Some Questions for Senator Cory Booker About Sexual Perversion

In this March 14, 2018, file photo, Senate Judiciary Committee members Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., left, and Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., talk during a hearing in the Hart Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C.

By Michael Brown Published on April 13, 2018

Senator Booker, pursuant to your questioning of Secretary of State candidate Mike Pompeo, I’d like to ask you some forthright questions. I understand you might never read this article. Or, if you do read it, you might choose not to respond. At the least, though, we can put these questions on public record.

When interviewing Secretary of State candidate Mike Pompeo, you asked him about his views on same-sex “marriage,” which he had previously opposed.

I very much appreciate the fact that Mr. Pompeo did not back down on his conviction that marriage is reserved for members of the opposite sex. He said, “When I was a politician, I had a very clear view on whether it was appropriate for two same-sex persons to marry. I stand by that position.”

What Does This Have to Do With Serving as Secretary of State?

As you surely know, his position agrees with the historic view of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, as well as with the current view of more than 85 percent of the countries of the world.

Surely you know Mike Pompeo’s position agrees with the current view of more than 85 percent of the countries of the world.

Mr. Senator, since the Secretary of State is required to reach out to all the countries of the world, shouldn’t you be glad that Mr. Pompeo’s views are in harmony with the vast majority of these nations? Isn’t that a positive rather than a negative, especially when he stated that, regardless of his personal views, he would treat all couples with respect?

In his own words, “I believe it’s the case we have married gay couples at the CIA. You should know I treated them with the exact same set of rights.”

But not only did you ask him about his views on same-sex “marriage.” You also asked, “Do you believe gay sex is a perversion, yes or no? Yes or no, sir? Do you believe that gay sex is a perversion, because that’s what you said here in one of your speeches. Yes or no, do you believe gay sex is a perversion?”

May I ask you, Senator Booker, what this has to do with serving as Secretary of State?

You clarified your remarks by adding, “Your views do matter. You’re going to be dealing with Muslim states on Muslim issues. And I do not necessarily concur that you are putting forward the values of our nation when you believe there are people in our country who are perverse.”

But again, may I ask you: Did you think through these words clearly? Did you intend to say what you said?

Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream »

What About Those With Different Values?

First, are you not aware that Americans remain deeply divided on homosexual practice? There has certainly been a shift towards affirming homosexuality in the last 20 years. But to this moment, we are a nation passionately divided over LGBT issues. That means that if Mr. Pompeo said, “I think gay sex is wonderful,” he would not be speaking for our nation as a whole.

So, in your view, what are “the values of our nation” when it comes to homosexual acts?

Second, in this context, why did you bring up “Muslim states” and “Muslim issues”? Again, as you must surely know, the vast majority of Muslim states vigorously oppose homosexual practice. And they would agree that homosexual acts are perverse. In fact, their views on this subject are even stronger than those of Christian conservatives in America.

What, then, was the point you were making? Were you stating that you want our Secretary of State to push gay activism on Islamic nations? To say to them, “If you want to partner with America, you’ll need to change your historic, deeply held religious convictions?” Was this you point? If not, what point were you making?

In your view, would these religious convictions disqualify someone from serving our nation? Are you proposing a religious test for the Secretary of State?

Third, what would you say to a traditional Jew or conservative Christian who affirms the teaching of Scripture? The Bible states plainly that homosexual sex is detestable in God’s sight, even while affirming God’s love for gay and straight alike. In your view, would these religious convictions disqualify someone from serving our nation? Are you proposing a religious test for the Secretary of State?

Where Do You Draw the Line on Perversion?

Fourth, in your opinion, are any sexual acts perverse? Are any contrary to our biological design? Are any in violation of the intent of our creator? Can you answer with a yes or no?

Several years ago, a colleague and I had dinner with a local gay couple. We wanted to get to know each other on a personal level in the midst of our deep differences. At one point I asked these two men, “What about two adult brothers having a romantic and sexual relationship? Would that be OK?”

They were repulsed by the very thought, calling it “Icky,” although they could give no specific reasons for their feelings. Do you concur with their position? Would you judge gay sex between consenting adult brothers or sisters to be perverse? If so, based on what criteria?

