Santorum's Surrender? by Joe Murray - (AgapePress) August 8, 2006 Category: Social Issues

HE CLEVER COMBATANT imposes his will on the enemy," wrote Sun Tzu, "but does not allow the enemy's will to be imposed on him." As the dust begins to settle on the battlefields that were home to a number of cultural skirmishes concerning the sanctity of marriage, one sees that the traditional marriage is forcing same-sex matrimony to retreat back into the closet from which it came. In July alone, six key court cases were decided -- all in favor of traditional marriage. New York, Washington, Georgia, Connecticut, Nebraska, Tennessee -- and yes, even Massachusetts -- delivered rulings that supported the sanctity of marriage in one form or another. Thus three years after homosexual activists took to the streets of the Castro District to celebrate the Supreme Court's declaration that sodomy was a fundamental right, it appears that the summer of 2006 will bring down the curtain on the "summers of sodomy" that preceded it. But is all lost for the homosexual movement? Have the hands of time been turned back as to erase all the good accomplished by Will & Grace? Will the love that dare not speak its name be forever muted? Not a chance. Enter Gender Public Advocacy Coalition (GenderPAC). GenderPAC, a group that describes its mission as promoting an "understanding of the connection between discrimination based on gender stereotypes and sex, sexual orientation, age, race, and economic status," has been on the prowl for a few years now attempting to tear down the societal barriers established by "gender roles." Translation -- this group seeks to rewrite the laws of nature, tamper with Mother Nature's recipe, and turn biblical gender standards on their heads. It also appears to be a front for the homosexual lobby. In order to accomplish their mission, GenderPAC has unleashed a number of politically correct weapons from its public relations arsenal; one of them being a "diversity statement" that is to be signed by all the federal lawmakers in Washington, DC. Since the "project" was conceived, GenderPAC has been roaming the halls of Congress seeking signatures at the bottom of its propaganda pledge. The pledge reads, "[t]he sexual orientation and gender identity and expression of an individual is not a consideration in the hiring, promoting or terminating of an employee in my office." Call it the Coco Peru clause. Not surprisingly, the liberal left has responded to this pledge like Teddy Kennedy at a happy hour. Counted among the signatories are the typical "A list" lineup from the Left -- Hillary Clinton, Chucky Schumer, John Kerry, and Russ Feingold. Also included, quite fittingly, are your Democrats in drag Republicans, such as Rhode Island's Lincoln Chafee. But just this past week GenderPAC announced a new member had arrived at their gender-neutral gala, a member who potentially outshines all the other signatories on the list. Who is this bell of the ball? Rick Santorum. Rick Santorum, the darling of the social conservatives and two-term senator clinging to his job like a shopper to a garment at a blue-light special, has signed the pledge guaranteeing that Ru-Paul's employment application is welcomed at his office; a pledge Arlen Specter has not even signed. In a single swoop of the pen, Santorum expunged the wisdom of Sun Tzu, and handed over the reigns of the debate to those he had been fighting for 12 years. Why? What does Rick Santorum have to gain by placing his John Hancock on this statement? Does he really think that the same homosexual lobby that has hitched its bandwagon to Bob Casey, Jr. is really going to mosey on over to the man who once compared the "fundamental right" of sodomy to incest and bestiality? Let's just say this author would not take those odds. Nevertheless, while Santorum's gains are known only to the disciples of Jeane Dixon, one thing can be ascertained -- what Santorum has cost his movement. The Buggery Blitzkrieg that started in 2003 came fast and furious. Not unlike the French of World War II, traditionalists were quickly overrun and astonished at the lightening-fast strike that came from the homosexual lobby. From Lawrence v. Texas to Gavin Newsom's weddings by the bay, traditionalists were overwhelmed by the war that was unleashed on them. Judge Marshall and her Massachusetts' Supremes added cover to the Buggery Blitzkrieg, permitting homosexual groups to go on the offensive, subvert the will of the people by way of the Judiciary, and force traditionalists to fight on the terms the homosexual lobby had established. But every blitzkrieg must meet its Battle of Britain, where its weakness is exposed and its tide reversed. What was the weakness of the Buggery Blitzkrieg? Despite its fast and furious assault, it could not undo the laws of nature. While it is true that the attack initially leveled the walls protecting the institutions established to foster traditional marriage, such accomplishments began to disappear as quickly as they came. At this point in American history, the people are not ready to toss out the fundamentals of our society -- at least not yet. The Buggery Blitzkrieg may have overrun society's institutions, but it was unsuccessful in winning society's heart. Thus, it was only a matter of time before the counteroffensive was successful. Recognizing this, homosexual activists are going back the basics. Just like every fanatical movement, setbacks equal a distraction, not a demise. Understanding that the battle for marriage will be a long-term struggle, Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry, recognizes that "[t]here's no marriage without engagement, and our job is to engage nongay people in this conversation." Stephanie Simon of the Baltimore Sun further reports: "[The homosexual lobby's] priority now is to step back and reintroduce themselves to America. After the recent setbacks, they see an urgent need to convince first the court of public opinion -- and then, they hope, more and more courts of law -- that their families are just like any other families, their children like any other children, their love just as deserving of official recognition." Hence, the blitzkrieg having failed, the new strategy embraces a Lifetime lobbying effort; thus bringing us back to Santorum. At a time when the American public was fleeing same-sex nuptials' cause like George Michael a London park, why would Santorum sign a propaganda pledge that bestows legitimacy to a cause Santorum has long fought? Why bolster your opponents at a time when you have them on the ropes? Why let the enemy impose his will on you? This author knows no answer to these questions; one hopes Santorum does. Joe Murray (jrm1835@gmail.com) is a civil rights attorney residing in New Jersey. Murray is a former staff attorney for the American Family Association and has also served as national director of correspondence for Patrick J. Buchanan's 2000 presidential bid. Murray has been a guest on numerous radio and television talk shows, including the O'Reilly Factor. More guest columns.