Raising the Next Generation in Turbulent Times

I said last time, and I have said for a while that the social justice movement is like a train with several boxcars. And you know, the lead box car is the racial identity or racial Marxism boxcar. But behind that boxcr are several other box cars. There are several other issues that are linked to critical theory cultural Marxism, not only race, but for example, the issues of sexual identity. So lgbtq AI two plus, by the way, I didn't say that to be funny. That's just where it is now. Now it's gotten up to lgbtq AI two plus in fact, in Canada's new law, and I'll be talking about this in the Service Layers this morning. In Canada's new law C four, which if you're not familiar with Canada's new legislation, Bill C four that has become law in Canada, the law against Conversion therapy, they use lgbt Q two And that two is important because it links back to critical theory and critical race theory because the two is for two spirit, which is the indigenous Native American, Native Canadian, whatever Indian way of talking about this kind of identity. It was referred to as two spirit. So in their intersectional nod to critical race theory. They put lgbt Q two on the bill there in Canada because there is an inexorable link between critical theory, critical race theory, and queer theory and sexual identity Marxism, and it's really becoming more and more prevalent today, and more and more prevalent through our schools. So when we talk about the next generation and preparing the next generation, we're hearing a lot in schools and at school board meetings about you know, critical race theory and critical theory. And that's great, But what's really more significant, I would argue, is the sexual identity Marxism through the lgbt QA two plus movement. The acronym is just going to get longer and longer and longer, right, And one of the things that we'll talk about is the fact that this acronym really exposes the identity behind the movement because the acronym is filled with contradictions. Right. The acronym is filled with contradictions. And we'll talk about that more as we get into this. There's some of these things that can't coexist, they're logically inconsistent with one another. But the only thing that holds them together is critical theory and cultural Marxism. That's the only thing that holds them together. Beyond that, some of the acronyms are mutually exclusive and almost at war with one another. But they're part of the same critical social justice movement. They're part of the same application of critical theory, part of the same application of cultural Marxism, and therefore they have the same goals and that keeps them bonded together. Right now, we're seeing it expanded and expressed in our schools through a number of things, but perhaps most covertly through what's called SEL, or social emotional learning. And you may have heard of SEL. You may have heard of this whole social emotional learning push within the government education system, and it is the trojan horse that right now is advancing critical theory, cultural Marxism, and specifically sexual identity Marxism among kids at every level K through twelve. Okay, so what I want to do this morning? And again, we were supposed to do this on yesterday, and I apologize for us not being able to do this on yesterday multiple sessions, but I was in the COVID penalty box and wasn't allowed to fly. Yeah, we were supposed to leave on Monday, and now they make you do your test within you know, twenty four hours. And we had all had COVID a couple of weeks ago, and so you know, we'd go on Sunday and take our tests and then they call me later Sunday evening, you know, and I'm sorry or in the COVID penalty box. And I was supposed to start lecturing at the Institute of Public Theology in Fort Myers and were supposed to start class there Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, come down here, do the conference in the Sunday service, and then go back up and finish lecturing there. And so I wasn't able to start my class. I had just started virtually, which was interesting because you know, we had a you know, like thirty five students show up to take this course in cultural apologetics and their professor couldn't be there because he flunked a test. But we tear a test again and we're able to get here on yesterday. So glad to be able to do this. But we've got a lot that we're going to try to do. I'm going to share a lot of citations with you, a lot of quotations with you. But it's very important that we do this. It's not always the most exciting way to cover material, but it's very important that we do this. It's very important that you see this. Some of this stuff I've been sharing for a decade or more now, as you know, I've been talking about this and teaching about this. But now that all of this is sort of coming together, and now that it's being exposed and expanding, it seems that things are ramping up and moving even more rapidly than they have been in the past. So a couple of passages of Scripture I want to share with you, first second Print in three through six. Though we walk in the flesh, we're not waging war according to the flesh, for the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but have divine power to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ, being ready to punish every disobedience when your obedience is complete. This is our mandate. We are engaged in spiritual warfare. That that's what this is. This