Abortion and the Abortionists

                           Abortion and the Abortionists

               Published in Marietta (GA) Daily Journal, 3/26/19

               

            This past week my wife received a mail-out from Planned Parenthood.  It included a membership card and an appeal for money.  My wife did not solicit the information, has never been a member of Planned Parenthood and most certainly never will be.  She doesn’t believe in “terminating” unborn babies or in the ridiculous claim that doing so is a part of “reproductive health.”

            This appeal came at a wrong time for us.  Our youngest son and his wife are expecting their second child in July.  It’s a girl.  When I look at our beautiful daughter-in-law in her third trimester, I think of Governor Northam of Virginia (a doctor!) who defended letting babies die after birth.  He has paid no political price.  After a brief stir, things are back to normal for Northam.

            I think also of Joe Biden who recently said if he is elected president, he would do everything within his power to maintain “abortion rights.”

            Abortion “rights”?  The “right” to get rid of a baby?  Just what is abortion?  How is it done?  Why is it done?  We know the answers to these questions.  Abortion ends the life, horribly so, of unborn babies.  And that is a “right”?  God forbid.  There is no separation of the abortionist and abortion supporters.  They are all accomplices.

            Abortion is done in different ways, and they are all barbaric.  Why is it done?  That’s the most important and revealing question.  It is not done mostly because of rape.  It’s done out of convenience, because people don’t want the baby they have produced.  Regarding rape, I’m glad that the black actress and Christian singer Ethel Waters, the result of rape, wasn’t aborted.

            Reading through the mail-out also made me think about Stacy Abrams, Nancy Pelosi, the National Organization of Women, and many others, all of whom are complicit with the infamous Dr. Gosnell.  The whole picture makes me sad and angry.  Where is our respect for the wonder, the mystery, and the sacredness of life?  Are abortionists and their cheerleaders not bothered at all by the brutal act of dismemberment or suction?

            What a philosophical dance to toy with the word “viable.”  What a moral judgment to “decide” when human life is human life.  It is akin to the euthanasia argument that says “quality of life” is the determining factor in whether or not assisted suicide should be permissible.

            How did abortion become the centerpiece of the Democratic Party?  How can any woman who is carrying a baby allow it to be killed?  How did so many American and European women become hostile to the thought of pregnancy and motherhood?

            Our modern culture wants no limitation on sex.  Now we can – or so we think – choose our sex, change our sex, reduce sex to entertainment only, and simply rid ourselves of the undesired result of sex.  One chief aim of liberalism has been to free man from nature and nature’s God, particularly regarding sexuality.

            But more and more Americans are speaking out against abortion, with little help from Congressional conservatives.  Eleven state legislatures have already passed “heartbeat bills” that virtually end abortions in their states.  The persistent work of Concerned Women of America (which dwarfs the NOW), the Family Research Council, and other pro-life groups is paying off.  It’s no longer a fight between activist organizations.  Ordinary citizens are apparently telling their state legislatures how they feel.

            The movie “Unplanned” has revealed much about Planned Parenthood.  Its main true character, Abby Johnson, had risen from volunteer to clinic manager.  Upon witnessing an abortion for the first time in her own clinic, she left Planned Parenthood and began to give speeches that advance the pro-life position and uncover the details of Planned Parenthood’s evil.  I suspect witnessing an abortion might change Abrams, Pelosi, and anyone else.  But how likely is it that they or any of us will ever witness one?  Enjoying bloody murder and raunchy sex on the screen, we withdraw from depicting the act of abortion.

            And just why has our federal government continued to give money to Planned Parenthood?  Perhaps because members of Congress have never witnessed an abortion either, or because there has been no effective groundswell against the murderous act.  But that is changing and changing fast.

            The letter my wife received states there are nearly 20 abortion cases that are one step away from the Supreme Court.  Yes, the letter was a fund-raising effort, but it also revealed a real fear of the changing wind at the state level.

            Technology is opening many eyes, but it was observation that changed Abby Johnson.  I pray that many other Planned Parenthood employees and supporters will be changed as well.

