The present furor over transgenders and bathrooms is not really about alleged discrimination. It is actually a war against nature itself and the establishment of a new social order based on this denial of nature.
The goal of feminists and homosexual activists is an attempt to destroy the concept of male and female and restructure society away from this reality. They do not accept a person’s sex is immutably assigned at birth. They claim that such an understanding of gender is an artificial social construct. Rather, they believe the individual may “self-identify” as a member of the opposite sex or any number of up to 58 genders recently invented.
These activists work with determination to remake society into their own image and likeness. They strive to criminalize any dissent from their new vision.
For example, New York City’s human rights commission says it will fine New York employers and landlords up to $250,000 for refusing to call a transgender person ‘ze’ or ‘hir’.
Transgender activist Riki Wilchins says that activists must advocate “blowing up binary.” Wilchins writes in the homosexual magazine The Advocate, “What really needs to be contested here is not just our right to use bathrooms with dignity (which would personally be very welcome), but the entire underlying hetero-binary structure of the world queers must inhabit.”
When Wilchins uses the term “hetero-binary” or even “binary” he means a world in which heterosexuality is the norm given by nature itself, which only has two sexes – male and female, assigned to each person at birth.
“This is a real struggle,” Wilchins continues, “and queer activists have been talking about it at least since the 1970s of Gay Liberation, even as the movement it spawned has continued to nudge it aside. All of which is to say, transgender advocates and their allies are doing incredible work.
But they have finally and perhaps unwittingly opened the gender Pandora’s Box, and over the next few years all sorts of unexpected non- binary things … are about to come popping out.”
Commenting on Wilchins, conservative writer Rod Dreher notes, “[T]hey [transgender activists] want to destroy the concepts of male and female entirely. This is what they’re after, and they’re not going to stop until it is accomplished. If you think the federal courts or Democratic administrations are going to stop it, you have a lot more faith than I do in the moral sanity of American elites.”
Michaelangelo Signorile, journalist and homosexual activist, likewise speaks plainly about the movement’s aim, which is the destruction of the family:
“The goal of the homosexual movement is: to fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits, and then, once this is achieved, to completely redefine the institution of marriage, not to demand the right to marriage as a way to bind ourselves to society’s morals, but to debunk a myth and turn an age-old institution on its head … The subversive act that gays and lesbians are undertaking … is the idea of completely changing the family.”
Along the same lines, Peter Sprigg, Senior Fellow for Policy Studies at the Family Research Council explained, “The long-term goals of many LGBT activists are actually not just access to the restrooms of their preferred gender identity, but actually destroy the concept of gender or the separation of gender altogether.”
A Global Revolution
Much of this homosexualist revolution is documented in the superb book by Catholic sociologist Gabrielle Kuby, The The Global Sexual Revolution, Destruction of Freedom in the Name of Freedom. Kuby spotlights what is called “gender mainstreaming” and warns, “We are contemporaries of a cultural revolution that reaches into every home and heart.”  She continues, “never before has there been an ideology that aims to destroy the gender identity of man and woman and every ethical standard of sexual of moral behavior. This ideology is called gender mainstreaming.”
Kuby decries this new ideology as a kind of totalitarianism and paints an accurate picture of the present state of disorder.
“Today, anyone in the political, academic, media, or even ecclesiastical realm who brings forth reasons why the sexual act belongs exclusively with the marital relationship between a man and a woman, and should be be open to conceiving children, puts himself at risk. Anyone who scientifically discusses the risks and consequences of non- heterosexual behavior, or at-out opposes sexual deregulation, opens himself up to becoming a social pariah. He may be excluded from public discourse, stigmatized with obscenities, lose his professional position, harassed in many ways by interest groups, or otherwise discriminated against. In Germany [the author ’s home country] demonstrations on behalf of family values need heavy police protection. Criminalization through anti-discrimination laws and punishable offense such as ‘homophobia’ and ‘hate speech’ is already a reality in some countries and is being promoted globally.”
