Marriage and Normality under seige

The LBGTI Lobby

This acronym sounds like a bacon and lettuce sandwich with the lot, but is the current flag under which lobbyists of every sexual orientation other than normal heterosexuality is fighting. And fighting they are.

Not that long ago homosexual acts were crimes. Then the cry went up “what place does the law have in private bedrooms” and homosexual acts between consenting adults was de-criminalised. Fair enough in a secular state if it had stopped there. But it didn't. Granted many – perhaps most of the small percentage of the population who defined themselves as “gay” were content to live quietly with their partner.
But there was a vocal group who were incredibly, almost impossibly promiscuous and who were far and away the major group affected by aids. They mounted a brilliant and unrelenting scare and propaganda campaign. (I even had 80 year old widows and single ladies in my congregation afraid they would catch aids!)
One of the claims of this propaganda was that the general heterosexual population was at risk. This was backed up by stories from Africa. But in a medical journal I read that this did happen in Africa because there was such a high rate of promiscuousness coupled with a low availability of medical treatment that untreated venereal disease was endemic and gave rise to running sores so that there was an easy entry path for the aids virus. This was not the case in developed Western countries.
When I wrote this my parish newsletter I the 80's I was reprimanded by the bishop. The Anglican church had already been infected by the homosexual extremist's campaign.
Since then anti-discrimination legislation has made LBGTI's one of the “protected species” of identity politics while Christians have been “fair game” for attacks and vilification.
The movement has not stopped there. Films at first showed the good side of homosexuality – who could not sympathise with the pair in “the Birdcage” and as I said there were many like that who were just living quietly as best they knew how. But for the extremists it did not stop there. More gay, lesbian and bisexual characters appeared in films – I suspect far exceeding their representation in the general population. One we were acclimatised to that, overt homosexual sex scenes appeared.
On the political front there was the push for “marriage equality” that is to say they wanted homosexual marriage instituted by law – curiously at the same time that a very large proportion of heterosexual unions were de-facto rather than legally instituted. So much so that laws were passed to give property rights to de-facto couples breaking up the relationship.
Laws were then passed giving that same property rights as marriage entailed to breakup of homosexual relationships. But that was not enough. It had to be “marriage”. In many jurisdictions homosexual marriage has been made law, in others lobbyists are still trying.
While all sections the community was extending a “live and let live” attitude to homosexuals, the LBGTI extremists and the social progressives who had taken up their cause had no intention of reciprocating in kind. Anyone who wanted the word and institution “marriage” to mean “between a man and a woman” was immediately howled down, called a bigot and a homophobe and excoriated in social media – which sometimes cost the victim of this attack their job. There was no tolerance now of the traditional view or of those who held it. Religious tolerance – a cornerstone of modern Western democracy was to be suspended towards a Christianity that did not espouse gay marriage. (Islam was naturally exempt because it was – at a distance – the darling of the progressive left).
But again that was not enough!
Now curricula are being forcibly introduced into Australian schools by government mandate teaching children from kindergarten up that gender is “fluid”. There are no longer “boys” and “girls”. All “hetero-normative” expressions were to be avoided. Children were to be trained to at various times to chose to be one, and then perhaps at another time chose to be another gender.
Even government departments were instructed to avoid all hetero-normative words!
Added to this the idea of constancy “till death do us part” (even to a same sex partner) is completely rejected. Sexual immorality is assumed.
Mercifully there has been some public outcry, and the few non-progressive media have severely criticised these and there are some signs that governments may back pedal. The frightful aims of these social terrorists have been exposed. They want to destroy the institution of marriage (legal and de-facto) causing catastrophic damage to our society and cause incredible psychological damage and long trauma to our children. They may indeed be far more dangerous than Islamist terrorists!



For the survival of Western societies these dangerous dogmas need to be defeated.
Certainly kindness and tolerance to those few who choose a same sex partner. But no quarter for the ruthless fanatics with their complete bigotry and intolerance of all that is good.
We must restore moral virtue and the social necessity for marriage to be “between a man and a woman for their mutual support and joy and the raising of children to the good order of society” to paraphrase the Anglican Prayer Book.