The Conquering Victim
Gay Rights Advocates Say They Want to be “Equal,” But is That All They’re After?
November 21, 2008
It’s unavoidable. In the past weeks, no one could pick up a newspaper or read a story online without being confronted with a direct attack on morality. It was dressed up in the guise of “civil rights,” and it’s aimed to force normal people to view their own morality as if it was a shameful, disgusting vestige of their cultural upbringing, like hateful, unenlightened racism.
Americans were told by the news media, political and entertainment figures that anyone who is not in favor of expanding social acceptance and benefits to gays is tantamount to harboring irrational hatred.
The images were haunting. Churches were surrounded by screaming mobs; elderly women were spat on, cursed and stripped of their religious symbols by angry gay rights protestors. Blacklists were circulated and businesses were boycotted, honest men were forced out of their jobs when their support for morality was brought up by the gay rights bandleaders for public ridicule.
They say they want to be “equal” in the eyes of the law. But is that all they’re after?
Take, for example, the Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act, proposed by the New York State Assembly recently. This act seeks to make illegal “discrimination” based on something called “gender expression.” That means, in simple terms, a small businessman might interview a woman for a job as a bookkeeper or receptionist, but when the woman arrives for work one day with a five o’clock shadow and a deep voice, being really a man who had dressed up as a woman for the interview, the employer would be legally prohibited from firing the new employee. If the employer does resent being tricked and does fire the employee, the employer can then expect to be forced to pay back wages after a lengthy court case where the employee can prove that he was the victim of “gender expression discrimination.”
Gone is any notion that major religious traditions view as immoral the act of dressing in the clothing of the opposite sex in order to circulate about society for the purpose of homosexuality. Political leaders seem to have accepted unquestionably that anything gay is good, and anything that opposes homosexuality is inherently evil.
Sounds too wild? Maybe not.
For instance, see what’s happening in Chicago. Flush with money and a strong bargaining hand with local politicians, gay activists have been pushing not only for “equality” but in fact “superiority,” creating a “gay public high school” with public tax dollars, along the lines of a special school for dramatics, science or gifted children. Curiously, while some opponents of gay rights might actually deem this a good idea, the supporters of the “gay high” didn’t mean to imply that they needed to re-enact segregation in order to keep their corrupt influence away from the larger student body. Instead, supporters bill “gay high” as a “bully-free” school, where gays can be free to act as gay as they feel without fear of prejudice. But who said gays are any more subject to “bullying” and deserve a special school to protect them, any more than Muslims, Chinese, overweight or socially awkward students would?
A dating website called “eharmony” was recently forced to settle with gay groups who claimed “discrimination” because the site did not let them advertise and seek dates with people of their same sex. As a concession, to avoid a lengthy court battle, the management of eharmony agreed to create a separate website where gay people can seek their mates.
The unappealing task that’s been thrust upon the American people may be a great test of the legacy of the nation’s Founding Fathers. The Pilgrims fled religious tyranny in England, the revolutionaries fought against oppressive economic colonial rule, abolitionists struggled to overcome the institution of slavery, and civil rights leaders pushed on to banish segregation, sexism and racism from popular acceptance.
But the biggest challenge that’s been thrust upon the American people today may be the challenge to say, “Enough.” In a multicultural society, we are forced to tolerate each other’s beliefs. The nation has survived, persisted and thrived not only in spite of, but very likely because of, the robust tolerance that Americans developed, to focus not on our differences but on our common good.
However, our common good has come under attack. Gays represent a small fraction of the nation. Even with the support of well-meaning but naive heterosexuals, the push for “same-sex marriage” was roundly defeated by popular votes in over 30 states that amended their constitution to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. However, gay activists seek to portray themselves as a “victimized minority” that seeks to gain government protection from the “tyranny of the majority.”
We are forced to admit, then, that in the end, not all philosophies are equal, not all lifestyles are equal, and not every foolish thing that a person can dream of doing with his body should be encouraged by government mandate.
The Founders of this country were extremely concerned about the power of factions. That is, small groups of people who do not reflect the best interest of the society at large can sometimes have the ability to impose their will on the rest of society. The separation of powers, in to Legislative, Executive and Judiciary branches, as well as the two-tiered system of Federal and State power, upper and lower levels of legislature, were established to break the stranglehold that powerful factions could exert on the nation. It was thought, that the more the nation’s power is broken up and given to different people, the less a chance that powerful groups could dominate the rest of society. But the complicity of judges and lawmakers in advancing the gay cause, even against wide public opposition, threatens to destroy the protections of even this form of government.
”Gay rights” cloaks itself in the role of being an oppressed minority while at the same time that they exert vast influence through political power, media control and money. All the money that normal citizens spend on educating, feeding and clothing their own children, gays waste on friviolous vanity projecs such as juvenile political showboating. They claim they are a minority that needs government protection, while at the exact same time they are seeking to institute laws that would force their values against the rest of society.
It’s an insult to all people of color, for gays to insist that their struggle is the same. Being born with an ethnicity or nationality that bigots can spot by one’s skin color, in no way resembles a wilfull behavior, the practice of homosexuality, which major world religions still regard as morally wrong. Equally despicable is the attempt to “blame” the defeat of gay-marriage laws on high voter turnouts of black Americans. Equally strong, if not stronger, was the rejection of gay marriage by mainstream white voters.
In a letter to the People of the State of New York, known as “Federalist #10,” published in the Daily Advertiser, November 22, 1787, James Madison defined the key problem in a republic as the power of “factions.” He explained as such.
By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.
…
It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good… If a faction consists of less than a majority, relief is supplied by the republican principle, which enables the majority to defeat its sinister views by regular vote. It may clog the administration, it may convulse the society; but it will be unable to execute and mask its violence under the forms of the Constitution…
The influence of factious leaders may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable to spread a general conflagration through the other States.
It may be frightening to note that James Madison did not contemplate that the “factions” would be able to wrest control over “the forms of the Constitution.” In each state that has recognized “same sex marriage,” judges have ruled over strong dissents that their state constitutions themselves mandated the recognition of such gay marriages.
We face a critical crossroads in our nationhood. While we benefit from a society that gives maximum freedom to its citizens, the time has come for Americans to tell their elected leaders that the freedom of morality and conscience is being threatened. Freedom simply for the sake of freedom itself is foolishness. Freedom without boundaries is the clarion call for chaos. Decent Americans need to rise up to fight for their freedom to insist on our common morality as a nation. Immoral practices such as homosexuality should never be allowed to gain the official protection of the law.