D.W. Griffith's classic 1916 film, Intolerance: Love's Struggle Throughout the Ages may not have caused the current "Age of Affirmation" for all the variations of love that we have discovered over the past one hundred years, but the silent film's theme certainly sounds like a modern day talking point for progressives when it comes to issues surrounding sexual identity and behavior.
It seems to me that there are five stops along the progressive highway. Four of them sound innocent enough,
Intolerance, at its extreme, leads to bloodshed, but we all have things that we will not tolerate that do not move us to violence. One personal example: When I was single, I would not tolerate a date who smoked anything. It was not a hateful intolerance mind you but one born out of love and concern for their health and mine. If the break up of those relationships appeared to be the result of a hateful intolerance, so be it.
What is it that you will not tolerate?
I will not tolerate same-sex activities under my roof. Is that hateful?
I will not tolerate a false teacher in the Church. Does that make me a bad person?
Tolerance, on the other hand, does not lead to violence, but it does not mean you have to like something. I might tolerate a date who chews gum, but I probably wouldn't consider them to be a prospective spouse. I might tolerate homosexuals being open and agree with their not being persecuted, but I become intolerant when they attempt to change the Church's definition of what is a sin, or upend the Church's traditional teachings on marriage. I am intolerant when they flaunt their sexuality parading about in revealing clothing (or lack there of) in "Pride" events in front of impressionable young children
Acceptance occurs when you shrug your shoulders and accept the fact that your date smokes or chews gum, and that there is nothing you can do or say that will change their ways. Once you agree that a behavior is acceptable for that person, it is likely that you will begin to accept the behavior in anyone. You have lost the ability to be intolerant in a loving way. An example for the Church would be the acceptance of homosexual priests as a fact and no longer being capable of defrocking them for same-sex activities.
Approval is the welcoming of what is now an acceptable behavior into your household, public library, public streets, or the Church. Once you approve of it, you will see more of it.
Affirmation is the final step in the process, and that is where you encourage others to engage in the behavior. When your church marches in a "Pride Parade", you have reached the end of the line.
We shall have the opportunity to see the process in action over the next decade or so as polyamory and polygamy follow the trail blazed by their LGBT predecessors.
Recently, an article at the Christian Post reported that,
You can rest assured that the "cult of affirmation" will attack anyone who does not complete the five step process from intolerance to affirmation.
It seems to me that there are five stops along the progressive highway. Four of them sound innocent enough,
- Intolerance
- Tolerance
- Acceptance
- Approval
- Affirmation
Intolerance, at its extreme, leads to bloodshed, but we all have things that we will not tolerate that do not move us to violence. One personal example: When I was single, I would not tolerate a date who smoked anything. It was not a hateful intolerance mind you but one born out of love and concern for their health and mine. If the break up of those relationships appeared to be the result of a hateful intolerance, so be it.
What is it that you will not tolerate?
I will not tolerate same-sex activities under my roof. Is that hateful?
I will not tolerate a false teacher in the Church. Does that make me a bad person?
Tolerance, on the other hand, does not lead to violence, but it does not mean you have to like something. I might tolerate a date who chews gum, but I probably wouldn't consider them to be a prospective spouse. I might tolerate homosexuals being open and agree with their not being persecuted, but I become intolerant when they attempt to change the Church's definition of what is a sin, or upend the Church's traditional teachings on marriage. I am intolerant when they flaunt their sexuality parading about in revealing clothing (or lack there of) in "Pride" events in front of impressionable young children
Acceptance occurs when you shrug your shoulders and accept the fact that your date smokes or chews gum, and that there is nothing you can do or say that will change their ways. Once you agree that a behavior is acceptable for that person, it is likely that you will begin to accept the behavior in anyone. You have lost the ability to be intolerant in a loving way. An example for the Church would be the acceptance of homosexual priests as a fact and no longer being capable of defrocking them for same-sex activities.
Approval is the welcoming of what is now an acceptable behavior into your household, public library, public streets, or the Church. Once you approve of it, you will see more of it.
Affirmation is the final step in the process, and that is where you encourage others to engage in the behavior. When your church marches in a "Pride Parade", you have reached the end of the line.
We shall have the opportunity to see the process in action over the next decade or so as polyamory and polygamy follow the trail blazed by their LGBT predecessors.
Recently, an article at the Christian Post reported that,
"The American Psychological Association has established a task force on 'consensual non-monogamy,' an effort they say is necessary in order to reduce 'stigma' on persons who practice polyamory."
"'Finding love and/or sexual intimacy is a central part of most people’s life experience. However, the ability to engage in desired intimacy without social and medical stigmatization is not a liberty for all. This task force seeks to address the needs of people who practice consensual non-monogamy, including their intersecting marginalized identities,' the website for the task force of the APA's Division 44 explains."
"The work of the task force, which is led by psychology Ph.D.'s who are based in California universities, promotes 'awareness and inclusivity about consensual non-monogamy and diverse expressions of intimate relationships.'"
"Since American mental health experts have largely given up on their job of investigating underlying factors that may be contributing to marginal sexual behavior, this is what we are left with, the cult of affirmation."We will learn to tolerate "consensual non-monogamy" (note the more tolerable language), and then we will accept it. Eventually the law will approve of it. The natural progression to affirmation will result in the Church employing polyamorous or polygamous deacons, priests, and bishops who will be marching in the streets on some future "Poly Day" as the crowds cheer and the media celebrates what was once considered "intolerable".
You can rest assured that the "cult of affirmation" will attack anyone who does not complete the five step process from intolerance to affirmation.
"Among the expressions of sexuality that appear to fall under the consensual non-monogamy umbrella, according to the task force website, are polyamory, swinging, "open" relationships, something called "relationship anarchy" and other kinds of "ethical" non-monogamous relationships." Not sure I have seen the words anarchy and ethical in the same sentence before. It seems like pairing two words like this is a means of desensitizing people. An earlier example was Katherine Ragsdale pairing the words blessing and abortion.
ReplyDeleteAnarchists have an ethical code, one that we would reject under step 1 of the path to progressivism. A search for the anarchists' code of ethics is revealing. Among others, "All anarchists agree with Max Stirner that an individual must free themselves from the confines of existing morality and question that morality". https://medium.com/anarchist-faq/what-ethical-views-do-anarchists-hold-9142c7016df3
DeleteThese five steps are really a circle. Having reached #5, Affirmation, they have circled around to #1, Intolerance. They cannot tolerate traditional belief or conservative practice and actively work to destroy the livelihoods and lives of those whom they cannot tolerate.
ReplyDeleteKatherine, And that is what Cognitive Dissonance is all about.
ReplyDeleteInstead of a circle, maybe we should add a sixth step: “Enlightened Intolerance”.
ReplyDeleteIt should be "Woke Intolerance," and it's already with us.
ReplyDeleteWe are now reaping what the church (including us) has sown. Irrational tolerance of deviancy has been our downfall. Our leaders long ago gave up on the faith delivered by the apostles in order to serve up a jolly Jesus who demands nothing in hopes of drawing the deviants into the fold. When have you heard a Bishop condemn sinful behavior? They avert their eyes and pretend it isn't happening. They have not drawn people in, rather they have repelled them as our shrinking membership attests.
ReplyDelete