It is the iron law of “progressive”
movements that having achieved their goals they refuse to fade away.
Rather than disbanding upon completion of their mission, these
movements, now fully institutionalized, keep chugging along, and the
father they go the more they resemble their sworn enemies, the rationale
for their existence.
The labor movement that arose as a desperate defense against unbridled
exploitation has degenerated into a mafia-style, stultifying monopoly
whose grip on any business dooms it to death by slow strangulation. The
civil rights movement emerged to fight discrimination. But as its baton
passed from Martin Luther King Jr. to the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al
Sharpton, the movement’s main motto transmogrified from equality, i.e.
abolition of white privilege, into affirmative action, i.e.
establishment of black privilege. And equality has come to be denigrated
by the new self-appointed civil rights elite as a particularly insidious
form of racial discrimination. Feminism born of a legitimate earning for
equal rights and dignity has turned into a female supremacy movement
implacably hostile to the “patriarchy”, i.e. the traditional social
The gay rights movement, too, has been transforming itself before our
very eyes. Once a movement fighting against persecution and
discrimination, which is the reason why its initial demands enjoyed wide
public support, it has gone from one triumph to another and won the war.
Today, the issue is moot. But the gay movement has not declared victory
and gone home. No longer content with mere equality, it has been
radicalizing and increasingly shrilly demanding recognition of its
lifestyle as superior to the traditional one. The militant gays’ not so
secret motto is: equality today, supremacy tomorrow.
Central to achieving their goal is bending society to their will and
forcing it to acquiesce in their agenda. That’s where same-sex marriage
comes in. It’s no mystery why it commands considerable support. After
all, what can be more “American” than the idea of granting equality to a
formerly persecuted group that has done nothing untoward other than
being different in their sexual proclivities. Sort of like being
discriminated because of the color of one’s skin (even though many black
leaders, jealously guarding their highly lucrative victimhood, take
strong exception to equating gay liberation with the civil rights
struggle). So recognition of gay unions as legitimate marriages seems to
be an eminently innocuous idea. But appearances can be deceptive. Few
things are more destructive than gay marriage, a poison pill devised to
corrode the very core of a healthy society - the institute of marriage.
Not a single society in the long history of mankind has ever attempted
to substitute homosexual relationship for traditional marriage. Even in
places where homosexuality was viewed as normal, openly practiced and
even encouraged (as in Sparta, where carnal relationship was regarded as
forging an extra bond between the warriors), marriage was sacrosanct and
never called into question. Marriage has always been universally
understood as a biological, social and economic arrangement to bring
into the world and rear the young, thus perpetuating the species.
Indeed, humans took their cue from wild nature where heterosexual family
is virtually the sole organizing principle of life.
The rare exceptions only prove the rule, as do stable childless
marriages held together by considerations of economic necessity or
social convenience. Indeed, so central is marriage to human existence
that it forms the basic building block and prototype of any society. The
many forms of social organization are but permutations of the basic
familial pattern; the clan, the tribe and the state are merely an
extended family writ large.
Don’t believe revolutionaries when they hold forth about their intention
of building paradise on earth. Actually they would be unable to build
anything even if they wanted to. Their talk about the bright future is
mere lip service, because in reality any revolution is exclusively about
destruction, with very little thought given to what will happen
afterwards (“we’ll cross that bridge when we come to it”). But how do
you go about destroying society? Where do you direct the blow so it will
do the most damage? In his Theses on Feuerbach, Karl Marx provided the
clue: destroy the traditional family.
True to the teachings of their prophet, socialist revolutionaries have
placed the destruction of the matrimony high on their list of
priorities. Social upheavals have always opened the floodgates of
debauchery and pornography. The socialist revolution brings about a
breakdown of social conventions, with “sexual liberation” regarded as
part of the overall drive for freedom. But while the rabble earns to
throw off the yoke of moral strictures to give vent to its animal
passions, the revolutionary leaders see moral decay as a means of
undermining the bulwark of the social structure - the family.
Radical movements are merely battalions of the revolutionary army, each
charged with a particular subversive task. The mission of the radical
feminists and militant gays is to destroy the traditional family.
Undoubtedly, the overwhelming majority of rank-and-file gays are
well-meaning people who have sincerely bought into the myth peddled by
their leaders that the marriage license is the ultimate token of
recognition of their normalcy. They know not what they are doing. But
the wizards behind the curtain know better and there shouldn’t be any
illusions about their intentions: they want nothing less than to bring
down the capitalist system and view their movement as a battering ram to
shatter its principal bastion, America. Bringing down the traditional
family is a crucial step in that direction.
But why is gay marriage inimical to the traditional matrimony? How does
society suffer if it gives legal sanction to the cohabitation of gay
couples and bestows upon them the rights traditionally granted to
spouses? However, an approach based on individual rights is a bum steer.
Legalization of same-sex marriage compromises the institution of
marriage and thus undermines the family built on the foundation of
It has been known since the dawn of history that a family unit
consisting of a man and a woman is the best nurturing environment for
the children. According to the research center Child Trends, "Research
confirms that children develop best in families formed by both
biological parents in a low-conflict marriage." Even the
best-intentioned gay couples raising children shortchange their wards.
But the militant gay leaders are not well-meaning. Just as the radical
leftists started out on their Great March through the Institutions with
schools and colleges as their primary targets (“We’ll get you through
your children,” the radical leftist and gay poet Allen Ginsberg warned
his erstwhile friend Norman Podhoretz), gay militants have children in
their cross-hairs. A nationwide organization, The Gay, Lesbian and
Straight Education Network, openly acknowledges that its objective is to
promote a positive view of homosexuality among pre-teen and teenage
Aside from the tremendous damage same-sex marriage does to the
well-being and normal development of children, by offering an
alternative to a bedrock institution gay marriage calls into question
all traditional values. There is a strong correlation between the rise
of homosexual marriage and the weakening of traditional matrimony. David
Blankenhorn observes, "The deep logic of same-sex marriage is clearly
consistent with what scholars call deinstitutionalization--the
overturning or weakening of all of the customary forms of marriage, and
the dramatic shrinking of marriage's public meaning and institutional
authority. Does deinstitutionalization necessarily require gay marriage?
Apparently not. For decades heterosexuals have been doing a fine job on
that front all by themselves. But gay marriage clearly presupposes and
Marx’s loyal cohort Friedrich Engels in his influential work, The Origin
of the Family, Private Property and the States, disclosed the game plan
in a single, succinct proposition: change the concept of matrimony and
the traditional family will cease to exist. And once the family is gone,
society will fall apart. Knock out the cornerstone, and the whole
edifice will crumble, which is precisely the ultimate goal of the