is not just cultural warfare. This is spiritual warfare. These are individuals who are at war with our God, and consequently they are at war with us in this particular area. They're at war with the word of God. Romans, Chapter one, verses twenty six and twenty seven. For this reason, God gave them up to dishonorable passions for their women, exchange natural relations for those that are contrary to nature. And the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the do penalty of their error. One last passage of Scripture is very important as we talk about this. Woth to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light hm and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter. That's what we're seeing today. We're seeing those who call good evil and who call evil good, who exchange light for darkness and bitter for sweet. But they even go beyond that in that they are at war with those who call dark dark and light light amen. They find it hugely problematic and attempt to shame and silence those who say what God says about sin, and so part of that, changing light for darkness and darkness for light is a changing of definitions. Listen to this from Mark Stein. I think it's poignant. In the old days, there was sodomy an act. In the late nineteenth century, the word homosexuality was coined a condition. A generation ago, they accepted term became gay and identity. Each formulation raises the stakes one can object to and even criminalize an act. One is obligated to be sympathetic toward a condition, but once it's a fully fledged twenty four to seven identity, anything less than wholehearted acceptance gets you marked as a bigot. The transformation of a crime against nature, sodomy, into co equal civic identity within little more than the span of one human lifetime is one of the most remarkable victories ever achieved by any minority group in the Western world. A minority that didn't even exist in a formal sense a century ago, has managed to overwhelm and overhaul a universal societal institution thousands of years old again and nowadays. If you think wrongly about this, or speak wrongly about this, you are treated today in a way that sodomy would have been treated a century ago. Because today sodomy is not a sin, but the Biblical view of sodomy is a sin. Woe to those who call evil good and good evil. But that's where we are, and that's where this current generation especially is being educated and discipled. This is what they're being taught. There's a chart here that I wanted to show you. It's often used in educational circles and the idea here you see privilege in the center. The idea is the closer that you move to the center, the more privileged you are. Now you have to understand that this connection between critical theory and postmodernism. Critical theory divides the world up into oppressors and the oppressed. We talked about how critical race theory does this with whiteness and with non whiteness, and then this postmodern idea that everything is a construct, right, and that even language language is used within the context of power dynamics to create these constructs that are all about power. Antonio Grahmshe the Italian Marxist, gives us this idea of cultural hegemony and how those in authority, the oppressors, actually use this cultural hegemony, this ideology, in order to enforce their oppression and for Grahams sheee, he saw the law. And you know, education and and the family and religion and politics really is the main ways that these things took place. But in this chart, if you'll take a look at it, look, for example, in terms of gender and towards the center, privileged cis gender men, and then out from that less powerful, less privileged cis gender women. And then outside of that is trans intersect non binary people. When it comes to sexuality, which is different than your gender. According to these folks, heterosexuals are in the center there and outside of that lesbian, gay, queer, pain by asexual or outside of that, then you see skin color, you see citizenship. It's interesting, you know, on the inside of that, the privileged people are the people who are citizens, and then there's permanent residents, right, and then there's precarious status, and then there's no status. But what's interesting is they go to no status. They don't go to illegal aliens. You notice that's not on the chart because because that's just a construct. Right by the way, this is another one of the box cars. So again everything is about the oppressor and the oppressed, and all of our interactions are about power imbalances. And people who have privilege and people who don't have privilege. This is where the connection comes from. And you remember when I said that the whole idea of critical theory, critical race theory, you know, sexual identity, Marxism, that they're all connected at their root, even the whole LGBT QAI plus two plus whatever. Right, these things are their contradictions within the acronym, but they're all connected by this idea of privilege and power, critical theory, critical race theory, cultural Marxism. This is where they're all connected, and at their root they're being taught to our children. This is from two authors named Kirk and Matson. I'll say more about them, but Kirk and Maxon argue that to suggest publicly that homosexuality might be chosen as a huge problem because it opens what they call that can of worms known as moral choice and sin, and it gives the religious intransigence a stick to