Social Insanity: The Cult of Transgenderism :: By Denis Bowden

The Cult of Transgenderism

If you have ever wondered where this preoccupation with the re-identification of our sexuality is leading, you should have a look at these links I have provided.

The time has come when we can no longer keep our head in the sand, though that’s exactly what many parents are now doing. They are succumbing because they feel that they have little option but to ‘conform.’ It is fairly well documented that those parents confronted by the homosexuality of their children now increasingly become amongst the strongest advocates of the LGBT position, fearing that, otherwise, they will lose their children entirely.

My daughter, now fifty, has kept ties with members of her birthing class. A group of mothers who became and remained friends from immediately prior and then following the births of their respective kids.

Yesterday, my daughter said to me, “Dad, do you know what polyamory is?” I replied, “Yes, to some extent; I’ve read about it!” It transpired that one of those in her birthing class now has a ‘highly successful’ graduate daughter (with a number of degrees) who has informed her mother that she now practices polyamory. The Greeks called it ‘many loves.’ It is described as ‘the state of loving multiple people at the same time.’

Apparently, this highly educated young woman now conducts a highly active series of sexual liaisons with multiple partners. Whether at the same time or not wasn’t specified. I am not speaking of ‘group encounters,’ though that might occur. Rather, the focus appears to be that you might be running a number of ‘romantic’ interludes with several people at the same time. And they will, almost certainly, involve same-sex partners as well as what were formally more likely to be heterosexual relationships.

I asked my daughter what has been the impact on her mother? She replied, “Dad, she is absolutely devastated!” I then asked if the mother had been able or had moved to remonstrate with her daughter? The answer was in the negative.

The mother had said that, in fact, she couldn’t deal with it on any level and, as a result, had felt forced to ‘bury her head in the sand,’ thus pretending she was not privy to the information at all.

One can sympathize with Mom’s dilemma, particularly if God has been absent from their respective lives. In truth therefore, she may well have felt that she had few weapons at her disposal. Also, her own level of education might have placed her at a distinct disadvantage to a ‘brilliant’ young adult who had been well-indoctrinated by her peers and educators of the Left. Preaching to the ‘converted’ usually meets with little success.

I then inquired of my daughter was she herself aware of the high risk of disease from such multitudinous contact with multiple partners (let alone any moral or religious prohibitions)? My daughter said that she was completely aware of such risks and she believed her fellow mother and friend was also. I take it that this meant that such risks are increasingly not taken very seriously in some sections of the community. This is what used to be referred to as ‘flying by the seat of your pants.’

‘Fly by the seat of your pants’ is parlance from the early days of aviation. Aircraft initially had few navigation aids, and flying was accomplished by means of the pilot’s judgment. The term emerged in the 1930s and was first widely used in reports of Douglas Corrigan’s flight from the USA to Ireland in 1938.

“Douglas Corrigan was described as an aviator ‘who flies by the seat of his pants’ today by a mechanic who helped him rejuvenate the plane which airport men have now nicknamed the ‘Spirit of $69.90.’ The old flying expression of ‘flies by the seat of his trousers’ was explained by Larry Conner, [which] means going aloft without instruments, radio or other such luxuries.”

I use the above illustration as yet another example of that which, through ‘liberalism,’ fueled by Godlessness, has taken over this current generation now reaching its ascendancy of power in the community. In the elitism of the Left, this is just one sad and frightening outcome of where the postmodern age of ‘enlightenment’ is taking us at a breathtaking pace.


And then there is the now legislated (in New York) practice of what is almost legal infanticide that is really worrying.

I know that the law as it stands says that this is not infanticide because the baby has not been born or taken a first breath. Whereas, a baby killed post-birth creates the felony of infanticide. Practically all western nations adhere to that canon of law.

What does the Bible have to say about the subject?

From Focus on the Family: A Global Ministry (quotes with relevant scripture):

The Bible is far from silent on the topic of the sanctity of human life, especially preborn life in the womb. This resource provides just a few of the Scripture verses that speak to the value of preborn life created in God’s image from the moment of fertilization.

Why Should We Value Life?

“Know that the LORD Himself is God; it is He who has made us, and not we ourselves; we are His people and the sheep of His pasture” (Psalm 100:3, NASV).

“Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, and the One who formed you from the womb, ‘I, the LORD, am the maker of all things, stretching out the heavens by Myself, and spreading out the earth all alone . . .'” (Isaiah 44:24, NASV).

“But now, O LORD, Thou art our Father, we are the clay, and Thou our potter; and all of us are the work of Thy hand” (Isaiah 64:8, NASV).

Who Is the Creator of the Preborn?

