Originally posted at American Thinker
Larry Brinkin, 22-year retiree from the San Francisco Human Rights Commission and veteran gay rights advocate from San Francisco, has been arrested for felony possession of child pornography. Following his arrest, Mr. Brinkin was released on bail after spending the night among friends in a San Francisco jail.
According to a search warrant served by San Francisco police, after seizing two laptops, a desktop computer, videos, a floppy disk, and flash drives from Brinkin’s home, his computers were found to have “pornographic images that show children as young as 1 and 2 or 3 years old being sodomized and performing oral sex on adult men.”
Allegedly, the human rights/gay rights advocate also had messages linked to his AOL account that included attachments that depict “exploitive sex acts” as well as links to a discussion group that approves of “sexual exploitation of young boys and girls.”
According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Brinkin was best known for “championing equal rights for gays and lesbians. He helped craft San Francisco’s groundbreaking Equal Benefits Ordinance, which became a national model for workplace equality.”
When Brinkin retired, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors was so grateful for the work he had done on behalf of human rights for gays that they approved a “resolution declaring the week of Feb. 1, 2010, ‘Larry Brinkin Week’ in San Francisco.” According to the board, and despite his alleged penchant for pedophilia, after retirement, Larry’s “dedication to advance the civil rights of all people … never stopped.”
Former supervisor Bevan Duffy, who authored the board’s resolution for “Larry Brinkin Week,” said he was shocked to learn of San Francisco gay icon’s arrest. Duffy said, “I have admired and respected his work for the LGBT community. I respect and am confident that there will be due process.”
Due process will ultimately determine whether or not the human rights advocate considered the sexual mistreatment of tots a right worth pursuing. In the meantime, regardless of the outcome, it’s clear that both Larry Brinkin and the tiniest victims of his alleged crime have all been damaged by a liberal lie called moral relativism.
The children in the photographs notwithstanding, based on what was found on his computer, Brinkin is just as much the result of a philosophy which preaches that there is no set standard for right or wrong and that human decency is a passé concept that hinges on personal conscience, not social mores or outdated religious criteria.
Brinkin thrived for almost a quarter of a century in a setting that promotes the false premise that moral behavior is subject to individual judgment. He was well-respected in a community that makes heroes of people whose primary goal is to undermine traditional values such as marriage, portray as out-of-date the belief that heterosexuality is normal, and endorse all manner of perverse behavior by putting it all under the umbrella of “human rights.”
So in Mr. Brinkin’s case, after making a name for himself advocating for the right to individual sexual expression, it could be that he had convinced himself that pedophilia also meets the necessary criteria. The North American Man Boy Love Association marched in San Francisco Gay Pride Parades early in Brinkin’s career.
Before retiring from the equitable workplace he had helped create and retreating to his e-mail account and his NAMBLA-like discussion group, Larry Brinkin lived and gained fame in a world where the lines that define decency are oftentimes ambiguous. Brinkin attained star status in a city where people pride themselves on being their own moral judge and jury, where individuals are the subjective arbiters of their own behavior and the sole captains of carnal vessels that are encouraged to set sail in any direction they desire.
Then Brinkin, at 66 years old — old enough to be someone’s grandpa — is caught with child pornography on his computer and participating in an online chat that approves of sexually molesting innocent children. The question arises: who, then, in a secular culture determines the ethical norms? After Brinkin spent 22 years working to eradicate a line of moral demarcation, does someone or some system with different measures now get to draw a new line in the sand?
Moreover, don’t the tenets of the “what’s right for me might not be right for you”-and-vice-versa school of thought teach that no one has the authority to impose personal standards of morality on anyone else? Should that principle change just because it has been revealed that the person responsible for advancing the civil rights of San Francisco’s LGBT community may also turn out to be a degenerate who approves of having oral sex with toddlers?
If moral relativism is a valid argument, then Brinkin is innocent regardless of what he’s done. And any man or woman with small children should accept the fact that if, in his mind, Mr. Brinkin believes it’s acceptable to sexually abuse a child, and the child being abused should happen to belong to a fellow moral relativist, then that morally relativistic parent is duty-bound to pardon Larry’s amoral behavior.
However, if Larry Brinkin is found guilty, then so too are all the moral equivocators who have promoted a debauched philosophy whose lack of boundaries has led to the corruption of society and, more tragically, been part and parcel of the irreparable harm that has befallen the helpless and most innocent among us. As for a dupe like Larry Brinkin, if proven guilty of pedophilia, it’s because he’s just another deluded predator who believed the lie that all morality is relative. Then he acted upon that conviction and, by doing so, became another one of its victims.