A young man who stood up at the recent Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington and dressed down the group for accepting sponsorship by same-sex marriage supporters is himself being vilified by so-called conservatives.

His name is Ryan Sorba, and you can watch his brief appearance before the group on video:

The controversy came when CPAC accepted sponsorship by GOProud.

Sorba rightfully condemned the conference for accepting sponsorship from a group promoting an agenda totally at odds with conservatism – and, more importantly, at odds with Judeo-Christian morality and Western civilization.

You can see the reaction at the event.

But the reactions following the event were even more telling with regard to the bankrupt state of the so-called “conservative movement.”

Sorba is under attack on Internet forums provided by so-called “conservatives” David Frum, David Horowitz and the man CPAC named “blogger of the year,” Ed Morrissey of HotAir.com, a website newly purchased by the largest Christian radio broadcaster in America.

Is the triumph of evil inevitable in today’s culture? Find out in David Kupelian’s latest, “How Evil Works: Understanding and Overcoming the Destructive Forces That Are Transforming America”

What are these so-called “conservatives” saying about the protest?

  • Some are accusing of Sorba of being a closet homosexual.

  • They are insisting that homosexual behavior is not a choice.
  • They say “most conservatives acknowledge that there are compelling arguments on both sides” of the same-sex marriage debate.
  • They suggest it’s time “to get over their issues with homosexuality.”

Let me remind you what Sorba was condemning – the notion of same-sex marriage.

Same-sex marriage has been overwhelmingly rejected by popular vote everywhere it has been put to the test.

Barack Obama cannot even say he supports same-sex marriage, not because he doesn’t, but because it is so politically unpopular.

I would suggest to you that at least 90 percent of Americans reject same-sex marriage.

But “conservatives” don’t?

That’s just the practical politics side of the equation. Listen to those booing Ryan Sorba and you are headed for political disaster.

However, what exactly are these so-called “conservatives” trying to “conserve”?

Is it not what made America great?

Is it not what historically works?

Is it is not a biblical worldview?

Is it not a Judeo-Christian ethic?

Is it not Western civilization?

I guess not.

I guess it is none of those things.

I guess “conservatism” has lost its meaning – at least with respect to the organizers of CPAC and much of their 20-something constituency.

On the other hand, I doubt very much whether you will see GOProud being accepted as a sponsor of tea-party events.

That’s why the tea-party movement is galvanizing much more mass public support than the so-called “conservative movement.”

One movement knows what it is all about, and the other doesn’t.

Marriage is the building block of a free, self-governing society. And marriage is, was and always will be an institution based on the union of one man and one woman.

Rewrite homosexual behavior as anything other than a sin, an affliction, a weakness in man’s character and you place a society at grave peril.

Same-sex marriage is part of a radical and extreme political movement, not a “conservative” one.

It is not about liberty, but about license.

Governments don’t grant “rights.” They don’t come up with new ways to expand freedom. At best, they can only protect our inalienable, God-given rights. At worst, they destroy them.

That’s what the same-sex marriage agenda is all about – destroying the foundation of America’s heritage of self-governance and limited government under God.

There is nothing “conservative” or even libertarian about permitting government to rewrite a 6,000-year-old God-given institution.

It’s very disturbing that CPAC leadership would not see that, and equally disturbing that so many young attendees would not understand how they are compromising with the eternal truths “conservatives” should be “conserving.”

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.