You might not guess this from the frequency of my posts about alphabet ideology, but I favor a “live and let live” attitude regarding “alternative lifestyles.”

Even when I believe what others are doing is wrong or sinful, I try to stay out of other people’s business. “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”

I draw the line simply: if somebody harms others or society as a whole, it becomes my business. If a man wants to wear a dress, I think he is a mostly harmless weirdo. If he wants to displace women from sports, invade their spaces, or recruit children to his alternative lifestyle, then he is harming others.

The same is true for similar issues. I opposed gay marriage not because I wanted to keep gays from having permanent relationships that have legal boundaries and responsibilities–in fact, my view is that encouraging gay people to engage in monogamous coupling is far superior to the sybaritic lifestyles associated with gays in the 70s, or on display often enough in “pride” parades. That is why I supported civil unions.

On that issue I have changed my thinking a bit–I thought that protecting “marriage” as a sacred institution separate from the mere legal, contractual relationship was important; now I think we lost that battle in the 60s with no-fault divorce. Most Westerners have given up on marriage as sacred, unfortunately, and we are poorer as a society for it.

The fight against gay marriage wasn’t a battle to save sacramental unions because the idea had already died.

The recent move of the UK Methodist Church to drop gendered language in referring to married couples is yet another step down that road.

The Methodist Church of Great Britain is advising church leaders to avoid using "exclusionary" terms in order to make transgender and non-binary parishioners feel "included."

Among the now-discouraged words are "husband" and "wife."https://t.co/PNzhuvFI92

— ThePublica (@ThePublicaNow) January 1, 2024

The Methodist Church of Great Britain has completed a revision of its “Inclusive Language Guide” in an attempt to accommodate transgender and non-binary people. The new guidance urges ministers, deacons, and elders within the church to adopt more gender neutral terminology, such as “partner,” “child,” and “parent,” in lieu of traditional terms like “husband” and “wife.”

The initiative is reported to be part of an “ongoing commitment” by the Methodist Church to “eradicate potentially harmful language directed at marginalized groups.” The “Inclusive Language Guide,” which has been subject to biannual updates since its creation, now incorporates recommendations regarding gender identity.

Among the recommendations in the guide is that church leaders use the “preferred pronouns” of congregants, and share their own in order to create a “safe space.”

Further, the revised guide cautions against the use of conventional expressions like “brothers and sisters” while preaching in church, taking into account the presence of non-binary individuals within the community. This guidance extends beyond the clergy to congregants, urging the incorporation of personal pronouns in everyday conversations.

But among the more controversial changes includes a recommendation that church leaders avoid the use of the terms “husband” and “wife,” with the guidance reading: “There is infinite variety in the way that God’s creation is expressed in human life. This is worth bearing in mind as we speak and write. Terminology such as ‘husband’ and ‘wife’ may sound inoffensive but it makes assumptions about a family or personal life that is not the reality for many people.”

It continues: “The words ‘parent’, ‘partner’ and ‘child’ are a good place to start. ‘Carer’ is also a neutral yet understandable way to refer to the primary carer of a child, who may or may not be their parent.”

Mother, Father, sister, brother, husband, wife…these aren’t just words but embody deeply embedded concepts that define the basis of our social order and those of most cultures. They speak to a reality so fundamental to our being that wiping them away is another step along the path to wiping out family as an institution–which is precisely the point.

I am not exaggerating on this latter point; it really is where this movement is headed, and you can see this in the burgeoning movement to get kids to go “no contact” with their families in order to build a community with Queer culture. Teachers hiding things from parents, “sanctuary states,” alphabet ideology–all of them are rooted in cultural Marxism, which has always been hostile to the family.

The family is the enemy of Marxism because the primary relationship individuals are supposed to have is with the state, and the state is supposed to become the moral educator. That is why communist countries encourage children to spy upon and rat out their family members–the family is otherwise a bulwark against the complete ideological capture of the next generation.

I do not doubt that the Methodist Church leaders don’t understand the goal–they are likely just virtue signaling and displaying their “inclusiveness.” But such moves are an acid that corrodes the very foundation of society.

It is remarkable how quickly this movement has gained momentum. The movement toward cultural Marxism has been going on for over a century, but until recently, its progress has been slow. Now, it is lightning fast.

Our cultural decline reminds me of the saying about bankruptcy: it happens gradually, then all at once.

The idea is that the collapse has deep roots that go back a long way, but the collapse happens rapidly as all the tools you have to stave off the inevitable are exhausted.

I fear that we are near the “all at once” phase of cultural collapse.