A Letter to the Gay Community from a Loving Daughter

The cultural, and now legal, redefinition of marriage does indeed have enormous societal ramifications, particularly for the children of gay parents, as I have repeatedly argued.  This open letter from the daughter of a lesbian mother and her mother's partner helps to explain her anguish. Sadly this girl and many other children of gay parents that have had the temerity to speak out are either squelched or shamed back into silence.

With the recent Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage across the country last week, we are told by its supporters that "love wins".  But it seems to me that we are simply putting our own desires of whom we choose to sexually love over the loving needs of our children.  Gay marriage doesn't hurt anybody we are told by its proponents.

Try telling that to Heather Barwick and the thousands of other children of gay parents.

The Rainbow Contradiction

In the Old Testament book of Genesis, scripture tells us how God decided to wipe all of humankind from the earth with a great flood because of their wickedness.  Only the righteous Noah and his family were spared because of his faithfulness to God.  After the flood, God made a covenant with Noah and his kin that He would never again send a flood to destroy the earth.  His promise of this covenant was the beautiful rainbow He set in the sky.

I have always loved rainbows, since I first heard this story as a child.  There is something about them; about the prism that the rain droplets make that separate the light wavelengths into their different beautiful colors that has always fascinated me and made me feel joyful. 

These days, it is both ironic and frustrating to me that the rainbow has been recognized as the symbol for the gay rights movement.  I don’t know if this misappropriation was done intentionally and mockingly of God or not, but regardless, I have long ago discovered that God allows us to suffer the consequences of our own sinful actions – particularly when we purposefully choose to take a stand against Him.  As a nation, we seem to have done precisely that, and embracing the LGBT movement is just one more example of our turning our backs on God. 

It seems that we are once again presented with another significant opportunity to turn away from Him.  The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is expected to release its ruling on gay marriage in the next few days; likely it will be on Monday June 29^th.  SCOTUS will rule on whether states can legally ban gay “marriage”, and also whether states can refuse to recognize a same-sex “marriage” that was legally performed in another state.

 

Many learned folks presume that the SCOTUS will indeed strike down gay “marriage” bans.  Regardless of whether they do so this month or not, it does seem that public opinion would suggest that it is inevitable that gay “marriage” will eventually become the law of the land within the next few years. 

I, personally, don’t think the government should be involved in the institution of marriage of any sort.  Marriage, as it has been defined and held to for millennia, was and is only between one man and one woman.  It is a religious sacrament.  It is the bedrock principle of western civilization.  Without this sacrament, it is impossible to believe that our societies would have flourished and prospered.  Government really should not be inserting itself into this by granting licenses to whomever it deems appropriate to engage in holy matrimony.  That is something better left to the churches.  Or, if a person is a non-believer, they can become “married” through a civil wedding.  Regardless, the government should stay out of it.

Personally, while I see the long-term societal harm of gay “marriage”, I am rather Libertarian on the issue.  If two gay people choose to form a union, so be it.  But to misappropriate the term “marriage”, which is a religious sacrament between man, woman, and God, to describe their union seems to be a slap in the face to those of us who still do hold marriage to be a sacrament – to be sacrosanct.  Gay people can call theirs a bonding union or what-have-you, but it is not marriage. 

God created marriage and words mean things.  We can twist words and try to give them new meanings but saying that two men or two women joined together in a civil ceremony is a marriage is about as ridiculous as calling a man, a woman.  You can call it whatever you want, but that doesn’t make it so.

Of course the upcoming SCOTUS decision will have many drastic long-term ramifications for our society.  If they do strike down gay “marriage” bans as expected, we can also expect further lawsuits against religious institutions that still recognize the sacramental nature of marriage and refuse to “marry” same-sex couples.  These institutions will be targeted as discriminatory and hateful and in violation of federal law.  Already there are efforts under way to remove the tax exempt status of many faith-based organizations that refuse to recognize, let alone celebrate the LGBT culture and lifestyle. 

