The former Democratic senator from Pennsylvania, Harris Wofford, has announced his plans to marry his boyfriend, Matthew Charlton, this weekend. To most anyone over 30 years old (who might not have heard about this engagement) the news should naturally still knock a bit of the wind out of you. When I see an announcement of marriage where both the names of the intended are male (or female), I am old enough, and have sufficient common sense to see that at least the unconventional is (again) being put in front of me for any number of reasons - least of all, for my information. In this case, it amounts to nothing more than marketing.

Big network TV quickly realised its power to shape our thinking. It began refining its ability to mold a wide-eyed, gullible audience into whatever mindset the biggest money demanded. And the old landmarks the Bible told us to keep in place have been falling like a house of cards ever since. What used to be considered valuable wisdom and godliness, liberal media has ‘exposed’ as outdated and/or ‘hate speech.’ Today more and more people are just folding up and backing away from even acknowledging the twist that is evolving in the American perception of right and wrong, good and evil. It’s because few people are anymore equipped to understand or defend it.

Most of us baby boomers were given no explanation of the morality that was largely imposed upon us by rote. Parents are supposed to teach by example - but, in the past sixty years especially, so many have dropped the ball in making that handoff. In the mid sixties, electronic media saw that fumble, and immediately seized the opportunity to lump anything that smacked of morality, prudence or discretion into pitiful caricatures like Archie Bunker, Boss Hogg or George Jefferson. And it worked.

At ninety, Harris Wofford is experienced enough to know that he is effectively dropping a gauntlet before what is left of the shriveling remnant of any Americans who might openly take issue with his behavior here. But he doesn’t have to say a word in explaining himself to people who still feel as I do - because PC America has been adequately programmed to respond for him. And that machine must now begin to walk under its own steam. Call this a test run.

I first read Harris Wofford’s autobiographical sketch in the New York Times, as well as a summary piece in the Washington Post telling all the world how he’d arrived at the relationship and his decision to marry Matthew. The photograph he provided to the Post stands as justifier all by itself. At first glance it appears to be maybe that of a happy grandfather and grandson with their arms around each other’s backs enjoying a balmy Florida sunset. So if I might dare to disagree with Wofford’s enlisting the mightiest press in the world to showcase this marriage as unquestionably perfect, I will first be seen as a total redneck bully in not showing a bit of respect for this pastoral vision of sublime union.

But all the consensual validation that the gay lobby can buy won’t attenuate what most people my age will for a moment feel, regardless how well free America has been media-trained, socially intimidated or even litigated into silence. Mine was a spontaneous, heart-level reaction, and in no way a premeditated one. And for that I am supposed to feel guilty, I guess.

The thing that so offends me in Wofford’s unveiling here certainly has nothing to do with the fifty years age difference between them, or even that they are gay. I’m not outraged that both men appear to be quite happy and careless of my reaction. They and a now comparatively huge percentage of America are quick to tell any critics that our checked feelings are of no importance. Okay, I’ve got that.

What does most disturb me is that Wofford is old enough to know better than to do this circus. And, again, I am not talking about his gayness. I’m talking about the massive credential he is currently lending to the politically correct machine that used stupid strawmen like Bunker, Hogg and Jefferson to lace up and rein in the minds of a plurality of stupid people who actually lean upon such icons for direction.

Harris Wofford is a type of Superman. He is an ultra-achiever who was centrally involved in turbulent formative ‘60s America, and was integral in assisting with and advising JFK’s official interaction with the groundbreaking civil rights movement. As that was playing out, he and its Abraham Lincoln, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., apparently became good friends. The man is big and connected with all the heaviest liberal movers and shakers. Most everything he’s done has been in front of a lot of people - and therefore he bears much responsibility. He is a leader, and great part of good leadership is a careful mindfulness for those who are watching his lead, and how they will be affected by it. And he totally knows that.

I think this spectacle can only help in clearing the path for the gays who are now portrayed as the last trailblazing pioneers for civil equality. But to me he is showing a complete disregard for at least half of America, and the world, that isn’t quite done with God or the conscientious perception our Creator pointedly designed for our happiness and safety. Wofford is an older model of the same stuff I am made of. And he knew perfectly how AND WHY his complicity with what has torn a gash in the Episcopalian church he was raised in would also serve to rend a significant portion of a limping America. And he doesn’t seem to care!

Harris Wofford is a gifted leader. He’s been given much, and from him much is expected. He completely knows that he will now again affect the lives of millions, and he is not leaving quietly. In the midst of all this marital bliss there is nothing naïve about the senior groom here. When he sent his story to the Times, he was deliberately putting all of this homosexuality in my face, and I am supposed to keep shut about it and take it. Wofford understands completely my revulsion. It has nothing to do with an invented hatred for gays. It has everything to do with the fact that the God of the Bible (another ‘thing’ 21st century sophist ‘experts’ are laboring to kill) is - in its traditional understanding - roundly against the sexual union of two of the same sex.

I don’t for a moment presume to look down my nose at or question the love these two men have for each other. I can’t know or judge anyone’s heart. And that is not my business. I only know that one of the two sides of this story is being bound and gagged by a formerly free press that has been purchased to spearhead that effort.