WARNING: Adult content!
Most folks, church-goers included, have never heard of Molech (Moloch). I mean, if he never shows up on a Face Book page, a Twitter account or Tik Tok, that Chinese-own social video-sharing app – then what are most adults … and all young people, to conclude? Reminds me of FBI Director Christopher Wray testifying before a House Committee on Homeland Security declared Antifa, a far-left anarchist movement was “not a group or organization.” [Thursday, September 17th 2020]. “OK, so apparently it does not exist! If you say so Chris!”
Molech was real! Not the deity himself of course – since there is only one true God, as the Bible unambiguously reminds us (Deuteronomy 4:35,39; 2 Samuel 7:22; 1 Kings 8:60; Isaiah 43:10-11), but that did not stop the disciples of this cult from worshipping the forged bronze effigy of the bull-headed, Canaanite god of sacrifice – who had a particular lust for child.
Sometimes depicted with seven chambers on its chest, with one chamber reserved for children and at other times equipped with mechanical arms that its priests maneuvered so that the hands could move up and grip the chest – the results were always the same: the child “passed through the fire” (Leviticus 18:21; Deuteronomy 18:10; 2 Kings 17:17) and was roasted alive by the flame burning within or by the glowing-hot hands … while the parents watched and danced! The writer of the Pentateuch rightfully condemned the brutal practice, saying, “Do not allow any of your children to be offered to Molech.” (Leviticus 18:21). Indeed, it was so evil … so pernicious … so harmful that God warned Israel that anyone who did it deserved to die.
One would think that given the particular hideousness of Molech worship, that this would have put the ‘fear-of-God’ in every one of his followers. You would think! Regrettably, King Ahaz burned his son in the fire (2 Kings 16:3) … and Manasseh built an altar to Molech right in the temple (2 Kings 21:5) and gave his son as well. It was only King Josiah who put an end to “burning their sons and daughters as an offering to Molech” (2 Kings 23:10). After that, Molech disappears from the pages of Scripture – until Stephen’s speech to the Sanhedrin (Acts 7:43).
What I find particularly interesting is that anyone who looked away to pretend not to see the evil for what it was – was to be cut off from the nation (Leviticus 18:29). Translation? There was no room to say, “It doesn’t involve my family so it’s not my problem!” To ignore it was to act cowardly.
The devil, in league with his shadow company of fiendish demons, is involved in endless intrigues, shaping our reality to reflect their fallen nature. Setting the spiritually dead against the spiritually living, the bitter ice of their influence engulfs every continent …
every nation … every person – even children!
The spirit of Molech is alive and real today! It has become increasingly clear to me that in Canada and among our American cousins to the south, we are basically where the Israelite nation was: child sacrifice is a part of our culture. In escalating dangers, it is found lurking in every twist and turn of our society’s fabric, from the activism of gender diversity to child trafficking … from non-binary nonsense to puberty blockers and gender reassignment surgery … from queer critical theory to critical race theory … from documentation pronouns to MAID for minors [coming soon to a hospital near you]. To ignore it is to act cowardly.
We do not literally kill our children these days to worship other gods, do we? Well, actually we do! The ‘Church of Fetal Homicide’ is brimming with neo-pagans, who with religious fervor, celebratory dance their little heart’s out around slogans like ‘women’s health’ …’hands off my body’ … and ‘a fetus is not a baby’ – while babies get dismembered daily and sucked up into a vacuum tube.
Even Christian universities appear unwilling to promote life. Baylor (Baptist; Texas) offers a class that uses a textbook that refers to abortion as “safer than childbirth.” … Duke (United Methodist; North Carolina) promotes chemical abortion pills through it’s Obstetrics and Gynecology School of Medicine … and Augsburg (Evangelical Lutheran, Minnesota) ‘explicitly’ promotes Planned Parenthood and its culture of death.
Now when it comes to scripture, even literalists are not in the habit of limiting it to the narrowest, most literal interpretation possible. After all, literal interpretation is not the same as literalism. To that extent then, we are not ‘factually’ sacrificing our kids. Still, every day we read of reports where kids are indeed sacrificed to egregious contemporary cultural ideologues in their push for what is newly possible.
Where convicted killers can be legally executed for their capital crimes, drugs are difficult to secure. If you want to abort a child in the womb, take an infant’s life because their death is not ‘reasonably foreseeable’
or insist on MAID because of mental illness -
there is no end to the drugs available to kill.
