Overturning Obergefell is not where the battle is currently being fought. The real struggle is over the words we use and the basic concept of human relationships. “Gender norms” and “gender stereotypes,” which means the use of the pronouns he and she are being outlawed in some legislation. Here in Colorado it can be found in HB-1032, where one will not be allowed to teach public school children (starting in the 4th grade) any gender norms in all sex education classes.
After studying this for the last several weeks, here are my observations.
Is “Family” a Four Letter Word?
https://www.wnd.com/2019/01/calling-family-family-sparks-meltdown-for-google-workers/
This attempt to corrupt one of the most important nouns in the English language has been around for a long time, but it is chilling to see such a big concern like Google falling for it. This is not surprising, just chilling.
…and in a related story, Karen Pence is under fire for teaching art at a Christian school because the school does not embrace homosexual practices.
https://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=WA19A35&f=WU19A12
Again, no big surprise, but this is where the marriage issue has gone. The gloves are off and the deeper agenda is obvious. Make the acceptance of homosexuality mandatory.
Corrupting the word, and consequently the understanding of and practice of marriage was just a first step. The deeper agenda is trying to eliminate the Biblical principle of the family God introduced in the first chapters of Genesis. Getting rid of the terms we use to construct our understanding of the family is a most effective way toward their goal.
I encountered the idea that the word “family” was to be shunned nearly 20 years ago. It seemed absurd at the time, but it fits the pattern that is now all too clear. The terms “male” and “female” are now on the chopping block. What word is next: “parent,” “love,” “baby?” It seems beyond belief, but it is now before us at every turn.
Here is a story about one of the major players in this movement:
This story from Rolling Stone is trying to say Gill is not attacking Christianity, which may be true in a general sense, but he is attacking Biblical Christianity, and the Biblical foundation of Judaism, and anything else that stands in the way of preventing him from forcing his values on everyone.
I have been on the front lines against Tim Gill for some time. Here is a montage the Rocky Mountain News constructed for a story on Gill in 2006:
He is on one side, I am on the other. I have been pursuing this problem for some time…
And here in Colorado the other big public player is the current governor, Jared Polis, of whom I also have some familiarity (I ran against him for Congress in 2012).
After spending a great deal of my time battling on many fronts of this war I have come to some conclusions. First, there can be no reasonable accommodation of both perspectives. We cannot have a culture that recognizes the essential Biblical values of the family and rejects their use and application in law and everyday life. This is similar to the life issue. we cannot respect the sanctity of life and allow the wholesale destruction of the unborn. Something has to give. Somebody has to change.
To get out in front of the defense of marriage and the family we have to reclaim the language (i.e. family, marriage, male, female, Christian, etc.), and stop the rush to characterize Biblical values as evil. Nothing short of a reformation of our culture will really turn this corner, but at a minimum we need to insist that the English language is not corrupted by this madness.
Is it time for legislative and judicial action to reenforce the basic meaning of these essential words in our lexicons? Specific definition of words for use in a statute are common practice in legislation, but this would be the next step.
With such an onslaught against marriage and the family, we must protect the meaning of the words we use. It could be a court case which challenges legislation that completely twists the terms. Or it could be a bill in a friendly state. Alabama, Idaho, the Dakotas, or… defining terms to prepare for a future court case that may need these definitions to win the argument.
If a state had given clear direction on what constituted a “person,” Roe might never have happened. My reasoning here is similar.
The poll on gender will be a useful way to help construct this type of argument. The terms we take for granted are now being deconstructed. The poll should help identify which words are still the most respected in the general population, and among what demographic.
At this time much of our battle is for the very words we use.
