Homosexual authoritarian radicals with militant tactics
Defenders of marriage and the traditional family continue
to lose battle after battle to the purveyors of sexual liberation. So
predictable have their defeats become that the judicial coup at the US Supreme
Court over same-sex “marriage” surprised no one.
Moreover, it finally but slowly seems to be dawning on Christian
leaders that much more is at stake than even marriage, critical as that is. The
awakening fear for “religious freedom,” along with attacks on peaceable
Christian organizations as “hate groups” and perpetrators of “violence” reflects
a growing awareness of the sexual agenda’s authoritarian designs. Now if we can
start showing concern for the freedoms of others, who already face plunder and
prison at the hands of the sexual radicals, we will become leaders of a
constructive response. In fact, the impositions on Christians so far are very
mild compared to what others have endured.
It is time to step back and look at the broader picture of what
is taking place here. When we do, we will realize that we have seen all this
before, and we are making the same mistakes.
The attack is being waged by a small neo-bolshevik cadre of
militants. They have momentum and organization, and they use relentless, quasi-bolshevik
“salami tactics” to push their way to control over both the cultural
institutions and the reins of political power.
The vast majority of people do not sympathize with the
militants’ zeal, even after saturation media propaganda leads many to relent in
polls or referenda. Moreover, Christians also have unifying beliefs and
organization—neither of which they mobilize adequately. The agitators can be
effectively neutralized, but it will require changes in the fixations and
habits of conservative Christians—changes that are healthy in themselves and
could regenerate the larger spiritual and civic health of the West. It will
also demand leadership and courage beyond what has so far been demonstrated.
“The greatest tragedy is not the brutality of the evil people, but rather the
silence of the good people,” Martin Luther King used to say. “In the end, we
will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”
Christian leaders like to quote King these days, but his greatest frustration
was the diffidence of “do-nothing” Christian leaders, and it is hardly
different now.
Niemoeller’ Warning
Matthew Staver is a perceptive Christian leader who is waking up to the seriousness of our predicament, but a little too slowly. He quotes Martin Niemoeller, the German pastor during the Nazi terror, who also famously warned of the dangers of silence:
Matthew Staver is a perceptive Christian leader who is waking up to the seriousness of our predicament, but a little too slowly. He quotes Martin Niemoeller, the German pastor during the Nazi terror, who also famously warned of the dangers of silence:
First they
came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out because I was
not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me, and there was no one left to
speak for me.
Staver then paraphrases Niemoeller, updated to fit the present
reality he sees:
First they
came for the adoption ministry, but I did not speak out because I did not do
adoptions. Then they came for the wedding photographer, but I did not speak out
because I did not photograph weddings. Then they came for the baker, but I did
not speak out because I was not a baker. Then they came for the florist, but I
said nothing because I was not a florist. Then they came for me, and there was
no one left to speak for me.
But Staver is at the wrong end of the story; he has learned the
lesson too late. He depicts this process as just starting, when what he is
describing is in fact its culmination. For many years they have been “coming
for” the others, who are already sitting in prison, while the Christian leaders
(as in Niemoeller’s day) remained silent. Staver’s concern extends only to
those with whom he agrees, but the essence of Niemoeller’s warning is the
failure to defend those with whom we disagree. Staver is only waking up now
that the gendarmes are coming for his friends. A more appropriate update might
include the groups that, even now, Christian leaders refuse to defend:
First they
came for the parents and daycare providers, whom they accused of child abuse,
but I did not speak out because I was not accused of child abuse. Then they
came for the fathers, whom they accused of abandoning and molesting their
children and beating their wives, but I did not speak out because I was not an
accused father. Then they came for the students and the soldiers, whom they
accused of “rape” and “sexual assault,” but I did not speak out because I was
not a student or a soldier. Now they are coming for the traditional Christians,
and there is no one left to speak out for us.
We must wake up a little faster and cast our vision a little
wider. And some critical truths must be faced.
First, we must recognize that this is no longer simply a matter
of immorality or “culture.” These foolish myths have rationalized inaction for
too long. We face an extremist political ideology, akin to communism or
fascism, where in fact it originated. But its political currency is not social
class or national identity or race: It is sex. A radical sexual ideology that
began with feminism but now includes homosexualism and perhaps other
sexualities has wheedled its way to the commanding heights of political power.
At stake are no longer simply abstract values; basic civil liberties and
constitutional rights have already been lost for many, and the jails are
already filling, though this is off the radar screen of most Christian leaders.
We have constructed a Maginot line against the ideologies of yesteryear, but
today’s radicals easily circumvent our outdated defences.
