Pride Rallies: Built to Resist Outside Influence

 

Want to give your eyes a break? Click the link to have the article read to you.

 

As a young boy growing up in Idaho Falls, I never could have conceived…

Ahem, sorry…

I never could have conceived of something now known as a pride event occurring and supported publicly (including on Christian radio). As I reflect and write this, many appear to be proceeding to or from the event. The website reveals that it’s not just a quick rally or parade; it’s a series of events.

Right now, I’m not going to respond to whether such a thing is Christian or not. I'm not going to prove the waywardness of it from the Scriptures. In this event, it's not really about that. Most participants probably don’t care what Scripture says on the subject; if they do, there would still be no amount of biblical exegesis that would influence many of the pro-Pride crowd to change. These powerful feelings, along with a predisposition to having them affirmed, means that a series of Bible verses is unlikely to do much to sway somebody who is already very steeped in this. For most, it is much easier to just reject any God or faith that stands opposed to certain behaviors than to acknowledge and turn from these forms of wrong or harmful behavior.

The system is set up so that you and I cannot influence such a movement. The Idaho Falls Pride festival, and certainly countless others, inoculates itself against dissenters—which is anybody who publicly disagrees with what they are doing. Here is how they have forewarned Pride attendees on their official event page:

“Zero Engagement with Protesters: In the event of a protest, do not engage in negative dialogue or debate. Debating only serves to reinforce their belief they have a valid position. Our rights, freedom, dignity, and our lives are not debatable…. Protesters want attention. Don’t give it to them. Learn to internalize a total indifference to their presumed positions of authority” (idahofallspride.com).

Now, to pick apart the egregious brainwashing, dis-education, and hypocrisy associated with this warning. As I do this, bear in mind that the above statement is foolish regardless of the type of event it is connected to. Imagine that there is a type of religious event, maybe one of the worship events that they used to have in the same spot by the river. Maybe there is a homeless drive that occurs in the same spot. Maybe the animal shelter is in the same spot. Now reread the warning about protesters as if it pertained to that event…

Does it sound like the promoters of that event are prioritizing reason? Are they concerned with sound justifications for their beliefs and choices? Does it sound like they are willing to submit to evidential support for what they are doing? Does it sound like a voice that is an asset to the community if their posture toward anyone who is not a part of them is indifference, ignorance, and passive-aggressive insults about attention-seeking and phony authority?

Why does this matter? If this is the measure for making important decisions about our lives (faith, personal identity, who to marry, whether to marry, how to view others, etc.), then a poor precedent is being set (especially with adolescents and young adults, as that makes the majority of those passing by). The possibility of reasonable dialogue is being shut off, possibly before it ever begins. And if this applies to gender and sexuality, you better believe that it will apply to countless other areas of life as well.

If they are insulated in this way, how will a person ever know if they are wrong? There is a phenomenon called the echo-chamber that is perpetuated by modern internet tracking and social media—and it will get worse before it gets better. This occurs when social media platforms and advertisers begin forming your online experience around the things that already fascinate you and/or with which you already agree. This leads to two different people having radically different perspectives about the weight of support regarding particular social, political, or faith-based issues. This is very unhealthy to anyone who is interested in cultivating a sound and truth-sensitive mind.

Those who organize the Pride events claim to be open and affirming… except when it comes to anything that disagrees with their sexual gratification or pro-Marxist ideologies. They claim to spread love in the community, but love with these contingencies is more of a cult-like social pressure. They claim to be open-minded, value all types of people, and do not want to put labels on anybody… unless it is an attention-seeking, closed-minded, hate-mongering, conservative or religious bigot who is only out to ruin your life by posturing their idiocy as expertise.

*Excuse me, how do we know that they are hateful and not loving? How do we know that they are idiots—if they are, wouldn’t it look good for our movement if we talk to them and expose how foolish their arguments are? If we have to dismiss all who are out here for attention, should we also disregard those who are over-sexually dressed, or over-the-top flamboyant, or, frankly, those of the drag variety? If dialoguing with someone affirms their unreasonable stance, then what happens when we dialogue together within our little subgroup? If debating is not a viable way to support one’s position, then what is—burying my head in the sand of sexual experimentation and identity confusion?*

That’s right: stay in your echo chamber; don’t ever bother with the thought that what you are thinking might be… wrong (gasp)!

Why would it be that engaging with people who disagree, even if it is a substantive debate, is a recipe for disaster? This is very much the type of insulating and brainwashing that keeps cults active. Essentially, this generation’s developing answer to finding truth and ethics is, if it feels good, is a personal choice, and if you can find some people to pat you on the back, then do it! Unfortunately, the same justifications have been used to support suicides and certain criminal behavior. Truth has become/ is becoming a matter of personal feelings. However, no level of personal feelings will cause a bridge to support your weight, your water to be drinkable, the sun to come up and nourish the earth, or your next breath to be what you need. The same level of objective truth goes for God. He is who He is, and His means of salvation do not change according to what one chooses to believe.

I would tell anyone of any faith to have good reasons for what they believe. I would give the same standard to pro-Pride folks. But, since their approach to evidence and reasonability is more emotion-based, with a cult-like closed-mindedness, I might have to first call them to listen and think about what’s reasonable. Like the cultists, they have to shift their paradigm for epistemology and ethics (meaning they have to change how they determine what’s true and good). It can’t be all about subjective feelings—especially those that are sexually charged. Because, wouldn’t we agree, those have a track record of destroying people?