There’s actually a push in some gay circles to accept adult consensual incest. As a recent headline asks, “Why can’t gay or lesbian twins have sex with or marry each other? Why is incest wrong between same-sex siblings?”

If it’s appropriate for you to press Mike Pompeo on his views as to what constitutes sexual perversion, is it inappropriate for me to press you on your views? What kind of sexual acts would you deem perverse?

With all due respect to your office, sir, I would suggest that someone can serve our nation (and the world) admirably while believing that some sexual acts are contrary to God’s plan. Surely we all draw the line somewhere, do we not? And if Mr. Pompeo draws his lines in accordance with Scripture, while also loving his neighbor as himself, should he be penalized for it? Certainly not.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • Patmos

    Booker is one of the more clueless people out there, and he epitomizes the left: Totally self righteous, never passes up the chance to virtue signal, and yet all of his ethics rest on moral relativism. It’s the underlying premise behind the left’s tyranny, and the belief that they know everything and so you must agree with them. It’s the blind leading the blind. How far the left has fallen.

    • Thisoldspouse


      Turn his question back around on him and ask him to define sexual “perversion.” He’ll retract his question in short order if you insist on an answer. They don’t have one.

      • Willam Nat

        Their idea of “truth” is whatever appeals to the radical left leaders (government, media, education, corporate) AND whatever they think will give them more votes. If a future leftist push is for cannibalism, then they will support that too.

  • GLT

    Booker’s questioning simply reflects the mind set of so many in the LGBT camp. Literally everything is filtered through the lens of sex.

  • Luminous

    One of the dimmest bulbs in Congress, and that’s quite an achievement.

  • mj

    I hope Mr. Booker reads this article. I hope everyone who had to witness this sham part of a Senate hearing will read this article also.

  • Chip Crawford

    Where are the kickback kids in the Repub camp on this kind of trash?

  • Mike

    Lawd H’mercy, Cory be on the down-low.

    • Chip Crawford

      He and Kamala be good at snickerin’ – not much mo

  • Howard Rosenbaum

    Such a sad state of affairs that some among this countries elected representatives have in essence redefined the reach of their office. Nevertheless , this kind of thing has been going on as long as there have been elected officials. Officials elected to serve a constituency reflecting their values. No matter how misguided or perverse.
    Yeah, ” the way of the transgressor is hard”. Problem is , until they reap ( God forbid ) the wages of their misappropriated self righteousness, we all suffer ( in a measure ) the consequences ….

    • Royce E. Van Blaricome

      Anyone who thinks elected officials serve their constituency is a delusional fool except in the sense that the elected official reflects the constituents values. That’s how they get elected. Duh.

      How on earth would one otherwise explain Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Hank Johnson, Donald Trump, and a host of others.

  • Anne Fernandes

    Where does self-righteousness come from? Pride. Man, we have some huge strongholds in this country, don’t we? Pride, control, independence, anger…we cannot even have a civil conversation about differences any more because pride, control, independence, and anger manifest before words are even uttered. I’ll make a suggestion that as this fight of corruption and perversity of thought exists among many, that those of us who have a relationship with Jesus as our Lord and Savior bow before Him in intercessory prayer for those who don’t value that relationship or His design for life…and those whose thinking is so deceived that THE only hope for them is Christ Himself. Pray!

  • Tim Pan

    Those are the faces of dictators. Beware America.

  • Grn724

    It is not just Booker. The radical left has taken over the democrat party and sees fit to impose “their” moral conscious on every American. These are to same people who oppose Christianity because of the imposition Christianity has supposedly put on all people, which is blatantly false. Radical liberals pander to small groups all the while ignoring 85% of the rest. Is that a recipe for success in November? Hardly not

    • Royce E. Van Blaricome

      You are dead on correct about the radical Left & the Dems. Had they the House, Senate, & Presidency today they would stop at nothing to push thru their evil agenda. A fault that the GOP unfortunately doesn’t possess. Their fault is that they stand for nothing & do nothing to push their agenda thru.

      But you’re wrong about their being small in number and ignoring the 85%. They don’t ignore them at all. They ignore the 15-20% of those who are strongly Conservative and Christian while going after the vast majority that sit on the fence and are Right-leaning but with no core convictions and are getting fed up with the GOP.

