Time to reverse Obama's immoral homosexual agenda
Official photographic portrait of US former President Barack Obama who promoted levels of homosexual immorality never seen before in any country. |
Reversing
Obama’s LGBT-friendly policies won’t be easy, but it’s possible
Are the LGBT gains under former President Obama
irreversible? That’s the $24,000 question.
Once an action has been advanced in the name of a
sexual minority, can it be undone, or does progress have a built-in ratchet
effect?
The former president said in one of his numerous
parting statements that he didn’t think the legal and social achievements of
sexual minorities during his administration “will be reversible. American
society has changed and the attitudes of young people have changed.”
He has stated the problem for conservatives neatly
enough.
Can America, can Western civilization, be moved back,
or is the best that can be hoped for by conservatives a kind of ratchet effect?
We can stop the juggernaut of sexual permissiveness from rolling on when we
control the state, but when the other side gets its turn, it will take another
irreversible revolution toward total permissiveness.
Is the best we can do is fight a delaying action, like
the band of heroes in C.S. Lewis’ The Last Battle, the final book
in the Chronicles of Narnia? Is that the best Christians can hope
for — gold in heaven?
Obviously, it is the best we can hope for, but it
is not all we should strive for. The rewards for fighting the good fight here
in Canada and America are the souls of future generations saved from sexual sin
and the lives preserved from the physical and psychological ruination that flow
from that sin. The pro-life movement fights for the flesh-and-blood lives of
unborn children and the soul of our nations. It’s big.
But is it doable? Or is Obama right? Are social
changes irreversible? History teaches that it is tough but not impossible to
buck social trends. These days, social change is achieved through big spending
– grants paid out not only by the likes of left/progressive George Soros, but
by left/progressive Barack Obama.
Now at least one of those fonts of funding should dry
up.
In fact, the whole LGBT promotional effort of the U.S.
Justice and State Departments ought to dry up now, thanks especially to the
voting choices of evangelical Christians.
Conservative Christians have already demonstrated the
LGBT agenda is resistible. Many states have pushed back at the softest spot in
the left/liberal advance, with washroom laws to protect female modesty and
safety, and with religious freedom protection laws that push back against of
homosexual privilege and intolerance.
Equatorial Africa is pushing back too against Obama’s
LGBT diplomatic initiative. But even before that, Uganda famously pushed back
against the AIDS establishment’s evangelization of condoms and sexual
permissiveness as the answer to that fatal STD.
Our information on the AIDS establishment comes from
public health expert Edward Green, the former head of Harvard’s AIDS Prevention
Research project, who in 2010 famously said Pope Benedict was right about
condoms not helping Africa.
Because AIDS spread first and fastest among male homosexuals,
Green reports, the NGOs and government agencies that sprang up to fight it
recruited their leadership from the homosexual community.
This group adamantly defended their multi-partner,
promiscuous mores as a big part of their identity. They cited flimsy empirical
evidence showing that people’s sexual behavior could not be changed. So it was
not only immoral to ask homosexuals to limit their sexual activity, it was
ineffective. Condoms were the only solution because they wouldn’t cramp
anyone’s sexual style.
But before the party line was imposed, actual
homosexuals in places like Vancouver did change their behavior — and did reduce
their infection rate. And in AIDS-stricken Uganda, the churches, mosques and
government devised the ABC campaign that pushed Abstinence before
marriage, Being faithful in marriage, and using Condoms only as a last resort.
It succeeded in changing public behavior and ending the AIDS epidemic.
In the end, the AIDS establishment pressured Uganda
into backpedaling with the predictable result of an increased infection rate.
But the story teaches two lessons: first, the truth can prevail over lies; and
second, in this fallen world, the truth will prevail only with the utmost
effort.
One way to think of homosexuality is as an addiction,
and one way to think of addiction is that it is the result of seeking to
satisfy a natural, God-given need in the wrong way. The real need is for the
lifelong and life-bestowing fellowship of marriage. Attempts to satisfy that
need with casual sex are doomed to be unsatisfied, which is why they keep going
back for more.
Obama’s message of irreversible LGBT “gains” is
mirrored in the claims that addiction is incurable. An addictions specialist,
Californian Robert Weiss, came to my hometown to talk about sex addiction and
emphatically asserted that once the production of an addictive product had
reached industrial scale, it was unstoppable at a social level. (But individual
therapy or self-help groups could work).
This is manifestly false. Cigarette smoking is the
obvious example of a mass-produced, addictive product whose influence has been
severely curtailed by public policy. Rampant drunkenness was also successfully
addressed. Though it is often argued that Prohibition failed, or that it only
encouraged the rise of organized crime, it did stop the excessive
drinking by the working poor in Canada and the U.S.
Two hundred years earlier, Great Britain’s urban
underclass and its industrial poor were soaked in gin, the first
industrial-scale liquor. Like sex on the Internet and like cigarettes,
mass-produced gin was so cheap anyone could afford it.
What defeated gin was the Great Awakening, a Christian
revival that replaced a false spirit with a true one. Many upper-class Britons
were moved by the Holy Spirit to campaign for a wide-ranging reformation of
behavior and of laws. William Wilberforce is the best-known exemplar of this
movement, but he championed not only the abolition of slavery but the relief of
chimney sweeps and prostitutes and the humane treatment of animals. He sat on
the boards of more than a hundred charities devoted to improving the lives of
the poor.
The power of facts to change people’s attitudes is
exactly what our common sense tells us. In 2012, a team of German scholars used
social media to try to change people’s opinions and found that negative facts
were particularly effective. Their study was titled Reversal of Attitude:
The Influence of Counter-Attitudinal Information.
We are going to need all the elements found in the
reformation of British society in the 18th and 19th centuries – faith, facts,
fervor – if we have any hope of changing the direction of our culture away from
sexual libertinism. But to overturn a general bias in favor of individual
freedom, we are going to have to lead with facts: the facts about STDs, the
facts about parenting outcomes of same-sex couples, the facts about
homosexual-on-homosexual violence.
Yet the truth won’t be enough. As Christians, we know
this. In the short and long runs, our actions must be linked to compassion.
Until and unless we can manage to tell the truth without it impairing our love
for those who have fallen into the LGBT lifestyles – and until and unless we
can express love for members of the LGBT communities without it preventing us
from telling the truth about how mistaken they are – we don’t have a hope.
With all those pieces in play, we can reverse much.