Tag Archives: LGBTQ+

by

Daily Broadside | Andy Stanley Is Walking the Line and About Ready to Trip Over It

One of the littles is getting married next week, so we’re off to prepare for and participate in the festivities. While I’m gone, my childhood friend, military veteran, author and brother in Christ, Bruce Gust, will handle the blogging duties here. I’m so grateful that he agrees to step in almost every time I need a sub.

If you haven’t ordered Bruce’s book, American Devotional Series: Part One: The Revolutionary War, let me encourage you to buy a copy. It’s an interesting and creative combination of American history and Christian devotional, putting the lie to the claim that “America was not a Christian nation” or that “the founders were not Christian men.” It’s true that not all of our founders were Christians, but many (if not a majority) were, and many of those who didn’t fully accept the Bible as true accepted the virtues of the Christian faith as necessary for a thriving nation.

I’ve read it and have benefitted from it.

Before I leave, I want to call your attention to an article by R. Albert Mohler Jr. over at World. It’s about Andy Stanley, the pastor of North Point Community Church in metro Atlanta, one of the most influential pastors in the United States, and his departure from a biblical Christianity.

It’s not like we have not seen this coming. Andy Stanley is set to host the “Unconditional Conference” at a campus of North Point Community Church in the metro Atlanta area in the coming days, and the website for the conference bills it as a “two-day premier event” especially designed for parents of LGBTQ+ children and ministry leaders. “You will be equipped, refreshed, and inspired as you hear from leading communicators on topics that speak to your heart, soul, and mind,” it promises. One statement stands out in the description: “No matter what theological stance you hold, we invite you to listen, reflect, and learn as we approach this topic from the quieter middle space.”

The promise of “the quieter middle space” might appear attractive, given the volatility of cultural discourse on LGBTQ+ issues, and a conference designed to help parents of LGBTQ+ children and ministry leaders work through these issues in clearly Biblical terms would be a welcome development. But the advertising for the Unconditional Conference indicates clearly that this event is designed as a platform for normalizing the LGBTQ+ revolution while claiming that the conference represents “the quieter middle space.” In truth, there is no “middle space” on these issues, and it is no longer plausible to claim that such middle space exists.

Two men who are married to other men will be speaking at the conference, as well as “David Gushee, a prominent intellectual who has been honest about his own change of mind on the moral status of LGBTQ+ behaviors and relationships. In the ‘definitive edition’ of his book Changing Our Mind, subtitled as a ‘Landmark Call for Inclusion of LGBT Christians,’ he traces his own pilgrimage to eager LGBTQ+ advocacy.”

The road to embracing LGBTQ+ conference speakers begins with subtley teaching people that LGBTQ+ people matter to God, then moving people to engage with them by accepting them where they’re at, then inviting them into the church to hear the gospel and to experience the love of the congregation.

That’s the core of the teaching: what’s important is that Christians “love” these people. Yes, we are called to love all people, no matter who they are. But we are not called to affirm sinful behavior, beliefs, or choices.

I’ve seen this at work in a large church that I attended for years, but eventually left as it became clear that the lead pastor was caving to the LGBTQ+ agenda. The congregation’s rally cry was “Love everyone always.” But what it led to was “Affirm everyone always.”

This isn’t the first time that Stanley has been controversial, which is why Mohler says we saw this coming.

Andy Stanley, one of the most influential pastors in the United States, has been moving in this direction for years, often by suggestion and assertion but clouded by confusion and the deliberate avoidance of clarity. Back in 2018, he called for the church to be “unhitched” from the Old Testament, arguing that the Old Testament should not be understood as the “go-to source regarding any behavior in the church.” There goes “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination” (Leviticus 18:22). But, in truth, there goes the entire Old Testament. A few years before that, in a 2012 message Stanley seemed to argue that adultery is a sin but told of two men in a relationship with no suggestion that the same-sex coupling was forbidden by Scripture. When the message became controversial, Stanley did not clarify the situation at all. More recently, in another message Stanley dismissed Biblical texts against homosexual behavior as “clobber” verses and said, “If your theology gets in the way of ministry—like if there’s somebody you can’t minister to because of your theology—you have the wrong theology.”

This is not a misunderstanding. This is a trajectory that points to the Unconditional Conference and two speakers married to other men on the platform. This is a clear and tragic departure from Biblical Christianity.

As Christians, we have to be exceedingly careful where we draw lines. We don’t want to be legalistic, but we don’t want to err the other way by not calling sin what it is: sin.

Pray for Andy Stanley and North Point Community Church, that the Lord would call them back from error, if indeed the conference is affirming LGBTQ+ men and women as brothers and sisters in Christ.

I’ll be back at the end of next week.

by - 1 Comment

Daily Broadside | No Joke: They Really Are Coming For Your Children

So over the last couple of days I’ve been chronicling the filthy behavior of the Alphabet mafia during their so-called “Pride” events across the US and Canada. I’ve noted that barely clothed and fully naked men have been gyrating or bicycling or twerking in public with children present.

And the children are present with parents who either don’t care about the psychological damage such exposure will do to their kids or are simply too weak to resist being carried along by the open sewer running down the middle of our culture.

Worst of all, the sexual anarchists aren’t hiding that they are targeting our children.

LGBTQ activists participating in New York City’s annual Drag March on Friday sparked outrage for chanting “we’re here, we’re queer, we’re coming for your children” in a Manhattan park.