Roger Hines

5/22/19

           

             

Is our Language getting to be a Mess?

                                   Is our Language getting to be a Mess?

               Published in Marietta (GA) Daily Journal, 5/19/19

So …, if global warming doesn’t do us in, repetitive or prissy words and phrases will.  That said, at the end of the day we’re talking about an existential threat to the nation.  I mean, the way we’re throwing around repetitive, prissy words these days, who can understand anybody?  Like, what’s wrong with plain words?

            So … another thing.  About the two words “existential threat.”  I used them in the paragraph above just to see how it would feel.  I can tell you I feel awful for doing it.  I know what a threat is, but every time I hear somebody on television say “existential” threat, I screw up my face a little bit and sit there, praying that the word will soon die.

            But it’s not dying.  Last week I heard it 5 times during a 10 minute conversation between a cable news anchor and a member of Congress.  Speaking of conversation, “let’s have a conversation.”  That’s another jewel that’s going to drive some of us to insanity.  The first time I heard it was when Hillary Clinton was announcing her candidacy for president via video and concluded by saying, “So … let’s have a conversation.”  Ah, was it Hillary who in-artfully initiated the “So …” craze as well? I’m ready for a conversation on how to kill off “Let’s have a conversation,” as well as on “We can have that conversation.”

So …, back to “existential.” I’m sure it refers to existence, so am I right to assume that an “existential threat” is a threat that threatens our existence, say, like the sun itself, since it’s supposed to burn us up in about 12 years?

Another word is “issue.”  I have an issue with the word “issue.”  Talk about abuse.  It used to mean “topic,” as in the issue of inflation, slavery, or the misuse or overuse of certain words.  Today it means anything you want it to mean, but typically people use it when they mean problem.  So …, I don’t have an “issue” with arthritis; I have a problem.  Believe me.

Not to offend members of the therapy generation, but I’m also skittish about the word “bonding.”  Look, I’ll befriend you, support you, defend you, give you a little money, or hug your neck, but please don’t require that we “bond.”   Let’s just become the best of buddies and leave it at that.  I didn’t say I was against touching.  I’m not.  I’ve been around hundreds of teens and young adults who, I firmly believe, were not touched enough.  But they didn’t need any “bonding.”  They needed a little more attention and loads of encouragement.

Speaking of the therapy generation, may I never make light of depression or any other such emotional needs, but our heightened emphasis on therapy is an indication that many of our emotional needs have been manufactured.  According to Dr. Peggy Drexler, a New York-based research psychologist, today’s 20-and 30-somethings are turning to therapy more frequently and far sooner than their age group in any previous era.  With such changes come the changing language and new words.  “Self-care” and “life coaches” are now very much with us.  And what do life coaches recommend for self-care?  Bonding.

As for clichés, don’t get me started.  Let’s just “bring to the table” all of them we’ve ever utilized (that means “used”) and “put them to bed.”  Then let’s start with “a level playing field,” avoid “mixing apples with oranges,” and do our best to “change the culture” at our workplaces.  Truth is we just need to have a funeral – I mean, “memorial service” – for all the pretentious language any of us have ever used.  That done, we should all have “closure.”

Closure can never arrive, though, for those who insist on saying “firstly” for “first.” Or “hopefully” for anything.  “Hopefully” should be shot at daybreak.”  It is a cheap, non-think convenience that is right up there with “issue,” and I do have a problem with it.  Not an issue.

I don’t mean to sound like a language stickler.  The people I grew up around used clear, understandable English.  They busted many a verb, but they still knew how to speak plainly and respectfully.  I understand that language, like dress, is social adaptation.  You put it on or take it off, depending on the occasion.

But you always, always avoid saying something like “Never end the life of a water bird that can lay ovoid bodies composed of the precious yellow metal” when all you mean is “Don’t kill the goose that lays the golden egg.”

Roger Hines

5/8/19

 

Why I Still Love the South

                               Why I Still Love the South

               Published in Marietta (GA) Daily Journal, 5/12/19

            I’ve always believed I would make a good Yankee, mainly because every place in the North I’ve visited, I’ve liked.  Pristine Wisconsin won my heart during a college summer job that carried me all over the state. 

