Sexless Humans, Activist Judges, and the Death of a Culture

Up until recently a sure sign of sanity was living in accordance with reality. A good indication of insanity was when a person made it clear that he somehow could transcend mere reality and create his own universe according to his own whims.

People claiming to be God or the President of the US or the like were usually locked up for living in such sad states of unreality and delusion. But today we seem to celebrate and promote those who would make things up as they go along, rescripting reality to suit their preferences.

Indeed, we even have respectable types in the judiciary who have now become self-appointed guardians of what is reality and who should define it. They have taken it upon themselves to sit in judgment on the real world, including the world of biology and DNA, and make pronouncements about what is and what is not real.

delusionalAnd we find no more scarier examples of this than when activist judges start telling us that we can dispense with biology altogether and we can just make things up as we go along. So now judges have become just like those we used to lock up – they have declared themselves to be gods with god-like powers of redefining and remaking reality.

Scary stuff indeed. Consider a few recent – and shocking – cases of this. The headline of the first case is a real worry: “Judge Grants Oregon Resident the Right to Be Genderless”. Yes you read that right. Now judges are becoming arbiters of gender, basically pulling them out of a hat to suit their needs and their ideology. The story begins:

History was quietly made in Oregon this month when a judge granted a Portlander’s request to become genderless. Patch, a 27-year-old video game designer, is likely the first legally agender person in the United States.
The Multnomah County Court granted Patch a “General Judgment of Name and Sex Change” on March 10. In the same judgment, Patch was also allowed to change names, becoming mononymous — meaning only having one name instead of a given name and a surname.
“Even gender-neutral pronouns don’t feel as if they fit me. I feel no identity or closeness with any pronouns I’ve come across … What describes me is my name.”
Agender is defined as the absence of gender. Not to be confused with transgender or genderqueer, agender people typically describe feeling that they have no gender identity whatsoever. While sex refers to biological features such as chromosomes, genitalia and hormones, gender is the expression of identity as male, female or somewhere in between. But agender people are not drawn to male or female identity — or any point along the spectrum.
“As a kid, probably starting around age 6, gender didn’t make sense to me,” Patch told NBC News. “I was told ‘men were this, women were this.’ As a teen I learned about transgender people, and that didn’t seem like what I was. And then I learned about genderqueer, and that didn’t seem like what I was.”
A handful of organizations serving transgender, gender-nonconforming and intersex people told NBC News that no U.S. court has ever granted a legally genderless status before.
“This is the first time that Sylvia Rivera Law Project has heard about this, and we applaud the court recognizing the person as they are,” attorney Kyle Rapiñan said. “We hope that other government agencies will help people self-determine their gender identity, which also includes the option to identify without a gender.”
The judge who signed off on Patch’s agender petition is ahead of the curve: She also presided over the nation’s first non-binary gender change last year.
In a June 2016 decision, Multnomah County Circuit Court Judge Amy Holmes Hehn granted Portland resident Jamie Shupe a legal change from female to non-binary — casually setting off a nationwide third-gender movement that sent dozens of residents in other states into courthouses seeking genders other than male or female.

While this may have been a first in the US, sadly it was not the only time such judicial activism and judicial overreach occurred. Unfortunately, Australia seems to be leading the way here. Some three years ago Australian judges were also getting into the game of redefining reality. Consider this news item:

The androgynous person at the centre of a high court decision recognising those who do not identify as either male or female has described being “overjoyed” at the ruling and expressed the hope that it will encourage Australians to be more accepting.
In a historic decision with far-reaching implications for institutions and individuals across the country, the court on Wednesday formally upheld the right of transgender person Norrie to be registered as neither a man nor a woman with the NSW Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages.
The decision is recognition by the highest court in the land that ”sex” is not binary – it is not only ”male” or ”female” -and that this should be recognised by the law and in basic legal documents.
”I jumped up and down a lot … I was getting ready for my shower and I saw it come up and I said, “hooray!” … I squealed,” Norrie said of the decision at a press conference hosted by the law firm DLA Piper, which took on the case pro bono.

Hmm, I wonder if I can get a law firm to take on my case as a freebie. You see, I have always strongly identified as a can of Dr Pepper. I am sure we can find some sympathetic judge somewhere who can rule in my favour. After all, if we can now state with a straight face that male and female do not exist but are mere social constructs, then the sky is the limit of course.

