A Truly Lopsided Debate

Webcasting around the world from the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona. This is the dividing line. The Apostle Peter commanded Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us.

Yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence. Our host is dr. James White director of Alpha Omega Ministries and an elder at the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church. This is a live program and we invite your participation.

If you'd like to talk with dr. White call now at 602 973 4602 or toll-free across the United States. It's 1 -877 -753 -3341. And now with today's topic here is James White.

A Special Monday Edition and Recent Cultural Decay

And welcome to a special Monday edition of the dividing line people in channel are asking why? But we do not have to divulge that information. That's what's nice about Live webcasting you do live webcasting when you do live webcasting and you don't have to worry about anything else.

Obviously, I'm doing something tomorrow and I needed to make some moving of things around and that's how it works. We live in a information age. I just right before we went on air Most you know, I'm a cyclist and it was sad to see that there has been a fatality in the Giro d 'Italia one of the major tours someone crashed on one of the descents and Did not survive the crash and that's that's a shame those guys push it and they push it very very hard that's that's a hard thing to To work through for everybody else in in that race, but that's not our subject today in any way shape or form.

I was looking at an article this morning by dr. Keith Abloh who you may have seen on Fox News and The title is Cameron Diaz is right for reasons why marriage is a dying Institution and I had seen the statement from Cameron Diaz Saying Marriage is a dying institution.

Ms. Diaz added I don't think we should live our lives and relationships based off old traditions that don't suit our world any longer. Well, I've often wondered why we worry about what actors and actresses and sports stars Say about society.

I've never understood that. Especially actors and actresses don't they spend their their lives pretending to be someone they're not. I'm not sure why and You look at Hollywood. Is that really what we want society to look like and to function like?

All the marriages and divorces and illegitimate children and and the mess of lives that is that is found there I'm not really sure. But anyways, dr. Keith Abloh who by the way is co-author of a book with With with the big guy Glenn Beck.

Yes Agrees with Cameron Diaz and Says well, I'm not certain marriage ever did suit most people who tried it from what I hear in my site Psychiatry office and when I hear from other psychiatrists and psychologists and from what my friends and relatives tell me and show me through their Behavior and from the fact that most marriages and either in divorce or acrimony Marriage is as it has been for decades now a source of real suffering for the vast majority of married people.

So there you go. In in Europe there in Scandinavian countries marriage is becoming extremely rare. And in fact, you look down upon if you marry you are looked as if you are one of those people sort of giving in To old traditions rather than being forward-looking and so on and so forth.

There are there are couples who marry secretly because they for some reason want that commitment, but you know, the society says it's a bad thing and Right after that I saw a link Navy authorizes chaplains to perform same-sex marriages in naval chapels.

There you go. Things are happening so quickly I mean, I I need to I have started a bookmark folder called cultural decay and it's filling rapidly. It's filling rapidly because every day We were hit with us.

Preaching on Genesis 19 and Addressing Homosexuality in Church

I I preached last evening at Phoenix Foreign Baptist Church wasn't scheduled to but for the first time since I became an elder there I needed to have that that sermon ready to go when my fellow elder took ill during the day really wasn't feeling well in the morning either for that matter and I I preached through Genesis 19.

I'm actually gonna blog it off of sermon audio on Sodom and Gomorrah and responding to a lot of the assertions made By homosexual advocates that Sodom and Gomorrah has nothing to do with the subject of homosexuality, which is rather interesting.

But anyways One of the things I mentioned was that One of the things that struck me is in Sunday school yesterday morning. I also addressed The issue of homosexuality. I broke the group up into three groups.

I had one group address it from the Old Testament one group from the New Testament one group from our confession of faith and then I played the devil's advocate and I just shot down everything they said and I immediately could tell from some of the comments this was something that a lot of people were very interested in because they're not only do we have people involved in the educational system in our church, but What they were saying was a lot of their young people are facing this at younger and younger ages including One woman who said that at her daughter's junior high school.

There is a homosexual couple amongst the students not amongst the leaders amongst the students at a junior high school and. So that's why I went with it Sunday evening and that young lady even said to me thank you very much for this because that's what I'm dealing with in school and certainly makes me Ponder an entire series on all of the relevant texts in the Bible on the subject.