The marchers, many wearing flamboyant dresses and clothing, walked through Tompkins Square Park in the East Village Friday night as part of the city’s Pride Month celebrations.

Video of the march shows people laughing and joining in with the cheeky chant — including one dancing topless woman.

C’mon, guys. It’s just a “cheeky chant.”

Seriously.

A little naughty nothing to worry about. No big deal.

Many online users pointed out that the chant was more than likely a joke in response to accusations of pedophilia among the drag community from the right.

We’re just joking. LOL!

We’re not really coming for your children. We’re just mocking the totally unjustified stereotype you conservatives have of us. It’s your fault H8er!

What the reaction to the declaration that “we’re coming for your children” tells me is that there’s still a wide swath of the American public that does not accept homosexuality and transgenderism as “normal.” They only “accept” it because the state has told them to accept it. They only “accept” it because they no longer have the cultural weight to oppose it.

Another part of it is that no one wants someone else usurping the role of parent in a child’s life. Atheists and the irreligious don’t want Christians telling their kids about Jesus. Christians don’t want secular humanists telling their kids about evolution. And nobody wants sexual deviants telling their kids about fisting or tucking and binding.

Especially a stranger.

Any parent would feel offended when someone else undermines their authority by teaching their children something the parent wouldn’t. It’s a shocking loss of control that threatens the parent. That’s why parents are showing up to school board meetings to express their outrage about middle school teachers groomers.

But it’s more than that.

It’s that parents don’t accept homosexuality and transgenderism personally. They don’t accept it morally. And they sure as heck don’t want some godless hedonist influencing or molesting their children. They don’t want someone screwing up their kid’s moral center or their emotional stability.

Most of us have accepted that homosexuality has been mainstreamed. We’ve had our misgivings about where such integration into the culture would lead and warned that once we gave an inch, we could expect that other dominoes would fall. And now here we are with transgenderism already forcing itself toward normalization while drawing p3d0philia in its wake.

Disturbing details in the arrest of the nation’s first elected transgender legislator and a Massachusetts preschool worker on child exploitation and pornography charges have been released by the United States Department of Homeland Security.

Former New Hampshire State Rep. Stacie-Marie Laughton, a Democrat from Nashua and Lindsay Groves, a caregiver at the Creative Minds Learning Center in Tyngsboro, were both arrested and charged last week with multiple counts of child exploitation and distribution of child pornography. 

Laughton made history back in 2012 when she was elected as the first transgender lawmaker in the United States. She was elected to the New Hampshire House of Representatives.

The arrests of Laughton and Groves were initiated by the Nashua Police Department, but because of the nature of the crimes, it has been transferred to HSI for federal prosecution.

According to a report  based on a preliminary investigation into the case by a Homeland Security criminal investigator, Groves bragged in text messages that  she used  “natural bathroom breaks” at the daycare center prior to “naptime” to take photos of children’s genitals.

Special agent Rocco Rauseo said he was able to determine that the children allegedly exploited by Laughton and Groves are between the ages of 3 and 5. 

No joke.

by

Daily Broadside | New Term Tries to Make “Normal” Just Another Brick in the Wall

Not sure if you’ve heard, but there’s a new term being bandied about that applies to me and my sexuality. Straight men are now “gynosexuals” and we’re just another stripe on the Pride flag.

Are You Gynosexual? Here’s What It Means, According to Experts

It isn’t easy being a straight male these days unless maybe you enjoy all the privilege that Hunter Biden does. Everybody else gets their own special color on that increasingly garish flag, gets to bobble their man-boobs on the White House lawn, and has the entire month of June dedicated to whatever naughty thing they’re doing with their private parts — slice it, dice it, even make Julienne fries!

But as a straight white male, I don’t get any of that stuff. I have to make do somehow with my gorgeous wife of 21 years, my two handsome sons, and the rewarding career that I’ve pursued for more than two decades. It’s a daily struggle.

As of today, though, I don’t have to settle for less. Thanks to the experts, I now understand that I’m a total freak with my own special made-up word and everything.

Bite me, normies, because my color just went up on the Pride flag. That’s right: I’m a gynosexual, unlike the rest of you squares.

Stephen Green’s tongue-in-cheek take on the latest development in the dynamic world of ever-evolving sexual freakisms is humorous, but there is something vaguely threatening about it.

Gynosexual, according to sex educator Lilith Fox “refers to being sexually attracted to femininity, irrespective of one’s own gender identity or the gender identity of the femme-presenting person they are attracted to.” In plain English, it means that whether you’re a man or a woman, you are a gynosexual if you’re attracted to femininity in either a male or a female.

It means that you can be a boy and like girls, or you can be a girl and like girls. You can also be a boy and like a girly-boy, or be a girl and like a girly-boy. Up until a minute ago, we’ve known boys who like girls as normal and girls who like girls as “lesbian,” and boys who like boys as “gay” and girls who like boys as normal.

But once the LGBTQWERTY+ mafia began defining every conceivable combination of sexual deviancy, they had to invent labels for the normies.

That’s what I find vaguely threatening. Don’t label me. Don’t add me to your endless list of sex-addled possibilities. Don’t try to force me into some little quadrant of your sexual matrix. Doing that destroys the historic “binary” norm of “men” and “women.”

Which is the point.

One guy has put up a fight on Twitter over being labeled “cis” by the trans-community.