Why box me in? Who says I cannot be a can of Dr Pepper? And if you say I am not or cannot be one, you simply show your bigotry, intolerance and narrow-mindedness. So where are my rights? Why am I being discriminated against? C’mon judges, come to my aid here!

And I am sure that plenty of rather poor folks like myself also identify as multi-millionaires. And why not? So I assume there would be plenty of judges happy to take up our cases. I am sure they would happily make a ruling that we are in fact all fabulously wealthy, and demand the world act accordingly on our behalf.

Once a friendly judge makes this decision, I will expect to see my bank account go through the roof as piles of money from around the globe instantly appear in it. Thanks judge, I needed that. Hey, the game of making up your own reality to suit your desires and preferences is kinda neat.

Why didn’t I think of it before? Now that judges have become gods, creating their own reality, it is now clear what a religious cult the gender benders and their judicial supporters have now become. It is the new religion of un-reality. As Joe Bissonnette recently put it in his important piece, “The Priesthood of the Transgendered”:

For a period of time, during the ascendancy of gay pride, homosexuals assumed the role of our persecuted avant-garde priesthood. On the one hand they were anything but ascetic, pursuing a hedonistic transgression of natural sexuality, but insofar as they could claim social condemnation and rejection by villainous reactionaries, whether real or imagined, they were exemplars of a transcendent, sacrificial commitment to the religion of progress; they were priests. They had moral authority and we gave them deference.
But once we had caught up with the avant-garde, their claims of persecution and thereby their sacrificial priesthood ended. The religion of progress had triumphed over natural sexuality, and even if we ourselves hadn’t become homosexuals, we had internalized their philosophy. Now we are in the age of the priesthood of the transgendered, and the transformation they are ushering in is much deeper, much more existential. Whereas the homosexual priesthood sanctified the rejection of nature, the transgendered priesthood sanctifies the unreality of being.
The transgendered priesthood is the spiritual complement to the technological development of virtual reality. The transgendered have transcended not only their natures, but their very bodies. They, and through them, all of us, have achieved spiritual and physical plasticity. There is no longer essence. We are utterly subject to our own redefinition and reconfiguration.

He concludes:

The rise of the transgendered movement marks the complete defeat of common sense realism, which had been the everyday, boots on the ground response to existentialism. It could be seen in the common sense of the parent who would say to her child “you can bark all you want, but that doesn’t make you a puppy.” But now, enlightened by the post-essentialist existentialism of the transgendered age, when little Tanner declares that he feels like a Tanya, mom and dad are floating in space. They give little Tanner hormone blockers and surgery so that his body can be mutilated to match the madness of his mind. Now, any attempt to convince Tanner that he is in fact a boy is viewed as hate speech. For some time now, the naturally modest period of pre-pubescent sexual latency has been forcibly violated by explicit and perverse sex education. Now a growing number of parents support the rights of adult men dressed as women to use the same washrooms and change rooms as their daughters.
Over the course of a mere three years, the transgendered have gone from creepy and transgressive to almost mainstream. Soon, once completely mainstream, they will be desacralized, like the now suburbanized homosexual movement. They will be replaced by a new mildly persecuted avant-garde.
A possible candidate group are advocates of inter-generational sex, or more plainly, adults who want to have sex with children. My students have a visceral disgust at the suggestion, not unlike their response to homosexuality ten years ago, or transgenderism three years ago. But given the complete subjectivity and meaninglessness of sex established by the acceptance of homosexuality and now transgenderism they cannot find any rational argument to support their visceral disgust. The avant-garde will cry discrimination and point to the logical consistency of our newly minted sexual lifestyle. We will initially cower in silence and then in short order embrace the most explicit abuse of our children.
There is little reason to wonder at the implosion of the West and the loss of our cultural will to live. Even the most debased, corrupted soul can’t help but have occasional eruptions of conscience, and when what is seen in the mirror is more terrifying than what is seen looking out across the barricades at a world which hates us, the battle is lost. We know we are monsters and deserve to die. But on a hopeful note, it is darkest before the dawn. We are fast approaching an age when persecution will be upon us. But persecution is witness, persecution is priesthood, and it will be all the more brilliant for the darkness that surrounds it.
The priesthood of the transgendered is one of the last of the degenerate priesthoods. In the not too distant future we will join St. Paul in “…filling up what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ on behalf of his body, which is the church.”

