Is the Tide
Beginning to Turn on the Gay Lobby?
We are all designed to seek meaning – which has historically been
informed by faith. But in recent decades, religion has been rapidly
disappearing from the public square. As faith has been pushed out of culture,
politics, and education, it has left a void in countless hearts and minds.
Nature never permits a vacuum to linger long, however, and the need for meaning
now often finds an outlet in the fight for social justice. The cause inevitably
changes, but this decade has been marked above all by the fight for the social
approval – even outright affirmation – of one’s chosen sexual identity.
Any controversial movement, especially
a replacement for something as deep-seated as religion, begins by seeking
tolerance for itself, moving over time to implicit acceptance and virtue
signaling, and ultimately requiring explicit celebration. LGBTQ+ has become a
virtual state religion now, requiring the affirmation of everyone’s sexual
identity – whatever form it may take, and regardless of how opposed it may be
to anyone else’s individual beliefs.
To recognize this is not to obsess
about all things sexual, but simply to recognize what is now at the heart of
American society. All Americans are expected to offer incense at the altar of
not just sex, but disordered sex. We are told not to impose our faith, but the
religion of LGBTQ+ is imposed on all.
From its places of power, this ideology
demands full obeisance at all times, but particularly – and forcefully – every
June. Every time Pride Month rolls around, schools, businesses, and government
organizations preach the goodness of any and all sexual choices. LGBTQ+
clothes, flags, and library books come out front and center. To fail to bow low
at this altar is to risk being accused of “rainbow washing” or being outright
canceled.
This is how we’ve
arrived at Bud Light and Target promoting LGBTQ+ in some absurd ways, and why
the Dodgers/MLB turned the country’s national pastime into a sacramental for
the new order. Why else would Bud Light hire a marketing executive that labeled
the brand [read: its traditional customer base] as
“fratty” and “out of touch”? Why else would Target put out a
line of LGBTQ+ kids clothing? Why else would the Dodgers give a
Community Hero Award to an organization that openly mocks the Catholic Church
when half
of the fans who attend their games are Latino, a historically Catholic group?
We have arrived at a strange place,
where holding what has historically been understood as commonsense now feels
like a last stand for sanity. Beliefs such as that men should use men’s
bathrooms and only women should be allowed to play in women’s sports leagues
are now berated as bigoted and discriminatory.
One can only wonder
how much longer we will celebrate Mother’s and Father’s Days (a push has
already begun in Canada to do away with both) in a culture where a Supreme
Court justice can’t explain what a woman is or where saying
“mom and dad” is too exclusive.
The Church, which exists to spread the
Gospel, now must also preach the obvious: that there is something more than the
individual and his or her desires. She reminds us that there is order in the
universe and in human society. And she stands firmly behind the truth that
there is a human nature, and that we honor the Creator by honoring the truths
He built into the world and into our bodies.
A recent poll shows
that the tide is gradually turning back toward the most basic truth about the
human person: that there are only two genders. Sixty-five percent of Americans
believe this truth, up
from 59 percent two years ago. It is especially encouraging that
there is a positive trend across all demographics – more Democrats,
Independents, and Republicans believe in two genders than only two years ago
and likewise for Generation Z, Millennials, Generation X, Baby Boomers, and the
Silent Generation.
These numbers show that we are in an
opportune moment to correct our cultural craziness, but it will require
continued commitment and energy. It also requires the certainty that doing so
is necessary and good. Some within the Church pit the pastoral response against
claims to truth – but the pastoral is founded upon the truth about the human
person. Recognizing two genders is a necessary first step in our ministering to
those who identify as non-binary or “gender queer.”
The absurdity of slavery was exposed
through a movement that was largely led by people of faith, and now is the
moment for people of faith to stand up again. The current absurdity has gone
too far, and Americans are beginning to recognize it. We can and must rally
them.
And we can do so by
remembering this is not a solely religious issue. Justice Brown Jackson may not
be a biologist, but even
biologists who are “pro-rainbow” recognize that there are only two sexes.
