“Diversity” Propaganda

Kutztown, PA

A source employed by the Kutztown University who spoke to UncleRaisin.com on condition of anonymity advises that the University has been training the campus police in “diversity” and “sensitivity” training paid for by a grant from Home Land Security Department. Understandably, security has been increased in the wake of 9-11 and the Virginia Tech murders. However, the training focuses errantly upon the wrong causes when it seeks to prevent “violence.” The supposition is that the promotion “tolerance” is the key to peace on campus. (The ethical framework defining good and evil is left to the imagination or, rather, the guidance of the tolerance mongers who hold to no Commandment from God and therefore cannot discriminate between right and wrong.)

“Diversity” is a buzz word that suggests to the generally liberal mind that it is good and right to treat all kinds of people (from all places of the world with its varying racial variety and mixes) respectfully with the dignity and rights afforded to human beings because of well, and this is where the liberal mind trips up the fact that human beings are created in the image of God. The problem is that the modern “liberal” is also an atheist, politically speaking. He does not believe that the God of the West (the God of Christianity) has revealed Law which a modern body politic ought to acknowledge. The political arena is believed, by this ideology, to be off limits to God and His Law.

Diversity then involves not simply the doctrine that all races of human beings qua humans possess inherent dignity. Rather, the concept is wrenched and reshaped to apply to behavior and allegedly immutable characteristics (viz. sexual incontinence or deviancy). Moreover, and prior on the evolving social time-chart, distinction is sexual roles are also abolished for the sake of radical egalitarian principles extrapolated from this wrenched doctrine of human dignity.

A case in point is the fact that most of the violence which erupts at the University proceeds out of the dances where an observer can witness “gangsta rap,” simulated sexual activity, nearly naked dancers, participants with drugs in their pockets, and drunk DJs. This morally degenerate and immoral behavior is not censured but tolerated in the name of “diversity,” “sensitivity,” and “tolerance.” Since the University has no moral standard which finds fornication and lascivious behavior to be immoral, it must tolerate such perversion. Ethical concerns are shifted to enforce the First of the new Commandments, “Thou shalt respect all the gods,” and second, like unto the first, “Thou shalt tolerate . . . (any form of sexual deviancy).”

The new moralizing is a matter of teaching students to tolerate what is Immoral and to be intolerant of any one who Moralizes against another. The new morality supplants the old. Christian sexual Morality is to be kept in the closet. Perversion must be brought out of the closet and respected.

In the diversity and sensitivity training the class is guided to the goal of reducing “bigotry” (read: Christian opposition to sexual immorality). The training given to the campus police involves role-playing by which a policeman plays the role of a homosexual who is being harassed by “intolerant bigots” – Christians. In this fashion he can learn how to be sensitive to the abused group and to be more understanding of the need to arrest the “hater.” Repent America was named as “hot group,” a cause of conflict, which the university might need to remove to keep the peace.

A training segment designed by the Department of Justice designates Repent America, specifically, as “a fundamentalist hate group.” The seminar leader directed the class in the goal of removing the “hot group” from the seen in order to keep the peace and resolve the “conflict.”

While participating in one of these training sessions, Cpl. Armbruster was observed to stand up and object, declaring, “I have had enough of this. They have a right to be there.”

Whence comes this “Diversity” Training?

The National Coalition Building Institute (www.ncbi.org) is one of the training organizations contracted to train campus officials. Both Robert Watrous, Director of Judicial Affairs and Campus Chief of Police Bill Mioskie are certified by NCBI and have trained police and other administrators. The three “core principles” are 1) addressing “diversity issues” and the elimination of “prejudice and discrimination” which includes “prejudice” on the basis of “sexual orientation”; 2) providing personal testimony from those victimized by “racist and other prejudicial attitudes” [emphasis ours and let the reader understand the reference to be to those who believe sodomy is immoral behavior] in order to build sympathy and promote alliances between sympathizers and the victim; 3) respect for those leaders who promulgate these principles.

The University’s Code of Civility¹ binds students to commit to the essentially same philosophy preached by the NCBI. The Code of Civility calls all students to a “code of appropriate behavior.” The reader is never give a definition of “appropriate behavior” but the effort to describe it is laced with the familiar buzzwords straight out of the lexicon of the Left: diversity, acceptance, bigotry, harassment, prejudice. Gone from the “code” is any semblance of the four cardinal classical and Christian virtues, viz. temperance, prudence, justice, and fortitude. And even if these ancient virtues were resurrected, their meaning would be ever changing, evolving with the Left’s neo-pagan ethics.