In “The War on Children, Part One,” I laid out that there is a war of ideas, ideologies and conflicting worldviews going on. This conflict requires total compliance, no questions asked and it is conspiring to undermine parental rights, and social-engineer children away from pro-family, traditional values. Here in Part Two, I continue the journey.
Confusing Children about Identity
When it comes to gender identity confusion, few in Canada do it better than our publicly funded schools and school boards. They take their ideological doctrines and try to reconstruct them into shared public philosophy. I mean, do parents ‘really’ know what their child is being taught outside of the occasional reading, ‘riting, ‘rithmetic test they bring home? Without a doubt, our educational system has become an agency for creating political consensus, even willing to leverage teachers in positions of authority to have their elementary-school aged children self-declare which pronouns they use. Besides, its polite and inclusive, right?
Make no mistake. Queer theory wants to remodel
childhood education and it is succeeding!
In 2022, The Waterloo Regional District School Board (WRDSB), censored one of their teachers at their board meeting because the teacher had the temerity to question officials over a book in the elementary school library that promoted hormone blockers as normal and positive. In an effort to control Carolyn Burjoski’s narrative, the presentation was censored, the Chair said her words were a violation of the Ontario Human Rights Code and she was slandered to the media. Furthermore, the recording of the livestream, normally posted to YouTube was not because of those who “were impacted by comments made during the meeting.”
Then there was the 22-page Caring and Inclusive School Survey that was quietly administered by the same (WRDSB) school board this past November (2022), without parental consent I might add. The survey asked children as young as nine whether they are “gender fluid, intersex, non-binary, trans or two-spirit”, along with nonsense things like, do you “do things wrong a lot?” And imagine asking a 10-year-old to respond to “If I could live my life over, I would have it the same way,” Are you kidding – “live my life over.” The child is 10 … ten …, yes, TEN for crying-out-loud! Thankfully, the Toronto District School Board, with a budget of $3.5 billion, shelved their similar 2022 census, but only after it became public.
We are officially living in South Park
An even ‘bigger’ story appeared in September, 2022, when the Ontario public learned of an Oakville Trafalgar High School shop teacher named Kayla Lemieux who identified as a transgender and started wearing massive, braless, size Z prosthetic breasts to ‘her’ shop-class. If you are not aware of this story, look it up. But be warned, the pictures are absolutely --- eye-popping! I am not sure why this person is cited as transgender when what we really have here is a male in drag acting out his overt fantasies.
Now if ‘she’ wants to go on Dancing with the Stars … or ‘Naked and Afraid’ – go for it! I might even watch an episode or two. But a ‘teacher’ taking their private fetish public while gaining the support of the Halton District School Board is in my view indefensible. Make no mistake. Our school boards have become battlegrounds for the ideological, politically Woke circus, with schools inserting political activism into their curriculum quicker than I can order and receive a burger with fries at McD’s. One might think that ‘normal’ teachers would speak up. Oh, that’s right – they dare not. It’s a career ender!
More recently, libraries have become the latest cultural battleground for sowing gender identity confusion. They used to be places of neutral calm, but that all changed in 2015 when Drag-Queen Story Hour made its debut in San Francisco, a place where sex dungeons, queer sexuality and much of its derivations, seems to frequently originate. I suspect the normalization of LGBTQ+++ attitudes have helped validate the movement.
Here in Canada, on February 8, 2023, drag queen performers Cyril Cinder and China Doll were doing their thing at The National Arts Centre in Ottawa … and according to the Heritage Canada website, even our Liberal government got in on promoting these story time for kids as part of the capital region’s “Winterlude” festivities. Nothing like State support!
The modern drag-for-kids movement is infinitely more than the deconstruction of sex to the purpose of reconstructing the sexuality of children. Ultimately, the goal of queer theory is to soften the ground, demystify sexual conventions and normalize deviant behavior.
In Florida where I winter to escape Canada’s arctic chill, the state stepped in to bar children from attending a December performance of “A Drag Queen Christmas,” an “All-Ages” 36 city touring show with its highly sexualized content like ‘Screwdolph, the Red-Nippled Reindeer’ and ‘Tits in a Box’. Why do drag queens feel the need to expose children to risqué, even sexually explicit material? It is surely not for its artistic value.
