If you were to go back 50 years in time and describe to people the moral universe as it would exist in 2006 you would not be believed. You would be thought a grotesque pervert for imagining such things and would be rightfully shunned by polite society.
Ah, but we have come a long way, baby! Those activities that could not even be mentioned then are now boasted about and performed in public. And of course the state has gotten into the act of aiding and abetting our moral decline. Recall Clinton’s Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders recommending that masturbation be taught to kindergarteners. (But who would teach it?)
It was only a matter of time before like-minded perverts formed their own groups and demanded recognition from government. Thus the push for special rights for sodomite marriage. But this morning I read of a new coalition made up of about every sexual grotesquerie I can conjure up. A bunch of well-heeled perverts have formed a union of sorts and are demanding—you guessed it—that government grant them taxpayer money.
In a call to arms called Beyond Same-Sex Marriage: A New Strategic Vision for All Our Families & Relationships these twisted folk comprise a menagerie of unhygenic activities and bizarre practices.
Organized by a “diverse group of nearly twenty LGBT [lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender] and queer activists,” the several hundred signatories include a predictable list of homosexual rights advocates, sexologists, self-professed pagans, and practitioners of polyamory, among other colorful categories. But it also includes Rabbi Michael Lerner of Tikkun, Cornel West at Harvard, Gloria Steinem of Ms. magazine, and a smattering of rabbis, Unitarians, Quakers, ex-nuns, and leftist Protestant clergy.
Their writing is a manifesto of sickness and spiritual disease. It is filled with multi-cultural and post-modern gobbledygook. Here is one example (put your coffee cup down first). By parading their odd habits they wish to end the
structural violence of poverty, racism, misogyny, war, and repression, and to build an unshakeable foundation of social and economic justice for all, from which authentic peace and recognition of global human rights can at long last emerge.
Perhaps these creatures could bring peace to the Middle East. We could at least send them to Hezbollah. Think what you want of Islamic fascists, but they would know how to handle “a diverse group of queer activists.”
We live in an interesting time where everything and anything goes. All behavior is merely a function of biology. If it feels good, then both do it and force others to either join you or support you.
As always when such things arise in our culture I ask myself if there is anything left, if there is anything yet so disgustingly filthy that no one would possibly wish to be known to practice it. Remember that NAMBLA itself is already middle-aged. What’s next? Should you ask?
I will tell you. The next ‘new new thing’ will be zoophilia. This hobby even has its own philosopher, none other than Peter Singer, a professor of bioethics at Princeton. Soon its practitioners will energe from the shadows just as sodomites emerged from the closet years ago. You read it here first.
And no, I am not kidding. Be forewarned, and don’t let your pets out of your sight.
3 Comments;
And what would all this do to harm you? I thought that the goal of Conservatism was to “get government out of our lives”? Yet all the pundits are lathered up about gay marriage. Afraid some queer might propose to you?
Dear w s cross: To ‘get government out of our lives’ is not a goal of conservatism but of libertarianism. Conservatives understand that some government is necessary. We believe, however, that only those functions of government that provide for the common good and security—property rights, for example, without which no rights are possible—are needed.
We also believe like Jefferson that there are self-evident Truths, and that these are demonstrated through the workings of Natural Rights and Law. Sodomy is manifestly against Natural Law. Nothing whatsoever is created through homosexual activity, but much is destroyed. The life-span of such brokeback men is 50 years—even below that of elephants. What a waste!
Just to clear things up for you: I am against any amendment to the Constitution specifying marriage as specifically between a man and a woman. The reason is that in 100 years—or 1000 years—it would be so embarrassing to think that there existed a society in such a state of moral confusion that it did not understand the basics of marriage. It would be like a society making a law that every citizen had to breathe air.
The sodomites and others such as I mentioned in my post cannot make any headway whatsoever without explicitly invoking government sanction—in other words, only by increasing government power over our lives. Thus, the lawsuits by the ACLU and its ilk to force sodomite privilege upon the rest of society. Certainly you are aware that whenever such oddities of morality are sent to the voters—we are a republic, remember?—they are handily voted down, even in Blue States such as Oregon and Washington.
As for your question about how all of this grotesque immorality could harm me: All societies known in history have functioned inside of a moral order. When that order begins to crack—Assyria after Ashurbanipal, Israel after Solomon, Imperial Rome after 180 AD or so—the result is political and social chaos. All suffer under such conditions.
And may I ask why your type must always insult and attempt to belittle those who disagree with you? Of what possible addition to your argument is your ad hominem assertion I might be living in fear that ‘some queer might propose to me’? What does that have to do with anything?
Pingback: The Return Of Scipio » A Horse Is A Horse, Of Course Of Course