To speak of a code without any reference to a divine Law is to speak of tyranny. Appeals to “diversity,” “acceptance,” and “prejudice” beg the question; “By what standard?”

Are those who call for “tolerance” and “acceptance” and who denounce “prejudice” applying this principle to Communists, Nazis, Aztecs, and KKK wizards? By what standard these ideologues to be judged? By what standard is a Leftist to be judged?

And so the University, which does not even believe in the concept the One Truth from which its very name derives, blows in the wind of whatever pop sociology and evolving “law” happens to be breathed out by the latest judicial appointees. And the judicial appointees get their ethics not from any divine Law but from whatever is in vogue. They divine from public opinion – especially as shaped by the “progressives,” the political Left – that which seems “just,” and so the begged question remains. The finally authority is the evolving opinions of people. It is not God, nor His Law. There is no transcendent, permanent Law or ethic. There is no enduring right or wrong. All ethics are in flux, like the evolving universe.

Kutztown University’s Code of Civility expects its students to pledge accordingly:

“I shall appreciate diversity and encourage its acceptance by others;

“I shall nourish the development of a society in which bigotry, harassment, prejudice, and hatred of any kind is not tolerated”²

The University’s trendy embrace of “tolerance” says that it is in pursuit of a society in which “hatred” (how about of evil?) will not be tolerated. Surely good and justice cannot be loved without its opposite being hated. May the good students not be prejudiced against evildoers? And, if this be tolerable, which are the evildoers? Nazis? Cannibals? Race baters? Pedophiles? Pederasts? Catamites? Sodomites? Though the University’s definition of good and evil is not clearly stated, it is easily inferred. An examination of the student organizations that it tolerates and promotes signifies its Lawlessness and its embrace of the Left’s transitory moral code.

The GLBTQ (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Trans-gender, and Questioning)³ student organization, listed as an official organization of Kutztown University, has two faculty members who serve as bona fide “allies” – what was formerly called a “sponsors” of the organization. Anke Walz and Dr. Deryl B. Johnson are faculty advisors who serve as “allies” seeking to enlist more of the same from the student and faculty population. “Allies is a group of concerned students, faculty and staff who are dedicated to providing a safe and cooperative environment for gay, lesbian and bisexual persons and their straight friends.”⁴ This University-sponsored organization states one of its purposes to be to “increase” the “acceptance of GLBTH persons and issues and to create and insure cooperation and unity among the Kutztown University community.” (Curiously, the “H” refers not to homosexsuals but to heterosexuals who wish to identify themselves as sympathetic “allies” in the achievement of the goals.) The fifth among the stated goals is: “Maintain a safe space environment to nurture and support student leadership development and campus activities to reduce homophobia.”⁵

On the fair assumption that the University supports the organization which it houses in its Office of Human Diversity, it is fair to conclude that the University stands in support of this goal to suppress or reduce “homophobia.”⁶ Those who hold the “old Christian ethic” which regards sodomy as an odious crime punishable by death according to the Scriptures (or castration according to, for example, the more liberal Thomas Jefferson⁷) must by discouraged in their beliefs so that they and their beliefs may be “reduced.”

---

notes:

1 http://www.thefire.org/pdfs/6be57553e37ec4d280f3d00f01c32b85.pdf (on site 19 June 2007).
2 Ibid.
3 The GLBTQ is part of the Office of Human Diversity, 15 Stratton Administration Building,P.O. Box 730 Kutztown. PA 19530.
4 http://www.kutztown.edu/glbtqcenter/purpose_goals.asp (on site 19 June 2007).
5 Ibid.
6 The political neologism was invented as a propaganda tool of the avant-garde “homosexual rights” and has appeared as early as 1976 in the American Heritage Dictionary and defined as “fear of homosexuals or homosexuality.” The employment of the term serves the purpose of shifting conventionally understood deviancy in the sodomite from him to the one who despises the loathsome practice and practitioner of sodomy. That which is still listed as a crime in most state law codes has been transformed into an “alternative lifestyle” against which critics thereof all manner of isolation and shunning is brought to bear by the authorities of academe.
7 Philip Kurland and Ralph Lerner,“A Bill for Proportioning Crimes and Punishments,” The Founders' Constitution, (University of Chicago Press, 1987), vol. 5, Amendment VIII, doc. 10, p. 375. Jefferson’s recommendation regarding Amendment VIII: “Whosoever shall be guilty of Rape, Polygamy, or Sodomy with man or woman shall be punished, if a man, by castration, if a woman, by cutting thro' the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch diameter at the least.”