Glorious and free? For now, only in dreams. It is now unacceptable to express one's most deeply held moral convictions in the public square — the politically correct totalitarianism in the water supply has led to a curious reversal of logic that Orwell would have understood only too well. The Mayor of Truro, Nova Scotia, refused to fly a gay pride rainbow flag because of his moral convictions, and he was predictably pilloried in the mainstream media as a homophobe. Now, let's imagine that the local Aryan Nations chapter had asked the good Mayor to fly a Nazi flag to celebrate Adolf Hitler's birthday — would his refusal have raised a similar outcry from the chattering classes? Not likely, you say, because the Aryan Nations and National Socialism are morally disordered, whereas homosexuality is not. Oh, really? On what basis can we make this, ahem, fine distinction? That the Nazis persecuted and murdered homosexuals? (They did.) Not so fast.The backstory may seem a tad more complex than it appears, but it's not, really.
Where to begin?
Let's start with Biology 101 — our species propagates through sexual reproduction. Therefore, long-term human survival depends on adequate numbers of healthy offspring, in the proper gender ratio. But in our time, children (in general, and in many cases girls) have come to be regarded as an unwelcome inconvenience, such that some men are even willing to undergo vasectomies so they can buy mobile phones, and others express (misguided) sympathy and understanding for those who strike such Faustian bargains (read the comments on the linked vasectomy article to see how much children are disliked in contemporary Western culture). Do the math: Labour shortages would not be as severe if 100,000+ Canadians weren't being aborted each year.
I blame this sad state of affairs (pun intended) on the contraceptive mentality of the West.
Most everyone here assumes that if a woman wants to have a baby, all she has to do is stop taking the Pill (why did she start in the first place?) And if she doesn't want to have a baby and gets pregnant anyway, what then?
She kills her unborn child and then asks her partner to get his tubes tied?
Is this what's meant by "glorious and free"?
So, with the intrinsic connection between sexual intercourse and procreation so thoroughly sundered in the popular mind, it becomes much easier to justify not only contraception and abortion (two branches of the same evil tree), but even the oh-so euphemistically-named practice of "selective reduction" based on, among other things, gender preference. Of course, it then also becomes easy to justify non-procreative sexual relationships, such as (by definition) between same-sex partners — who then loudly insist on being accorded the same social and legal status as a traditional family with husband, wife, and child(ren) — despite the glaringly obvious fact that their aberrant orientation more or less consigns them to genetic oblivion.
There was a time when homosexuality was (correctly) classified as a mental disorder. Now it is flaunted as merely another lifestyle choice — what's next, bestiality or coprophilia? Things are indeed getting much worse, and much more rapidly. But there is hope yet.
This brings us back to the embattled mayor of Truro. If you'd like to express support for his courageous stance, write him. The really sad part of the story is that he's just being true to his (morally sensible but increasingly unpopular) convictions — which, by the way, are ultimately informed by the very same ethos enshrined in the words of our national anthem, O Canada.
Being glorious and free is not about being gay and proud of it.
It's about seeking (and upholding) the truth — because only the truth will make us free.
