|Pseudo-victim Dayna Morales. (Dept. of Defense)|
Let me set this up by saying I'm conflicted on the issue of tipping. I tip good service because it's customary, and because I know a lot of servers depend on the extra change for their ability to pay rent and utilities and put gas in their cars. However, I don't believe servers are entitled to tips, and I resent that restaurateurs can legally take advantage of the custom to pay their waitstaff less than minimum wage — it's their moral obligation to pay a decent wage for the server's work, not the general public's.
But no way would I not tip a waitperson solely because of his/her sexual orientation. That's the kind of judgmentalism Jesus condemns in Matthew 7:1-5 — "You deserve to be underpaid because of your sinful life." Charity gives not to the deserving but to the undeserving; to give to the deserving is not charity but rather justice. If we were all to be denied the necessities of life because of our sinfulness, who would own so much as a loaf of bread or a pair of pants?
So when Dayna Morales, a former Marine and a server at Gallop Asian Bistro in Bridgewater, New Jersey, claimed that a customer stiffed her on a $93.55 bill and wrote on the receipt that it was "because I do not agree with your lifestyle", I was torn. On the one hand, such an act is petty and Pharisaical; on the other, precisely because it is petty it doesn't warrant a lot of attention ... it barely budges the needle on the persecution meter. Other people disagreed, and started sending Morales "tips" from all over the world, which she claims she will donate to the Wounded Warrior Project (a fine and worthy cause).
But now a New York couple has come forward with a receipt from the same restaurant, the same time, the same date, the same bill ... except that the receipt includes an $18 tip and no comment on Morales' lifestyle. What's more, they presented to NBC 4 New York a Visa bill showing $111.55 charged to their account for that meal. Said the wife of the couple, whom Channel 4 declined to identify, "We've never not left a tip when someone gave good service, and we would never leave a note like that."
But wait! There's more!
Seems this isn't the only tale Morales has told that has departed from the truth. Inter alia, her fish stories include surviving a bomb attack that killed the rest of her platoon (not only has she not served in a combat zone, she was dishonorably discharged from the Marine Corps Reserves for not showing up for required drills), a boat hurled by Superstorm Sandy through her living room wall (friends found only minor water damage in the carpet by the front door), and upcoming brain-cancer surgery (a story she reportedly "leaned on" to avoid some of her duties). The picture emerges, not of a victim of petty harrassment, but of a pathological liar.
The most disturbing feature of the pro-gay movement — indeed, of many a modern political faction — is the willingness of its participants to lie, or at least tolerate lies, so long as such deceptiveness serves the Cause. I'm not talking about silly academics who hold that reality is a social construction or that truth is subjective; I'm talking about political activists and members of the chatterati who know (or at least have probable cause to believe) that a story is a fabrication or that a factoid is misleading, yet who remain silent or deliberately repeat and foster it for the sake of a social agenda.
Consider: We all know of people of who have been fired from jobs with various dioceses for violating the morals clauses of their contracts; I wrote about one such person in May on The Other Blog. The most common feature is that the discharged "victim" proclaims that s/he has "done nothing wrong", when in fact perpetrating a deception for the purposes of gaining or maintaining employment is a commonly-recognized firing offense.
Or we can consider Kate Hunt, an 18-year-old lesbian who was convicted of two counts of lewd and lascivious battery for her abusive sexual relationship with a 14-year-old girl; defenders of Hunt continually (and falsely) presented the victim as sixteen, and tried to portray Hunt as the innocent victim of the minor's parents' homophobic desire to ruin their romance, which was far from the sordid truth.
Especially telling is the myth surrounding the death of Matthew Shepard; a recent book by a gay journalist, The Book of Matt by Stephen Jimenez, reveals that Shepard died not as a victim of homophobia but of a drug deal gone bad. John Stonestreet, writing for the Christian website Breakpoint, reports that Aaron Hicklin of the pro-gay publication The Advocate admitted Shepard's death had been "hijacked": "There are valuable reasons for telling certain stories in a certain way at pivotal times, but that doesn’t mean we have to hold on to them once they’ve outlived their usefulness."
In other words, we only worry about telling the truth after we win.
Most recently, Cardinal Spellman High School in the Bronx was pressured into suspending — perhaps temporarily, but more likely permanently — a talk by Fr. Donald Timone on behalf of Courage, a Catholic ministry which supports the efforts of the same-sex attracted to live chaste lives in communion with the Church. The New York Daily News led the screaming by asserting (falsely) that Fr. Timone and Courage push the "pray away the gay" message and reparative therapy (about which there is more misrepresentation floating around as "fact"; the point is, though, that Courage does nothing of the sort). Of course, HuffPo and other progressive outlets immediately repeated the charge, either without checking their facts or blithely ignoring them — as Your Humble Blogger has noted before, progressives are remarkably credulous where the MSM is concerned.
Cardinal Timothy Dolan wrote in response, "For individuals and groups to bully, to threaten, to protest, when a priest seeks to explain this timeless and timely message [concerning chastity] to parents who invited him to do so, is a scary precedent. We have gone from the days when the plea from some activists was 'all we want is to live our lives in peace' to 'you shall not have the right to present your teaching.'" But I submit, pace Cdl. Tim, that the Cardinal Spellman flap is no precedent: lies, slander and verbal abuse have long been features of demagoguery, and have been part of the LGBT strategy for many years. Fake victims of persecution are merely variations on a theme.
Why? Because it works. You get enough people to shout anything long enough and loud enough, and eventually people will come to accept it without further question. Just as people accepted Morales' lie without further question.