It's been years since I addressed it. I have addressed it in the past. But it was a decade ago started thinking about it and this young lady would have been about four at that time. Wouldn't have been there anyways so This is all around us folks.

We can't avoid it. It's it's an it's not enjoyable to think about but because we don't think about it. We are rarely practiced in Giving a meaningful response. I mean I it wasn't difficult for me to To sidetrack almost all the people who spoke for their various groups.

Simply because you know, I I asked The entire group if anyone had heard The statements of Steve Simon the Minnesota representative. About you know, how many gay people's God have to make before we get the idea that God wants gay people around.

Nobody nobody in my church had heard that no one zero. We don't focus upon that stuff. We don't really think about that stuff very much and that's why we experience these things and so as I mentioned on the last program I wish to Listen to some more of the debate that took place between Michael Brown and dr. Small.

We're finally here. Dr. Small here in a moment. Because on Thursday of this week on the 12th of May I will be joined by Michael Brown and we'll be talking about his new book a queer thing happened to America.

And I really hope you'll be listening in as we discuss that particular that particular issue. But I wanted to pick up where we left off in Michael Brown's rebuttal comments and Then listen to the cross-examination and then we'll get to your calls a bit later in the program.

Michael Brown's Rebuttal on Marriage, Rights, and Redefinition

Well, it would help. Once again, if we actually plugged it in here we go as bigots and already in school systems in America. There are parents who said like in Massachusetts when these things are taught in school homosexuality these other things taught in school.

We want to pull our first grader out our kindergartner out the school said no because it's legal in our state and the Court of Appeals held it up and said it is more important in the schools to teach quote diversity than to honor the requests of the children.

You know, there are major corporations that give mega bucks massive amounts of money half a million dollars at a shot to to gay rights. Organizations and they have every right to do that what they do with their money who they support.

That's their prerogative. You have Chick-fil-a gives a small donation to one organization that stands against same-sex marriage. There are campuses in America now trying to get them banned. Incredible intolerance and and this is while most of America in terms of states that have voted are still saying we uphold Historic marriage so I still await from my esteemed colleague.

Some answer as to what the meaning of marriage is and why it should be redefined. Why the government has any interest in sanction now notice? Michael well knows the importance of this. He has put the responsibility where it needs to be.

That is why should marriage be redefined? Because they won't do that. They want to say this is a gay marriage ban as if gay marriage is the default and you're trying to take away someone's rights. Rather than the reality.

To anyone as any historical sense whatsoever any logical sense whatsoever. This is a massive redefinition of what marriage is. Notice Michael does. Michael's good debater as we all saw when he and I debated on the on the program here and.

That's the exact approach. It needs to be taken. The romantic and sexual relations that it's private citizens citizens have unless it is marriage. I'd love to hear is there a difference between male and female or the genders just blurred do they matter?

I would love to hear if you can hold to marriage as a union of a man and woman without being branded an intolerant bigot. I'm quite sure my esteemed colleague would never say those words of me or others in this position.

But I would love to hear that publicly renounced because it makes dialogue all but impossible with that. I await with interest dr. Smalls comments.

Thank you very much, dr. Brown and reintroducing dr. Eric small for a response. It's getting quite hot in here. Dr. Brown is letting out a lot of hot air. So So I will respond to some of the things that he said in his preliminary remarks about me.

He said first he said.

Dr. Small's Opening Response: Logic, History, and Scholarship

Now, let me just remind you of something. Dr. Small is a professor of law. But I want you to listen if you listened and I know we started middle things. But if you listened last time you you heard what Michael was saying, his arguments were very clear very understandable but the number of non sequiturs illogical conclusions Just just shallow thinking that will flow from dr. Smalls mouth are Absolutely amazing to me.

It is amazing this to me that this man is teaching in light of his performance in this situation. It was Unbelievable, but this is what the world finds to be.

Well, anyway, I gave him a rebuttal and then he said I didn't rebut him at the end of his speech. Dr. Brown I will point that out to you as a contradiction.

There's a little logic for you and that's a little arrogant statement and a completely errant one. What Michael had said was that dr. Smalls opening statement was not a positive open statement. It was a rebuttal of Michael's opening statement and That was the form that it took.