This neo-pagan cultural revolution encompasses the powerful forces for population control, feminism, abortion (euphemistically called “reproductive rights”), homosexualty and gender mainstreaming. As Mrs. Kuby documents extensively, the United Nations, the European Union, countless NGOs and other powerful groups advance this new system worldwide. These groups receive millions of dollars to promote this agenda. NGOs actually monitor nation-states for compliance of pro-homosexual, “anti- discrimination” laws. The groups influence governments, judicial systems, education, media and more.10 They work to permeate every vestige of society with their radical program, including the sexualization and ‘de-genderiation’ of children (including programs that encourage young boys to wear nylons).
In the United States, the two most prominent politicians who promote this agenda are Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, and the agenda is effectively part of the Democratic Party platform.
Hillary Clinton, during her term as Secretary of State, is on record favoring the gender-abstract terms “Parent 1” and “Parent 2” in place of “Father” and “Mother” on passports and other documents.
Obama, long time advocate of homsexualist issues, made headlines on May 13, 2016, when he decreed mandatory transgender-ready, mixed- sex bathrooms and locker rooms in all public schools. Comply, demands Obama, or the school will be stripped of federal funding.
Lifesite’s Ben Johnson noted the most under- reported danger wrapped in Obama’s decree:
- “School districts must allow biological males and females to spend the night together in the same hotel room or eld trips;
- “Colleges must let men who say they are trangendered be roommates with one or more woman; and
- “School officials cannot even tell those young women or their parents in advance that their new roommate is a man, without risking a federal lawsuit.”
Once again, Obama’s edict has little do to with correcting alleged discrimination. It has everything to do with advancing a poisonous cultural revolution that tramples natural law, divine law, and the rights of anyone who stands in its way.
Likewise, new bathroom policies at Target stores and other establishments are enacted either due to intense pressure from homosexualist groups or because the corporations see pandering to transgenderism as the wave of the future.
Gender mainstreaming follows the theories of pseudo academics such as Judith Butler who is hailed as a pioneer of gender theory.
Gabriele Kuby sums up Butler’s gender theory as follows: There are no such things as “men” and “woman” One’s sex is only a fantasy, something we accept because we here it constantly repeated. Biological sex – the sex assigned us at birth – represents a “dictatorship of nature” against a person’s self-definition, a dictatorship from which one must be freed. Gender is not associated with the sex assigned to us at birth, which plays no role because it is merely created by language, and created by what the person repeatedly hears. “There is no masculine or feminine being, but only a certain performance, that is, behavior that can change at any time.”
Butler also teaches there should be no taboo on incest – saying the taboo is the cause of ‘phantasm’ of gender identity as man or woman and of the taboo against homosexuality. Both taboos must be abolished.
Not only must we eliminate concepts such man, woman, father, and mother, but:
“Societies heterodox ‘signatures’ must be eliminated in all spheres. Man and woman, marriage and family, father and mother, sexuality and fertility are not deemed natural; rather, it is claimed, they establish a hegemony of men over women and of heterosexuality over all other forms of sexuality. This must be destroyed at its roots.”
How does the world react to Butler’s radical theories? With lavish praise, prestigious awards, and mountains of cash.
Butler received a Guggenheim Fellowship in 1999, a Rockefeller Fellowship in 2001, and the Yale University Brudner prize in 2004 for special achievement in “lesbian and gay studies.” Butler went on to receive the Andrew M. Mellon Award in 2008, “which is endowed with $1.5 million and is meant to enable its recipients to teach and do research under favorable conditions.”
Butler was awarded the 50,000 euro Theodor W Adorno Prize in 2012 and received an honorary doctorate in from the Swiss University in Fribourg in 2014 for her political involvement especially for the rights of homosexuals. She has been a visiting professor at Columbia University since 2012.
