For decades now, sexual anarchists have declared June as LGBTQIA Pride Month, which is orchestrated in cities and towns across the nation with parades, drag shows and other revealing exhibitions. Of course, central to this leftist agenda is an aggressive push for political and cultural activism. In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the Jack Phillips case; a pro-family leader says Christians should respond with action and love.
Peter LaBarbera, the president of Americans for Truth suggests that this year’s Pride Month is taking on added significance in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the Jack Phillips case. Justices ruled that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission acted with hostility toward the cake baker’s religious beliefs concerning same-sex marriage. LaBarbera is hoping the High Court’s decision in the Phillips case will help to embolden Christians to share the Gospel message during Pride Month.
Accepting, Including, Embracing, and Sharing Deviance
|
*WARNING: VIDEOS CONTAIN OFFENSIVE MATERIAL*
What kind of twisted person makes a YouTube video in which she tells two five-year-old girls and two five-year-old boys that as a “child,” she “questioned” her sexuality and that she watched the movie Nell multiple times in order to see actress Jodie Foster naked?
Well, that’s just what childish, 35-year-old, Canadian television personality and mother of two, Jessi Cruikshank, recently did. Cruikshank views “gay” pride month as a teachable moment to persuade very young, impressionable children that sexual deviance is fun, funny, and worthy of support and celebration.
In a clownish, polka-dotted outfit and surrounded by rainbow balloons, she quizzes these five-year-olds on their understanding of homosexuality, “pride” month, the importance of affirming homosexuality, and the meaning of the term “gay icons”—you know, people like Neil Patrick Harris, Ricky Martin, Lady Gaga, Anderson Cooper, and Jodie Foster, all of whom she lists for the children. Cruikshank tells them that “gay pride” is a celebration of “sexual diversity,” a concept young children have no capacity to understand.
Of course, Cruikshank doesn’t care whether they can understand it because her goal is not understanding. Her goal is indoctrination. Neither does she have any intention of sharing with them that her views are a-historical, arguable, and subversive.
Rather, with a mind shrouded in darkness, she wallows in perverse delight that that these little ones know the terms “gay,” “lesbian,” “transgender,” and “bisexual.” She shows her delight in one little girl’s positive response to the idea of how “cool” it would be to be raised in a fatherless home, cheering her on, saying “Yeah…. so many advantages!”
Cruikshank feeds children putrid dogma and then shamelessly posts her pernicious effort on the Internet for the world to see.
While anyone with a moral compass will be repelled by Cruikshank’s perverse ploy, Minnesota librarians are likely rejoicing. Three public libraries in St. Paul are hosting “drag hours,” at which drag queens (i.e., men who masquerade as women) and drag kings (i.e., women who masquerade as men) will confuse and corrupt preschoolers.
Here are two of the bad lip-syncing, cross-dressing adult men these taxpayer-funded libraries are bringing in to propagandize children:
And here’s one of the cross-dressing women:
The libraries advertise these events as “Suitable” for “Adult, Baby, Preschool, School Age, Teen, Toddler,” urging people of all ages to “Come meet some fabulous drag queens and kings at the library! They will read stories, sing songs, and strut their stuff for an over-the-top story hour.”
These “drag hours” are rationalized as a way to promote “acceptance and inclusion,” to “break boundaries and explore creativity,” to “embrace our differences” and to “share who we are with the world.”
Just attach terms that elicit good feelings to deviant acts—terms like “acceptance,” “inclusion,” and “creativity”—and abracadabra, deviance is normalized and even celebrated.
In the service of acceptance, inclusion, and sharing, maybe next year St. Paul libraries could invite some sex-workers or dominatrices to read picture books about empowerment and embracing to toddlers.
Thinking people know there’s nothing intrinsically good about the acts of accepting, including, or creating, and boundaries are often very good things essential to sustaining the public good.
We can accept, include, and create valuable, worthy phenomena, and we can accept, include, and create sordid phenomena that debase and harm.
Boundaries help to rein in the all too often disordered impulses of fallen humans, thereby protecting children and cultivating a climate conducive to human flourishing.
Some “differences” in human behavior should be embraced, and some should be condemned and rejected.
Some behaviors should be shared with the world because they reflect that which is good, true, and beautiful. Some behaviors should never see the light of day because they reflect evil, lies, and ugliness.
Before inviting cross-dressers to “entertain” toddlers, these Minnesota libraries had to have concluded first that cross-dressing is a phenomenon worthy of being accepted, included, embraced, and shared.
I guess if “progressives” can’t kill children in the womb, they’ll kill them—body, mind, heart, and soul—afterwards.
IFI works diligently to serve the Christian community in Illinois with email alerts, video reports, pastors’ breakfasts, special forums, worldview conferences and cultural commentaries. We do not accept government funds nor do we run those aggravating popup ads to generate funds. We depend solely on the support of readers like you.
