END-AROUND

Stephen T. McCarthy has written about the use of the Hegelian Dialectic in American politics as a means of moving the bar ever farther left while making it seem to most Americans that a compromise is simply being made.

I can think of no better example for this than the assault on Christian values by the gay lesbian bi-sexual transgender (GLBT) lobby.

But before I go there, can we all agree that this is too broad a group?

John Stewart makes the following point about whether or not one “chooses” to be gay, and I am willing to agree with him here.

But even if I were to go further and say that a homosexual marriage is valid in the view of the Bible (I won’t say that), how does either a bi-sexual relationship (would need three people) or a transgender (talk about you classic argument for “don’t-ask-don’t-tell”) fall into the same ballpark?

And how can you say either lifestyle is not a choice?

In my mind, bisexuality is clearly hedonistic behavior, and I don’t know what to think about a transgender relationship once the snipping and sewing has been done.

So for purposes of this post, I am only recognizing gays and lesbians as party to the debate.

And while I agree with Mr. Stewart that they probably did not wake up one morning and say, “instead of Corn Flakes, I think I’ll be gay,” I am not sure that means that a rewrite of the Bible is in order.

Yet that is happening as you read this.

Tolerance is simply a code word for the Hegelian Dialectic.

Look at how the pendulum has swung in twenty years.

Bill Clinton’s “big” solution for gays in the military (becoming policy on December 21, 1993) was ‘don’t ask don’t tell,” (DADT) which basically meant that gays were meant to remain in the closet and the military was not permitted to discriminate on personnel they suspected of being homosexual.

Under Obama, DADT was repealed, and the military’s ban on openly homosexual was struck down by a Federal court.

In twenty years we went from persecution, to keep it to yourself, to let your freak flag fly.

Similarly, in the private sector, the gay lobby has made all sorts of inroads (no pun intended).

Major corporations (like the one I just left) have special task forces on GLBT marketing (or in my former employer’s case, the health care needs of GLBT, which, seems to me, are the same health care needs as everyone else, except for counseling and an operation for the T's).

In short, it's all about being politically correct.

According to Emporer Obama's edict, if you make a gay slur, that’s a hate crime.

How long before we start calling it the "G" word? It's coming! America IS that freaking stupid!

In churches, we’ve gone from gays being persecuted and vilified (not very Christian behavior), to being prayed for (better), to some Christian churches performing same sex marriages, in spite of a pretty clear track record in the Bible of the acceptability of gay and lesbian behavior (can you say turned into pillars of salt?).

Some Lutheran churches allow gay priests, and recently, a gay bishop.

You could see it coming.

When “Brokeback Mountain” made it’s Oscar splash, all I heard people say was “why shouldn’t they be allowed to be together?”

And I am certainly not advocating witch hunts on gays and lesbians.

But I do not understand how one reconciles an active gay lifestyle and being Christian.

While I support the idea of DADT, when asked my opinion, I believe marriage should be defined as between a man and a woman.

I believe there would be huge fiscal implications of a change in the definition of marriage (we can’t afford the entitlements we have without causing more), not to mention that it violates the fundamental Christian values this country was founded on.

Does that mean I want to cast out homosexuals?

Of course not.

Does it mean I hate homosexuals (or bisexuals or transgenders)?

Do not be ridiculous.

I thought DADT provided a decent middle ground, and I feel that the Christian faith needs to stick to their non-judgemental guns on this issue.  

God will judge the behavior, or not.

Christians should pray for gays and lesbians, not persecute them, but remain true to the book that is the foundation of their faith.

Whether or not Obama gets his way, any church following the bible should refuse to recognize a GLBT marriage.

But it is already more acceptable to be openly GLBT than it is to be openly Christian.

I believe that many churches are sacrificing their principles to be trendy again. 

Because of that, I think the battle has already been lost by the organized Christian faith.

My father thought the Catholic church made a mistake when they stopped saying mass in Latin.

He may have been right on that one...it seems to have been a slippery slope.

You'll notice I refrained from making a Vaseline joke there. I am not totally without couth.