If Barack Obama’s campaign rhetoric is put into law, 2009 will be the year homosexuality becomes a civil right.
During the campaign, Obama said the issue of gay rights “is about who we are as Americans.” On Change.gov under the heading “civil rights,” Obama promises legal protection for “gender identity” and “gender expression,” expansion of “hate crime” statutes and homosexual adoption rights, the repeal of the federal Defense of Marriage Act and of the Don’t-Ask-Don’t-Tell rule for military service.
Adopting homosexual behavior as a civil right apparently trumps majority rule at the ballot box, as well. Last November, California voters passed Proposition 8, a state constitutional amendment which defines marriage as “the traditional union of one man and one woman.” However, after the voters had spoken, homosexual activists embarked on a beyond-statewide witch hunt, targeting the Mormon church, getting prominent supporters of traditional marriage fired and boycotting businesses whose owners had contributed to the “YES on 8″ campaign. A loud, self-righteous media campaign painted the voting majority as hateful bigots (except the blacks and Latinos, of course) and the homosexual campaign to suppress democracy a defense of basic civil rights. The over-zealous attempt to link the black civil rights movement to homosexual rights tripped, though, when analysis of the vote revealed that majorities in the black and Hispanic communities voted yes on Prop 8. No-on-8 proponents have said this was because they were “lied to” by the devious Yes-on-8 campaign– ’cause obviously these minority communities would never consciously vote against gays’ “civil rights.”
A legal challenge by homosexual activists to the constitutionality of this amendment was filed with the California Supreme Court. State Attorney General Jerry Brown at first vowed to defend the right of the voters to define marriage, then reversed himself– either under pressure from homosexual activists, or betting such political posturing would better his chances in the 2010 gubernatorial election against Gavin Newsom. The California Supreme Court, whose unprecedented 4-3 vote invalidated Proposition 22 which adopted traditional marriage in the 2000 election, has yet to rule on Proposition 8. The justices are now hearing the rumblings of a recall movement not experienced in California since voters removed Chief Justice Rose Bird in the ’80s when the court refused to enforce the voters’ desire for a reinstatement of the death penalty.
Labeling homosexuality as a “civil right” seems to trump everyone else’s civil rights, too. Just as illegal aliens seem to have more rights than citizens, homosexuals use their “civil rights” to bully and prevail over everyone else’s.
Case in point: Four San Diego firefighters are ordered by their lesbian fire chief to participate in a “gay pride” parade, in uniform, driving a city fire truck. Fire Captain John Ghiotto reported that along the parade route he and the other firefighters were subject to verbal sexual abuse, with spectators crying out “show me your hose” and “you can put out my fire” and “give me mouth to mouth” all the while “exposing themselves, grabbing their crotches, rubbing their nipples and exhibiting tongue gestures.” For decades now, such behavior between men and women has been defined as sexual harassment, subject to severe penalties. However, when the four firefighters alleged a violation of their civil rights in a civil suit against the City of San Diego, they lost. Their right to be protected against homosexual sexual harassment was subordinate to the homosexual parade spectators’ right to ignore city laws against public nudity and harass the firefighters.
You don’t need to be a weatherman to know which way this wind is blowing.
One of my closest friendships was threatened recently over the issue of gay marriage and civil rights. I was engaged in what I thought was a spirited debate over Prop 8 with a longtime friend– a member– who, over the years, has become increasingly liberal. Since he makes his living in academia, I thought we were on safe ground, locking horns without getting personal. Suddenly, however, he said “goodbye” and terminated the conversation. Stunned, I emailed him, apologizing if I offended him and saying how I thought it was just a sparring exercise. His response was that talking about this subject had led him to experience negative feelings toward old and dear friends, and he just couldn’t do it anymore.
It hit me like a bucket of ice cold water: This damned issue– which seemingly came out of nowhere– has reached a tipping point that isn’t only exponentially infecting the country, but also the Church membership. I realized already that many in the ranks didn’t approve of the Church’s public position on Prop 8– it was all over the blogs– and even a few lug nuts decided to leave the faith because of it. To have it hit so close to home, though, makes me realize just how toxic a poison it is. Satan’s laughing his ass off.
I think we’re going to lose some ground in 2009. I think the sifting process is going to claim more than its usual share of chaff and that, unless the winds change course through the judicial process (a momentary lapse of reason that I pray for), the church of secularity will claim the spoils.