He was, of course, taken to the woodshed by the TransElites, who told him that he had no choice. He was “cis” and that was that, you “cissy.”

That’s when Elon Musk jumped in.

This is a front in the war on cultural norms. Language is powerful; if the trans-activists can change the language, the terms of the debate, they win the culture. And so far they’ve been very successful.

Resist. Refuse to accept the label.

by

Driving on the Wrong Side of the Road

How Bizarre is That?

Imagine someone driving on the wrong side of the road and justifying it by saying they have the right to be happy.

How bizarre is that?

Now envision that same situation, only now that person is being pulled from the wreckage that was their automobile after colliding with another car because they were in the wrong lane. But instead of admitting that it was their fault, they insist that it’s all due to an oppressive system that obligates them to conform in ways that make them feel uncomfortable.

The person who wants to see themselves as their own absolute is having to constantly reconfigure the human experience in order to validate their mindset as being beyond reproach. They’re like the middle schooler who turns in their multiple choice exam believing that because they had the freedom to choose how they wanted to answer each question, they’re automatically deserving of a perfect score.

This is the world of the individual who has declared himself as his own bottom line. There are no failing test scores, there are no standards, and anything that could be accurately processed as a consequence of their actions is dismissed by labeling it as a hateful convention coming from either a corrupt institution that needs to be destroyed or an ignorant individual that needs to be silenced.

They shoot themselves in the foot and then blame all the pain they’re in on the one who told them not to pull the trigger to begin with.

When you attempt to reason with this kind of person, you are not being heard as someone who’s questioning their logic as much as you are challenging their authority. It’s not about what’s true, it’s about what works as far as those statistics and testimonies that can be used to make a self serving agenda appear compassionate and preferrable while simultaneously validating themselves as the only one that they’re accountable to.

And yet…

Practical Gravity and Simple Math

The validity of one’s perspective is ultimately proven by what happens when that perspective is put into practice. However convoluted and volatile the debate may be, feelings and beliefs can be readily identified as being either clarifying or distracting simply by observing those things that result from the application of any one methodology.

Should one approach translate to a world of pain and problems, that perspective can then be logically subordinated to a viewpoint that yields better results. At that point, you’re not looking at anything other than pure utility and however passionate you may be about your particular brand of morality, you are no longer able to assert your preferences as principles when all that exists in the aftermath is a mess you expect someone else to clean up.

There has always been an element that wants to push back against those things that remind them that there is such a thing as “practical gravity.” You cannot hope to do certain things and not have to contend with the natural consequences of your actions. If you decide to jump out of an airplane as it’s flying through the sky, you can’t deny the effects of gravity simply because you want to believe that you have the right to be happy or because you believe that gravity is a byproduct of an oppressive hierarchy.

In a similar way, you can’t drive on the wrong side of the road and not risk a head on collision, nor can you embrace what amounts to a perverse or irresponsible lifestyle and not be confronted with the medical and practical realities that characterize the choice that you have made.

There is a natural order in place that transcends whatever it is that drives your resolve and you can’t circumvent that infrastructure simply because it doesn’t coincide with your opinion on the matter.

It’s math, really.

The way you think + the way you act = the price you pay

Wise decisions tend to be very beneficial and cost very little.

On the other hand, foolish choices can be lethal and in that way are very expensive.

And here’s the thing: When that bill arrives, it’s your responsibility. However you want to insist that it’s someone else’s fault or another person’s obligation, you’re the one that has to come up with the functional finances necessary to pay the amount owed which will inevitably include a lack of fulfillment, a substantial amount of wasted time and a collection of physical and emotional scars.

Antiquated Traditions

Some want to try and avoid the “practical gravity” of their situation by insisting that the angst they experience as a result of the way they choose to process themselves and the world around them is due to the unjust and antiquated traditions of the society they live in.

Perhaps.

But then again, if your perspective is revealed as being problematic in terms of what happens when your perspective is put into practice, it’s not the society you live in that’s causing the tension, it’s the organic outcome of your flawed approach.

It’s not the Supreme Court, it’s not a political party, it’s not a cultural trend or a societal norm.

You’re driving on the wrong side of the road and there are consequences to not staying in your lane that are based more so on the laws of Physics and Chemistry then they are the Department of Motor Vehicles.

This is the problem you inevitably encounter when you establish any kind of human agency as your philosophical foundation.

Die, Quit or Change

You have chosen to build your existence on a platform that is destined to either die, quit or change. It is as fluid as it is inconsistent and whatever rights or truisms you want to maintain as givens will resonate as such only when you’ve surrounded yourself with like-minded individuals. Reason being is that you can’t logically condemn another person’s viewpoint if everyone is entitled to their opinion and the universe is nothing more than a lucky mistake.

This is what happens when you remove God from the equation. Bear in mind that there are only two religions in the world: Either God is God or you are. Every religion on the planet empowers the individual with the ability to facilitate their own salvation. Only Christianity maintains that you are not your own deity and the only thing that you contribute to your salvation is the sin that makes it necessary.

When you embrace God as your philosophical starting point and the Substance of the empty tomb as what defines your identity, you’re no longer tasked with having to manufacture a reason for your existence or an enduring Source of fulfillment.

Bear in mind we’re talking about the Person of Jesus Christ – the Son of God and not a corrupted clergyman or a hypocritical layperson. Neither one of those two individuals died for your sins or put the planets in their place.