He was trying to argue, but then he later said he did not actually engage his argument. So anyone thinking clearly who can understand categories and classifications things like that knows exactly what Michael was saying.

Dr. Small does not understand what Michael was saying, but Because he's not listening very well, then rather arrogantly says here's a little logic for you. When in point of fact, it's dr. Small that has completely missed what Michael was saying.

He was complaining that he had not given an opening statement. He had gone straight to the rebuttals, but that he had fact actually in fact had failed to provide a meaningful rebuttal.

To the position that Michael had laid out in his opening statement and I'll continue since I'm in my rebuttal stage showing you the logical flaws in his arguments I'll answer some of the questions that he acts.

He wanted to know whether or not Um Gender matters. I'll talk about whether or not gender matters. He said that I didn't really respond to his history lesson. This wasn't about history. He didn't really give a history lesson.

Okay, so I'll respond to your history lesson, even if you don't want to acknowledge it as a history lesson. And then he said people called him names in the past Dr. Brown you will note that none of none of the times that we interacted have ever called your name.

So I don't pretend to speak for those people who called him names.

And of course that wasn't Michael's point. He wasn't saying you've called me names. He was saying that those on the other side are seeking to limit dialogue to limit conversation. That was his point right toward the end.

And that was that look. These individuals want to take away my freedom of speech. They want to use terms like bigotry and things like that. That's just all there is to it. So again, he has he is completely.

I don't know if he just wasn't bothering to listen. Has a trouble understanding the arguments of being presented. I don't know but that was one of the reasons why this was one of the most lopsided debates ever heard.

Dr. Brown did an excellent job in his presentation and his opponent just simply like Peter Stravinsky's did not seem capable of Formulating meaningful responses to the position of the person. He was actually debating.

Of course people would have called him names. People have called me names. In fact, I published in The Orlando Sentinel on this very issue. I got a flood of emails from people on the opposite side of this issue many of whom called me names.

In fact one person said. And Why we have academic protections or academic free speech in tenure in colleges because one person said dr Small doesn't even deserve to be a college professor simply because of a position that I hold.

Now dr. Brown told you he was married. So I'll tell you that I'm not married. Dr. Brown told you he was straight I believe. So I'll tell you that I'm straight, but I'll tell you why I'm doing this and why I talk about this.

But I'll do those things later. I just wanted to mention that dr. Brown and I are both I think. And The only reason why I say I think is because dr. Brown and I were in the restroom and he said oh dr Small you're dressed so nicely.

And I said dr. Brown This is not the place for a come on. And then he mentioned again how nicely dressed I am.

So dr. Brown, that's not now remember this is in a university setting. His students are sitting in front of him. As I recall, he wasn't even wearing a jacket. I think he's wearing braces suspenders over here in the United States braces for our European and English listeners and.

And it's high as I recall and I really really Felt that smalls behavior in this entire debate was just absolutely childish just So far below any type of professional standard of behavior that it was it was amazing.

And I wonder how much of the fact that he was on home turf with his own students in front of him. Who you could tell from some of the things Michael will say we're actually participating. Some of the things you're gonna hear are very sad.

Especially when Michael addresses the roles of men and women. This next generation folks. They will be in charge in a matter of years and. The battle has been lost right there unless God brings a third Great Awakening type change to this nation.

Our values and Are gone are gone. They're just gone.

It well, we'll hear a little joke. Calm down. Calm down, dr. Brown. Yes. I'll marry you. I'll marry you. Okay, all right, so that's a joke and the only reason why I can joke like this is because I'm comfortable with my sexuality.

I'm straight and I think dr. Brown is straight and I believe that he's comfortable with his sexuality even if he is red right now, so. So, let's talk about some things here in response to what dr. Brown said this history lesson.

Their marriage has been the same way throughout history. So what is the justification for change in marriage. And what I'll say to dr Brown is this if all you have is history as your justification for not changing an institution.

Then you don't have very much and the reason why I point that out is because we had many Institutions in this country and in others for long periods of time and there was a point at which we came in our society that We decided that those institutions, although they were around for a long time Needed to be changed and of course slavery is an example of that.

Slavery was around before America was even around. No, and we decided at some point that history in and of itself. It's not a justification for keeping the institution the way that it is. And so dr. Brown, I will say to you all you've done is given us a history lesson.

