Accept It: Gay Marriage & The Left’s Obsession with Destroying Language.


“Freedom means freedom for everyone”

Dick Cheney said that three full years before Barack Obama suddenly evolved on the topic of Same Sex Marriage. So why did the gay community never hear Cheney’s words? `The message of love, tolerance and understanding is slowly dissolving. It has been hijacked by a progressive narrative more interested in using the gay community to drive another wedge between them and anyone that disagrees with them and they will destroy the foundations of how we communicate with one another to do it. Both conservatives and the gay community in the United States have a common, vested interest in halting the Left’s agenda of linguistic assassination

A cultural shift has happened as it does with every generation in some form or another. More and more conservatives have accepted gay marriage as a very legitimate act of love. This has come primarily with a growing youth base that are interested in more important fights that ultimately affect all Americans, gay or straight. But what’s often misunderstood about the gay marriage narrative is that it has almost nothing to do with the act of gay marriage itself as it does the Left’s progressive systematic elimination of values they don’t agree with.

They have taken the argument beyond matrimony and are trying to weaponize it against anyone who disagrees with them, institutions of religion in particular. Under President Barack Obama there is a sense of “..Now it’s your turn!” justice being executed. A sociological penance to be paid. Willful and purposeful political revenge to those that should have “had it coming” for way too long. Whether it be successful business owners, insurance companies or race relations, the fact is it’s time to pay up for living so large under a flag casting too big of a shadow.

The birth control employer mandate for religious institutions in Obamacare was the first crack in the dam of religious freedom in this country. Hungry ACLU attorneys looking to make their name in front of the Supreme Court of The United States will be the flood that breaks it wide open. Gay couples simply wanting to be married out of love for one another and to live their lives are not the conflict. It’s liberal activists harboring a grudge with religious institutions they think unfairly target them or have been unfair to the indigenous peoples of whatever from 600 years ago. Co-existing with these institutions is not an option. They must be eradicated and forced to comply. The simple fact is that while gay couples have the absolute best intentions to experience marriage unions as every couple should as far as the law should allow, progressives have other ideas starting with eliminating tax exempt status for churches and religious institutions. This is a not a fight conservatives want but unfortunately it is a fight we are going to get and one we must be clear on who the actual nemesis is.

Already churches in the UK are being sued for not accepting gay weddings. This was an expected and inevitable conclusion and it will be one in this country. Count on it. Barack Obama has stated that he will not force churches to marry gay couples and has declared gay marriage a states rights issue. However his Activist Attorney General has thus far remained mute on the subject. It won’t be long before mouthpiece Jay Carney will be reading notes to a compliant White House Press Core along the lines of “I will refer you to the Department of Justice as we’ve made it quite clear that we will not interfere with these matters. I will say that the President believes that gay couples deserve equal rights under the law.” It’s simply only a matter of time.

Jack Phillips, a private business owner in Denver refused a gay couple’s wedding cake request due to his Christian beliefs. There were calls on Facebook to shutter the shop, protest it and flood their phone lines with hate messages. Now he is facing a lawsuit and possibly criminal prosecution. In a similar case a Washington florist is now facing civil complaints for refusing to offer service to a gay couple and as reported on The Blaze website just last week, Betty and Richard Odgaard faced threats and constant harassment for refusing a gay couples wedding ceremony at their private property. And lets not forget the calls of violence and vandalism against Chick-fil-A just last year including this leftist act of tolerance. Gay couples even staged “Kiss-Ins” at Chik Fil A restaurants as a way of protest. This however backfired on the progressive’s message of conservative hatred toward gays, as there were allowed to eat at these restaurants and kiss each other without the same vitriol?directed at them that leftists practiced themselves. There wasn’t a single reported case of a gay couple being kicked out of a Chik Fil A restaurant for kissing each other.?There are other examples of this with more dangerous ramifications than small business owners and chicken sandwiches.

Are these vendors morally justified in refusing services or expressing an personal opinion based on a person’s sexuality at the risk of losing business? Perhaps. Perhaps not. Do they have a legal obligation as private business owners to oblige every request of patrons entering their shop. Absolutely not. Do Conservatives believe gays have the freedom to boycott these establishments if their interests are not served? Yes. Furthermore, do Conservatives believe that gay couples all around the country will begin preying on businesses for an easy payout settlement. Absolutely not. Do we believe that Liberals will?

Absolutely, unequivocally, without a doubt, yes.

The conservative objection to gay marriage based on practical religion and the Bible is a dwindling minority and it must be stated loudly for the gay community that this is not our argument any more than saying the Westboro Baptist Church are welcome members of the party. It is this writer’s personal belief that while say Hop on Pop by Dr. Suess is a great book that can teach many important lessons (Like don’t in fact, hop on pop), I don’t intend to live my life by every word of it. I have marched twice for civil unions during Pride festivities. I have signed petitions. I have many friends that are gay and when we look at each other we don’t see acts of sin or politics. Liberals however see everything as politics and they are relentless. The real conflict with accepting gay marriage from a political standpoint is they think they are entitled enough that we must comply with their belief structure while abandoning our own and if they can’t change our minds they will litigate us to death until we agree with them. This begins by simply redefining terminology to suit the needs of their agenda, executing that agenda, and then implementing it under an entirely new set of definitions.

