The Intolerance of the Homosexual Agenda – A Response to the Homosexual ULM Student’s Open Letter to Phil Robertson


An anonymous student letter to Phil Robertson from a homosexual University of Louisiana at Monroe (ULM) student has surfaced in social & traditional media. Naturally, it is being held in high esteem by the Left as the epitome of the horrible vicissitudes of life that a homosexual must endure, and of course, it espouses the popular zeitgeist that it is always someone else’s fault.

The following is a reproduction of this letter, and my on-point response to the ‘pity-me-pity-me’ current that runs throughout.

Bob Mann recently wrote a post from the perspective of a young lesbian girl that really painted an accurate picture of LGBTQ life in Ouachita Parish. But I couldn’t share it on my Facebook.

It was too gay.

take our poll – story continues below Completing this poll grants you access to Freedom Outpost updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Well to say that Mann presented an accurate picture of life as a homosexual in Quachita Parish is somewhat disingenuous, as it is written through the tinted spectacles of one trying so hard to justify his perversions, and to vilify those who would object and hold a different viewpoint.

It’s fine for you to stand up for the queers,” my grandparents will say, “but God help you if you’re one of them.”

Well, it is not “fine” to stand up for queers, for Scripture is quite clear that one who condones, through action or inaction, the sin of another, is party to it and just as guilty as if the one defending them had committed the sin themselves. Loving your neighbor does not equate to tolerating nor condoning, even tacitly, their sin.

“I am, it appears to be, the last gay man still in the closet to his family. That’s why this post is anonymous. That’s why my sexual orientation is blank on Facebook. That’s why I use gender-neutral pronouns when talking about my significant other.”

So, he admits that he continues to lie to his family, Facebook friends, and others. Lying seems to be a common paradigm in the homosexual, rationalized with the excuse that it is OK because of the reaction of others. This seems to be a popular rationalization with homosexuals; as long as they think they have a reason, or cause celebrant, to lie, it is ok. So, can we really trust anything they say, when lying comes so easily to their lips?

“I can’t be gay in Northeast Louisiana. I came out to my parents, and they’ve shoved me back into the closet.

“The family isn’t ready to hear that,” they said.

Is this any real surprise? Do homosexuals even give a moment’s thought to how their perversions affect others? The question is rhetorical, and the answer is, “of course they don’t.” They are too submerged and wrapped up in their own selfish pursuits to give meaningful consideration to how their perverted desires would affect those they claim to love; it is completely alien to them.

“The family isn’t ready. Well, I suppose in all fairness it did take some getting used to myself.

I live in West Monroe, and I’m a Mass Communications student at the University of Louisiana at Monroe (ULM). I moved here because it’s more progressive than my hometown, also in Northeast Louisiana. I mean, it has two gay bars. Look out San Francisco.”

Here begins the mis-characterizations. He uses the word “progressives,” an appellation that the Left has bestowed upon themselves to add legitimacy to their worldview; a Leftist zeitgeist implying subtly that they are for “advancement” and a “forward movement,” and that their opponents are not. This is much like the homosexuals hijacked the word “gay,” in order to conjure in the minds of the masses of a “happy festive non-offending” demographic, to detract from the negativity that conjures in the mind if you use the term homosexual, as it implies their sexual habits & behavior. Therefore, if you use the words “gay” and “lesbian” this helps to actually detract from their sexual behavior and is more favorable to the homosexuals because the emphasis is taken off their sexual deviant acts in favor of something more positive. Therefore, the Left’s self-applied word of “progressive” is in the same vein, as it detracts from the real meaning of being liberal, accepting of sexual perversion, depravity, and immorality, which they amusingly wear as a badge of honor.

But West Monroe is also home to the most famous anti-gay person in the world: Phil Robertson. I’ve never met Phil. But I was raised by a Phil Robertson.

One scarcely knows where to begin here. To say that Phil Robertson is the most famous anti-gay person is both a mischaracterization and just a flat out lie; and followed by the sentence “I’ve never met Phil Robertson…,” is a fallacy of hasty generalization.