The Image of God, the Son of God and the Spirit of God

You are made in the Image of God, you have been redeemed by the Son of God and you have access to a Perfect Source of Purpose, Peace and Power because of the Spirit of God who lives in and through you.

Like our Founding Fathers, you can effectively dispute injustice because you’re not limited to a human premise, and unlike those who borrow from God without believing in Him, you can accurately claim an entitlement as a legitimate right because you know that they’re gifts from God He gives to guard your way and not weapons you use in an attempt to get your way.

Moreover, you don’t see His Instructions as “rules” as much as you see them as “tools” that you use to realize a life where you are making a difference and not just an appearance.

Scale That Wall and Dismantle That Strategy

There will always be people who drive on the wrong side of the road. They will justify themselves with compelling sounding arguments framed by a strategy designed to avoid that direct line of questioning that has the capacity to reveal their platform as toxic and self-serving.

But you can scale that wall and dismantle that strategy by focusing on the empirical results of their perspective and allow the logic of how a flawed methodology needs to be subordinated to an approach that yields a better outcome.

When you hear someone say, “That’s your opinion!” or “You can’t force your beliefs on me!” they’re neither proving their point nor are they proving you to be wrong. Rather, they’re attempting to secure the kind of pity that’s awarded to the person who’s been hurt in order to distract from the wreckage caused by their own decision making.

You can’t always change a person’s mind without changing their heart and only God can do that.

But God can use you to make an impact and you want to be ready to do more than argue…

You want to champion the Truth by asking the right questions and letting their responses not only make your point, but more importantly make Him known.

by - 2 Comments

Daily Broadside | Beating a Dead Horse To Fight the Progressives

It’s Pride Month! and that can only mean one thing: at the risk of beating a dead horse, I want to revisit, again, the idea of abandoning Target and any other commercial enterprise that supports the Marxist (read: communist) induced destruction of American culture and history. I’m motivated to stay on the topic not only because of more reading I’ve done, but by the outing of other major brands that have jumped on the sexual deviancy bandwagon, including department store Kohl’s, the Los Angeles Dodgers baseball team, and Chick-Fil-A (as I mentioned in yesterday’s post).

Carina Benton writes in The American Spectator that conservatives don’t have what it takes to win the culture war. The sub-head of her article reads, “The conservative movement is incapable of fighting, much less winning, an unprecedented revolution against Western civilization.“

We’re in the throes of an unprecedented winner-takes-all revolution against Western civilization. Since the objective of worldwide communism, cunningly rebranded in recent decades as “globalism,” was always the full communization of the United States, this is no surprise. The real shock for many on the right is that the conservative movement is ipso facto incapable of fighting, much less crushing, this rebellion.

This assumes, of course, that the “culture war” is still winnable. If it is, it’s going to be a long climb.

She goes on to say that what we need is not conservatives, but counter-revolutionaries. She explains:

A decade earlier, [Whittaker] Chambers met with Gen. Walter Krivitsky, a former senior Soviet military intelligence officer and a fellow Communist Party fugitive. They shared their perspectives on communism and agreed that the forces of history in the postmodern era “can be grasped only as the interaction of revolution and counterrevolution.” When a totalitarian, pseudo-messianic ideology like communism seeks the radical remaking of governments, societies, economies, history, culture, families, and the individual himself, there is no middle ground.

The problem, as Chambers saw it, is that counterrevolution has little to do with conservatism. The conservative seeks first to conserve what he is and what he has. He wants to be left alone and is largely uninterested in self-sacrifice. This is the head-in-sand strategy: If I ignore it long enough, it will probably just go away.

This statement threw me a little; part of “conserving” your way of life is to fight for it, and we just spent Monday memorializing the ultimate sacrifice that many thousands of Americans made to keep freedom alive here and in other places around the world. However, if you consider what’s happening just within our country, I think it’s accurate to describe conservatives as hoping that if they ignore developments long enough, “it will probably just go away.”

Spoiler alert: No it won’t.

The passive resistance of the conservative movement has been further diluted through its mésalliance with the my way, your way, anyway classical liberals, whose lack of a fixed moral compass is the ideological loophole communists exploited to gain a foothold in this country in the first place. The product of this union is the line-in-sand strategy: don’t force me to abandon my side and I’ll leave you alone on yours.

Both stratagems are futile against the violent and inexorable tides of communism. If he adopts the former, the conservative will be engulfed in the deluge. If he tries the latter, his position will be erased and redrawn to the point that he no longer recalls where he started.

Ms. Benton then goes on to contrast “a conservative” with “a counter-revolutionist,” including these two examples:

The conservative frankly can’t keep track of which companies he’s supposed to boycott. The counter-revolutionist has the names etched in his brain. He’ll happily forgo slave-labor merch from misogynistic brands like Nike and disposable junk designed by satanists for groomer retailers like Target.

The conservative won’t let politics get in the way of sports. The counter-revolutionist won’t offend God and scandalize his children by supporting leagues like the NHL and the MLB that venerate sodomy, adultery, and blasphemy.

Unfortunately, I can see myself in the “conservative” side of the comparison, but I’ve got the growing conviction of the counter-revolutionary side. In other words, she’s saying that those of us who consider ourselves “conservatives” need to take a stronger stand and draw a harder line against the attacks from the Left. I think my call to “abandon” Target moves me to the counter-revolutionary side of the equation.

But then add to that Tom Gilson’s article in The Stream, and I’m even more convinced that this is what we need to be doing.