            If Boston has any alleys that aren’t clean and shiny, I must have missed them.  All of the ones I have peered into were as clean as the streets.  Portland, Maine had me even before I walked through the house of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow.  Oh, those seafood restaurants and the friendly locals who frequented them.  In Chicago at the world famous Moody Church, I observed that the auditorium full of congregants was about one-third black, one-third white, and one-third Asian.  That was nice.

                        Unlike other regions of the nation that are quite happy with who they are, too many leaders of the South have succumbed to the smearing of the South-hating Southern Poverty Law Center and to Hollywood’s portrayals of the South.  Former Emory University professor Boyd Cathy recently wrote, “A South whose leadership cannot or will not say a good word about Robert E. Lee is in serious decline, if not already dead.”

            How sad that in the South we now have virtually no political leaders who will defend the South from the slings and arrows thrown her way.  How many Southern governors, mayors, or community leaders have resisted the numerous attacks on Southern monuments?  Indeed, how many of them have led the way in getting rid of them?

Robert E. Lee was no more imperfect than George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, or Abraham Lincoln.  Lee was a man of honor.  Like many of our founders, he owned slaves.  Unlike many other slaveholders of the era, he treated them kindly.  Who is defending this good man from the onslaughts of those whose aim is the cultural cleansing of the South?

            Recently presidential candidate Joe Biden used a stump speech opportunity to bring up Jim Crow laws and to claim that Republicans will take us back to Jim Crow.  How productive, how healing was that?  Has Biden visited Atlanta lately, or Charlotte?  Or Mississippi, the state that has more elected black officials than any other?  Biden’s remarks were pure bigotry, the rattling of old bones.

            Before the Civil War, the South was leading America, providing the fledgling nation with its first, third, fourth, fifth, and seventh presidents (Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, and Jackson), not to mention its supreme debaters of all time, Calhoun and Clay.  Of that stellar quartet (Washington, Madison, Hamilton, and John Jay) who transitioned America from a loose confederation into a nation, two were Southerners.  The nation’s eleventh president, James K. Polk, who extended America’s territory across the continent from sea to sea, was a Tennessean. In fact, all of the nation’s land mass beyond the 13 original states was acquired by Southern presidents.  Since 1900 the South has provided 5 presidents.

            Because of the tragic racial events in Charlottesville, we can count on one hand the Southern political leaders who will remind the nation of the South’s virtues and contributions.  It’s even harder to identify those who will defend the South against cultural cleansing.  Fearing the media, they keep quiet.

            In 1930 twelve Southern men of literature, most of whom were professors connected with either Vanderbilt University, Yale, or University of the South, penned the book, “I’ll Take My Stand.”  Dubbed “the Nashville Agrarians,” these men held forth on what the South has lent the nation.  Long before “green” was in vogue, they argued for the value of agriculture and against the evils of excessive industrialization.  No silly dreamers, these historians/novelists/poets invoked the simpler values of family, home, tradition, and community.  They decried the forces of materialism, love for power, and all compulsions of society that mediated against strong families and communities.

            If the Agrarians were alive, they would speak out against the false piety of those who point fingers at Southern monuments.  They would defend those who won’t sell their land to corporations simply because they love their land, and would rebuke Southerners who cave to the South’s critics.

            The Agrarians were not “sufferers from nostalgic vapors.”  They foresaw the cultural breakdown of hearth and home we are now seeing on the 6 o’clock news.  They knew that the South had much to offer.  Would that more Southern leaders today could be so positive instead of allowing themselves to become shameful deniers of their heritage.

            I’m proud of the South for its self-reckoning, its racial healing, and its genuineness.  And I’m still proud of Robert E. Lee.

Roger Hines

5/8/19

             

From Culture to Self-Culture and Narcissism

                        From Culture to Self-Culture and Narcissism

               Published in Marietta (GA) Daily Journal, 4/28/19

            When the Greek mythological figure Narcissus, thirsty after hunting, comes upon a pool of water and leans down to drink, he falls in love with his own image.  Seeing himself in the bloom of youth, Narcissus assumes that no one could ever love him as they ought or as his image deserves.  Writhing in passion for himself, Narcissus melts away and becomes a beautiful flower.

