of trying to walk the streets in down-town Las Vegas. However, if a person takes their family to Las Vegas, they are willingly subjecting their family to similar confrontation, yet when attending a Christian college on someone’s home-town, no similar choice has been made to thrust themselves into the den of those they have no problem with living their own lives in their own belief system but simply disagree with.

    It is sad how the people that comment here cannot see their own hypocrisy as they are only seeing how they are offended but not how they offend others…

  4. avatar
    Paul Ibbetson
    August 28th, 2011 at 20:49 | #4

    Josh McGinn! I hope you are doing well. Glad you read the article and thanks for checking out our newly redone website. The MCC incident was unfortunate and I felt I had to write about it. I actually visited the link you provided for FHHRP before you sent it. I found the hypocrisy at the website when they say they were ” just visiting” the christian college hard to tolerate. Even the liberal Manhattan Mercury could discern the christian college kids that were visiting the college to enroll with the homosexual organization that was there to protest. If we cannot come together on that simple reality, we won’t agree on which day of the week it is.

    It is intellectual dishonesty to say that the protest was to bring awareness to the christian students about the LGBT community. They study that issue as part of their curriculum and you and I both know that. The protest was about strong arming the president who stood with the majority of the community to oppose the homosexual push. The mercury touched on the subject, I just got down to the truth.

    When we discussed the issue on my radio show, I stated clearly that I do not believe homosexuality is an immutable quality so trying to bring back the black civil right’s movement argument is not only an empty argument, but if I was a black man I would be offended as much as I am as a white man. We are talking lifestyle versus skin color. When we come to the Bible and God’s clear word on homosexuality, it is clear beyond a doubt that homosexuality is an sin. Watching you try to spin it to be otherwise is painful to see. I think in your heart you know this to be true. You seem way to smart not to know this.

    You are right that being a conservative christian my issues with the homosexual agenda in America go well beyond the Manhattan ordinance. I have written extensively on many issues and they are easy to find if you just look. My new book has a whole chapter on the issue that I invite you to read. I think you are angry because I expose folks like LGBT and others for who they are, people who demand that traditional America give them the culture or they will come and strong arm them into submission. As I said in the article, I told you the ordinance would get revoke, you also know this to be true. I was right and you would do well to privately reflect on that part of our conversation.

    My stance has remained the same and my message, unlike LGBT and FHHRP who talk like a victim and act like a bully, I am consistent. That consistency includes the fact that I do not hate you because I will not endorse certain activities that you may do. I think you should have freedom to have your say, once again, I have kindly provided you a forum to say what you think and have spent the time to answer your thoughts. I do this all without marching with signs on your place of business or where you live. What I will not do is endorse the homosexual lifestyle. That is not going to happen. Thanks for coming by the website and sharing your thoughts.

  5. avatar
    Paul Ibbetson
    August 28th, 2011 at 21:04 | #5

    Sunflower
    I don’t know who you are, but if you know me at all, then you know that I am consistent on this issue. It is not hate to not support everything everyone does. If you are honest with yourself, you will see that you have friends that you love and care for that you do not support everything they do. Thus is my position with homosexuality. If you are not a man, white, heterosexual, then let me tell you as one who is that there upsides and downsides to being one. Nobody is living in a perfect world. Once again giving you a forum to say your thoughts just for you to tell me that you are not being given a forum, that is hypocrisy. I am tolerant, but not tolerant of all things. I have core values that are based on my christian principles. I have the right to challenge the homosexual agenda as any other person. Remember, the majority of voters in Manhattan did the same. Once again, I am very consistent where the LGBT community whines that they are victims and then acts like bullies. The MCC protest was in terrible taste.

  6. avatar
    sunflower
    August 29th, 2011 at 02:11 | #6

    Dear Paul,
    Thank you for your response. I don’t recall saying I wasn’t being given a forum to say my thoughts. I’m not sure what gave you that idea. Perhaps you derived this information from the same place where you seem to get your “facts” about everything else including the “homosexual agenda”. Paul, l I think perhaps you are pushing a “heterosexual agenda.” There, now see how silly it sounds when you say it in reverse? I don’t take issue with your stance on tolerance. You don’t have to tolerate everything. But intolerance should have its boundaries. Just because a person doesn’t fall into what you consider the appropriate “lifestyle” doesn’t make him/her wrong or the fight for equal recognition and rights through information dissemination in poor taste or a strong arm tactic. By the way it’s pretty hard to strong arm those that hold a power base and have greater recognition and acceptance under the law. It’s not an attack to want equal rights. On a side note I have to smile when people pull out the old core values card and say things like “the Bible is clear on the issue of homosexuality.” The Bible is clear on very little. But perhaps I’ll revisit the Good Book and take to heart its stances on slavery, women, plagues, and the age of the Earth. I love a good literal interpretation based on accounts written long ago by men in a particular time and context. I agree that it is not considered “hate” to not support everything everyone does. However, it is hateful to misrepresent the facts-which you do. And it is hate to call names. That’s what Mr. Phelps does. You’re not with the Phelps family are you Paul? As to your consistency on a particular issue, I’ll have to take your word on it. I’m sure you believe you have been consistent. But I’ve interacted with you in context with those who are members of the LGBT community and you weren’t so outspoken then Paul. Perhaps you acted in such a manner because you thought it was best for self-preservation. I can respect self-preservation. As long as we both recognize the cowardice in it. Oh and it’s not whining about victimization when you are indeed a victim. And as for your use of the term bully, somebody saying something you don’t agree with or want to hear doesn’t make them a bully. Your attacks on people with legit issues are in poor taste. Know what you are talking about before you leap Paul. You’re better than this.

