This article was originally a segment on Pastor Bass’s radio show, A Moment of Truth, aired on February 2, 2014. Here you can listen or read the transcript.
Greetings! This is Pastor David Bass at New Geneva Orthodox Presbyterian Church with a moment of truth where we challenge you to think through an important issue of life and faith. Today, what is the dialectic process and how have we moved as a society from seeing issues like homosexuality as taboo to celebrating it as terrific? How have we come to see abortion as a liberal sacrament when a generation ago it was seen as a human sacrilege? Since the beginning of time animals were thought to be food for our table fit for human consumption; now they are thought to be food for thought and elevated to human companions!
Dear listener, you are a sheep for the slaughter if you think this is just the normal progress of humanity; you are a drone in a bastard bee hive if you think this is inevitable social evolution; you are a mindless prole in a Marxist proletariat if you assume this is the predetermined outcome of history. Marxist social engineers have long recognized and embraced the fundamental process of human change: The Dialectical Process.
Some of you know exactly that of which I speak; others of you scratch your head and ask, “What in the world is he talking about – diabolical, diametric process – I have no clue as to what you’re talking about and what it means to me.” What if I told you that the dialectical process helped to guide how you think about homosexuality – especially if you see it as normal and equal to heterosexuality?
Last week I put forward 3 reasons why gay/lesbian marriage was destructive towards society:
A theological reason – i.e., one man/one woman in a faithful, monogamous covenant union was the unbreakable model that God designed.
A demographic reason – i.e., owing to Reproductive inertia homosexual couples contribute to a population death spiral in every society in which they are allowed to flourish (lesbian women have the wombs but not the wish to use them for babies; homosexual men have the seed but not the sense to reproduce after their kind).
A cultural reason – i.e., that gay culture must seize upon breeding, heterosexual culture for their next generation of persons to perpetuate that culture. By definition, left to themselves, they would die out. They rely upon breeding heterosexual culture for the prey to perpetuate the next generation of gay culture.
Yet these reasons fly in the face of what you have been led to believe:
LGBTG people deserve to be happy like everyone else – We are only human with regular desires like anyone else. Therefore we should be allowed to exercise these desires freely.
LGBTG people have the right to be married – Marriage is a “right” to which the gay community is entitled. You heterosexual people are discriminatory when you deny us our right to be married like straight couples.
What was taboo yesterday is trendy today; what was perverse in the dark yesterday is preached from the rooftops today; what was malignant yesterday is mainstream today. How/why did this happen? What does it mean for our future?
Already we see our future on the horizon: Another taboo (pedophilia) is just gearing up to become trendy; perverse pedophilia is coming out from the dark shadows to be preached from the rooftops; the malignant sexuality of pedophilia will become mainstream in days to come. “Impossible,” you say; “No sane person will ever be persuaded that child molestation is normal,” you may object; “Sex with children will be mainstream over my dead body,” you may strenuously assert. Let me suggest that there are people out there who may accommodate you and your dead body!
There is now a pedophile activist lobby group B4U-ACT founded by Dr. John Money of the National Institute for the Study, Prevention, and Treatment of Sexual Trauma. It was initially part of Johns Hopkins Sexual Disorders Clinic. Dr. Money and his disciples want to redefine pedophilia as a normal sexual orientation, like heterosexuality and now what mainstream society considers to be normal regarding LGBTG.
They have been metaphorically “standing in line” in the debate over the mainstreaming of homosexuality, awaiting their opportunity for acceptance. With the complete collapse of resistance to the normalization of all things homosexual, B4U-ACT sees its time to move as opportune.
Dr. Fred Berlin succeeds his mentor Dr. Money (deceased) as head of B4U-ACT. He addressed the infamous American Psychiatric Association in August of 2011 with a paper entitled, Pedophilia, Minor-Attracted Persons, and the DSM: Issues and Controversies. In it Berlin attempted to make a case for redefining pedophilia as a normal, well adjusted sexual orientation which he labeled Minor Attracted Persons (a tortured euphemism if ever there was one).
These Minor Attracted Persons are no different from you and me with the exception that they are sexually attracted to children rather than adults and should not therefore be condemned because we are not attracted to children. According to Dr. Berlin these relationships between children and Minor Attracted Persons can be so structured that no one is hurt but that both the child and adult so drawn can profit from the relationship.
Dr. Berlin wants all of us “to learn more about attraction to minors and to consider the effects of stereotyping, stigma, and fear.” According to one observer, “all speakers focused on pedophiles as healthy, normal, and unfairly victimized by stigma and mean words.”
This is what is coming! You may be shocked and outraged at the very thought of it, but your kids will become accustomed to hearing about it and their kids will wonder what the problem is and their kids will wonder why you are so prejudiced against Minor Attracted Persons!
Dear Listener, this trail of benign surrender is well blazed; it has transformed from a cow path to a super highway. Dr. Berlin and the pedophile lobby is following the path first blazed by the homosexual lobby in the 1970′s. Back then the situation was parallel. The general public resisted with disgust any “normalization” of what was considered perverted behavior.