hit us with. So this can't be a choice. Homosexuality can't be a choice, which we'll see is incredibly ironic. Lit'ten know what they state in their book After the ball Straits must be taught that it is as natural for some persons to be homosexual as it is for others to be heterosexual. Wickedness and seduction have nothing to do with it. And since no choice is involved, gayness can be no more blameworthy than straightness. If there's no choice, right, if I was born this way, then how can it be blameworthy? In fact, it is a simple matter of the odds one in ten as to who turns out gay and who turns out straight. Each heterosexual must be led to realize that he might easily have been born homosexual himself. Now that number one in ten, the authors in this book that was published in nineteen eighty nine acknowledge the fact that they just made the number up. It's late as ninety four. We know that two point eight percent of males and one point four percent of females identified themselves as gay lesbian are bisexual. By the way, that number has grown exponentially in recent years, the number of people who identified themselves this way, And there's a number of reasons for that. But the point that I'm making here is that when Kirk and Matson, by the way, they are two Harvard professors who wrote the book after the Ball, when they wrote this one in ten, they acknowledged even in their writings that the one in ten wasn't factual, but it was a useful piece of propaganda. One in ten, one in ten. So there are key exponents of this idea, people who connect the idea of of your race or ethnicity and the idea of your sexual identity. People who they don't say, right, this is all critical theory, this is all cultural Marxism. They don't say that at its roots, this is what's connecting us, this is what's connecting our movements. But there are people who became key exponents of this whole gay is the New Black idea. A couple of decades ago, it was real. It was a really big thing, right. The Advocate ran a cover story The Advocate, for those of you who don't know, is a very popular gay magazine. They ran this cover story, gay is the New Black Right, and the idea was clear. The idea was that, you know, in the civil rights struggle, we have now moved to another area and another level of the civil rights struggle, and that's the struggle for rights, which you know would be argued now that people have moved beyond that to now trans rights. But who are these key exponents, one homosexual activist obviously, two black and civil rights leaders, three judges for business and political leaders, and then finally religious leaders. These are people who are putting forward this idea that gay is the new black, and that the sexual identity movement, sexual identity Marxism is a continuation of this social justice movement and this quest for so called racial justice. And again, some people are thrown by this last one. And I'll say this because we probably well there's no probably, we won't be able to get through all of this. But in this last area, they're like people are like wait, religious leaders, you mean like religious religious Yes, religious leaders. There's a couple of movements that you need to be aware of. One is called Living Out. There's a ministry called Living Out. There's another one called Revoice. And these people have done conferences within mainline churches. We're not talking about you know, the the pro homosexual denominations, you know, the usual suspects or whatever. But Revoice, for example, was in a number of Presbyterian churches and the Revoice conference was very popular, and there are a number of mainstream evangelical leaders who have endorsed the Revoice Conference. The gay Christian movement. More broadly, you may have heard of the gay Christian movement. There are a lot of religious leaders who are now advocating for the whole gay Christian movement. But let's see how many of these we can get to and get through. First, Obviously, homosexual advocates or activists are abdicating for this position, this masterful connection of gayness with blackness. But why now this book after the Ball, How America Will overcome its fear and hatred of gaze in the decade of the nineties. Again, Marshall Kirk and Hunter Matts, and two professors at Harvard, one in psychology and one in marketing. They published this book in nineteen eighty nine. And I always point out that this book was published in eighty nine because when you read it, and when you read from it, it sounds like something that was written more recently to explain what happened, not something that was written in eighty nine as a strategic manual for what was supposed to happen. But that's what it was. In nineteen eighty nine. It was a strategic manual for how to change the way people think, believe, and talk about homosexuality. Again, when you read it. It doesn't sound like that. It sounds like somebody got in a time machine came to you know, these times, saw what happened in the whole you know, homosexual movement, and then went back to nineteen eighty eight and wrote a book that was published in nineteen eighty nine, and some back to the future stuff going on. Right, listen to what they say about the moment. Remember nineteen eighty eight, nineteen eighty nine, right, age was then what COVID is now. Amen, So it was on everybody's lips. Everybody was talking about age back then, right like people are talking about COVID. Now. Here's what they wrote. AIDS, though a loose canon. As