Wednesday, September 26, 2012

IV. The Issue of marriage.

I will start this rant with the question:
Why was the left so successful in attracting minorities?
The answer? Simple. It is entirely on the failure, nay, stubbornness of the political and social conservative right to address the issues of such individuals and communities. This is also the reason why the Jews of Russia flocked to be a part of the Bolshevik movement. Marxism was the only political option for those historically disenfranchised to exert their will. The same happened with the gay and feminist movements. 
Homosexuals, Atheists and Pagans, like Jews, where segregated, but in social and intellectual ghettos. 

The women's rights movement and the homosexual movement had serious, real grievances. Both movements argued the issue of oppression at the hands of the state and religious institutions. In the case of homosexuality, it was the right of every single consenting adult to seek sexual and romantic love with another adult. But something happened to both movements. They were co-opted by the New Left. Instead of using arguments and concepts pertaining to freedom and individualism, collectivism and entitlement became the rallying cry, all minorities uniting under the common banner of Marxism.

Assertions that the modern homosexual and the modern gay subculture are significantly different from the past are based primarily upon ignorance of that past. Contemporary queers have a very limited historical perspective. In a discussion about the gay press, for example Bronski (1984) argues that 'The marketing of gay culture waspossible only to gay people and then only after a gay movement hademerged and given the community a more visible and national presence. (- this article argues against Bronski's statement, although from a Marxist perspective)

But back to marriage. If some of you have been paying attention to the gay marriage debate, one lie that is being used is the historical fact of gay marriage in Europe. Once again the New Left is distorting history for its gains. Warren Johansson and William A. Percy explained this better than I can:

Boswell's attempt to find medieval precedents for gay marriages is misleading. True, he has assembled neglected documents in Greek and Old Slavic tongues from various archives that bless male couples. Not one of his "many" Orthodox liturgies, however, sanctions carnal unions; in fact, they always specify "spiritual brotherhood" or "absence of scandal." This clearly implies that they are not, unlike heterosexual marriages, to be carnal. Churches which demanded celibacy for monks and bishops and allowed matrimony only for those too weak to abstain from sex altogether would hardly have sanctioned what they called "unnatural" sex or the "abominable sin against nature." In neither the Jewish nor the Christian scriptures is there a single endorsement of samesex sex. "The Old Testament", on the other hand, imposed death on "males who lie with males as with females" and St. Paul condemned not only men who slept with men, but lesbianism, thus going beyond the Jewish scriptures. Not a single Christian Father, Penitentialist, Scholastic or Canonist, Protestant Reformer or Catholic Counter-Reformer or even any Orthodox, Coptic or Nertorian ever wrote even a neutral, much less a kind, word about sodomites

          Like I've said, “gay” is a political statement. I'm a homosexual, but I understand that when it comes to my sexual 'reproductive' behavior (not capabilities) I am inferior. That being said, I'm also not foolish or selfish enough to not acknowledge the real biological, neurological and psychological differences between men and women. The "gay" culture of the West is symbolized by a desire to destroy masculinity and turn men into subordinates to women, not sexual freedom or the ability to bond emotionally with other men, but rather a hatred of men and all things male and a promotion of all things female.

          Regarding the feminizing effect that cultural Marxism has on European and Colonial civilizations (America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, even Israel), and the visceral reaction of traditionalists in Europe (including the rise of Neo-Fascism) and other cultures (For example the Muslim Sphere and India), one must note the hate this cultural phenomenon brings, and its destructive effects. There is a good reason why they hate the West. The stated goal of this group is "gender diversity"...which presumably is syptomized by the prominence of drag queens, gender queers and other members of the merry band of misfits that forms the New Left's identity groups. The "gay" culture of the West is symbolized by a desire to destroy masculinity and turn men into subordinates to women. In other words, "gay" has come to mean not sexual freedom or the ability to bond emotionally with other men, but rather a hatred of men and all things male and a promotion of all things female. Arabs, Turks, Persians and Indians respond accordingly--rejecting such a culture, even as bisexual activity remains widespread. It is not homosexuality that they regard as disgusting, it is the feminist-driven culture of "gay"--and the fact that this group goes to Israel to practice this culture will only reinforce their attitudes.

No comments:

Post a Comment