If you appreciate the work and ministry of IFI, please consider a tax-deductible donation to sustain our endeavors. We need your support, and are deeply grateful for those who stand with.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Say It Ain’t So!
|
Some readers may be blissfully unaware of DOJ Pride, the “Association of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Employees of the U.S. Department of Justice and Their Allies.” According to its website, “DOJ Pride is the recognized organization for all Lesbian, Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgend employees and allies in all DOJ Offices, Boards, and Divisions; the ATF, BOP, DEA, FBI, USMS, OJP, and USAO; and contractors in any of these components.”
In celebration of “pride” month, DOJ Pride is hosting its annual event on June 28, 2017 in the “in the Great Hall of the department’s main building on Pennsylvania Avenue, in between the Capitol and the White House.”
At this event, DOJ Pride will award its Gerald B. Roemer Community Service Award to “Gavin” Grimm, the girl who masquerades as a boy and who filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against her Virginia high school for prohibiting her from using the boys’ restrooms.
Her case made it to the U.S. Supreme Court and would have been heard this month had Attorney General Jeff Sessions not rescinded Obama’s edict to public schools, which threatened loss of federal funds to schools that prohibited co-ed restrooms and locker rooms.
Unfortunately, Sessions really mucked things up a couple of days ago. When asked about the upcoming DOJ Pride event, Sessions said this:
We are going to have a pride group, in this very room… so that’s perfectly appropriate, and we will protect and defend and celebrate that — and protect the rights of all transgender persons…. [W]e are not going to allow persons in this country to be discriminated against or attacked in any way for their sexual orientation—”
What the heck does that mean? Is he saying it’s “perfectly appropriate” for the government to celebrate homoeroticism? Or it’s perfectly appropriate for the government to celebrate the “trans” cult ideology? Or it’s perfectly appropriate for the government to protect and celebrate the non-existent right of pretend-boys and pretend-girls to force their way into opposite-sex restrooms? Is he suggesting that subjective homoerotic feelings and volitional homoerotic activity (i.e., “sexual orientation”) should constitute the basis for a protected class? Is he suggesting that, for example, those who refuse to provide goods or services for celebrations of faux-marriages are guilty of unjust discrimination or attacking homosexuals?
No one should be mistreated or attacked. Neither Gavin Grimm, nor any other person who rejects her or his sex, nor any person who identifies as homosexual should be mistreated. But opposition to bullying or other forms of abuse does not require humans to relinquish their privacy. And opposition to bullying or other forms of abuse certainly does not require the government to celebrate homoeroticism or gender-rejection.
Homosexuals and people who reject their sex are no more or less deserving of celebration than any other person, but the reasons to celebrate them do not include their homoerotic desires, their sex-rejection, or their efforts to sexually integrate restrooms, locker rooms, showers, and shelters.
Session’s statement is the kind of ambiguous statement born of foolishness, cowardice, and political correctness run amok that sows confusion and helps advance the social, political, and moral agenda of Leftists. Many conservative Americans expect more of Sessions.
Subscribe to the IFI YouTube channel
and never miss a video report or special program!
Pride & Presidential Proclamations
|
Written by Josh Hetzler
Earlier this month, President Barack Obama issued a Presidential “proclamation” asserting that by his authority, the month of June will be celebrated as “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month”.
It’s a curious thing, really, to have a whole month officially devoted to feeling pride for traits which represent “who you are”, as the proclamation puts it. Perhaps by this same logic someone should convince the President to proclaim a month of pride for being white, or male, or heterosexual, or human, or perhaps being left-handed, big-footed, or diabetic. Or how about a month of pride for being a secretary, a doctor, a janitor, or a pilot? All of these seem at least as worthy of feelings of pride for those who identify as such.
And for that matter, this Presidential tribute to certain sexual proclivities seems to raise an obvious question: What about the other 31 gender types that are already being lawfully recognized in places like New York City? Why has the President excluded those? Are there simply not enough months in the year? This sort of passive inequality should outrage us all! Though, to his credit, the president did acknowledge that “There remains much work to do to extend the promise of our country to every American.” So it seems.
Then again, I’m not sure how or why the government ever got into the “pride” business to begin with. By my understanding of the law, it seems that inner feelings of pride and love are reserved to the People rather than the government – and certainly not the federal government. (See: 9th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution)
In the law, there is a procedural tactic known as a motion to dismiss for lack of standing. It’s essentially where one party says to the judge: “Regardless of whether my opponent is right or wrong on the substance of his case, he loses because he doesn’t even have a right to be here.”
Excepting the fact that Obama’s proclamation carries no weight at all, I’d like to make a motion that it be totally dismissed for lack of standing. Without even having to address the complete incoherence of the President’s statements, he loses because he has no right to declare what the American people ought or ought not to be proud of.
Mr. President: Respectfully, if you would spend less time trying to “fundamentally change America” through endless edicts, guidance letters, and proclamations, and more time reading the U.S. Constitution you swore to “preserve, protect, and defend” (especially the 9th and 10th Amendments), I can all but guarantee that you would cause America to develop a greater and more authentic “pride” than any that you would otherwise impose upon us through hollow or lawless means.
Now go give us something to really be proud of.
This article was originally posted at The Family Foundation blog.