a canon, indeed, as cynical as it may seem, AIDS gives us a chance, however brief, to establish ourselves as a victimized minority, legitimately deserving of America's special protection and care. This, therefore, is the question and the challenge. How can we surmount our insurmountable opportunity. How can we maximize the sympathy and minimize the fear? How given the horrid hand that AIDS has dealt us, can we best play it? That's what they were writing about in nineteen eighty nine, how do we do this? This could be a tipping point in one direction or the other. People could turn against the homosexual movement because of age, or or if we can somehow use this to gain a minority identity and a minority status within the context of critical theory critical race theory oppressor oppressed, if we can put ourselves on the oppressed list, as we're already moving forward with these ideologies of critical theory critical race theory. I noted before, and I noted in fault Lines, that this book came out in nineteen eighty nine. Nineteen eighty nine was also the first year that they had an official conference of critical race theory right. It was started by some Harvard Law professors, so Derek Bell was the principal leader of that group in that movement. They had their first meeting in nineteen eighty nine. Kimberly Crenshaw, who was a protege of Derek Bell at Harvard Law School, wrote her seminal paper on intersectionality, which is an arm and a branch of critical race theory, also in nineteen eighty nine, and then Peggy Macintosh, who wrote the seminal paper on the concept of white privilege. Published that paper in nineteen eighty nine, the same year that this book comes out, talking about identifying themselves right as this aggrieved minority group within the same vein and the same context of the advance of cultural Marxism with racial identity. So the method, what are they going to do? What did these two Harvard professors propose? Glad you asked? The campaign we outline and after the ball, though complex, depends centrally upon a program of unabashed, propagated, firmly grounded, and long established principles of psychology and advertising. Remember I told you one professor of psychology and one of marketing. But they said propaganda. Certainly they're just using that loosely, right, No, they actually define propaganda in the book. They say that it relies on emotional manipulation, uses lies, and is subjective and one sided. Just in case you were wondering what they meant when they said it was propaganda relies on emotional manipulation, uses lies, and is subjective and one sided. That was the play. That was the strategy to tell their side of the story, and to frame their side of the story in such a way that they got what they were after. Three things they used desensitizing, jamming, and conversion. They also acknowledged the fact that these are the three steps in brainwashing. But these were the three steps that they used. What does this mean? Well, first, desensitizing. The idea of desensitizing was very simple, and what they argued was that they needed to get images of gays and gayness into the public arena. They needed to have you know, TV shows and commercials and you know out athletes and actors and actresses, and they needed to use this they need They used it illustration and they talked about turning on a shower, right, and just overwhelming the straight world with this so that after a while they give used to be in web that's desensitizing. Let me ask you something. When was the last time you watched a show? And when I say a show, I don't mean like a single episode, but when was the last time you watched a series? Right? Just think about your favorite series, right, whatever series it is that you like. When was the last time you watched a series on television that did not have a gay character or that did not introduce a gay storyline. It just doesn't happen. I mean, you just you can't turn on the TV without seeing it. Now there are commercials, and the commercials come out, and when the commercials are about couple using gay characters, are gay couples in the commercials? They are airwhere, not everywhere the airwere, it's beyond everywhere, right, You can't get away from it so much so that when people watch television, you know, when they watch these series, if you live in an environment where you're not surrounded by this, you almost start to think that your circles are the strange ones. That's desensitizing. The next tool they use is jamming, And the way they talk about jamming is that they want to eliminate and reverse what they call psychic rewards. So the way that they explain jamming is this, you equate being against home homosexuality with being part of the KKK or skinheads or neo Nazis, so that when people think about homosexuality, and they think about whatever their biblical position on homosexuality, their biblical position on gay marriage, that they automatically have a check. They're jammed. Right. It's like you've got a machine and they throw sand in the work, so the machine gets jammed and it doesn't work, So now you have to stop because you feel bad about believing what the Bible says about homosexuality. This is why, for example, if you want to see jamming at work, what you do is watch a sermon by a pastor in the last especially five years, maybe ten years, on homosexuality. Most guys will spend the first quarter to a third of the sermon softening the blows. I don't hate gay people. I have family