Those individual Americans that believe homosexual actions are wrong and sinful will also be further ostracized and targeted via force of law in the coming decade.  Already private businesses have been shut down and destroyed for refusing to take a peripheral part in gay weddings.  In Canada, it is considered hate speech and illegal to preach against homosexuality.  In certain states, Catholic adoption agencies have been forced to shut down because they refused to adopt out children to gay couples. 

How long until the federal government insists that since gay “marriage” is the law of the land, that churches must “marry” gay couples or lose their tax exempt status, or even worse be fined?  This likely decision would seem to me to create additional great conflicts as it places the “right” of gay “marriage” up against our 1^st amendment right to freedom of religion and the exercise thereof.  This probable decision will likely only serve to further divide an already fractured nation.

Despite all of this, we are all still called to love our neighbor as our self.  God tells us not to condone sin, but also not to condemn our brother or sister.  It is His place for such judgment.  We must love our neighbor, regardless of their sin.  And we are all sinners; me, most especially.  Love the sinner, hate the sin, we are told.  That means we love each and every child of God, not just the straight ones.  Everyone.

Our country and the world is indeed changing, and I fear it is certainly not for the better.  It is infinitely easier to be on the right side of history than it is to be on the right side of Truth.  That said, I will stick to my beliefs and do my best to live my life according to them, regardless of the contempt that our new “enlightened” society throws at me.  Even Christ said, "In the world you will have troubles, but take courage; I have overcome the world."  John 16:33 

And I know and believe in Him when He tells me this.  All of that said, I still want my rainbow back. 

A Catholic View of Marriage

I have become rather distressed by some conversations in which I have shared recently, particularly with my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ’s own Catholic Church.  Unfortunately, it would seem that many of my Catholic friends have a misplaced sense of justice regarding the recent Supreme Court rulings when it comes to the oxymoronic term “gay marriage”. 

This is not simply my opinion, but rather that of the Catholic Church as taught by the Magisterium for over two millennia of its history that marriage is an institution and indeed one of the seven sacraments that was created by God and is only between a man and a woman.  Support for any other iteration of a union is not a marriage and is contrary to what God and his universal church clearly states. 

God gives us free will, but for one to be fully in communion with the Catholic Church, one must use that INFORMED free will and thus abide by the Church’s dogmatic and doctrinal teachings, even when one finds them to be difficult.  (Indeed, this is especially true when one finds them to be difficult.)

I am further distressed that many folks ascribe such horrible labels of “bigot” and “hateful” at me for following God’s teachings.  I am writing these things not out of hate for our gay brothers and sisters, but rather out of love for God and what he teaches us is right.  I have no malice or hatred towards any of my fellow men and women who have same sex attractions.  I have friends and even family members who are homosexual, and I love them dearly.  My purpose is not to condemn anyone, as that is not my place to do so.  I simply wish to educate my fellow Christians what their church has to say on this issue, so that they cannot claim ignorance going forward, or think that their is no difference in the conjugal love of a gay couple and that of a man and woman joined in a sacramental marriage.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly states the following:

2392    “Love is the fundamental and innate vocation of every human being” (FC 11).

2393    By creating the human being man and woman, God gives personal dignity equally to the one and the other. Each of them, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity.

2394    Christ is the model of chastity. Every baptized person is called to lead a chaste life, each according to his particular state of life.

2395    Chastity means the integration of sexuality within the person. It includes an apprenticeship in self-mastery.

2396    Among the sins gravely contrary to chastity are masturbation, fornication, pornography, and homosexual practices.

2397    The covenant which spouses have freely entered into entails faithful love. It imposes on them the obligation to keep their marriage indissoluble.

