EGN NEWS DESK
In June 2023, there was a drag march in New York. It achieved notoriety on-line in a single day when the marchers took up the mantra “we’re right here, we’re queer and we’re coming on your youngsters” (warning: graphic).
The rising sexualisation of kids has turn into one of many saddest and most distressing facets of progressive ideology.
It has taken some time for this technique to start to emerge into daylight. As the progressive trajectory has developed and advanced as an engine of adjusting tradition, each the results and ambition of the motion turn into clearer.
Part of the issue was that nothing was what it appeared. What we noticed, or have been introduced with, was not what we acquired. Beginning with a feminism that introduced itself as a catalyst for equality and equity, it as an alternative produced the masculinisation of girls. Motherhood and femininity have been exchanged for work and the pursuit of energy. Having turned their backs on the virtues of Christian marriage and kids, feminists have been among the many foremost advocates of gay marriage, a transfer that sped up the de-Christianisation of tradition.
Third wave feminism created a brand new platform for actuality. What was actual was what you longed for or imagined in your head. It trumped objectivity and even biology and science. It ushered within the tsunami of transgenderism that was going to energise the psychological sickness of gender dysphoria, producing an exponential rise in referrals for intercourse adjustments, particularly amongst adolescents after which youngsters.
It took a while for the typical individual to know {that a} central a part of the progressive technique was the sexualisation of kids. We can see this within the extraordinary marketing campaign by drag queens to learn to youngsters in public libraries by means of the phenomenon referred to as Drag Queen Story Time.
One of the essential adjustments that emerged within the progressive technique was the homosexual turf conflict with so-called TERFS (transgender-exclusionary radical feminist). Lesbians reacted strongly towards their newly received men-free zones being invaded by males pretending to be or presenting themselves as ‘girls’. One of the results of this was to separate homosexual foyer group Stonewall.
Stonewall had been some of the efficient companies for progressive change and shifting the homosexual agenda from certainly one of cultural inclusion to a extra aggressive weapon of exclusion towards anybody who remained dedicated to the idea and follow of Christian heterosexual marriage.
But underneath the management of a brand new chief govt, Nancy Kelley, the transition to creating trans rights central to its campaigning technique break up its constituency and led to a civil conflict in Stonewall. Matthew Parris, one of many 14 unique founders, wrote an article in The Times claiming Stonewall had turn into “extremist” and ought to stay to LGB rights with out the T. While homosexual rights campaigner Peter Tatchell lept to the defence of Kelley and the brand new concentrate on trans, Prof Kathleen Stock, a professor of philosophy on the University of Sussex, claimed Stonewall had inspired a definition of transphobia that was far too extensive.
“Through its Diversity Champions scheme it is disseminated this very widespread concept that an assault on the idea – or an assault on the actual interpretation – of id is an assault on trans folks. And that has actually made the entire discourse extremely poisonous, given its huge attain inside nationwide establishments,” she informed the Guardian newspaper.
That attain inside the establishments, it has now been revealed, stretches so far as the Church of England. Anglicans have been deeply disturbed when the Church launched an training coverage entitled Valuing All God’s Children. Despite the misleading euphemism of its title, its content material suggests to main youngsters as younger as 5 that they could be born into the unsuitable our bodies and be ‘transgender.’ Astonishingly, the encouraging foreword was penned by the Archbishop of Canterbury, whereas Christians throughout the denominational spectrum discovered it exhausting to grasp how Justin Welby had been in a position to market it.
An reply to a proper query in a current session of the General Synod of the Church of England has been illuminating. The episcopate had initially tried to deflect questions on Stonewall’s potential involvement, the Bishop of Durham, Paul Butler, having beforehand denied that Stonewall had written the report when confronted with questions on it earlier. But that was solely technically true; the unsuitable query had been requested.
When the proper query was requested, Jonathan Frost, Bishop of Portsmouth, was pressured to confess that what had truly occurred was that Stonewall had funded it as an alternative. He refused to reveal how a lot cash Stonewall had given the Church of England however we are able to guess that, as is usually the case with such funding, the entire level of the cash altering palms – actually from Stonewall’s perspective – was to make sure that the Stonewall agenda was promoted by the Church of England. It is unlikely to have been a present with ‘no strings’ connected.
Miriam Cates, the Tory MP for Penistone and Stockbridge, quoted by the Daily Telegraph was excoriating in her criticism: “Activist teams shouldn’t be enabled by any training suppliers to push their political agendas on colleges…taking cash for basically permitting Stonewall to dictate the Church of England’ s coverage is an entire failure by these in authority.”
The deception over who supplied the funding and the try to cover the truth that the Church of England was performing as an ideological mouthpiece for Stonewall should be a matter of deep disgrace for the Church and a betrayal of its personal folks and values.
But worse nonetheless is the betrayal of the kids who have been entrusted to its care. By its keen promotion of transgender propaganda it helped flip the intense and deeply debilitating psychological sickness of gender dysphoria right into a rampant social contagion among the many most weak members of our society, our youngsters.
If, because the Gospels insist, we stand in the midst of a battle between good and evil and are invited in our recognition of Jesus as saviour to choose sides, it’s exhausting to not come to the conclusion that on this matter, the C of E has modified sides.