“My Phil Robertson told me that I was an a**hole for being so selfish to come out of the closet to my mother.”

Your father probably meant you were an “a**hole” for breaking your Mothers heart, in favor of your own selfish, hedonistic pursuits.

“My Phil Robertson told me that my boyfriend will never be welcomed to his house, as if he were diseased.”

As well he should have. If he is a Christian and permits this in his own home, he is as guilty as if he had engaged in the sin himself. But more importantly, this belies the moral bankruptcy of today’s youth, specifically a lack of respect for another’s home. Do you really have to be told not to bring your perversion into your parents’ home? Your lack of respect for your parents is glaring; so much for honoring your mother and father. Homosexuals constantly, ad nauseam, whine about how your views are not respected, but you seem to have no compunction about disrespecting the views of others, especially your parents. The homosexuals have taken to the mantra that Phil is entitled to his views and opinions, but he is not free from the consequences of them. Yet, they seem to be of the opinion that they should be free from the consequences of their actions. Well I got some shocking news for these cupcakes – they are not.

“My Phil Robertson threatened my life because I had the audacity to be who I am.”

Threatened your life? For which we have only your word for it, of course. 

“I’m 21 now. I first realized I was gay when I was 13. I’ve known that I liked boys since I was eight. And I will never forget the day that I decided I wasn’t going to be gay.”

In answer to the bold print, unless you went into puberty at 8, you’re a liar. No one has any sexual attraction to anyone before puberty – that is what puberty is. It is the activation of the sexual subroutine.
Readers see my article on the genetics and endocrinology of this subject here.

“I was in Sunday school, and I’d been daydreaming about moving off to San Francisco, because my dad had told me “it was full of faggots.” It sounded like the place for me.”

Oh this is very telling, and quite deplorable. You were in Sunday School and were daydreaming about San Francisco and how it was, to use your words, “full of faggots,” meditating on how you wish you could move there, presumably to be able to practice sodomy and indulge your sexual proclivities? In Sunday School? Lovely.

“Then it came to be my turn to read the Bible. And I read the verse aloud. Thou shalt not lie with mankind (arsenos koiten), as with womankind: it is abomination. That didn’t quite click with me, so I asked what it meant.”

That didn’t quite click, you had to ask what that meant? I can only assume this is a disingenuous statement. It is quite plain what that meant, although homosexuals today, in an effort to legitimize their perversions and downplay the words in Leviticus, Romans 1, I Corinthians, etc., now claim that it means “one will not deceive (Lie to) a man as one deceives a woman. Of course, this claim is made by persons who don’t know a smidge of Greek, as arsenos koiten is quite clear, but they all know what it means, as I suspect did you.

And my Sunday school teacher said, “It means that being gay is a sin.” I felt sick. It was fine if my dad hated gays, but now God does, too?”

Ah, more embellishment – Your Sunday School teacher said homosexual acts were a sin. He/she did not say God hated you. Why do you homosexuals insist on twisting and embellishing what is said to you? Can you not construct cogent arguments in response to what your opponent said without lying about what was said?

“My future caved in around dreams of sunny California and San Francisco, until all I could see were the fires in the pit of hell.”

And unless you change your ways and repent, that’s still what you are faced with. Nothing has changed.

“I was 13 years old.”

“So, I became straight…”

You became straight? I thought you fellows claimed you were “born that way” (you weren’t). How does one “become” straight? Readers, no homosexual was born that way; read my article on this subject HERE.

“So because I didn’t want to go to hell, and any time I strayed from the path of heterosexuality, I prayed to God to heal me of my sickness. And, then, after a while, I still liked boys. So, I prayed harder. I prayed more. I cried. Until eventually, I stopped believing in God altogether.”

So you didn’t have the self-discipline to abstain from homosexual acts; didn’t have the fortitude to continue your abstinence, so you just gave in and quit?

“If there was a God, surely he heard my prayers. So, he either is wanting me to be a sinner or he doesn’t exist. Either way, it’s not a god I wish to believe in.

