Michael Brown's Deceptive Anti-LGBTQ Attacks, Part 3: 2022

The WorldNetDaily columnist claims he understands "why some LGBTers call us hateful" -- then went on to prove those LGBTers correct.

By Terry Krepel
Posted 9/25/2023

Michael Brown

When I first began to focus on LGBT issues in 2004, it was because of the gay agenda. I immediately saw that this was the principal threat to freedom of religion, conscience and speech in our nation. I also saw that this was an issue that all of us would have to address someday. We would not get to sit this one out.

At the same time, I understood that we were dealing with both people and issues. And if I was to be in harmony with the Lord, I needed to have His heart of love and compassion for the people.

I understood that the rejection so many of them had experienced (at the hands of family and religion) had deeply wounded them. Consequently, what I perceived as loving and tactful would be perceived by them to be hateful and harsh.

That's why I sat with local gay activists and asked them to tell me their stories face to face. That's why I immersed myself in their literature, wanting to understand the world through their perspective. That's why I even bought their theology and commentary books, reading every argument they brought in support of same-sex relationships.

That's also why I would sometimes pray for them in tears, saying, "God, I don't want to hurt people. I just want to help them."

Brown linked the words "gay agenda" to a version of his column from a couple days earlier in which he referenced "a [1972] gay rights platform spelling out militant, comprehensive goals, including the repeal 'of all laws governing the age of sexual consent' (an endorsement of pederasty!) and governmental recognition of multiple-partner 'marriages' (today called 'polyamory') at both the national and statewide level.'" But Brown offers no evidence that this platform had any influence at the time or since; certainly nobody is seriously advocating for the repeal of laws regarding age of sexual consent (the "endorsement of pederasty" Brown is apparently referring to) then or now. The fact that he believes he needs to fearmonger about this 50-year-old document amply demonstrates why people call him hateful.

Again, much of his schtick is hateful fearmongering about LGBT people. He went on his usual tear in a March 2022 column:

Yes, you read that headline correctly. A man claiming to be a gay Christian has predicted that the gay community will destroy the Christian church – those are his exact words – and he hopes it will happen sooner than later.

Allow me to give you a spoiler alert. The church that Jesus is building – by which I mean the community of His true followers around the world – cannot be destroyed. Or canceled. Or silenced.

As for much of what goes by the name of "Christian church," that's another story.

Perhaps that is what this gay author is describing, namely, the dismantling of so-called Christianity. If so, how on earth could he imagine that the gay community will lead the way in destroying it?

As for churches "hating" gays, I'm sure there are gay-hating churches in America, and I and many others have called them out. They are the exception to the rule, and they misrepresent God.

But it is not hate to tell someone that God has a better way. And it is not hate to declare that, not only did Jesus die for every human being, He also wants to change every human being.

[...]

Do I agree with him that the church needs to demonstrate much more unconditional love, including to the LGBTQ community? Absolutely. "More love" is always a word the church needs to hear. After all, Jesus is our example, and no one practiced selfless love more deeply than He.

At the same time Michael has things completely upside down. It is when the church of America returns to preaching and teaching the Word of God, as written and without apology, full of the Spirit and full of love, that our buildings will be filled with seekers and sinners alike. The truth that will set them free.

In a column a few days later, Brown insisted that the Florida education restriction bill is not the "don't say gay bill" -- "In order to oppose it, the critics must grossly misrepresent it" -- then insisted the alleged misnomer is the same as conversion therapy in that it's "a term created by critics, not by proponents of change":

The reality is that there is not a counselor or therapist or pastor that I have ever met who advocates using coercive, forced, or, God forbid, violent measures to "convert" a homosexual into a heterosexual.

All they advocate for is that those with unwanted same-sex attractions or gender-identity confusion have the legal right to sit down with a trained professional and talk. That's it. And what is the goal of these people who seek out counselors? They hope to get to the root of their struggles and find a path for inner-peace, emotional wholeness and potential change (as many thousands have successfully done, to one degree or another).

Why on earth should that not be allowed, not just for minors who want counseling but all the more for adults?

Because minors tend to be forced into conversion therapy by parents or church people who hate those who are LGBT and think one can (and must) "pray the gay away"? Of course, he calls that a "mocking term" and declared that "the Christians who are being accused of practicing 'pray away the gay' do not simply rely on the power of prayer. They believe in solid counseling, in uncovering spiritual or emotional or experiential roots that influence our behavior and our desires." Of course, Brown doesn't explain why a person's homosexuality must be removed by whatever means.

