"Open-Minded" -- Brain Cells Where Art Thou?

pics on Sodahead

Being open-minded does not mean that you're supposed to let your brain cells pour out through a sieve and ignore reality, truth, and facts. Being open-minded does not mean being tolerant of those things which are harmful to our health and others' health.  

Today the term "open-minded" as it is used by progressives really means only being tolerant of the points of view that they agree with as well as tolerating opinions which run contrary to logic, fact, and truth while displaying intolerance of any views different than their own, e.g., those that conform to logic, fact, and eternal truth.  Being open-minded means making up your version of the truth to fit your own feelings and opinions.  

If being open-minded means rejecting reality, truth, facts, and logic and exchnaging those things for truth-denying opinions based on fantasy, an alternate reality, then I can gleefully accept not being labeled open-minded" by those who are open-minded like a sieve.  

People who are okay with gay marriage, abortion, contraception, and euthanasia in the name of tolerance, compassion, privacy, and open-mindedness are going against the grain, rejecting God's lawful authority over all creation and the divine prerogative to decide who lives and who dies, while believing in man-made laws born from opinions which are based on emotions are acting irrationally. 

These people who claim to be open-minded and tolerant believe they know best as far as morality goes.  The so called open-minded believe that their morality supersedes God's laws. 

According to those who claim to be open-minded anything goes all in the name of privacy because to them the choices they make only affect the person(s) involved in the decision-making process which tends to normally be primarily based on their feelings.  

Is that true? Or simply an opinion based on emotion? 

Let's first start with homosexualty. Homosexuals claim to be all about privacy and for the right to do whatever they want in their bedrooms. There is no bedroom police coming after homosexuals in their homes. At least not that I know of.  Homosexuals are free to be hip having fun playing cornhole - sex - oooh love making - with each other. That is their perogative if they wish to do so.  Homosexuals are free to engage in any sexual escapades they want to in their bedrooms.  

But now homosexuals don't merely want privacy.  They want to live out their homosexuality openly in public. 

Somehow according to liberal logic privacy equals living out their homosexual lifestyle publicly. Doesn't that defy logic? Opposites attract? 

Homosexuals who at one time were calling for bedroom privacy are now demanding that they be permitted to marry not only demanding tolerance but full fledged approval from society for their openly homosexual lifestyle. 

What happened to homosexuals being for privacy, left alone? 

Homosexuals along with other open-minded individuals perception of reality gets a bit cloudy when they claim homosexual marriage is equal to that of traditional marriage - you know the meaning of marriage which has been around since the time of Adam and Eve, between one man and one woman.  Their claim is fallacious.

Is there even the remotest possibility that two lesbians or two homosexual men are able to procreate without the facilitation of the man made up technological science of in vitro fertilization or artificial insemination? NO. 

With 100 percent certainty I can say that there is no possibility that two homosexuals can be open to natural procreation.  God did not make it possible for that to occur.  Then we get the arguments from the Left what about the elderly or those who are inferile? In both cases each were able to be open to procreation naturally.  In the case of infertility it is still possible that God could make a way for the sperm and egg to meet and form a zygote so that an embryo could come into existence.  The elderly couple has experienced the natural cycle of life and while no longer able to achieve pregnancy when she was younger she had the ability to achieve pregnancy naturally so therefore she had the capability to procreate naturally.  

Let's go on to tackle both abortion and euthanasia at the same time.  

The open-minded clamor for privacy over their own bodies. In the case of abortion pro-abortion women claim to have the right to kill another human being that's living inside of them in the name of privacy.  These people need to murder an innocent human being to fulfill their so-called right to privacy? Wait... But I thought these people only wanted to have the right to privacy for themselves? I know I know, that liberal logic again. Somehow they consider having the right to kill another living human being equal to having their own privacy rights even though what they call their privacy is not limited to theirselves but in fact includes another living human being. 

Then we have those who claim it is compassionate to kill the unborn baby especially when the baby has some sort of disability, disease, or genetic defect. These same individuals also claim that killing those persons who are sick, dying, or elderly is compassionate.  In that open-minded sieve-like brain of theirs somehow progressives believe that murdering a person equals compassion. I know another case of liberal logic defying reality. 

I guess these same people believe that individuals who either physically or mentally handicapped should have never been born.  They demand for a purified humanity in a society without who they deem to be "undesirables." Gee... That sounds familiar. 

Progressives don't believe that it is possible for individuals experiencing old age, illness, or disabilities to live meaningful lives.  Those who claim to be open-minded believe it is okay and even a better alternative for these people to be put down like a dog instead of truly showing them compassion by assisting these people in their time of need, treating them with dignity, as they go through the stages of life. 

I suppose those individuals on the Left who claim to be open-minded but are either agnostic or atheists who reject God also don't believe that there is the possibilty that God's healing touch will come upon those individuals who are experiencing old age, sickness, or a disability.  

God is the author of life and He is the only one who has the authority to create new life and to take life. We must not act like pagan gods making up our own rules as we go along rejecting the One True God's authority over all of creation. We are called to be faithful followers of God who believe in his rightful authority and who follow laws which are in accordance with God's will, not man's laws which run contrary to God's laws.  

“Merely having an open mind is nothing. The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid.”  - G.K. Chesterton