I was 16 when I lost my faith. I was also 16 when I met my first boyfriend. It was like being James Bond in Podunk, Louisiana. We’d sneak off to the soybean fields just so we could be together. It was all a magical experience of holding hands under blankets and secret signals for “I love you.” Ah, to be 16 again.”

Someone remind me not to eat any soybeans from Louisiana.

So unless God does what you want, when you want it, your conclusion is that He must not exist? Brilliant. Surely you are aware that your argument, “So, he either is wanting me to be a sinner or he doesn’t exist” is another logical fallacy, the fallacy of the excluded middle?

“I had my first kiss, my first time and my first heartbreak. I was being the most abnormal person in school, but I was finally living what I thought was a normal life. I was being me. Even though “me” involved leading a double life.”

Uh, what? You thought you were living a “normal life” out sodomizing in soybean fields? My goodness!

“Long story-short: I regained my faith. In fact, I’ve been considering becoming a minister. I am very much still a gay man….”

Slow down there cupcake – you regained your faith? Faith in what, the long discredited philosophy of Relativism; is Protagoras now your god? You cannot be a minister of the God of Abraham, the God of the Bible if you reject the Words in the Bible, the Words of Almighty God! He has declared homosexuality to be an abomination. You, nay anyone, is permitted to gainsay the Word of God and still claim to be a Christian. You might as well disagree with other parts of the Bible as well. Just pick and choose what parts you believe to be valid, and ignore the rest, because you find it unpalatable. This is bordering on blasphemy and heresy.

“…And I believe God has called me to minister to other gay people to let them know that God loves them just the way they are. I’m to undo the hurt caused by the Church—the same hurt caused to me.”

More mischaracterization; (read lies). God loves sinners, but you, like all of us, have the choice to willfully remain in sin, to repent or not. If you remain unrepentant, you are demonstrating you remain under the condemnation and wrath of God, not His love (see Christ’s words in John 3:16-21; 36).

No one hurt you, but yourself. God never promised any of us a rose garden, that life would be devoid of strife, struggle, disease, and the vicissitudes of existence. You blame the Church for “hurting” you when what you mean is that the Church did not embrace and condone your sin. They told you the truth, and you didn’t like it. That is not the Church hurting you.

We do not say to an alcoholic, “We love you, and we also love your alcoholism that is killing you.” Moreover, you would not encourage this individual that it’s just fine to be inclined to such a lifestyle. A rational and human loving person would instead do everything in their power to get this other person to see that the direction in which he is heading leads to nowhere but destruction.

One does not help homosexuals through amazing feats of sophistry and dialectics of argument that only make a person feel good in the continuation of engaging their disorders to their own harm (physical, emotional, spiritual, intellectual, self-dignity of species or otherwise). We also just don’t see other sins, like adultery, gluttony, murder and lying, paraded down-town on holidays taking pride in their sin (nay, even reveling in it as a liberating and elite advantage) and forming their identity around being a “sinner.” It is only homosexuals who engage in this absurd, if not outright mentally deranged, conduct and attitude. It’s as if they have taken upon themselves to act as if they are a new species of human unto themselves — one that is perhaps more enlightened and superior, since it transcends race, creeds and the traditional human mores of any kind. My complaint is that they are really trying to redefine society and seem to operate to only one real new (irrational) dogma: “You must respect me for what I choose to be (or else I hate you for your choice to not be like me or accept me). Rubbish!

Accepting a person for “what he is” is not love in the Christian sense. What is Christian love is to continually exhort people to honor God in every aspect of their lives, including sexuality.

“Gay people, more often than not, throw the baby out with the bath water when it comes to religion. But we have a good reason. We’ve been scarred. Religion has damaged us. And I try to share with them the light I have seen in the Episcopal Church. But every time I get close to a breakthrough, something happens that brings out the worst in people.”

If the Episcopal Church is preaching tolerance of homosexuality, then they are apostate and detestable before God. Religion has not damaged you. What has damaged you is your own unwillingness to turn from your sin. You say you tried, but by 16 you gave up.

