Not long after the Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage a co-worker asked, “What’s next, polygamy?”  He’s much younger and in fact they’re all pretty much younger than this old broadcasting dinosaur.  Most aren’t very conservative and not because they’re liberal.  The younger people I meet aren’t very political.  His tone, however, reflected something I mentioned in a recent post.  You can avoid events for a very long time but history and politics are always in pursuit.  Lifestyle changes may not matter much to Millennials and even the Generation X crowd.  Or they don’t spend as much time pondering what it means as does an aging Boomer they know at the office.

A cultural earthquake. Courtesy, KLIX Library.

His tone was sarcastic.  One of disdain for the decision.  Which fell along expected lines.  His reaction isn’t specific to my previous column.  I suggested it would be onrushing economic events making the young suddenly political animals.  I host a show with an older audience.  Much older than my previous gig, which was on the FM band.  Today there were even some younger incredulous voices on the telephones with reaction.

Even younger liberals writing at left-leaning publications, as you can read here, are sounding alarms.  If not exactly for the same reasons but because of how only a handful of people can bring about sweeping changes in a nation of 330-million.  We’ve also opened a Pandora’s Box and it was rarely mentioned in the post-mortem media discussion I followed.  It’s the concern raised by my younger colleague.  What’s next?

In the Philippines not long ago there was a marriage ceremony between three men.  Are we next looking at two men and a woman?  Three women and two men?  Brothers and sisters?  A 34-year-old and an 8-year-old?  Donkeys?  The advocates for “marriage equality” call it straw man, spurious or ridiculous slippery slope arguments but in some cultures past and present all or some of the above are considered if not normal then not too far beyond the pale.  It was in my lifetime when homosexuality was once considered mental illness.   In movies as late as the middle to late 1980s homosexuality was shunned as less then manly.  I recall a newspaper reviewer in a city where I lived at the time venting about the Crocodile Dundee character being a homophobe.  For crying out loud it was just a film, although.  It was media entertainment.  About the same time Hollywood and the news media began a campaign to sanitize a taboo lifestyle.  In the early 90s I was working at a TV station and one of my first assignments was covering a pride parade.  Barely dressed folks in glitter and rainbow wigs roller-skating down a deserted city street.  It was oft-putting even as some of the participants were acquaintances through my job.  Within a few short years the parades had a new look; marching in Dockers and golf shirts.  Often with children in tow.  At some point somebody recognized the public relations benefits of portraying themselves as just average everyday Americans, which most of them were underneath the earlier Mardi Gras costumes.

A couple of other observations.  Gay traditionally means happy or excited.  At some point it replaced the scientific term homosexual.  Like the Dockers and family parade part of a new branding effort.  Maureen Dowd of the New York Times even refused to use the old term, calling it bigoted.  Media played a massive role in the change we’ve seen.  Cal Thomas has remarked visiting newspapers carrying his column and seeing job postings encouraging homosexuals to apply.  Of course the papers used synonyms.  Many of the men I worked with in the city where I covered that first pride parade went on to powerful positions on-air and off in network news.  When the homosexual public relations operatives coined “marriage equality” the news media adopted the two words without question.  You know who made those decisions?  It was no longer journalism but cheerleading.

I had to spend 7 years of my life working for a miserable old codger named David Schoumacher.  A newspaper man turned radio announcer and then TV journalist.  He was at CBS News during its glory years in the 1960s and later helped stabilize the struggling ABC.  Despite my disdain for the man’s lack of people skills his adherence to “just the facts” never flagged.  When one of our news anchors used the equality line he dressed her down.  I should note she was a lesbian and used her position in news to advance an agenda.

All of this is background so you’ll understand what’s coming.  The public relations scheme devised for same-sex marriage is going to be co-opted by polygamists, the incestuous, the man/boy love crowd and the bestial.  As media likes telling us, we’re no longer a Christian society.  Our President calls his country atheistic.  Pagan is probably the most apt description.  Disagree and the head-shrinkers will be coming for you.

*************************************************************************

!!!UPDATE!!!

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/06/gay-marriage-decision-polygamy-119469.html#.VY6Gj_lViko

!!!You were warned!!!

**************************************************************************

You can here some reaction the the Court's ruling here: