The Movement to Protect Singing

My friends, I would like to speak to you today about singing, and the radical threat that could destroy the divine gift of song for all of us.

I refer, of course, to homosexuals.


It is time that laws were introduced to outlaw homosexuals from writing or performing songs. We must also formally enshrine the definition of song as “a lyrical and musical composition originated and performed by heterosexuals”.

The soundness of my reasoning is self-evident, but if you will indulge me, I will explain my position.

In brief, homosexual songs undermine the value and sanctity of singing. They harm our songs.

Singing is a gift given to us by God so that we can praise Him. Song is used as a means of expressing faith and worship. Any songs that deviate from this standard will inevitably sully the importance of songs as a means of expressing ourselves to God. For this reason, it is important that all songs be messages of faith, reverence, and sanctified love, either between man and God, or between a man and a woman.


Homosexual songs are by their nature heathen and spiritually bankrupt. They are often used to praise unnatural or harmful behaviour. One need only look at such songs as ‘Relax’ by Frankie Goes to Hollywood, Marc Almond’s version of ‘Tainted Love’, or ‘Anything Goes’ by Cole Porter, to see the menace they represent.

It is no exaggeration to say that many people do most or all of their singing in church. If we do not take a stand against the growing storm of homosexual singing, it is certain that some day in the near future churches will no longer be free to choose songs for their congregations to sing. Uplifting hymns such as ‘Amazing Grace’ and ‘Nearer My God To Thee’ will be replaced by decadent gay songs like ‘Fastlove’ and ‘Go West’. Can you imagine an evangelical assembly being forced to sing ‘Filthy/Gorgeous’ by the Scissor Sisters? It simply does not bear thinking about.

Of course, it is not just our churches that are under threat, but also our schools. Song is an important part of teaching, especially for the youngest and most impressionable children, who learn about the alphabet, mathematics, wildlife and even foreign languages through the medium of song. If we do not act now, teachers will soon be forced to teach children the lyrics to gay-themed songs such as ‘In The Navy’ and ‘Cowboys Are Frequently Secretly Fond of Each Other’. Do we really want our five-year-old sons and daughters to know that “[Candy] never lost her head even when she was giving head”? No we do not.


Nor is this the end of it. Shops that currently make a living selling religious books and music will soon be made to sell Queen and Ani DiFranco, or else they will be forced out of business all together. Churches will be obliged to rent out their property for rock concerts by The B-52s and Judas Priest. Adoption agencies will be made to give children up for adoption to people who own music by Tracy Chapman, Rufus Wainwright or Stephen Sondheim.

Then there is the fact that gay singers and musicians are frequently intrinsically unnatural. One need only look at Boy George or KD Lang to see that the singing of ‘gay’ music has a corrupting effect on traditional gender roles. The sounds made by the likes of Antony and The Johnsons and Sigur Ros are barely songs at all.

Indeed it is surely not too extreme to suggest that the ultimate aim of those who would seek to promote homosexual songs is to do away with the concept of singing altogether. It is a stealth movement that is fundamentally opposed to our musical values. If we accept homosexual songs, what next? Will we have to define the noise a goat makes as ’singing’?

Homosexuals do not even need singing. There are already plenty of perfectly good words that describe the noises that they make, such as ’screeching’, ‘yelling’ and ‘wailing’; they will still be permitted to use those words.


Some people say that homosexual songs make people happy or joyful, or they argue that homosexuals deserve the same right to sing and compose as everyone else. It has even been argued that the sale of homosexual songs can have some economic benefit.

This very much misses the point; this is not about an individual’s happiness or rights, or even about money; this is about protecting the religious freedoms on which our society was founded. If we challenge those foundations it will be a threat to family, liberty and the right of individual expression. This has nothing to do with equality and everything to do with respect for our sacred traditions. People may say that this proposal is intolerant, but surely the true act of intolerance would be to oppose narrowly defining an activity in a way that excludes people based on their differences?

So I call upon you all now to join me in my campaign. It is time to say no to David Bowie. Say no to Dusty Springfield. Say no to Linda Perry, and Aaron Copland, and REM. This is not about hating homosexuals; this is about protecting our music. Love the singer; hate the song.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

25 Responses to “The Movement to Protect Singing”

  1. » Post Topic » And in response to the upholding of Prop 8… Says:

    [...] Wheeler wrote this particularly vicious bit of satire. Tell The World: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover [...]

  2. D Morgan Says:

    Oh please. This is pathetically stupid. I’m just going to listen to them even more just because of this article.


  3. nigeltde Says:

    Homosexual singing has always worried me, not because I have anything personal against homosexuals, but because I worry for my children. My daughter loves to sing along with her favourite female singers and I have always encouraged this sweet and educational behaviour. But what if one day in her tender innocence she sings along to a kd lang song? Without her even knowing it, she will be lured into the homosexual lifestyle.

