Like many of us, last week I came across news pieces covering “Star Trek” alum and homosexual activist George Takei’s racist rant against Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. The Justice’s dissenting opinion on the court’s same-sex “marriage” decision of a week ago apparently left Mr. Takei “seething.”
For the record, “dissenting opinion” means that Justice Thomas was on the side that lost.
I guess some people can’t even win gracefully. Even though the sodomites got their way, so to speak, Takei found it necessary to deliver his denunciation of Thomas, calling him a “clown in blackface” who “does not belong on the Supreme Court,” is “an embarrassment” and “a disgrace to America.”
Mr. Takei’s professed objection to the content of Justice Thomas’s opinion is immaterial, since he elected to mince into the gutter and have at it. To be fair to him regarding context, however: Part of the argument before the court held that the government would somehow be robbing homosexuals of their dignity – like slaves or segregated blacks, for example – by not “allowing” them to “marry.”
Thomas met that argument head on, addressing the nature of dignity. In short, he contended that even if the government or court was indeed denying some perceived benefit or right to homosexuals, the dignity of the individual or a segment of society (like slaves or segregated blacks) is in no way reliant upon the imprimatur of government.
In a sense, I’m not sure that Mr. Takei entirely understood what Justice Thomas was saying. In other words, Thomas may have been speaking a wee bit above Takei’s head. I’ve spoken with quite a few people in the last several days who independently considered this possibility based on the actor’s volatile response.
But I believe a larger factor was this: People such as Clarence Thomas are so reviled by the left that liberals interpret everything they say with an ear toward being offended. Takei wanted to take offense to what Thomas said, so he found offense in it – perhaps without even a full understanding of that to which he was taking offense.
Although what Takei said referencing Justice Thomas was undeniably bigoted, the aggregate of his statements provide insight into the liberal worldview, their sense of self-worth, and their feelings of entitlement.
Takei trotted out his progenitors’ experiences with internment during World War II, intimating that Thomas simply had no idea what it was to be from an oppressed minority group – whereas Takei himself, being a Japanese-American and a homosexual, certainly did, by golly. This, I believe was a straight-up case of the actor being blinded by narcissistic self-righteousness.
While I doubt he realized he’d done it, Takei also expressed the liberal-inculcated conviction that an individual’s self-worth most certainly is predicated upon other people’s perceptions. This occurs at a deeper level than simply being vain or overly concerned with one’s outer presentation. Giving personal power away is what the liberal con is all about; how else could their Marxist overlords enroll followers into victimhood and surrender?
I had a great deal of fun on social media last weekend over all this, I must say. After tweeting an apology of sorts in the general direction of Justice Thomas, George Takei then took to Facebook, where he embarrassed himself even more. I weighed in – which I seldom do with others’ pages on that site. Some sparks flew, but the majority of comments reflected disappointment and disgust on the part of many George Takei fans (or perhaps, former fans).
Certainly, most people saw the hypocrisy quite clearly: Here we had an arch-liberal homosexual activist openly disparaging a black Supreme Court Justice along racial lines. It didn’t even fit with Takei’s usually reserved deportment.
Nobody in the liberal establishment raised an eyebrow, and the press pretty much gave Takei a pass. In fact, the website for Fox affiliate KSAZ in Phoenix (which conducted the original interview) left out Takei’s anti-Thomas rant entirely in its text version, though it appeared in one of the accompanying videos.
So here’s my question for this week: Whatever happened to homosexuals simply wanting “equality,” not having to “hide in the shadows,” as they used to whine years ago?
I’ll tell you what happened: Leftist incrementalism happened. Later, “tolerance” became the catch phrase du jour. Then, it was “acceptance.” Fast-forward to 2015, and we have a member of this heretofore oppressed minority publicly declaring that the beliefs of another American disqualify him for his job.
Takei, the sodomite lobby, and the left at large are of course operating upon the premise that homosexuality is “normal and natural.” The determination of normalcy for every bizarre alphabet designation they contrive is completely arbitrary. The left decree them as “normal” because it legitimizes demonizing their opponents; biological convention and millennia of historical evidence that affirm homosexuality’s destructive effect upon societies be damned.
Finally, as we’ve heard floated by some on the left lately: Deviation from this new “truth” is not only bigoted, but reflects deviant mental processes – ones that could be remedied quite effectively in a re-education camp.
The “Gay Rights Movement” has never, ever been about the civil rights of America’s miniscule population of homosexuals. It is about conditioning people of faith (Christians, speaking tactically) into accepting State revision of their doctrine.
This would effectively make the State “god” in the operational sense – but that’s how it has always played out with communism.