Christ called us to repent. He did not tell us to live in our sins and to accept perversions of every kind to live among us, hold hands and sing Kumbaya. He told the woman caught in adultery to sin no more. That was an imperative. Sin matters, irrespective if one believes in sin or not. All Christian theology holds that sin wounds us terribly each and every time we engage in it, and has effects on our relationships (with self, with others, with community, with nature, with church, with God). It’s toxic and deadly stuff. We lose our human dignity with each offense and it becomes increasingly difficult to turn away from as it becomes “who we are.”

Even when we do earnestly try to turn away from sin, like you, habitual sins of the past will try to return the person back to it (why many Christians believe in strong penance as a discipline to anneal the will and to draw on grace to fight old habitual sins). You have to practice perseverance and not expect God to operate on your timeframe. It is impossible to run from or hide from guilt. It is part of our own judgment system given by God (“I will write my laws on your hearts”). It can be covered up for some time with diversions, sensual impulses, drugs and so on, but it always eventually drags you down (and ultimately leads to asking God for His help too – so that opportunity for grace abounds ever more as we sin to give us enabling power to overcome it).

“One year it was Chick-fil-a. This year it’s Phil Robertson.

Thanks to Phil, I now know where everyone in my family stands on the issue of whether or not I’m a human being.”

It’s always someone else’s fault with you people, isn’t it? Your hyperbole knows no bounds it seems. I doubt very seriously that your family, or anyone, thinks you are not human.

“I even saw a “friend” of mine post something about how gay people can’t be Christians. Wow. Not only will they keep us from having equal rights, but they’ll keep us from equal salvation. We can’t just be second-class citizens. We have second-class souls.”

Again you mischaracterize and misrepresent. First, you already have every right that I do. I may marry someone of the opposite sex, and so can you; same right. I am forbidden to marry someone of the same sex, and so are you; same protection. Your engaging in homosexual behavior will not prevent you from getting married; you may marry a homosexual woman anytime you like, and the fact that you are both homosexual will not stop you – no one will. Before you start pontificating about how you can’t marry someone you love and I can, I invite you to reflect that there is no law for me (or anyone) that says you have the right to marry someone you love. I don’t have such a law, and neither do you; again, the same. Love is not a condition or pre-requisite of the right to marriage, anywhere in this country, or the world.

As regards to practicing homosexuals not being Christian, of course they are not. A Christian believes the Word of God, and does not toss out those parts that are inconvenient to your carnal desires. A practicing homosexual is not a Christian any more than an adulterer who continues to adulterate and refuses to stop is one.

One is not a Mason unless one adheres to the tenants of Masonry. One is not a Buddhist unless one adheres to the tenants of Buddhism. One is not a member of GreenPeace unless you adhere to their tenants, etc. ad nauseam. Why does this challenge your intellect so?

“I drive through town, much like the girl in Bob’s story, and I see everyone talking about how right Phil is. How they have Christian values by excluding about 15 percent of the population from their religion.”

You are not 15% of the population. Every time it gets bigger and bigger with you people. It is part and parcel of minority groups to try and lend legitimacy to themselves by inflating their numbers. Homosexuals are just under 4% of the population (if that), with male homosexuals, including bisexuals, at 2%, according to the Center for Disease Control and the National Institutes of Health. Read it here. I am sure they just forgot to call you and ask your opinion before publishing their data on your numbers. And yes, they took into account that not all homosexuals are “out” and admit it, and factored that into their calculations as well. They are pretty smart fellows over there.

“Phil claims to love everyone, and I have to believe that he has the best of intentions for saying what he said. But he must realize the damage that those words do to people like me.”

Telling you the truth does not damage you. One does not help homosexuals through amazing feats of sophistry and dialectics of argument that only make a person feel good in the continuation of engaging their disorders. As I said above, one does not say to an alcoholic, we love you, and we also love your alcoholism that is killing you. Encouraging you by validating your behavior is not helping you.

“He encouraged – hopefully unintentionally – a two-week-long “fag bashing” in Monroe and around the world. He made me feel unsafe in my own home. I can’t count how many times I heard “faggot” over the Christmas visit home.”

