With Stirrups Raised to Molech

Sharing Options

The modern world has seen many revolutions, from the French revolution to the Russian, but the bloodiest of all of them has been the sexual revolution. And that provides the backdrop to our current uproar over the definition of marriage.

We are now much occupied with the issues swirling around same sex mirage, but we need to take great care not to get distracted. Why have the homosexual activists gone all in on this issue? Why is their prosecutorial zeal so adamant? We went, in just a matter of months, from “let’s let individual states” decide on this, to federal judges striking down state statutes, followed up hard by official harassment of florists, bakers, and photographers. Why the anger, and why the savage over-reach? And do they really think we wouldn’t remember all the things they were assuring us of this time last year?

I was talking last night with my daughter Rachel, and she mentioned something that she had observed, and which I believe is very much on point. The battle over same sex mirage is not just a distraction, but is intended to be a distraction. We do have to deal with these challenges to marriage, but without forgetting what they might be trying to drag us away from. And I am talking about the relationship between the abortion issue and the homosexual battle.

The pro-life cause is one where conservatives have fought a successful incremental battle. The carnage has certainly been terrible, and there is still a long way to go, but one full generation after Roe v. Wade, we still have a robust pro-life movement, and it is a movement that has been making significant headway in state after state. In other words, for the secularists, the momentum — however inadequate it may seem to us — is all the wrong way.There are many reasons for this. They range from improvements in ultrasound technology to shrewd incremental legislation to tireless work on the part of pro-life activists to young people growing up into the cause.

At the beginning of this month, I tweeted this:

“If a nation has slaughtered 50 million infants, they are not going to suddenly get a sense of decency over you and your cupcakes.”

Now this explains their lack of proportion, and their refusal to acknowledge the rights of florists. Someone who doesn’t flinch at the dismemberment of babies is not going to flinch at the dismemberment of some evangelical baker’s conscience. This reveals their distorted priorities, of course, but it also might be revealing a strategy. Is the homosexual lobby doing this because they are freaking out over their losses on the pro-life front? And are they doing so in a way intended to distract us away from an issue where we are slowly, gradually, inexorably, winning?

Our state legislatures are clearly having second thoughts about abortion. That is all to the good, and we must continue to push them in that direction. But at the same time we have to say that “second thoughts” is not a synonym for repentance. When repentance comes, the whole apparatus of death is coming down.

In the meantime, we must continue to defend marriage, of course, and the religious liberty of those who don’t want to be dragooned into abominable celebrations. But we should never forget that the underlying war is against our fruitfulness. If one of the central tactics of gay abortionists — now there’s a phrase for you — has been to destroy the fruit of heterosexuality, and to celebrate the fruitless deeds of darkness, then we must take special care to continue to fight them on their insistence on a “constitutional right” to slaughter the unborn.

Fruitlessness is a religion, and abortion is their bloody sacrament. And just as Boniface chopped down the tree sacred to Thor, so also we must remove those stainless steel altars with their stirrups raised high to Molech. Like Josiah, we must pitch them all over the lip of the cliff and down into the Valley of Ben Hinnom.

And this is why one of our central responses to the battle over the definition of marriage should be to double down on our commitment to the pro-life cause. Before we got into this fight over what constitutes a marriage, we were previously winning a fight over what constitutes a human being.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
21 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Alex
Alex
6 years ago

Well said.

Gwen
Gwen
6 years ago

Making an excellent connection between same-sex “marriage” and the abortion issue that I hadn’t thought of before. Good line on “stirrups raised high to Molech”. We pray for actual repentance. Thanks for posting this article.

Seth
Seth
6 years ago

This is a great reminder, Doug!

In regard to Christian response to the homo-lobby and Christian businesses, I recently read this by a Catholic priest and while it’s a bit tongue in cheek, I’m wondering what your thoughts are about the practicality of what he’s suggesting.

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2015/04/when-they-come-to-destroy-your-business-because-you-are-pro-traditional-family/

Dr. Harry Schaumburg
6 years ago

Excellent point! However, doesn’t their fight go beyond the definition of marriage? When more and more states make it child abuse to counsel LGBTQ minors to a biblical standard of sexual purity, how far are we from parents being accused of child abuse when teaching the same standard? How long before a teenage girl appears in court, wanting to be a lesbian, and claiming her parents are abusing her; causing great emotional harm by demanding she live by biblical standards?

Moor
Moor
6 years ago

The concept of “distraction” reminded me of something I once heard Tony Evans say. He was expounding on the Ephesians 6 passage about the full armor of God and he made what I thought was a keen and apt observation about “flaming arrows”. He said that in the context of warfare, “flaming arrows” are rarely used to do damage to people. Rather, they are designed to do damage to structures, setting aflame those things with which they come in contact, and thereby pulling resources from the main conflict. So, instead of engaging the enemy on the front lines with whatever… Read more »

Michelle
Michelle
6 years ago

This is well said, and I do believe there is much in what you say regarding distraction. But it strikes me also that there are conundrums in this. Last year I had two colleagues who gave birth to children, one a lesbian whose child was manufactured by artificial means and one whose child came as a result of normal God-given marriage. My lesbian colleague at her 20 week ultrasound was so blown away by the intricacy and beauty of the child in her womb, it proved a revelation about the horror of abortion and she knew that she could never… Read more »

Eric the Red
Eric the Red
6 years ago

On the politics of it, Doug is partially right. Given the cultural reality that public support for gay marriage is waxing and public support for abortion is waning, a deal was struck at the highest levels of the GOP, with a lot of your so called social conservative leaders on board, to abandon the fight against gay marriage but continue the fight against abortion, with the understanding the Supreme court will prevent any flat ban on abortion. That’s the politics of it, which of course is a separate question from what is right and wrong. I of course disagree with… Read more »

