[The two priests arrive at the scene of the fight between Sean Thornton & Red Will Danaher]
Father Paul: Father, shouldn’t we put a stop to it now?
Father Lonergan: [Smiling, making fighting movements] Ah, we should lad, yes we should, it’s our duty. Yes, it’s our duty... [Smiles as a punch is heard]
The Quiet Man 1952
4th Doctor: The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. Instead of altering their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views…which can be very uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering.
Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Pt 4 1977
A long time ago on my radio show I did an hour on the redefinition of marriage and the deficit. This was back in ancient times when Barack Obama had for political reasons not “come out” for gay marriage and thus one could still publicly argue against it the entire media / left defining you as a racist, sexist bigot homophobe for stating facts that had been true for millennia. (For the record I stand by my arguments against gay marriage that I made 10 years ago here)
Now you might think these two topics are as unrelated as you can get but I pointed out on my show that the insistence that there was nothing wrong with redefining marriage opened up huge possibilities for solving the deficit.
All we had to do is redefine what a “deficit” or a “balanced budget” or even “debt” was and viola suddenly deficits would be a thing of the past and we would be able to look forward to balanced budgets for the rest of our days.
The possibilities were endless and the best part of it was people wouldn’t have to vary their spending or borrowing habits one bit and if any person holding a debt objected why they were just not as enlightened as the rest of us.
The entire point of that monologue was to not only point out the insanity of redefining marriage but to also point out that once you decide you can redefine one word for the sake of one’s personal advantage you can redefine another. Or as Kurt Schlichter prophetically put it a few years later
Liberals May Regret Their New Rules
I thought of that when I saw This piece by Stacy McCain about the conflict between lesbians and the Transgender community:
Lesbian feminists are being attacked as “TERFs” (trans exclusive radical feminists) because they don’t want to date men in dresses, nor do they want to cede control of the feminist movement to men in dresses. Transgender activists are insulting lesbians as “vagina fetishists.”
and they just can’t understand why this is happening to them.
In 2018, lesbians are being called “vagina fetishists,” being censored by social media, being targeted & assaulted…and all by people in the so called “LGBTQ.”
WTF is even happening? https://t.co/IukpxvliZa
— Julia Diana Robertson جوليا ديانا (@JuliaDRobertson) May 31, 2018
The answer is in fact very simple. The people who had no problem redefining the word “marriage” to satisfy their own narcissism and then tried to drive those who fought them from the public square (ask yourself why the Catholic Church is no longer allowed to deal with adoptions in Massachusetts) are now shocked Shocked that other narcissists would choose to redefine word “woman” and by extension “lesbian” and bring the same public social and legal opprobrium upon them that they gleefully and self righteously applied to others who dared suggest that words actually mean things.
You see, once one realizes that in one fell swoop by the act of redefining words one can:
satisfy one’s narcissism
turn one’s proclivities into virtue to be celebrated
turn mental illness into courage
and silence one’s enemies by both cultural and legal censure
you’re not like to let simple things like biology or objective reality stop you.
Now Stacy McCain who has been the target of radical feminists and Christophobic folk for daring to take his protestant faith seriously is right when he stand up for those radical feminists, who despise his very existence, on constitutional grounds
By the way, a conservative need not endorse homosexuality to believe that lesbians should not be insulted as “TERFs,” etc. What is at issue here is a matter of basic liberty. The First Amendment, which guarantees both freedom of speech and freedom of religion, likewise safeguards the principle of freedom of association. In guaranteeing “the right of the people peaceably to assemble,” our Constitution expresses this principle. A woman who chooses to avoid intimacy with men is exercising her basic liberty and, while we might lament her choice, the friends of liberty cannot in good conscience compel her to do otherwise. Forcing citizens to associate with others against their will is not “social justice.”
The Christian is as free to eschew association with non-believers as the homosexual is free to eschew the companionship of the opposite sex. For decades now, the Left has accused Christian conservatives of seeking to “impose their morality” on others. But what is it that transgender activists are attempting to do now? Aren’t they attempting to compel others to do their bidding, and to silence their critics?
And my friend Cynthia Yockey, the conservative lesbian is doing yeoman’s work in shedding light on this insanity, you really should be reading her blog and financially supporting her efforts to fight back.
But while I agree with Stacy McCain’s first amendment arguments defending the radical feminists targeted in this effort, applaud Cynthia Yockey’s efforts to make this fight on behalf of her fellow lesbians who refuse to redefine what a lesbian, man or woman is and , as a faithful Catholic have sympathy for folks like Julia Diana Robertson for the abuse she and other feminists, both straight and gay are getting for these actions, I can’t help but think that the shock that radical feminists and lesbians have as they suddenly find themselves victims of the terror they helped unleash must be the same that Maximilien de Robespierre felt just before blade of the guillotine that he had used to eliminate so many “enemies of the revolution” beheaded him.
This is one of the disadvantages of thinking that the lessons of history are all just the ravings of a patriarchal past that have no application for the present, you don’t realize that revolutions always eat their own.
I’m sure there will be a few in the Christian right who will join the fight like Stacy McCain who closes his piece saying;
It is truly astounding to find myself defending lesbian feminists against transgender totalitarians.
Like I keep saying, people need to wake the hell up.
and will will speak up for the like of Ms Robertson and company, but I suspect that the vast majority of Conservative Catholics and Protestants who have spent the last decade being told they are beyond the pale from the likes of them and their allies and have had the full force of both culture and government brought against them will watch their oppressors with Schadenfreude for a while more as this verse from Proverbs comes to pass
Those who trouble their household inherit the wind,
Personally I think that the same rule from the Catechism of the Catholic Church on homosexuality applies to our transgender friends who like gays and lesbians are children of God whose sins Jesus Christ died for.
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
And remember the same people “triggered” by this blunt statement of the teaching of the Catholic Church “hate speech” would be triggered by this movie clip too:
Aren’t we so lucky to be ruled by the values of the most narcissistic generation vs the values of the greatest one?