Michael Brown's Deceptive Anti-LGBTQ Attacks, Part 4: Into 2023

The WorldNetDaily columnist is still pretending that he loves LGBTQ people even as he rages against them for failing to be heterosexual.

By Terry Krepel
Posted 11/9/2023

Michael Brown

Drag queens reading to toddlers in libraries and schools. Drag queens engaging in indecent acts with children in gay bars. Drag queens performing in our churches.

If anything was a sign that God has given America over to depravity, it is this.

Rampant porn addiction is bad enough, as is the redefining of the very meaning of marriage.

Radical shouting their abortions and the government openly advocating for the chemical castration and genital mutilation of confused children is yet another telltale sign.

But the drag queen depravity goes one step further.

It celebrates that which is shameful and normalizes that which is perverse. And it does so in the most exaggerated, even overtly demonic form, with Drag Queens wearing Satanic horns while reading to tiny little children.

[...]

This is madness. This is depravity. This is perverse.

But this is what happens when God gives people over to their sinful imaginations. A clear and definite line is crossed, as people not only tolerate evil, they celebrate it.

That which is despicable is now honored, and that which is shameful is paraded openly. The conscience is seared and the folly revealed.

It is as if God said, "If that's what you want, then have at it, without restraint and without reserve. The seat belts are off and the brakes do not work. You are in free fall now. I will let the whole world see your folly."

Brown spent his Nov. 23 column denying that right-wing anti-LGBTQ hatred was a factor in a massacre at a Colorado Springs LGBT club and again pretending that he really doesn't hate them (while taking the easy layup to denounce murder):

Although we still do not know if the massacre at a gay bar in Colorado Springs was a hate crime (as of this writing), it is always appropriate to denounce all acts of violence and hatred against the LGBTQ+ community. There is absolutely no justification for such acts no matter how deep the disagreements. You do not murder people because you differ with them.

All the more is this true for followers of Jesus. Acts of murder and hatred are totally antithetical to His character, His example and His teachings.

Unfortunately, before we know for sure what prompted the shooter to slaughter his victims in cold blood, the Washington Post and others are already assigning blame.

[...]

[Washington Post reporter Casey] Parks also cites Jay Brown, senior vice president of programs, research and training for the Human Rights Campaign, who claimed "that Americans can't, and shouldn't, separate those acts of violence from state-sanctioned efforts to limit LGBTQ rights."

He said, "We've seen more than 340 anti-LGBTQ bills filed this year alone. We've seen a huge increase in anti-LGBTQ rhetoric online and by politicians, and we've seen real threats."

But herein lies the problem.

If you oppose LGBTQ+ activism in any form, you are not only branded a hater. You are also accused of inciting violence.

If you object to drag queens indoctrinating toddlers, there is blood on your hands.

If you do not want a biological male sharing a locker room with your daughter, you are complicit in the Colorado Springs massacre.

If you oppose the chemical castration and genital mutilation of trans-identifying children, you are a murderer.

If you support your state's efforts to protect religious freedoms, thereby supporting "state-sanctioned efforts to limit LGBTQ rights," you contributed to the bloodshed in Colorado Springs.

Have not leaders like Jay Brown made themselves perfectly clear?

For more than 20 years now, ever since I started preaching on the theme of "Jesus Revolution," I have stated categorically that the Lord calls us to put down our swords and take up our crosses, devoting whole chapters to this subject.

I have shouted from the rooftops that we are called to overcome evil with good, hatred with love and lies with truth.

The Lord's kingdom cannot be advanced with carnal anger, hatred, violence and bloodshed. God forbid.

And as a leader in the culture wars since 2004, when I first felt called to push back against gay activism, I have made clear that all human beings, including those who identify as LGBTQ+, are created in God's image.

I have also stated that Jesus shed the same blood for gays as for straights.

And our mantra has been simple: "Reach out and resist," meaning, reach out to the LGBTQ+ community with compassion; resist the agenda with courage.

But today, if you dare resist the goals of LGBTQ+ activists, you are not just a hater. You are complicit in the shedding of innocent blood.

This leaves us with two choices.

We either sit back and allow LGBTQ+ activists and lawmakers and educators to reshape society, taking away our rights and indoctrinating our children, or we get branded an accessory to murder.

Brown then tried to articulate his dichotomy:

What, then, should we do?

First, we make clear in our words and attitudes that we categorically denounce all acts of violence and hatred against all those who identify as LGBTQ+.

Second, we do our best to demonstrate our love for the LGBTQ+ community on a personal level, letting them know who we really are.

Third, we stand our ground without flinching, knowing that opposing LGBTQ+ activism is a good and righteous thing to do.

