If there were any need to further establish the radical and reckless vision for America embraced by the man who presently inhabits the White House, one need look no further than his proclamation declaring June 2010 as “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month.” This is the second year Mr. Obama has made the proclamation honoring a group of individuals based on nothing more than their sexual proclivities, following the lead of his Democratic predecessor Bill Clinton. President George Bush passed on this politically motivated opportunity.

Repeating the established socialist mantra that all Americans (by which he means select groups residing within America’s borders) “deserve the same rights, privileges, and opportunities,” Mr. Obama declared that one “important chapter” in America’s “great, unfinished story” of forced equality is the ongoing efforts to normalize homosexuality by any means necessary. “This month, as we recognize the immeasurable contributions of LGBT Americans, we renew our commitment to the struggle for equal rights for LGBT Americans and to ending prejudice and injustice wherever it exists.”

That commitment on the part of the President has included, among other efforts, pressing to repeal the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and to overturn the 1993 “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law prohibiting homosexuals from serving openly in the military, a goal he came a step closer to realizing in late May when both the Senate Armed Services Committee and the full House of Representatives voted to repeal the law.

The President also emphasized his commitment to ensuring that homosexuals have a federally enforced right to work wherever they want, that homosexual federal employees and their partners receive full and unfettered benefits, and that same-sex couples are free to adopt — regardless of the impact their lifestyle might have on the children they raise.

Mr. Obama noted the strength America derives from its diverse peoples, “with each of us contributing to the greater whole.” Included in that diverse grouping, the President insisted, is the broad category of homosexual activists gathered under the LGBT umbrella, whose members “have enriched and strengthened the fabric of our national life.”

Among those who paused at the President’s connection of sexuality with substantive accomplishments was Joe Carter of the  Institute on Religion and Public, who wondered if Mr. Obama might explain “how bisexuals — because of their bisexuality — have enriched America and how transgendered — because or their transgendered orientation — have strengthened the ‘fabric of our national life.’ In other words, maybe he could explain why alternative forms of ‘gender identity or sexual orientation’ are something we should celebrate at the national level.”

The truth of the matter is that a myriad of individuals have made enormously important and enriching contributions to society in general and to America’s unique culture specifically. Some of those individuals were, no doubt, homosexuals. But their sexual practices had nothing to do with their contributions. As Laurie Higgins of the Illinois Family Institute pointed out, “the sexual impulses and sexual behavior of homosexuals and cross-dressers are irrelevant to their contributions. Therefore, making irrelevant characteristics the central focus of ‘Pride’ month as Obama did is absurd.”

Higgins noted that, in fact, the LGBT characteristics Mr. Obama uses as a measuring stick are, to a majority of good Americans, “disordered and immoral.” Writes Higgins, “Those who experience, for example, selfish, vain, greedy, gluttonous, deceitful, promiscuous, incestuous, sadistic, pederastic, gossipy, philandering, or polyamorous impulses, and engage in behaviors impelled by such impulses have also contributed to society. How would Americans respond if the President were to proclaim June ‘Polyamory Pride Month’? Substituting another irrelevant and morally questionable characteristic for homosexuality brings into sharper relief the dubious nature of Obama’s proclamation.”

Obviously, people who engage in immoral and dysfunctional behaviors — including those who fall under the LGBT label — are also responsible for many of the good things that happen in our world. But to use that behavior as the foundation for honoring a group of people is patently disingenuous, done for no other reason than to try to convince Americans to celebrate and embrace behavior and a lifestyle that has been considered immoral and repugnant throughout the history of our civilization. That is what Mr. Obama has attempted with his LGBT proclamation.

He is, writes Higgins, “using his power, his position, and this proclamation to make a fallacious association between good deeds and homosexuality. It is an exploitative stratagem to normalize homosexuality. Associate homosexuality with something positive like creativity, compassion, or self-sacrifice, and eventually the good feelings society has for creativity, compassion, or self- sacrifice will be (irrationally) transferred to homosexuality or cross-dressing.”

It is a sad commentary on the slide of our culture that sexual depravity is now used to define a recognized minority in America. That our President would embrace such an arbitrary minority for political gain is sadder yet. And that few individuals are willing to risk the persecution and backlash that will come with standing boldly against such a destructive agenda is downright alarming.

Photo: President and Mrs. Barack Obama hosted a reception for Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Pride Month in the East Room of the White House on June 29, 2009: AP Images

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (12)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Patrick said:

Why black and women's history months but not LGBT pride month? I don't see the difference between having a gay pride month and having a black history month, or a women's history month. It is not just important to recognize the contributions individuals from various groups have given, but to remember the hardships and obstacles that those groups have had to overcome as a whole to be respected as actual human beings. Blacks had to survive slavery, Jim Crow laws, and countless instances of racism. Women have had to fight for the right to vote and to be taken seriously as people who can contribute outside of the home. And LGBT individuals are fighting to show their love is just as good as the heterosexuals of the country, who half the time get divorced or have 55-hour just for fun marriages. They have to live with the fact that most states allow them to be fired, evicted, denied employment, or have their children, even their biological ones, taken from them simply because of the fact they have a different way of loving. All this, despite the fact that the divorce rate in Massachusetts has gone down since gay marriage was legalized, and that a new 20 year study has shown lesbian mothers make better parents than heterosexual couples. When you add in the fact that our entire system of Western thought is based on the works of a bunch of homosexuals, the Greek philosophers, I think the LGBT community has earned the right for its own pride month.