David
David
6 years ago

Eric, No doubt that we are experiencing the highest incidence of outward support for homosexuality. However, there is a significant difference between what is pushed by the media, and what our politicians might decide upon, and what might be laid down from a judge’s bench, on the one hand and what public opinion is on the other. When a pizza parlor in Indiana can raise just south of $900K for taking flack over not being willing to cater a gay wedding, there must be a lot of people who are not on board with the program. I also doubt your… Read more »

Tom Nichols
Tom Nichols
6 years ago

Thank you for this reminder. At it’s core the entire sodomy marriage issue is a “life” issue. Those who through their own wicked choices practice sexual behavior that is a biological dead end, are desperate to justify themselves and their sinful actions by attacking life. God has given human men and woman the power through the intimate loving act of sexual intercourse to CREATE LIFE. Nothing shows the empty, barreness of same sex relationships than the impossibly for them to create life. Those relations are by nature hollow, empty voids, which will never experience the God given joy of new… Read more »

John Forster
6 years ago

As far as core issue, I vote for Christ’s offices and functions as judge, lawgiver, and king (most high executor of sentence of the lawgiver’s law, adjucated(sp) by the judge). In that light, God has promised to “spank” any society who refuses to punish His crimes with His punishments. Fornication “fines” (only committed to girl’s father, indentured servitude if necessary), execution for adultery, sodomy, and murderer. For those thinking this too harsh, to implement this upon the father, who has primary responsibility for his child, a mother who consents, and the doctor/nurse accomplices — consider the consequences of a few… Read more »

Mark B. Hanson
Mark B. Hanson
6 years ago

:

“not being willing to cater a gay wedding”. Actually, it’s worse. Not being theoretically willing to cater a gay wedding. Nobody had asked them to do so.

Orwell wrote about “two minutes hate” in 1984. So far the editors haven’t gotten to work, so it’s “two days’ hate”.

David
David
6 years ago

Mark, Yes, here is a business which, like Arlene’s Flowers, has actually served gays and lesbians, BUT, when asked if they would theoretically be willing to cater a wedding, they incurred this kind of wrath. This is why I believe the psychological and theological issues behind gay mirage are as Doug described them. There is not systematic denial of every day service to gays and lesbians in the vein of Jim Crow laws. There are, however, many millions of people who do not see marriage between two same gendered persons as a marriage. Their view of marriage does not require… Read more »

Zachary
6 years ago

Mr. Wilson,

Great thoughts. If you have a few spare minutes I would appreciate your thoughts on a recent post I did about incrementalism vs immediatism.<a

Matt
Matt
6 years ago

But the pro-life movement hasn’t really been that successful. They haven’t moved the needle on public opinion at all, much less in the dramatic way the gay movement has. They did get Clinton’s “safe, legal, and rare” type talk, but even that is gone nowadays. What has been successful is the Republican takeover of several state governments, which lead to the anti-abortion laws alluded to here. Contrast the pro-life movement with the pro-gun movement. There’s no real pro-life equivalent in terms of influence and reach to the NRA, nor has the former had nearly the level of success as the… Read more »

Christopher
Christopher
6 years ago

“What has been successful is the Republican takeover of several state governments, which lead to the anti-abortion laws alluded to here.”

Assuming the takeover was due to elections it could signify some shift in public opinion in those states which is success, however small, and could grow to further success.

Steve Burdan
Steve Burdan
6 years ago

Good thoughts! but we must be careful to prioritize the importance of issues in the sense that if we “win” the argument or the battle about these issues – or even get a draw – unless the Gospel is part of what is most important and innermost – otherwise, things devolve into another “culture skirmish.” We can be right on all counts, but still not have love enough to care – this is why having media debates, etc. with people we never see, live near or fellowship with is really two-edged…or so it appears to me…

Eric the Red
Eric the Red
6 years ago

Matt, I think there are fewer abortions than there were ten years ago, for several reasons, one of which is that the pro-life movement has succeeded in getting state legislatures to make it more difficult. And, as a side note, if you want there to be even fewer, you’re going to need to support government safety nets for single mothers, because there is crystal-clear evidence that the number of abortions goes up as the services available to single mothers goes down. If your measuring stick is that the right to life movement hasn’t succeeded until there’s a constitutional amendment banning… Read more »

Matt
Matt
6 years ago

I wrote a longer post but it got ate by the site. The gist was that while we can quibble about what is considered “success” or “failure”, if you line up the pro-life movement next to the pro-gun and gay rights movements, it’s clear that one of these is just not in the same league as the other two. I don’t know why that is. If I did I would be more famous than I am. But it clearly is the case. Abortions have declined, but then so have violent crimes of all stripes over the same period. I don’t… Read more »

Daigh
Daigh
6 years ago

As long as we continue to push legislators to regulate how abortionists should murder babies the legislators will take that way out of their predicament. Then along comes the courts and strikes down the latest hard won pro-choice law on admitting rights, width of hallways, waiting times etc and strikes them down. Until we start demanding full abolition of this bloody sin the politicians will not do anything to really end it.

John Reasnor
John Reasnor
6 years ago

Righteous civil laws are a good schoolmaster. They teach the populace what is good and right in the eyes of The Lord. They uphold justice. Incremental laws are a bad schoolmaster. They reinforce to the populace their ageist assumptions, thus justifying their support for the destruction of God’s Image. There can be a lot said about the so called victories; how they have regulated the abortion market, shut down the private clinics, drove business to Planned Parenthood, and substituted some abortion methods for others. I readily concede that we have fewer abortion clinics. I readily concede that there are far… Read more »