members who are gay. I have friends who are gay. I just want you to again, the first quarter to third of the sermon is trying to soften the blow. They do it in a way that they would never do a sermon, for example, on drunkenness. You don't start that by saying listen, I don't hate drunks. I don't hate drug addicts. I have family members, I have friends who are drug addicts. Adultery listen, church. I just want to stay up front as I preached this message. I don't hate adulterers. I love adulterers. God loves adulterers. I have friends who are adulterers, family members of mine who are knee deep in adultery. So as I preach this sermon, I just want you to keep that in mind, God loves adulterers. You see, we laugh because it's ridiculous. But sermons on homosexuality start like this, because we've been effectively jammed. It's worked. Then there's conversion. Now, by conversion, they're not talking about, you know, making straight people gay. That's not what they mean by conversion. By conversion, what they mean is something more sinister. By conversion, they mean changing people's minds and attitudes about homosexuality, about lgbtq IA two plus so that they become ally. By the way, in the acronym l g B t q I A two plus. I told you what the two is for, right, that's the idea of two spirit. And they get that from in indigenous groups and communities, right, American Indians, they used to have this idea of two spirit, a way that they would talk about people who were either you know, homosexual or whatever or whatever you have it there. So they bring that too in. We know that we know the L it's for you can say it lesbian, right. You know G is four B, bisexual, okay, t transgender, k Q, queer or questioning okay, I intersects. Do you know what the A is for? Allies? Wow? As for allies. You see, that's the purpose of conversion is to create as to create allies. So even in the acronym they have allies. Now I talked about this being contradictory. The reason that its contradictory is because and this is this point is made brilliantly in the book The Madness of Crowds, written by almost exual author by the way, but he points out the fact that for decades, the l's and the g's have been arguing it's a hardware issue. Right, We've been trying to do, you know, studies and you know, to prove that it's in the genes, it's in the brain, it's in the pheromones. Right. None of the studies did prove that. But for years, for decades, the lesbian movement and the gay movement was making the argument, we're born this way, it's biological. Now the trans movement comes along and says hardware, hardware means nothing, it's a software issue. So you got lesbian gays, we're born this way, it's our hardware. Transgender saying you're evil if you let hardware dictate reality. I am who I am in spite of my hardware. Those two ideas are completely and diametrically opposed to one another, and they can't both be true at the same time. Yet they're part of the same acronym. I'll go you one better. The q's for queer. Now. Queer theory is a whole branch of critical theory and queer theory. Contrary to what many people think, it's not about. You know, a lot of people use the word queer and what they mean is gay right queer no, no, no no. Queer theory is about non normative sexuality. It's an identity without an essence. It's non normative. Queer theory is about being against that which has been normalized. Well, guess what. Now that gay marriage is legal, Queer theory has to be against the normalized L and G. And now that the T is being normalized, queer theory has got to be against that too. But they all still occupy the same acronym. Why because they're rooted and grounded in critical theory. They're rooted and grounded in cultural Marxism, They're rooted and grounded in identity Marxism. And they hope that you don't pay attention to the fact that these things are contradictory because the problem is power and privilege. That's what's evil, power and privilege. And all these people can be in the same acronym because compared to cisgendered HETEROTIACA. By the way, cisgendered means nothing. I get people who ask me that all the time. What is cists? It's a made up word. The whole point is you have cis gendered heterosexuals in the position of power. All of it is socially constructed, right, That's what postmodernism is arguing. It's all socially constructed. None of it exists as objective reality. It's just socially constructed to keep people in power. And so all of these things may contradict one another ideologically, but when you put them on the spectrum of oppressor oppressed, they all occupy the oppressed category. Therefore they all belong together cause there's one ultimate reality, and it's the ultimate reality of critical theory. A. Now, this may sound crazy to you, I mean, I hope it does. But the closer you are to K twelve education, the less crazy that sounds. If you're a teacher who's graduated with a degree in education in recent years, this doesn't sound crazy to you at all. This is what you've been inundated with for the last several years of your life. If you're an administrator in a school, this doesn't sound crazy to you at all, cause you're scheduling in service training for your teachers so that they get this. If you're a student and a K through twelve school, this doesn't sound crazy to you at all because all of your curriculum is now pointed in this direction and geared toward getting you to this conclusion. Woe to those we'll call evil good and