When actor, Kirk Cameron, requested a faith-based story-reading library hour for his book “As You Grow”, to “speak with families about following the wisdom of the Bible…” the request was ignored or denied -- until court action was threatened. Suddenly things changed and their anti-Christian bias revealed. To my shame, I celebrated the good news … and still do!
“We Are ‘Queer Theorists,’ You will be Assimilated.”
OK, I understand that some of you reading here might expect to read only perspectives on Bible passages … and very often I do. But these days are hardly normal … and at some point, the church needs to get its head out of the sand, so-to-speak. The church has lost its voice – with some within my denomination afraid to speak because the government might take away their charitable status for speaking out. I’m speechless!
To understand the Drag-Queen movement, it is helpful to understand the ideology and activists who drive the queer-theory movement. Not surprisingly, many of them have sexually deviant histories. In 1984 Gayle S. Rubin wrote an essay “Thinking Sex: Notes for a Radical Theory of the Politics of Sexuality” which has since come to be regarded as the first real queer theory text for gay and lesbian studies. A feminist lesbian activist, she formulated her perspective having immersed herself in the dark San Francisco subcultures of bondage, leather, orgies, domination and sado-masochism.
Activist Drag-Queens are desperate to reinforce their vision of gender-bending and the illusion that normal men wear pantyhose. So, targeting vulnerable children, who become the casualties of adult fantasies,
is not a misplaced strategy.
Currently an Associate Professor of Anthropology, Women's Studies, and Comparative Literature at the University of Michigan, Rubin opens her essay by saying essentially, ‘Lets talk about sex.’ [OK]- fair enough, I think], but then shortly thereafter she morphs into ‘Let’s talk about child sex.’ This is the essence of Rubin’s theory – start with paedophilia. Rubin writes:
“The law is especially ferocious in maintaining the boundary between childhood ‘innocence and ‘adult sexuality’. Rather than recognizing the sexuality of the young and attempting to provide for it in a caring and responsible manner the culture denies and punishes …”
“The coercive power of the law ensures the transmission of conservative sexual values with these kind of controls over parenting and teaching.”
“It is legal for young people to see hideous depicts of violence but not explicit pictures of genitalia.”
“The laws produced by the child porn panic are ill conceived and misdirected … and abrogate important civil liberties.”
Remember now, this is where queer theory started. Read her essay and you encounter a litany of unjustified wrongs against sexual liberation – of laws against pedophilia, cross-generational encounters, exposing children to pornography, statutory rape and that minor-attracted people need to be treated better. Calling fears of child sex abuse “erotic hysteria” Rubin won’t be happy until authorities codify structural paedophilia into normalcy and usher in a sexual world beyond limits.
The other patron-saint of queer theory was Michel Foucault (1926-1984), a French philosopher and sexual activist. Said to be the father figure of queer theory, he was openly gay, a sado-masochist and celebrated the “pleasures of sadomasochism and the bathhouse”. In 1977 Foucault signed a petition to legalize adult-child sex and lower the age of consent in France. It was 15 at the time but he felt that it should be 13.
Foucault went to teach at the University of Tunis and to study the homoeroticism of the Muslim culture. He left the university after only two years of a three-year commitment, something most attribute to his sex with underaged boys. Talking about young Arab boys, Daniel Defert, a sociologist and Foucault’s gay lover, quipped:
“They live among men. They are men and made for men …”
Regrettably the garbage patch is moving
closer and closer to land.
Not unlike the progressive-left media whose proclivity has been to ‘sit’ on stories that are not helpful to their cultural ideology, the press in Foucault’s day was no less keen to ignore his sexual peccadilloes, including paedophilia. Mostly, there was silence.
“There were journalists present on that trip, there were many witnesses, but nobody did stories like that in those days. Foucault was the philosopher king. He’s like our god in France’.” [Guy Sorman, a colleague, recalling a visit to Tunisia in 1969].
The scholar Edward Said, James Miller in his 1993 biography ‘The Passion of Michel Foucault’ and Rachel Hopes Cleves, an historian of sex offer that, despite the secrecy from both the media and the academy, the charges of Foucault having sex with little boys were credible. This is the legacy of queer theory and at its logical conclusion -- the abolition of restrictions on sex with children. Foucault and his ilk are simply child sexual abuse apologists who populate the queer landscape.
