It takes me about 80 minutes to drive to the station from my house, and I was a little delayed by getting Littlest and two other chess players I coach settled into the city youth tournament. That was fortunate because I might have otherwise missed some of Craig Westover, who said essentially what is written here about Katherine Kersten's Wednesday column.

Yes, there is a "gay agenda," but it is driven by leftist politics, not sexual orientation. Sexual orientation is merely the means of pushing the politics, much like gender is simply the means for leftist politics masking as "feminism." If conservatives are true to the principle of individualism (and do not succumb to group identification), then they shouldn't condemn the one because of the actions of the many.

Hell yes! I say. Kersten and some others of the right have succumbed (good word, Craig!) to trying to intellectually engage the left on the same terms they use. Dennis Prager makes the point about how the left responds to editorials like Kersten's:

The "anti" arguments are effective. Conservatives have to spend half their time explaining that they are not bad people before they can be heard. But the Left has paid a great price. Because they have come to rely so heavily on one-word dismissals of their opponents, they have few arguments.

Which is they rely instead on invective.

The enemy on campuses isn't gay studies, women's studies, area studies, peace studies, or whatever, separately. It is one agenda. It is leftism. It is socialism. Strike at the root, which are most sociology programs in American universities, and the entire edifice crumbles.

Categories: higher_ed, politics