Tyranny of the Self

The Equality Act and the Looming Tyranny of the Self – Part 1

Rick Plasterer on March 24, 2021

The sexual revolution is poised to wipe away any religious freedom against sexual license with two acts: the Equality Act (H.R. 5), and a follow up Do No Harm Act (H.R. 1450). Together with the campaign against “conversion therapy,” the meaning of which  is being radically expanded to cover any expression of traditional sexual morality, both words and actions in accord with God’s commands in Scripture against sexual immorality will be forbidden. Unsurprisingly, as reviewed in a recent article, this legislation is opposed by religious groups holding to an orthodox, historic understanding of their faith, and supported by religious groups advancing a post-1960s, revisionist understanding.

It might be called a sexual dictatorship, but as has been noted before, transgenderism abolishes sex by making it self-defined (it is “violence” to classify someone against their will). The true violence, of course, is advancing self-will against reality. Thus, what is happening is more properly described as a tyranny of the self. The “dignity” that is endlessly claimed is based not on who we are, but who we say we are.

The dictatorial self will be groomed by the entertainment industry, the educational system, and social media to see itself as preeminently sexual, and valorize the latest sexual identity trends as sources of meaning and hope and pleasure.  

As noted in earlier articles, the claim of civil rights for sexual behavior involves the impossible project of conflating people with their behavior. Personal behavior and inclination simply cannot be free and equal. Complete anarchy would prevail, with no question of “harm,” because there can be no adverse judgment (discrimination) against a protected category. The instability of the “LGBT” initialism, with varying letters added to it, and sometimes a plus sign, shows this.

Instead of any principled argument from liberty or equality, what has happened is that the religious and popular condemnation of homosexuality has been judged cruel on the basis of liberal sensibility and made into a civil rights category. Our nation’s long history of religious freedom and liberty of conscience would reasonably mandate exemption from complicity in homosexual (and now transgender) behavior. The First Amendment’s protection of the “free exercise of religion,” which its principal author, James Madison, explained includes action as well as belief, would reasonably mandate the same thing, however pained or offended anyone is. But the point for LGBT liberation is not civil rights, but the destruction of traditional sexual morality. Therefore with skilled and seasoned legal support, and few exceptions, such as the Masterpiece Cakeshop decision, declining complicity in homosexual or transgender behavior has been judged discrimination against persons.

The bill’s radical scope is clearly stated (Sec. 3 (a)(2)(c)(4)) as prohibiting “discrimination or segregation in public accommodations” based on sexual orientation and gender identity – and as commonly interpreted by the courts, including discrimination against associated personal behaviors – in:

“any establishment that provides a good, service, or program, including a store, shopping center, online retailer or service provider, salon, bank, gas station, food bank, service or care center, shelter, travel agency, or funeral parlor, or establishment that provides health care, accounting, or legal services.”

and Sec. 3 (a)(2)(c)(5):

“any train service, bus service, car service, taxi service, airline service, station, depot, or other place of or establishment that provides transportation service.”

In addition to requiring complicity in sin on the part of individuals employed in any of these activities, it also presumably affects churches, other houses of worship, or religious organizations who offer educational, medical, or charitable services to the general public. Apparently legal service organizations such as the Alliance Defending Freedom, First Liberty Institute, and others which defend Christians against the LGBT agenda would be required to offer their services without discrimination against LGBT behavior. And since most religious services are open to the public, it has to be wondered if even churches would be bound by the LGBT antidiscrimination provisions.

One aspect of the Equality Act that people may not be thinking of is that it is not merely a national sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) law. The old state SOGI laws passed in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, where they existed, had fairly generous exemptions for religious organizations. The Equality Act has none, and repeals the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) where it might apply to the Equality Act.

The central misrepresentation of the bill was well stated by Alphonso David, President of the Human Rights Campaign, the leading national advocate for the LGBT movement. He told the Senate Judiciary Committee that “all we are asking for is the same protections under law that should be guaranteed to every single person in this nation.” It is this kind of rhetoric that wins casual listeners to support SOGI legislation. It is absolutely wrong. The LGBT movement is in fact asking that their personal behavior and self-definition be privileged as no one else’s is. One may refuse complicity in military activities or hunting, but not in homosexuality or transgenderism, according to the proposed law. The bill’s Orwellian name thus sells the public on perpetrating gross inequality in law in the name of equality.