            Art, they tell us, is the imitation of life.  More and more there are examples of life imitating art: youths committing crimes they saw in movies, or even acts of real life heroism inspired by fictional heroes.

            No doubt imitation still works both ways.  There are at least two areas in contemporary society in which imitation is taking place, dress and music.

              Americans are a nation of copycats.  There was a day when I was required to stand at my classroom door and, among other responsibilities, stop the boys whose shirts were not tucked in and point them to the boys’ restroom for a slight wardrobe do-over.  Today men of all ages are wearing un-tucked shirts.  Why? I suspect because “everybody else is doing it.”

 Don’t be surprised if within five years a sizable number of men are wearing dresses.  If a presidential candidate publicly and passionately hugs and kisses his husband on the occasion of his candidacy announcement, men in dresses shouldn’t be a shock.  Once a month, tucked into the weekend edition of the Wall Street Journal is a glossy, thick magazine of style that is already showing males modeling dresses.

            Oh, the lonely life of a toxic male like myself who still believes males are males and females are females, who considers the expression “self-identifies” as hoo-ey, and who has to explain why the Philadelphia 76’ers Coach Brett Brown wasn’t out of line when he told his players, “You’re playing in a man’s gym and you need to act like it.”

            Coach Brown and most other coaches, I suspect, regret that public ritual behavior has succumbed to personal freedom.  Individualism now runs amuck, resulting in a diminished appreciation of the team, the family, the civic club, and indeed the larger culture. We now have an increased elevation of oneself and one’s own ‘druthers.

            In his book titled “Bowling Alone, America’s Declining Social Capital,” Harvard professor Robert Putnam argues that individuals are increasingly disconnecting themselves from other individuals and from society as a whole. Putnam is right.  In regard to dress, Americans have lost all sense of “occasion.”  Ragged is OK, no matter where you’re headed.  Having reached the soul’s basement, more and more people care less and less about dressing up for anything.  What I want to wear is what matters, not the occasion.  That’s narcissism, self-absorption at its worst.

            Today college students rail against conformity, all the while wearing their conforming, copycat uniform, namely, tattered jeans.  Their self-absorption exceeds their sense of community.

            Where I grew up, the poorest of the poor knew what “Sunday best” was and honored it as a social norm.  But today stultifying casualness is our ethic.  “Toxic masculinity” has its good side, and I admire the coaches I’ve worked with who still teach boys to be men, even in dress.

            Music, too, is a compelling art form, and it too provides confirmation of Professor Putnam’s argument.  Nothing is more obvious than the present generation’s addiction to music.  How did Scottish patriot Andrew Fletcher put it?  “Let me write the nation’s songs, and I care not who writes its laws.”  No wonder.  Music is the most primitive expression of man’s rawest passions.  The purpose of civilization (education?) is to tame, inform, and direct our raw passions.  If our passions are barbarous, warlike, or sensual, hard rock can certainly feed them.  Plato wrote that in order to take the spiritual temperature of a society, we must “mark the music.”

            Guess what kinds of music most high schools feed to students during lunch, at pep rallies, or during halftime at basketball games.  Let’s just say it’s music that feeds the passions instead of civilizing or educating them.  But, “we’re here for the kids,” so we give them what they desire (and already have).

            Civic club membership, PTA involvement, and family dinners have waned significantly since 1995.  “Social capital” is losing to disconnectedness.  Solutions do exist: refuse the isolation of the cell phone, eat family meals together, join something, and don’t be a copycat.

            And remember.  The Narcissus tale is a myth.  In real life we don’t become beautiful by withdrawing and admiring ourselves, but by giving thought to those around us.  To our culture, that is.

Roger Hines

4/24/19

           

                

Unborn Beauty and a Chance to Give it Life

            Unborn Beauty and a Chance to Give it Life

                  Published in Marietta (GA) Journal, 3/17/19

State Representative Ed Setzler is a man of science.  An architectural engineer, he also has a degree in physics. Setzler is serving his 15th consecutive year in the Georgia House.  His District 35 covers the northwest corner of Cobb County, including the cities of Kennesaw and Acworth.

