By Gary Hunt
Just a week before Christmas, the Spirit of the Christian Faith has arisen to a degree unseen for decades. It began when a reality program personality, in an interview, made observations about his faith and the Bible, principally directed at queers - those who have aberrational lifestyles.
In just a few days, the forces of the oppressed people of Christian Faith, or simply, Christian moral values, have come together by the millions to denounce those who would use social, political, or economic pressure to suppress what has been foundational to this country, and land, for nearly four centuries.
Under the guise of political correctness, "tolerance", and verbicide (the changing of the meaning of a word to effect a social or legal change), our country has been chicaned (past tense of chicanery) into a submissive state, in terms of moral values.
Let's look at how verbicide works (See Freedom of Speech). We take a perfectly innocuous word, having a meaning that is readily accepted and has a positive connotation, such as:
Webster's New Ideal Dictionary (1978)
gay: 1.) happily excited; MERRY, 2 a.) BRIGHT, LIVELY, b.) brilliant in color, 3.) given to social pleasures; also, LICENTIOUS
Now, that third definition may border on immorality, though it is the least significant, and most often referred to the "gay blades" of the aristocracy.
Merriam-Webster on line (2013)
gay: 1 a.) happily excited: merry <in a gay mood>, b.) keenly alive and exuberant: having or inducing high spirits <a bird's gay spring song>, 2 a.) bright, lively <gay sunny meadows>, b.) brilliant in color , 3.) given to social pleasures; also : licentious, 4 a.) homosexual <gay men>, b.) of, relating to, or used by homosexuals <the gay rights movement> <a gay bar>
In just over thirty years, we have a fourth definition, that, though in fourth place in Merriam-Webster, has become, in common usage, the only remaining definition of the word, as any other definition would tend to assign an improper connotation to the use of the word.
An example would be, say, the old "Donna Reed Show" (1958-1966), where, on occasion, the Stones would be invited to a "gay party" (actual expression in a number of the series episodes). Of course, it was not a party of queers, rather, it was a party where the atmosphere would be jovial, and there would be humor in the telling of clean jokes.
However, if one were to say that they were going to a "gay party", today, some would be excited, however most, being those of Christian moral values, would look askance at the person who made such claim.
What has happened is that a change in definition has had the affect of changing the moral and social acceptance of a lifestyle that might best be left in "the closet".
Once the structure -- the verbicide -- has come into play, the next step is a demand for tolerance (how can you demand tolerance, isn't that, in itself, intolerance?).
This call for tolerance came out because of the interview, mentioned above, when GLAAD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) responded to what Phil Robertson said, when explaining his religious beliefs. He explained that there is a logical fit between certain parts of the human anatomy, and there is a "not logical" fit. He then paraphrases Corinthians, in the Bible, when he lumps "the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers" into one lot, those that will not inherit the Kingdom of God.
GLAAD spokesperson, Wilson Cruz, condemned his Robertson's words, saying that "Phil and his family claim to be Christian, but Phil’s lies about an entire community fly in the face of what true Christians believe." I do find it interesting when a spokesman for queers asserts his understanding of the Bible and its moral values, contrary to the wording in that Bible.
But, wait, GLAAD admits, by their organization's name, that they are "Against Defamation". So, they, then, defame Robertson for paraphrasing an ancient source of moral values, when they, GLAAD, have probably never taken the time to read, let alone understand, that book that was fundamental to the origination of our country and moral laws.
Instead, he reverts to a one-sided attempt at "tolerance" (the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with), which in his statement, is demonstrative of intolerance. Cruz continues, "He clearly knows nothing about gay people or the majority of Louisianans -- and Americans -- who support legal recognition for loving and committed gay and lesbian couples." Interesting that the presumption of what the majority believes is coming from one that is desperately seeking acceptance, and presumes to speak for those who have, as a result of both verbicide and "tolerance", simply remained silent (tolerant) for the sake of "political correctness".
Perhaps, however, the greatest gift that Providence has given to mankind, in recent times, is this demonstration of the deviation from holding moral principles and values, and the necessity to begin to stand, once again, for those values that are at the very heart of this great nation.
Like fireworks bursting forth, to celebrate the birth of Jesus, the Christ, the rebirth of moral values, and against political correctness, is now bursting forth in a brilliance, and with a magnitude, that will propel us forward an return us to the moral nation that was once, and will be again, the greatest nation on this earth.
With that in mind, let me wish to all,
A Merry
Christmas
No comments:
Post a Comment