April 6, 2008

The mainstream media pushed the story of Thomas Beatie this past week, billing the story as the 'miraculous' male pregnancy. The startling news headline took the media by storm on April 1 (was this date a coincidence?), following Beatie's appearance on the Oprah Winfrey show and an interview in People magazine.

If this story really were an instance of an unexplained pregnancy in a male, it might really be newsworthy. But it is actually a total non-story about a woman becoming pregnant. And yet, it has been turned into a giant media deception to forward the homosexual and transsexual agenda.

The fact of the matter is that "Thomas Beatie" is really Tracy Lagondino, a lesbian inclined woman who underwent transsexual surgery that altered her breasts, and who decided not to remove her reproductive organs. Beatie has been able to grow a beard due to a testosterone regimen, adding to the deception of a male pregnancy.

The mainstream news media has decided to cover the story, universally referring to Beatie as a "man", using "he" and "his" in reference to her, and proclaiming her pregnancy a miracle. In a widely circulated Reuters report, for example, it was stated, "Beatie, 34, who lives in Oregon, was born a woman but decided to become a man 10 years ago".

Somehow, biology has now been arbitrarily replaced by "deciding" in order to determine one's gender. It sounds so similar to the increasingly heard argument that an unborn baby, at any stage, is only human if the mother "decides" it is wanted, and if she decides not - she can kill it.

Even the normally politically incorrect and reliable DrudgeReport has been consistently referring to Beatie as a "pregnant man" in his headline links.  What has happened to Matt Drudge that he would go along with such an incredibly obvious political correctness?

What we need to understand is how this story fits into the sweeping agenda of the forces gathered to destroy the family.

Homosexual lobbyists have somehow succeeded in many nations in persuading or bullying governments into recognizing same-sex couples legally, one focus being securing the "right" to raise children for themselves.

At the same time schools are introducing mandatory programs to indoctrinate children with a homosexual understanding of families. Hence, it has become clear that the homosexual movement does not so much wish to do away with the concept of family, but rather to twist and warp it until it means something totally subjective.

"Thomas," the ex-beauty queen, proudly said that being pregnant didn't make her feel less of a man, and that the moral of her story is that "wanting to have a biological child is neither a male nor female desire, but a human desire." Trouble is, men just do not and physically cannot bear children, no matter how much a few might desire to do so. Desire is not reality.

As the attacks on traditional marriage begin to succeed, the next stage in the homosexual offensive is the attack on gender itself. The total mutability of gender and identity has begun, and stories like this one are forced down the throats of readers everywhere with the expectation that they will be gullible to believe that families are whatever two people want them to be. LifeSiteNews has reported a number of times in the past about attempts to deconstruct gender via the United Nations and in other forums (see http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2004/mar/040323a.html)

And the proof is in the pudding. Hundreds of versions of the Beatie story have spawned across the internet and the world, even in such far-away places as New Zealand, Australia, Singapore, India and Thailand.

The UK press is all over the story, which even a week later is still in the top five most popular stories for the BBC. Beatie has become a miniature celebrity and poster-child-bearer for lesbian magazines. Dozens of YouTube videos have been uploaded, paying homage to the woman who is trying to convince the world that childbearing and family are things that transcend gender.

Even breastfeeding advocates, who should be showing outrage that a woman would give birth to a child denied breastfeeding because the child's mother has mutilated her own breasts, are strangely silent on the issue.

It's not hard to tell that this whole movement is geared, as we have said, to deconstruct gender. The goal of the transsexual movement is "liberty," a freedom to call oneself a woman or a man depending on his or her feelings or whims.

The homosexual movement has promoted the belief that persons with homosexual inclinations are all born that way and a growing proportion of the public is accepting the theory without bothering to investigate the evidence or lack of for the claim. The transsexual threat is more ambitious: it aims for acceptance of the fantasy that someone can be born a woman in the body of a man, or a man in the body of a woman, or a man can be a mother, or a woman can be a father.

Can the public be led to accept this as well? Again, without any compelling evidence to support such an extremely radical notion? Could it be, as we yesterday reported Peter Kreeft stating, "Antichrist is now winning, because he has convinced most people to bypass that simple word: reason. Most people today "feel;" they no longer "think."'

This preposterous story shows that now the transsexual movement is gaining prominence in the anti-family crusade. All readers need to be aware that the next phase in the transsexual advance involves wholesale deception and manipulation with the full cooperation of the mainstream media.