Manny Pacquiao, Gay Marriage, and a Call for Eternal Hostility (Part One)

I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.
– Thomas Jefferson

Filipino boxer and politician Manny Pacquiao
now joins reality show personality Phil Robertson  and Chick-fil-A founder Don Cathy on the growing list of public figures recently punished for holding traditional views on sex and marriage.

He expressed his belief that homosexuality is abnormal, and subsequently lost a Nike endorsement contract, received an avalanche of vilification, and became yet another warning of what happens to those who admit they haven’t “evolved” with the rest of the culture.

And America yawns. After all, these days, when someone suffers for making anti-homosexual remarks, it’s no more newsworthy than when yet another high-profile woman or man comes out of the closet. In 2016, the abuse of the religious conservative and the celebration of the gay celebrity are both business as usual.

Manny’s Crime

Ironically, he didn’t even bring the subject up. Last week Pacquiao, an openly Christian athlete, was asked along with other candidates for the Philippine Senate how he viewed same-sex marriage. His verbatim response was as follows:

“It’s common sense. Will you see any animals where male is to male and female is to female? The animals are better. They know how to distinguish male from female. If we approve male on male, female on female, then man is worse than animals.”

Reaction was fast and furious. Nike, who he represented as an endorser, dropped his contract, calling his remarks “abhorrent.” Basketball legend Magic Johnson tweeted his support of Nike’s actions  and the media picked up the story with headlines  declaring Manny said gays were “worse than animals.”

(He didn’t – read his statement again. He said that if we as a society redefine marriage we – not gays – are worse than animals. So if anybody got compared to lower forms, it was us, not lesbians and gays.)

The Animal Standard?

Now, you can legitimately critique his remarks. So can I, and I will. Because I don’t think it works using animals as a standard for human behavior of any sort.

Especially the sexual sort. I’ve raised enough dogs to know that their pattern of molesting legs and pillows hardly raises the bar for human conduct. So when gay apologists argue that homosexuality does exist within the animal kingdom, or when conservative apologists argue that it doesn’t, I say to both sides, “So what? We don’t take our cues from animals.”

So OK, on that point, I’d say Manny could have chosen better examples. But he didn’t compare gays to animals as the press mistakenly says he did, nor did he resort to insults or name calling. He was asked a direct question, to which he responded honestly, saying nothing hateful or rude.

He in fact graciously apologized later for any hurt he may have caused, while refusing to back down on his position as a Bible believing Christian.   All in all, I’d say the guy deserves our prayers and appreciation for taking a godly stand and paying for it.

More Equal than Others

But when it comes to free expression of viewpoints, even if those views or the expressions are offensive to some, are Americans operating with any sort of consistency? I’d find the uproar over Pacquiao a lot easier to swallow if any public figure who offended a group’s sensibilities was censured. But don’t hold your breath looking for integrity when it comes to free speech. It all depends on who you are, and who you’re offending.

George Clooney, for example, mocked conservative NRA spokesman Charlton Heston when Heston’s Alzheimer’s disease was progressing. When asked about making fun of a dying man, Clooney quipped,    “I don’t care. Charlton Heston is the head of the National Rifle Association. He deserves whatever anyone says about him.” Nobody cancelled any of Clooney’s contracts.

Rev. Jessie Jackson, revered figure to the political left and Civil Rights supporters, referred to Jews as “Hymies” and New York City as “Hymietown” when being interviewed by a journalist who, he assumed, would never repeat his use of the anti-Semitic term. When his remarks went public, despite a muted outcry, Jackson’s career was barely nicked and his stature’s intact.

The Hunger Game’s Jennifer Lawrence, named by Forbes magazine as the highest paid actress in 2015, referred to conservative Christians from her home state of Kentucky as “all those people holding their crucifixes, which may as well be pitchforks, thinking they’re fighting the good fight. I grew up in Kentucky. I know how they are.”   And there’s not so much as a hand slap coming her way.

In this brave new world, saying you believe homosexuality’s wrong sparks a scandal. But insult Jews, Evangelicals, or a terminally ill gun rights advocate, and you’re clear. All of which brings Animal Farm’s famous observation about equality to mind: “All animals are equal. But some animals are more equal than others.

“The Fault Lies not with the Stars but with Ourselves”

This kind of thing is causing a lot of hand wringing over violations of the freedom of speech guaranteed by our First Amendment. But it’s not the First Amendment being violated here, because our only constitutional guarantee of free speech is that the government won’t stifle it.

Well, it’s not. So far, those who’ve reaped punishment for holding the “wrong position” on homosexuality – Dr. Laura Schlessinger, journalist Andy Rooney, or Miss California USA Carrie Prejean, for example – have all been punished by corporations or private organizations, not the law. They’ve lost contracts and careers, but not their freedom   And despite the virus of “hate speech” laws spreading in other countries, America hasn’t, at this point, gone down that oppressive road.

Which is good, but which also leads to a disturbing conclusion: Freedom of speech is alive and well in the Constitution, but not in the Culture. The government won’t, at this point, act against you for expressing conservative views. But the culture will, and only the most naïve among us will refuse to recognize that.

On this point George Orwell, whose books Animal Farm and 1984 are definitive works on freedom of speech and thought, made quite an observation:

If large numbers of people believe in freedom of speech, there will be freedom of speech, even if the law forbids it. But if public opinion is sluggish, inconvenient minorities will be persecuted, even if laws exist to protect them.

Now public opinion doesn’t become sluggish in a vacuum. The influencers of the culture, notably the news media along with the entertainment and education industries, have all adopted solidly pro-gay positions, along with the belief that any other position is at least ignorant; at most hateful. So when influencers of the public become intolerant, the public will eventually follow suit.

All of which is intimidating many people into silence, when outrage would be more appropriate. We need less “don’t make waves” timidity, and more of what Thomas Jefferson espoused when he famously swore eternal hostility against every form of tranny over the mind of man. If there’s such a thing as noble hostility, this is the sort which surely qualifies.

The question, then, becomes how to speak responsibly about homosexuality in such openly pro-gay times, when to speak, and what circumstances call for it. In the second part of this post tomorrow, let’s try tackling those questions.