So let us continue to proclaim this truth, lovingly but loudly. For authentic happiness is always hampered by misunderstandings about human nature. And reclaiming our sanity around sex and gender is a necessary first step to the happiness we all desire.
And let's once again check out Rev Calvin Robinson. This man tells it like it is!
SHOCKING! Watch This Video Before They Take It Down! w/ Rev. Calvin Robinson - YouTube
Oh God, Gene whanging on AGAIN about the “gay lobby” (sic) - one of these days he will get off his fat lazy arse and actually DO something other than plagiarise professional writers to assemble this apology for a blog. And he is, naturally, sucking up to that poisonous bastard “Father” (sic) Calvin Robinson, the man who praised Enoch Powell’s “rivers of blood” speech.
ReplyDeleteStill, at least he isn’t repeating his scandalous assertion that homosexuality is the moral equivalent of genocidal mass murder. Nor is he renewing his outstandingly nasty claim - in connection with the paedophilia scandal in his church - that buggering a small boy or raping a little girl is the moral equivalent of parking on a double yellow line. That is something to be thankful for, I suppose.
Anyway, more later from the colossally dreadful “Gene Vincent - close up on a phenomenon”, the literary wankfest from 2012.
Today’s excerpt - the opening chapter from “The man who thought he heard Jenny Lind sing” - the literary equivalent of skid-marked underpants…
And here it is - the sphincter-shrivellingly terrible "opening chapter" [sic] of Gene's "novel" [sic], The man who thought he heard Jenny Lind sing".
ReplyDelete"THE MAN WHO THOUGHT HE HEARD JENNY LIND SING
It's slow Saturday in mid-December. Gene looks out through the darkening conservatory and snow clouds blanket Hillingdon. Snow falling like petals from the whitethorns of spring; snow drifting in oblique sheets over the Grand Union Canal at Uxbridge where sometimes on early summer morning jogs Gene used to see the former boxer and now painter, the late Kevin Finnegan, at work at his easel. Snow. Everywhere. Snowing in finely granulated powder, in damp spongy flakes, in thin, feathery plumes, snowing from a leaden sky steadily, snowing fiercely, shaken out of grey-black clouds in white flocculent dustings, or dropping in long low lines, like white spears gliding down from the silent heavens. But always silently!
LIBBY: What ineffable delicacy! Superb! Now Gene you have been quoted as saying: "This will be the novel to do for Uxbridge what James Joyce's Ulysses did for fin-de-siecle Dublin." I think I detect James Joyce as a major influence upon your work. Am I right? Or am I right?
GENE: Well, what can I say? Of course James Joyce is a big influence on my work. I feel flattered that so many have detected this."
Isn't that dreadful? The pretentious diction - like "It's slow Saturday" - the kind of transposed adjective that was a cliche when Dylan Thomas stole it from Gerard Manley Hopkins; seventy one words used to convey the fact that it is snowing; the sensational news that snow falls soundlessly [what else is that exclamation mark meant to convey?]; and the cluelessly inept syntax of "former boxer and now painter" - it is so bad that it recalls Jeffrey Archer before his ghost writer gets to work. [Ten seconds' thought, Gene, that's all it would have needed for a competent journeyman to come up with "used to see the late Kevin Finnegan - once a boxer, but by then a painter - at work on his easel....]
But the crowning turd in the soup tureen is this self-basting self-adoration:
"LIBBY: I think I detect James Joyce as a major influence upon your work. Am I right? Or am I right?"
For that kind of deluded effrontery, the only appropriate response can be a brisk tattoo of kicks in the knackers. Not to mention the trademark done-to-death cliche of "Am I right? or am I right?" For fuck's sake.
Ineffable delicacy? WTF?
ReplyDeleteINEFFABLE: too great or extreme to be expressed or described in words.
or
a word not to be uttered or written [if only, in this case]
DELICACY: fineness or intricacy of texture or structure.
So we are meant to see in the above semi-literate stew of words ["former boxer and now painter"] an intricacy of texture and structure too great to be expressed in words, are we?
Gene, you are demented.