Sunday, 28 October 2012

The whole gay agenda is based on nothing more substantial than a nice story

The whole gay agenda is based on nothing more substantial than a nice story

The whole gay agenda is built on a nice story that goes something like this:  we are all born different, the majority, for example, are born right-handed, but a minority are born left-handed.  Similarly a majority are born heterosexual, but a minority are born homosexual; and just as we would not think of discriminating against someone born left-handed, so we should not think of discriminating against someone born homosexual.

It’s a lovely story.  It gets you right in the middle of your chest, it appeals to our sense of fair play. There is just one small snag: it is a load of cods-wallop that has been completely disproved by science.  I am aware that liberal hate science, but the rest of us are rather partial to having our theories supported by facts.

This anti-scientific story has been fabricated, promoted and maintained for one purpose, to justify a particular course of action.  As such it does not differ in principle to the lie that Jew are an inferior race, an unscientific lie similarly fabricated, promoted and maintained by the Nazis for one purpose, to justify a particular course of action.

The alternative story (the one supported by science)

All men are born heterosexual, just as are all insects, birds, fish and animals, and indeed most vegetation; a fact that can be easily confirmed by a cursory study of genitalia, which are clearly designed by nature to be complimentary.

It is a very imperfect world and sadly not everyone develops into maturity along healthy lines.  Further, it is of the nature of youth to experiment; this can be entirely proper but nevertheless carries with it very real dangers.

Some young people experiment with and abuse alcohol and a minority of these finish up alcoholics.  Some young people will experiment with and abuse substances; a minority will finish up drug addicts.  Some young people will experiment with sexual perversions such as same-sex anal-copulating (those who have experienced the adolescent neurosis of same-sex attraction are especially at risk here); a minority will become addicted to this depravity, and finish up describing themselves as gay or homosexual.

Most people who identify themselves as gay do not seek marriage (not even the pseudo-marriages of the church of secular liberalism).  Whereas approximate 40% of the UK population are married, yet only about one in fifty gays have entered into civil unions.  Most gays, it has been scientifically demonstrated, are astonishingly promiscuous, averaging in excess of 500 sexual partners in a lifetime.
Nevertheless, some gays do pair off, just as do some alcoholics and some drug abusers.  When they pair off, it should come as no surprise that they select partners who share their addiction to perversion.

I have a clear example of this pattern of behaviour within my own circle of acquaintances   Susan (not her real name) is an alcoholic.  Her relationship with Derek (not his real name) was dependant on his addiction to glue-sniffing.  Their mutual substance abuse condoned one another’s substance abuse.  Likewise, her current relationship with Martin (not his real name) is dependent on his drug abuse for similar reasons.  One cannot from this jump to the conclusion that the relationship is worthless or evil, but it is sensible nevertheless to face the reality of the situation.

This story has one massive advantage over the liberals' story: it is backed by science.  Academic researchers have found scores of cases of identical twins where one twin is straight and the other gay.  Identical twins have identical DNA, thus homosexuality cannot be hard-wired - period.  And as one researcher pointed out, they would have only needed to find one case to completely disprove the theory.

What is not hard-wired has to be learned.  The word “learned” here is used in a scientific sense and does not necessary imply culpability.  One’s mother tongue is learned but one would hardly accuse someone of being guilty of having learned their mother tongue.  Nevertheless, if conduct is not hard-wired, than it must be learnt, apart from divine infusion, there is no third way.

The second fact is that there are thousands of ex-gays in the world, just as there are thousands of ex-alcoholics and ex-drug addicts.  These ex-gays are hated by the militant sodomite collective and their liberal allies alike, and knowledge of their existence is suppressed by the media because it does not support their latest liberal dogma, and liberal dogma trumps science every time. 

The following web site should open your eyes to the underlying causes of this disorder:   Many of the stories leave one with a huge lump in one’s throat.  The site is especially valuable because everything is written by ex-gays.

Michael Portillo dabbled with homosexuality in his university days.  He has however been happily married for decades.  I have an acquaintance that was once gay who has been happily married for twenty years; he now has two teenage children.  He is also responsible for one of the best one-liners I've heard on the subject, “I just woke up one morning and realised it was possible to be good mates with a guy and keep my clothes on.”  Another of his memorable comments was, “The first time I felt attracted to a woman, I was walking on air – it was like, ‘welcome to the human race’”  I suppose if I was a liberal bigot, I should have responded, “Oh f**k off, and get back to buggery.  What’s wrong with buggery anyway?”

Militant gays and their allies make a big issue of the fact that some, possibly many, ex-gays relapse.  I personally would be very astonished if they didn't; so do many ex-alcoholics and ex-drug addicts.  There is a sense in which it is true that once an alcoholic, always an alcoholic.  Yet no one seeks to argue from this that it is impossible to beat these destructive patterns of behaviour.  I imagine that the same is true for someone who has been deeply immersed in the sodomite life-style for a number of their most formative years.  All that this proves is that once you have succumbed to an addiction, there is always a real danger that you will relapse at a later date.  But that surely doesn't mean that we have to give up hope on ourselves and others merely to sustain some cruel liberal agenda.  On the contrary, we should take hope from those who have managed to break these destructive addictions, and if and when some do relapse, show them compassion and help them pick themselves up yet again.  Liberals, never ones for consistency, applaud therapy for paedophiles yet denigrate therapy for homosexuals.

Of course, if someone does not want to break out of these destructive patterns of behaviour, they cannot be helped; the desire for health must first come from within.  Someone who is committed to this addiction should be treated with kindness and respect, just as one would treat an alcoholic, but that is hardly a good reason to institutionalise their degeneracy!  I believe real love demands that I strive to raise my brother up, not confirm him in his depravity.