Brown started saying the quiet part out loud about the bill in another March 2022 column:

Yet, even if the bill actually contained the expression, "Don't say gay," I would still support it, since there's no good reason to be talking about homosexuality to these young children. As Bill Maher correctly opined, "maybe kids that young shouldn't be thinking about sex at all.'"

Again, the bill does not mention homosexuality or use terms like "transgender." And we must be diligent to combat the media's misinformation.

[...]

Simply stated, it is not the role of a kindergarten teacher to address these things, especially when we remember how young and socially ignorant and impressionable the little ones are.

That's why even an irreligious atheist can point this out. And that's why, even though the Florida education bill does not say "don't say gay," there's no good reason that "gay" needs to be in these children's vocabulary.

Brown spent yet another March 2022 column lashing out at transgender swimmer Lia Thomas, offering "five reasons why 'Lia' Thomas is not the new Jackie Robinson" (note the scare quotes around her name) and ranting:

How can this possibly be compared to the situation of a person of color? It cannot.

So let's stop this moral insanity before it destroys more lives.

Let's stop calling Thomas "she" and "her."

Let's help him get to the root of his gender confusion (if he's willing).

Let's stand up for women's sports and for female athletes.

And let's not demean the courage and legacy of Jackie Robinson.

Brown used an April 2022 column to declare that pastors cannot be silent about "LGBTQ+ issues and people" because there are "kids in school (from pre-K to college) who are getting indoctrinated with all the radical LGBTQ+ talking points until they have embraced them for themselves." (Brown offers no evidence of this.) He went on to mention "the family members who write to me in tears, sharing their own horror stories," which seem to be about the mere existence of an LGBT person in their family, which is "horror" only in the eyes of people like Brown.

Brown even worked his anti-LGBTQ activism into the abortion debate. In a July 2022 column following the Supreme Court's overturning of Roe v. Wade, Brown rooted for it to be followed by the banning of same-sex marriage as right-wing Justice Clarence Thomas advocated (and yet again falsely denying he hates LGBT people):

Before the Supreme Court's official decision to overturn Roe v. Wade was released, President Biden was already warning that same-sex "marriage" would be next. As he said in May, "It's not just the brutality of taking away a woman's right to her body ... but it also, if you read the opinion ... basically says there's no such thing as the right to privacy. If that holds ... mark my words: They are going to go after the Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage." Was he right?

[...]

Personally, regardless of whose legal argument is right (in terms of Alito or Thomas), I do hope that the Court revisits the Obergefell ruling. But that is not because of animus I have toward gays and lesbians. It is simply because the Court had no business redefining marriage.

That decision should never have been in the hands of nine justices, nor is there any way under the sun our founders would have countenanced such a thing. Could you even imagine how the signers of the Constitution would react to such a scenario?

"Gentlemen, are you comfortable with the idea that, based on the division of powers you have outlined, the Supreme Court could one day redefine marriage so that two men or two women could marry each other?"

The question itself would not have even qualified as a poor joke. It would have been too ridiculous (and, plainly, distasteful) even to draw a smile.

[...]

As for the argument that "love is love," that is not the issue here, since it's not up to the court to determine what is and is not loving. Plus, most all of us would agree that some relationships should not be recognized by the courts or by society, no matter how loving they might be. (Included in this list would be adult, consensual, incestuous relationships, such as two gay brothers or a father and his adult daughter.)

And as far as loving relationships go, I have no doubt that there are thousands of gay couples who love each other dearly and deeply, even sacrificially. In fact, the Obergefell case itself involves a very touching story.

I am also acutely aware of how much the Court's ruling meant to same-sex couples throughout America, giving them a feeling of legitimization and respect.

I do not minimize any of this, especially as a follower of Jesus who genuinely cares about those who identify as LGBTQ+. They hurt and suffer pain and feel rejection like anyone else, and I don't relish the fact that my words seem hateful to them on the most visceral level.

But I am even more committed to honoring the God who created us male and female and who never intended for men to be with men and women to be with women. And I am sure that the Court's ruling in 2015 was a massive step in the wrong direction.

My hope is that it will not take almost 50 years to reverse Obergefell and, more fundamentally, that, just as America has shifted radically towards LGBTQ+ activism in recent years, the tide will turn here as well.

Brown is, in fact, minimizing gay marriage by demanding that their relationships must not be legally recognized.