The act of course ends (against religious liberty) the years’ long conflict over the rights of bakers, florists, photographers, and any others serving the public who are required facilitate homosexual (or now transgender) behavior. Christian educational, medical, and charitable institutions would have to retain on staff or consider for hiring persons who violate their doctrines.

The inclusion of transgenderism in the bill (now the cutting edge of the moral revolution) compounds the inequality. As noted above, transgenderism abolishes sex, making “male” and “female” arbitrary words, and establishing transgenderism as an antidiscrimination category requires everyone to act (and perhaps speak, although it violates the First Amendment) according to the wishes of a small, but ubiquitous (and likely growing) group of persons. Women are abolished as a legal category, destroying women’s sports, with sporting events now won by biological males. All rest rooms and other spaces reserved for women would be opened to men, including homeless shelters for abused women. Female prison inmates will not be safe. They have already been subjected to the presence of criminal biological males, resulting in a number of cases of rape. 

To replace real, biological sex with subjective feelings about who one is and mandating that people accept and act on this in public life is, as Emilie Kao of the Heritage Foundation recently observed, not the result of new scientific discoveries or thoughtful public debate. It is a radical and coercive decree, which amounts to “gaslighting reality.”  It is, as a recent article by this writer reviewed, a replacement of reason with raw will.

Merely to discuss any part of the act seems to be a “parade of horribles.” Subsequent articles will spell out in greater detail the proposed legislation’s consequences and philosophy.

  1. Comment by Pirate Preacher on March 24, 2021 at 2:29 pm

    “Colorado baker Jack Phillips back in court after refusing to make gender transition cake”
    https://www.christianpost.com/news/colorado-baker-jack-phillips-back-in-court-for-cake-refusal.html

    Once (H.R. 5) and (H.R. 1450) become law the the experience of Cap’n Jack “Tha Cake Baker” Phillips ‘ill be tha plight of all who sail under tha banner of Skipper and his Sun. Tha armada that be closing in ‘ill take no prisoners. Be a fight ter tha finish, ya may lay ter that.

  2. Comment by David on March 25, 2021 at 6:27 am

    “Seventy percent of Americans support same-sex marriage, according to the 11th annual American Values Survey, the highest percentage recorded by a major national poll. The results, released Monday, found just 28 percent of respondents oppose the right of gay couples to wed.

    Approval crossed the political divide, with majorities of Democrats (80 percent) and independents (76 percent) supporting same-sex marriage, and 50 percent of Republicans, according to the poll conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) in partnership with the Brookings Institution.

    Most major religious denominations back marriage equality, too, including white mainline Protestants (79 percent), Hispanic Roman Catholics (78 percent), religious non-Christians (72 percent) Hispanic Protestants (68 percent), white Catholics (67 percent), Black Protestants (57 percent) and other Christian denominations (56 percent).

    White evangelicals stood out as the only denomination where a majority opposed same-sex marriage, 63 percent to 34 percent. Support decreased among this group, according to PRRI, which found 41 percent of white evangelicals supported gay marriage in a 2019 survey.” NBC News, Oct. 2020.

    Following the 1964 Civil Rights Act, there was case brought by a man who sought exemption from the provision that all persons, including Blacks, must be served because it violated his religious beliefs. The courts did not give credence to this claim. The use of religion to support bad things cannot be ignored. From the poll mentioned, Evangelicals are becoming more removed from general public opinion.

  3. Comment by Steve on March 25, 2021 at 2:11 pm

    There will be no recognition of homosexual unions or marriage by the Roman Catholic Church. It is non-negotiable. The Anglican Church in North America recently said the same thing. Scripture is clear, no sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman in marriage.

    https://virtueonline.org/vatican-and-acna-slam-door-homosexual-marriage

    The post that states “most major religious denominations back marriage equality” and goes on to include the Catholic Church is clearly way off the mark.

