Introduction
The hard nugget of the choosing ego is the source of no end of trouble. In one sense, this is the “capital city” of every form of such pro-choice thinking, but in another stricter sense this kind of pandemonium can’t be the central city of anything—because a world of disintegration has no principle of cohesion. The outer darkness has no city center, no city square, and no restaurants or shops either.
So when using the term pro-choice like this it is necessary to define carefully what I mean. By it I mean untrammeled choice, unconstrained choice, absolute choice, autonomous choice. And whenever a finite creature aspires to that sort of autonomous choosing, the end result is a rejection of all assigned constraints, which is to say, the end result is the Abyss. There is no way for a finite creature to yearn for ultimate autonomy without in that same moment choosing to unravel completely.
When you are a creature, your attributes are assigned to you from outside. Rejection of those assignments is to pursue final dissolution—and moreover, in the last analysis, to pursue it in vain.
Tumbling Into the Void
There can be no external constraints for those tumbling into the Void, and so the only thing left is the hard choosing ego, the hating center, the rejection of all that is good. Which is to say, the whole thing is an attempted hard rejection of the gift of creaturehood.
Such a rejection cannot be entirely successful because that hard choosing center remains inescapably a creature, about which nothing can be done, however much this “victim” of God’s common grace would love to erase His grace to them. But he still does what he can. With every creaturely limit that seems like it could be rejected, such a rejection is attempted.
The Anglo-Saxons had a word for the residents of Hell—and that word was helwaru. The helwaru are those who would not have God assign anything to them, and the end result is that every form of blessing is gone. The meadowlark rejects song, the trout rejects water, the man rejects the woman, and the woman rejects being a woman.
In the meantime, those who want to reject the doctrine of Hell have a grave difficulty arising before them, as we can see in our day. This is because what we are seeing is an entire generation doing their level best to stack up as many hellish blocks as they can, trying to build their very own Hell in this life. Those who deny Hell are the ones who create little hells. They pursue it ardently as though their everlasting death depended on it, which, come to think of it, it does.
They are stacking up these cinder blocks of sin—sinder blocks—so that they can wall themselves in, creating a little dungeon for self, in which place no identity can be assigned to them from the outside, or so they think—particularly from outside the world.
What is their grievance? When the Creator, without so much as a “by your leave,” simply assigned certain things to them—like their sex, or their parents, or their skin color—His impudence just takes the breath away. Who does He think He is?
Case in Point
While traveling recently, I had a chyron from CNN inflicted on me. Fortunately, the sound was off, but I was still beset by Anderson Cooper solemnly interviewing some “presidential historian” on the move that conservatives were now making to “ban books” in public schools.
This is why words like effrontery and chutzpah were invented, and why sometimes phrases like nickel-plated gall are sometimes needed to supplement the point that simply cries out to be made.
Substitute parents for conservatives and porn for books and you might be getting close to what is actually happening. Say that some parent might conceivably be upset because he found out his kid’s violin instructor was molesting his child, and Anderson Cooper could perhaps frame it as a parent who has a problem appreciating higher forms of music.
But take the porn away from the third-graders in the school library, and what have you done? You have clearly interfered with untrammeled choice. We are not here talking about the good choices of parents, because they don’t count, and that is because they want to prevent and restrict the options that certain creepers want to offer to the kids—like meth, or porn, or surgical butcheries. Conservative parents are enemies of the choices that will pitch their children headlong into the Pit. They are therefore the enemies of that ultimate choice, the choice to embrace damnation, and so their choices don’t matter.
So if a child is going to a school where kitty litter is being provided for some of the kids as a bathroom option, then that child is being groomed for Hell, with good prospects of getting felt up on the way there, and the superintendent’s name is something like Slewfoot.
The Revolt of the Women
I think it is a matter of biological fact—to bring up a sensitive subject—that women have more built-in (obvious) assignments from God than men do. That means that a general revolt against all creaturely assignments is going to place women, necessarily, in the vanguard of that rebellion. If they choose to revolt along with this wicked generation, they have a lot more to revolt against.
I think this is part of what Paul means in Romans 1 when he says “even the women.” The women are more naturally conservative than men, having more in their persons to conserve, and so when it goes bad, it goes really bad. Remember the prevalence of women in Daleiden’s sting videos. Look at all the suburban mothers bringing their children as votive offerings to the drag queen creeper events.
But if women stand firm in Christ, they are going to be attacked on more fronts by the rebels who hate and detest the fact that there are still godly women out there who are still accepting their assignments from God, written out for them in the very nature of their bodies. God writes our natural design into the very structure of our bodies, doing this with men and women both—but with the women He wrote that design out in all caps.
Women are built to be mothers, and they have biological reminders of this at every turn. They have wombs, they have periods, they have breasts, they are created to be maternal. When they refuse these attributes that were assigned to them, they are refusing much more of their obvious assigned identity. Their sexual suicide proceeds much more quickly than that of the men, although the men are doing whatever they can to keep pace.
Every gift of God ties us to people and to places. The grace of God tethers us. When we reject the grace of God, we are detaching ourselves from the ties that bind. But I do not mean the kind of binding that chains do when attaching someone to a dungeon wall. I mean the kind of binding—bonding—that happens when a mother koala nurtures her offspring for a year or so. Nobody is making her do that—she is not being oppressed by the patriarchy. Maybe she wants to, and maybe she wants to because she didn’t major in wymyn’s studies at a state university somewhere. So I am talking about the kind of bond that enables us to be somebody. Somebody with a face, with a name, and with a family.
But as soon as you become somebody, the stark injustice of not being able to be somebody else dawns on you, and you are back on the barricades of revolution, yelling at clouds. The helwaru don’t want to be somebody. In the grip of envy, which is the ugly driver of all of this, they want to be anybody they want. They don’t want to be somebody, they want to be anybody. Maybe everybody. They have determined that they will ascend the sides of the north, but all they wind up doing is sliding down the long sloping scree, the pebbles of their damnation bouncing around them, down toward the lip of the Chasm.
Think of It This Way
The tranny revolt is a flagrant case of such rebellion, but there are always variations on the theme. For some reason, some Christians rejoice because there are certain conservative homosexual voices that are rejecting all this tranny madness. They drew the line at the pronouns. They think the pronoun business to be beyond stupid, and we do appreciate it . . . so far as it goes. But think about this for a minute.
The transsexual man wants to pretend that he is a woman. The homosexual wants to pretend that his catamite friend is the one who gets to play the role of the woman. Both are pretending, and both are pretending that somebody is a woman who isn’t one, and all in defiance of how God made the world. Both are sinning against the nature of God, the nature of God’s Word, and the nature of nature. Dave Rubin and Dylan Mulvaney are not really on opposite sides of this confusion, in other words. The fact that one of them spares the pronouns is not actually the great moral victory it pretends to be.
In economics, Gresham’s Law is that bad money drives out good. A similar law could be crafted with regard to moral madness—a madness that begins with a claim to final autonomy. It is a madness that begins with that hard choosing center, and which does not want God to do any of the essential choosing for us.
Admit that abyss-in-microcosm into your heart, and you are on your way to the final Abyss—the one that will swallow up every autonomous choice, and do so without taking up any room to speak of. Inside, it is cavernous, and very dark, and with a sound track of endless wailing. Outside it withers in the light of God’s grace, and it is hard even to make it out.
And that is how it has to end. Death is swallowed up in victory. Madness is swallowed up by the restored sanity of countless creatures, all dressed in white linen.