But the aggressive homosexual lobby began by enlisting the “experts” to bludgeon the public with so-called facts/science. Under tremendous pressure from these groups a small committee of the APA in 1973 recommended in a study to lift its designation of homosexuality as a disorder from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manuel (DSM), the Bible of what is considered abnormal and in need of treatment.
This study was based at the time on the now long discredited Kinsey Report, the sensational and revolutionary study of human sexual behavior in the USA. At the time, Kinsey’s data, for example, asserted that some 10% of American men were thoroughly homosexual and up to 37% of men engaged in some kind of homosexual behavior/experimentation at some time in their lives, though otherwise straight. With that kind of impressive number of behaviors percolating underneath the American psyche, how could anyone call it abnormal?
The Kinsey Report was hyped and sensationalized all throughout the ’60′s after its release, cited solemnly and authoritatively by everyone from Walter Cronkite and the news media, Playboy Magazine, and used as monologue material by Johnny Carson and the Tonight Show. However, later research into Kinsey’s methods and data revealed that he regularly inflated statistics, extrapolated unwarranted conclusions from meager testimony, and planted leading questions into his surveys. Kinsey’s Report has since been tossed on the dustbin of science in every quarter but the popular public imagination.
But that did not stop the APA from using it in ’73 to justify eliminating homosexual behavior as a disorder from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manuel. With these heavy guns on its side, the homosexual lobby now had a scientific bludgeon from the premier ivory tower of psychiatric science with which to beat back its opponents. And use it they did! The study of the APA was then employed in legislatures, courtrooms, and governor’s mansions all over the country to lobby for gay rights and eventually for gay marriage. Additionally, the APA decision was hyped in college textbooks and high school sex education and eventually into primary schools and kindergartens under the guise of AIDS prevention and the need to prevent bullying and hate panics.
The pedophile lobby is hoping for the same kind of treatment by the APA. If Dr. Berlin and his cohorts at B4U-ACT get their way, they will get the full range of pedophile behaviors – all manner of sex with children – removed from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manuel as disorder in need of treatment and therapy. Armed with this authority from a so-called scientific quarter, they hope to lobby legislatures to remove all age of consent restrictions for pedophile sexual behavior.
And they said it couldn’t be done! All through the debate over gay rights and marriage, the “slippery slope” argument – that once you condone one sexual behavior you begin to slide down the greased incline towards condoning all sexual behaviors – was dismissed and pooh-poohed as irrelevant. Yet we see as exquisitely relevant this fact materializing before our eyes!
My assertion remains as relevant as ever: Without the absolute moral standard of the Bible, there is absolutely no limit to the corruption of the beauty of human sexuality.
How is this done, dear Listener? We see the pedophilic freight train coming barreling down the track of history and righteous America seems incapable of derailing it. How is this seemingly unstoppable historical force of sexual degeneration performed? In order to more effectively equip you with the information you need to struggle against some of the demonic powers at war with America, let me expose what every Marxist is taught on his Red mother’s knee: Historical change is accomplished by the dialectical method.
“What,” you may exclaim, “I’ve never heard of such a thing; what does this fancy philosophical term have to do with my gay cousin who wants to get married?”
Everything! And the dialectical method is more than an ivory tower concept that only intellectuals talk about when they’re not debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. The dialectical method is a well established pattern of human thought/behavior that goes back to the philosopher Plato but was honed and refined by the early nineteenth century German philosopher George Hegel. For Hegel, history was the key for understanding the progress of man. Throughout history, man progressed in his thought in the following manner:
Change begins with an established premise/status quo, or thesis. Let us use the historical example of the Roman Catholic Church of the sixteenth century which exercised monolithic authority over the conscience of the people.
This, in Hegel’s thought, is the thesis.
Along comes a man like Martin Luther who strongly asserts the authority of the free, individual conscience. This is the anti-thesis.
For Hegel, the conflict between these two seeming opposites – the authority of the monolithic conscience vs. the authority of the individual conscience – produces in the course of history a new synthesis, i.e., a free conscience within the Church.
This new synthesis then becomes the thesis for the next antithesis to come along. For example, a free conscience in the political sphere soon challenged the status quo or thesis of the feudal system of Europe. The new synthesis of representative government soon replaced it as the new synthesis which in turn became the new thesis for change.
For Hegel, this is how change looks as it progresses in history. It was a profound insight into how human thought works. There were those who seized upon it to plan strategies to achieve their goals. One of these was Karl Marx, author of Das Capital and the Communist system. In fact, George Hegel influenced Marx’s grand view of history in general and those of his successors, too (e.g., Nikolai Lenin of Russian Revolution fame…). Of course, for the Marxist, history is a determined process and will inevitably issue in the perfected “worker’s paradise” after its struggle with the evils of capitalism. One component of that inevitable historical process is the dialectic method.
Progressives of all stripes recognize this dialectic and seek to gradually shape history by challenging the received norm, status quo, or thesis with a new antithesis of their own creation, one that will move their radical agenda. In retrospect, we can see that one of those antitheses was the gay agenda.
The thesis: Straight America, with its heterosexual culture.