            Neither Setzler’s practical, scientific bent nor the precision of his line of work has kept him from appreciating beauty and wonder.   Accordingly, Setzler is not cagey about the subject of abortion.  He introduced and led the fight for House Bill 481, the so called “Heartbeat bill,” which is actually titled “Living Infants Fairness and Equality Act.”  The bill’s acronym (LIFE) is further evidence of Setzler’s belief, and agreement with author Ian McEwan, that an unborn baby reveals “a stately ship of genes dignified by unhurried progress.”

            Setzler’s bill has already passed the House by a vote of 93 to 73 and has been forwarded to the Senate.  105 House Republicans voted for the bill; 75 Democrats voted against it.  Five other Southern states plus Ohio are also considering “Heartbeat” legislation.

            Setzler’s language in HB 481 is neither ambiguous nor squirrelly.  Unlike the weasel word language of Planned Parenthood defenders who object to the words, “partial-birth abortion,” and argue that “intact dilation and evacuation” is more precise, 481 reads, “It shall be the policy of the State of Georgia to recognize the presence of a fetal heartbeat as the point of fetal viability…” The bill goes on to reject the concept of “potential ability to live outside the mother’s womb,” since “not even healthy full-term infants can always do so, without artificial aid.”

            Anyone who has ever attempted to read legislative bills knows that their totally unnecessary ponderous language is daunting.   HB 481 has its share of gobbledygook, but its purpose is clear.  For instance, the bill lucidly declares: “No abortion is authorized or shall be performed if the unborn child has been determined to have a heartbeat,” and “early infants in the womb are a class of living distinct human beings … that have their own distinct blood type, organ system, central nervous system, unique fingerprints … and detectable heartbeat.”

            The bill references the U.S. Constitution’s 14^th Amendment: “No state shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor deny any person within its jurisdiction the protection of the law.”  To Setzler, “the child in the womb … has a right to life that is worthy of legal protection.”  But “Not so,” say the Democrats in the Georgia House.

            One of the “fanatics for choice” (columnist George Will’s phrase), former National Abortion League president Kate Michelman, once declared that in abortion, the baby “merely undergoes demise.”  Will posed the question, “Does Michelman say herbicides cause the crab grass in her lawn to ‘undergo demise’?”

            Thanks to Governor Cuomo of New York and Governor Northam of Virginia, whose public comments on the unborn – and the recently born – have been abhorrent, Rep. Setzler and other legislators are creating momentum, aided by the fact that “fanatics for choice” have gone from “safe, legal, and rare” to “keep the newborns comfortable” while the doctor considers infanticide. 

            Regarding the beauty of the unborn, Swedish photojournalist Linnart Nilsson has deeply affected our thinking about abortion.  In “Life Magazine” in 1965 Nilsson gave us the first photograph of a living fetus in the womb.  Nilsson died in 2017 at age 94, leaving us with pictures of a 15-week old and a 28-week old fetus.  Nilsson was deeply disappointed that, while photographing the 15-week-old, his camera malfunctioned just before he was to snap the baby sucking its thumb.

            Even the Washington Post heralded Nilsson as “a photographer of genius who revealed unborn life.”  Nilsson’s compilation of his work was published in1965 and titled “A Child is Born.”  This little volume plus more modern fetal-imaging technology haven’t made life easy for “abortion rights” advocates.

             Rep. Setzler probably knows that Nilsson’s photos were challenged.  After Nilsson’s death, “Atlantic Magazine” claimed his photos were staged with aborted material.  Both “Life” and “Time” defended Nilsson.

            Photojournalism and modern technology are on Setzler’s side.  So are voters in many states, or why else are more and more state legislatures toughening their laws on abortion?

            At a time when so many have lost their moral compass regarding infant life, we should be grateful for photographers and politicians who engage our moral sense.  That’s exactly what Nilsson, Setzler, and HB 481 have done.

