Back in 2016, President Obama issued an edict that all federally funded public schools must support any “transgender” child who wants to use the bathroom of their choice or risk losing federal bribe money. This was a predictable output from the government of a society that has given up on self-governance based on natural laws, individual self-control and now relies on the state to define all aspects of human interaction.
But when government intrudes on society with interventionist policies, what is “allowed” often becomes promoted, then expected, and eventually, mandated.
In “The Law” (1850), Frédéric Bastiat wrote:
“As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose–that it may violate property instead of protecting it – then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder.”
Now, in 2022, we are seeing the fruits of the state’s interventionist forays into social engineering.
“It’s just about bathrooms” has resulted in outright sexual grooming by mentally ill, gender dysphoric teachers and woke corporations, like Disney, the main market of which are children.
I believe in individual choice. I could care less about a person who decided that even though they have a penis, they really want to be manly looking Kate Upton or Scarlett Johansson with a five o’clock shadow – but that’s not what we are talking about now.
We are talking about kids here. Little kids. Kindergarten kids.
We are talking about allowing a child to make a decision about gender and sexuality at a stage of such low intellectual and biological immaturity when we would not even allow them to decide how many ice cream cones to eat, much less how to “identify.”
Something tells me that this says more about the maturity and mental health of the parents than it does of the children themselves.
As I was digging through past posts of mine, I ran across a 2013 interview with San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone that I had flagged. At the time, the battle over state recognition of same-sex unions was raging and the Archbishop chaired the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops' Subcommittee for the Promotion and Defense of Marriage.
In the interview, he was asked: “What is the greatest threat posed by allowing gays and lesbians to marry?”
Archbishop Cordileone answered:
“The better question is: What is the great good in protecting the public understanding that to make a marriage you need a husband and a wife?
I can illustrate my point with a personal example. When I was Bishop of Oakland, I lived at a residence at the Cathedral, overlooking Lake Merritt. It's very beautiful. But across the lake, as the streets go from 1st Avenue to the city limits at 100th Avenue, those 100 blocks consist entirely of inner-city neighborhoods plagued by fatherlessness and all the suffering it produces: youth violence, poverty, drugs, crime, gangs, school dropouts, and incredibly high murder rates. Walk those blocks and you can see with your own eyes: A society that is careless about getting fathers and mothers together to raise their children in one loving family is causing enormous heartache.
To legalize marriage between two people of the same sex would enshrine in the law the principle that mothers and fathers are interchangeable or irrelevant, and that marriage is essentially an institution about adults, not children; marriage would mean nothing more than giving adults recognition and benefits in their most significant relationship.
How can we do this to our children?”
Indeed.
How could we?
And yet, we did.
Remember the process: allowed, promoted, expected, then mandated.
Same sex unions have reached the expected stage. Representations of these unions permeate entertainment, advertisement, and literature, to the degree one would assume same sex unions were the norm rather than the minority they statistically are.
Now we are headed down that same path with transgenderism.
But transgenderism is unique in its destructive potential because it is not about who you love, it is about asserting an identity that completely denies the natural being. It leaves the realm of emotion and asserts that one’s physical being can (or should be) altered to conform to one’s mental conception of their “correct” natural sexuality.
Where neither heterosexuality nor homosexuality entertain the destruction of the sexual and gender binary, transgenderism does. Where the same-sex attraction of homosexuality is a variation of human nature, transgenderism represents the attempted destruction of nature itself.
For some reason, the image in my head of our current state is the scene in Terminator 2: Judgment Day where Sarah Connor is standing at the chain link fence of a playground and seconds later a nuclear blast incinerates everything.
Archbishop Cordileone’s 2013 question is even more relevant today.
How can we do this to our children?
Totally agree with how this insanity progresses....BUT I would change the "we" to "they."