Brown used another July 2022 column to rant against transgender people and mocking how to describe them (while, again falsely claiming compassion for them):

On the other hand, the mainstreaming of this societal craziness is particularly shocking, especially when we think of the devastatingly destructive impact it has had on impressionable children. (For my recent article on this, see here.) How could so many people accept as normative something that is so very bizarre? (I say this with compassion for those who struggle with their gender identity while at the same time being convinced that hormone therapy and sex-change surgery are not the way to go.)

[...]

For example, the Cleveland Clinic website notes that, "While Afib can affect anyone, it's more common among people of European descent. However, Black people who have Afib are more likely to have serious complications such as stroke or heart failure. People assigned female at birth (AFAB) are more commonly diagnosed than people assigned male at birth (AMAB)."

So, there are even acronyms for these terms now, AFAB and AMAB. (I'm going to go out on a limb here and predict that these acronyms will not replace female and male in the long term.)

Couple these acronyms with the discussion about Afib, and the whole thing almost sounds like an Abbott and Costello parody.

"Doctor, do I have Afib?"

"First I need to know if you're an AFAB or an AMAB. This way I can tell you if you're an AFAB with Afib or an AMAB with Afib."

"But what if I don't have Afib?"

"Then you're an AFAB without Afib or an AMAB without Afib. But first tell me if you're AFAB or AMAB and then we'll discuss Afib."

Sarcasm aside, the very fact that doctors need to distinguish between "AFAB" and "AMAB" is because there is a difference between females and males, and that difference directly affects many health outcomes and treatments. Of course biology matters!

Brown ranted against same-sex marriage again -- and that some Republicans don't hate it as much as he does -- in yet another July 2022 column:

As reported by Fox News on July 19, "A vote to codify same-sex marriage into federal law split House Republicans on Tuesday, with roughly a third of the GOP conference voting with Democrats in favor and the rest opposing.

"In a 267-157 vote, the House passed legislation repealing the Defense of Marriage Act and enshrining protections for gay marriage into federal law. Overall, 47 House Republicans voted with nearly every single Democrat to back the measure, dubbed the Respect for Marriage Act."

Let that sink in for a moment.

It is bad enough that this bill is called the "Respect for Marriage Act," seeing that the "marriage" of which it speaks represents a radical and fundamental redefining of the institution of marriage.

And it is to the shame of the Democratic Party that "nearly every single Democrat" voted in favor of the measure.

But it is no surprise that the Democrats voted this way, seeing that they are overtly and proudly pro-LGBTQ+. Perhaps the only surprise is that there were any who did not toe the line.

But for 47 Republicans to vote this way, representing almost 25% of all Republicans in the House, is both surprising and shameful.

That's because the Republican Party is supposed to be the pro-life, pro-family party, the party that upholds traditional Judeo-Christian values. Why else do so many conservative Christians vote Republican if not for these core moral and social values?

And, yes, he played his bogus compassion card:

Again, as I have said many times, by saying this, I do not mean that gay couples do not love each other deeply. And I do not deny that many of them are incredibly devoted parents. I simply mean that marriage throughout history, with the rarest and slightest exceptions (like Nero marrying a man who took on female characteristics), has always been the union of a male and female. And from a biblical perspective, the idea of two men or two women marrying would be utterly abhorrent.

For 47 House Republicans to vote to protect this new version of "marriage" is deplorable (in the worst sense of the word), regardless of what Republican senators decide to do.

Brown began an August 2022 column by huffing: "Just as we should have compassion on those who truly struggle with their gender identity, we should stand firmly against transgender activism. Thankfully, there are more and more signs that the tide is turning against this latest example of sociological contagion." Needless to say, the column contains much more transphobia than it does the "compassion" he falsely claims to have. He continued to huff:

Thank God for a moment of sanity in the midst of today's cultural madness. And how telling it is that the school leadership was shocked by the response of the parents. Moms and dads, keep raising your voices!

[...]

The bad news is that some cultural commentators have been sounding the alarm about transgender radicalism for many years.

The good news is that society is waking up to reality.

The bad news is that many young lives have already been irreparably destroyed, at least physically.

Let us, then, do our best to hasten the societal turn by continuing to get the truth out. The time for doing that is now.

Brown is too consumed by anti-LGBT hate to be considered a credible source of "truth."

Brown spent a September 2022 column reminding readers that all non-heterosexuals must be hated, not just the transgender ones:

Whatever the cause, the fact is that, as much as opposition to transgender activism has increased, opposition to LGB activism has decreased.

This is a serious error, theologically, morally and practically, since the transgender movement is just the logical extension of the homosexual movement, the inevitable next step on the LGBQ trajectory.

