Skip to main content

The Absurdity of Self-Identification and Public Education

    Forget about bathrooms.  Forget about LGBT and all that.  What we are dealing with now is a plague of self-identification, as evident by the number of memes satirizing the concept.  We're taking the whole "I think, therefore, I am" thing to places Descartes never imagined.  To say that we're bordering on the absurd is an understatement.  We've crossed the border.  We're officially residents in the land of absurdity!

    Allow me to offer an illustration.  There are laws in basically every political subdivision of this country against impersonating a police officer.  If I can simply identify as whatever I please, why is that the case?  Can't I simply self-identify as a police officer?  I dare you to try.  You'll find your rear end parked in a jail cell so fast you're eyes will spin.  Why?  Because reality.  Because we live in a world where natural laws are constant and things that are true are really true.  Two plus two equals to and so on and so forth.  If you haven't proven yourself qualified to be a cop, and if you haven't been sworn in as a cop, you are not a cop.  It is an objective reality.  Again, try performing surgery in your garage and see how long that lasts.  You can't just call yourself a doctor.  You actually have to have studied and proven that you are qualified to be a medical doctor.  It is a great irony that our government requires standards and licensing (many times unnecessarily) for so many different professions, yet allows (encourages is a better word) self-identification in the realm of gender.

    Why has this issue blown up so much?  We all know it's because the liberals want to be viewed as progressive and LGBT friendly, and the LGBT movement is ideologically unwilling to stop at tolerance.  No, they want to cram their ideals down our throats.  At the end of the day your gender is no more fluid than whether you are a police officer or a medical doctor.  This goes beyond gender though.  This goes beyond sexuality and the state of our legal system.  This is a national crisis of truth.  This political climate in which we find ourselves is a natural outworking of the "truth is relative" teaching that several generations have now received in the government education system. Don't think that this has been accidental.  It has been an intentional degradation of our Christian moral heritage.  John Dewey, widely considered the father of progressive education, hated Christianity, particularly the distinction that it made between "sheep and goats."  The educational system he helped to establish in our country has done a pretty good job of relativizing not only morality, but truth itself.  You can choose your gender in the same way that you can choose what you want to believe.  It's all relative.  If it's true for you, then that's fine.  I'll have my truth and you have yours.  You can choose your religion, sexuality, and now your gender.  There's no higher authority or standard by which to determine if your truth is true.

    So, we can argue till we're blue in the face about gay marriage, bathroom use, and other political issues, but don't expect it to be successful.  Those engaged in the debate speak different languages, philosophically speaking.  All these incidentals are just symptoms of the ideological unraveling of our nation.  Until we return to a place where truth and morality are objective, based not upon the whims of creatures but upon the revelation of man, we'll continue our descent into absurdity.

   

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Real Presence & Paedocommunion: A Deeper Rift Between Reformed Churches

You're going back to Rome! Theological disagreements within the Reformed world, especially those of the last half century, often devolve into these sorts of accusations.  As controversialists like Doug Wilson and Peter Leithart began to break away from the larger conservative Presbyterian and Reformed denominations, it became clear that the rift was deeper than semantics and systematic minutiae.  Much like the Reformation four centuries before, the Table was a primary point of conflict.   What does it mean?  Who may partake?  What do we call it?    These questions, along with a few more, divided Reformed brethren as the physical elements of our religion reflected deeper conflicts.  Good men began to understand that the problem wasn't just in our logos, but in our pathos and ethos, as well. Paedocommunion (hereafter PC) has been one of the hottest points of contention.  PC has always been normal to me as I grew up with it.  I underst...

Anglicanism, Paedocommunion, & Being Reformed

I consider myself Reformed.  I was baptized as a baby in a PCA church.  I grew up in a Reformed microdenomination that allowed its member churches to subscribe to any of the Reformed confessions (we subscribed to the Three Forms of Unity).  In many ways, whether I like it or not, I still think and act like a Reformed Presbyterian.   Some, however, would seek to deny me that label.  I suspect there are many reasons for this, but paramount among them is that I hold to Paedocommunion (hereafter PC), which, for some reason, is absolutely the worst thing ever to these people.  Some would go so far as to say that PC makes me a heretic, but they all agree that I am certainly not Reformed .   My recent engagement with these opponents of PC has caused me to reflect on what it means to be Reformed and what it means to be a Christian.  This online jousting has dovetailed well with some of my recent study, particularly  An Apology of the Church...

Some Thoughts on the 2024 Election

So, we had an election earlier this week.  Perhaps you heard about it. I have done my best to remain mostly silent on political issues this time around because I have found that fixating on such matters does little for my mental or spiritual health.  Also, no one cares what I think.  Nevertheless, here are a few thoughts on our recent election. 1) I didn't vote for Donald Trump, but I'd be lying if I said I'm not glad he won.  To be clear, that says more about Kamala Harris than about Donald Trump. 2) This election seemed much cleaner--much less suspicious--than the sordid affair we had in 2020.  This election didn't feature any poll workers tallying (discovering? conjuring?) votes behind closed doors in the wee hours of the night, messy mail-in voting, or voter turnout beyond plausible expectations.  The 2020 election had me convinced that we would never see another peaceful, uncontested election, but, as contentious as things were this year, it seems like...