Mike Pompeo’s confirmation hearing took a weird and graphic turn yesterday when Democrat Senator Cory Booker demanded that the Secretary of State-designate express approval of sodomy.

Booker did not just solicit Pompeo’s views on gay marriage — which would still be irrelevant to the job he was assigned — but specifically interrogated him about his feelings on gay sex. Booker asked if he believes “gay sex is a perversion.” When Pompeo didn’t answer quickly enough, he asked again. Then he asked again. Anyone who watched the hearings probably wanted to hear about matters related to American diplomacy and national security, but Cory Booker just wanted to discuss sex positions. It was a perfect illustration of the modern Democrat Party and liberalism as a whole.

Now, obviously, this was really nothing more than a thinly-veiled attack on Christianity. Any serious Christian must believe that sodomy is a perversion because Scripture is exceedingly clear on the subject. Indeed, the Bible cites four sins so grievous that they “cry out to Heaven” for vengeance, and sodomy makes the list (Gen 18:20). This is a teaching professed by every Abrahamic religion and held by the devout members of each, yet Booker and his Democrat cohorts reserve their interrogations for Christians only. Does anyone seriously believe that Booker would have berated a Muslim in the same manner? Of course not.

But anti-Christian bigotry is not the only thing evident in this bizarre exchange. We see also the Left’s incredible willingness to shamelessly contradict itself. The Left cheers Booker for “destroying” Pompeo by browbeating him over his views on gay sex even as it insists that a gay man’s sex life is none of our business. If it’s none of our business, why is it being brought up in a confirmation hearing? If it’s none of our business, why is a Secretary of State nominee being given a list of sex acts he is expected to endorse?

It’s the same thing with “pride parades.” Gay men march through the streets, blowing trumpets and waving flags, announcing their sexual proclivities to people who do not care and did not ask, and then they become indignant if anyone dare form an opinion about the information they forced into our heads. They say, “HERE IS WHAT I DO IN THE BEDROOM.” And then, two seconds later, “HOW DARE YOU HAVE AN OPINION ABOUT WHAT I DO IN THE BEDROOM?!”

Liberal homosexuals are not alone in playing this game. Feminists have their own version. They take to the streets in vagina hats, wearing vagina costumes, talking explicitly about their vaginas, and then they recoil in horror at the people who would dare intrude in their private lives. Even worse, they demand that we fund their sexual activity by subsidizing their birth control and then they tell us to mind our own business. “Get out of my bedroom,” they shout. “But leave your wallet on the dresser before you go.”

Sorry, it doesn’t work that way. A general rule of human society is this: I’m allowed to have an opinion about anything you openly share with me. I do not think about what strangers do in the bedroom. I do not contemplate or form theories about the sex lives of the people I pass by on the street. But if you run up to me and say, “Hey! Here’s what I do in the bedroom,” I am well within my rights to feel one way or another about the information I did not solicit and did not want to hear in the first place. If I find it perverse or sinful or anything else, that is your fault for telling me. I did not ask. I did not initiate the conversation. You brought it on yourself. If you do not want me to have an opinion about your sexual exploits, shut up about them.

We begin to understand that the Left is not actually looking for neutrality. They are looking, specifically, for approval. It would not even be acceptable anymore for me to have no opinion about homosexual sex. To yawn in the face of a gay pride parade would be as bad as protesting against it. I must celebrate. I must validate. I must grab a trumpet and join the march. The Left will accept nothing less.