 

Further, the CCC states:

2357    Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.”142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved. (2333)

2358    The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359    Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection. (2347)

 

And lastly:

III. The Love of Husband and Wife

2360    Sexuality is ordered to the conjugal love of man and woman. In marriage the physical intimacy of the spouses becomes a sign and pledge of spiritual communion. Marriage bonds between baptized persons are sanctified by the sacrament. (1601)

2361    “Sexuality, by means of which man and woman give themselves to one another through the acts which are proper and exclusive to spouses, is not something simply biological, but concerns the innermost being of the human person as such. It is realized in a truly human way only if it is an integral part of the love by which a man and woman commit themselves totally to one another until death.”143 (1643, 2332, 1611)

Tobias got out of bed and said to Sarah, “Sister, get up, and let us pray and implore our Lord that he grant us mercy and safety.” So she got up, and they began to pray and implore that they might be kept safe. Tobias began by saying, “Blessed are you, O God of our fathers.... You made Adam, and for him you made his wife Eve as a helper and support. From the two of them the race of mankind has sprung. You said, ‘It is not good that the man should be alone; let us make a helper for him like himself.’ I now am taking this kinswoman of mine, not because of lust, but with sincerity. Grant that she and I may find mercy and that we may grow old together.” And they both said, “Amen, Amen.” Then they went to sleep for the night.144

2362    “The acts in marriage by which the intimate and chaste union of the spouses takes place are noble and honorable; the truly human performance of these acts fosters the self-giving they signify and enriches the spouses in joy and gratitude.”145 Sexuality is a source of joy and pleasure:  The Creator himself... established that in the [generative] function, spouses should experience pleasure and enjoyment of body and spirit. Therefore, the spouses do nothing evil in seeking this pleasure and enjoyment. They accept what the Creator has intended for them. At the same time, spouses should know how to keep themselves within the limits of just moderation.146

2363    The spouses’ union achieves the twofold end of marriage: the good of the spouses themselves and the transmission of life. These two meanings or values of marriage cannot be separated without altering the couple’s spiritual life and compromising the goods of marriage and the future of the family.

 

To have a valid marriage, one must be open to the sacrament and its unitive and procreative aspects of the union between a man and a woman.  Nature, and nature’s God has precluded this sacrament from members of the same sex, as the procreative aspects of the conjugal embrace are not possible in such a union.  The same sex couple acts contrary to nature’s design and God’s purpose of total and potentially life-creating giving of one spouse to another.    

Friends, if you are a Christian, especially a Catholic Christian, I urge you to pray upon this with an open and loving heart.  If you still choose to support gay marriage, just know that you are not in communion with your Church, which Christ himself established.  Yes, we should and absolutely must love and treat with dignity our gay brothers and sisters, just as we should strive to do with all people.  That does not mean we should be tolerant or supportive of actions that God and his church has clearly told us is wrong.  Indeed, as God’s word tells us in Isaiah 5:20, “Woe to you that call evil good, and good evil: that put darkness for light, and light for darkness: that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter.”  Let’s pray for each other and for God to grant us wisdom, love, mercy, and forgiveness as regards this exceptionally difficult issue.

Christ tells us that the greatest two commandments are to love God and to love our neighbor.  And indeed we must always strive to do so, but are we really loving our neighbor if we support them when they do something that God has said is wrong? 

A Refutation of the Case for Gay "Marriage"

I had made it a point to try and restrain myself from writing on temporal matters during Lent and so of course found much in the way of temptation that just cried out for my vitally-needed input into the various debates that occurred over the course of these past forty days.  Unfortunately one of those critically important debates was focused on the topic of gay “marriage” as our Supreme Court heard arguments on this matter last week during the holiest week on the Christian calendar.  Irony abounds as we as a culture further turn away our faces from God and His will and concentrate rather on what we want as self-indulgent adults in our “enlightened and compassionate society” today.

