Leftist Governmental Morality Enforcement & Homosexuals

The newspapers in this area are woefully behind the times. Both of the regional papers, one in our small town and that one in the city several counties to the left of here, still refer to the First Amendment on their editorial pages. That might not be the only Amendment to the Constitution which they care about, but it’s the one they care about the most.

The American Left however, has left that behind them and is taking the reverse stance these days. Back in the ‘60’s and ‘70’s, of course, the Left was not in charge of much of anything, so their mantra was free speech, which included flag burning, defecation art, protest posters calling for the death of various officials, and so on.

These days things are different. Free speech is allowed only if it is in support of the new orthodoxy which the Left thinks it has in place. Speech which supports things like a nuclear family which sports a blood-related father is considered too evil to allow into the carefully morally-controlled culture. Hence, the officials who protect the morals of the culture must prevent the likes of Chik-fil-A from entering their moral cloister. Free speech is like free thought, then: only certain ideas are acceptable and deviations must be condemned and abolished. The problem is that the moral condemnation is governmental, and the punishment is banishment from economic enterprise. The heretics are removed from the society which the Leftist government thinks it owns.

To make things even more interesting, the moral guardians have loop-holes for certain like-minded groups, “like-minded” meaning having the ambition to unilaterally dictate the morals and behaviors of their citizen-subjects. Here the reference is to Islam and the creation of Islamic centers in the same city that refuses to accommodate Chik-fil-A. The Islamists actually think similar thoughts concerning the nuclear family, but in draconian and non-voluntary terms. Homosexuals are to be terminated under Islam, and the only internal debate is the method of termination, be it by fire or by tossing off of high buildings.

This doesn’t faze the moral guardians, however, who will no doubt claim freedom of speech for their Islamic pals. So it is apparent that freedom of speech is not for those who advocate voluntary moral character as an approach to social issues, it is only for those who advocate dictatorship over moral behaviors, and consequently access to business opportunity as well.

In the minds of the Leftists who finally have a little control, free speech is a tool of the state, and morality in thought and speech is a dictate of the state which is punishable if the thought and speech are not dogmatically Correct.

The lesson here for homosexuals is that they are pawns in this Leftist game. If they think they are actually protected by the Left, they are not paying attention. Their freedom of speech is as volatile as anyone else’s, unless they join the diktat class. And many have, as demonstrated in the morality laws of California. But historically, under real Leftist rule homosexuals have not fared all that well. The Left is never favorably disposed to anything except control, and all of the Leftist interim feints are temporary; the Hegelian antithesis is always in play and the Left will not stop at the current synthesis with homosexuals. Aggressive Alinsky Consequentialism considers everything and everyone to be a tool to be used, and that includes faux attachments to moral positions and the people who hold them. And that is exactly what is being seen in the great Chik-fil-A caper.