[...]

Without any possible doubt, if we do not reaffirm our position that homosexual practice and same-sex relationships are sinful in God's sight and detrimental to society, we will lose the moral battle for our nation. If we do not reaffirm our belief that marriage is the union of a man and a woman, we will see a continued downward spiral into sexual and gender confusion.

There is nothing more fundamental to a society than the institution of marriage, and once you redefine that, you redefine everything. Once you say that biology does not matter when it comes to marriage, it's a small jump to say that biology doesn't matter when it comes to gender identity, and from there, it's an even smaller jump to putting children on puberty blockers and subjecting them to mutilating surgery. And once kids are raised in a same-sex environment with two mommies or two daddies, no matter how loving and caring those parents might be, it will bring confusion on the next generation.

[...]

Let us not deceive ourselves into thinking that by opposing radical transgender activism, we can stem the larger decline into sexual confusion, which itself is the natural fruit of the sexual revolution, which quickly went from hetero to homo to beyond.

By all means, let us truly love our neighbors as ourselves and practice decency and civility. But we can do that without affirming that which violates God's fundamental order and plan. To ignore the LGB while opposing the T is a shortsighted counsel of despair.

Brown didn't mention any of the purported compassion he has for the LGBT community -- perhaps he's finally understanding that he's lying to himself, and his readers, by claiming he has any.

Brown used an October 2022 column to complain that churches weren't hating LGBT people enough:

For the last 40 years, with rare exception, I have been teaching in (and leading) ministry schools on a weekly basis, having the joy and privilege of pouring into the next generation of leaders. I now spend five days a month in Texas, teaching three days at a school in Dallas and two days at a school in Fort Worth. This week, after speaking about the church and LGBTQ+ issues and people, one of the deans made a striking comment to me: "The church's silence has hurt these people." She was absolutely right.

I devoted the class this past Monday to the subject of the church's calling to make a positive impact on society, to function as salt and light.

[...]

An older man said to me with pain in his voice, "Please pray for my daughter. She now identifies as a man. She has changed her name, she is taking hormones, and she had her breasts removed."

He told me she was 23 years old and had the mastectomy at the age of 21. Can you imagine how this father feels?

With his wife, he welcomed their precious daughter into the world, probably bouncing her on his knees and singing songs to her when she was a baby, only to see her make these tragic, self-destructive choices.

She was once their precious little girl, perhaps wearing cute frilly dresses for fun. Now she has mutilated her body and identifies as a man.

I encouraged him to watch the "In His Image" documentary that I had the privilege of hosting for American Family Studios. It gives hope to family members praying for their struggling ones, as well as hope to the struggler. And he gave me a piece of paper with her name on it, asking again for my prayers.

The fact that this film was put out by the anti-LGBT American Family Association says pretty much all you really need to know about it.

A few days later, Brown complained that right-winger Dennis Prager was too nice to transgender people by saying merely that they are "not necessarily blurring the distinction God made":

To be sure, we should show compassion to those who are genuinely confused about their gender identity. Absolutely.

But it is absurd to think that a bearded man who dresses like a woman has violated the Torah while a biological male who does his best to destroy biological reality and transform himself into a woman has not violated Torah law.

Really now, which is a greater assault on the fundamental distinctions established at creation by God? A man dressing up like a woman, or a man claiming that gender is a mental perception rather than a biological reality? The former makes a mockery of the male-female distinction. The latter seeks to obliterate that distinction entirely.

How about a woman surgically removing the healthy breasts God gave her, then mutilating her private parts and getting a male-looking add-on, then taking hormones for life that will daily fight against her God-given femaleness, now claiming to be a man? How is that not infinitely worse (and more in violation of God's design) than that same woman cross-dressing?

[...]

Prager ends his article stating, "How God regards an individual who is convinced he or she is living in the wrong body is not addressed here. I believe God both has standards (that we never blur the male-female distinction) and compassion (for those few individuals who do not identify with their biological sex), and so should we."

It would have been far better to say, "While having compassion on those who are confused and pained over their gender identity, we must never affirm transgender ideology, since it undermines the male-female distinction."

Dennis, please do reconsider your position (Proverbs 1:5a).

Brown raged against drag queens in another October 2022 column:

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 is a guy who laments been seen as hateful by the LGBT community while being oblivious to the fact that his dismissive attitudes toward them and his ultimate rejection of the idea that they should be treated as anything other than abnormal and hellbound are exactly what makes him a fount of hate, no matter how nicely he tries to couch it.