The antithesis: Gay America, with its radical homosexual culture.
The synthesis: Sexually progressive America, with full legitimacy and acceptance of LBGTG lifestyles – including the coveted institution of marriage.
Of course, this grand 40+ year agenda was achieved – not all in one chunk – but in gradual steps, one dialectical process at a time.
Thesis – straight America for whom homosexuality was a perverted taboo (’70′s).Antithesis – underground homosexual America who struggled to be accepted as a legitimate culture.Synthesis – an American culture in which homosexuality was no longer a perverted taboo but seen increasingly as a legitimate culture.
Thesis – a straight American culture with a taboo-less gay culture.Antithesis – (80′s – ’90′s) homosexuals who are no longer taboo but who nevertheless suffer by being deprived of their rights and suffer from discrimination in the larger culture.Synthesis – a straight American culture in which gays are no longer discriminated against in the workplace or schools or larger culture.
Thesis – an American culture that no longer discriminates in the broader culture against the homosexual.Antithesis – (late 90′s – early 21st C.) a gay culture that yet lacks the ultimate crown jewel of legitimacy, marriage.Synthesis – a shrinking straight culture in which LBGTG enjoy full status with straights.
Do you see how the dialectical method operates? Thesis, antithesis, and synthesis and the process begins anew with the old synthesis as the new thesis. Marxists/Progressives have been consciously employing the dialectical method in service to their agenda for over a century now to the complete ignorance/naïve gullibility of most Americans.
That is why every concession that conservatives and traditionalists make is never the end but only the occasion for a new antithesis to be introduced to challenge what is now the status quo. Pretty soon, not only do you have social security (30′s), but as the dialectic method is employed consistently over the decades, you acquire unemployment insurance, food stamps, welfare, Medicare/Medicad, and the summit of socialism, Obamacare!
Inherent in the dialectical process is the idea of struggle and conflict. No synthesis occurs without the struggle and conflict presented by the antithesis. This is precisely why Progressives are never interested in the final resolution of any issue; it is precisely why Progressives never shrink from conflict but relish and invite it; struggle and conflict with the status quo is the very means by which they achieve their goals. This is why Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel could quip while he was chief of staff for President Obama, “Never let a good crisis go to waste…” because a crisis always presents the opportunity to struggle/battle with the opposition, consciously implementing one of their agenda items as an antithesis in the conflict and coming out at the other end with a favorable synthesis that wasn’t there before the crisis!
In fact, so basic to Marxism is this notion of conflict to the overall triumph of the Communist Revolution (why do you think they call it revolution) that even each individual issue (e.g., the gay agenda) is – in the end – only another tool / means towards the ultimate goal of the triumph of the Revolution. This principle of conflict gave rise to Lenin’s famous saying, “The issue is never the issue; the issue is always the Revolution!” Do not be a naïve dupe; every issue put forward by modern Progressives is never pursued purely on its own merits; it also more importantly serves to advance the Marxist Revolution.
Are you aware of one of the goals of the Communist Manifesto? One is, indeed, to destroy the western family as it is traditionally constituted. That is why there is such a symbiotic relationship between the homosexual agenda and Progressives. It advances the Communist agenda to destroy the family. Dear listener, what do you think the pedophile agenda of Dr. Berlin and his B4U-ACT lobby group will accomplish towards these ends – destroying the family and advancing the agenda of the Communist Manifesto?
As soon as it is practicably possible, look for Progressives to take up the antithesis of pedophilia/Minor Attracted Persons in order to challenge the status quo thesis of straight culture’s taboo on sex with children. There will be great conflict over this issue even as there was with the issue over homosexuality. But as Progressives well know in the crucible of history, conflict with the status quo brings about change – especially as they use our own ethic against us. Who can be against love and affection (i.e., which children ostensibly enjoy when they have sex with adults)? Who can be against changing prejudice and discrimination (which straight culture presently demonstrate to Minor Attracted Persons)? Who can be against giving equal rights and recognition to Minor Attracted Persons (which, if they are re-categorized as normal by the APA, they deserve)?
Dear listener, as horrified as your initial reaction may be to this, as incredible as it may seem to actually materialize, I submit to you that this was precisely the reaction of mainstream straight culture to the homosexual agenda back in ’73 when the APA voted to remove homosexuality from its Manuel of mental disorders. But as we have just recounted for you, the gay community and American Progressives employed the dialectic method to transform the thinking and behavior of the American public. Behold, now not only do we accept LGBTG people as normal but also entitled to the crown jewel of social sanctity, marriage! This same method will be employed to transform your thinking concerning pedophilia – destroying that much more the family that has been the backbone of western civilization and an obstacle to Marxist paradise.
Therefore, dear listener, if you are not going to be sheep led around by your nose in this merry-go-round of change via the dialectic method, you must know what you are facing and be prepared for the extended political / cultural conflict ahead of us. Believe me, Progressives are prepared for and cynically using the conflict inherent in the dialectical method to achieve their goals: Change that progresses towards the end of Marxist Revolution.
Wake up, get educated in these things, pray fervently, and prepare yourself for the extended cultural battle ahead.