Dishonoring the Men Who Served

Introduction
Happy Veterans Day, and praise the Lord for the men who have given their lives so that we might continue to enjoy relative freedom to live and work and worship in this land. 

But if you’re paying any attention at all to the images and messages seeking to honor veterans today, you will no doubt notice the plethora of women being foisted into our collective imagination. And today, we are being commanded by our intersectional high priests that we put a pinch of incense on their high and lofty egalitarian altar. 

Will you capitulate? Will you honor the goddess?

Every time you hear the phrase “men and women who serve” or “service men and women” or other gender neutral, gender “inclusive” phrasing like “personnel,” know that you are being catechized in a false religion. 

But on this day, Veterans Day, originally marking the Armistice of World War I, the day after the birth day of the Marine Corps, a day on which we honor the men who gave their lives, a day on which I honor men from my own family, including my own grandfather, the self-appointed Pharisees of our land, right and left, collectively demand that we dishonor those men. 

Dishonor How?
What? But the flags and old pictures and the interviews of aged men in uniform? What could be dishonoring about that? The dishonoring thing is the insertion of elements into the celebration which were the very things our fathers and grandfathers died to prevent. Our men died so that our women might live. Our men died so that their mothers and sisters and daughters might be safe. And even more than that, our men died in order to defeat the underlying Marxist agenda that is driving the current egalitarian blitzkrieg. The current jackboot gestapo demanding that we use certain pronouns or else you will lose your job and livelihood is no less fascist or totalitarian in principle than what we faced in World War II. Give it a few weeks and there’ll be special yellow badges for the folks who won’t get in line. 

The driver behind all of this is a rejection of the Creator God and His Christ, and this necessitates a “new creation” dreamed up by man and a savior that is usually called by the name Democracy, but which in practice means secular elites telling the masses what to do. You must let sexually confused dudes shower with your high school and college girls or you are a bigot. You must bake cakes and photograph sodomite weddings, or you are basically a racist. And you must pretend that there is no appreciable difference between men and women. They are just interchangeable cogs in the great collective machine. And this is necessary because a humanist salvation is necessarily narrow and bland. Man cannot actually do anything approaching a real salvation from all our human misery, but man can attempt to pretend to save human cultures by flattening everything to a drab, monotonous drone. If all differences can be relatively suppressed, achievements relatively depressed, and progress reduced to a belly crawl, then the masses can sometimes be duped into thinking that the occasional lurch is a sign that things must be really humming along. 

So when you see the women in those cutsey-nice commercials Skyping to their families from their combat duty in Afghanistan, a righteous indignation should rise up in your chest. Our men did not die for that. In fact, they died so that she wouldn’t have to. That’s how you dishonor our veterans. You cheapen their sacrifice. You steal a central part of their glory.

Black-Face & Soldier-Face
I know the whole blackface thing is a seething intersectional mess, but if there ever was a wide spread “blackface” in our culture, it is the current soldier-face running every five minutes in commercials today. 

Think about the insanity and hypocrisy. Our culture throws a collective hissyfit at the thought of a white man making his face darker to play the part of a man with darker skin. This was done in minstrel shows early on in a way that was frequently full of racial malice and spite and mockery. And to Hell with that. But the fact of the matter is that it has also been done plenty of times with no spite intended, and in reality a small symbol of actual honor. To represent someone well, to honor who they were/are, an actor or actress sought to truly represent them. But the cries go up now that this is systemic white supremacy – no white man could ever pretend to know what the black experience has been, no one could ever truly represent that, and why couldn’t you find a person of color to play the person of color, you hater?

Notice this carefully: the high priests shriek and howl that you cannot ever, ever, ever pretend to have more pigment in your skin, because the lived experience of more pigment is so different than anything you have ever imagined, that it is necessarily a lie and therefore a hateful slander of all people who actually have more pigment than you. But then when Bruce Jenner comes along with fake boobs and a dress, the whole priesthood goes misty eyed and makes him Woman of the Year. They rise like Televangelists with quivering voices proclaiming the glories of diversity and inclusion. 

