What is a family? That simple question has gotten more challenging to answer in the day and age in which we live, and intentionally so. But why?

The 5th Edition of the American Heritage Dictionary’s first definition offered for “family” is as follows: “A fundamental social group in society typically consisting of one or two parents and their children.” What is tellingly missing from that definition are the terms “father” and “mother.”

The core family — a father, mother, and their children — has formed the definition of family in the human context since the dawn of time. Aside from historical polygamy, it’s really been over the last 50 years that these fundamental family components have been challenged.

Coming out of the sexual revolution of the 1960s, the notion that sex could be completely divorced from procreation and the responsibility of caring for one’s progeny became progressively accepted and embraced across the landscape of American culture.

In public schools, the focus on sex education moved away from a study of purely scientific reality to one of social engineering, with the aim of challenging America’s historic Judeo-Christian sexual ethical mores. The goal was to eliminate any moral boundaries to sexual activity, so long as those who engaged in the activity did so with their own consent.

As the years have gone by, the old sexual ethics have been attacked as old-fashioned, backward, or bigoted. Indeed, the Old Testament warning in Isaiah 5:20 has seemingly never proven more apt: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!”

In America today, to object to sexually immoral activity and lifestyles is, culturally speaking, to engage in evil. Failure to affirm sexual immorality, such as homosexuality or “transgenderism,” as legitimate and wholly appropriate expressions of human sexuality is seen as “hate.”

Making matters even more convoluted was the U.S. Supreme Court’s Obergefell v. Hodges ruling redefining marriage to include homosexual relationships. This fundamental redefining of what constitutes a nuclear family has only fueled social confusion and moral rot. Now, even recognizing the basic binary nature of sex is controversial.

A recent example of this cultural rot and topsy-turvy moralism played out among members of the new media.

Daily Wire commentator Matt Walsh was a guest on Tucker Carlson’s podcast, which was posted on April 30. During that podcast, Walsh made the argument that as much as a child being in foster care is not a good situation, he believes that “a child going to two gay parents, I think, is worse. I think it’s easily worse, actually.”

When Carlson asked why, Walsh stated: “It’s more disordered. It’s more confusing for the child. … I don’t see going to gay parents as an improvement over what they had before.” Walsh defended his opinion by saying that various studies had been done that show adverse mental health effects on children raised in same-sex-parent homes.

That comment clearly got under the skin of independent journalist Glenn Greenwald. He posted a clip of Walsh’s comments on X with the following statement: “One has to be morally deranged — or totally ignorant of the grim realities of kids lingering without parents in orphanages, shelters and foster care, only to be expelled at 18 with no support — to believe that that dark hell is better than being adopted by gay couples.” Later in another posting, Greenwald attacked Walsh again: “[Walsh’s] hatred for gay people vastly outweighs his self-glorifying professed love for The Children.”

Greenwald is a 58-year-old homosexual who “married” his male partner, David Miranda, in 2005 in Brazil. They met when Greenwald was 37 and Miranda was 19. In 2018, the couple adopted two boys. Miranda died in 2023. In other words, Greenwald clearly took Walsh’s opinion as a personal attack on his immoral lifestyle.

It didn’t take long for the nature of Greenwald’s immoral lifestyle to spill out all over the Internet, as a recent fetish video of him engaging in grotesque homosexual activity with an apparent male prostitute was leaked last month. The video also included an apparent meth pipe.

Greenwald’s response was the typical obfuscation of the issue by contending that what transpires in private between two consenting adults is nobody’s business. Furthermore, Greenwald asserts that he has his own personal moral and ethical code, and he is answerable to no one else. That view is indeed ironic given the fact that he felt completely free to judge Walsh as “morally deranged” over his objection to children being placed in same-sex-parent homes.

Yet even Greenwald’s “privacy” argument proves disingenuous, given that the video shows he knows he’s being filmed. Furthermore, the whole homosexual movement is anything but a push for greater privacy. Rather, the exact opposite is the case. Every year, and progressively so over the decades, the American culture has become inundated with gay-everything — from Pride Month, during which seemingly every major business is pressured to fly the rainbow flag, to pride parades that often consist of scantily clad individuals promoting sexually objectionable behavior.

The aim is not simply a call to live and let live but to infiltrate and indoctrinate the American culture into rejecting traditional Judeo-Christian sexual ethics and morals in favor of the socially corrupting and family-corroding ethics of the sexual revolutionaries.

The reason they have pushed to have their same-sex relationships recognized as “marriages” and demanded the right to adopt children so they can declare themselves a “family” is to further erode the old moral social foundations.

The truth is, there is ultimately no middle road. Either the culture follows the sexual revolutionaries into greater and greater corruption, or the culture rejects the new sexual immorality and returns to the fundamental and ethically sound morals of sexuality as God designed it.