But you haven't given us a justification for keeping the institution the way that it is.

Actually, he had he had very clearly in his opening statement. Dr. Smalls opening statement was much shorter and Basically his whole his whole position was well Since everyone citizens the same thing they need to have the same rights because they have the same burdens and therefore they have the right to all these things and he just completely ignored the the entire justification of what the relevance of Marriage to a society is and the fact that society receives a benefit from marriage and that is new citizens responsible procreation the creation of the family unit and the raising of children and Obviously if you adopt a perspective on Society where children now belong to the society and the society can do with them as they wish and that is what People are now thinking, you know, it takes a village to raise a child no, it takes a family to raise a child and Once you adopt that change then then all bets are off and it becomes really a frightening thing to consider where society is going as it goes down this path.

And I gave you a.

Justification for changing the institution. In fact, you agreed with it. You said sure same-sex couples or gay people participate in society but We are not treating them unequally when we don't let them participate in the benefits of societies.

Dr. Brown I'll point out to you That's the very definition of treating people unequally because african-americans participated in society and we didn't let them enjoy the benefits equally. So does Sexuality matter or does gender matter.

The answer to that is this. Look dr Brown and talking to you about gender gave you a lot of Statistics and he gave you a lot of facts about what people have said now.

Cross-Examination on Research, Gender, and Children

Listen, this is what you're about to hear is one of the classic examples in my experience of utter failure as a scholar in a debate. When the other guy has all the facts he's done all the research and you've done nothing.

And I've been in this been in this boat where I had researched everything. The other guy said I had all of his quotes. He hadn't even looked me up on the internet or anything else hadn't read anything I had said but They still for some reason decide to debate.

Amazing thing. Here's a perfect example of a complete scholarly debate. Face plant is What you're gonna listen to you. Here's how you explain away the fact that you you will not even deign to cite sources in support of your position against the other guy because it just would confuse things which is a nice way of Saying I can't compete with that, but I'm not even gonna try.

He said that these things are the facts is the way he put it. There's a problem here. Dr Brown it seems to me that either you are dishonest or your research is not astute. First I don't think that you're dishonest because I talked to you and you strike me as a very honest person.

Also, don't think that you're uncaring because I've talked to you and you strike me as a very caring person. I do have to question your research though. Because five minutes on the internet will reveal to any of us that there is research on dr Brownside that says the things that he wants that research to say and five more minutes on the internet will reveal to you that there's.

Research on the side that I am articulating and you know, I just could not help. I've listened to this twice I listened to it again on a quick ride this morning just to refresh my mind on it and I just could not help but think of my daughter's College professor as she was a freshman when she challenged him and his only response was well.

Look it up on Google. I mean, that's that's the kind of scholarship The left has these days. Look at my googles spend five minutes on the internet. There you go. It's that's all you need.

Whoo deed. I did this for the purposes of determining if I could find contradictory or very complex research and I did and I did and so what I'll do instead of telling you the research shows that as dr Brown did show the research shows that these are the facts.

I'll offer you an explanation of the complexities of the research. Because both of us could present research for our side when it comes to gender when it comes to raising children when it comes to being born gay and innate ideas and all of those things that dr. Brown talked about put them in the research category and what the and.

What we find is that they're research on that there is research on both sides and the reason why is because the conditions for raising a child properly are multivariate and they're multifaceted and The people who are being raised themselves are multivariate.

That is there's no blueprint for raising a child. Certainly the people who have children know this. Of course, there's no blueprint for having this for for having a successful marriage those of you who are married also know this.

So what we need instead of presenting the information as if there are only facts on one side and not facts on the other. Or or as if the research is all pro. Dr. Brown and anti dr Small because we could get into a pro nay back and forth.

He'd say yes, I'd say no. He'd say yes.

I'd say no at this point, you know an example would help. I mean how much time has now been spent in just making an excuse here and and throwing this out and and not even beginning to Address anything that Michael Brown has said.

That's why I said this was.

Massively lopsided and then he might say my research is flawed and I'll say that his research is flawed and we do that for The next 30 minutes and you leave here thinking that conversation went nowhere.

So instead of doing that to you what I'll do is point out that because raising children having a successful marriage and all of those things are very complex and idiosyncratic to the people who are being raised or the people who are in the marriage.