June 14, 2010

escaswv cvpko said:

human if it weren't for societal discrimination, you might have a point. but, you don't. the social pressures on young GLBT folks are even worse now than when i was young. after all, back then it was "the love that dare not speak its name." and these pressures have led to an unbelievably high suicide rate among young GLBT people, so high that with any young persons' self-inflicted death any reasonable person has to wonder if it was because they were gay. social pressures like these affect society as a whole, not just GLBT people. to prove their 'normalcy', some people try to hide in relationships which, when proven false, result in the breakup of families, often with serious rifts that rip children from their parent for the rest of their lives. as the Fundies try to keep their obsession with our sexuality a matter of law in increasing desperation, they may finally stack up enough repressive statutes to make GLBT people a 'suspect class' under constitutional law, and therefore deserving of more rigorous legal protection from the courts than we would have if folk would just leave us be. citizens, beware of anyone who argues against "the equal protection of the law" for any purpose whatsoever. just because you aren't on their list now, doesn't mean that you, or your child, or your niece or nephew or grandchild, isn't on that list or won't be on it in the future.

June 14, 2010

Lee Gonzales said:

escaswv cvpko, if it were not for common sense... you would have a point.

June 14, 2010

Stephen Cleary said:

... Ridiculous. Neither blacks nor homosexuals should have special recognition. This is discrimination. It's about time that people realize these stupid kinds of designations only further damage their cause. Why can't we just be Americans? White or Black (or anything else), homo or hetero? Singling out a specific group for special recognition is just wrong.

June 14, 2010

Ben said:

... This is nothing more than the "Participation Trophy" mentality. Everyone is special and deserves special rights. Wrong everyone has the same basic rights, if that is not enough for those who need to made to feel special maybe they should move to a country of their liking. No one has ever said that life was fair nor should it be. Yes some homos did remarkable things what no one knows because they never needed to advertise their sexuality. Their deeds were the reason for accolades. Now everyone must have accolades reguardless of their contribution to society.

June 14, 2010

yourretarded said:

... You are trying to turn this into a "special treatment" case. This is still fighting for rights that everyone else already has. This is not a case of trying to give the LGBT community anything more than equality. History has nothing to do with it. They want to serve in the military and can't. The same goes for marriage. That's limited rights. End of story.

June 14, 2010

Marco Luxe said:

Laurie Higgins is right?!?! I think you just inadvertently argued for the end of DADT and for the passage of ENDA, [the federal employment non-discrimination act]when you quote Laurie Higgins of the Illinois Family Institute. “The sexual impulses and sexual behavior of homosexuals and cross-dressers are irrelevant to their contributions. EXACTLY! Why get fired from your job, evicted from you apt. or booted from the military when your private behavior is irrelevant to your contributions? The real point is that the religious rightists are hypocrites who will without principle adopt any position to suit their ends [to make themselves feel falsely superior].

June 14, 2010

MD said:

To Ben and Steven You are both absolutely right. When will minority groups realize that they are being condescended by these politicians. Likewise, to quote the movie Incredibles, saying everybody is special is just like saying no one is special.

June 14, 2010

Patrick said:

Counterargument to Stephen I would love it if we could all just be Americans, with no special rights to any one group. What you are failing to take into account, however, is that heterosexuals have special rights that homosexuals do not. They have the 1055 legal benefits of marriage, nearly all of which are denied to homosexuals. While some LGBT individuals enjoy the extra attention, most of us would just like to have the same rights as heterosexuals, namely to marry the person of our choosing, and then to be left alone. I've never understood the special rights arguement. It's like saying begging and sleeping in parks is illegal for all Americans, rich and homeless alike. Heterosexuals take for granted things like being able to marry who they want or not being fired or evicted without good reason. All homosexuals want is to be able to do the same.

June 14, 2010

Paul said:

Discrimination, hatred and bigotry It's been a while since I've come across an article filled with such clear and unabashed bigotry and hatred against other human beings. The author should be ashamed.

June 14, 2010

Fred said:

Just part of Obama's plan The special treatment of sexual proclivities is the ultimate extension of the Left's distortion of the meaning of Dr. Martin Luther King's struggle. He, like our Founding Fathers, wanted a society where all men were equal, as God made them. He did not want groups singled out for preferential treatment, because that would make some groups more "equal" than others, which sadly was the case up until the '60's. Instead of creating a color- (or other characteristic) blind society, leftist politicians have Balkanized the nation, pitting one group against the other, in order to get power for themselves. When are people going to realize that they are being used by these unscrupulous individuals for their own personal gain? After his response, or lack of response, to the recent tragedy in the Gulf, among others, does anyone really believe that Obama cares a whit about anyone or anything save crowning himself King of America and fostering his radical communist agenda on the American people? Divide and conquer is how he is doing it.

June 15, 2010

escaswv cvpko said:

ending discrimination some of you speak as though this were discrimination. hogwash. you want to keep the discrimination you have right now. you want to keep people down because they are different from you. you have to have your foot on someone's neck to feel like you are superior to someone. that's not what america is all about. equal means equal. period. no exceptions. lay all your biblical crap out that you want. Christ our lord never said one thing about homosexuals. he said a lot about adultery. but some of your most 'important' fundie and conservative leaders are just plain ol' adulterers, who you follow and praise and give more money to than your local church. not one of my reasonable arguments above has been addressed, much less undermined. y'all are dinosaurs, raging against a change in climate. and when your generation's discrimination is ended, we won't need proclamations like this anymore. but right now, supportive words from the President of the United States may save the life of your child, or your grandchild, or your niece or nephew or neighbor. but, you won't know that, will you? you aren't concerned with them or the way their Creator made them. you're just totally self-involved in how you want them to be. there are moral ways to live a homosexual life. eventual monogamy is not unknown. some relationships are not only exclusive but last more than half the partners' lives. you are fighting against a stereotype which grew from repression. as our young folk are free to be themselves, they also become free to choose a moral lifestyle and a life partner, instead of hiding behind the bushes in public parks, or worse.

June 15, 2010