Roger Hines

3/13/19

Are Babies Precious or Not?

                             Are Babies Precious or Not?

               Published in Marietta (GA) Daily Journal, 4/7/19

            Georgia’s House Bill 481 has hit a nerve nationwide.  Over 100 Hollywood actors have vowed not to work in Georgia again if Governor Kemp signs the so-called “heart beat” bill.  No doubt the Georgia Chamber of Commerce and others who don’t like “social issues” are getting nervous.  Movie production in any state means big money.  Will the Chamber and the Governor stand with those who deem abortion barbaric or will they put dollars above babies?

            The Governor says he will sign the bill.  Since when has Hollywood been the arbiter of Georgia’s politics or laws?  Let Hollywood boycott and make their R-rated movies elsewhere.

            I believe abortion is evil.  Stacy Abrams believes a law to restrict it is evil.  A “political stunt” she also calls it, suggesting it will probably lead to her challenging Governor Brian Kemp for the governorship in 2022.

             In 2006 Abrams stood in my English classroom at Chattahoochee Technical College and  spoke eloquently of effective communication, respect for “the marvel of language,” and how to put one’s best foot forward in job interviews.  She stuck to her topic and never approached politics.  I was as spellbound as the class was by her knowledge and verbal ability.  I appreciated her giving her time and gas money to drive up to Marietta.  She taught us well.

            When Abrams and I were simultaneously serving in the Georgia House of Representatives, there was no talk of abortion bills.  Already the state and the nation were moving toward the Great Recession of ’07 and ’08.  Budgetary matters were our chief concern.  While we were not close friends, we spoke several times about our Mississippi background and her work as a writer.  Right away I learned that she was smart and most personable.

            Though I’ve never read any of her novels, written under the pen name Selena Montgomery, I have read reviews of them.  Her steamy erotica, had it been brought up during the Abrams-Kemp race, would have been a considerable bump in the road for her campaign.

            According to the Chattanooga Times Free Press, Abrams said the following at a rally in Dalton, Georgia: “The ‘heartbeat bill’ is dangerous.  It‘s scientifically unsupportable.  It will cause harm to women.  We will lose doctors and jobs.”

            A sweeping and erroneous charge there.  Dangerous?  The law would end almost all abortions in Georgia, saving the lives of countless babies.  Scientifically unsupportable?  Perhaps we need the full context of Abrams’ speech to discern this claim.  How does “unsupportable science” touch the issue?  Harm to women?  Abrams is pushing abortion by scaring people with images of teenage girls and coat hangers.  Let’s let a doctor do the same act “safely.”  But coat hanger or forceps, the baby is still “terminated.”  “Terminated” is the most abominable and euphemistic weasel word in the history of the English language.  It means killed. 

            I will never understand how Democrats and moderate Republicans can hold abortion so close to their hearts and defend it so strongly.  Has it not always been a core issue for Democrats?  Nor can I understand how any woman can abide it either.

            Abrams and her cohorts wouldn’t like my mother.  Ocasio-Cortez would have pulled her before the magistrates.  Planned Parenthood would have “counseled” her to abort long before I was born.  Let us just say I’m glad, actually ecstatic, that I wasn’t aborted.  Is Abrams glad she wasn’t?   I firmly believe my loving mother would have warmed the hearts of every abortion supporter on the planet, melting them away from their horrendous support of murderous abortion and shifting them to a belief in the sanctity of all life.  (“sanctity of life”: the expression most Dems simply dismiss). 

I believe my ten sisters, because of their love for life, their faith in God, and their appreciation of beauty, would convert many an abortion supporter as well.  Not with words, but with the example of their joyous lives and their love of life.  My younger brother and me?  I don’t know.  But we do know that poverty doesn’t always kill one’s spirit and can be overcome, even by unwed mothers who spare their babies from abortionists.  He knows that a newborn with severe problems can be a blessing, and our five brothers know that life is a gift to be cherished, not rejected and killed off under the guise of “freedom of choice.”

Are babies precious or not?  If so, at what point do they become precious?  These are terrible questions.  I can’t believe that anyone must ask them.

