Photo by REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst
Last Friday, millions of Americans were devastated when Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy jumped the social and cultural shark, sided with the wackadoodles on the bench and wrote that “gay marriage” is to be allowed in all 50 states. Even if the people of the state voted against it. After all, love conquers all, right?
Whatever. This unleashed a firestorm that will for many years will strain relations among American families and friends. It is already invoking charges of hatred where there are none, and perversion of charity to mean something other than its original definition. Many of us considered that the driver of the “marriage equality” movement was a superficial desire for the gay community to achieve benefits status above all else, the motivation even Justice Clarence Thomas identified in one of the four dissenting opinions on Thursday.
Well, what if we were all wrong about that. In places like the Netherlands, where gay marriage has been legal for some time, a small percentage of homosexual couples tie the knot. Here in the United States, the number of homosexuals who do so is by no means unanimous. In fact, there are many gay couples out there who know they are not in normal romantic relationships, and very much respect traditional marriage. They are not the ones driving the fight.
The determined activists are people like Masha Gessen, a lesbian originally from the Soviet Union who is well known for her supportive stance on over the top feminist stunts, had this to say recently about the true motivation of the gay marriage and “marriage equality” movement:
“It’s a no-brainer that (homosexual activists) should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. …(F)ighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there — because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie.
The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change. And again, I don’t think it should exist.”
So, that would make so many people who see gay marriage just as a stepping stone in the larger fight to destroy the United States just a little behind the curve. The true end game seems to be doing away with marriage altogether. Everywhere. These people will take any little victory they can get in the journey to their final goal: wholesale destruction of the main building block of social order.
Why these people are hellbent on this path is a psycho-socio question that they will eventually spill (most likely, these people want their own disordered family situations to be normalized in the eyes of society), and in the meantime, they don’t particularly care who is destroyed in the process. That should be the most telling aspect of their endeavor. (Can you say selfish and self-centered?)
In an interesting twist on the entire gay marriage debate, a Facebook page has emerged titled “We Defend Traditional Marriage – And We’re Gay.” It was brought to this writer’s attention by a homosexual friend. (Met this person in the classical music scene.) It is actually faith based, and a place where like minded people who happen to gay can go for support as they refute the lies spread by gay marriage activists (including Barack Obama) and push back against the brain washing in American culture. (And Ireland, too as it turns out. That campaign was financed with Chuck Feeney’s American money.)
My friend sent a link to a beautifully written piece that explained why gay marriage is not marriage, at least not to the victims of the male bathhouse scene.
Although I observed a genuine affection…it was akin to the instant camaraderie which indelibly links all horror survivors. For, this was the characteristic that I witnessed in every same-sex couple: a bond of suffering enkindled by their shared memories of a childhood gone wrong: failed parents, tales of bullied boys and lonely nights spent crying out for love. It was a marriage forged through experience — of coming out, finding an introductory pride and hope in the gay lifestyle, then, seeing it dashed by the reality of collective gay self-centeredness and its propensity towards meaningless sex. They flee it, and by doing so, reveal its inherent dysfunction….
I instinctively sensed this unease, a disquieting armistice that always seethed with sexual frustration. For it was a brotherhood born of anxiety and apprehension, a realization that the gay world continually spins out of control, incessantly chopping up every batch of newcomers. Therefore, the current obsession with gay marriage is not a step towards a version of heterosexual monogamy transplanted into the heads of gay men, but a withdrawal towards safety and an unconscious awareness that so far nothing (decriminalization, sexual liberation and acceptance) had worked.
Marriage as we traditionally know it, cannot be this selfish to survive. It is also not primarily about meaningless sex. The author of that quote writes of men, and that “gay marriage” is about salvaging men tossed aside by their own community, but the activist who speaks of doing away with marriage altogether is more dangerous (aside from being a communist). Both communities use others shamelessly, but it is the one that has as its final goal destruction of marriage which came to be because humans determined it was the best way to raise the next generation who must be outed, and not simply on religious grounds. God endorsed the marriage arrangement. However, if one does not believe in God, that affirmation is meaningless, which is a big problem for those of us trying to defend marriage strictly with Scripture.
So here we are at a crossroads where the aura of acceptance can be applied to “gay marriage” simply because five unelected lawyers say so, when the main proponents of the movement really don’t believe in the institution and are using brainwashed sheep as a steppingstone to get their way.
How do you say “duped” in Satan-ese?