Whenever the Left champions a cause, I look.I look closely.
They usually do it for reasons that are obscure and darkened, camouflaged against the searchlights of Reason.
One such cause is being 'Gay', homosexuality.
Look.
And look for the inevitable inconsistencies.
Such as:
"Being Gay is involuntary."(No moral consequence)
"We must allow Gay marriage."(Moral consequence)
"We must promote Gay rights(Moral consequences for people who aren't even involved)
And so on. I'm sure you can think of other examples if you put your mind to it.
But you see that, the more they claim that homosexuality is not a matter of choice, the more they insist on the recognitions usually associated with choice.
I have my own theories about the deep, fundamental subcultural psychotic influences that can cause homosexuality.
On a simple level, 'playing the game' with females over matters of purest morality reduces all our finest emotions to relativistic impulses, a deluge of humiliation amounting to an embarrassment, that our best men will turn into a homosexual attitude(if not necessarily 'drive').
What about the line in the song Vincent(this world was not meant for someone as beautiful as you), which, with the complex simplicity of poetry says exactly what I did?
What about the age-old delusion that sex is 'dirty', so that normal desires are bootlegged into furtive encounters?
The Left does understand and know about matters like this, but what they know and what they do have always been at odds.
That is their particular corruption.
And, there is no difference when it comes to Gays.
Maybe some of them are genetic. I don't believe it.I think that they are normal men and women overwhelmed at an early stage by the subliminal evil of popular psychological exchange.
The Left knows this and yet still sees in these victims nothing more than tools whose suffering can be used to undermine life.
3 comments:
By the way, the expression on the face of the man in the foreground of the Gay wedding picture is the one I would expect to see on the face of a man being crucified.
Actually, it is none of my business whether or not homosexuals are by acquisition or essential nature(or a mixture), but they do seem so often to suffer, which would indicate a severe moral aspect.
Perhaps I've been a little disingenuous;perhaps not.
Choice open to heteros is marriage of one particular woman to one particular man, up to four times for a Moslem.
Choice open to(NON-CHOSEN)homos is still marriage.
But it does carry the assertion that one form of sexual relation is equally valid to another.
Which is another matter.
Post a Comment