If you have never heard the term, then no need to read this. It’s probably not something you have to deal with.
This is why I’ve lately grown more inclined to avoid debating same-sex marriage in open discussion forums. I haven’t declared an unbreakable personal moratorium. I’ll happily explain the Christian position to a good-faith questioner over coffee. But I don’t want to act as though the marriage issue is just another open question that we’re all free to consider. I’m not willing to pretend anymore that rational debate has anything to do with what is happening in America today (and indeed, throughout the Western world). Christians are not losing the cultural battle because they’ve lost the argument. Their arguments are as compelling as ever, but in most “decent company” they are no longer permitted to explain them, and are often subject to censure and other penalties if they try.
Rachel Lu, “Why I Avoid Same-Sex Marriage Debates” 8 Jun 2015, Ricochet 16 Aug. 2015 < https://ricochet.com/avoid-sex-marriage-debates/ >
Says Lord of the Rings actor John Rhys-Davies about the Western response to ISIS:
‘But it’s all relevant, it’s all equally relative. We’re all the same. And God and the devil, they’re the same, aren’t they, really? Right and wrong? It’s really just two faces of the same coin.
‘We have lost our moral compass completely, and unless we find it, we’re going to lose our civilization.
That is what impersonalism does: it destroys one’s sense of right and wrong because no culture is supposed to be better than another.
In the Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx and Richard Engels observed,
Nothing is easier than to give Christian asceticism a Socialist tinge. Has not Christianity declaimed against private property, against marriage, against the State? Has it not preached in the place of these, charity and poverty, celibacy and mortification of the flesh, monastic life and Mother Church? Christian Socialism is but the holy water with which the priest consecrates the heart-burnings of the aristocrat.
What can be added to this list of similarities is the parallel between Christian eschatology (study devoted to God’s final coming, mankind’s final endpoint) and the Marxist belief in Communism as the final form of social organization that mankind is destined to embrace. Both are forms of eschatology, with the Marxist belief being a secularized version of the Christian notion of the “end of times”. Indeed, the former Christian preacher’s zeal has been transferred to professional sociologists and so-called “social justice warriors” warriors of our day.
In this regard, there is an interesting radio interview that raises the subject of Cultural Marxism, in which the interviewer and interviewee both proceed from an unwarranted conviction in the superlative, objective goodness of Christian ethics and American Exceptionalism, which they correctly attribute to America’s origins in Enlightenment thought and, as far as American Exceptionalism is concerned, is also correctly identified as a set of secularized and evolving Christian morals which the economist and sociologist Gunnar Myrdal called “the American Creed” and which has been widely identified as the American Civil Religion.
Here is the problem the interlocutors in the radio interview fail to grasp: Since Christianity itself has been so malleable in terms of changing its theology according to time, place, and circumstance, it was inevitable that Christianity would give rise to secular social movements and philosophies like Communism. Christian scripture is quite sparse in itself and had developed over time, borrowing heavily from other religious and philosophical traditions along the way. Hence, it’s sparse scripture and reliance on other philosophical traditions made it susceptible to speculation.
Thus while the radio interviewers bond with each other over the assumed evils of Marxism and Communism, the question simply does not arise in them to ask how it is that a formerly Christian civilization gave rise to a secular belief system like Marxism, which would in time come to disestablish the Christian values the interviewers are so attached to.
Or, why the gay rights movement in the United States is not the benevolent civil rights movement some of you might believe it to be. Moira Greyland, the daughter of a famous science-fiction writer, reflects on the gay rights movement in light of her own experience as a victim of childhood sexual abuse from her parents:
I was born into a family of famous gay pagan authors in the late Sixties. My mother was Marion Zimmer Bradley, and my father was Walter Breen. Between them, they wrote over 100 books: my mother wrote science fiction and fantasy (Mists of Avalon), and my father wrote books on numismatics: he was a coin expert.
What they did to me is a matter of unfortunate public record: suffice to say that both parents wanted me to be gay and were horrified at my being female. My mother molested me from ages 3-12. The first time I remember my father doing anything especially violent to me I was five. Yes he raped me. I don’t like to think about it. If you want to know about his shenanigans with little girls, and you have a very strong stomach, you can google the Breendoggle, which was the scandal which ALMOST drummed him out of science fiction fandom.
Moira Greyland, “The Story of Moira Greyland (Guest Post)”, 23 Jul 2015, askTheBigot 25 Jul 2015 < http://askthebigot.com/2015/07/23/the-story-of-moira-greyland-guest-post/ >
One part of her story in particular struck me as similar to what we call samskaras (bolding added):
Due to my long experience with the BSDM community (bondage/discipline, Sado-Masochism) it is my belief that homosexuality is a matter of IMPRINTING, in the same way that BDSM fantasies are. To the BDSM’er, continued practice of the fantasy is sexually exciting. To the gay person, naturally, the same. However, from what I have seen, neither one creates healing. My mother became a lesbian because she was raped by her father. My father was molested by a priest–and regarded it as being the only love he had ever experienced. There are a vanishingly few people who are exclusively gay, but far more who have relationships with people of BOTH genders, as my parents and other relatives did.
What sets gay culture apart from straight culture is the belief that early sex is good and beneficial, and the sure knowledge (don’t think for a second that they DON’T know) that the only way to produce another homosexual is to provide a boy with sexual experiences BEFORE he can be “ruined” by attraction to a girl.
If you’re OK with that, and you might not be, it is worth your consideration. If you think I am wrong, that is your privilege, but watch out for the VAST number of stories of sexual abuse AND transgenderism that will come about from these gay “marriages.” Already the statistics for sexual abuse of children of gays are astronomically high compared to that suffered by the children of straights.
This was published February 13, 2008: iskcon_history_ideological_struggle_and_constitution
. . . because this is what passes for enlightened discourse amongst Western intelligentsia nowadays:
“Before my wife started sleeping with other men, I certainly considered myself a feminist, but I really only understood it in the abstract. When I quit working to stay at home with the kids, I began to understand it on a whole new level. I am an economically dependent househusband coping with the withering drudgery of child-rearing. Now that I understand the reality of that situation, I don’t blame women for demanding more for themselves than the life of the housewife.”
Michael Sonmore, “What Open Marriage Taught One Man About Feminism”, 16 Jul 2015, NYMAG.COM: The Cut, 19 Jul 2015 < http://nymag.com/thecut/2015/07/what-open-marriage-taught-one-man-about-feminism.html >.
What a tool.