      You talk about a recipe for success but it sounds like you’ve forgotten the popular vote last election. The Dems don’t need a recipe for success. The really don’t have one. So they just sit by and watch the GOP put their recipe for destruction together and wait to reap the results.

      • Grn724

        That does not explain the democrats losing election after election in local and state elections. Polling suggest no more than 25% of Americans consider themselves liberal. The American people as a whole are not in step with Washington liberalism.

        • Royce E. Van Blaricome

          I don’t know, obviously, what polls you’re reading but those sure aren’t the ones I see on a daily basis. Perhaps you have a different definition than I do on what a Liberal is.

          To your last claim, I would point to a couple of things. First, I would point to the Popular Vote in the last Presidential Election. Second, look at the Electoral Map state by state. What do you see? Do you not see the majority of geography is Red but every single major populated city is Blue?

          And then I would add one more thing. Go back and look at the RNC from 2yrs ago. That will give you a great picture of what the GOP looks like today.

          Self-professing Christians and other Social Conservatives/Unbelievers who held to Biblical morals threw their support, yeah even allegiance, behind a Party that started their national convention off with prayer by a Rabbi (that’s an Unbeliever folks – and that statement is NOT antisemitic!), followed by a prayer claiming that Hillary & the Dems were our enemy, followed by a Catholic, followed by false teacher/false prophet/adulteress/female “pastor”, followed by a Sikh. But that’s not the end of it, the invocations ended with a Muslim!!!! Then, if that’s not enough, they trotted out Peter Thiel who proudly announced himself as a “proud gay man” and went on to say that “Fake culture wars only distract us from our economic decline”. In other words, “It’s the Economy, Stupid!” Nevermind that he reneged on a promise with NC that pulled 400 jobs from the state because they had the audacity to pass a law that says a man must use a man’s restroom! A real Capitalist Conservative there, folks!

          It’s not the enemy dressed in the easily recognizable uniform that is the problem. It’s the enemy dressed in your own uniform that’s the problem.

          The GOP’s “liberalism” was fully displayed during the speech by Peter Thiel. The same crowd that booed Cruz off the stage and became so unruly as to have the need for Heidi to be physically escorted out of the hall previously the same day gave a rounding applause to Peter Thiel. Thiel, a man who is co-founder of PayPal reneged on his promise to build an office in NC after the “Bathroom Bill” was passed. How is that “Conservative”? Cruz booed for falsely accused of not living up to his promise and Thiel applauded for wrongly breaking his. Cruz booed for exhorting the crowd to vote their conscience and Thiel applauded for bragging about his Homosexuality and obviously searing his. Cruz booed for exhorting the crowd to vote for Constitutional Conservatives that create jobs and Thiel applauded for breaking his promise and taking hundreds or thousands of jobs away from NC. Cruz was roundly booed for standing on principle and integrity and for not giving some gushy, malarkey-laden speech that would have been lying about Trumps wonderful attributes while Thiel received thunderous applause on announcing he’s “proud to be gay” AFTER just a couple days before the GOP putting a plank in their platform defining Marriage as between one man and one woman. Are we to believe that Thiel and Trump actually support that plank? So who’s the real hypocrite and the true Conservative?

  • Jim Walker

    Bear in mind that this group of people like Booker is growing at an alarming rate especially the young.
    Ask any teenager whether they support the LGBT agenda and I believe more than half says yes.
    This also mean the conservative base in shrinking and there goes their vote to the left.
    At this rate, Trump will probably get another term and thereafter it will be very difficult unless parents start to take action to educate your kids the right values. God have mercy on us !

  • Royce E. Van Blaricome

    Wouldn’t it have been a riot if Pompeo had just said, “Well Senator, it depends on what “is” is.”

    I wish Pompeo had looked him straight in the eye & said, “Yes Senator. Homosexuality is a sexual perversion but unlike you & those on the Left I have the ability & make the choice to treat ALL people with respect regardless of how totally depraved they choose to be.”

Greater Purpose
Paula White-Cain
More from The Stream
Connect with Us