Hard Working Traditional Values With A Dash of Fun

Hard Working Traditional Values With A Dash of Fun

Wednesday, April 9, 2014

'Gay'-vid and Goliath or David and 'Gay'-liath?

Malcolm Gladwell's latest best-selling book David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits, and the Art of Battling Giants presents a challenging argument that the underdog can beat the giant most of the time by changing the game. He starts by explaining that David was no match for Goliath in a hand-to-hand combat, but that Goliath was no match for David when David changed the game to nimble slingshot shooter vs. lumbering armored swordsman. Gladwell gives the example of America winning their revolution from Great Britain. The Continental Army could not beat the better trained and equipped redcoats. However, when they changed their tactics not to fight head on, they were able to last long enough to wear out the enemy. The same thing happened in Vietnam. The communists could not beat America using conventional military means, so they changed the way the war was fought.

There are many other examples of the underdog beating the favorite in history. The Soviets could not beat the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan in the 1980's. During World War II the British tried to challenge the battleship Bismark using conventional means of other battleships. The Bismark easily won, sinking the vaunted HMS Hood. However, when they changed tactics and attacked the formidable battleship with slow flying bi-plane torpedo bombers, they were able to win.

In our current day, perhaps no group has been more successful in a David vs. Goliath struggle than the homosexual community. They are riding a wave of growing acceptance of same sex marriage. 

Could a gay agenda win in an open challenge against traditional values? Absolutely not. During the 70's and 80's the homosexual activists acted like revolutionaries, with in-your-face challenges of cross-dressers, public same-sex kissing, and other actions meant to shock. It got them nowhere. Fighting Goliath on his terms, you lose.

Then in the 90's they changed their strategy from revolutionaries to victims and found a way to play David against Goliath. It was all planned out by public relation experts Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen in their 1989 publication, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred for Gays in the 90's. The plan was for homosexuals to show themselves as mainstream, such as wanting to marry, instead of displaying their overwhelming desire for promiscuity. They would get the media to focus on middle aged women or professionals and not the leather-men or drag queens. Extreme gay groups like the North American Man/Boy Love Association would have to be kept out of the news.

The plan also included selling the idea that people are born gay and have no choice. Again, it is a victim ploy to make society believe that homosexuality is the same as race as far as choice is concerned. If someone can't be held responsible for their actions, how can you blame them for what they do? They have largely succeeded in this plan even though there is no full proof scientific evidence. For example, studies of identical twins do not show that they are always both gay or both straight. Obviously there is choice involved.

We only have to look at the daily headlines to recognize that 'Gay'-vid has beaten Goliath and as long as we keep playing the same game, those who believe in traditional Christian values are going to keep losing.

The way to win is to change the game so David beats 'Gay'-liath. What will that require? I don't think we can use Right vs. Wrong, or Good vs. Evil, because moral relativism increasingly dominates society and does not recognize these are legitimate public issues. I do think an argument we can win is making choices as responsible adults (traditional) vs. making choices like irresponsible juveniles (homosexuals). I will present the details for this argument in a future post. It will show that when both values are compared, homosexual values will be recognized for what they are: immature, selfish, and anti-children. Traditional values will be recognized for what they are: responsible, forward thinking, and pro-children.

If you liked this post, be sure to share it by selecting one of the share buttons below.

If you would like to get a notice of future posts, choose the Follow option at the bottom of this blog.

1 comment:

  1. An important voice in this conversation . . .