good evil. This is this is the next box car and the critical social justice train. A couple of things that I wanted to get to here before we stop this. We're supposed to. We're supposed to end this here soon. First on this before I close it. Pedophilia is what's next? Okay, pedophilia is what's next. Pedophilia rebranded in a new push to be included in the LGBTQ community. They got their own flag. They rebranded themselves as m aps Minor attracted persons, right, not pedophiles, Minor attracted persons. They're making the same arguments that the gay Christian movement is making. So the gay Christian movement is making this argument. It's not wrong to have a homosexual orientation and to be attracted to people of the same sex. It's only wrong when you act on it. That's the gay Christian movement's argument. And that's also the pedophiles argument. Being attracted to minors, that's that's not I mean, as long as you're not abusing miners. Right, It's the exact same argument that groups like Living Out and Revoice are making about homosexuality. There's a tweet here about a professor, a university professor who wrote a book normalizing this idea of minor attracted persons. Okay, all right, quickly, for the sake of time, I want to look at this next group because it's where the connection becomes more clear. Well, because you may think, and I thought at one time that what was happening was that Kirk and Maxon and people liked them were co opting the civil rights movement, right, that they're jumping on the bandwagon. And they looked at the civil rights movement and they said, wow, look at how successful that has been. If we could just get in on some of that. But that's not the way that it happened Julian Bond, who was the head of the NAACP. African Americans were the only Americans who were enslaved for two centuries, but we were far from the only Americans suffering discrimination then and now. Sexual disposition parallels race. In other words, gay is the new black. Courritas Scott King, banning same sex marriage is a form of gay bashing because gay is the new black. Michael Steele, former chair of the Republican National Committee. Oh no, I don't think I've ever really subscribed to that view that you can turn it on or off like water or like a water tap. I think there's a whole lot that goes into the makeup of an individual that you just can't simply say, oh, like tomorrow morning, I'm going to stop being gay. It's like saying tomorrow morning, I'm going to stop being black because gay is the new black. But even back in this overrights movement, listen to this from Bear Aggressive and you may not know this name, but I'll explain to you who this individual was after this quote. Today, blacks are no longer the litmus paper or the barometer of social change. Blacks are in every segment of society. By the way, this is back in the sixties and seventies. He's saying this, Blacks are in every level a segment of society, and there are laws that help to protect them from racial discrimination. The new Niggers are gays. It is in this sense that gay people are the new barometer for social change. The question of social change should be framed with the most vulnerable group in mind, gay people. Now, who was Rusting? Rustling was a homosexual. He was a cultural Marxist. He was arrested in nineteen fifty six for public sodomy. He was a member of the Communist part of the USA. He was a member of the American Socialist Party. Went to India in the nineteen forties to study Gandhi's non violent tactics and then came back to the United States and was Martin Luther King Junior's mentor for the non violent tactics of the Civil rights movement. He was also one of King's ghostwriters, and Rustin spoke at the March on Washington. Nor was he the only one in the movement. King was well aware of Rustin's and James Baldwin's homosexuality. You know James Baldwin, the black poet. He knew that their tendency was to mingle black social justice with gay social justice. King agreed with another close advisor and ghostwriter, Stanley Levinson's Levinson was a white guy, that the race issue should be priority. Homosexuality was not to be conflated during the climactic point of the nineteen sixties, but King and Levinson agreed that Ruston and Baldwin were more qualified to lead the homosexual movement. After the climax of the civil rights movement in the nineteen sixties, nobody co opted the civil rights movement. This was linked long before. Kirkhan Matson wrote After the Ball and it was well known at the time. Well, I hate to do it, but we have to stop. But before we stop, let me say this, that wasn't the only civil rights movement that attached these two things. In the nineties, when Nelson Mandela was released from prison and became president in South Africa, a number of his advisors had left South Africa and been educated in the West. There were sort of exiles right during the apartheid period, and these individuals had great influence on Mandela and the rest of the leaders of that movement, so that under Mandela, South Africa became the fifth nation in the world and the first nation and so farth still the only nation in Africa to legalize same sex marriage because under Mandela they also linked black civil rights and gay civil rights. So again, this is not a new thing by any stretch of the imagination. Okay, all right, I know it's a lot. It's only a fraction of what we're supposed to be dealing with this weekend. So I guess gonna have to write another book.