Roger Hines

4/3/19

              

Sexual Chaos … Is there no end?

                       Sexual Chaos … Is there no end?

           Published in Marietta (GA) Daily Journal, 3/10/19

            A message to three men whom I admire, U.S. Senators Isakson and Perdue, and my U.S. Rep. Barry Loudermilk:  Please tell the federal government to keep its hands off my grand-daughters, all 7 of them.

            If those granddaughters wish to join the military, I hope they will, but I don’t want them in combat with men.  Neither do I want the government ever to require that they register for military service.

            One of those granddaughters can scale a mountain as skillfully as a mountain lion.  She has a degree in Outdoor Leadership.  One of her sisters treasures a photograph in which the sister is posing with her first deer, the first deer she ever shot dead, that is.

            None of my granddaughters are shrinking violets, but if any of their fathers (my 2 sons and 2 sons-in-law) ever suggest it’s ok for them to engage in combat, we’ll have a talk.  My granddaughters have total authority in the matter, but I still have an opinion plus the testimony of nature, physiological science, and common, walking around horse sense.

            Women and men are different.  Is it not incredible how controversial such an assertion has become?  Because we have perverted the word “equality,” we now see it trivialized.  Don’t withdraw from the word “perverted.”  It merely means “distorted, twisted, or deviated from the norm.”  “Equality under the law” means we embrace the ideal that when we’re standing or sitting in front of a judge or jury, the floor is wondrously level.  It doesn’t mean that in our daily interactions we’re to abandon every ounce of common sense we possess, all for the impossible social goal of equality.  Equal we aren’t.

            Our deviation from the classical definition of equality has led to the cry that sexual differences are to be ignored, that masculinity is chauvinistic, that marriage-centric households are passé, that science is wrong about chromosomes, and that men and women together in trenches is just dandy.

            I’m sure that if I were in the trenches with a woman, I would be thinking about protecting the woman as much as hitting my enemy target.  I’m confident that 99 percent of the men I know, including the 20- and 30-somethings, think the same.

            “But that’s the way you men were taught.”  No, that’s the way we were made.  It’s also what we see.  My wife can birth children; I can’t.  I can sing baritone; she can’t.  What’s happening is rebellion against nature and norms.   As our favorite philosopher Woody Allen put it (after caught dishonoring a norm), “The heart wants what the heart wants.”

            My wife could also run the world.  I wish she could be president.  Oh, she could command the troops!  Her hold on the broad picture and its details would be firm and sure.  But that doesn’t mean she is equipped to do the task of a soldier.

            Sexual chaos stretches far beyond the military issue.  It has led to cheap sex and the decline of marriage, in fact an absolute marriage deficit.  According to the University of Virginia’s Institute for American Values, the out of marriage birthrate went from 13 percent in 1985 to 44 percent in 2010.  Writing for the Bloomberg News, former Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen called this statistic a recipe for poverty.

            Still more areas reflect the chaos, so include my 3 grandsons in the Watchful Papa lineup.  Schools around the country, though maybe not too many in the Southeast, are teaching “gender-equity,” and are inviting drag queens to their libraries to tell children glorious stories of equality .  Transgender ideologues are making sure that “gender dysphoria” is given equal time, most likely causing children to think about gender for the first time.

 The Methodist Church has been affected.  A strong, time-honored Christian denomination is experiencing a good measure of turmoil over the ordination of LGBT clergy.  Though delegates voted in a recent conference to strengthen their ban on same-sex marriage and LGBT clergy, resistance continues. 

Fake genders are multiplying.  For 5 decades I’ve taught that personal pronouns, unlike the nouns to which they refer, are a finite group, a snooty, closed-class group of words that doesn’t admit new members.  They still are.  But some people still dream, resist, and pervert.

Sexual innovators will always be with us, as well as the elevators of the unnatural to the natural.  The results will be the same: craziness and sexual confusion.  But I for one will protect those I love most and will resist the chaos.

Meanwhile … Help, Senators Isakson and Perdue and Rep. Loudermilk. Help!

Roger Hines

3/6/19