Is it time to separate sex and state? Examining the debate over the desecration of the Pride flag

A recent surge in crime has taken hold of the nation, and now progressives are advocating for harsh penalties, even charging teenagers with felonies.

This time, the crime is political, and these teens are accused of showing disrespect towards the flag — the Pride flag, to be precise.

The latest battleground in the cultural war is the common urban crosswalk.

Cities that strive to be seen as trendy have begun repainting crosswalks with the colors, stripes, and chevrons of the LGBTQ flag.

Some see this as a display for “Pride Month,” but in places like Nashville, Tenn., Alexandria, Va., and Westport, Conn., these changes are permanent additions to the city landscape.

If these cities had chosen to erect statues honoring war heroes or Founding Fathers, teenage vandalism with a political twist might have been more acceptable.

However, in Delray Beach, Fla., and Spokane, Wash., teenagers in pickup trucks or on Lime scooters are defacing the emblem of every sexuality except heterosexuality, and for that, there is no leniency.

Ruslan Turko, aged 19, and two unidentified minors are facing first-degree malicious mischief charges in Spokane.

Are the police in Spokane typically prioritizing the pursuit of kids leaving skid marks on crosswalks?

These teens are not in trouble for their actions but for their intentions and beliefs — and for a derogatory term allegedly directed at a member of the LGBTQ community.

Getting arrested in American cities for using profane language or leaving tire marks on the road is uncommon, but for disrespecting queer individuals and vandalizing their symbol, there is zero tolerance.

While the First Amendment still stands, the separation of sexuality and state doesn’t apply as it does to religion and state.

Essentially, there is now a form of blasphemy law that prohibits insults against gay symbols rather than religious ones.

Delray Beach police spent a week investigating the defacement of a crosswalk flag before 19-year-old Dylan Brewer turned himself in.

He is also facing felony mischief charges.

Law enforcement expressly stated the ideological nature of his offense: “The reckless action caused significant damage to the streetscape painting, which serves as a symbol of unity and inclusivity for the LGBTQ community.”

This was not simply a minor offense.

Perhaps the country would be a more peaceful place if disruptive teenagers were routinely apprehended for antisocial behavior.

However, the cities treating these kids as they would participants in the Jan. 6 incident aren’t focused on cleaning up the streets — they are enforcing morality.

Even now, liberals maintain that they oppose such actions:

They argue that it’s unconstitutional when Louisiana implements a law mandating the display of the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom in the state.

Progressives would not condone the painting of a Christian cross on a public crosswalk.

But what distinguishes one group’s symbol of pride from another’s symbol of love?

Why does the LGBTQ community have the right to an official presence in public that is denied to religious believers?

“The legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions,” penned Thomas Jefferson in the same 1802 letter to the Baptists of Danbury, Conn., where he described the First Amendment as “building a wall of separation between Church & State.”

The Danbury Baptists were not enemies of religion — they simply objected to being taxed for a religion that wasn’t their own, namely Connecticut’s established Congregationalist church.

If Baptists shouldn’t be taxed for Congregationalist privileges and it’s unacceptable to tax non-Christians for Christian public symbols, then why should all religious believers — many of whom follow traditions that oppose queer lifestyles — be taxed for gay pride?

Progressive sexuality is just as exclusive as any religion: Simply ask a pride parade organizer if “straight pride” is part of the celebration.

A sexual identity is inherently a moral identity, much like a religious one.

In other scenarios, progressives argue that America is a pluralistic country that shouldn’t impose one perspective on disputed moral issues through government authority.

But there is an exception when it comes to sexual morality.

There is a crossroads here: If liberals want to separate church and state, they must acknowledge that the same principle applies to sexuality and state — and the Pride-flag crosswalks violate this principle.

A conscientious religious believer or a nonbeliever should not be obligated to pay for the symbols of someone else’s sexuality any more than they should be forced to finance someone else’s church.

Alternatively, liberals can confront their hypocrisy and concede that if city governments can endorse and support gay pride publically, then the state of Louisiana or any other state can also publicly honor a religion.

The teenagers who vandalized the Delray Beach and Spokane crosswalks were wrong in their actions.

However, they have shed light on another issue — the one committed by cities that have established sexuality as an official religion.

Daniel McCarthy is the editor of Modern Age: A Conservative Review and editor-at-large of The American Conservative.