“They who join the unhallowed crusade against the institutions of the South will have reason to repent, that they have set an engine in motion which cannot be arrested until it has crushed and ground to powder the safeguards of life and property among themselves.” -Dr. James H. Thornwell, 1862
The homosexual crusade has made great progress over the past year with federal judges striking down state-level anti-same sex laws across the country, often under the flimsiest of pretenses. But this is not simply a struggle against traditional Christian marriage; this is a wider attack on the very concept of gender distinction itself. Having won the struggle against class distinctions in the nineteenth century and the struggle against racial distinctions in the twentieth, the next battleground for the radical egalitarians in the twenty-first century will be that of gender distinctions. In February of this year, Facebook reworked their gender options to allow 56 choices; that is the future of which the gender egalitarian dreams.
This was brought closer to home for me last week when Houston, the closest major city to where I live, passed an ordinance making all public restrooms unisex, in addition to outlawing discrimination on the basis of race, gender, or sexual orientation by a vote of 11 to 6. Unsurprisingly, the current mayor of Houston is a lesbian. Watch the video in this link and listen closely to what Councilman Nguyen says in his remarks in support of the ordinance. The egalitarians don’t view this as an isolated issue, and rightly so. This is just the latest battle in the cultural Marxists’ war on Christian European civilization. Councilman Nguyen said, “Let us continue our journey with love and peace.” Oh, and he forgot to mention the hefty fines, jail time, and hate crime and anti-discrimination laws to ensure that the kulaks are on board with this “love and peace”…or else. Be forewarned: the gender restroom signs in Houston are now merely suggestions.
Considering the modern church’s wholehearted support for anti-racism and anti-classism, I’m thoroughly looking forward to the first time this law gets applied to a church, especially a diverse, anti-racist church. And rest assured, this law will be applied to private businesses and organizations eventually. Church bathrooms segregated on the basis of gender? Discrimination! Won’t hire a homosexual pastor or perform homosexual weddings? Hate crime! And what passes for the church these days has absolutely no coherent defense against this. They have completely bought into the Marxist presuppositions that equality is good, discrimination is bad, and Galatians 3:28 erases physical distinctions. As I wrote three years ago,
[T]he conservative church thinks that it can embrace miscegenation, but not homosexuality, “civil rights” for non-whites, but not feminism, and racial Marxism, but not gender Marxism. . . . If [Galatians 3:28] is saying that Christ erases all physical racial differences, then the verse must also mean that Christ erases all physical gender differences too. If “skin color” is accidental and meaningless, then why should “genitalia” be any different? There is no logically or morally consistent way to oppose homosexuality or feminism while supporting miscegenation or racial egalitarianism. . . . After all, there is no male and female – only Christians and non-Christians – so why would you want to set up artificial distinctions like “gender”?
The modern Christian remains blissfully unaware of his untenable position, either by willful choice or due to historical ignorance. Even those Christians actively opposing the anti-Christian attacks by the Marxist state remain hypocritical in their defense.
Just a few years ago, it would have sounded absurd to say that Christians who believe in traditional heterosexual marriage are akin to racists. Today this opinion is quite seriously held by an increasing number of our most prominent lawyers. B.C. Bencher Cameron Ward put it this way:
“I remember that in the 1960s some people in the deep south of the United States were made to feel unwelcome at lunch counters, at the fronts of buses and, indeed, in some universities…TWU’s community covenant is an anachronism, a throwback that wouldn’t be out of place in the 1960s.”
Other Benchers asked
“whether we would have the same debate over discrimination against other equity-seeking groups, like women, people with disabilities or racial minorities.”
What is perhaps most concerning about these comparisons of Christianity to racism and other heinous intolerance is that they lead directly to the belief that Christians are simply not capable of practicing their professions without imperiling the rights of minority groups. Just as they would feel justified in excluding those who hold racist or misogynistic beliefs from positions of influence, so many Benchers also found it right and good to exclude Christians from the legal profession. For such lawyers, Christians have become synonymous with bigots who represent a public threat.
Oh really? Your own intolerance of anti-Christian behavior in the realm of gender distinctions is perfectly acceptable, but Christians being intolerant of anti-Christian behavior in the realm of race is “heinous.” Once again, this position is untenable, and the leftists recognize it as such. Christians will continue to lose ground until they are willing to take a stand for biblical segregation and distinctions in all categories.
Edit: It has been pointed out to me that the article concerning the Canadian bar association’s decision to exclude graduates from Christian universities from their ranks was merely posted on Father Peck’s site and was not written by Father Peck. While my point stands in regards to what the actual author wrote, I extend my apologies to Father Peck for the confusion.
| Tweet |
|
|
|
