"LGBT is here to stay. Get over it" — No, We Shouldn't. Here's Why

I have so many people who have said to me "There is no point in
fighting this LGBT agenda. There is no point in fighting gay marriage. That
horse has left the barn. That ship has sailed."

Well, imagine if pro-life advocates had been that cynical and
self-defeating after Roe v. Wade in 1973? That perverse decision was rendered
by a lop-sided 7-2 majority, devoid of legal argument or scientific fact. From
that moment on, the Pro-Life Movement was born, and it has grown considerably.
Today, the Pro-Life Generation is younger, more active, more militant than
ever. They don't back off, cave in, or run away from the fight for life!

 It's important to remember that both major political parties were
pro-choice. Richard Nixon was pro-choice, and so was Gerald Ford. Before he ran
for President, Ronald Reagan was pro-choice. What changed? Within seven years
of Roe v. Wade, the Christian Coalition rose up and changed politics in this
country. They prodded Reagan to be pro-life, and they have accomplished far
more in making President Donald J. Trump the most pro-life President in our
nation's history!

Now, let's look at the LGBT agenda, and the arguments which
precipitated this movement.

In 1986, the Supreme Court ruling in Bowers v. Hardwick upheld
anti-sodomy laws because according to the majority, there is no constitutional
right to sodomy. That was a 5-4 decision, and one of the justices in the
majority later regretted his vote because he did not "known" any
homosexuals. What does personal affection or affiliation have to do with
constitutional principles? The key arguments for striking down the anti-sodomy
statutes focused on right to privacy and "Live and Let Live", i.e. a
libertarian argument. That approach failed.

From that point forward, the LGBT lobby focused on arguments from a
civil rights perspective, i.e. "I was born this way." If someone is
born gay, then it would be such aggravated bigotry to punish someone for
"being gay". That would be so cruel, right?

Here's the fundamental problem with that argument: that's a total lie.
No one is "born that way." The growing scientific evidence affirms
tihs recognition. Just as in 1973, the general public wrongly believed that the
human being inside the mother's womb was not a living being, so too today the
general public has been believing a falsehood, that people are genetically
endowed, determined toward homosexual activity. The growing body of evidence on
this subject is confirming that homosexual conduct is not innate, genetic, or
inherent. Even LGBT activists themselves are slowly conceding this fact.

If the Pro-Life Movement could proceed with the truth and slowly but
surely change the minds of the public to embrace pro-life policies, so too
should we in the pro-family movement fight for pro-family outcomes. Yes, we can
envision a country where false marriage and the natural bonds of matrimony are
restored. Yes, we can see a country where attitude about homosexual conduct and
the ideology attached to it are rejected.

The Obergefell decision, which imposed false marriage on this country,
was more fraught than the Roe v. Wade decision, with four compelling dissenting
opinions. The dissenting opinions accurately point out the legal, moral, as
well as biological flaws with granting false marriage as a constitutional
right. Once again, the Wisdom of the Aged, the learning of our elders, was
correct in their rejection of abortion and homosexuality.

This is a fight which can we be won, just as President Ronald Reagan
envisioned in 1969 that the Berlin Wall would disappear, and then in the 1980's
that Communism would be consigned to the ash-heap of history. We should not
just throw up our collective hands with the excuse "The horse has left the
barn."