“Most remarkable of all,” writes Kuby, “is that the ‘subversive theory of Judith Butler, along with the theories of her masters and comrades in arms, is welcomed by the world’s academic elites – and implemented by them.”
Gender theory, such as that advanced by Butler, is rampant on college and university campuses.
This brave new world falls under the condemnation of Isaiah who warned, “Woe to those who call good evil and evil good.” (Isaiah 5:20)
Worse, the perverse revolution actually imitates the working principles that make up the Social Kingship of Christ.
Every Vestige of Society
The Social Kingship of Christ is a bedrock doctrine of the Catholic Faith not subject to change. To put in simple language, it is the truth that States, governments, and social institutions must base their laws of right and wrong on what the Gospel teaches is right and wrong and on what Christ’s Holy Church teaches is right and wrong. Any other way is out of order. Our Lord Himself said, “Without Me, you can do nothing.” (John 15:5)
The Social Kingship of Christ also strives to permeate every vestige of society with the beautiful truths of Christ and His Church and its moral law.
At the Second Vatican Council, our Church leaders abandoned the Social Kingship of Christ for the new program of “dialogue with the world,” that shrinks from advancing the truth that the world must conform to Christ. Such an approach may make the bishop’s life easier, but the result is detrimental to the Church and to souls. This dialogue is one in which world calls the shots, directs the program, and consistently emerges victorious.
The gender revolution apes what Catholic churchmen should do. The homosexualist movement does not content itself with requesting an equal place at the table but ultimately insists on dominance that seeks to permeate and influence every vestige of society. We face, as Kuby warns, “a cultural revolution that reaches into every home and heart.”
More than 120 years ago, the great Cardinal Pie of Poitiers explained the importance of the Social Kingship of Christ. He noted that Christ’s presence and influence must permeate every vestige of society in order for Christianity and Christian civilization to survive:
“So long as Christ does not reign over nations, His influence over individuals remains superficial and precarious. If it is true that the work of the apostolate consists in the conversion of individuals and that nations as such do not go to heaven, but souls, one by one, we must not forget that the individual members of society lives under the never-ceasing influence of his environment, in which, if we may not say that he is submerged, he is, at least, deeply plunged.”
Cardinal Pie observed, in other words, that it is not so much the Sunday sermons that a man hears, but the environment in which he lives that will have the greatest impact on his life. The Cardinal continues:
“If the environment is non-Catholic, it prevents him from embracing the faith or, if he has the faith, it tends to root out from his heart every vestige of belief. If we imagine Catholic social institutions with Our Lord no longer living in the hearts of individual members of society, then religion has there become merely a displeasing signboard which will soon be torn down. But, on the other hand, try to convert individuals without Catholicizing the social institutions and your work is without stability. The structure you erect in the morning will be torn down by others in the evening. Is not the strategy of the enemies of God there to teach us a lesson? They want to destroy the Faith in the hearts of individuals it is true, but they direct still more vigorous effort to the elimination of religion from social institutions. Even one defeat of God in this domain means the weakening, if not the ruin, of the faith in the souls of many.”
Thus we do not intend the headline of this piece “The Social Kingship of the LGBT” to be irreverent in any way. Rather, it serves to demonstrate a point: our churchmen shirk their duty of Catholicizing the social order while the revolution steps in to ll the vacuum and ensures their perverse principles are not only the ruling force in society, but become the very air we breath. (Recent interviews on college campuses show that students have accepted the falsehood that gender is what one chooses despite the sex assigned at birth).
There is no doubt that the Conciliar aggiornamento, the failure of Catholic teachers to teach the Faith in its integrity, the reluctance to of churchmen to preach against mortal sins of the flesh, and the effect of diabolic disorientation of the upper hierarchy, are central factors in the ascendancy of this re-breathing cultural revolution.