“For You formed my inward parts; You covered me in my mother’s womb. I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; marvellous are Your works and that my soul knows well. My frame was not hidden from You, when I was made in secret, and skilfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed, and in Your book they all were written, the days fashioned for me, when as yet there were none of them” (Psalm 139:13-16, NKJV).

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations” (Jeremiah 1:5, NIV).

How Is God Concerned with the Preborn?

“But when He who had set me apart before I was born, and had called me through His grace…” (Galatians 1:15, RSV).

“Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ for giving us through Christ every possible spiritual benefit as citizens of heaven! For consider what he has done—before the foundation of the world He chose us to become, in Christ, His holy and blameless children living within His constant care” (Ephesians 1:3-4, PME).

Are the Preborn Human Beings?

“When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit…[saying] ‘As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy'” (Luke 1:41, 44, NIV).

The Lord Jesus Christ began his incarnation as an embryo, growing into a fetus, infant, child, teenager, and adult: “While they were there, the time came for the baby to born, and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son” (Luke 2:6-7, NIV). (end ‘Focus on the Family’ Quotes)

In the focus of this discussion, I would refer you to several links.

The latest manifestation of this evil is an emerging view that parents should also have a right to terminate the lives of their children, post-birth, in their infant years. This appears to be based on the ‘rights’ of those raising the child (notice I deliberately do NOT say parents because, surely, they forfeit those rights in advancing these views) to make a conscious decision that they no longer acknowledge their own child/children or their right to exist.

One would assume that this type of proposed decision would be related to the termination of the lives of children born into the world with physical imperfection or medically identified limitations on life expectancy. Do not lose track of the thought, though, that this is the age of ingrained consumerism, and ‘product’ that fails to meet expectation or places any sort of stress upon members of society should be and is discarded as valueless.

So, would the final step leading to infanticide post-birth be something new in society? Certainly not. Some indigenous tribes have long practiced it. And it was practiced by the Spartans in the ‘golden age’ of Greek dominance of the then civilized world. It is still practiced throughout ‘third world’ and has some degree of societal acceptance. However, in those countries/nations wherein the Judeo/Christian ethic and belief was strong, it was neither accepted nor countenanced because of its sin nature.

the Kamayurá, an indigenous tribe with some 600 members on the southern edge of the Brazilian Amazon have for generations killed other children born with disabilities. The Kamayurá are among a handful of indigenous peoples in Brazil known to engage in infanticide and the selective killing of older children. Those targeted include the disabled, the children of single mothers, and twins — whom some tribes, including the Kamayurá, see as bad omens.

The voices of the Left are now quickly advancing in this direction.

“Partial-birth abortion” is a term invented by pro-lifers. But “after-birth abortion” is a term invented by two philosophers, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva. In the Journal of Medical Ethics, they propose:

(quote): [W]hen circumstances occur after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible. … [W]e propose to call this practice ‘after-birth abortion,’ rather than ‘infanticide,’ to emphasize that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a foetus … rather than to that of a child. Therefore, we claim that killing a new-born could be ethically permissible in all the circumstances where abortion would be. Such circumstances include cases where the new-born has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk. (end quote)

In commenting on this article which appeared in the Journal of Medical Ethics in 2012, the editor was moved to reply in the face of great criticism by Christian ethicists and Christians generally in these terms:

(quote): The arguments presented, in fact, are largely not new and have been presented repeatedly in the academic literature and public fora by the most eminent philosophers and bioethicists in the world, including Peter Singer, Michael Tooley and John Harris in defence of infanticide, which the authors call after-birth abortion.

The novel contribution of this paper is not an argument in favour of infanticide – the paper repeats the arguments made famous by Tooley and Singer – but rather their application in consideration of maternal and family interests. The paper also draws attention to the fact that infanticide is practised in the Netherlands.

Many people will and have disagreed with these arguments. However, the goal of the Journal of Medical Ethics is not to present the Truth or promote some moral view. It is to present well-reasoned argument based on widely accepted premises. The authors provocatively argue that there is no moral difference between a foetus and a newborn. Their capacities are relevantly similar. If abortion is permissible, infanticide should be permissible. The authors proceed logically from premises which many people accept to a conclusion that many of those people would reject. (end quote)

There are many obviously Christian links commencing to speak out. Unfortunately, it appears to be ‘too little, too late,’ as the Left immediately takes steps to have such dissenting voices shut down as soon as they publish or comment.


There is, in concert with this overall agenda, a strong move by the LGBT and the Extreme Left to advance the case to emasculate babies and young children in the pursuit of realignment of naturally occurring (please read as specified by God) sexual preposition. This is the increasing practice of induced transgenderism.