Target stores, which put “Pride” garishly on display several days ago, got hit hard by a boycott over it. The market value of the company dropped $9 billion last week. As for me, I’ve decided I’m not boycotting them. I’m also not associating with them. At all. For a long time to come. That includes not shopping there.

Sounds like a boycott, you say? Of course it does. And if you’ve decided to boycott them, I support you in it. There’s a big difference in my mind, though. A boycott is an economic power maneuver, meant to force a company to change its mind or at least its policies. Target has already changed its policies, or so I’m told: The display is gone, or at least moved away from the front door. The boycott has already had some effect, in other words.

That’s well and good, as far as it goes. It doesn’t change what they revealed about themselves, though. They sold products designed by a woman appearing as if a man, who also designed a pastel pin with the words “homophobe headrest,” and a drawing of a guillotine. And a sweet little heart to go with it. Maybe she meant it as a joke? Sorry, but no. I can’t view it that charitably. With the kind of anger gay activists routinely aim at conservatives, there’s no room for that kind of “joking.”

In other words, Gilson has abandoned Target as a place to shop because of what they revealed about themselves as a company: they’re evil.

Finally, there’s this from John Hayward, as reported by MacAoidh at The Hayride. As always, I encourage you to read every article I’ve linked.

I’ve been shopping at Target forever, but I can’t go in there anymore. The moral hazard has become too great. I won’t tell the kids of the future that I was unwilling to change my shopping habits to stand up for them. I won’t be part of the deranged extremism Target is pushing.

I don’t think anyone should be mollified by little symbolic concessions Target makes in a desperate bid to avoid getting Bud Lighted. The extremists are still in control of the company. No heads have rolled. The company is signaling the fascists that its heart is still with them.

Nothing less than complete de-wokification should be accepted by disgusted consumers: executives named and fired, apologies given, enraged woke boycotts that fizzle because there just aren’t that many of them. You’ll know a company means it when the Woke howl with outrage.

If companies want to be run by tiny bands of extremist lunatics, then let that be their customer base. Let competitors step in to pick up the customer base they’ve chosen to abandon. We’ll compare balance sheets at year-end and see which is the wiser business model.

Whoa, I could’ve written that! In fact, I’ve said the same thing (here): if companies want to cater to the LBGTQWERTY extremists, let that be their customer base. In fact, if you think about it logically, Target and Kohl’s and any other “woke” clothing stores shouldn’t be marketing infant onesies to members of the Alphabet Mob because gays, lesbians and trannies as a whole have very few children. What gives?

You may think those department stores are marketing baby clothes to normal men and women who marry and have children, but those onesies are better explained as part of a peace offering to the religion of woke extremism. Here’s the truth: Target isn’t trying to impress you; they’re trying to impress the woke gods and their financiers — State Street, Vanguard, and Blackrock.

It truly is a cult.

So again, I exhort all of you to join me in being a counter-revolutionary and abandoning those commercial enterprises that are actively destroying our country and, more importantly, mocking the God of creation. Just know that it won’t be easy, as MacAoidh reminds us:

So disentangling yourself from the machine, in an effort not to feed it or ideally to teach it a lesson, is going to be difficult.

It’ll take commitment that the machine is betting you won’t make.

Dumping Major League Baseball, or the NFL, or Target, or Bud Light, or Disney, might very well make your life less fun to lead. It will probably make for more inconvenience. It’s not what you’re likely used to.

Except you’ve got to be as committed to your point of view as the wokesters are to theirs. Either that, or we won’t win this fight.

Buy local, and buy small. Avoid doing business with large corporations altogether, and especially with publicly traded corporations. The publics are the companies yoked to radical agendas like ESG and DEI, and they’re largely under the control of institutional investors like Vanguard, Blackrock and State Street. Those big investment houses will backstop a stock to keep it from collapse, so long as the recipient of such generosity plays ball with the social agenda.

It’s why I’ve been making the point that you can do without a lot of things. As I’ve said, “Here’s the reality: there are only a few things that we really “need.” Food. Water. Clothing. A roof over our heads. Almost everything else is discretionary. Start with those things, then wean yourself off of indiscriminate consumer spending. Then, be very specific about the companies you purchase from.”

Choose to make the sacrifice now or it may be a bigger one you’ll be forced to make later.

by

Daily Broadside | Dictionaries Are Like Canaries in the Coal Mine

Daily Verse | Hebrews 4:13
Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight.

Thursday’s Reading: Hebrews 5-7

Thursday and we’re quickly losing time to get the Christmas shopping done. If you want to officially track Santa this year, NORAD can help.

You may remember earlier this year that I bought an old copy of Webster’s Secondary School Dictionary and posted pictures of the definitions of what a woman and a female were in 1913. I then compared those to the online Merriam-Webster’s dictionary definitions, where we learned that Webster’s had caved and expanded their definition of “female” to include “… a gender identity that is the opposite of male …”

Apparently not wanting to be left out of the virtue-signaling taking the world by storm, the online Cambridge Dictionary has gone a step further and has added inclusive definitions of a man and a woman.

The Cambridge Dictionary recently updated its definitions of “man” and “woman” to include people whose gender identity doesn’t correspond with their biological sex.

The definition of “man” in the online version includes a second meaning: “an adult who lives and identifies as male though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth.”