And with this reality- and biology-denying gender priesthood we can add the host of activist judges who are more than happy to join in with the delusion and the madness. Heaven help us all.

[1925 words]

12 Replies to “Sexless Humans, Activist Judges, and the Death of a Culture”

  1. “The earth helped the Woman” Revelation 12:16. Could mean that creational nature will assert itself. Creational reality will overcome social madness. When that occurs and this “flood” is vanquished “the rest of her children” (who did not give in to the social insanity) cop the rage of the devil in society. What ever, we need to be those who “hold the commandments of God and the testimony of Jesus.” Rev. 12:17. To do this is not survival, it is the victory that overcomes the world. 1John 5:4. Understand the times brothers! 1Chronicles 12:32.

  2. Hi Bill, it is truly a sad state for humanity when it descends to this level. I still wonder how Paul felt when he was compelled by the Holy Spirit to write Romans Chapter one. I commend you again for all the research that you’ve put into this article. Emotionally it must have been difficult. God Bless you Bill for the courage and conviction that was clearly displayed in writing it. Kel.

  3. “Genderqueer” – yup – says it all.

    Who’s for the queers??

  4. I simply replaced all occurrences of “gender” with “sex” in your article… it then made a lot more sense to me! Excellent piece of writing, Bill.

  5. As The Who once sang:
    I’m a boy, I’m a boy. but my mum won’t admit it.
    I’m a boy, I’m a boy. If I say I am I get it.

  6. It follows from the quest by humans to “become like gods, knowing good and evil”, that they will proceed to deconstruct the Biblical, divine account of the original, created human nature and go on to reconstruct a mythology of the human condition which flatly contradicts Biblical anthropology.

    In certain quarters, it is not only denied that woman is called woman because she was taken out of man and is created to return to man in marriage. It is further postulated that woman came from woman at birth and therefore must inexorably return to woman at the awakenings of adolescence.

    Men who conceive of a certain kind of manhood as a living apotheosis may well be inclined to dispense altogether with the notion of woman as the fitting, the most intimate neighbour and helper of man. Androgyny is, likewise, yet another projection of a human consciousness which aspires to self-made deity.

  7. Hi Bill,
    truly sad mad and bad.
    Have a look at this Seinfeld clip… it is happening now with the new marriage equality ring being handed out among Qantas Google and others.

  8. Everything that is disagreeable to someone is being highlighted for attention one by one.

    Once a thing has become somewhat “acceptable” ( i.e. it is perceived to be accepted in society as included in the range of “normal” behavior, or the range of “normal” opinion), the critical mass has been won, and those opposing are seen as outsiders, the next disagreeable thing is targeted. The aim is to make everything “normal”. This is none other than the “slippery slope” that so many have warned of.

    Many , if not most, of the “unacceptable” things are unacceptable to those who hold a biblical world view, and biblical values. That world view and those values have long underpinned a number of societies including liberal democracies.

    It seems to me that that the soft targets have been hit first. Currently it is hard core targets that are being hit. Finally it will be the source of the morality that will be targeted. We Christians may think we are under siege now, but in Australia it is still mostly only our values that are being targeted. Ayaan Hirsi Ali is targeted because she patently disagrees with something, it wouldn’t matter what.

    The irony is that in the rush to find the utopia in which nobody disagrees with anybody, in which there is only “love, love love”. Finally the only thing disagreeable to people will be Jesus.
    Then according to their own doctrine and practice they will have to make room for Him and those who worship Him.

    Who knows how far this process will go. (The irony will not be realized of course.) The seeds of its self-destruction have been sown and it may actually implode. The war is spiritual. We do not know how horrible it will get. We can but hold to our hope in the promise of final victory, and do what we can to be salt and light, and to snatch some from the flames.

  9. By getting everyone to kowtow to “agreeing with the majority”, It’s no longer “Divide and Conquer”, but also “Unite and Usurp” – as of course the consensus is already designed for the deconstruction of humanity.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *