So many of the moral issues that polarize the nation are now having legal consequences. Liberal activists insist upon forcing acceptance down the throats of countless Americans who disagree.
The violence of this forced acceptance is something unseen in American history.
Photographers, florists, bed & breakfast owners, and bakers who refused to service same-sex weddings are being fined and put out of business for simply following their consciences. Schools are being sued by angry plaintiffs who insist upon using bathrooms of the opposite sex. Employers who use the wrong pronoun for someone who self-identifies as something else than the sex given them by God face crippling fines. Satanists insist upon holding a sidewalk ceremony blaspheming and committing sacrilege in front of a Catholic Church.
In face of these acts, one has to ask: Why do these activists and their corresponding base rage over these cases? Why do they insist upon publicly forcing their opinions upon others?
After all, although morally wrong, one has to admit that all of the behaviors in question are legally permitted. In the case of the weddings, alternatives are plentiful. Indeed, there was nothing to stop "transgender" people from acting out their fantasies in the privacy of their home. Why do these activists resort to such intimidation tactics? Why do they not adopt a live-and-let-live attitude toward those who disagree?
It would certainly make all lives easier if they would abandon their rage. It hardly seems proportional that all society must change to accommodate someone's demand to publicly sin.
The answer lies in that little word: sin. The nature of sin calls forth this rage. It also lies in the word "public." The social nature of man will not allow a live-and-let-live attitude.
Of course, liberal activsts will not admit this. The very concept of sin "sins" against their worldview. Indeed, the only real sin for them is to affirm the existence of sin … and sinners.
This however does not change reality. Aristotle claims man is a social being made for society, which exists to facilitate virtuous life in common. The social nature of man craves a unity around this purpose. That is where the problem begins.
When one sins, one commits an anti-social act that breaks the bonds that unite the individual to society. A liar, for example, breaks the bonds of trust that must exist in relationships for society to function well. Persistence in lying causes others to avoid the person. The individual must repent and ask forgiveness to restore a social unity.
When a person is vitiated to sin, publicly manifests this vice, and will not change or repent, it has the effect of severing these bonds. It also awakens a sense of guilt that results in loneliness. By man's social nature, this isolation creates an urgent and furious need for reconciliation to feel whole again.
Hence, the rage.
As Prof. J. Budziszewski explains in his masterful book, What We Can't Not Know, the frantic need for reconciliation explains why activists "cannot be satisfied with toleration, but must propagandize, recruit, and convert."
Their rage is not centered on the acts they insist upon practicing since there is now nothing to stop them from doing so. Rather it is caused by the social stigma that these acts trigger. They desire to belong to society but do not wish to change. The only way to resolve the problem is to force their position upon the whole society, which must "reconcile" to accommodate their fancies.
In the case of sexuality, Prof. Budziszewski explains, "the shape of human life must be transformed. All of the assumptions of normal sexuality must be dissolved: marriage, family, innocence, purity, childhood — all must be called into question, even if it means pulling down the world around their ears."
Indeed, these activists now seek to unleash social ostracism against those who affirm natural law and an objective morality. These nonconforming absolutist adversaries must be crushed. The media and liberal establishment are recruited to isolate, intimidate, and socially and legally browbeat opponents (including The Little Sisters of the Poor) into compliance.
That is why there can be no peace in the Culture War. That is why the liberal activists rage.