What we need when we're talking about doing this properly is to provide children those people with the necessities of life. Education a safe loving home environment and so on and etc.

And in addition to that who gets to define what a safe loving home environment is. What is a loving home environment? What is that? Is that two men? Is that three men? Two women. Three women. Four women.

Is it two men with six women? What is it? And how do you determine it. And There would be people who would argue for all of those. So, how do you determine that? That's the question that I don't think dr. Small is really gonna be answering.

What we need our parents.

Who are responsive to the needs of their particular children? Same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples can do both of those things.

So same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples can do those things. They can respond to the needs of their children. So you can purposefully purposefully With malice aforethought Make sure that a child never has a father figure or a mother figure and yet That's perfectly fair.

That's that that's that's that's just that's just fine. That's not unnatural. That's something that's okay and Yet they can still meet the needs. See there's a vast difference between Purposefully making sure someone will never have one of those two either a father or a mother or and I'm sorry the situation where tragedy takes away one of those and anyone who has lost a parent as a Young person knows the impact that has upon them.

And we don't consider that to be a good thing. But we don't do it purposefully and Yet that's exactly what quote-unquote gay marriage, which is a profanation of actual marriage actually does.

He talked a lot about procreation. I know a lot of gay people with children.

So they obviously can procreate and certainly to catch that catch that this is this is one of the most amazing things. This man could actually stand from an audience and tell them that gay couples can poke.

And and and Michael just kept hammering away just no they can't it takes a third. There has to be a third one out there. If it's two guys, they they need the egg and if it's two gals, they need this but you can't know that doesn't work that way.

You have to have expensive situations to even use in vitro fertilization and it still takes the the stuff of somebody else and. Even if that changed it wouldn't change the fact that they cannot procreate.

I mean, it's so obvious and yet this guy is gonna go through this entire debate. Well, of course I can't. Well. Of course I can and you're just left going. Do you drive a car? I mean It just leaves you utterly dumbfounded at the the the ivory tower.

Disconnection from simple common sense and morality that is bred by the Academy and here.

You've got an awesome example of they can procreate through the alternative means of procreation like in vitro Fertilization or surrogate motherhood. So if all your claim dr. Brown for the grounds of being married is simply procreation Gay people are already doing it because I know many with kids and certainly there are alternative methods to reach those ends.

Question and Answer Period on Marriage, Polygamy, and Incest

Thank you. All right, and thank you. Dr. Small for your responses at this point. We're gonna shift gears a little bit and move into a question and answer period and the way this is going to work is for.

First dr. Brown will have the opportunity to ask dr. Small questions for six minutes. Then we'll switch and dr. Small will be able to ask dr. Brown questions while this process is going on. We want you to formulate questions for both of the speakers.

If you have a question, please raise your hand and attendant will bring you a note card and a writing utensil. Write down your question. Directed at one not both, but one of the speakers those questions will be brought to me.

And then after this question period I will field those questions or direct them towards the speakers. With that I'd like to turn the floor over to dr. Brown once more to ask questions of dr. Brown.

All right. Thank you, sir. Just for the record. I forgive you for the hot air comment. All right. What is the importance of the number two when it comes to marriage? Why two if marriage is not the union of a man and a woman.

Now, that is an excellent question. Why two? What what is the what is the if it if it isn't reflective of male and female? Then what white why two? Now for some reason small had said in his opening that he is not going to talk about polygamy.

He's not gonna talk about incest. He's not gonna talk about Pederasty, he's not gonna talk about any of these things and Dr. Brown keeps saying well, why not the the proponents of these positions are using the exact same Argumentation that homosexual proponents are using for theirs so you can't just simply dodge these things, but he claims That he told the organizers he would not talk about such things.

And so He did the right thing by not doing so. I don't think this man is capable of providing a meaningful response to those issues. He claims that he can but he refused to do so during the entire debate.

It'll be very frustrating and Just another reason why he lost just so horrifically.

He said what's the question is what's the importance of the number two. Again, I suspect this is the polygamy claim.

I'm just asking a simple question. Why do we define marriage before we even get anywhere else? Why do we define marriage as two people if not for the obvious a man and woman coming together for responsible procreation.