It is important to understand that all these measures are part of the same agenda and not simply a haphazard, piece-meal ‘think-fest’ by a few mentally deranged individuals. They are clearly, logical parts of a satanic plan to alter mankind (as created and described by God) into that which the Master of Deception can own in his own right. It is his attempt to defeat God on what he believes is a ‘level playing field.’

These links were chosen because they also discuss gender ‘progressivism’ which devalues sexual identity on every level. Specifically, they touch on moves to advance the horror of genital mutilation to make the child sexually bereft of their reproductive organs and/or genitalia. And so, those undergoing such procedures are become (by surgical intervention and/or drug ‘therapy’) sexless. Or as they currently prefer to be known, ‘NULL.’  When I say ‘currently,’ I mean just that because their agenda is constantly changing from horror to horror and almost by the month, but always within the framework of the master agenda.

Sadly, it would appear that those ‘willingly’ undergoing such transition, later have grave misgivings about the irreversible damage to their sexuality they have been complicit in (along with others).  Evidence is emerging that the suicide rate amongst those who have undergone such procedures is rising proportionately. A few respected medical voices have decried the procedures and have categorically stated that they lack any sort of medical creditability. Their voices are quickly silenced.

These decisions and positions, therefore, clearly reveal to us that these are objectives that are no longer simply hypothesis. The elite of the Left are now working towards such goals.

Sadly, we have learned so well in recent years that the Left moves swiftly to achieve its goals. We should take for granted (on their past ‘successes’ against the family and God) that they are actively lobbying the very politicians you elect to protect the way of life you foolishly thought was sacrosanct and, therefore, “Blessed by a Nation ‘under God.’”

This is Satanism and shows him highly active in his age-old desire to destroy mankind, particularly in the physicality of male and female as created/made by God in the Beginning.

Genesis 1:27 “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.”

Matthew 19:4 “He answered, ‘Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female…’?”

Genesis 5:2 “Male and female He created them, and He blessed them. And in the day they were created, He called them ‘man.’”

Malachi 2:15 “Has not the LORD made them one, having a portion of the Spirit? And why one? Because He seeks godly offspring. Therefore guard yourselves in your spirit and do not break faith with the wife of your youth.”

At every level, the LGBT movement is moving to destroy our children. And equally (at the same time), to deprive parents identifying as male/female of their traditional (hitherto legally entitled) rights to bring up their kids within time-honored, God-proclaimed values. The values of which I speak are those that ensure the continued blessing of a loving relationship with God.

Finally, these links might add to your understanding:

Australia has just returned a Conservative Government when all odds seemed against it. The Left are screaming that they lost because ‘we’ (the great unwashed) are socially inept and border on intellectual illiteracy.


Have no doubt, the enemy intends to destroy not only us but every remaining vestige of the values and mores that our own parents instilled in us and, thereby, everything that we stand for. They want us dead and gone – the sooner the better. I thank God we shall soon be highly conspicuous by our absence. Not the ‘absence’ that the Left plans but, alternatively, the one which our loving God has long prophesied to occur at the end of the Church age.

From infancy to University, the full agenda of this foul dogma is being not simply preached, but is now taught at every level. Its success is built on peer pressure and social coercion. Anyone, student or staff, who stands up with a different set of values is not only faced with social ostracism but is literally hounded to either recant publicly or is chased out of academia entirely.

Students know that their very marks depend on conformity to what has become systemic core values in the achievement of those academic credentials that allegedly ‘ensure their future.’

The career prospects of students and their possible recruitment by head-hunters directly from campus subject them to risk adverse outcomes for non-conformity. Even great corporate entities are now aboard. There is emerging evidence (mostly ‘word of mouth’) that kids who display alternative viewpoints are allegedly being pushed by their own parents to conform. And just because it is not statistically validated doesn’t mean we should disregard it out of hand. Unfortunately, for the God-fearing, we are increasingly being denied access to any studies that might grant accredited authority to these claims.

Don’t believe me? Brothers and sisters, I think it might well pay you to look at the current policies of Google, Facebook and Twitter which move very swiftly to shut down dissenting viewpoints that fly in the face of this evil madness. I also hold the strong view that websites such as Rapture Ready are now living on borrowed time.

Parent have themselves been raised in a society where material success is valued before anything else (other than the body beautiful). Their natural desire is a desperate need to want to see their lifetime investment in their own kids reap the promised material benefits from this fallen society.  Their advice to their offspring is simply ‘roll over and play dead.’

How pathetically silent is the voice of the ‘church’?!

The only thing we are left with is our vote, and even Conservative governments are now highly infiltrated by those who either countenance these satanic positions or else, out of poverty of spirit and fear (for loss of their respective electoral base), simply remain deathly silent.

God help us, for we have no portion here.

Denis Bowden