I see that Joe Biden has appointed one Jessica Stern as the Department of State’s “special diplomatic envoy for LGBTQ rights.” The appointment says a lot about how his administration sees the world. It ain’t good.
Ms. Stern is certainly entitled to her viewpoint. She can publicly embrace allowing genetic males to compete in athletic contests against females. She can believe that pumping prepubescent children full of powerful hormone-altering drugs is okay. She can consider it fine to allow a child below what used to quaintly be called the “age of reason” to decide what gender it wishes to be, long term health and social repercussions notwithstanding.
But now, thanks to a president who may or may not be able to measure the consequences, she will be allowed to harangue the world about its ignorance and wickedness, should there be countries whose leaders and populations do not agree with her rather special point of view. Because those things and more have, courtesy of her appointment, become our national policy, and the naysayers be damned. Rhetorically, at least. The actual question of who is to be damned will be resolved later, by a judge from whose verdict there is no appeal. No, not John Roberts.
Objections aside, Ms. Stern’s appointment does raise a number of interesting observations about our leaders and their unflinching devotion to the ideals they say they possess.
First, if the general tenor of current Progressivism is to be believed, why should anyone, anywhere, pay any mind whatsoever to the ravings of the envoy of such an odious, oppressive, vicious, racist and homophobic state as these United States? One must have a scintilla of honor and goodness to be paid attention, and according to Mr. Biden’s party, America has none.
Second, if the relativism on which Progressivism depends to bend reality to its needs is true, why should anyone, anywhere, pay any mind to Ms. Stern’s criticisms? Are all cultures not equally valid? True, anyone who bothers to give a moment’s consideration to this point will see that they are not, but it is a desperate article of faith on the Left that they are. So what vindicates Ms. Stern’s disdain and demands her views prevail? Brute force, the instrument of tyrants?
Third, aren’t LGBTQ rights “human rights?” That’s the litany we’ve heard ad nauseum from the Human Rights Campaign and others of its ilk for years. So why not subsume these questions into the general rubric of “human rights,” as the ostensible purveyors have demanded? Would it be because Joe is trying for a twofer – sowing further division while seeking donations through pushing an agenda near and dear to some very well-heeled hearts? Pardon me, but both your groveling and your hypocrisy are showing…
Fourth,we’ve been at the business of trying to bring enlightenment – as our political class sees it – to the world’s great unwashed since the phrase “great unwashed” was invented, and before. To little effect because our audience sees no reason to alter their longstanding habits simply to suit the whims of a fussy busybody who demands that everyone think exactly as she does. By the way, that “she” is Columbia, not Ms. Stern. See “Afghanistan” for a result of our reforming impulses.
The whole business is risible and brings to mind a quip from Georges Clemenceau – Ms. Stern’s appointment marks a further point in America’s rush from barbarism to decadence, without an intervening period of civilization.
Humorous, but true. And a pity.