With a willing print media and Sunday discussion show panels, tax increases suddenly and magically became “Revenue”. It’s asinine but it stuck. The federal government generates absolutely no revenue whatsoever as an engine of economic growth. None. But right along with Barack Obama?, Harry Reid, Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer, there was John Boehner, Eric Cantor and other GOP leaders accepting this wonderful new terminology and in doing so they surrendering one of the right’s most legitimate successful arguments against the progressive left. And now they can’t get it back. Presumably they went along with it because one day they will face another “No New Taxes” moment. It’s still unacceptable and to this day we have tolerated it instead of correcting them.

Almost overnight as if a mass email went out from Planned Parenthood’s PR department, the term Pro-Life has been retired permanently, replaced with Anti-Choice. Progressives are if nothing else persistent in their arguments, and if they have to stand on the corpses of a million dead snipped spines they will gladly toss aside hundreds of years of English composition.

But there are more practical examples that don’t require someone to be the most astute observer of day-to-day life as it exists in Washington DC of how popular celebrities in culture are furthering this cause.

NYC Pride 2013 - The RallyJust prior to the 4th of July this year, just after Bill Clinton’s DOMA law was struck down by the Supreme Court, Lady Gaga came out of gestation and sang the National Anthem at a Pride gathering at Pier 26 in New York City. She was clenching a rainbow flag during this performance.?On top of this odd display, Lady Gaga took it upon her brave and edgy self to change the lyrics of the Star Spangled Banner. It was an act that went largely unreported in the thralls of our new found social freedoms but it sums up the point of the conservative argument against the liberalization of societal traditions perfectly. Allen West took note of it on Facebook and criticized Lady Gaga for exactly the right reasons. His criticism of Gaga had nothing to do with DOMA or Gays as people, nor was it a message about marriage.

He directly leveled with Gaga’s progressive thinking that our flag and our anthem were somehow disposable to her personal whims, just as our language is. As West correctly noted, the American Flag is something men and women lay their lives down for. Our National Anthem was born out of a great struggle that cost Americans their lives and continues to do so to this day. Our flag and anthem are not disposable fads that artificial pop stars can distort as they see fit. It wasn’t edgy; it wasn’t low brow and if Lady Gaga had any inclination as a real artist and not a board room lab creation, she would understand that the American Flag itself is one of the greatest art pop pieces in modern history. The Star Spangled Banner, as it was written, has been suitable for every diva before her. West was able to clearly articulate why the progressive left is the problem, not homosexuals.


The right can win these battles, not by reacting to whatever brand new definitions progressives pull out of thin air to describe their flawed ideology (Global Warming/Climate Change) by not allowing them to happen in the first place. The English language can be a hot stove to them but they need to get burned by it before understanding this. The reason the left is constantly trying to redefine who they are through language is because they have no idea who, or what, they are and how to make themselves coherently?reasonable to reasonable people. This is why our current President has been whittled?down to poll tested, commercial sloganeering with pretty fonts over the top of retro filtered Instagram pictures.

Conservatives can bring the Gay community in by expressing this exact sentiment to them. Liberals spend an ideological lifetime projecting and pretending to be something they aren’t. If there is any community in our society that can appreciate that, it’s LGBT. When liberals stop lying to themselves, they become conservatives. When gays are allowed to stop lying about who they are, they become liberated and free and those are values we hold sacred almost above no others.

If conservatives want to make a moral stand in modern day culture, make it about the language. Conservatives lost the gay marriage debate the second they ceded what marriage has been defined as for hundreds of years. It was born of scripture and then adopted by Webster and like most everything else that seems to be common sense definitive, as soon as the federal government decided to involve itself, the language became murkier and thus weaker. This was an unnecessary fight George W. Bush picked and others like Michelle Bachmann and Rick Santorum tried to revive. Andrew Breitbart humorously took CPAC to task for excluding gays from their yearly conference. Fighting to save the definition of traditional marriage as it is played in the board game of Life is lost. Accept it. Allow the States to vote how they will on it and accept their decisions. Fighting to save the fundamental terminology of the way we communicate through language is not a lost fight, but it’s one we must actively pursue.

If progressives want to make gay marriage the civil rights movement of our generation, so be it. Let them try without having to change the definition of what a civil right is. They will lose and in doing so, alienate two large blocks of voters. African Americans who faced down fire hoses and attack dogs from racist Democrats themselves and gays and lesbians who will realize their usefulness to the Democrat agenda has run its course because the LGBT community will no longer allow themselves to be defined by them.

Gays would be welcome under the Conservative tent and instead of battling florists, bakers and property owners who like them are hard working citizens, they can begin to fight the very real battles of gay discrimination across the world. And when they are ready and willing to fight those battles, they can know that we will be standing right there beside them, hand in hand.




Share on:

Leave a comment