Brown began his Dec. 26 column by referencing allegations of a transgender woman exposing herself in a spa locker room (which remains disputed), then went into a rager over "semantic nonsense":

As for the rest of us – for you and me and our families and friends and the circles that we influence – may we shout from the rooftops that we will never accept this as normal.

Nor will we accept as normal 13-year-old girls getting full mastectomies simply because they are confused about their gender identity.

Or 10-year-old boys sterilizing themselves for life as they take hormone supplements to stop the onset of puberty while they figure out if they are male or female.

Or incoming college students starting their new classes by reciting their preferred gender pronouns.

Or users getting banned from social media platforms for saying that "Rachel" Levine is a biological male.

Or female athletes getting crushed and humiliated by boys who identify as girls and who are demolishing the hard-earned records of their female peers.

Or boys claiming to be girls so they can have access to the girls' bathrooms at school, where they proceed to rape and attack them.
No, no, no. I will never accept this as normal, and neither should you.

Once again, Brown played his faux-compassion card: "I truly care for those who struggle with gender identity issues, especially young people. I also know that the vast amount of confusion we're witnessing today is the result of sociological contagion." Actually, what Brown claims to "know" is wrong.

New year, same hate

For his Jan. 4 column, Brown used a poll claiming that women are more empathetic than men as a springboard to rant again about gender:

Despite the use of radicalized leftist language, as if your sex was arbitrarily assigned to you at birth by the doctors and nurses, the survey must ask for biological reality. Otherwise, to repeat, the survey has no meaning at all.

Quite tellingly, in today's upside down culture, you can't simply ask, "What is your sex?" Instead, you need to ask what was written on your birth certificate when you were born. Your actual, biological sex matters!

[...]

As I wrote in 2017 (with reference to "menstruating men"), "There is an all-out war on sexual difference (often referred to as 'gender'), and if it wins the day, it will lead to societal chaos."

That chaos is already here, growing by the day. But for a moment this week, quite unintentionally, reality crept back in and sanity prevailed as news outlets reported the simple, verifiable (and, widely known) fact that women, on average, are more empathetic than men.

Men and women exist, and there are differences between the two.

Brown's Jan. 11 column was a rant about too many comic characters failing to be heterosexual:

In 2011, when I first wrote about "mutant" being a codeword for "gay" in the "X-Men" movie series, I was ridiculed on some LGBT websites for being late to the party. To paraphrase their words, "You're just realizing this now? The comic books have been pushing this message for years already."

That's why it was no surprise to see that, in a recent DC Comics storyline, the Joker, the arch-nemesis of Batman, got pregnant and had a baby. But of course!

We've been familiar with "pregnant men" for years now, and semantic activists want to substitute "birthing persons" for "mothers." Perhaps the only surprise is that it took this long for a male comic book character to get pregnant and have a baby. The larger agenda of pushing LGBTQ+ characters has been crystal clear for quite some time now, even to someone like me who is not a comic book reader or superhero aficionado.

[...]

Against this backdrop (remember, as just stated, that there are more than 65 LGBTQ+ superheroes and villains) is it any surprise that "right-wing culture warriors" spotted an agenda behind a pregnant male character?

We know that comic book writers do not live in an abstract world devoid of cultural and moral values. To the contrary, many of them are quite socially aware and use comics to convey a larger message. There's nothing surprising about that at all, nor is this something hidden.

So, at the very least, the fact that so many of us immediately pointed to LGBTQ+ activism in connection with the pregnant Joker is quite reasonable.

What seems less reasonable to me is the idea that no one at DC Comics made this connection at all or there was not even a tacit wink or a knowing smile. Really?

He complained that a commentator noted the right-wing freakout over the storyline, but dismissed it as ignorance of the cultural wars.

Brown used his Jan. 20 column to praise a hockey player for refusing to wear a warm-up jersey celebrating LGBTQ pride, then whined that publicly hating LGBTQ people now has consequences:

In short, you can not graciously disagree. You can not respectfully opt out. Instead, you must deny your convictions, rewrite the Bible, run roughshod over your faith and publicly celebrate something you believe to be wrong. Otherwise, you are a crass human being and a small-minded bigot. Those are your only choices!

Already in 2011, in my book "A Queer Thing Happened to America," I could point to the Riddle Homophobia Scale, used in schools to evaluate whether the students were "homophobic." According to the scale, both tolerance and acceptance were considered homophobic, since homosexuality was not something to "tolerate" or "accept."

Instead, the only way not to be homophobic was to embrace a "positive" attitude, which called for "support, admiration, appreciation, and nurturance."

