By David Tulis
The men and women harassing the city toward a gay ordinance see her as a debtor to their cause, and would like her to pay her due, as have Collegedale and Knoxville. But, in reality, they propose just the opposite: That city government come down from her virtue on this point, which is a form of municipal capital measurable in her social life and the vibrancy of its lived-out Christianity.
The scriptures warn against borrowing. City Council is being urged to go into debt to the homosexual and egalitarian worldview. Gay activists and a sympathetic mushy middle in public opinion are demanding taxpayer benefits for partners of unmarried people who’ve been having sex for at least a year.
When God warns against the children of Israel rejecting his commands, He warns, “The alien *** shall lend to you, but you shall not lend to him; he shall be the head, and you shall be the tail” (Deut. 28:43,44).
If you borrow from these fine people, they will be the head, and you will be the tail.” You — the tail.
Is that a position in which you want our city to be?
Marriage + children = capital
Debt has saddled local economy in Chattanooga for decades, though the prevalence of debt in our part of the union is less than in other parts. I attribute this phenomenon to the same one that extinguished the Chattanooga Women’s Cinic in 1993 and made home education such a remarkable social force in the city since the 1970s.
The question of debts in the realm of ideas is, then, relevant to our main theme as localists and lovers of the free market.
Homosexuality, because it violates God’s commands, is anti-capital. That means it against profit, is not sustainable as a life theory, and is aiming toward decapitalization — the burning out of a man within himself, in the actual sexual relationship, and a burning out of his society from within. In other words, it rejects blessing and begs judgment from God’s hand. That means it is anti-capital.
It is anti-local economy, anti-future orientation, anti-family and against the very conception of civilization, which requires cultural, religious and financial capital to advance. If we want to be progressive, let me suggest, we need to understand the importance of family.
Homosexualism — the political and social theory of the homosexual activist — has a short-term perspective. This claim comes into question when one considers how groups such as Human Rights Campaign and Victory Fund exercise a long-term strategy for success in courts and state capitols. But culturally, homosexuality is about immediate pleasure, immediate gratification, consumption. It is about a feckless borrowing from the future.
Look at the number of children lounging on the front porch of gay households. Got the count? Homosexual unions are sterile and nonproductive. They do not produce babies. Homosexuals also are in league with pro-abortion Americans, who defend the destruction of baby girls and boys for the purpose of population reduction. These compatible systems of life and practice deny new faces there on the stoop or the front-yard swing set. They don’t put Big Wheel plastic tricycles down by the mailbox.
Homosexualism doesn’t want everyone to agree with its claims, because then there would be no children, except perhaps for the odd in vitro fertilization procedure or adoptions from Central America. There would be a demographic population that would imperil even them. To survive culturally, the gay movement has to borrow; it has to recruit, just as Mohammedanism in the 15th century persisted thanks to the fighting power of Janissaries, kidnapped Christian boys reared to be manly warriors for the Caliphate.
Homosexualism plays into the claims of the modern messianic state, which would like to make permanent wards of its citizens. For all those who have no children to care for them in old age, the state becomes administrator and caretaker. Since the 1930s the federal power has taken over the functions of family, which has reciprocal and personal (local economy) relationships providing welfare for young and old alike.
The gay theory of life envisions an unending impersonal and capitally consumptive continuum of service by the state to elderly gay couples, who have no children and no grandchildren, just a pet dog the nurse in the hallway allows them to keep, though it’s against nursing home rules.
Time is short
If you care for local economy, please call city council to register your support for marriage. Debate on the council is set Nov. 12. A final vote is set Nov. 19.
How sad that you think by not allowing gay people to marry, the already out of control population explosion will somehow be hindered. David, “those people” aren’t breeding anyway! But they do adopt and rear children who grow up wanted and loved instead of tolerated in an institution and told that they a burden on society! Why are you so hateful? Why do you really feel so compelled to limit the rights of others? Let a little love in, bro.
That’s a lot of big words just to say, “Gay people are icky.”
From Matthew 25:
41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’
44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’
46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
The way I see it. I’m not suppose to worry about who they share their life with; I’m suppose to feed them when they are hungry, clothe them when they are need clothes and take them in when they are in need of my comfort.
Refusing them benefits that we give other committed couples is turning them away when they need to be brought in and comforted. I would just hope that the city would be one of the sheep and not a goat.