It didn’t occur to me at the time of my previous post to check on the word “man” and “male,” so I’ve just taken a look at Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary to compare it to Cambridge’s. The first two are Cambridge’s, the next two are Merriam-Webster’s.

Merriam-Webster gets credit for keeping the definition of “man” rational.

The Cambridge Dictionary also updated their definition of “woman” which Christopher Rufo called attention to.

Note, too, that the definition includes a plural pronoun (they) as opposed to “she.” As Rufo says, “Notice that the dictionary writers say ‘*they* may have been.’ They couldn’t bring themselves to write ‘she may have been,’ because they know they’re lying. That’s the tell,” he tweeted.”

This is how a society is overthrown. Not all at once but little by little, changes persisting like waves against the shoreline until the erosion undermines your house and it collapses around you.

by

Daily Broadside | Brandon Gives Brinton the Recognition He Longs For

Daily Verse | Numbers 4:20
“But the Kohathites must not go in to look at the holy things, even for a moment, or they will die.”

Monday’s Reading: Numbers 9-12

Monday and we’re off to a new week in the ever more increasingly bizarre clown world that is the Brandon administration.

Politico reported last week that Sam Brinton, an LGBTQ+ activist and drag queen “pup” fetishist, has been appointed to serve as deputy assistant secretary of Spent Fuel and Waste Disposition for the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy (ONE).

Behold your new high-level official of a key federal department:

There’s no doubt the “non-binary” man seems capable of his job.

According to a biography Brinton provided to the LGBTQ Religious Archives Network (LGBTQ-RAN), he holds a dual Master’s degree from MIT in engineering systems and nuclear science and engineering, is the founder of “Core Solutions Consulting that provides technical expertise on topics ranging from nuclear waste management to advanced nuclear reactor innovation and nuclear non-proliferation policy to advanced nuclear companies,” and has advised Congress on related issues.

But there’s more to Sam Brinton than his degree, and I’m not going to spend any time on his “pup” fetish or his interest in sex with animals. You can find that on your own if you’re interested. What I’m more concerned about is his activism and what this unprecedented step means for the future of our government and nation.

However, the biography also details Brinton’s work as an adviser to the Obama administration on LGBT issues and an activist for campaigns to ban talk therapy for unwanted same-sex attraction, such as the BornPerfect Campaign and 50 Bills 50 States, ostensibly driven by his experience as a “survivor of a traumatic and torturous conversion therapy experience.”

This is the key. Perhaps you wonder what his sexual proclivities have to do with his ability to do his job.

Nothing. He can (apparently) do the job.

The problem is the agenda that comes with Sam Brinton.

He also openly says, on his website, that he uses his nuclear background to gain access to senior corridors of power, to influence leaders to accept the full panoply of sexual deviance:

You might believe that Brinton’s capacity to do the DOE job has nothing to do with his kink activism, but he doesn’t share your belief. He believes that it is good and right to gain access to senior levels of government, and use that access for advocacy. Anybody inside DOE who has to work with this guy now should be on notice that he is going to be watching them for signs that they don’t affirm him in every way — and he will make trouble for them. Guaranteed.

Here’s the thing: Brandon and his cohort of activists don’t care about you and your conservative norms. The appointment of Sam Brinton is so in our face, so depraved, so contrary to what has been considered “normal” and “moral” for generations, that it offends the sensibilities of Normal Americans.

But “normal” Americans are a dying breed. Brinton is not universally seen as a perverted and mentally unwell person. As Rod Dreher writes, “We live in a culture in which Brinton is not seen as a failure, but as a success.”

It is going to be quite interesting to see how official conservative Washington responds to the Sam Brinton hire. I bet response is muted to positive. Why? Because though what Brinton represents is being championed by liberals, and he is a progressive hero, objecting publicly to people like Brinton and what they represent is something that is no longer done in elite circles, even among conservative elites. By the time the Boomers and the Xers die out, there will be no one left to object.

Meanwhile, as I’ve said, this is radically changing our society. Read the Rensselaer Polytechnic story: the young are being taught, and accepting the teaching, that perverts like Sam Brinton are liberating and sympathetic figures, figures that incarnate possible futures for themselves. Is this what you want for your children? Because we are all going to get it.

We need to all realize — and I’m talking to myself here too — that classical liberalism is not going to save us from this decadence. I have long resisted the implications of this conclusion, because I really do want to live in a world of relative tolerance. I am not as confident as others that this is the natural end point of liberalism, because we lived within classical liberalism for centuries without this kind of thing. What is becoming clear to me is that this is what classical liberalism is when separated from Christian faith, or at least from a metaphysical/religious structure that sets boundaries within the classical liberal framework. This is what the Founding Father John Adams meant when he said:

“We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for any other.”

And here we are today: post-Christian, and plunging into decadence because we have unbridled our basest passions. If Sam Brinton kept his base passions hidden, that would be one thing. But he parades them, has built a lucrative public profile and career on them, and openly exploits them for cultural and political hegemony. When Brinton was in short pants, his predecessors in the movement appealed to liberal values of tolerance and individual dignity to open the doors to people like him. Now that they are in command of the culture, there will be no more liberal tolerance, only compelled affirmation of the kind of deviance that was unimaginable a generation ago to most people.

Giving Brinton a highly elevated role in the federal government validates his sexual perversions, his debased morality, and his mental unwellness. It also pokes a very large finger in the eyes of what’s left of a modest and largely Christian culture.

