Posted on 07/29/2016 7:17:06 AM PDT by fwdude
It was with disappointment but not surprise that I read the news about the standing ovation that openly homosexual Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiel received at the Republican national convention. It’s being spun by some conservatives as merely appreciation for Thiel breaking ranks with the Trump bashers of Silicon Valley, but in fact there’s a serious problem of moral compromise on the homosexual issue in the GOP and we need to face it for what it is.
Ronald Reagan was not a perfect man, but he was a great man and an outstanding leader whose presidency marked the high point of conservatism in the latter half in the 20th century. In 1983 President Reagan did two things that exemplify the battle of left and right ideologies that still define the culture war: On February 3rd of that year, in a message to the National Prayer Breakfast, he declared 1983 to be “The Year of the Bible,” and one month later in a speech to the National Association of Evangelicals, he declared the Communist Soviet Union to be an “Evil Empire.” In that latter address he contrasted America’s Judeo-Christian heritage with the Atheism of the Soviets, explaining that this contrast was at the heart of the conflict between the US and USSR.
In 1980 Candidate Reagan rode a wave of populist conservatism into the White House, in defiance of the GOP establishment, which was forced to settle for getting their man George Herbert Walker “read my lips” Bush in the VP slot. They bided their time and once Reagan was termed out they went back to steering the ship of state toward the New World Order with Mr. Bush, the former CIA spymaster, at the helm.
But President Reagan had been so effective at articulating conservative values, and so courageous in pushing back against his Cultural Marxist opponents in media, academia and government, that America experienced a massive spiritual, cultural and patriotic revival during the 1980s whose influence lingers even today.
So powerful was Reagan’s impact on the GOP, that the hands of elitists Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain and Romney were publicly tied on the homosexual issue, though the GOP brass kept advancing the “gay” cause behind the scenes. And so powerful was the revival of moral values of the Reagan Revolution on the culture at large, that it’s taken more than a quarter century, millions of hours of pop-culture propaganda, the complete takeover of the US public education system, and the blatant hijacking of the federal judiciary for the Cultural Marxists to undo it.
Reagan’s power did not come from the Party, it came from his Biblical values. And his conservatism was not measured by how many feet it walked behind liberalism on the path to globalism. What he fought to “conserve” was the authentic Christian worldview of the Founding Fathers as embodied in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. He did not accept the Marxist “Tide of History” lie, but pushed boldly in the opposite direction, advancing the Kingdom of God in world affairs and reclaiming lost territory in the domestic culture war. Under Reagan, “American Exceptionalism” was real, and not just a neo-con euphemism for bullying the world.
Ronald Reagan would never have allowed Peter Thiel to use the GOP stage to legitimize homosexuality, nor would the populist conservatives of the Reagan Revolution have ever applauded it.
Reagan knew that true conservatism is absolutely incompatible with the “gay” agenda. The two are as contradictory in principle and practice as marital fidelity and adultery. Every plank of its platform rests on the foundation of the Bible, from private property, to national identity and security, to personal freedom, to law and order: Conservatism stands for the truth of God or it stands for nothing. And the truth of God is clearer on the danger of legitimizing sexual deviance, especially homosexuality, than on any other social policy. It was the Reagan-era Supreme Court that affirmed the right of states to criminalize homosexual sodomy in Bowers v Hardwick (1986) a decision vigorously defended by Reagan appointee Antonin Scalia, his closest ideological ally on the court.
Ronald Reagan reminded America that our enemy was Marxism, that the root of its evil was godlessness, and that its goal was the total elimination of Judeo-Christian civilization. To quote The Communist Manifesto of Marx and Engles directly, “Communists everywhere support every revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order of things.”
The primary tactic of Marxists is syncretism, meaning the blending of two opposing views into a compromised view that’s always one step closer to Marxist goals. It’s called the Marxist Dialectic, and was taught to Soviet schoolchildren with a little dance: “Two Steps Forward, One Step Back — Net Gain One Step.” In other words: Demand a radical leftward change of policy and then compromise with the conservatives so that you get only part of what you demanded, but still move forward toward your goal. That strategy is detailed in astonishingly forthright terms in the must-read LGBT Manifesto, “The Overhauling of Straight America.” http://library.gayhomeland.org/0018/EN/EN_Overhauling_Straight.htm
Sadly post-Reagan Republicans have proven to be endlessly gullible and susceptible to this strategy.
Nowhere has this been more obvious than at Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News Network. In 1996 Fox designated itself as the guardian of the conservative hen house and heir to the Reagan legacy, launching what began as a genuinely conservative news network. Over time, however, Fox became merely an arm of the GOP. As Republican elites increasingly capitulated to the Marxist “Tide of History,” especially on LGBT issues, Fox continuously adjusted its personnel and programming to reflect the compromises and make them palatable to the masses.
