Trending in social media today is the revelation that the president of the NAACP chapter in Spokane, Washington is a Caucasian female who self-identifies as African American. Rachel Dolezal has apparently been passing herself off as bi-racial for quite some time, even to the point of obtaining a full scholarship reserved for African-Americans at Howard University. In fact, according to the City of Spokane, Dolezal is not under investigation for the possibility of misidentifying her race on an application to the Office of Police Ombudsman Commission, on which she is now serving. On the application, Dolezal claimed to have several ethnic origins, including white, black and American Indian.
And while the media is in a frenzy over the likelihood that a white girl is masquerading as a bi-racial African-American while leading a chapter of the NAACP, the obvious is apparently lost on the vast majority of reporters. The simple fact of the matter is, this is the natural result of allowing individuals to deny biological reality by protecting personal fantasies under law.
Here’s the thing … gender identity is the first step to the complete chaos of eradicating any biological distinctions whatsoever. Bruce Jenner (I refuse to call him Caitlyn) completely denies his biological make-up, right down to his genes, and underwent horrible body mutilations in order to give the appearance of a female. But no amount of hormone supplements and suppressors, silicone implants, or genital mutilations changes the fact that he is a man. Similarly, Rachel Dolezal has apparently gone to some lengths to alter her physical appearance in order to identify as African-American as well. According to a USA Today article:
The Dolezals said Rachel married and later divorced a black man. They said after the divorce in 2004 Rachel began identifying differently. She started claiming to be partially African American and the daughter of bi-racial parents. They said they have noticed her change in physical appearance but do not know how she did so.
The definition of “gender identity,” according to H.R. 1755/S.815: Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) of 2013, is:
“the gender-related identity, appearance, or mannerisms or other gender-related characteristics of an individual, with or without regard to the individual’s designated sex at birth.”
In other words, under ENDA, employers will have to figure out how to deal with the ever-changing behavior of an employee that shows up to work dressed and behaving as a man one day and dressing and behaving as a woman the next. This very idea, if enshrined in law, would suggest that one’s biological reality as identifiable by their genetic make-up is subject to the individual’s desired reality. So, if a genetically identifiable male decides that he is actually a woman, then ENDA would dictate that the man be treated in accordance with his desired reality, regardless of what his biological reality indicates.
If one is legally protected to self-identify as a gender “without regard to the individual’s designated sex at birth,” then there’s really nothing to stop someone from self-identifying as another race, as with Ms. Dolezal, even to the point of applying for and winning scholarships designated for specific genders and races.
It’s interesting to note the non-discrimination employment policy of the NAACP:
The NAACP is an Equal Employment Opportunity employer. As such, it is the continuing policy of the NAACP to take affirmative action to assure equal opportunity for all employees or prospective employees without regard to race, color, religion, national origin, age, gender, sexual orientation, genetic information, veteran status, physical or mental disability, and any other categories protected by applicable federal, state, or local law.
Genetic Information?! Apparently, self-identification in all forms trumps all realities. Given that, anyone could self-identify as just about anything, including animals. Sadly, this is already a thing in the LGBTQ-XYZ community. When I was working for American Life League and investigating CCHD grantees, I discovered an organization called the Cincinnati Interfaith Worker’s Center whose executive director is an LGBTQ activist. What was particularly disturbing was a workshop she participated in steeped in perverse instructions on bondage, sado-masochism, polyamory, and homosexual activism. In this workshop were individuals who self-identified as animals. On page 18 of this program booklet, an individual named Kasey Neiss claims to be part-can and part bird. Several individuals at the conference actually prefer to be referred to individually as “they.”
Sooner or later, people will be self-identifying as “deceased,” which could have the potential of changing their tax status. People could also self-identify as robots, or perhaps plants, extra-terrestrials, angels, or even gods. Where does it end? When myth becomes law, and the lies people tell themselves and others trump biological reality, then there is no order and chaos reigns supreme. And that is precisely where we are headed, and anyone who would dare to stand up and call out the lies for what they are, they are the ones who will be called haters and bigots, they will be sued and ultimately they will be crucified.
For now, it will be interesting to see if Rachel Dolezal suffers any legal consequences for falsifying a scholarship application and an application to serve on the Office of Police Ombudsman Commission.
Why the surprise? After all, in the post Vatican II world, “What is truth?”
I’ve just self-identified myself.
As we age, we all find ourselves “stepping in it” one way or another, be it due to failing vision, forgetfulness, clumsy hands/feet, etc.
My wife just let out an “Oh, s..t!” for some reason, using words that we’d never used in our child rearing era.
