Let us ask a difficult question.
What is the moral difference between gay conversion therapy (better known as religious counselling for people struggling with their gender and sexuality) and the institutionalised radical woke culture of deliberately confusing children about their gender and sexuality in the hope that they will join political activist movements?
It could be argued that, in the eyes of each movement, they are both seeking to protect the individual who is experiencing confusing emotions.
The religious community believes that counselling their church members in line with the tenants of their religion is part of their moral obligation, not only to their church and conscience, but also to their god.
On the other side of the debate, the LGBT movement has struggled for thousands of years against religious stigma and social persecution. Providing protection for people newly struggling with their identity could be regarded as an act of charity.
This might be true, if it were not for the reality that the LGBT movement has gone beyond voluntary subscriptions and instead ingratiated itself into a movement of social subversion, actively seeking out children via their entertainment and education.
What may have started as a desire to extend an arm to those few children who found themselves questioning their gender and sexuality, has become a way to radicalise as many young people as possible into a heavily politicised activist movement deeply rooted in modern socialism. It is, by proxy, a conversion conveyor belt that presents itself as a support network.
What evidence do we have for the dark undercurrent inside the LGBT activist movement? Well, like feminism, those who are not interested in subscribing to the whole political umbrella – or worse – those who chose to leave entirely, are ruthlessly abused. Verbal threats follow those who leave, along with a systematic practice of excommunication that would make the Pope blush.
Grouping together and abusing mentally fragile people who tap out of your fan club is not a healthy behaviour. It suggests that the group is protecting itself by erasing dissenters, rather than valuing the complex emotional journey of an individual.
These are not the actions of a genuine movement interested in mental well-being. Ironically, it is akin to that of a cult relying on unquestioned consensus to survive. Religious faiths are no stranger to (at least historically speaking) this type of behaviour exhibited towards those who walk away from faith.
So, why does the LGBT activist movement behave like a religious sect?
Quite simply, because it bases itself on socialist collectivism with a Post-Modern twist. While its approach to issues might be very 2021, it has remained true to its historical roots. Socialism, and all its derivatives, are political religions. They attempt to replace not only a political system, but the philosophical and religious beliefs of the population and ruthlessly punish those who rebel.
While it seems clear that most Australians object to any kind of physical application during gay conversion, that is the use of electric shock therapy, most agree that adults in full possession of their minds should be allowed to approach a church for counselling regarding their mental state. Just as consenting adults are perfectly able to switch from being straight to gay, consenting adults should of course be allowed to explore whether or not they wish to cease being gay or trans and return to their earlier life. Thousands do this. Their number is increasing every day, probably because attempts to boost the activist movement has resulted in kids joining for social reasons who then want to leave as they get older.
The idea that the government would get in the middle of this process by passing legislation against churches is as bizarre as it is dangerous. This is especially true when we consider how far the government is prepared to go in order to bend the rules for the activist movement, allowing the medical and often permanent intervention for children without their parent’s consent.
Hormone blockers, surgery, a loss of parental custody – these are all things that the government has either considered or passed despite there being a serious legal question hanging over whether or not children are capable of consenting to life changing medical treatment. Incidentally, these children are often handed over to state-funded therapists who actively and relentlessly push children into a decision to live as a different gender.
We return to the original question.
Both of these groups engage in a similar type of practice, and yet the government endorses one whilst seeking to ban the other. The ban focuses on consenting adults and their church, the other involves children and the full force of state-endorsed culture. The difference is that one of these groups enjoys political protection because they belong to a larger, more powerful movement with friends inside the government.
Instead of having serious discussions about what is going on in this nation surrounding the coercion of gender and sexual attraction, we are left to watch politicians embolden their friends under the cover of ‘social justice’. The conservatives in parliament, whose job it is to stand up and ask a few pointed questions, do nothing – too afraid of losing favour with the press to pick up their spines and rattle them about.
As an aside, the commentary online centres around the idea about how parents should not be allowed to tell a child that either transgenderism or being gay is ‘wrong’. Frankly, parents tell their kids that all sorts of things are ‘wrong’. That is part of being a parent. It does not prevent that child from reaching adulthood and making their own choices. This obsession with parenting other people’s children has got to stop – or at least focus on seriously harmful practices that are against Australian law, such as child marriage, female genital mutilation, and castration – oh wait, I’ll have to check if that last one is legal…
The truth is, these movements want the state to be everyone’s parent. That should scare you.