Marriage throughout the millennia was primarily about a man and woman becoming one flesh and the raising of any children that resulted from their unitive and procreative marital embrace.  Marriage was necessary for protecting and caring for the wife and children.  Marriage was about the perpetuation of our species in the most efficient and logical manner.  With that being the case, I guess that one of the main questions of this debate is do children have a basic right to a mother and father?  I would argue that the answer is emphatically yes, and therefore I oppose the redefinition of marriage on the grounds that doing so would dramatically infringe on that basic human right of a child to have a mother and a father. 

Sociology and science reflects what common sense already tells us.  Children tend to fair far better when living with their own mother and father who are living in a committed marriage.  Most gay marriage proponents disagree.  A refreshing exception to the rule, Jean Marc, who is a mayor of a French city who has cohabitated with his male companion for twenty years agrees with me.  He said, “the LGBT movement that speaks out in the media . . . They don’t speak for me. As a society we should not be encouraging this…The rights of children trump the right to children.”

Unfortunately, many proponents do not see any harm in allowing two people in love, regardless of either’s genders, from engaging in matrimony.  After all, we are an enlightened society today.  If two men or two women love each other, why shouldn’t they be allowed to marry each other?  Indeed!  Well what happens if both my wife and I decide that we both love Susie and want her to be our second wife?  Why should we be restricted from our polygamous marriage if love is the only standard?  For that matter, I love my mother too.  Why should society deem it inappropriate or taboo for me to marry her?  Shouldn’t I be allowed to marry the one I love after all?  And what about that 15 year old down the street?  We do so much enjoy playing video games together while listening to Justin Bieber CD’s.  Why should the government tell us that it would be wrong for us to marry?  And, what about my dog?  She has been a loyal companion for the last decade, and many folks already leave their estates to pets.  This would simply extend that path to its logical destination.  Why shouldn’t we codify it one step further and just allow human/pet marriages?  Continuing, there is already an instance of a woman “marrying” herself and another woman who has “married" the Eiffel tower.  And who are we to deny them this right to marry the person(s), animal, or object of their affections and love? 

 

You see, if the definition of marriage is so transitory and can be redefined based on what our newly enlightened society says it is, then we must also recognize these other “non-traditional” forms of marriage as being equally valid.  Of course if the definition of marriage is no longer the union of one man and one woman, but the union of any combination of individuals, then the term no longer holds any discernible meaning. A counterfeit will always devalue the real thing, and thus counterfeit marriages will lead to “everything is acceptable” unions. There will be no legal reason with which to deny anyone from falling under the penumbra of the new definition of “marriage.”  Since love is the determining benchmark, all of these "marriages" now become permissible.

Despite what many critics will characterize and dismiss as that slippery slope argument, it would seem today that many of the proponents of “gay marriage” still insist that traditional Christian morality on the topic is antiquated and unenlightened – indeed it is even bigoted and hateful to many peoples’ way of thinking in opposing gay marriage.  Sadly, many gay marriage proponents fail to realize that I and others can love someone without embracing everything they stand for, and likewise disagreeing (even vehemently) with someone on a particular issue such as gay marriage does not mean that I necessarily abhor that person.  Indeed we are called by God to love everyone, and although I do fail at this, such is nonetheless my goal.  I have gay friends and family members whom I do love and respect.  That does not mean that I accept or condone homosexual activity or the redefining of the sacrament of marriage.  That said, I choose to hate the sin and not the sinner, as we all are guilty of sin. 

This makes me wonder further though.  Is there such a thing as absolute Truth?  And if so what is the standard for that Truth?  Still today, many people would say that absolute and transcending truth is found in God and His will.  I know I am of this particular opinion.

It is my belief that God has placed in each of our hearts the essential knowledge of His truth and love.  We generally know if we are doing good or bad accordingly and this intrinsic knowledge typically transcends geography, cultures, faith, and time.   

So why is that throughout nearly all of recorded human history has marriage always been between a man and a woman? 

