I vow to be dragged, kicking and screaming and laughing out loud into the Brave New World.  What other choice do I have, pondering the spectacle of Bruce Jenner, trying on his tastefully medium-sized boobs, life in a dress, and the search for the ultimate hand bag?

A few years ago, my wife purchased a box of Wheaties with Olympian Bruce on the front.  “I wanted to show the girls,” she said, “what Bruce looked like before the Kardashians got a hold of him.”

I don’t think either of us could have quite imagined the bizarre eventuality that is now materializing, but I joked:  “look, if I were to consider turning myself into a woman, it would only be to spend more time with myself.”  She rolled her eyes in a show of the timeless contempt women have for men who adore women just for being women.  But men being women, for the world?  That is dark circus comedy.  Bruce Jenner is now and will always be a joke.  There is nothing “noble” or “groundbreaking” or “courageous” about it.  A dude in a dress?  Even with the best plastic surgery in the world?  No one buys it, even if they say  they are buying it.

At best, it is just horribly sad.

But I imagine, if things proceed according to the great humanist/progressive plan, this opinion of mine will be  regarded as job-ending  boycott-bait.  Bigotry.  Forbidden-think of the worst dye.

And  it reminded me of a shrill pro-abort I witnessed at Earth Fair San Diego last week.  He was yelling at a Christian street preacher, insisting that we appeal to the science of biology for our answers.  “Ultimately,” he intoned, with an earnestness and a compassion I find mildly hilarious, “we need to consult the science, dude.”

Well, let’s take him up on that.  Let’s try that.

What would science really have to say about any of our actions?   What does “science” have to say about  deciding to live life with a big new set of boobs?  What does science have to say about divorcing your wife or stealing money from your boss or murdering the corporate polluter?  Let’s find out — at least theoretically, let’s find out.  I say “theoretically” because if you did it in real life, you might be put on a list.  So theoretically…

Look up an associate professor of molecular biology at UCLA, find his office hours, and ask him:

“I am a man, but I find myself wondering what it would be like to dress up in frilly, lacey underclothing.  Can you tell me how far to go with that?  Should I arrange for some large breasts to go along with this desire?”

Biologist:  “Wait.  Okay.   Who is this?”

Seeker:  “I’m really annoyed at the noise pollution created by a  local packaging plant.  Do you think I have the right to kidnap the corporate manager in charge and have him fed to wild animals?”

Biologist:  “Why are you asking me?”

Seeker:  “Because you are a scientist.”

There is nothing more touching than the child-like faith modern progressives have in science.  It’s a bit like watching the cowardly lion before the great and terrible Oz.  A genuine scientist, an actual truth-seeker, an observer of the present universe, would recognize, immediately, that he had been presented with a question far too complex for the wisdom of his narrow trade guild.  If he were honest, he would say, “look, I study how proteins pass through cell membranes, I can’t resolve  your gender confusion.”

And even the soft science hiearchy, the sober folks who toil away in psychology, bio-ethics, and sociology aren’t really equipped to address the great “should” questions:

“I can abort my child, but should I?”
“I can divorce my husband but should I?”
“I can establish a four way marriage between 3 bisexuals and a dominant heterosexual matriarch, but, um, should I?  (I mean should we?)”

The great, uniting  story of civilization, the standard that really works, that builds empires, establishes peace, promotes justice is the story of a great, thundering AXIOM.  It is God’s finger in stone.  Thou shalt not murder.  Thou Shalt not commit adultery.  Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness.

Further down, in the divine statute, you get to the part about not putting on nylons and lip gloss if you’re a dude.

I would submit there’s a reason we see Bruce Jenner in the “ridiculous charade” category.

It has to do with a great moral axiom  written by God Himself.  Science might pretend to an answer, but it is powerless before the premise.

And if you think the transgender carnival is just a sideshow, just wait until someone seriously tells Dianne Sawyer, “in my heart, I really knew I was a muderer all along..”