Lines, Vectors and Morality

Geometry always made more sense to me than any other branch of mathematics.  I’m weird, I know, but in the tenth grade, I fell in love with triangles, parallelograms, squares and proofs.  Little did I realize, however, that there was any connection between geometry and morality.  But this past week which brought us news of our president “evolving” to a new position on same-sex marriage suddenly brought back to me some fundamentals of geometry.  The more I thought about it, the scarier it became.  

Briefly, the point, or a particular location in space, is the basic component of geometry.  The line is the shortest distance between two fixed points.  It has a beginning and an ending which makes it finite.  A line is predictable, definable and enclosed.  A vector is the same as a line except that it has a fixed point on one end but stretches out to infinity on the other.  It is unpredictable, indefinable and open.  End of geometry lesson. 

Some would say that the president drew a line that started with heterosexual marriage and ended with homosexual marriage, a simple shifting of the definition of marriage from one point to another.  “Not to worry,” they say.  “We’re going to be fine.  We’ve just evolved to a more inclusive, more sensitive, more understanding position that truly reflects the reality of human nature.  Everything will go on as before, only better for everyone.” 

Not so fast, I say.  It may have started with the marriage between a man and a woman, but I do not believe it will end with the marriage between two men or two women.  No, Mr. President.  You did not draw a line.  You drew the front end of a vector, and you have no idea of where it will end.  Strictly speaking, you did not begin the vector.  It began long before your administration.  Your announcement, however, gave legitimacy and momentum to the GLBT agenda, and opened a Pandora’s box.  Things will never be the same. 

To prove my point (no pun intended), let’s look at the homosexual agenda as it began and has now cut a swath through the highest office in the land.  I remember the Life Magazine story in the 1960’s about the homosexual movement as it began in the San Francisco area.  Photos of gay men sitting together and appearing in what was then considered very effeminate dress and poses ignited a firestorm of debate.  San Francisco became the symbolic home of the new, liberated lifestyle, but it was not contained there.  It was a subculture in the modern era that suddenly burst into the open. 

Take note of the progress.  My timeline might be off, but, essentially, the developments followed this path.  More homosexuals came out of the closet.  The DSM-II, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders dropped homosexuality as a mental disorder.  The public school curriculum began to include sex education with specific teaching and information about homosexuality as normal behavior.  In many states and communities civil rights laws were specifically worded to ban discrimination against gay citizens.  Hollywood movies and television shows began to include gay men and women as characters in their productions.  Now, plots and themes revolve around the plight of homosexuals. The military adopted a policy of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to create space for homosexuals.  Some states passed laws to allow homosexuals to get married.  The list goes on.  At any one of these junctures, a point could have been fixed to mark the end of the line.  It wasn’t and it won’t.  It’s not a line.  It’s a vector.  

Gay marriage is not the end of a line of developments; it is only the current point through which the vector is now moving.  What’s ahead?  Enforced hiring policies which will require churches and religious institutions to hire homosexual employees?  A ban on speaking against homosexuality from pulpits or in media outlets?  States revoking ministerial licenses to perform marriages if such clergy will not consent to marry gay couples?  Quotas of homosexual teachers, guidance counselors, doctors and nurses (if Obamacare survives), boy scout and girl scoutmasters, sports coaches and all other institutions or associations that employ persons of authority?  Required sensitivity training?  Required psychological testing that will probe for homosexual tendencies in all children and students so that they will not be denied affirmation in pursuing their natural urges?  

Even more, will there be a further expansion in the definition of marriage to include multiple partners?  Will pedophilia become legal?  Will all limits come off of pornography in the media?  (A New York City court has just ruled that it is not illegal to view child porn.)  

I suppose some people who read this will think I am a shrill lunatic who is just trying to stir up hatred and bigotry against homosexuals.  Be that as it may, I do think that what I have written here is a legitimate opinion that needs to be expressed.  The truth is that this movement is not static.  It will not reach a state in which its goals are sated until its leaders seize total control of the moral reins of this nation.  They got a huge boost this week from the president towards that goal.  I am not deluded into thinking that this is all they want and it will stop here.  

What can we do about this vector?  It will be up to us who believe in traditional marriage.  We can slow it down, we can impede its progress at every turn, but we cannot wipe it out.  Thomas Jefferson said, “The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.”  So it is with us.  We cannot fall asleep on the job.  But, the history of mankind has always been a struggle, and each generation has fought to preserve something for the succeeding generation.  We have already lost much in this war.  Marriage is a fundamental building block of a stable society. Let us not lose this battle.