In his groundbreaking 1982 book The Homosexual Network, Father Enrique Rueda wrote, “There is no question that the main stumbling block in the theoretical and practical acceptance of homosexuality by American society has been traditional religion. This has been perfectly understood by the leadership of the homosexual movement.” Further, “the importance of gaining the support of the churches or at least neutralizing them is widely acknowledged by homosexual leaders.”
This co-optiong and neutralization of the Church has exceeded beyond their wildest dreams and is evidenced by the state of the Catholic institutes of higher learning. New Ways Ministry, a pro-homosexual “Catholic” group that openly advances the LGBT agenda, lists on its webpage 83 North American “Catholic” universities that are “gay-friendly,” a number of which are Jesuit that have annual “coming out” days for homosexual students and faculty.
As for Jesuits, Father Paul Shaughnessy SJ bluntly states that the problem of homosexual- friendly campuses can be traced to Jesuit leadership itself. He notes that some of the most prestigious posts at universities – such as university administrators and presidents – are generally filled by Jesuit priests unofficially known as the “Gallery Owners.”
These Jesuits, skilled at fund-raising, are described by Father Shaughnessy as “discreet, well-spoken, well- dressed gay priests in their 50s and early 60s.” In his article “Are the Jesuits Catholic?” Father Shaughnessy goes on to explain:
“Where the older Jesuits are notable for the heat of their anti-papal passions, the Gallery Owners display a nearly complete apathy toward religion in all its forms. Conventionally liberal, they support condoms and women priests less as a matter of fact than a fashion statement – rather like wearing a baseball hat backwards … The teachings of the Church, being largely an irrelevance, has minimal importance in shaping the opinion of the Gallery Owners, who tend to regard orthodox Catholicism – like boxing or heterosexuality – as one of the coarse amusements of the working class.”
The ugly facts of homosexual scandal within today’s Catholic clergy have been discussed in past issues of Catholic Family News, and we need not repeat them here. Needless to say that such corruption reduces to impotence a clergy who should battle for the Faith and the faithful.
A War Against Nature
The new orientation from the Council and the resultant corruption of many in the clergy and hierarchy has effectively de-fanged the Church. Our leaders – many of whom are little more than smiling facilitators of dialogue – seem incapable of mounting an effective fight against contemporary forces of evil.
Yet for their own survival, they better stand up soon. Wrapped up in this new pro-homosexual, gender- mainstreaming social order is the criminalization of those who oppose the program. If our churchmen do not mount an effective opposition, it is only a matter of time before it is declared a crime to preach uncompromising Christian morality. The Church itself will not be immune from prosecution.
We note in passing that Francis’ post-Synodal document Amoris Laetitia is of no help in this regard. Yes, it speaks against gender theory, but it is effectively toothless. If anything, Amoris Laetitia is an aid to the enemy, for it refuses to reiterate homosexuality as “intrinsically disordered,” and downplays natural law, which is a central principal against gender- fluidity. Further, when Italy recently “legalized” same- sex unions this past May 11, Pope Francis did not say a word – not one word – against this legislation. From him there was nothing but silence on the passage of a bill that is another milestone for the advancement of homosexuality and “gender mainstreaming” in society. Gabrielle Kuby, in chapter 15 of her book, documents a number of resistance measures in various countries that pushed back against the gender revolution. It is possible to fight these evils if we have the faith, prayers and courage to move forward. If there is no effective opposition, however, it appears the forces of darkness may soon rule the hour.
There is much more to say on this topic and we’ve hardly scratched the surface. For now we will close with how we opened.
The present furor over transgenders and bathrooms is not really about alleged discrimination. It is actually a war against nature itself, and the establishment of a new social order based on this denial of nature.
The goal of the feminists and homosexual activists is an attempt to destroy the concept of male and female and restructure society away from this reality. These activists work to remake society into their own image and likeness and strive to criminalize any dissent from their new vision.
Truth to tell, we are not facing a “Social Kingship” of LGBT, but a new godless tyranny.