Yes, if you don't want to be a homophobe, you must admire your lesbian friend. You must nurture your transgender colleague's new identity. Otherwise, you will be marked.

Are you surprised?

Well, consider this: "The Riddle homophobia scale was developed by Dorothy Riddle in 1973–74 while she was overseeing research for the American Psychological Association Task Force on Gays and Lesbians."

That's how far back it goes, although it wasn't widely released until 1994. That's why I started my article with this question: "Do you remember when the main goal of LGBT activism was creating an atmosphere of 'tolerance and acceptance'?"

Most young people, including young adults, do not remember this time because they never experienced it. Instead, they have grown up with the choice to celebrate LGBTQ+ pride or be branded, to comply publicly or be ousted.

Brown went on to cite "the consistent Christian teachings of the last 2,000 years (or, more broadly, the consistent biblical teachings of the last 3,000-plus years)" as a reason to hate LGBTQ people. It seems he's starting to give up pretending to be compassionate toward them -- and that he's quite unashamed of pegging the Riddle homophobia scale.

Brown spent his Jan. 23 column raging against bans on anti-gay conversion therapy:

It doesn't matter what your religious beliefs might be. It doesn't matter if you were sexually abused and became confused about your sexual identity. It doesn't matter if you would really like to be heterosexual simply to marry and have a natural family.

No! You must stay gay (or trans, as the case may be), and it is illegal for anyone to help you explore the roots of your same-sex attractions with the view toward change.

Tragically, this "conversion therapy" ban is in place for minors in multiple states in America as well as abroad, while a complete ban for people of all ages, similar to that in Malta, exists in several countries as well.

Talk about extreme overreach. Talk about the exact opposite of live and let live. Talk about making a mockery of "tolerance and acceptance." That street only goes one way.

Brown didn't explain why people must be forced not to be gay, despite the fact that conversion therapy harms LGBTQ people.

Brown lamented in his Jan. 27 column that it's hard to demonize LGBT people when they are actually just like the rest of us:

It's easy to oppose "the LGBTQ+ agenda" when it is brazen and vulgar, marching down our city streets in open display. Or when it supports the genital mutilation and chemical castration of children. But what do you say to that very nice, same-sex couple who lives next door, the ones raising the abandoned child they adopted? Are they also a part of an evil agenda? Should they be demonized and condemned?

[...]

The fact is that there are countless thousands of gay couples whose lives are very similar to the lives of heterosexual couples. They go to work. They spend time with their friends. They have hobbies. And although they are half as likely as heterosexual couples to be raising children, thousands of them are, in fact, devoted parents.

Oh, the horror of having to find ways to demonize people you don't like. The struggle continued:

What do we say to a gay man like [former Rep. Sean Patrick] Maloney, or to the many, loving same-sex couples?

It's easy to point to the gay couples arrested for raping their adopted children or pimping them out for sex. It's also easy to point to the higher levels of promiscuity in the gay community, in particular among men, even those in "committed" or "monogamous" relationships.

[...]

But, to repeat, there are plenty of gay couples where partner swapping is not the norm (in fact, a 2018 study claims that monogamy is becoming more common among gay couples). And there are plenty of gay couples who would die for the kids they are raising.

I could also mention the fact that plenty of heterosexual couples commit sexual sin. Some of them abuse their children too.

Homosexual couples and individuals hardly have a monopoly on sin.

Nevertheless, Brown concluded that they ultimately must be belittled as "fallen" and subjected to conversion tactics:

As followers of Jesus, then, who know what the Bible says about homosexual practice, what do we say to our gay neighbors, friends and family members? And how do we relate to them?

In the end, it's quite simple.

We treat them like any other neighbor, friend or family member.

We love them. We take a genuine interest in their lives. We treat them as our equals in that we are all created in God's image, we are all fallen, and we are all in need of redemption.

If the door is open, we share the Gospel with them, recognizing that their same-sex attractions are not the root of their fallen nature but simply a manifestation of their fallen nature. And if they come to faith, we seek to disciple them, which, of course, will mean major life changes.

But this is often the cost of following Jesus.

[...]

As for the children raised by that caring gay couple, again, we don't doubt the devotion of the two moms or two dads. And if we are not asked for our opinion, we keep it to ourselves.

But if we are asked how we feel about same-sex parenting, we make clear that we don't doubt the love and devotion of these parents. Yet we restate, without apology, our belief that God's best plan is for a child to have a mother and father, since the world's best dad is not a mom and the world's best mom is not a dad. And there is something unique and irreplaceable in the roles that moms and dads play.

If we are branded bigots and haters and homophobes, so be it. We will do our best to overcome those negative judgments with genuine, long-term love.

We will not demonize these couples, and we will not celebrate them.

