If you want to understand why liberals fear conservatives and why a Curt Schilling must be fired at all cost watch this speech by Bill Whittle at Front Page Mag via Instapundit and Maggie’s farm.

In it he tells the story of his speech at a liberal high school, here is how the story ends

I got an email from them the next day saying the school’s on fire. That’s all they’re talking about. We have a speaker every week. You’re the best speaker we ever had — duh — and they want you to come and do a day, and then he said parenthetically, “We record all of these things, but the Rabbi has deleted your video.” “He did what, now?” “He deleted your video because you made an off-color remark about the school.” “What remark about the school?” “The business about somebody here calling you Hitler.” “Well, he did call me Hitler. Why would I invent that?” He used that as justification to erase the video. He didn’t sequester the video. He didn’t put the video on hold and not drop it and release it until they found out the truth of it. He deleted the video and he deleted the video because I was effective and I had an impact on those kids

That is why the left does its best to silence us, what else can you do when there is no answer to your words? It’s what totalitarians do.

The latest in our series of looking at what Amoris Laetitia actually says vs how people are spinning it:

Trigger warning for any of the feminists mentioned by Stacy McCain on the next paragraph

55. Men “play an equally decisive role in family life, particularly with regard to the protection and support of their wives and children… Many men are conscious of the importance of their role in the family and live their masculinity accordingly. The absence of a father gravely affects family life and the upbringing of children and their integration into society. This absence, which may be physical, emotional, psychological and spiritual, deprives children of a suitable father figure”.

Men as breadwinners? Praising masculinity? The need for a father figure? Our friends on the left must be fainting dead away.

And if that paragraph doesn’t give today’s culture the vapors this next one will

56. Yet another challenge is posed by the various forms of an ideology of gender that “denies the difference and reciprocity in nature of a man and a woman and envisages a society without sexual differences, thereby eliminating the anthropological basis of the family. This ideology leads to educational programmes and legislative enactments that promote a personal identity and emotional intimacy radically separated from the biological difference between male and female. Consequently, human identity becomes the choice of the individual, one which can also change over time”. It is a source of concern that some ideologies of this sort, which seek to respond to what are at times understandable aspirations, manage to assert themselves as absolute and unquestionable, even dictating how children should be raised. It needs to be emphasized that “biological sex and the socio-cultural role of sex (gender) can be distinguished but not separated”. On the other hand, “the technological revolution in the field of human procreation has introduced the ability to manipulate the reproductive act, making it independent of the sexual relationship between a man and a woman. In this way, human life and parenthood have become modular and separable realities, subject mainly to the wishes of individuals or couples”. It is one thing to be understanding of human weakness and the complexities of life, and another to accept ideologies that attempt to sunder what are inseparable aspects of reality. Let us not fall into the sin of trying to replace the Creator. We are creatures, and not omnipotent. Creation is prior to us and must be received as a gift. At the same time, we are called to protect our humanity, and this means, in the first place, accepting it and respecting it as it was created.

The Pope is declaring that we have to accept ourselves as we are? What an oppressor.

The next paragraph seems written for all those feminists Stacy has written about who avoided marriage and children

61. Contrary to those who rejected marriage as evil, the New Testament teaches that “everything created by God is good and nothing is to be rejected” (1 Tim 4:4). Marriage is “a gift” from the Lord (1 Cor 7:7). At the same time, precisely because of this positive understanding, the New Testament strongly emphasizes the need to safeguard God’s gift: “Let marriage be held in honour among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled” (Heb 13:4). This divine gift includes sexuality: “Do not refuse one another” (1 Cor 7:5).

Note that last sentence applies to married couples, not to hook-ups.

And what better way to have liberal heads explode that to emphasize Jesus talking about marriage as an indissoluble union.

62. The Synod Fathers noted that Jesus, “in speaking of God’s original plan for man and woman, reaffirmed the indissoluble union between them, even stating that ‘it was for your hardness of heart that Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so’ (Mt 19:8). The indissolubility of marriage – ‘what God has joined together, let no man put asunder’ (Mt 19:6) – should not be viewed as a ‘yoke’ imposed on humanity, but as a ‘gift’ granted to those who are joined in marriage… God’s indulgent love always accompanies our human journey; through grace, it heals and transforms hardened hearts, leading them back to the beginning through the way of the cross. The Gospels clearly present the example of Jesus who… proclaimed the meaning of marriage as the fullness of revelation that restores God’s original plan (cf. Mt 19:3)”.55

Marriage as a gift from God? No wonder so many feminists reject it.

As you might have noticed in the news the US Treasury has decided to replace Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill with Harriet Tubman.

While many have hailed this decision there is one problem, the fact that it will not be implemented until 2020 meaning that for the next four years there will be no women or people of color on any US paper money.

Lucky for the culture warriors of the left this situation is easily remedied.

Simply have the US government publicly declare that Andrew Jackson is a Black Transgender woman.

this solves many problems for the left.

1. It gets both a woman and a person of color on us currency immediately
2. It gives a nod to the transgendered community
3. It reinforces the cultural claims of the left that identity is completely subjective and gives a forceful response to those who say otherwise, like Pope Francis (See Amoris Laetitia paragraph 56)
4. It provides a template for dealing with figures in US history who might be considered unacceptable today.

The best part about the idea, it achieves all the diversity goals (and more) without the expense of actually redesigning the currency.

Now it’s true some might object to this, but that’s not problem, we can just call them bigots and that will be the end of it.