    As I said I have nothing against homosexuals but they need to stop recruiting our children with their apparently “harmless” singing.

  4. Transbuddha » Archive » It’s about time Says:

    [...] Since the California Supreme Court has now decided that the citizenry does indeed have the right to codify bigotry and dumbassery protect marriage from people who love one another make instant second class citizens protect America via the state constitution, I believe our next legislative choice is clear. We must protect our sacred institutions from all threats, and The Post-Game Show has our next target of opportunity. Allow me to present to you “The Movement to Protect Singing“. [...]

  5. Samus Says:

    Clearly, some people don’t get the point. This is positively Swiftian in its elegance. Great job, sir.

  6. The Imp Says:

    D Morgan: I think this might be parody/satire.

  7. Ruby Says:

    This is seriously the most amazing thing I have ever read! <3

  8. Jo Says:

    This is brilliant.

  9. jessi Says:

    this is a joke, right? i can’t even function i’m laughing so hard. much love, freddie mercury.

  10. Greg Says:

    Amazing, it’s like you took everything against gay marriage and changed the wording to gay song! Really shows how silly the whole thing is. Brilliant!

  11. Rebecca P. Says:


    I’m singing. I’m singing. I’m violating the sactity of your blog ;)

    You half-wit.

    I’ll bet *you* can’t even sing.

  12. The Amazing Gomez Says:

    I wish to point out-the only men wearing dresses in this article are in the church choir. In their defense, the dresses are color-coordinated.

  13. Rebecca P. Says:

    Okay I just re-read this and I take back everything I said before. This is absolutely *brilliant*. :)

    Blame it on too little sleep, awful customers and a bad day.

    LALLALALLALAL… Still violating the sanctity of your blog with my singing..

  14. Ben Says:

    Hey! I made a youtube video of this. Let me know if you approve. I’ll take it down if you ask me.

  15. The Sunday Papers | Rock, Paper, Shotgun Says:

    [...] Oh, here’s something about as un-games as it gets, though in this week with what happened in California, I feel fine with it. Andrew Wheeler on why homosexuals should be banned from writing songs due to it devaluing hymns. [...]

  16. Biscuitry Says:

    I think it nicely highlights just how ridiculous some of these views are that people can’t even tell if it’s satire or not. A hilarious piece, though; I’m going to start passing the link around.

  17. bleeps Says:

    D Morgan, don’t make the rest of s gays look stupid and blind to satire. M’kay?

  18. Glenn Says:

    A beautiful piece of writing, brings a tear to my eye.

  19. robynbender Says:

    I love your brain so much that I wish I could have your (obviously Christian and non-homosexual) babies.

  20. Don Says:

    Funny. Me like. Me laugh. Make me think.
    (David Bowie not homo no mo’, is he?)
    You forgot Bob Mould in tags.

  21. Aman Chaudhary Says:

    This is awesome!

  22. Kirsten Says:

    Is this for real? How ludicrous.

    I feel sympathy for the life of the person who felt compelled, and took the time, to write and post this article!

  23. Kirsten Says:

    OK, so it was a good use of humor. Point taken!

  24. Lucia Says:

    Banning music by gay musicians? You satanist!
    A REAL child of God would want to stamp out ALL musical expression, as Lucifer was the angel of music before God sent him to Hell.

    *sigh* It’s terrible that people out there actually BELIEVE the kind of crap written in this entry. Really, doesn’t Jesus teach us to love everyone, no matter who they are? If you found music you loved dearly, only to find years later that the musican was some sort of gay, would you immediately drop that artist’s music? If you do, I think you’re pretty silly and terriblly judgemental. It’s things like that that make me fear for young children in America living in highly religious homes.
    At least there are still some of us out there that have our own brains to know that God isn’t up there to HATE people. I don’t think he woul have given people such extrordinay talents if he didn’t want them to use them. He made us all who we are supposed to be, and that INCLUDES gay and homosexual people. :)

  25. Karla Says:

    You’re incredibly judgmental and downright cruel.

    If you think that gay people should not be permitted
    to the words song or sing, then maybe they shouldn’t
    be permitted to vote either.

    You say this isn’t about rights, well this is exactly about
    RIGHTS! You’re questioning gay people’s right to the words
    song or sing!

    You are not only judgmental and cruel but you are
    also a HYPOCRITE!

    By the way, I’m not gay okay, just in case you are
    questioning my sexual preference. I’m a girl who thinks
    everyone has equal rights to everything.

    And I agree with Lucia, if you are a child of God then you
    should be following Jesus’ teaching of loving everyone
    no matter the age, race or sexual preference!

    God’s teaching is to love our neighbor, he didn’t bring us
    into this world to HATE which is what you are doing.

    To be human is not to judge if we want Him to
    judge us. Remember THAT!

Leave a Reply