So this I think is the polygamy claim. Again, I told the people who organized this that I wouldn't get but I'm gonna tell you something about the question in a second. But I told the people who organized this that I wouldn't get off into conversations about those things.

They asked me not to so I'm not going to. But what I will say about this polygamy claim is that it results in what's called a red herring fallacy.

Excuse me. It's not a polygamy claim. I didn't ask that question. I'm not asking a word about polygamy. I didn't say it. I'm not thinking it. I simply asked you why is marriage defined as two people. Because I have constantly get from beginning to end of my presentation.

They've given justification for marriage. Well, you say I haven't. I've given it perpetually and everyone here can recognize that. So the question is why do we define marriage as the union of two people if it's not male and female great?

Okay, he's asking why do we define marriage as a union of two people without any other claims behind it. The easy answer to that Is we've simply defined a marriage that way and the question about other things have not yet come up.

If it does I'll be happy to debate you when it does come up.

Okay, so there's no reason why it's two it could theoretically just as well be three or four theoretically theoretically sure. Okay, there you go. There you go. Boom. No, I we we've just defined it it's to just just cuz just cuz.

There's yeah, why not one? Yeah, there's there is the essence of the mindset of of the modern scholar cuz I Couldn't get away with that in first grade. That wasn't the cut. What Jimmy? Why does two plus two equal four cuz I Mean come on and yet there are people sitting there going.

Oh the wisdom. Oh You're just left going. Wow. Amazing. Thank you. That answers my question. Wonderfully. All right. Yes, it does sir as far as society is concerned. Is there any difference between same-sex marriage and heterosexual marriage?

Okay, I can't speak for all society because I suspect that what different people with different people in society will have different positions on this. So you so you wanted to know whether or not as far as society is concerned their differences well I can't speak for all society.

And to the question of whether or not they'll think differently the answer to that is obviously yes. How do we know because it's reflected and what you mentioned in your information? There are some states that allow it.

There are some states that don't allow it. There are some states that are made up civil unions and so on and etc. So I'm not all together club I'm not all together sure that there is a society position.

Okay, the same-sex marriage conferred the same benefits on society that heterosexual marriage does. Sure. Now to catch that Same-sex marriage confers the same benefits on society that heterosexual marriage does.

So two guys Who can't have kids? Will will confer the same benefits upon society. That a man and a woman does in having children. Providing new citizens providing a home. That's that's what he just said.

Has did he even think about it before he said yes, I doubt it. Can he even hear what Michael Brown is saying. Him doesn't seem so. So so the fact that the only possible way that the two gay people can bring new life into the world is through expensive Procedures that many can't afford and it will never be their actual offspring to be the offspring of that person another person.

It conveys the exact same responsible procreation is something that gays and lesbians can't can engage in.

Okay, so let's answer your question. The question was the question was Can same-sex marriages bestow the same benefits on the world? And what he told us was a benefit of the world is the production of children.

So the answer to that is yes, you might have a particular version or particular view of that. Which is different from the others view of it. But certainly they can produce children as I mentioned before they already have and there are multiple ways in which they can do it and there's a benefit of the world to the world is The production of a child and the way that you said it is.

The answer to that would be yes.

But actually those two people together cannot produce a child. So a homosexual couple cannot produce a child without a third party. Do you agree with the statement? I mean How how can you? How can? Simple common sense.

Be so completely jettisoned. It takes years of training to drive simple common sense out of mind. It really does. And I I Should have the right to marry the person I love. Sure. Sure, did you catch that?

Would you agree the statement? I should have the right to marry the person that I love. And he said sure. Okay. So do you put any boundaries on that statement?

Maybe I would. Yeah, where you going with this? I have to be a question.

So the brother and sister in Germany that were separated from birth went later in life with incest. This is an issue sir. Don't listen. You made a catch that Michael's bringing up a perfectly valid point and that is look.

If you're saying that these citizens these same-sex citizens have the right to marry. Why not a brother and a sister? Why not a mother and and a son or a mother and a daughter? I mean all of these exist out there today folks.

It's disgusting as it is. They all exist and So if they're all paying their taxes then given his own position what's wrong. What's wrong? He won't even touch it. All he can do is mock it. Because he can't hear it.