Now, you would think that queer theory would be interested in helping gay, bi and trans children come to terms with their sexuality so they can lead normal, function lives along side straight folks and enjoy the same job opportunities and achieve the same social advancements as others. Apparently not! Instead, writers seem more interested in increasing their alienation and anger, while separating them from their parents. The writing of Hannah Dyer, assistant professor at Brock University, Canada and a cultural theorist of childhood with a concentration in queer theory is a case in point.
In her paper “Queer Futurity and Childhood Innocence: Beyond the Injury of Development” (2019), Dyer argues “the goal is to turn childhood education into queer studies adapted to children, and later, “Queerness is that which undoes identity, and still later “… queer is not what makes us recognizable to the other, it is what undoes us and what here can work to undo the innocent child.” Dyer is unhappy that children are born asexual and proto-heterosexual and this needs to change!
Since minors are permitted to be educated by a gay man
about sex toys, why not someone from the NRA bringing guns into the classroom for the same purpose? Parents have a legitimate right to be concerned about both.
Remarkable, Dyer even savages Dan Savage, a gay man himself, and his YouTube video “It Gets Better.” Wanting to stem the uprise in suicide, Savage tells gay children who might be the object of bullying at school, that as they grow older, it will ‘Get Better’ and they will find society in general far more accepting of them. But instead of affirming Savage’s encouragement to youth, Dyer refers to him as a “White man” [why does that matter?] and a servant of capitalism who apparently is trying to stop any uprising of gays masses to revolutionize and deconstruct colonial patterns of sexual normalcy.
Not surprisingly, Dyer even attacks reproductive sex. Given that gay people cannot have children through gay sex, this becomes a social inequity because it places straights on a level of privilege – one queer do not enjoy. So, no surprises here then when Dyer says the goal therefore of sex should be hedonism.
If you are a Star-Trek fan, you might recall a second-season episode called “Q-Who,” where the Enterprise is attacked by a cybernetically enhanced humanoid race that assimilate, called the Borg – a giant cube of metal. In Jean-Luc Picard’s own words, “The Borg are utterly without mercy, driven by one will alone; the will to conqueror. They are beyond redemption, beyond reason.” Their ultimate goal was ‘Perfection’ through forceable assimilation. This aptly describes today’s postmodern ideological activists who have taken over our universities, public school systems, media outlets, and political chambers. “We are the Borg: Resistance to Queer Theory is futile. You will be assimilated.” Parents need to resist this evil and find their voice. Yes, the war on children is real!
“The further a society drifts from the truth the more it
will hate those that speak it.”
George Orwell
In Conclusion
Now I suppose from this essay, some will want to accuse me of being transphobic because I do not unequivocally affirm the ideological nonsense out there. I am transphobic: not because I am afraid of them [hardly!] … but because I fundamentally disagree with them. Disagreement after all does not mean animus towards anyone – unless of course activists want words re-defined to their suiting! True, I have not prefaced my remarks here with the ‘obligatory’ all people, of every race, religion, creed, etc. are entitled to equality under the law [they are] because (1) the underlying assumption that disagreement must mean one is opposed to fundamental equalities is coercive nonsense, (2) there is no need to be apologetic for a difference of perspective, and (3) equality does not mean one must comply with other beliefs [If my beliefs are not valid, where is equality?] to soothe hurt feelings.
My disagreement is rooted in my traditional religious beliefs about the particular sinfulness of certain behavior – as unpopular as it might be for some. The Scriptures shape my worldview, and I remain unapologetic about that. Yes, believers must respond with grace, but the highest possible value is truth … not kindness or love as some imagine.
Jesus never said ‘love’ would make you free, though He was the personification of love. Rather, He said “the truth will make you free” (John 8:32) pointing to Himself … and a few verses earlier reminding us that He is the “light of the world”. But what I find particularly helpful here is that in the previous verse (v. 31) Jesus says “If you continue in my word … you will know the truth …” This is the direction Jesus gives us; a path that is narrow. The precepts we live by best agree with God’s word … and in the words of Isaiah it should be “line upon line, here a little, there a little” (28:10). It is when we stay in God’s Word, that Jesus himself says, “you are truly disciples of mine” (v. 31). Make no mistake: The neo-pagans are at the walls. “Only Saying …
Comments