Wait. So we’ve all been scribbling furiously at our desks trying to keep up with the Lecture. And we were just told that you may not pretend to have more pigment in your skin and don’t ever think you could even imagine what it’s like, unless you have been given a special indulgence and you’re the Prime Minister of Canada, but if you pull on a pair of nylons and change your name to Caitlyn, you’re a hero? This is like two locomotives going 70 down the same tracks towards one another. There’s something sort of exciting about the prospect of this ideological collision. You cannot keep up this charade for long. You can’t dress up like a smart man and carry on like this, and besides, don’t you know that smart-face is an attack on all really smart people on the planet? Doesn’t anyone remember toxic masculinity? Doesn’t anyone remember the oppression of women? You’re seriously saying that men can understand the lived experiences of women? And not only that, but when they do it’s Heroic and Noble. All rise!

Sorry, I dropped my pencil. 

The Glory of War
Every Bruce Jenner, every trans-athlete, every woman in a military or police uniform is a standing dishonor to all women everywhere. What kind of honor is it to say that some dude can just become a woman? The genetics, the chromosomes, the hormones, the “lived experience” is vastly more complex and intricate and foundational than skin pigment. But the dishonor goes the other way as well. Those women pretending to play men in combat are dishonoring men. No ma’am, you are not a man, and you can’t just put on military fatigues and hold a weapon and demand we go along with the game. They are pretending to be what they are not, and what they cannot be. A woman was made to give life not take it. A woman was made to nurture life not be put on the front lines of battle. A woman is to be treasured and protected. And men were made to protect, to defend, to lay their lives down. To put it very precisely, the existence of the fairer sex is what has historically made men willing to fight and die. And it was for the glory of home, family, a wife, a mother, a sister, a daughter, that our fathers and grandfathers laid their lives down. This is central to the glory of war. We do not glorify the violence or the bloodshed, but it is a true glory to defend your home, your family, and in particular, women and children.

So no, I do not honor our “service women” or our “women in uniform.” Our men did not die so that our women might be put in harm’s way as some kind of egalitarian virtue signal. Our men died so that our women might be safe, free to be homemakers and mothers, free to build cultures of life and festivity. You cannot “honor” the dishonor of women without simultaneously destroying the very foundation of what makes dying worth it. And every commercial you see today that pictures a woman in a man’s uniform is a direct assault on what our forefathers actually bled and died for. 

Conclusion
All of this is central to the Christian gospel and it is not a distraction or a side show. The women pictured in combat roles are icons of a false Savior, a false god, a false gospel – it is the false good news of leveling all differences (except the ones that are still convenient for manipulating people with white guilt). It is a humanistic gospel that proclaims salvation in uniformity, complete totalitarian blend. If everyone is exactly the same, then they can pretend to be making peace. But all of this is the plotting of stupid men. God sits in Heaven and laughs at their schemes. He holds all of this in complete derision, and so should we. But meanwhile, the salvation of the world has already been accomplished. Jesus Christ became a man, not a woman, not a eunuch, but a man, for us men and for our salvation, for the salvation of all men, women, and children, black, white, and brown. And that man, Jesus Christ, was God’s only-begotten Son, the only innocent man, the only righteous man, and He laid His life down freely, gladly for His Bride, the Christian Church, all those who believe. 

Humanism insists that we must save ourselves, and so they send their brides into battle. But Christianity insists that we cannot save ourselves, and God in Christ has accomplished it for us. He went and fought the dragon for us. He spoiled the Strongman and took his armor. He took our sins on Himself and took the death we all deserved. And having conquered sin and death and Satan, He rose up victorious in order to make all things new, including new men and new women, new creatures in Christ with sexual glory, sexual assignments in this world. We are Christians and so we honor that reality, that gospel, that Savior, and the men who have served and loved and died in order that we might continue to honor Him in all that we do.  

Photo by Suzy Brooks on Unsplash