So I yelled at her, she can no longer use that phrase around me…. “I just self-declare myself a child and will turn you into CPS if you persist.”
She responded that she just self-declared herself a drunken sailor and if I didn’t watch out she’d have her way with me.
I started to declare myself an Admiral…. but by then I was too tired yelling and just went to bed.
I love your spirit and humor! We need to keep that up!! Made my day!
Michael:
This is a valuable article on a dangerous trend. Here I think it is important to point out that these self-identifications – done dinhonestly – deny the specific gifts and characteristics that God created within these folks. Christ cannot fully act within you when you deny how God essentially made you. That is a message I hope organizations like Lepanto can send.
While you and I disagree on the scope of the infinite combination of God-given charateristics that inhere within a human being, every human being finds the highest and best use of all gifts through Christ.
I pray for Rachel Dolezal that she find healing and reconciliation within her own person.
Matt
Michael:
A clarifying point about the “genetic informaiton” employment policy you cite above. It reflects a federal law that prohibits employers from asking about a person’s genetic profile or deying employment because a persaon has a specific gene. As you may know, we not can test whether persons have specific genes linked to the development of cancers and other chronic diseases. As example is the BRAC gene linked to breast cancer. If a wonam, for example, has taken the BRAC test and finds outr she has the gene, she would have to reveal that if asked on an employment application or be fired for fraud if she denied it and developed the cancer later.
In order to encourage folks to get these important tests, employers cannot condition employment on disclosure of the results or deny employment to a health person who took the test and was found to have the gene. This is an important and wonderful law.
Matt
How Should Christians Respond to the Court’s Decision on Marriage?
by: Daniel P. Horan, OFM, a Franciscan friar, a columnist for America, and the author of several books.
Link: http://americamagazine.org/content/all-things/how-should-christians-respond-courts-decision-marriage
“The joys and hopes, the griefs and the anxieties of the women and men of this age, especially those who are poor or in any way afflicted, these are the joys and hopes, the griefs and anxieties of the followers of Christ” (“Gaudium et Spes,” no. 1).
With this now-famous line, the Second Vatican Council opened its “Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World” (1965). This passage immediately came to mind this morning as I heard of the U. S. Supreme Court decision (Obergefell v. Hodges) that upheld the constitutional right to same-sex marriage. My personal response was emotional in the way that the reaction of so many others has been in the wake of this landmark case. My reaction has been solidarity for a population of people who have indeed been “afflicted” and whose experience for so long, millennia perhaps, has been more “grief and anxiety” than “joy and hope.” But today, at least in the United States, things appear to be changing.
As a Christian, the “joys and hopes” of the LGBT women and men who have cried out for the recognition of their human dignity and value, these are the “joys and hopes” of me today.
There is doubtless contention on the subject of whether or not this is good news or bad news for the church. On the one hand, church leaders such as the current president of the USCCB, have decried this high-court decision and compared it to Roe v. Wade. Archbishop Joseph Kurtz stated in a press release that today’s decision “is a tragic error that harms the common good and most vulnerable among us.”
Yet, on the other hand, authoritative church teaching seems to offer us other ways to reflect on today’s decision. For instance, returning to “Gaudium et Spes,” we read: “True, all [women and] men are not alike from the point of view of varying physical power and the diversity of intellectual and moral resources. Nevertheless, with respect to the fundamental rights of the person, every type of discrimination, whether social or cultural, whether based on sex, race, color, social condition, language or religion, is to be overcome and eradicated as contrary to God’s intent. For in truth it must still be regretted that fundamental personal rights are still not being universally honored” (no. 29).
LGTB women and men have indeed suffered—and continue to suffer from—discrimination based on their sexual orientation. In some parts of the world this discrimination is made manifest with the threat of execution! It would appear that today’s decision could align well with this call for the church to “overcome and eradicate” such discrimination and affirm the “fundamental rights of the person.”
Similarly, we might look to Vatican II’s “Declaration on the Relation of the Church to non-Christian Religions” (“Nostra Aetate”) for parallel wisdom in how to approach reflecting on today’s decision. Early in the text, the Council Fathers write that there are truth and wisdom in the cultural and religious traditions, practices, and perspectives of those who do not affirm the Christian faith. We read: “[The Catholic Church] regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all [women and] men” (no. 2).
Perhaps we might look at what is affirmed in today’s decision about the inherent dignity and value of all women and men, regardless of their sexual orientation, as something to be referenced in the spirit of that which reflects a “ray of that Truth,” which is the love of God in Christ.