Marriage between a woman and a man is definitely something that has transcended thousands and thousands of years, across nearly all cultures, across nearly all religions, and across all continents.  Indeed, the concept of “gay marriage” was so aberrant that for all of these past millennia, humankind could not even conceive of the idea of it.  This is what the Inuit tribes of the Arctic taught.  It was the custom of dynastic China and Japan.  This was the case for the Mayan people of central America and such were the rituals of most of the tribes of Africa.  It was the way of our own Native Americans.  One male and one female marriage was the cornerstone of European society for all of the past ages.  Marriage between a man and a woman are what was recorded in the sacred scriptures and traditions of the world’s greatest religions from Judaism, Islam, and Christianity, to Hinduism. 

And after all these millennia of wisdom from man and the heavens, we as a people have finally become so smart and enlightened that we can reject them all.  We can now disavow all of human history as wrong and bigoted in order to redefine the term of marriage to allow for the union of same sex couples.  If all of these cultures, faiths, and traditions taught such a fundamental falsehood, then that would tend to indict them all as being false themselves.  All of the world throughout human history has been wrong, and now in the last two decades of our history we have finally evolved to know that we now have the Truth. 

But truth is not to be found simply in a majority of voters’ ballots or in a Gallup poll.  Real truth transcends time.  It is found in God.  And since the sides of history and the present are mutually exclusive in their view points on this topic, obviously both cannot be right.  Many of our progressive friends ironically decry the fact that those of us who fail to support gay marriage will ultimately end up being on the wrong side of history.  The wisdom of the millennia of past history screams out to be heard and is ignored by such people accordingly.  And while history does teach us what is right in this case, shouldn’t we be more concerned with being on the right side of Truth?

If we are to legalize marriage between same sex couples, does this not enshrine into law and teach our children that mothers and fathers are interchangeable and ultimately irrelevant?  Doesn’t it say that there are no significant differences between the genders?

Regardless of the decision rendered by the Supreme Court a few months from now, I think it is sadly likely that “gay marriage” will eventually become the new norm of the land.  It would seem that we are indeed continuing to slouch towards Gomorrah in our new enlightened society.

Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone when interviewed on the topic of gay marriage last year stated, “Everyone should be treated equally, but it is not discrimination to treat differently things that are different. Marriage really is unique for a reason.”

Simply identifying what is “right” with the will of the majority is a dangerous thing.  At one time in America’s history, a majority in the South thought that owning slaves was right.  Indeed a majority of the crowd on that first Good Friday called for the release of Barabbas and the crucifixion of Christ. A majority does not necessarily lend itself as a credible moral authority.  As the Venerable Archbishop Fulton Sheen once said, “there is a world of difference between an authority on which you rely when it pleases you, and one which you trust absolutely whether it pleases you or not; for what the world needs is a voice that is right not when the world is right, but right when the world is wrong.” 

I hope and pray that the Supreme Court will concur with the wisdom of all of human history and God, but whether it does or not, the Truth about what constitutes true marriage will not be altered.

A Christian Argument Against "Gay Marriage"

It would seem that the very important subject of gay marriage is a topic that has not even yet begun to wane in its ascendancy.  Indeed, there are many well-meaning folks that are trying mightily to make this into the new civil rights issue for our times.  While I think that such comparisons are strongly misplaced, and frankly do an injustice to those good people of color that had to struggle and suffer to finally reach equality in their rights under the law, I can see cleverness in couching the debate in such terms.  It is a debate that has even caused President Obama to reconsider his position on gay marriage and for him to state, unconstitutionally, that he will not have his administration enforce the Defense of Marriage Act that was passed in congress and signed into law back in 1996 under President Clinton.