Our Lady of Fatima, help and protect us.
 “Until 2014, users of Facebook had to indicate their sex – whether they are a man or a woman. But now the popular internet social network gives users 58 different options to indicate their gender.” Interview with Gabriele Kuby, “The Global Sexual Revolution and the Assault on Freedom and Family,” Catholic World Report, Sept. 8, 2014.
 “New York City Imposes fines up to $250,000 for refusing to cal trans person ‘ze’ or ‘hir’,” Lifesitenews, May 19th, 2016.
 “We’ll Win the Bathroom Battle When the Binary Burns,” Riki Wilchins, The Advocate, April 29, 2016.
 “The SexRev Tipping Point,” Rod Drehr, The American Conservative, May 2, 2016
 Joahann Braun, Ehe und Familie am Scheideweb, quoted from The Global Sexual Revolution, The Destruction of Freedom in the Name of Freedom, Gabriele Kurby, [Lifeside./Angelico Press, 2015], P. 175
 “Bathrooms are just the beginning: a scary look into the trans movement’s end goals,” Lifesitenews, May 6, 2016
 The Global Sexual Revolution, p. 5.
 Ibid., p. 10.
 Ibid., p. 12
 Ibid., See Chapters 4, 5 and 6.
 Ibid., Chapter 12, “Sex Education from K through 12.”
 Some Republicans still fight, many voice empty lip-service, while others already gave in to the powerful LGBT advocates.
 The Global Sexual Revolution, p. 117.
 “The most dangerous, and underreported, part of Obama’s transgender edict.” Ben Johnson, Lifesitenews, May 20, 2016.
 Global Sexual Revolution, p. 45-46.
 Ibid., p. 46.
 Ibid., p. 47-48.
 Ibid., p. 48.
 The Kingship of Christ According to Cardinal Pie of Poitiers, page 59. Taken from The Workingmen Guilds of the Middle Ages, Godfrey Kurth, (Introduction by Father Denis Fahey: First published in 1943, Reprinted in 1987 by Omni Publications, Palmdale, Ca, USA), p. 3. (Emphasis added).
 Video: “College Kids Say the Darndest Things about Gender,” Family Policy Institute of Washington.
 The Homosexual Network, Private Lives & Public Policy, Father Enrique Rueda [Devin Adair, Old Greenwich, CT, 1982], p. 243-244. For example, on the same page, Father Rueda writes, “At a Washington meeting of Friends for Lesbian and Gay Concerns (FLGC), a Quaker organization, concern was expressed for the apparent lack of support for homosexuality from the Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL), an important body within the denomination. (1) The meeting was attended by Steven Endean, director of the Gay rights National Lobby, who apparently prodded the attendees to enlist the collaboration of their church in the homosexual cause. Endean, according to the official newsletter of FLGC ‘outlined for us the significance that such a position of support from FCNL would have on national legislators and other church lobby groups – some of which would be less timid about supporting gay rights if the Friends (FCNL) were doing so. The support of these church lobbies led by the Christian Voice, the new lobby set up to wage their war against us.” The clear implication is that homosexual Quakers should use their resources to set their religious organization against other – more traditional – Christian groups and support the homosexual movement.” Father Rueda cites as his source Friends for Lesbian and Gay Concerns Newsletter, 3 (Sumneytown, PA: Friends for Lesbian and Gay Concerns, Autumn, 1979):2.
 “Are Jesuits Catholic?”, Paul Shaughnessy, The Weekly Standard, June 3, 2002. Quoted in Status Envy: The Politics of Catholic Higher Education, Anne Hendershott, [New Brunswick: Transaction Publications, 2009], p. 83.
 Amoris Laetitia effectively undermines natural law wherein it presents natural law not as an objective reality that must be acknowledged and lived, but only at the level of “inspiration” that one may take or leave as the individual works out his “deeply personal process” of deciding one’s moral behavior. (#305).