We should recall of course that the First Amendment to the U. S. Constitution protects the Catholic Church—and other religious communities—from being compelled to perform religious services for same-sex spouses. What has taken place today is a matter of civil rights, literally. The definition of marriage has not changed for the Sacrament of Matrimony in the Catholic Church, but perhaps this court decision like the recent referendum in Ireland should have us asking difficult theological and moral questions, questions that have been largely avoided for some time. After all, it is interesting that 56 percent of Catholics express support for same-sex marriage, according to a 2015 Pew survey.
So what is the right way to respond to today’s decision? The Christian response is love. And the Second Vatican Council has challenged the church to remember this amid the complex realities of our world. I understand the church’s teaching on the Sacrament of Marriage, firmly accepting and holding all that is taught definitively. Still, I can’t help but embrace what “Gaudium et Spes” and “Nostra Aetate” exhort all Christians to do in celebrating the dignity of the person, as well as the joys and hopes of all women and men.
As a devote Catholic I am sick and tired of organizations that find they must react to issues by intentional 1/2 truths. Just like in the U.S. Constitution, the Catholic peoples of the world ARE THE CHURCH. “We The Catholic People” (as in “We The People)” can decide matters ourselves, rather than being dictated to. What 1/2 truths? well… Yes, thousands of dollars may have been given in support of an opinion that these organizations deem too liberal but, hundreds and hundreds if not millions of dollars are spent by narrow minded corporate tyrants that push their so called “moral” views on others. Half truths?… Planned Parenthood is NOT an abortion factory; the major part of their work is dedicated to seeing that women (and now men) receive care, people that otherwise would have no where else to go. THEY NEVER NEVER push contraceptives or abortions or embryo research where it is not wanted. People come to them for help and they give that help,, always with ALL POSSIBLE alternative info given.
The infallibility of the pope is RARE; it takes much more than a waving of the papal hand to make something “infallible.” As regards to the never ending battle of homosexuality, Francis DID NOT OFF HANDEDLY say the famous “who am I to judge” remark… That means tolerance. NOT SOME BIGOT RELIGION teacher making the most UN-SCIENTIC remark that to be is a “choice.” Wake up! The church now is 100% behind evolution; we ARE NIT hysterical bible thumpers who actually believe the world was created in 6 days… If you think that way, get thee gone from OUR church!! Granted the so-called “gay gene” is non existent but behavioral medical researchers have traced certain “generic” traits, over a persons generational makeup that DO point to what amount to inheritable behavior. In other words, through modern genetics a couple are now able to get a “picture” of some traits that may show up in their offspring… Homosexuality being one.
Who who who? would CHOOSE, at a young age, in their teens or in early adulthood to willing put themselves through all the discriminatory BS THAT IS ATTACHED… Who? Is anyone out there trying to say that gays are so sexually pervers that they choose to be “one with the devil” (in their eyes) , choose to be “abnormally deviant (again in their eyes). Really? Then in the eyes of these people sex without the intention of procreating is a choice to be deviant. Certain heterosexual sexual positions must also be “deviant”… Let’s me just say it… Any sexual act other than “missionary” position penetration thus must be deviant. Does anyone thing that heterosexuals do not enjoy some of the same practices homosexuals do? So straight fellatio is OK THEN?
The worst I think are anti womens choice nuts who LIE outright. Catholic anti-abortionist have, time and time been guilty of saying that they will help PAY for the expenses of women who can not afford to have yet another child. They lie about how many months women are pregnant hoping to “stall” any decision until the woman thinks she is “too far gone” to have said procedure. How is it productive therapy to tell a woman who has been raped, many times by a family member, that it is her “duty” to have the child. Where are all these Catholic orphanages that should back up their 1/2 truths; where are all these totally unwanted infants to go? They stalk Drs. Who preform said procedures and I WOULD NOT BE SUPRISED if some of those misguided ant-abortionists blew up a Planned Parenthood or two.
Again, MY CHURCH is not s place for hysterical evangelists; go join a hate church that believes ithat Christian Family Values means beating an infant if it cries… Go! You belong with those hypocrites that have molested their sisters and seek extra marital S&M (deviant heterosexual) sex… You know who I am talking about.
Catholic’s must do GOOD DEEDS regardless of what a needy person might say or think… We are humble servants of Christ who said “he without sin cast the first stone.” LOVE US NOT A SIN, DECEITFULLNESS AND 1/2 truth are sins… No matter for whatever misguided “common good” these sins are committed; to humiliate youth to degrade a woman who has been raped to act “holier than thou”… SIN SIN SIN on all counts…