But this is our country now and it’s defining deviance down further than we ever thought possible.

by

Daily Broadside | Threat Against Christians: Humorous. Threat Against Gays: Hateful

Daily Verse | Proverbs 1:7
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom,
but fools despise wisdom and discipline.

Monday and it’s hard to know which latest degeneracy to warn about as our culture pushes to find the ever-elusive bottom of the moral gutter. There’s so much to choose from! Today’s five-alarm headline is the scornful and creepy “A Message from the Gay Community,” performed by the San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus.

Their message: “We’ll convert your children.”

Their audience is anyone who believes that LGBTQ+ relationships and sexual activity are sinful. It’s right there in the first line: “You think we’re sinful.”

The SFGMC released their confession on YouTube, but after getting blowback, made it private. They immediately went into damage control, trying to salvage what they could of the public relations disaster they had created. The obvious first step was to blame, shame and spin.

They blamed the “alt. right” (they’re saying Bible-believing Christians are far-right extremists) and accused them for “anti-gay hate” and “willful intolerance and aggressive hate.” You see, if you register an objection to sodomizers confessing that they’re coming for your children, you’re now not just hateful, but “aggressively” hateful. You’re not just intolerant, but “willfully” intolerant. These people inflate the degree of felt opposition by using heavy emotional adjectives that are effectively only their opinion.

They also shield their anthem from criticism by claiming that it’s an “obviously tongue and [sic] cheek song” in response to an “epithet used against our community.” The “epithet” is presumably that Christians and other like-minded people believe (and say) that the gay community will corrupt their children. It’s right in the first stanza: “You think that we’ll corrupt your kids.”

Correct: we do. And double-correct: you have.

And again the apologists also use a word that is a matter of opinion: “obviously.” As in, “obviously we’re only kidding, you hateful bigots.” So they’re claiming to be making light of my concerns as a parent, meaning that they don’t take my fears seriously.

Either way, the perverts are giving me the finger.

From Ace of Spades:

The San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus privated their video after finding out that promising to prey on people’s children wasn’t the cute viral moment they were looking for, but it was copied here, if you want to see the degeneracy.

If that video doesn’t work, well, I guess they got another takedown.|

The group published a non-apology bragging that they’re getting every single copy of their video struck down on fake legal grounds:

The irony of a group that has just published a song claiming that they’re “coming for your children,” like some demented trolls, fretting over “increasingly alarming” comments and wanting to keep everyone involved “safe” isn’t lost on me.

Oh, c’mon. I’ll bet most of that “hate” is just tongue-in-cheek, don’t ya think?

Funny how when you’re the target your perspective changes and it’s not funny anymore.

As a Christian man with children, I have no problem standing against the stated goals of these people, satirical or not. Every commie organization wants the children, as do the sexual extremists who have gotten everything they want — except my approval. And my withholding that approval is deemed “willful intolerance” … as though that’s a bad thing.

If you can stomach it, below are the full lyrics of “A Message From the Gay Community”, along with the introductory comments from the lead singer:

AS WE CELEBRATE PRIDE AND THE PROGRESS WE’VE MADE OVER THESE PAST YEARS, THERE’S STILL WORK TO BE DONE. SO TO THOSE OF YOU OUT THERE WHO ARE STILL WORKING AGAINST EQUAL RIGHTS, WE’VE A MESSAGE FOR YOU:

YOU THINK WE’RE SINFUL,
YOU FIGHT AGAINST OUR RIGHTS,
YOU SAY WE ALL LEAD LIVES YOU CAN’T RESPECT.
BUT YOU’RE JUST FRIGHTENED,
YOU THINK THAT WE’LL CORRUPT YOUR KIDS
IF OUR AGENDA GOES UNCHECKED.
FUNNY, JUST THIS ONCE, YOU’RE CORRECT.

WE’LL CONVERT YOUR CHILDREN,
HAPPENS BIT BY BIT,
QUIETLY AND SUBTLELY
AND YOU WILL BARELY NOTICE IT,
YOU CAN KEEP THEM FROM DISCO,
WARN ABOUT SAN FRANCISCO.
MAKE ‘EM WEAR PLEATED PANTS,
WE DON’T CARE…
WE’LL CONVERT YOUR CHILDREN…
WE’LL MAKE THEM TOLERANT AND FAIR.

JUST LIKE YOU WORRIED,
THEY’LL CHANGE THEIR GROUP OF FRIENDS,
YOU WON’T APPROVE OF WHERE THEY GO AT NIGHT
(TO PROTESTS)
OH, AND YOU’LL BE DISGUSTED
(SO GROSS)
WHEN THEY START FINDING THINGS ONLINE
THAT YOU’VE KEPT FAR FROM THEIR SIGHT
(LIKE INFORMATION…)
GUESS WHAT?
YOU’LL STILL BE ALRIGHT!

WE’LL CONVERT YOUR CHILDREN,
REACHING ONE AND ALL.
THERE’S REALLY NO ESCAPING IT
‘CAUSE EVEN GRANDMA LIKES RUPAUL.
AND THE WORLD’S GETTING KINDER.
GEN Z’S GAYER THAN GRINDR.
LEARN TO LOVE,
LEARN TO VOGUE,
FACE YOUR FATE!
WE’LL CONVERT YOUR CHILDREN,
SOMEONE’S GOTTA TEACH THEM NOT TO HATE.