The rhetoric from the pro-gay marriage side of the debate has become quite heated.  Often times, an immediate and vociferous proclamation regarding one’s bigotry and hatefulness is issued if one does not agree and support the concept of gay marriage.  Evidently it doesn’t occur to these folks or it is rather ignored that those of us that support and defend traditional marriage do so out of strong sociological reasons that support the concept that a family composed of a mother and a father is typically the very best environment in which to raise and support children.  The fact that many people who think this way also do so because of a strong religious Christian faith only seems to exacerbate the matter.  Indeed, many pro-gay marriage advocates and even many “enlightened” Christians think that God’s word is not necessarily eternal and on this issue it is antiquated.  It is an anachronism to them accordingly.

I have been confronted by pro-gay marriage proponents that have used the fallacious logic that “Christ never said anything about same-sex marriage”.  This argument is used as justification for some Christians to assume that Christ would not condemn such marriages, since they are still constituted in love.  The notion is silly frankly.  Christ also never explicitly said anything about rape, suicide, or pedophilia either.  Surely, following such flawed logic, they are not implying that our Lord is just fine with those things too.

While I absolutely do not support gay marriage or condone homosexual acts, I certainly do not have any hatred or loathing for gay people.  My thoughts on the issue, while having matured over time, have always been rooted in the same basic tenet that such actions were intrinsically wrong.  People with same-sex attraction though are God’s children, just as we all are, and should thus be treated with respect and dignity.

I was very pleased to read what the Catechism of the Catholic Church had to say on the subject, as I found myself in complete agreement with the teaching of the Church’s Magisterium and thus Christ’s own teachings accordingly.

CCC 2357 states: “Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, *141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." *142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

CCC 2358: The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

So what specifically did Christ have to say about marriage?  In the gospel of Matthew 19:3-12, Christ gives us His word on what marriage is supposed to be.

Some Pharisees approached him, and tested him, saying, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause whatever?”  He said in reply, “Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female' and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?  So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate."   They said to him, "Then why did Moses command that the man give the woman a bill of divorce and dismiss (her)?"   He said to them, "Because of the hardness of your hearts Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so.   I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery."   [His] disciples said to him, "If that is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry."   He answered, "Not all can accept [this] word,  but only those to whom that is granted.   Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some, because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Whoever can accept this ought to accept it."

The people seemed to be amazed at what Christ told them regarding a valid marriage and how anyone who divorced and remarried was living in adultery.  “If that is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry!” (Mt.19:10 )  The fact that Jesus didn’t clarify or back-pedal means that they had obviously understood his meaning.  Jesus knew that it would be difficult for fallen men to live by that definition of marriage, and yet he held firm.  “Not all can accept this word, but only those to whom that is granted” (Mt. 19:11).

Let’s look closely at what Jesus said next: “Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some, because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven” (Mt. 19:12). The implications of Christ’s words are absolute then.  A man’s ability to be united to his wife sexually is was what made him a candidate for marriage. If he was unable to achieve sexual union because of a birth defect, castration, or a vow of celibacy, than marriage was not his vocation. 

Consequently it would seem that the foundation of Jesus’ whole argument is indeed biological. Unless “a man” and “his wife … become one flesh,” there is no valid marriage.  For Jesus, and for anyone committed to His teachings, it is impossible to speak of a “Christian same-sex marriage.” Jesus’ words rule it out absolutely. The parameters for marriage between Christians, the parameters for a sacramental marriage, have been set by Jesus and cannot be changed.  Indeed, as Christ said, “Heaven and earth will pass away but my words will never pass away” (Lk.23:33).

*141 Cf. Gen 191-29; Rom 124-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10.

*142 CDF, Persona humana 8. [Rom.1:21-32, 1 Cor.6:9-11]

Giving In To Progressives

Over the course of all of the years that I have spent arguing with progressives, I have finally determined that I should no longer attempt to fight an inexorable force.  That said, I am now in agreement with some of their most ardent wishes as follows:

A. Back off and let those men who want to marry men, marry men.

B. Allow those women who want to marry women, marry women.

C. Allow those folks who want to abort their babies, abort their babies.

D. In three generations, there will be no progressives left in America.


I love it when a plan comes together!