Joe Carter on How to Normalize Pedophilia in 5 Easy Steps


Back in July we noted Joe Carter's essay in First Things on five steps to destroy a marriage culture:

If the goal [is] to undermine cultural institutions [such as marriage], the process for getting from Unthinkable to Policy would follow these five easy steps:
Step #1: From Unthinkable to Radical
Step #2: From Radical to Acceptable
Step #3: From Acceptable to Sensible
Step #4: From Sensible to Popular
Step #5: From Popular to Policy

This week he notes how the recent academic symposium in Baltimore to normalize pedophilia follows this same pattern:

Back in June I outlined how to destroy a culture in 5 easy steps.

An academic symposium in Baltimore comprised of just such a cluster of professoriate and perverts is meeting today to shift the acceptance of pedophilia from “unthinkable” to merely “radical”...

With the euphemism “minor-attracted persons” they are also including Step #2: “From Radical to Acceptable — This shift requires the creation and employment of euphemism.”

... Remember when conservatives were mocked and derided for claiming that Lawrence would lead to the normalization [of] polygamy and pedophilia? Now some of those same people who sneered at us are using the decision to promote . . . polygamy and pedophilia.


  1. MIkeS
    Posted August 23, 2011 at 9:29 am | Permalink

    What does this have to do with "traditional marriage"?

  2. mike duckworth
    Posted August 23, 2011 at 11:30 am | Permalink

    I looked at Joe Carters post and the B4UACT site and I fail to see the relationship between traditional marriage, Lawrence, same-sex marriage and pedophilia. Frankly, the argument erodes our position more than supporting it. I question the wisdom of making such tangential assertions if trying to convince the value of marriage.

  3. Barb
    Posted August 23, 2011 at 4:51 pm | Permalink

    I find this post very relevant. Pseudo-marriage has opened the door to other social ills using the strategy outlined above.

  4. catholicdad
    Posted August 23, 2011 at 5:32 pm | Permalink

    Barb has it exactly right. The legal precedents which would be established were the lunacy of pseudo-marriage to be imposed by judicial fiat, would be precisely the same lunatic precedents which would render it impossible to deny the same "benefits" to polygamists, polyandrists, and ultimately (just give them time!) pedophiles as well.

    It is time for America to stand up and take their children out of the clutches of these fanatics.

  5. Doogan
    Posted August 23, 2011 at 6:24 pm | Permalink

    Carter misses the point regarding how marriage culture is destroyed.

    Simply put, traditional marriage cannot be destroyed without the consent and consensus of the people.

    Marriage culture was gradually destroyed over the years because the obligations of marriage were chipped away while the privileges were expanded. At a certain point people start seeing marriage as an entitlement. Only then did it become vulnerable same-sex couples who wanted inclusion. Carter's Step #1 occured long before the battle over SSM.

    And the fight against this trend will fail because people like Carter fail to see the larger picture. The battle to protect traditional marriage has already been lost, and nobody's calling for a rematch because the people don't want traditional marriage.

    Traditional marriage is for life. The people want unilateral divorce and serial marriages.

    Traditional marriage is monogamous. The people want legal adultery.

    Traditional marriage is the only legitimate place for sexual activity. The people want sexual freedom.

    The people surrendered traditional marriage a long time ago. The only way to reclaim it is to rebuild it. And nobody's making a serious effort to do so.

  6. Badger
    Posted August 23, 2011 at 7:01 pm | Permalink

    NOM has tried this tactic before. However, overplaying their hand in such a revolting way is turning more and more people off their cause.

  7. catholicdad
    Posted August 24, 2011 at 1:11 am | Permalink

    Doogan's post is highly important. Apart from its defeatism, it is spot on. The remedy for its defect is found within its own logic: just as marriage was "chipped away", so it will be restored, incrementally, and over a period of decades.

    The process has already begun, and Doogan is quite wrong to say no one is making a serious effort in this regard.

    NOM, along with notable other organizations, is answering the call.

  8. catholicdad
    Posted August 24, 2011 at 1:15 am | Permalink

    Badger, there must be phrase somewhere to describe someone such as yourself, whose position has been rejected thirty one straight times at the polls by the American people, yet whose assessment is that more and more people are turning away from that which they have unanimously and definitively upheld.

    Whistling in the dark springs to mind....

  9. Louis E.
    Posted August 24, 2011 at 1:37 am | Permalink

    That the religious understanding of "traditional marriage" represents an extreme that is unpopular does not mean that the false dichotomy of there being only that,or a "sexual freedom" so extreme that even the sex of one's partner does not matter can not be shown to be false.

  10. Doogan
    Posted August 24, 2011 at 4:28 am | Permalink

    @Louis E.: Framing the issue as having to choose between traditional marriage and unprecedented sexual freedom is certainly a false dichotomy. This is where Carter gets it dead on. You never present the choice between Unthinkable and Policy. You travel there one step at a time. The arrival at Policy is only only inevitable if those steps aren't effectively opposed.

    I believe that no-fault divorce was the tipping point. Once the marriage became a union that could be unilaterally dissolved for no reason at all, it lost much of its significance. Marriage was no longer about the family; as a matter of law, marriage was decreed to be about individual happiness.

    Every time marriage is stripped of its obligations, it moves one step closer to being an entitlement. SSM isn't destroying marriage culture. It's merely an natural consequence of a culture that's already been destroyed.

    @catholicdad: This is where NOM is misguided. Stopping SSM won't save a single traditional (to the extent that still applies) marriage. Yet they pour millions into this battle. Meanwhile, New York became the last state in the nation to enact no-fault divorce last year. The effects were immediate and significant, as NOM noted:

    That's 4,000 real, traditional, one man/one woman marriages that were destroyed by a single piece of legislation in just eight months. This battle is far and away more important than the SSM battle, but it only merits a single post on the NOM blog.

    This is the war that needs to be fought to save traditional marriage, and it's a war nobody's fighting.

  11. Mikhail
    Posted August 24, 2011 at 7:00 am | Permalink

    The Lawrence case was a good thing because it overturned draconian anti-sodomy laws which seemed totalitarian in nature. What happens in private between consenting adults is nobody's business. I do not see how the Lawrence decision could possibly lead to same-sex marriage or pedophillia

  12. Badger
    Posted August 24, 2011 at 11:20 am | Permalink

    And in fact the Lawrence decision was very narrowly written and won't lead to either gay marriage or pedophilia. Gay marriage will have to be argued in front of SCOTUS on its own terms. However, before that the Supreme Court will consider DOMA and will almost certainly declare it unconstitutional.

  13. Louis E.
    Posted August 24, 2011 at 1:37 pm | Permalink

    If DOMA is not compatible with the Constitution as it stands,then its provisions must be explicitly added to the Constitution.The general welfare can not endure the treatment of same-sex sexual relationships as if they were of as much worth as opposite-sex relationships.

  14. Louis E.
    Posted August 24, 2011 at 7:05 pm | Permalink

    As I have said before,I believe that opposite-sex couples should STOP marrying in any state where SSM is legal,and move their weddings (and the money spent) to states where SSM remains illegal.This smashes the pro-SSM claim that SSM is an economic bonanza.If they are religious (I am not) they have the option of having a religious ceremony at home but should still remain single to the civil law until they register in a state where they are legally husband and wife and not spouse one and spouse two or partner A and partner one should treat the latter form as a valid marriage.