That's such an outrageous statement, you can't say that. I just did and I can because I understand the far left like hardly any others do. First we have to understand exactly who the far left is, in this reference, and how they operate. The average registered Democrat voter is not the far left, most of them don't really agree with a lot of what's supported by the far left but they do often vote for leadership that they don't realize does agree with the agenda of the extreme left. Even some of the far left personalities on MSNBC or the “liberal” types that appear on Fox News Channel, they are not really the far left either. They're just followers in the progressive movement. The real far left aren't the media personalities you see talking the talking points are just the followers, the real far left are those who quietly, behind the scenes, write those talking points. They decide the present and future “intellectual” course the left-progressive movement takes.
For example, during the 2012 election both President Obama and Massachusetts Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren, both hard left Democrats, both gave their variations of those anti-business “you didn't build that” talking points. But here are the so-called intellectuals, that I wrote about shortly after, that wrote those “you didn't build that” talking points. The authors of those talking points were two far-left activists and writers named Brian Miller and Mike Lapham. Most among the public haven't heard of them, and others like them. But they, and others like them, are the key intellectuals from which these ideas are given voice and ultimately become more “mainstream” and acceptable for Democrat candidates to espouse.
The far left has been very well disciplined to know they can't get everything they want quickly, and know that their more radical ideas will take longer for them to get the public to accept. In the 1950s, ideas like same sex marriage or civil unions or even simply public acceptance of “civil rights” for homosexuals was far outside the mainstream, and even those progressives who favored these issues didn't publicly propose any of that. Opponents of these ideas said at the time that the far left would eventually propose them, for which they were ridiculed for saying, and they proved to be right. There were right, because even then, they understand how the far left operates.
Today the big push by the far left, on social issues, is for same-sex marriage, or as they quite slickly brand it now, “marriage equality.” After all, who can be against anything framed as an issue of “equality?” Marriage equality doesn't yet, but soon will, extend to those who desire ti live in polygamous relationship and have multiple wives. But the far left uses entertainment and culture to work to mainstream their radical ideas on social issues. That is why the producers of the Grammy Awards show this past month staged a mass same-sex marriage near the end of the awards show. This is why one of the cable channels has a program called “Sister Wives” that is about a man who has several wives and children with them. They seek to gain public acceptance of these “alternative” lifestyles by producing propaganda shows that sympathetically portray the people involved in these lifestyles. Millions watch them initially for the shock value, and then once hoodwinked, later watch them out of sympathy and support for the individuals involved. This where the format of so-called “reality” programming really fits well into this agenda. It's really not that much of a stretch that one of the cable networks will soon do a program depicting the hardships of those who like to have sexual relations with their pets, or seek to get married to their pets. After all, they can't be denied marriage equality either. The far left, ultimately, will oppose discrimination against anyone and anything they want, including pedophilia. “Inside the lives of pedophiles” may well soon be a new program on The Learning Channel. Don't be surprised.
Why does the far left, intellectually (if you can call it that) has to be totally against discrimination, therefore entirely indiscriminate, on everything? The answer is readily and quite brilliantly and profoundly explained by Evan Sayet's universal theory on modern liberals, the terms he uses to describe those on the far left. Evan Sayet years ago first explained this theory in a talk before the Heritage Foundation and since he's given several talks on it and he's authored a great book explaining it, titled KinderGarden of Eden: How the Modern Liberal Thinks.
To understand the theory, one really needs to listen to the speech fully and read the book. But I will summarize it briefly here. The modern liberal, as Sayet says, must be entirely indiscriminate, because to discriminate in any way is an act of bigotry, for the modern liberal. No lifestyle choice, or any other choice, can be condemned or disliked or discriminated against because that would be an act of bigotry or even a “hate crime.” So the modern liberal accepts, and demands acceptance of by others and equality for, any lifestyle choices or anything else that others desire. It literally means, anything goes. Anything that anyone calls a “marriage” will eventually come under “marriage equality.”
If this sounds so far fetched, it's not. One, because I understand the far left, and two, because I've already seen the future of the far left. The future of the far left was seen in the more verbose political platform that had been officially endorsed by the Libertarian Party in the 1980s and 1990s. The Libertarian Party (LP) has since officially ditched much of that platform because it politically embarrassed them, but they still support it privately. Simply put, the Libertarian Party is very free market-oriented on economic issues, but at the same time, they are far far extreme left on social issues. They are the cutting edge of where progressives would like to be, and eventually will be, on social and cultural issues. That's not to say all registered Libertarians support this, many of them do not, just as many Democratic voters do not support the far left of their party.