On behalf of the GOP establishment Fox has led the way in normalizing the myth of the “gay conservative,” and other “conservative” media outlets have followed suit, such as Breitbart with it’s openly “gay,” spotlight-hungry representative “Milo.” But like the truth of the Bible, true conservatism doesn’t “change with the times.” If it abandons its logical presuppositions, such as the resolve to protect civilization from the cancer of sexual degeneracy, then it loses all moral authority. True conservatism must agree with God that “A man must not lie with a man as with a woman. It is an abomination” (Leviticus 18:22).
President Reagan once said in a speech to his conservative supporters “Without God, there is no virtue, because there’s no prompting of the conscience. Without God, we’re mired in the material, that flat world that tells us only what the senses perceive. Without God, there is a coarsening of the society. And without God, democracy will not and cannot long endure. If we ever forget that we’re one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under.”
By Reagan’s standard we’re going under. It’s time for conservatives to reject the Marxist-invented myth of the “gay conservative” and get back to Biblical truth.
“How are we going to defeat the Left if we turn against G-d like that? How can we do anything without Him?
We are following Bible prophecy to the letter. We will continue to lose all these little battles, but we win the war. Tighten your seatbelts and watch it unfold.
YOU ARE DEAD WRONG in these beliefs, our culture HAS CHANGED our FREEDOMS are being eroded, WE are being thrust into GOBALISM social justice where the weath of the nation is being brought DOWN to equal those of 3rd world nations my faith has become between me and my God!!! If someone IS gay that IS between them and their God!!! I will ALWAYS accept someone being gay if they BELIEVE in FREEDOM and are NOT trying to push their sexuality down my throat or businesses throats!!! Their are many gay people who just wish to live their lives in FREEDOM and what they do in their bedroom does NOT affect me in ANY way!!!
I’m hardly on the “Christian Right.” And you know nothing about what I put up with in the theater in NYC and how I fight back against the Entertainment Left.
If you want to like Milo, fine with me. But this is hardly the thread to start beating up on Christians - the majority of whom fought in the 70s and 80s for Reagan, welfare reform, abortion control and myriad other causes for which they deserve praise.
Yeah, I’ve heard of Him. He already came. He fulfilled Mosaic Law and established a New Covenant which we’re now free to live under due to His Grace.
Have you heard of Him?
“BTW churches are full of sinners too!”
Yup, and hospitals are full of people looking for help to get better, too.
I’ve already been pummeled on this thread! You’d think they’d start their own Milo fan club (the way some of them once had the Glenn Beck fan club) and leave those of us doubters alone.
Count me in too. When he says the feminist send a wrong message about it being ok to be fat and ugly and it being bad for their health, someone needs to remind him that his lifestyle is probably just as unhealthy or not worse.
My objection to voters who put social issues like homosexual marriage first is the same as my objection to people who vote solely on fiscal issues like tax cuts. All worthy goals, I suppose, but there won't be any taxes to cut or moral order to impose if you don't have a functioning nation first. There's no sense worrying about the tax code when increasing parts of the country are looking more like a Central American slum with each day, or worrying about who gets to marry whom when our cities are being looted and burned by BlackLivesMatter thugs and jihadis.
Didn’t say he did. He also did not give up on sinners or dissociate Himself from them. He walked among the sinners, talked to them, preached to them, tried to bring them into His Church. Why should we act differently? We don’t have to condone homosexuality. We should not change our views on gay marriage to attract homosexuals. We should not cave on transsexual issues. When there are gays who side with us and vote for our candidates, though, we should not push them away either. If they’re voting with us they already know and accept that our candidates don’t support the gay agenda. If they’re ok with that why should we push them out?
I can’t believe people here are saying what they do in the privacy of their bedrooms are no concern to us! If only that were the case! Everything you cite is the exact opposite of privacy.
And for gay men, sexuality, the penis, is the only thing they think about. They are sexual obsessives. Even a genius, like the late great Quentin Crisp (who I was privileged to know) admitted this. He was pilloried for it.
“It’s just reality to face the shrinking number of hard core Christians that exist now and start attracting people to the Republican party that agree on more than religion. I understand that is not a popular opinion here and can accept your criticism while still working with you.
Alt-right is a growing group while religious conservatives is getting smaller.”
The bible does state something to the effect of the gate to heaven being narrow and the road to hell being wide.
In listening carefully to some of Milo’s earlier debates, he refutes any notion that he was “born that way.”
He himself has admitted that his homosexuality is a choice; he has acknowledged that it is sin, and that he struggles with it daily.