Correlation is not causation; cum hoc ergo propter hoc. This is another logical fallacy on your part. Can you people not construct cogent arguments without violating every fallacy in Copi and Cohen? Just because you heard more slurs after Phils speaking of the truth, does not mean that was the genesis of the increase. It is much more likely the resultant increase was because of the knee-jerk caustic reactions of the homosexual population, a reaction that people are sick and tired of listening to. In short, it is the attacks of your people upon Phil that likely engendered the backlash.

“All of this is in a state that still has laws against, and still arrests people for, having homosexual relations.”

If it is illegal and the law of your State, why does this surprise you?

“I remember hearing about Matthew Sheppard. I remember learning about Harvey Milk. I’ve never been under any impression that northeast Louisiana is safe for gays.

And people say Phil is being persecuted for his beliefs.”

You do know that Harvey Milk was a known pedophile, right? You are defending, and more importantly identifying with, a pedophile. Is there no end to the lows that you people will go to in order to rationalize your behavior? As for Matthew Shepherd, you do know it was one of his sex partners that killed him over drugs, right?

“You don’t know persecution until you’re a 12-year-old boy sitting in a church pew when your preacher encourages everyone to vote to make gay marriage illegal because they think you don’t deserve the same joy of raising a family due to your depravity.”

Well, at least you admit it is depravity. This is not persecution; it is people telling you the truth. Unless you marry someone of the opposite sex and conceive a child from your own loins, you will never know the joy that we do, of producing life from yourself and your mate. The most you can achieve is a cheap shadowy imitation of it.

“Have I now become your enemy because I tell you the Truth?” – Galatians 4:6

“You don’t know persecution until you’re told that God doesn’t love you because of how He made you; when Christian fundamentalists are tied up to the back of pick-ups and dragged down a back road because they believe the Bible. When you know that, then you can talk about persecution.”

No one told you God did not love you. Repeating a lie does not make it so; although from observation it seems that the Left has the idea that it does. And when are homosexuals tied to backs of trucks and “drug to death”? More hyperbole on your part.

When Christian photographers, cake bakers, t-shirt printers, hotel owners, etc., are told that they cannot practice their faith without some pervert group telling them they can’t, without them be prosecuted in a court of law for refusing to violating their faith, in direct contravention of the First Amendment, yes we will speak of being persecuted because we are being persecuted.

“I try really hard to not get angry over this. But it’s hard for me not to see red when I think about my grandparents, whom I love, who will never be able to be a part of my life because of their own ignorance. I doubt my parents come to my wedding one day. All because my love is different than their love.

But my love isn’t different. It isn’t unholy. It isn’t wrong because a man with a beard said so in a GQ article.

My love is real. And it’s not going away.”

Of course your “love” is different. Like most teenagers, you confuse lust with love, and commit the fallacy of equivocation by equating homosexual “love” with the love between a man and a woman. If homosexual “love” was the same thing and equal to heterosexual love, one of you would be a woman, unless you have some distorted, hijacked definition of “the same.”

And it is unholy, yet I find your use of the word “unholy” out of place and disingenuous when placed against your earlier proclamation that you no longer believe in God. But you are correct when you say it isn’t unholy because a man in a beard says it is not (like he is the only one who ever said this), but it is wrong because Almighty God said it. Robertson did not say it was “unholy,” he merely repeated God’s Word – so get over it, and yourself.

Perhaps this meme’ of a third grade lesson in the inequality of two sets will serve to illustrate my point that your “love” (lust) is not equal to the love between a man and a woman, and by extension a homosexual perversion of marriage is not equal to a heterosexual one. Why do you want to imitate us in the first place?


You bemoan being judge, yet your entire “pity-me-pity-me” tirade against Phil Robertson is a hypocritical exercise in you judging him, your parents, and us, epitomizing my position that homosexuals don’t want to be judged, but have no problem in doing so themselves.

I will close this article with the observation that if your lifestyle and behavior cause you so much pain, ridicule, and discrimination, perhaps you should consider changing it, instead of trying to change everyone else’s reaction to it.

And that’s just the way it is.

This is Part 2 in a series. Click here to read Part 1.

Don’t forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook and Twitter, and follow our friends at