WE’RE COMING FOR THEM
WE’RE COMING FOR YOUR CHILDREN
WE’RE COMING FOR THEM
WE’RE COMING FOR THEM
WE’RE COMING FOR YOUR CHILDREN
FOR YOUR CHILDREN

YOU’RE CHILDREN WILL CARE ABOUT
FAIRNESS AND JUSTICE FOR OTHERS
YOUR CHILDREN WILL WORK TO CONVERT
ALL THEIR SISTERS AND BROTHERS
THEN, SOON, WE’RE ALMOST CERTAIN,
YOU’RE KIDS WILL START CONVERTIN’ YOU!

THE GAY AGENDA IS COMING HOME
THE GAY AGENDA IS HERE!

BUT YOU DON’T HAVE TO WORRY
‘CAUSE THERE’S NOTHING WRONG WITH
STANDING BY OUR SIDE
GET ON BOARD IN A HURRY
BECAUSE THE WORLD ALWAYS NEEDS
A BIT MORE PRIDE

BUT YOU DON’T HAVE TO WORRY
‘CAUSE THERE’S NOTHING WRONG WITH
STANDING BY OUR SIDE
(THE GAY AGENDA)
GET ON BOARD IN A HURRY
BECAUSE THE WORLD ALWAYS NEEDS
A BIT MORE PRIDE
COME ON, TRY A LITTLE PRIDE!

WE’LL CONVERT YOUR CHILDREN,
THEN WE’LL TURN TO YOU
GIVING UP THE FEAR INSIDE
IS FREEING LIKE YOU NEVER KNEW!
GO AND SEE SAN FRANCISCO!
GO AND TURN UP THAT DISCO!
YOU’LL FORGET YOU WERE EVER UPSET
WE’LL CONVERT YOUR CHILDREN
AND MAKE AN ALLY OF YOU YET!

WE’LL MAKE AN ALLY OF YOU YET!
WE’LL MAKE AN ALLY OF YOU YET!

Hilarious, isn’t it?

by

Daily Broadside | This New Toy Wants You to Feel Included

Daily Broadside | Esther 4:14
“For if you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance for the Jews will arise from another place, but you and your father’s family will perish. And who knows but that you have come to royal position for such a time as this?”

It’s Monday and we’re off into another week which happens to be the last one in May. “Turtle dove” sounds like the best combination of chocolate in the world.

Next month is June, which is the first month of the summer season and the month in which the longest day of the year occurs. It’s also the month now celebrated as Pride Month. Just in time to celebrate, toymaker LEGO has announced a brand new box set called “Everyone is Awesome.” The 346-piece set offers 11 figures with each assigned a color of the rainbow.

CNN quotes creator Matthew Ashton, who says, “I wanted to create a model that symbolizes inclusivity and celebrates everyone, no matter how they identify or who they love.” Mind you, this has nothing to do with building things with plastic bricks; it has everything to do with making people feel like they belong. When you don’t feel like you belong, you feel left out or alienated from others.

People (especially kids) feeling alienated or left out is a common experience. Listen to Ashton describe his experience:

“Growing up as an LGBTQ+ kid – being told what I should play with, how I should walk, how I should talk, what I should wear – the message I always got was that somehow I was ‘wrong’,” he said. “Trying to be someone I wasn’t was exhausting. I wish, as a kid, I had looked at the world and thought: ‘This is going to be OK, there’s a place for me’. I wish I’d seen an inclusive statement that said ‘everyone is awesome’.”

The alienation is real, so the problem he’s trying to resolve is real. But, as Albert Mohler observes, the alienation is misplaced — “the primary alienation is the alienation of the creature from the Creator.” And that can’t be fixed with a model toy that tells you, “you’re awesome.”

(Somewhat inexplicably, the Lego set is targeted at the eighteen-plus crowed. If you believe that it won’t be bought for children at much younger ages, I’ve got a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.)

The other thing to note here is the title of the set: Everyone is Awesome. Returning to Mohler, he says,

What exactly does “awesome” mean? Even if you understand how the word has been devalued in our society, is everyone awesome? Is everyone awesome all the time? Are you going to speak of everyone is equally awesome? Does it have anything to do with sexual identity? And as everything is awesome, everything really is awesome. I don’t think so. It’s a branding message but it’s also a branding message that fits into the model confusion of our time. We don’t actually believe that everyone is awesome as defined by character, as defined by behavior, as defined by any number of things. We do believe that everyone is equally made in the image of God and every single human being bears equal dignity and thus infinite worth. The statement, “Everyone is awesome,” basically sounds like the understanding that everyone must have a trophy.

For those who long to be affirmed as having “worth,” the message “you’re awesome” is very appealing. But relationships and circumstances and cultural norms change. What happens when the people who tell you you’re awesome aren’t around any more? When the job tells you to start looking for other opportunities? When what you ‘identify as’ becomes “the norm”?

Where do you find lasting affirmation?

Who you are is the core issue, and the Bible tells us we are all made in the image of God, but that image has been marred by sin in everyone of us. That’s the issue that we have to address, and we can’t do it by looking to others to provide the affirmation we need. In fact, sometimes rather than affirming someone based on their sexuality, we need to affirm them based on their dignity in the eyes of an all-loving God.

The “Everyone Is Awesome” Lego model is just a continuation of the moral degeneracy that we’re suffering as a nation. It’s one more burr hooked into the lining of our national moral framework. True affirmation comes not from those around us, but from the One who made us.