  4. Comment by Jeff on March 25, 2021 at 11:28 pm

    “Seventy percent of Americans support same-sex marriage, according to the 11th annual American Values Survey &etc &etc yadda yadda…”

    Well golly whoop, David! Guess I could agree with them on the queering of the church, but then I’d be wrong too!

    Ten percent, seventy percent, ninety-nine point nine nine nine percent… the number really doesn’t matter, David. Sin is still sin; abomination is abomination, unrighteousness is unrighteousness, perverted is perverted, sick is sick, regardless of WHAT percent practice it. I’d rather be on what you progs call “the wrong side of history” than to be on the wrong side of GOD’s commandments. Even if I’m the very last one!

  5. Comment by Douglas on March 26, 2021 at 4:36 am

    Marriage equality is Newspeak. Sodomy is never promoted anywhere in Scripture. Jesus Christ didn’t die for us to promote tolerance . Leftism destroys everything.

  6. Comment by Rick Plasterer on March 26, 2021 at 7:56 pm

    David,

    “Following the 1964 Civil Rights Act, there was case brought by a man who sought exemption from the provision that all persons, including Blacks, must be served because it violated his religious beliefs. The courts did not give credence to this claim. The use of religion to support bad things cannot be ignored. From the poll mentioned, Evangelicals are becoming more removed from general public opinion.”

    To state the obvious, religious freedom means nothing if the government can judge what “good” and “bad” religious beliefs and practices are. Freedom, as I have said many times, means nothing if it can be set aside when people are offended or pained. Jack Phillips and all others I know of who have been dragged into court have consistently said they are perfectly willing to serve LGBT identifying people, but not to facilitate sinful behavior. This cannot be done according to Scripture (Matt. 18:7, as I have cited often before).

    Christians, Jews, and Muslims have no good basis in terms from their religious texts for practicing racial discrimination. If they did, it should stand in court.

    But in any case, the duty of everyone, which faithful Christians will not deviate from, is to obey God, not the government or public opinion.

    Rick

  7. Comment by George on March 26, 2021 at 10:25 pm

    So are we to reshape our religious beliefs by what secular poles dictate ? Poles which are run by those with an agenda ? Someone recently said that “God uses good and bad uses God.” I suppose that depends on what your definition of good and bad are and for what purpose God intends to use either .

  8. Comment by David on March 27, 2021 at 12:04 pm

    Well, the Bible is morally wrong on slavery and genocide by modern standards. There is no reason for us to lower ourselves to the level of the Bronze Age or whatever. Why can there not be other areas where there is moral error?

  9. Comment by floyd lee on March 27, 2021 at 4:59 pm

    An excellent article. This nation has clearly forgotten God, which is precisely what both Ben Franklin and Abe Lincoln warned this backslidden nation NOT to do.

    This fact is easily proven by the existence of the misnamed, poisonous “Equality Act.” Are you a Christian? Are you a Non-Christian? Are you Straight? Are you Gay? Then deal with THIS reality: The odious Equality Act clearly promises to destroy YOUR personal Religious-Freedom, ***regardless of your favorite label.***

    America’s gonna get hurt, as soon as Joe Biden signs that corrosive mess into law. And there’s NO guarantee that the Supremes will save America’s bacon on this one.

  10. Comment by Search4Truth on March 27, 2021 at 7:55 pm

    David, I’d love to hear you argue that when you meet God face to face.

  11. Comment by Douglas on March 27, 2021 at 9:10 pm

    So glad to know that we are past the Bronze age genocide and slavery.sarc.

  12. Comment by George on March 27, 2021 at 9:44 pm

    Did you say the Bible is morally wrong by modern standards? Standards ? What standards are those ? From what I see around the world and in our own country, there are no standards. What’s good today is bad tomorrow and what is bad today is good tomorrow. Those are not standards. This is satin doing what he does best and we are told we must accept it.

  13. Comment by Steve on March 28, 2021 at 10:53 am

    I missed the part of the New Testament that was morally wrong on slavery and genocide. Perhaps the poster who incessantly suggests that to be the case could enlighten us?

The work of IRD is made possible by your generous contributions.

Receive expert analysis in your inbox.