GOP’s Moral Cowardice Leads to More Concessions, Acceptance of Dems’ Unthinkable Agenda

Written by Robert Knight

What is it with Republicans who try to fight the culture war with one hand tied behind their backs? They shift to a defensive crouch even when their position is clearly right.

G.K. Chesterton mocked this tendency years ago. Some politicians, he wrote, would loudly oppose the deadly mugging of a grandmother in a city park not because it’s immoral but because it would be a “waste of a perfectly good grandmother.”

Further, it would deter the public from enjoying the park. Anything but saying it is morally wrong to hit Grandma over the head.

In debates over marriage, some GOP strategists recommended legalizing same-sex civil unions or even endorsing gays being parents. They gave away the store, ceding the moral underpinning of marriage.

It took a few short years before the Biden White House was giving an LGBTQ flag more prominence than Old Glory, corporations were browbeating religious employees, and the Los Angeles Dodgers were giving a Hero Award to the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence.

Cowardice always leads to more concessions and to where we are now — a culture shrilly demanding acceptance of what was recently unthinkable.

The latest example of moral obtuseness is former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a Republican presidential hopeful. Citing parental rights, he opposes the enactment of commonsense laws that protect children from trans madness as 20 states have done.

This stance should endear him to LGBTQ activists, who apparently account for the lion’s share of his minuscule base.

On CNN’s “State of the Union” on June 18, he told Jake Tapper that the government should not be involved in any way. On Thursday, he reiterated this on “Fox & Friends,” telling Brian Kilmeade:

“I don’t think anything can replace parents when you are talking about major decisions that need to be made by our children. I want all parents out there to think about something. How many other decisions do you want the government making for you, in your home, regarding your kids?”

This is about child abuse, not parental rights. Nobody, not even a parent, has the right to ply a confused child with dangerous drugs and hormones or authorize life-altering surgery. Would we say parents have the right to cut off a child’s healthy arm or leg? Doctors who do gender “transitions” should lose their licenses and be jailed.

Almost as morally obtuse is another GOP presidential candidate, Miami Mayor Francis Suarez.

“Sex change for minors is something I just can’t even comprehend, as a parent,” Mr. Suarez told the Daily Caller in a good start. But then he added:

“It’s problematic for Republicans because we say, I think correctly, that we don’t want the government telling us, or the school system telling us, or teaching sexuality to our young children. Right? And so, you know, that is a totally defensible position, and I believe that position and I agree with that position.”

Huh? It’s not problematic. Child abuse is illegal in all 50 states.

The most common moral dodge is to begin a discussion with a statement like “I don’t care what anybody does in the privacy of his home.”

Well, yes, up to a point. Americans have a deep regard for privacy rights. But most of us also believe that because human beings are created in the image of God, we should care about others.

Indifference is not a virtue. Jesus made that point in the parable of the good Samaritan. Nobody likes busybodies, but well-founded concern is why police get called when physical abuse is suspected next door.

As for the morality of “gender transition,” even for adults: Do you think a doctor should be able to make money by taking advantage of someone who is so mentally ill that she wants to cut off her healthy breasts or he wants to be castrated?

Gender dysphoria is real, but it’s treatable. More than 90 percent of children grow out of it. Surgery is permanent.

Sexual transition surgery violates the foundational medical command “First, do no harm.” For that matter, how is abortion, except to save the life of the mother, justified under that timeless standard?

In California, Democrats have introduced AB 957, which directs family court judges to award custody based partly on “a parent’s affirmation of a child’s gender identity.”

If you don’t go along with little Sue transitioning to little Samuel, you might just lose your child. President Biden proclaimed on Pride Day:

“These are our kids. … Not somebody else’s kids; they’re all our kids.”

Except, of course, his son Hunter’s love child, Navy Jones Roberts.

Eyeing the California bill, author Abigail Shrier writes at

“Teachers and activists and influencers and therapists suggest to a child that she might be ‘genderqueer.’ The moment she takes the bait, she trips the wire, and becomes ‘all our kids.’”

Scott Wilk, a Republican state senator, summarizes AB 957:

“If you love your children, you need to flee California. You need to flee.”

Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders said that we have a choice between “normal or crazy.”

True, but it’s deeper than that. It’s good vs. evil.

Republicans who understand this and expose Democrats as the party of late-term abortion and operating on confused children should be able to win elections even in deep blue states.

Robert Knight is a former Los Angeles Times news editor and writer and was a Media Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. This column was originally published by The Washington Times.

He has been published by the Wall Street Journal, National Review, the Christian Post,,,, and many others.  He has co-authored three books and written 10, including “Liberty on the Brink: How the Left Plans to Steal Your Vote” (D. James Kennedy Ministries, 2020) and “The Coming Communist Wave: What Happens If the Left Captures All Three Branches of Government” (D. James Kennedy Ministries, 2020) . 

You can follow him on Twitter at @RobertKnight17, and his website is