The hijacking of civil rights

At a very early age, I remember being babysat by a beautiful young lady named Willie-Mae.  She taught me a simple lesson that has guided me for more than sixty-five years.  One day, when I was about four or five years old, I crawled up on her lap.  I noticed her black skin and asked her, "Don't you wish you were white?"  She replied, this is the way God made me, and I would not wish to be any other way.

Living in the Deep South, surrounded by public signs that read, "Whites Only," the lesson she taught me saw me through the turbulent years of the civil rights movement.  I could never countenance any public policy, nor even condone any privately held attitude, that would harm my beloved Willie-Mae.

Today, we look back upon the civil rights movement and marvel at the degree to which things have changed.  However much may remain to be done, whatever missteps were made along the way, the civil rights movement is victorious.  No one who lived in the Deep South in the 1950s or before can reasonably deny that.

Because nothing succeeds like success, every social policy activist since then has hijacked that movement.  Not all of their ideas are worthy, and some of them are downright dangerous.  Today, we are confronted by so-called social justice warriors who demand that we change our attitudes about morality to suit their hedonistic lifestyles.  If you object, they hurl accusations of bigotry.  If you are a baker or a florist, they sue you for not participating in their celebrations.  Even religious institutions have been targeted by those who insist that churches perform same-sex ceremonies as if they were weddings.

The success, to date, of these leftist social movements hinges on equating sexual perversion with race.  They forbid the notion that one can hate the sin and love the sinner.

Homosexuality and so-called transsexuality are two of the most prominent, personal dysfunctional traits being normalized in society.  By defining these behaviors as immutable characteristics, the law has created protected classes whose behaviors are not only shielded, but actually promoted, even in elementary schools.

Social libertarians have, to a large degree, taken the attitude that what people do privately is their own business and no one else's — but in fact, the entirety of these leftist movements requires not only tolerance, but active participation by those whose religious and moral convictions are dismissed as archaic and even oppressive by the leftist establishment.

The Left relies heavily on arguments based in equality, but as we have seen in the radical feminist movement, social equality is not the same as moral equivalence.  Just as men are not women (and of course vice versa), so also same-sex relationships are not the same as marriages.

To pretend otherwise leads to absurd conclusions.  If we dispense with the idea of marriage as a union of one man and one woman and replace it with the idea of a union between any two people, then by what logic do we deny marriage among any three people?  Or more?

If we celebrate (and even subsidize) the surgical mutilation of people who wish to disguise themselves as members of their opposite sex, then why do we not celebrate the wishes of people diagnosed with BIID (Body Integrity Identity Disorder) by amputating the healthy arms and legs they wish removed?

There are deaf people who oppose the surgical repair (such as cochlear implants) of children born deaf because deafness is now considered a lifestyle identity.

The abortion movement has, by steps and stages, become the infanticide movement.

What all these perverse social trends have in common is society's abandonment of Judeo-Christian values.  The consequences will be disasters of biblical proportions.

At a very early age, I remember being babysat by a beautiful young lady named Willie-Mae.  She taught me a simple lesson that has guided me for more than sixty-five years.  One day, when I was about four or five years old, I crawled up on her lap.  I noticed her black skin and asked her, "Don't you wish you were white?"  She replied, this is the way God made me, and I would not wish to be any other way.

Living in the Deep South, surrounded by public signs that read, "Whites Only," the lesson she taught me saw me through the turbulent years of the civil rights movement.  I could never countenance any public policy, nor even condone any privately held attitude, that would harm my beloved Willie-Mae.

Today, we look back upon the civil rights movement and marvel at the degree to which things have changed.  However much may remain to be done, whatever missteps were made along the way, the civil rights movement is victorious.  No one who lived in the Deep South in the 1950s or before can reasonably deny that.

Because nothing succeeds like success, every social policy activist since then has hijacked that movement.  Not all of their ideas are worthy, and some of them are downright dangerous.  Today, we are confronted by so-called social justice warriors who demand that we change our attitudes about morality to suit their hedonistic lifestyles.  If you object, they hurl accusations of bigotry.  If you are a baker or a florist, they sue you for not participating in their celebrations.  Even religious institutions have been targeted by those who insist that churches perform same-sex ceremonies as if they were weddings.

The success, to date, of these leftist social movements hinges on equating sexual perversion with race.  They forbid the notion that one can hate the sin and love the sinner.

Homosexuality and so-called transsexuality are two of the most prominent, personal dysfunctional traits being normalized in society.  By defining these behaviors as immutable characteristics, the law has created protected classes whose behaviors are not only shielded, but actually promoted, even in elementary schools.

Social libertarians have, to a large degree, taken the attitude that what people do privately is their own business and no one else's — but in fact, the entirety of these leftist movements requires not only tolerance, but active participation by those whose religious and moral convictions are dismissed as archaic and even oppressive by the leftist establishment.

The Left relies heavily on arguments based in equality, but as we have seen in the radical feminist movement, social equality is not the same as moral equivalence.  Just as men are not women (and of course vice versa), so also same-sex relationships are not the same as marriages.

To pretend otherwise leads to absurd conclusions.  If we dispense with the idea of marriage as a union of one man and one woman and replace it with the idea of a union between any two people, then by what logic do we deny marriage among any three people?  Or more?

If we celebrate (and even subsidize) the surgical mutilation of people who wish to disguise themselves as members of their opposite sex, then why do we not celebrate the wishes of people diagnosed with BIID (Body Integrity Identity Disorder) by amputating the healthy arms and legs they wish removed?

There are deaf people who oppose the surgical repair (such as cochlear implants) of children born deaf because deafness is now considered a lifestyle identity.

The abortion movement has, by steps and stages, become the infanticide movement.

What all these perverse social trends have in common is society's abandonment of Judeo-Christian values.  The consequences will be disasters of biblical proportions.