The LP supported repeal of age-of-consent laws in the states, that protect children and criminalize pedophilia, because they saw them as age discrimination. They had clear language in their platform calling for repeal of all laws that discriminate on the basis of age. The LP also had a “children's right” platform that asserted children have all the rights of adults, including an explicit “sexual rights” for children plank that even mentioned abortion and birth control. This was decades before the left asserted abortion and birth control rights in their phony “war on women” attack on the right. This platform fully supported children having the rights of adults, and was completely in line on those issues with the agenda supported by the pedophile-rights organization, The North American Man-Boy Love Assocation (NAMBLA).
In some instances, including in San Francisco during the 1980s and 1990s, Libertarian organizations actually shared office spaces with NAMBLA. One LP member in California, when this issue was discussed on the Libertarian Party list-server in 1999 and 2000, admitted to seeing NAMBLA brochures and information in the same office physically shared by the Libertarian Party of San Francisco and the libertarian-oriented organization, the International Society for Individual Liberty (ISIL). Additionally, when NAMBLA was founded in Massachusetts, Libertarian Party members from that state were involved.
But the LP and associated Libertarian movements didn't just support this agenda, they doubled down on their efforts to advance this agenda. The libertarian movement, with support from the LP, created an entirely separate organization to advance their support of the NAMBLA “youth rights” agenda called Americans for a Society Free from Age Restrictions (ASFAR). ASFAR opposes all laws based on age and supports repealing them, including age-of-consent laws. This is perfectly congruent with NAMBLA's agenda, hard line Libertarian doctrine, and also the ultimate logical conclusion of the far left views on sexual rights and respect for all forms of human relationships.
Remember how the left operates. When they believe there is sufficient public support for parts of the their agenda, they will promote and push for those parts of the agenda. When they believed enough citizens were okay with homosexuality, they began to promote civil rights for homosexuals. Soon that expanded to all who fall under the broad categories of “lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgendered” individuals, or LGBT for short. Maybe after a few more seasons of brainwashing the public with the likes of “Sisters Wives,” the far left will call for legalizing of polygamy. How can they oppose that, after all they say marriage is an evolving paradigm and full marriage equality must also include those who want to have multiple spouses. The logic is unimpeachable, if you're a progressive and fully support the indiscriminate ideology of the modern liberal as Evan Sayet explains it.
After polygamy, and the repeal of age-of-consent laws, the idea that it's okay that one of more of the spouses be minors, will gain acceptance on the far left. Then support for legalized pedophilia will be next. See, it's not so outrageous a claim. The really will, eventually, call for the legalizing of pedophilia. Even the American Psychiatric Association, which had published the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (the “bible” of the psychiatric profession) that included a classification of pedophilia as a “sexual orientation” later backed down to public backlash by calling pedophilia a “sexual interest” instead. But it's clear what was intended, and don't be surprised to see future efforts to declassify pedophilia as a mental disorder, as the APA was once pressured in the 1970s by the homosexual political movement to declassify homosexuality as a mental disorder after decades of recognition, based on science, of it as a mental disorder.
Don't be surprised when the far left promotes legalizing pedophilia. Where do you draw the line? For the far left, ultimately there is line or need to draw one. Literally, anything goes. Many of us want that line drawn, and this whole agenda of perversity of the far left stopped, by continuing the thousands of years old tradition as defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. The far left is destroying that and has far more targeted for destruction, in their cultural war for anything goes.
Did you know there is a facebook group of Hillary supporters that has 54,000 members in it? Could we get at least 20,000 that support Ted Cruz for president instead? Join our Ted Cruz in 2016 Facebook group!
If you don't support Cruz, please help us reach 54,000 members in the group we created to defeat the extreme far left, please join our new facebook group: Stopping Tyrannical Oppressive Progressives.
If you liked this article, please join Dean's facebook group to read more articles like it.
Visit the Conservative OPEN FORUM and click the LIKE button to join our new conservative community to help save the country from the extreme far left!
Stay on the right side of issues, visit my QstarNews Facebook page and like it and share it here
Outraged at how Barack Obama is destroying America? Join Us Here to oppose Obama!
The ultimate group for Rush Limbaugh fans: Realville on Facebook!
Join our new Facebook group: Stopping Tyrannical Oppressive Progressives