Instead, we will join grace and truth together with the goal of introducing them to the priceless, transformative love of God. That's what disciples do.

Actually, if you're hectoring them for being gay -- as Brown clearly seems to want despite his expressions of faux compassion -- you are, in fact, demonizing them.

Brown's Feb. 13 column was spent raging at a major church for not hating gay people as much has he does:

With all respect to the responsibilities carried by the leadership of the Church of England, and in recognition of the history of this branch of the universal Body, I make this heartfelt appeal.

Just as Elijah the prophet urged the people of Israel to stop wavering between two opinions, I urge you to stop wavering between the Word of God and the spirit of this age. As Elijah said, "If Yahweh is God, serve Him. If Baal is God, serve him" (1 Kings 18:21). It can only be one or the other.

Your current decision to "bless" same-sex unions while at the same time forbidding your churches from hosting same-sex weddings is not just a deep and fundamental departure from the biblical faith. It is also a hopeless compromise, seeking to play both ends against the middle in a way that can only frustrate, if not infuriate, the principal parties involved.

How can you bless something you will not sanctify? How can you invoke God's favor on something at which you cannot officiate? How can you claim to uphold the church's historic definition of marriage if men or women involved in same-sex relationships can receive "prayers for God's blessing"? And how can you "apologize for the ways in which the Church of England has treated LGBTQI+ people – both those who worship in our churches and those who do not" while barring same-sex weddings from your churches?

How can you repent to the LGBTQ+ community "for the times we have rejected or excluded you, and those you love" and lament for "the occasions on which you have received a hostile and homophobic response in our churches are shameful and for this we repent," while allowing your clergy to refuse to bless same-sex unions, at their discretion?

This is as hypocritical as it is self-contradictory. Why not simply come out and say, "Our views are changing, and we are well on our way to fully embracing practicing 'gay Christians'?" Why the wavering?

[...]

Will you uphold the plain teaching of Scripture and the historic doctrine of the church, namely, that all same-sex relationships, no matter how loving, are sinful in God's eyes? Or will you fully embrace and endorse these relationships as holy, not only blessing them but performing same-sex wedding ceremonies in your church buildings? What will it be?

I appeal to you to choose this day whom you will serve. It is either the Lord or the spirit of the age. It cannot be both.

Brown is unsurprisingly framing his anti-LGBT hate as holy and ordained and that anyone who doesn't share that level of hate cannot possibly be a "real" Christian.

Brown's Feb. 20 column was headlined "An insight about how Gen Zers approach LGBTQ issue," which was largely complaining that young people don't see LGBTQ people as an "issue":

If you know anything about the younger generation, you know that many of these teens and young adults have a real passion for justice, even if misguided at times. Many of them are also highly empathetic, commonly siding with the perceived underdog and outcast. That's why so many Gen Z young people stand with the LGBTQ+ community or even identify as such. It is an essential part of who they are.

[...]

Recently, I was speaking to hundreds of multi-national, Gen Z ministry students on this very topic, and as always, I did my best to speak with sensitivity and compassion.

I pointed to the hurt and rejection suffered by LGBTQ+ individuals over the years. I said that the vast majority of them are not activists and are simply trying to live their lives in peace. I emphasized that many of them feel hated by God and the church. And I explained that some of our Gospel cliches are highly offensive to them. For example, when we say, "Love the sinner and hate the sin," they hear, "You hate me, since this is not what I do. This is who I am."

[...]

I shared with tears stories of young people "detransitioning" after having life-altering hormone and surgery treatments as teens. And even when I showed shocking examples of LGBTQ+ indoctrination of little children, I explained that those involved, be it the parents or the teachers, really thought they were doing a good thing.

So, the presentation was as caring as could be, spoken with a heart of love.

Yet when most of the students laughed out loud when I read off lists of the latest preferred gender pronouns, a small minority of the students were offended. They felt as if everyone was laughing at one of their friends or loved ones and as if I was ridiculing one of their friends or loved ones.

Brown concluded:

But we must not underestimate the degree to which they have grown up in a radically different world than we did, one in which same-sex "marriage" is the law of the land. In which trans is trendy and gay is cool. In which any rejection of LGBTQ+ activism is perceived as hateful. And in which, even for some Gen Z Christians, there is a deeper sense of solidarity with LGBTQ+ people than with the ways and Word of God.

And so, just as the older generation focused so much on LGBTQ+ issues that we lost sight of the people, the younger generation has focused so much on LGBTQ+ people that they have lost sight of the issues.

If Brown continues to insist that LGBTQ people are "issues" instead of humans who deserve basic respect and rights regardless of who they love, he's only preaching to the choir.