Those old enough might remember in the early days of the sexual revolution, the common refrain was to “get the government out of the bedroom”.

The thought was that the police powers of the state had no business involving themselves in the private sexual practices of consenting adults.

This principle was applied first to heterosexual relationships and later was applied successfully to gay and lesbian relationships.

This generally “libertarian” view is based on basic principles of liberty.  There is a private sphere in life, that government should not intrude into, as long as violence, coercion, and fraud are not involved. Private acts which do not intrude upon the rights of others, are to be permitted, with the consent of adults participating.

There may well be moral reasons to object to this behavior, but it was believed that these religious precepts should not be enforced by the state.  This thinking went even further though, when moral objections by private actors were also disallowed.  This may well have been a mistake.

Now it seems, states like Colorado wish to force a baker against his will to make cakes for gay weddings.

The thinking on some of these matters has become so twisted it becomes easy to violate laws because there seems to be little consistency.

One cannot “discriminate”, and soon we saw the destruction of the Boy Scouts from two opposite sides.  One side attacked them because they did not show common sense by having Scoutmasters that were attracted to young men being in charge of young men, an obvious incentive for abuse.

Then they got attacked because they would not allow gay men to be in charge of young boys.

Indeed, society seems quite confused as to what government should be allowed to do in regulating sexual behaviors and what private organizations are allowed to do.  Within this confusion, a small determined group of sexual radicals has staked out territory that does not belong to them.

And a small minority that felt it was discriminated against, now wishes to discriminate against the vast majority of citizens.

Part of the problem is the application of civil rights laws where they don’t apply.  Being Black is a skin pigment, not a set of behaviors.

One cannot deny services to a Black man in interstate commerce.  But I am not required to do business with you if I don’t like the way you behave or what you are offering.

Here is a problem to challenge your thinking: is it OK not to hire a male gay therapist to take care of a young autistic boy?  A boy that is nonverbal, naïve, and socially completely helpless?

Commonsense suggests parental discrimination should not only be allowed, but it would be foolish not to exercise it. In any case, the parents should have the choice.

However, there is no interest relating to private or public safety invading the home of a quiet lesbian couple, exposing them to prosecution or public humiliation.  Their private acts do not, and most likely cannot violate the rights of anyone else.  Moreover, it is just none of the government’s damn business or that of private individuals or organizations.

Besides this evolution in legal thinking, the novel argument was made that gay people were “born that way”, and that not having free will on the matter, it was unjust and just plain stupid to make them guilty of a crime.  They are just doing what they are compelled to do and the sex drive is quite powerful.

Because of that concession, it was argued that their sexual practices were just as valid as the majority’s normative heterosexual activities and that gay and lesbian people should be allowed to marry and form long-lasting relationships.  This was thought would be beneficial both to the individuals involved, and society at large.

Many homosexuals felt finally their sexual practices were “equal” in validity to the normative majority and they were now out of the closet and “proud” of their sexual practices.

This is a bit odd, because the majority of heterosexuals never expressed “pride” in their sexual proclivities.  They were doing what is most natural for all animals that reproduce to continue the survival of their species.

The counterargument is that heterosexuals were never discriminated against so therefore they have no reason for “pride.”

Humm.  Jews don’t strip naked in parades as recompense against past discrimination, nor do the Chinese, Italians, or Irish.  American Indians would seem to have a special claim to get naked in parades. Past discrimination is not a permission slip to be publically obnoxious.

“Pride” as practiced today (lots of randy videos up on Twitter) is very public.  Apparently, only gays have the right to offend in our society today.

A few years back my wife and I got caught accidentally in such a parade while just strolling around Zurich.  The Swiss are pretty self-controlled lot but this was over the top.  Most participants were older men in thongs.  With some difficulty, we sought refuge from what was quite a wrinkled and tawdry display.

Then society moved another step, this time in another direction, and it gets even a bit more confusing.  Now we are told people are not “born that way”, but rather sexual desires are chosen solely by the internal “identification and feelings” of the participant.  Further, the person having these feelings is the sole judge of their own condition, and all parental influence and medical advice must “affirm” the conclusion made by the internal “feelings and sensibilities” of the person.

Are people born gay or is it chosen?  You can’t have it both ways.

The claim is further expanded to the affirmation of the internal feelings of children, who have no idea what it feels like to be a man or a woman.  Such young people are too inexperienced to give informed consent.

