Larsen Financial is a full-service investment center that has all the products and services of the major brokerages, but without the high costs.

Learn more.

Love the Person, Reject The Agenda

  • Love the Person, Reject The Agenda

  • 9 August 2011 by 0 Comments

Love the Person, Reject the Agenda

By Richard Larsen

Published – Idaho State Journal, 08/09/11

This past week we’ve seen played out in the pages of the Idaho State Journal the modus operandi of the left in reframing and reshaping fundamental issues regarding cultural and societal standards, by denigrating and disparaging those who believe differently. Lynda Eggimann, an intelligent, affable woman of exceptional courage and moral clarity brought to readers’ attention two local events. One is an attempt to further disenfranchise the all too reticent majority’s freedom of speech and freedom of religion, and the other a further degradation of our cultural mores.

She didn’t seek to silence the self-proclaimed “Thinkers, Atheists, and Agnostics for Religious Tolerance.” nor did she advocate disallowing them their rights of expression and free exercise of their beliefs . She rather lamented that due to their intolerance, they were prohibiting people of faith from exercising their inalienable rights.

Lynda was right on in questioning where we’re heading as a society when fundamental First Amendment rights are being deprived for the majority of the population by a small vocal group of intolerant extremists, who ironically have “Tolerance” in the name of their group.

To these individuals, freedom of religion can only be exercised by those who conform with their concept of religion, or lack thereof. Freedom of speech can only be exercised if it conforms with their ideology, and all other voices are to be proscribed. Adherents to this perverted logic reject the fundamental right of all Americans to express their faith freely and publicly, and rather advance a fascistic concept of tyranny of the minority by imposing their views on all others.

Her second point of contention was not against homosexuals, contrary to what her antagonists imputed to her. It was against the “in-your-face,” “ram down society’s throat” tactics of the radical advocates of homosexual normalcy. There are societal and cultural mores, or standards that vary by community. The mores of Pocatello and Eastern Idaho, however, are significantly different than San Francisco, where Lynda’s from, or from Amsterdam’s Red Light District, or New Orlean’s Bourbon Street or Sodom and Gomorrah.

Yet the events surrounding Pocatello’s homosexual pride event sound like they belong in any of those places, much more than they belong here. The very spectacle of a transgender hip hop “artist”, Katastrophe, leading a parade down Main Street seems incongruous with Pocatello’s cultural mores. Also disconcerting is the nature of his art form and his lyrics, and what he stands for. After all, his debut album as a producer was “Let’s F***, Then Talk About My Problems.” Participants at the event are warned five times in the rules and regulations that there is to be no public nudity. Do you think there just might be a threat of that? What kind of a debacle of debauchery has our mayor and city council authorized, even granting public alcohol consumption privileges to them? It would appear they are equally bereft of community standards of decency.

Alan Sears and Craig Osten in their book The Homosexual Agenda, identified the four stages that the movement has gone through to reshape the issue. It’s now in the fourth stage of legitimization where, with the full backing of the American Psychiatric Association, Hollywood, the mainstream media, and the education establishment, the issue has been taken from a treatable psychological disorder to normal, if not preferred, “lifestyle” in less than 40 years. If the practice is so “normal,” how long would civilization last if we were all that way?

Most of the movement’s success can be linked to reshaping the argument from a moral and logical debate to one of “human rights.” As such, all who question the movement and the practice are labeled as “homophobic,” “hateful,” or “intolerant” toward those who are merely “different.” And as we saw this last week, they do so with all the acrimony, animus, and vitriol they can muster and get away with in print.

Society has been reprogrammed to assume they’re victims, even with all the laws on the books preventing discrimination and in the Equal Opportunity Employment protections while seeking employment. With the passage of “hate crime” legislation, they now have super protection where opponents can and are literally deprived of their freedom of speech for expressing opposition to their agenda. In England and Canada ministers have been arrested for referring to it as a moral issue. With our hate crimes legislation on the books, it won’t be long before the same occurs here.

There is a sharp distinction that needs to be drawn between accepting and loving those of different persuasions and accepting the militant, extremist tactics of the movement purportedly advancing their cause. If anything, we need more Lynda Eggimanns who can make that distinction, loving the person, but willing to stand against the erosion of our cultural standards of public decency.

AP award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, and is a graduate of Idaho State University with a BA in Political Science and History and former member of the Idaho State Journal Editorial Board.  He can be reached at


About the

More than anything, I want my readers to think. We're told what to think by the education establishment, which is then parroted by politicians from the left, and then reinforced by the mainstream media. Steeped in classical liberalism, my ideological roots are based in the Constitution and our founding documents. Armed with facts, data, and correct principles, today's conservatives can see through the liberal haze and bring clarity to any political discussion.

Related Posts