  7. avatar
    Paul Ibbetson
    August 31st, 2011 at 00:06 | #7

    Sunflower
    I am certainly better than how you have described me. Again I am not using a handle but my own real name so I can only take you at your word that you know me. If you know me and have interacted with me you would have to say that I am polite and respectful to everyone I meet gay or straight. If you listened to my radio debate with the Flint Hills Human Right Project, you will see I was also polite while having an opposing position. That is because I have nothing against you or any homosexual as an individual. I simply oppose an ideology that is inconsistent with my values. I do champion traditional values which include heterosexual marriage as a component, I have three books and hundreds of articles on the subject. I am consistent on the subject. If you think I act in ways just for self preservation maybe we should be re-introduced. I would simply invite you to read by writings or listen to the hundreds of hours of my radio show. As far as the Bible goes, we could walk through that issue but I can see that we do not see the Bible in the same way. that is fine, but your confusion on God’s word is not mine and we are just not going to agree on the issue. It is the homosexual community that attempting to change American culture, not be. Who is the aggressor here? Who wishes to keep the vote on these issues from the American people? Not me. It’s not the Christians protesting you and where you work and study, it’s the other way around. That is why I made the accurate comparison with Westboro. WBC is terrible and I have taken them on directly, have you? So much for me being a coward, I am simply someone who does not agree with the homosexual agenda. Calling me a hater is as empty as me calling you a Nazi. We simple disagree on fundamental ideological issues. My biblical beliefs tell me the gay lifestyle is wrong and that is where my tolerance stops. Go live your life the way you want, you won’t see me peeking into your bedroom, I deal with cultural issues. Things that affect society. I spent years helping people of all backgrounds as a police officer and put my life on the line many times. Calling me a coward (name calling) without knowing me makes you look very simple minded and I am sure you are smarter than your words. You are just angry with me. I respect your anger but I will keep my core values anyway, even if you don’t like them. Thanks for your thoughts.

  8. avatar
    sunflower
    September 5th, 2011 at 02:29 | #8

    Hi Paul,

    You don’t have to take me at my word that you know me. We do not need to be reintroduced. My name is Sarah Jones. We were in the same MA program at WSU and Phd program at Kansas State. We took a stats class together and I spent many hours with you in the grad lab working on stats assignments. I listen to your show. I’ve even been on your show. I’ve read your work. In fact I ordered one of your Patriot Act books. You brought in two and I paid for them and gave once as a gift. My family is from the same small town where you “put your life on the line many times.” I in fact appreciate the service you and any other individual in uniform provides. However, that service is not a free pass from all acts of cowardice. And when you engage in the behavior you have chosen to engage in-I think you are a coward. You don’t have to agree with the “homosexual agenda” or any other cliche catch phrase people like to fall back on because it’s easier then accepting change they don’t feel comfortable with. I too don’t peek into bedrooms. But distorting truth and claiming that you are somehow being attacked because individuals who engage in behavior and live their lives in a way contrary to your personal beliefs and want to fight for their right to equal protection is wrong. Equal protection and respect for homosexuals will not diminish my protections and rights as a heterosexual. It will in fact make those protections all the more solid. You’re not being attacked Paul. You know this.

  9. avatar
    Paul Ibbetson
    September 6th, 2011 at 14:00 | #9

    @sunflower
    Sarah, I am not being attacked, just being called a coward LOL! Sarah you do know me and that is why it is shocking that you are surprised that I would take the conservative Christian stance on homosexuality. I have always been nice and kind to you, and I am also that way with those I do not agree with. Ask Josh McGinn who posted above. When his gay advocacy group asked for a debate on the radio I gave them one. He will tell you that I was respectful, decent, and professional with him. No name calling. I just have a different belief system. If that makes me a coward in your eyes, then I guess you see cowards everywhere around you or you live in a bubble. I do not believe in the homosexual lifestyle on biblical grounds, period. however, even with those beliefs, I don ‘t try to keep people from living that lifestyle, I never advocate violence against those I disagree with, I just refuse to say it is right. I refuse to walk in the gay pride parades or be an enabler when these issues reach a cultural level which this bill did. When it came to the ordinance I opposed in Manhattan, I did not come to a quick decision there. I went through the ordinance alteration line-by-line and even sought legal scholars in the field to question. How about you? After researching fully, I concluded that it was bad law from both a legal and moral standpoint. No, I did not factor in male white guilt, I looked at the facts and was responsible to my faith. I feel very comfortable with my decision. When it came to the MCC protest, that was a political move by FHHRP to place pressure on the school’s president. The Manhattan Mercury was pretty clear in stating that. I think that was dirty pool and so I was honest and said so and have let everyone, including you, have a counter say. Come at me with some facts about the ordinance, listen to the Ibbetson/McGinn debate on the issue. Probably one of the better discussion on the issue before you lower yourself to calling me names. You are a good person Sarah, I have always liked you and will continue to do so. But for me to like you does not require you to believe and endorse everything I say and do, you should not demand that I do the same or get called names. In the end if the best you can do is call me names, so be it. I can handle it. Just do the best you can.

  1. No trackbacks yet.
You must be logged in to post a comment.