Monday, March 18, 2019

OK Michael Brown - If you don't want ridicule, why invite it?

“Don't ask us to normalize Dr. Brown's personality disorder.”
Dr. Michael Brown
Via YouTube
Monday, Dr. Michael Brown writes: The Silencing of the Lambs.
There has always been one endgame for the radical left: the silencing of dissenting voices, in particular conservative Christian voices.

The radical left is not simply interested in winning in the marketplace of ideas. It is not simply interested in changing hearts and minds. It is ultimately interested in silencing the opposition, especially all opposition that is based on a biblical worldview.
If the goal was to silence people we haven't been terribly effective. Knowing Brown you know that this is about LGBT people. We are all activists and we constitute the radical left. I would remind Brown that conservative Christians are not a persecuted minority group. That would apply to LGBT people who are persecuted at the hands of those same conservative Christians. Furthermore, Brown enjoys nondiscrimination protection from the Civil Rights Act of 1964. We do not and religion is a choice while being LGBT is involuntary.
For years I have said that those who came out of the closet (meaning, radical gay activists) wanted to put us in the closet (meaning those of us who identify with conservative biblical values). And for years I (and many others) have documented this, time and time again.
As I said, Brown and his ilk are not victims of The Homosexual Agenda©. We would like to stop people from promoting untruths because doing so objectively harms LGBT children. We try to inform parents of scientifically accurate information which Brown and his fellow travelers try to drown out.

I could not care less about anyone else's religious beliefs until those beliefs directly affect my community or the pious attempt to impose those beliefs on public policy.
Poor you!
By intimidation. By ridicule. By legal action. By expulsion. By exclusion.

Anything to avoid civil, respectful debate. Anything to avoid a genuine discussion of differences. Anything to avoid true dialogue.

Instead, those who differ with the radical left are to be demonized, stigmatized, marginalized and silenced.
Debate is supposed to be about differing opinions. Dr. Brown is intent on debating facts. It is rather difficult to have a true dialogue with people who are disrespectful at the outset. For example, Brown insists that the scientific literature supports conversion therapy. If scientific literature means articles published to respected, peer-reviewed academic journals then there is only one such article (Dr. Robert Spitzer) and it has been retracted with an apology.

Brown has also claimed that being transgender is “absurd.” He pointed to a story of someone who wanted to be 20 years younger for comparison purposes. Brown is not impressed by the simple fact that people are transgender to mitigate the suffering caused by a medical condition.

If Brown showed the slightest interest in doing the right thing for those sufferers we could have a meaningful dialogue. However, Brown's interest is in defending Christian dogma. His is not an argument in good faith. There are conservative Christians with whom I have frequent dialogue. It is possible because we agree on mutual respect.

You cannot have mutual respect when Brown claims:
Tolerance is not the goal. Diversity is not the desired result.

Instead, dominance is the goal and exclusivity the desired result.
He seeks to denigrate us by disingenuously assigning and then disparaging motives. In point of fact the goal is equal protection under law. Nothing more and nothing less. Equal protection includes having the same anti-discrimination protections as Brown has as a Christian.

Conversion therapy seems to be popular among conservative Christians as a way of pushing back against laws that protect LGBT people from discrimination. How do you have a debate with someone who dishonestly claims that we have sinister objectives?

How does one have a meaningful dialogue with someone who says this?
For those not familiar with my use of the term "transanity," I'm not demeaning the struggles of those who believe they are trapped in the wrong body. Rather, I use the term to describe the denial of biological verities, the idea that reality is whatever you perceive it to be, and the extremist agenda that flows from this mindset.
Aside from saying “transanity” he claims, as he is not demeaning transgender people as he proceeds to do so.
Returning to the current piece:
GLAAD's goal was not to provide useful information for the liberal media to refute our arguments. Instead, its goal was to discredit us and convince the media not to give us any platform.

In short, GLAAD's operating principles were simple. Exclude people, don't examine their ideas. Demonize them, don't dialogue with them.
That is effectively true. What makes Dr. Michael Brown believe that he is a responsible spokesperson? What makes Dr. Michael Brown think that he deserves media presence any more than David Duke? Brown does not say “scripture teaches us thus and so.” Rather, he attempts to obfuscate his religious agenda. And he is always a victim at the hands of radical LGBT people. That does not make for a responsible spokesperson.

The only difference between Michael Brown and David Duke is that Duke is always claiming victimization at the hands of Jews. Otherwise, the depth of bigotry is about equal.
In that same spirit, it is the radical left that seeks to block conservative speakers from college campuses, even with violent protests.
Radical left and LGBT are somewhat interchangeable in Brown-world. We are not monolithic. I think that colleges do a disservice to students when they block conservative speakers. However, that has nothing to do with Brown's failures to invite a meaningful dialogue with LGBT people and then to complain that the dialogue does not exist because of our (fabricated) agenda.

I have often said that I have learned far more from people I disagree with than those with whom I am in accord. That is predicated on intellectual honesty. Feigning victimization while disparaging LGBT people is not intellectually honest. Furthermore, I gain strength from debating opponents about LGBT issues. I am not afraid of debating anyone if we are debating opinion rather than facts.
More victimology:
It is the radical left that seeks to shame people on their jobs and humiliate them in their schools.

As for freedom of speech and expression, that must be a one-way street.

Only the ideas of the left are worthy of dissemination. Dissenters are no better than the Taliban, than ISIS, than the Nazis, than the KKK.
“Dissenters?” People who spread untruths are not dissenters. They are liars. Big difference.
And that's why a high school student was recently suspended for posting Bible verses in her school in response to LGBTQ pride displays. The displays were perfectly welcome. The Bible verses were not.

As I said, freedom of expression only goes one way.
This is about Gabby Helsinger who admitted that she did not have permission to post bible verses all over the school. The real problem is that she was targeting LGBT students. Helsinger's parents made sure that she is a future wizard:
I seen that there was people in my school that needed help…they don’t need to be living in the confusion of wondering if they should be gay, bi, lesbian, trans, anything like that and I know that God is the only way that they can be healed by that.
More daisies from Michael Brown:
Once in place, the real agenda now comes to light. And make no mistake about it. It is an ugly, vile agenda. (Yes, I call things like drag queens reading to toddlers ugly and vile, all the more so when one of the drag queens is a registered sex offender.)
The attempt, it seems, is to portray Drag Queen Story Hour as a threat to children. They might all be sex offenders (the school ordinarily do background checks but did not in this instance).
Projection defined:
How then should we respond to this attempt to silence us? How should we respond to attempts to intimidate us and marginalize us?

Simple. We speak out more loudly and clearly. We take our stands more firmly and boldly. And the more we are hated and slandered, the more we respond with love and truth.

The darkness will never succeed in snuffing out the light.
The answer to Brown's rhetorical question might be not to write things like “tansanity.” Not championing pseudo-scientific nonsense like conversion therapy might help as well unless he can dig up some peer-reviewed evidence. Not claiming to be victimized by LGBT people over and over and over again might help as well.

Dr. Michael Brown has some balls to claim that we are the darkness and he is the light. I would like to believe that good and evil is first based on how we treat others. Michael Brown is obsessed with LGBT people whom he denigrates with regularity. Don't ask us to normalize a personality disorder.

Related content:

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.