As we approach the midway point of our nation’s month-long cultural rejection of the traditional norms upon which Western Civilization rests, also known as Pride Month, some might have noticed a decline in the prominence of public displays and support.
National Public Radio reported recently on the drying up of corporate sponsorship of Pride parades and other activities, and Gallup polling now indicates a decline in America’s embrace of same-sex relationships and marriages. The drop is attributed to Republicans, which may suggest that what changed was not the opinion but the willingness to admit it to a pollster. Either way, what we are witnessing is a societal clash playing out on various fields as the inevitable result of a court ruling that removed the debate from its proper location in the policymaking branches of government.
In his dissent from the majority opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges, Justice Samuel Alito raised serious concerns over the societal and cultural impact of the decision and the implications, especially for free speech and religious liberty. Alito warned specifically that the decision would be used “to vilify Americans who are unwilling to assent to the new orthodoxy. In the course of its opinion, the majority compares traditional marriage laws to laws that denied equal treatment for African Americans and women. The implications of this analogy will be exploited by those who are determined to stamp out every vestige of dissent.”
Alito continued by noting the two sentences of Justice Anthony Kennedy’s majority opinion devoted to the rights of those who would disagree: “Perhaps recognizing how its reasoning may be used, the majority attempts, toward the end of its opinion, to reassure those who oppose same-sex marriage that their rights of conscience will be protected. We will soon see whether this proves to be true. I assume that those who cling to old beliefs will be able to whisper their thoughts in the recesses of their homes, but if they repeat those views in public, they will risk being labeled as bigots and treated as such by governments, employers, and schools” (emphasis added).
Recommended
Time and tenacity in the enforcement of the “new orthodoxy” have given Alito’s dissent a nearly prophetic air. Alliance Defending Freedom clients Jack Phillips and Lorie Smith were both forced all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court for vindication of their First Amendment rights not to be coerced to express messages they did not believe or punished because officials disagreed with their beliefs on marriage. Kaley Chiles simply wanted to have conversations to help her clients achieve their counseling goals without risking her license. All three of these cases arose from the same state, Colorado, but it is not an outlier. In Mahmoud v Taylor, Maryland parents who simply wanted to opt their children out of a pro-LGBT curriculum that contradicted their beliefs on human sexuality also had to take their case all the way to the Supreme Court.
Over many years of observing and writing about the nature of America’s politics and culture, I have observed that two constants stand firm against the ever-shifting winds of public opinion: 1) No one can match the American Right’s tendency to form circular firing squads, and 2) no one can match the American Left’s capacity for overreach.
If the Left’s claim to the moral high ground is based on tolerance, then declaring anything to be taboo becomes taboo. G.K. Chesterton once defined tolerance as “the virtue of a man without convictions.” The redefinition of marriage quickly gave way to gender ideology with its Drag Queen Story Hour for children in taxpayer-supported public libraries and men in women’s sports and private spaces. Public schools are engaging in the secret social transitioning of minors without notification to parents, combined with mental health professionals prescribing dangerous drugs and surgeries for kids struggling with issues related to gender.
And yet, Newton’s law that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction holds true outside of physics. West Virginia and Idaho are currently waiting for the Supreme Court’s decision on their laws that recognize biological reality and preserve women’s sports for women. More than half the states in the union now have similar laws. Tennessee successfully defended its law protecting minors from experimental drugs and surgeries. Twenty-six states have enacted similar laws. Corporate America—having learned from cautionary tales of Bud Light, Target, Cracker Barrel, and others—seems to have rediscovered its primary fiduciary duty to shareholders. Wading into controversial cultural waters can lead to a flood of red ink. This likely explains the decline in corporate sponsorships that NPR laments.
While the debate over marriage, sexuality, biology, and reality still lingers, work remains to be done for cultural renewal. But the waning prominence of Pride Month celebration is cause for hope, like a rainbow after a flood.
Lathan Watts is the vice president of public affairs for Alliance Defending Freedom (@ADFLegal) and its sister organization ADF Action. He earned his juris doctor degree from the University of Mississippi.
Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Townhall’s conservative reporting that takes on the radical Left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.
Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member