Thomas J. Vilsack is the former governor of Iowa. My governor. He drifted away from Iowa in a bubble of political correctness to land in the chair of U.S. Secretary of Agriculture.
Vilsack, apparently still in the bubble, is pushing for an intense brand of homosexual sensitivity training. The Washington Times (6-19-2011) reports that this training would include a discussion that compares “heterosexism” to racism. People who view marriage as being between only one man and one woman are guilty of “heterosexism.”
The “push for the training” is coming from Vilsack. Why? Does he have too much time on his hands? Is there not enough work to be done with farm service agencies? Food and nutrition? The forest service? Rural development? Food safety and inspection? What does agriculture have to do with homosexual sensitivity training?
Vilsack has launched a department-wide “cultural transformation” that includes a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) Special Emphasis Program. It appears that this program goes far beyond any training now being done by the Pentagon. The USDA’s program is called “groundbreaking [and a] model for other agencies.” It “delves more into gay issues and terminology. It also justifies pro-homosexual political positions.”
Rowan Scarborough, writing for The Washington Times, explains that if the Obama administration accepts this kind of homosexual sensitivity training “it could mean more sessions for military service members already undergoing gay-sensitivity indoctrination. Critics fear additional gay-oriented training would add an unnecessary burden for combat troops and encourage some to leave.”
Elaine Donnelly, who heads the Center for Military Readiness, has long opposed the repeal of the military’s ban on acknowledged gays. She told the Washington Times, “There are disturbing implications for national defense in the USDA’s development of a ‘groundbreaking’ training program that is to become a model for other federal agencies.” She notes that “thousands of experienced troops, starting with chaplains and people of faith who do not support LGBT ideology and activism” would be driven out of the military.
Vilsack’s bubble of political correctness will burst. Of that I am sure. But, before that happens, I wonder. How many people and institutions — including the family — will his “cultural transformation” affect?
Why is it more important for the USDA to be a leader in gender-identity diversity training than growing food to feed the world?
A Culture of Lying
Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Commentaries of others, Culture Shifts, Life issues, tagged culture of lying, euphemisms, fallacies, Robert Knight, social constructs, The Washington Times, truth on February 3, 2013| Leave a Comment »
We are hip-deep in a culture of lying. It’s the coin of the realm for liberal politicians, the “mainstream” media and Hollywood, all of whom cover for each other. Since an accusation of lying amounts to fighting words, journalists reporting the lies tend to use softer terms, such as prevarication, dissembling, not forthcoming, not fully disclosed, misleading, redirecting, etc.
Lying often is accomplished with euphemisms. Government spending is “investment.” Raising taxes is “revenue reform.” Torture is sanitized as “enhanced interrogation techniques.” Global warming is morphing into “climate change” to accommodate obvious departures from the warming scenario. Gambling is “gaming.” Defense of religious freedom is a “war on women.” There’s a slew of terms invented to validate sexual immorality. The sin of sodomy became homosexuality and then merely gay. Adultery became “finding oneself,” “open marriage” or “swinging.” Prostitutes are “commercial sex workers.” Two men – with no bride – are considered “married.” Pornography became “erotica.” And abortion – the killing of unborn children – is “choice.”
The culture of lying has become so entrenched in American political culture that any deviation is swiftly punished. People who question any part of the theory of man-caused global warming, for instance, are branded “deniers.” End of discussion. Question the junk science behind the “born gay” myth and you’re a “hater.” If you believe God created marriage as the union of a man and a woman, you’re not only a hater but a bigot. If you favor photo ID laws to thwart fraud, you want to “suppress the minority vote.” If you question the morality or wisdom of putting women into combat, you’re against “equality.”
Often, liberal policies are sustained by repeated citations of a single study or studies, however flawed. The granddaddy of those is Alfred C. Kinsey’s fraudulaent sex studies . . . .
One of the biggest lies in recent years is that there are no real biological differences between men and women – that masculinity and femininity are artificial social constructs. The latest fallout from this departure from reality is the Pentagon’s opening the military to homosexuality and putting women into combat. We’re told that everyone in the armed forces thinks this is wonderful. Sure they do. It would be a career-ender in this culture of lying to say otherwise.
The culture of lying depends heavily on cooked studies, weasel words and a compliant media that parrots them without examination. It’s a house of cards that’s waiting for a gentle breeze of truth to blow it over.
As G.K. Chesterton observed, “Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
Robert Knight is a Senior Fellow for the American Civil Rights Union
and contributor to The Washington Times.
He wrote this article following Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s
testimony before Congress.
I encourage you to read the complete article here
Read Full Post »