|
|
| Last Updated:
Nov 3, 2009 - 1:48:45 PM |
We have all seen the same scene. Our friends and neighbors gather in a modest town hall, seated in the old-fashioned way, shoulder-to-shoulder, on wooden benches. A controversial point is raised, and the crowd falls silent. There is a pause, then a man rises to speak. He is an average man, in simple clothes, a plaid flannel shirt, and a jacket that shows the wear and tear of his daily toil. All eyes are on him as he rises to speak; because although he is an average man, his expression is frank and resolute; and when he begins to speak, he speaks in clear and confident tones, without the slightest trace of flattery or fear - for this average man is an American, and he is a free man.
One day last week, we saw a very different picture at the same sex marriage hearing in Augusta. Thousands were crowded together in a large auditorium, and red was the uniform of the day - a sea of red, as many gay activists wore red shirts and jackets, while others wore red bandanas; and still others wore red arm bands.
It was a day for mass activism, just as our New England town hall meetings are occasions for individual free men and women to speak their minds. The most memorable moment came when an old gentleman stepped to the microphone and made a shocking observation. In his younger days he had been an eyewitness to certain troubling events, and his conscience compelled him to speak frankly. He said that the scene at the hearing reminded him of his earlier days living in a captive nation, East Germany. Let me remind you that these were his words, not mine.
There is a striking difference between the way our form of government works and the workings of a mass movement. In a free society, political ideals are a matter of individual conscience. One may take into account popular opinions and long-held traditions and beliefs; but ultimately, each ideal and each political principle must be based on a determination made within the heart of each individual, on the basis of reason. There is no room for coercion, or the imposition of ideas from the outside.
Uniformity of opinion is the hallmark of mass movements and totalitarian governments. This uniformity is expressed in an outward conformity of thought, word, and deed. Mass movements rely on the force of numbers, rather than honest reasoning; and that is why the gay rights movement relies on sloganeering and tabloid thinking; and that is why the call went out for gay activists to all dress in red for the hearing on same sex marriage.
An element of coercion characterizes the gay rights movement. In the last election, gay rights activists sent so-called "Truth Squads" to polling places to challenge the pro-family position on gay rights. Other forms of coercion were exercised in an equally heavy-handed fashion. After I wrote a column exposing the methods and tactics used by the gay rights movement, the leader of the largest anti-hate crime organization in the state called on one newspaper not to publish what I write.
The willingness of gay rights activists to squelch dissenting opinions was on full display during the recent Miss USA Contest. There a contestant learned the perils of speaking one's mind freely in modern-day America. After Miss California gave the politically-incorrect answer on same sex marriage, she lost her chance to win the contest. She explained later that her remarks were based on her Christian beliefs.
Even greater penalties have been imposed for opposing the gay rights movement. Many people have lost their livelihoods, and some have lost their freedom. There is now a bill before the United States House of Representatives which will make it a crime for any person to state publicly that homosexuality is wrong. Clergymen in Europe have already been sentenced to prison for proclaiming the Biblical teaching about homosexuality. Such is the power of the homosexual rights movement.
One wise writer, reputed to be the wisest New Englander ever, once wrote that the most important time to speak the truth is when the truth is forbidden. For that reason, I will now speak frankly. All Americans have the right to speak their conscience, and this is never truer than when they are asked to give their opinion regarding a grave moral evil. It is simply unacceptable to cry 'bigotry' when someone states the obvious truth that homosexual behavior is harmful and immoral. Americans will still retain the right to speak this incontrovertible truth, even after it is declared a 'hate crime.'
To seek to censor this obvious, incontrovertible truth is to deprive Americans of a fundamental right - the right to freedom of conscience. Such behavior is worse than unfair or disingenuous - it is an intolerable interference with our freedom as Americans.
Send us feedback on this page by clicking
here
Copyright by
Maine Family Policy Council. All rights reserved.
Top of Page
|
|
|
|