Second, this is a broad attack on many political fronts, only a
few of which have met with any substantial resistance. Christian conservatives
oppose the radicals’ demands on abortion, same-sex “marriage” and a few other
issues, but this is the tip of the iceberg. On the most dangerous threats,
Christian leaders have been timid, self-absorbed, and silent. The same radicals
pushing same-sex “marriage”:
- fomented
hysterical witch hunts over child abuse in daycare centers and the homes
of innocent parents, destroying lives and sending innocent people to
prison;
- intimidate
homeschoolers with similar accusations of child abuse and “educational
neglect”;
- fabricate
rape accusations against heterosexual male university students, military
personnel, and others and endeavor to expand the definition of “rape” to
include almost everything and everyone;
- pressure
courts to separate children from their fathers through divorce and incarcerate
the fathers on various pretexts.
And the same lobby also continues to expand the crime-infested
and budget-busting welfare state.
These campaigns involve inflammatory sexual accusations, and
Christian groups have been obsessed with themselves and shown little courage in
defending others from attack. Only when we summon the resolve to confront the
radical sexual agenda in its entirety—and endure the savage backlash of
accusations that will ensue—will the broad public begin to understand that this
involves much more than lesbian wedding cakes, and represents a deadly attack
on fundamental freedoms, and be forced to choose sides.
Finally, confronting this crisis will also enable us to redeem
the larger civic culture. Until now our strategy has been to hire lawyers to
fight our battles for us. We pay the Family Research Council or Alliance
Defending Freedom to oppose same-sex “marriage,” and then the rest of us,
thinking we have done our duty, go home and watch television. Meanwhile,
government officials forcibly dissolve marriages and seize children all around
us—in our own communities, congregations, and families—causing very concrete
misery for those closest to us: children’s lives ruined by growing up
fatherless; fathers incarcerated without trial; productive households bled dry
and enslaved to feed the burgeoning welfare apparat. Likewise, national defenses are
weakened by sexualized militaries and trumped-up accusations against our
fighting men, while our universities become expensive orgies whose hook-up
culture generates more accusations, suits and counter-suits. Throughout all
this, the churches (meaning all of us) avert their eyes and hold their tongues.
And then, on top of it all, our paid advocates predictably lose
the battle over same-sex “marriage.”
Pretending to stand for God on the grand political stages while
remaining silent as government functionaries destroy our neighbors right next
to us is not righteousness; it is self-righteous posturing. It reflects a weak
understanding of Christian obligation and a debased concept of citizenship. It
cannot sustain our faith or our freedom.
We cannot pay others to fight our battles for us. Lawyers are
professional surrogate citizens whom we pay to perform our duties of
citizenship. Sometimes this is unavoidable (and the more we do it, the more
unavoidable it becomes). But when we habitually farm out our citizenship to
proxies, we lose it. Notice that most threats are launched using judicial or
quasi-judicial machinery:
- courts
overturning democratic referenda and forcing citizens to accept same-sex
“marriage”;
- contraceptive
and abortion decisions culminating in Roe v. Wade;
- campus
kangaroo courts composed of faculty and students pretending to adjudicate
serious crimes like rape;
- secretive
family courts operating outside constitutional safeguards as they render
children fatherless, loot families, and incarcerate parents without trial;
- military
courts resembling feminist tribunals that likewise pretend to adjudicate
criminal accusations;
- million-dollar
lawsuits plundering those trying to help people overcome same-sex
attraction.
It is time to stop ceding power to lawyers and start fighting
our own battles: to start acting—dare I say it?—like men.
Churches Rather than Courts
Reclaiming our citizenship means mobilizing institutions other than the judiciary—above all, churches. Not only are (some) churches about all that remains outside the control of sexual radicals; more fundamentally, this is the churches’ turf. It is their role to uphold moral standards—perhaps especially sexual ones. Their failure to stand firm and speak out against both sexual debauchery and sexual power grabs renders the churches contemptible and has allowed the matter to get this far: from sexual indulgence to sexual gendarmeries.
Reclaiming our citizenship means mobilizing institutions other than the judiciary—above all, churches. Not only are (some) churches about all that remains outside the control of sexual radicals; more fundamentally, this is the churches’ turf. It is their role to uphold moral standards—perhaps especially sexual ones. Their failure to stand firm and speak out against both sexual debauchery and sexual power grabs renders the churches contemptible and has allowed the matter to get this far: from sexual indulgence to sexual gendarmeries.
The churches’ irrelevance is especially conspicuous in one of the
militants’ most dishonest campaigns. If the feminists are to be believed, we
are experiencing an epidemic of sexual violence, including rape, sexual
assault, child molestation, paternal abandonment, and more. And yet the
churches—the supposed guardians of sexual morality—have nothing to say about
this. They undertake no campaigns to eradicate this alleged scourge of male
perversion. The reason, we all know, is that the feminists’ hysteria is a hoax
and their charges are fabrications, because no such epidemic exists. But
neither will the churches point this out or take a stand, because they know the
accusations will be turned on them as “apologists” for rape.