But in continuing to watch him as he has become a controversial superstar, something strange seemed to happen to Milo.
It seems to me, that as conservatives began to celebrate him as one of our own due to some of his views, we managed to convey the notion that we were celebrating—or at least condoning— his homosexuality as well.
After which, Milo seemed to “come out” even more, dispensing altogether with any talk of struggling against his urges, culminating with his appearance in front of the aforementioned photos of naked children.
Was he really trolling conservatives, not liberals, from the get-go?
Was all this according to some scripted plan?
Was he a trickster, a double agent all along?
I can’t help but wonder.
Perhaps a better way for conservatives to deal with him, and others like him, is not to isolate and reject, but to pray for him and with him. We can continue to agree on matters economic and political, but we must not FORGET to encourage him in his struggle against this sin, and help him—no, insist—that he must try to turn away from it.
That’s the thing. We must not forget or soft-peddle, or be timid and afraid to sound uncool, on things like this.
One’s understanding of what conservatism means determines whether it is possible to be a gay conservative. I think that definition should also include conserving the wholesome morality of the past.
That said, I can form alliances. The nature of a two party system requires it.
In contrast, having the US transformed to a Third World country through mass immigration does effect my quality of life, as does the proliferation of radical jihadi movements and radicalized racial movements like BlackLivesMatter. That's why I really have no objection to someone like Milo Y. being treated as a political ally. It's also the reason why even people who find homosexuality disgusting found the jihadi attack on homosexuals in Orlando infinitely more disgusting.
It's a matter of picking your political fights.
A well-said, intelligent post about Milo!
I call it the Andrew Sullivan effect. America is VERY bad for gay Brits who come here as reasonably humble people and turn into monsters through too much praise and easy money and publicity.
If you can find an hour long video, made with a friend before his admittedly nice press conference in Orlando, it’s a farrago of gross language, woman hatred, drug praise and his beloved talk of pillow biting with large black men.
Milo is not stupid and he has said many good things and when he wants to be, quite charming. But as a follower of him on Facebook, I know there’s a dark side as well. Move over Andrew! Another Brit is comin’ in!
Never said He was, but He didn’t just give up on them either. He didn’t say that there were certain people He didn’t want as follewers because of their sins. Why are we saying there are certain people we don’t want in our party because of their sins?
We shpuld not compromise our principles to attract gays. However, there is a subset of the gay population that votes with us even though we oppose the gay agenda. If they’re not agitating for us to accept the gay agenda, why should we drive them away? They are implicitly supporting conservative principles at a societal level even if they are not doing so on a personal level.
Besides, do you really think Jesus asked sinners to repent once and then gave up if they refused? If a sinner initially refused to repent, but later realized his error, did Jesus say “Nope, too late, you had your chance and you blew it”? Of course not; He doesn’t give up on sinners, and it’s never too late to find Jesus and repent. Jesus loves us all, even unrepentant sinners. Perhaps gays who become conservative are guided by God to us so that they can have a chance to be saved? Maybe they just haven’t found Christ yet. Being rejected by overly rightious Christians surely won’t help them find Christ and repent, though. Do we not have a responsibility to help these people rather than just casting them aside as hopeless cases?
I have no fight with Milo. This is a discussion forum, nothing else.
But I live in NYC where I see gay guys every day - with their adopted girls and boys dressed like little cabbage patch dolls. Charming perhaps until - as I once witnessed - a vicious meltdown occurred when one little girl pee’d on her daddy’s Ralph Lauren blouse. Chilling, to say the least.
I see the signs on their establishments that say “If you don’t believe in gay marriage don’t enter this store.” (So much for their vaunted tolerance!) And, of course, the gay pride parade and worse, the West Village Halloween parade.
I also know some quiet gays who mind their own business and one who even votes Republican. But, believe me, they are few and far between.
I disagree- they USA was an entire country founded on basically conservative principles united under one government.
Why would that not work with the rest of the planet?
In fact, I submit it would be THE ONLY thing that would work for th whole panet- we know socialisms massive failure mode.
It is not about committing the sin it is about reveling in it. It is the un-repentent middle finger to God that Christians find revolting. People who truly follow Christ are very well aware of their sinfulness and they do 2 things. First they ask for forgiveness, and second they promise to try to sin no more. If a gay speaker who was not actively leading a perverted lifestyle presented himself to conservatives, there would be no problem. Homosexuality is an evil perversion of the God given gift of human sexuality . It is a choice to behave in a way that separate’s oneself from God (which is the definition of sin.)
But other than that, yeah, I know what you mean.
For instance, there's a certain element here which takes pride in driving all Mormons out of Free Republic. That's no way to build a conservative website, let alone a conservative electoral victory.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.