However, lacking parental consent, or informed consent of the child, teachers now secretly “affirm” the child’s new “identity” and doctors will “affirm” by cutting off their sex organs.

What other medical condition allows the patient to determine their own medical diagnosis absent any tests or scientific proof other than self-described feelings?  What other medical condition requires physicians to play along with hysteria?

Now the government wants taxpayers and insurance companies (both of which the public funds) to pay for sex change operations.

We have come a long way from “getting the government out of the bedroom” and letting consenting ADULTS indulge in PRIVATE sex acts, as long as NO HARM is done to anyone else.  Now we have the government encouraging and subsidizing certain sexual proclivities that are both public and harmful.

Moreover, the idea of sexual privacy has met “pride.”  What was supposed to be limited to private bedrooms, perhaps certain controlled clubs, now is as public as a 4^th of July parade, replete with floats, flags, and crowds of children.

Today we must put up with public displays of vulgarity and sexual provocation in public because we too must show pride in these proclivities and fetishes.

No, we don’t.

The movement now has its own month of mandatory celebration month where corporations and sports teams compete with each other for the approval of a tiny sexual minority.  So much for being marginalized.  Did you get to vote on this month-long celebration?

California is considering legislation, that if parents do not “affirm” the sexual identity of their children, that state with its guns can come to take your kids from you.  And they can brainwash your kids in schools against your consent and without your knowledge.

Transgenderism is now so powerful of a social movement, they have their own flag, which our government dutifully places alongside the nation’s flag.  We even display it overseas at our embassies.  Can you think of any other group with such power and privilege?  Having and displaying your own flag is a very PUBLIC act.

So, it would seem, the bedroom activities of LGBTQ+ are now in our government, which not only displays flags but run school curricula to inculcate children.  Our armed forces even put on drag shows, at public expense.

Our President solemnly intones that “Transgenderism is the soul of the nation.”

This is no longer “private” and it requires coercion and punishes those who don’t consent.  One can easily lose one’s job if the correct required pronouns are not used at a publically funded university.  The FBI will start monitoring non-compliant families and put them on a terrorist watch list if they object to LGBTQ indoctrination in schools.

To oppose this group is “hate”, which involves curtailing the freedom to speak for the vast majority.

For a group that says it is “marginalized,” they have the support of the major news networks, have their own flag, their own political party, and even their own film studios.

Apple even makes sure that “pride month” is marked on my personal calendar, without my permission or consent, just in case I am not aware of the mandatory celebration about to take place.

Some of this is being socially reinforced but much of this is now being legally enforced using the police powers of the state.

Today sexual revolutionaries don’t like consent but require compulsion.  Moreover, they seemed determined to direct their attention to our children and grandchildren.

Conservatives can object on solid grounds that public compulsion should not be allowed, that these acts are not private, and that the movement seeks to recruit children who cannot give informed consent.

The alphabet alliance does not hold logically together.  The QT portion of the alliance regularly mocks and degrades women.  It is the new misogyny. And we think there are many gays and lesbians who are appalled by the brazen behavior, boorish proclamations, and the endangerment of children.

We hope they start speaking up more forcefully.

The QT portion of the coalition also demands that the rest of us believe falsehoods.  The idea that men can have babies, that they menstruate, and can change their DNA by simply putting on a dress is nonsense.  Yet school districts insist on putting feminine products in boys’ bathrooms and letting men compete in women’s sports.

Again, the state and its agencies should not be involved in subsidizing a nonsensical secular religion using our tax dollars.  Nor should they be putting the state’s imprimatur on these activities.  If the Bible cannot be read in class, then rainbow propaganda should not be in classrooms.

There are many steps that must be taken to untangle the logic and law which got us where we are today.  But for one small minority to endanger the lives of children and make their acts public, is a clear violation of the first principle that launched the sexual revolution in the first place.

Now we must reverse the process.  We need to get the coercion out of the process. The first step is to get the LGBTQ+ bedroom out of our government.

In particular, the QT needs to be divided from the rest.  While that is a job best left to those within the coalition, most of the demands for government involvement are coming from the QT brigade.  When the government starts spending public funds and uses its police powers, it becomes the business of all citizens.

What should be protected are the private acts of consenting adults, that do no harm and do not violate the rights of others.

However, public displays of indecency and the grooming of our children should not be permitted, and certainly not sponsored, endorsed, or subsidized by our government.