LGBTQ+: Leftism’s corruption of God’s sacred gift to humankind

The Florida legislature recently passed the “Parental Rights in Education Bill,” containing language forbidding open discussion, without parental permission, of matters of sexuality and homosexuality in public school early primary grade classrooms (K-3). Predictably, the action is applauded by parents and by Florida’s governor (who just signed it into law) and, just as predictably, panned by hair-on-fire leftists, who have dubbed the bill, “Don’t Say Gay!”

It has been accepted, since time immemorial, that parents responsibly defer “The Talk”—the family discussion of “the birds and the bees”—to when they surmise their maturing children have reached the day they can understand and accept the explanations given without being confused, even bewildered. Until that moment, the dominant parental motive is to shelter them in their innocence, a motive long shared alike by teachers.

Given that, leftists are hard put to produce an intellectually honest and convincing justification for why young children and their classroom leaders even should “Say Gay,” or participate in any other frank discussion of sexual matters. Concerns over whether they are being groomed at school are legitimate. Further, should it turn out that a third-grader or younger is already seemingly at ease with the subject—straight or deviant—suspicion likewise mounts of the child possibly groomed elsewhere.

In other news, one Lia Thomas, a twenty-two-year-old man masquerading as a woman, finished first in a freestyle swim race. This unsurprising result seems readily explained as deriving from Thomas’s masculine physique, easily outclassing the feminine physiques of the other competitors. The only thing actually surprising is that a substantial number of officials and observers see this outcome as the result of anything other than overt, deliberate fraud. Or maybe, in this current age of sexual confusion, it’s not so surprising anymore. Following traditional rules in our enlightened postmodern era is passé, and…well, we’re coming to that.

Then there is Rachel Levine, another man “transgendered” into a “woman,” holding titles of pediatrician, admiral, and assistant secretary for health for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Levine masquerades with a virtuosity sufficiently convincing that the potentates running USA Today have named “her” to its “Women of the Year” list. One may wonder whether one of the requisite qualifications is for exhibiting audacious presumption. Levine is quoted as urging society, “…to be more compassionate and more accepting of girls and women, no matter what their size and shape.” Right. Presumably, such compassion should include girls shaped like boys, women shaped like men, and people with chromosomes shaped like “X-Y.”

Such subtleties are evidently lost on Joe Biden’s pick for the Supreme Court, Ketanji Brown Jackson, currently a federal court judge, now nominated, in part, because she is (ahem!) a woman. However, in sworn testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Judge Brown Jackson declared her inability to define “woman,” citing her lack of training in biology.

Fox News host Tucker Carlson had a field day with this stupefying remark, then handily segued to Lia, the aquatic pretend woman. “She” is the one whose “womanhood” is beyond question to the left’s addled True Believers, but in a way that leaves a federal judge struggling for discernment. The whole point of the “trans” movement, Carlson explains, is to force people to accept falsity as truth:

That’s what they demand you say. Not because they care about Lia Thomas or any other trans person. They could care less. Making you pretend to believe something you don’t — that’s the point. Because if they can make you pretend to believe something you know is untrue, they’ve won. They control your brain.

Truly, this is Orwellian, in the hideous 1984-ish realm, with 2 + 2 = 5. And you’d better believe it. Or 2 + 2 = something else, once The Masters have forced you to accept 5. Just wait until 2 + 2 = √(-1).

Image: Elementary school 1942. Library of Congress; no known restrictions.

Many won’t know what that means, but failure to accept it absolutely will be condemned as felonious wrongthink. It’s postmodernism’s Theory of Relative Truth, wherein absolutes are supplanted by arbitrary dicta, changeable on a whim, by those self-appointed societal masters.

All we’ve touched so far is the “G” and “T” in the LGBTQ+ compendium. Rather than delving deeper, we’ll simply presume that the “+” represents a gateway into a vast fantasy world of invented genders, sexual orientations, disorientations, and whole new vistas of gobbledygook, endlessly unfolding. Facebook’s catalog of some 58 genders is but a prelude.

What is missing and completely ignored from this scene resembling an ideological carnival sideshow is the fundamental truth, the prime issue, the unalterable basis for sexuality, the point I hinted at in a previous paragraph.

That fundamental issue is the problem of human mor­tality. Every person is conceived, birthed, lives for a time, then passes away. Without a robust method for making new human beings, humanity would be extinct in one generation. The truth stands steadfast on solid foundations both religious and secular.

On the one hand:

So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it (Genesis 1:27-28, NRSV)

On the other hand is the objective truth we have all learned as our natural human heritage, clinched by the sciences: principally biology and anthropology.

For humans, the biological element is augmented with the practical, emotional, and spiritual virtues necessary to form and rear the nuclear family. That family—minor children raised to adulthood by a mother and a father—is the foundational component in forming a durable and thriving society. Each parent provides physical, intellectual, emotional, and spiritual attributes that, to the degree necessary, complement and reinforce the other. From this, children emerge into adulthood, form their own families, and the process continues. This is the sole purpose—repeat—sole purpose of sexuality.

But today’s secularism has dropped society into an intellectual quicksand that repudiates matters of faith and objective reality. It is fitting to define this neopaganism as “sexolatry,” with sexuality warped into a bizarre dark comedy of dysphoria and disorientation. Now it’s “hookup culture,” it’s a casual “participation sport.” The unremitting truth of male and female—something assigned immutably at conception—yields to a whole zoology of “preferred pronouns,” with a spectrum of genders absurdly more varied than a fat folder of decorator’s paint chips.

This toxic climate of deranged permissiveness has desensitized the population to a torrent of coarseness and spawned an epidemic of tragedy. Teen pregnancy. Human trafficking and sexual slavery. Public school teachers demonically pushing gender manipulation on students. Pornographic graphic novels in school libraries. Teacher-conducted “Pride” festivals. Jarring messaging from the entertainment world.

Reared in this sexual jungle and drenched with such thought, word, image, and deed, it seems unsurprising that some, even many, young people emerge, confused and depressed, into adulthood.

Isn’t this all just harmless, fun, and educational? Consider Sir Walter Scott’s famous utterance:

O what a tangled web we weave

When first we practise to deceive.

Truly, when even a prospective member of the United States Supreme Court is thus confused, things are deeply ungood. (That means “bad” in 1984’s Newspeak.)

If you experience technical problems, please write to