The churches should be saying something about this—one way or the other.
But they refuse to weigh in, take a stand, or make any effort to reclaim their
lost domain of sexual propriety. Reputable (and brave) scholars have finally
stepped in and discreditedthe
feminists’ charges. If Christian scholars had been among them, it would not
only have demonstrated that we have a God whose power and protection gives us
the courage to take a stand and speak the truth; it would also have vindicated
Christian sexual morality before the world as the only alternative to the
hook-up culture and all the ills coming down to us from the Sexual Revolution.
But instead Christians respond to the accusations by hiding under the table, so
now they look cowardly and contemptible before the world.
Is it any wonder that the churches’ meager attendance continues
to dwindle? Western Christianity seems headed for extinction, and those remaining Christians feel mounting
pressure to conform to such abominations as same-sex “marriage.”
Simply by taking up their calling, the churches can redeem the civic
realm, reinvigorate their congregations, energize the larger population,
increase their membership, and directly face down the sexual radicals.
Saving Real Marriages
While leaders correctly identify marriage as the line in the sand, we cannot save marriage in the abstract or on the cheap. We must begin where the radicals did: with actual marriages. This emphatically does not mean more touchy-feely indulgence in psychotherapy (another excuse for inaction), and it means more than prayers and help finding lawyers. Churches must adopt a new vigilance and boldness to protect marriages and families against government agents. They must demand to be the first line of adjudication in all non-criminal family disputes, whether internal among family members or external against state officials.
While leaders correctly identify marriage as the line in the sand, we cannot save marriage in the abstract or on the cheap. We must begin where the radicals did: with actual marriages. This emphatically does not mean more touchy-feely indulgence in psychotherapy (another excuse for inaction), and it means more than prayers and help finding lawyers. Churches must adopt a new vigilance and boldness to protect marriages and families against government agents. They must demand to be the first line of adjudication in all non-criminal family disputes, whether internal among family members or external against state officials.
Whenever government officials intervene in families over
non-criminal matters—divorce, child abuse allegation, child custody or
homeschooling issue—the churches must be integrally and vocally involved.
Click "like" if you want to defend
true marriage.
The churches must intervene in the families of their parishioners
before the state does, and failing that, they must intervene in the courts and
social service agencies to ensure that justice is done. They must adjudicate
the matter first—before the secular state sinks its talons into a family—and if
they are ignored or by-passed, then they must follow the matter into the secular
tribunals. For marriage to be “saved,” the integrity of every marriage and
family must be protected against state functionaries, and with it the integrity
of the church that consecrated it.
When couples marry in a church, they give the congregation a stake
and a say in the integrity of their family. They may no longer tell church
members, “It’s none of your business.” They made it the church’s business. They
gave the church and everyone in it a moral obligation to defend that marriage
and family against anyone who threatens it, whether it is a wayward spouse, a
meddling social worker, or a family court judge.
Judgmental? The Bible commands us to uphold justice. People who
want their marriages consecrated by a church must understand that it entails
responsibilities to God and that the church is the authority God appoints to
enforce those responsibilities. In some churches, members who refuse to allow
the church to adjudicate their disputes before resorting to civil authorities
can be excommunicated. Meaningful discipline is part of what it means to be a
“true” church.
Intrusive? Quite the opposite. The churches’ cowardly failure to
“render true judgments” has done no favors to family privacy: It has simply
left a vacuum filled by government functionaries with a vested interest in
multiplying the problems they claim to be solving. Their involvement is always
mercenary. Churches have no such vested interest. This is why their involvement
is sacrificial.
When churches summon the courage to undertake this sacrifice
they will not only preserve their own marriages and therefore do immediate
good; they will also become effective in saving marriage as an institution.
They will also redeem their own authority from the irrelevance and contempt
into which they are rapidly falling and begin once again to give glory to God.
What I am demanding is daunting, because our problem results
from decades of neglect. The accusatory jeers we will encounter (as Christ did)
from the radicals will confirm that this approach can be effective with another
Christian principle now in short supply: steadfastness. The alternative is
ineffectual gimmicks to redeem marriage and society without the necessary
sacrifices.
Until we become serious about following Christ and accepting the
necessary sacrifices, please do not waste my time asking me to “save marriage”
from the homosexuals, who are not the ones who destroyed it. “On marriage, we
will not render to Caesar what is God’s,” Staver promises. But that is
precisely what we have already done.
Stephen Baskerville is Professor of Government at Patrick Henry
College and past president of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children.
He is a Fellow at the Howard Center for Family, Religion, and Society and a
Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. He holds a Ph.D. from the London
School of Economics and his second book, Taken Into
Custody: The War against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family, was published by Cumberland House
Publishing in 2007. This article is reprinted with permission from Crisis
Magazine.