This is why the media hated Sarah Palin so much during her campaign to be Vice President:
she didn't go to schools that inculcate their students with
an ivory-tower sense of their graduates' being the cream of
society's crop. She represents the fact that average person can
legitimately gain political power through the democratic process
and so deflates elitism among the elite.

I think there is another reason. Big Media makes billions
selling to the most base desires in the human psyche: illicit sex,
instant gratification, becoming rich without effort, etc.

Big Media's partner is The Left, which wants the masses to insist
that the government do everything for them (no-effort success),
achieve "liberation" through anything-goes sexuality (illicit
sex) and to never have remorse or self-reflection (no self-
discipline). In this way, The Left creates a permanent
underclass whom they can manipulate at will.

Big Media and The Left want the masses to fit
into their "scientific" belief that people are merely
slightly more evolved animals. To put forth the view
that humans are the crowning achievement in God's creation
would upset their cash cow and, for The Left, their
means of achieving domination in society. Animals
cannot be held morally responsible for what they do.

So Palin represents a break from their plan: she's a
woman (with no victim mentality) who models a way
for regular folks to achieve power for the purpose,
in part, of telling the truth: that Big Media's
product is pure dreck and that more government
represents less freedom. The United States fought
a valiant and noble war of independence against
unrepresentative government in the late 18th century.
It's time to do it again.

Not Friends, No Benefits

There is a college "ethic" that encourages "friends with benefits." During sex, women tend to bond more than men do with their mate. When the "friends with benefits" relationship ages, the co-ed is left without a friend (he has become more whether she sees it or not) and with no benefits (the sex no longer thrills because she realizes she is being used). The incoming co-eds are not called freshmen; they are called "fresh meat" by the young men that used to be protective of the purity of their new co-eds. How liberating.

Homosexual Agenda and the Leftist Worldview

If you believe in the concept of original sin, then even a person’s being born a certain way doesn’t mean that the behavior that the person is born inclined to do should be legally protected. For instance, I believe that many people are born with a temper that is “quicker” than others. If these people now tend to get irritated quickly with their spouses, should we legally protect their right to emotionally badger their husbands or wives? Of course not.

So even if there is a genetic tendency towards homosexuality, the only question is, Should the institution of marriage be redefined because of it? What about the pedophile who was “born” with an attraction to children. In the eyes of the law, no one with such an attraction can be put in jail unless he or she acts out upon this attraction. Therefore, we need a source to inform us what kinds of actions are right and which are wrong. If the Bible is no longer our source (the specious “living document” argument), then we are left to rely on our feelings.

The world is divided into two types of people: those that believe behavior should be guided by a higher authority who is outside themselves and those that believe we should look within for this guidance. Liberals are in the latter camp, which is becoming the dominant worldview in industrialized countries. The say, “Search your heart for what is right and wrong and do whatever your inner person tells you to do.” The Columbine shooters, among many others, were raised in such a worldview. The liberals think that to believe in a higher moral authority is dangerous because the “Church’s history” is replete with examples of periods in which masses of believers were duped into engaging in all manner of atrocities against their fellow men. So the Spanish Inquisition is a great point of proof of this for the Left. Meanwhile they ignore the holocaust against unborn babies that dwarfs the damage done merely in the name of religion.

In this light, the homosexual agenda is at its core the demand that society stop looking for moral absolutes. This is intended to free us to do what we believe to be right. Somehow, doing what your heart tells you to do is liberating. As the noted Christian apologist Ravi Zacharias says, There is a difference between autonomy and freedom. Unfettered autonomy can obliterate actual freedom, such as the right of life for the unborn. We are in a civil war of ideas that has and will increasingly have a massive affect on the way we live our lives.

There is not enough of an outrage against the homosexual movement. Unless we act now, we as a society will be pushed even further from our moral bearings. We did nothing when prayer was taken out of school, and if we do not push back against the homosexual agenda, our children will grow up believing that homosexuality is a legitimate expression of love. True biblical love will be even further from our children’s minds.

Homosexuals can, and should, cease from engaging in homosexual activity, just as those that feel an attraction to children should not act out on their feelings. What we do, or don’t do, will affect the moral tone of society ten years hence and of the generations to come.

http://www.meetup.com/counter-protest-prop-8
http://savecalifornia.com/
http://www.nationformarriage.org/

Let’s get involved.