I have, heretofore, used the term “homomania” as a foil to the term “homophobia,” a term coined as far back as the nineteen eighties to medicalize and pathologize dissent from and disagreement with the homosexual rights movement, its politics, and later, the homosexual marriage movement. The medicalization of dissent and alternative views has a long history on the Left, and its rise and flourishing within the modern Left as a central feature of “political correctness” must be seen for what it is: the present manifestation of psychological and philosophical tendencies that have been a key feature of the Left’s intellectual and cultural pedigree from its inception in modern form some two centuries ago.
Any gospel-centered critique, however, must take much more into consideration than just the directly perceivable cultural, social, and historical dynamics grounding a complex social and ideological phenomena such as the sexual revolution (of which homophilia in two forms, literal, among homosexuals themselves, and ideological/social, among progressive heterosexual supporters and allies of the homosexual rights movement, is a key component), and move farther and deeper into the spiritual dynamics of what we too often take to be the purely human.
Homomania, by which I mean the continual saturation of the tissues and mediating institutions of society – legal, cultural, political, educational and media – with all things homosexual or related to homosexuality and its allied sexual philias or “orientations” (LGBTQ etc.), especially in a political sense, is a deeply spiritual phenomena manifested, as all spiritual phenomena are, in a mortal human context. There are spiritual forces battling in and through God’s children on earth (a major “front” in the ongoing war between Christ and Satan that began eons ago and continues as a part of our probationary experience here) upon the battered souls of those who have already fallen upon the sexual/cultural battlefield, and who will yet become causalities of this war. We are not, as saints, alone in this battle, but then, neither are those who oppose us.
It is not just that the mind is saturated with specific thoughts, concepts, and quickly regurgitatable bromides or mantras when prompted at a party or at the dinner table, but with an unrelenting, burrowing, boring, injecting presence; with the constant impingement upon both the conscious and subconscious mind of the matrix of issues, causes, language, legal errata, and movements all concentrating themselves with tornadic energy upon a single, overriding goal: gay marriage.
This saturational presence is continual, incessant, and insistent; it is ideologically uniform, psychologically weighted, and it impinges upon us and the central institutions of society that mold, form, and influence us and our children each day of our lives through numerous venues and nodes at which we imbibe and absorb information. It is at a level of informational saturation. It is fiendishly ubiquitous and unavoidable.
It is a movement that has intellectually and psychologically waterlogged virtually the entire culture such that, not only is there no space within the culture any longer free of its influence and activist pressures, but it has grown powerful enough in a legal sense to now openly challenge the very concept of natural unalienable rights inhering in individuals and transcending the existence of the state. It challenges these with the hardly new but now fully domesticated concept of group rights protected by “anti-discrimination” law that inhere in collectives and which claim an inherent and preemptive status when in conflict with the core individual rights of the Constitution.
Homomania demands that all aspects of culture, including norms, mores, broad-based attitudes, values, religion, philosophy, education, pedagogy, media, entertainment, and contractual economic relations be bent, focused, and channeled into the support, defense, establishment, and finally, open and, indeed, enforced recognition of and complicity in the lifestyles and behavior of “queer” or virtually all non-heterosexual modes of sexual expression and self-identity.
The idea of “homophobia” is itself a central effect and aspect of homomania. The intimidate impulse to personally attack and impugn the motives and even mental health of others who disagree and dissent from a political or ideological orthodoxy, especially when it attains, as the gay marriage movement has, the status of an existential, world-historical moral crusade similar in scope and import to the abolition of slavery and the civil rights movement, and especially when knee-jerk moral defamations-in-lieu-of-rational debate are, in most cases, the initial and accepted reaction to principled dissent and come from fundamentally one cultural and ideological enclave, is a sign that the movement itself is not rational or,to a great degree, amenable to civil philosophical critique of opposing viewpoints at all.
It is also a sign that what we are dealing with here is an ideology, not a philosophical/moral analysis in which cool heads can meet other heads in the marketplace of ideas while both agree to disagree but also agree that the rule of law and the Bill of Rights are not to be tampered with, and that any alteration in the legal status of homosexuals and their ways of life must come, as with anything else, contained within and conditioned by those fundamental overarching principles.
But there is more, much more, and too much for one essay, but it will suffice to say that homosexuality and “marriage” between homosexuals is the cresting wave of the older baby boomer sexual revolution that took cognizance of homosexuality early on but remained unconcerned with anything but tolerance and civility to homosexuals up until sometime in the eighties, when the militant homosexual movement began demanding far more than this, and the cultural Left, primarily in the academic sphere but also centered in the news media, foundations, and entertainment world, long having sought for and used the sexual revolution as a single-edged sword to hack and slay the family, marriage, traditional gender roles, and the institutions and concepts of motherhood and fatherhood to open the way for its “better world” of egalitarian collectivism: economic, social, political, psychological, and sexual, began a new long sexual march.
Having already achieved many of its goals through radical feminism, no-fault divorce, the Pill, the massive value shifts of the original sexual revolution (a heterosexual cultural erotomania, still with us and still, for all that, actually growing in intensity) and the destruction of the black inner city family through the welfare state, the Left set its sights upon the next great sexual frontier; not tolerance and civility towards homosexuals, but overt and legally enforced acceptance and celebration, followed by the crest of the wave itself, the redefinition and reconceptualization of marriage qua marriage as a gender neutral institution.
This is why I say it is the crest of the wave. There is a great deal of water coming in behind that breaking wave; a tsunami that the homosexual movement and the cultural Left has been telegraphing the nature of for many years now in its use of the term LGBTQ (and its ever lengthening permutations), in which ‘G’ (gay) is one – and only one – of a plethora of alternative and “transgressive” sexualities and “orientations.”
Come one, come all, to the apocalypse ball.