FROM SACKCLOTH AND ASHES TO LET'S DEAL
FROM SACKCLOTH AND ASHES TO LET'S DEAL
By Joe Kress
November 26, 2006
NewsWithViews.com
The caption read: “Catholics plan gay outreach.” This headline was above an article published, November 14, 2006 by the Post and Courier, South Carolina. Just below that article was another article with the caption: “N.C. Baptists adopt anti-gay policy.” The day before, there was the announcement that the Episcopal hierarchy elevated a female priest to bishop. Her first announcement was to condone same sex marriage, approve the use of fertilized embryos for stem cell research and equate the homosexual lifestyle with the heterosexual’s as the natural, progressive understanding of the human condition. The Episcopal Church announced that deformed and imperfect new born babies should be allowed to die without undue medical care. Evidently these little ones struggling for life are the new throwaway class of non-productive humans.
These captions and statements are examples of modern day Christianity and its new age dissimilitude. There was a time in the early Church when serious sins could be forgiven only if the penitent spent long days, even months standing, draped in sackcloth and ashes before the entrance of the church.
The Roman Catholic bishops approved guidelines for gay outreach, November 15, 2006, to be an open invitation to the homosexual communities that this is the religion to belong to, but don’t have sex, because you can’t receive Holy Communion if you do. The bishops equated buggery, fallatio, and cunninlingus as benign as the use of prophylactics to avoid conception between married couples. Sodomy is no longer looked upon so serious an evil that it brings down the wrath of the Almighty and more Sodom and Gomorrah
The appearance as some would say is that Catholic Bishops evidently want to live in Sodom City to fill the pews, with special sections set apart for non-abstaining Sodomites so that the rest of the faithful can snicker past as they march up the aisle to receive communion. That is certainly not the case. I would not agree with that perception. The Catholic Church would never turn away any sinner. The fact is, the Catholic Church probably is more aware of the homosexuals’ dilemma than any other religion and has a greater sympathy for those who are afflicted. The problem is not a problem, if sexual abstinence can be observed. It’s like the military, don’t ask, don’t tell. The Church is well aware of what happens to those children that have been violated and suffer the scars of sexual abuse for a lifetime. It could never approve of the homosexual lifestyle. Those who are afflicted are given sympathetic counseling with the sincere hope that the homosexuals can be either cured or can remain celibate.
I cringe that a priest or bishop would say the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, perform the Consecration of the Sacred Host in the morning and later have, abnormal, disgusting, weird intimate relations with adolescent altar boys. The violation of their vows of chastity and celibacy are sacrilegious, adding another serious sin to the abnormal act itself. Nearly as bad, in my opinion, were the straight Catholic bishops trying to hide what can only be determined to be widespread pedophiles in the seminaries and within the sacristies committing crimes against man, God and His Church. What must be recognized is that homosexuals had found a deep cover and a great avenue to prey on the innocent by infiltrating the clergy.
The Baptist State Convention of North Carolina’s spokesman is quoted in the article as stating, “It’s not something that we wanted to do, (the national Southern Baptist with its 4,000 churches and 1.2 million members is more strict than the national Southern Baptists), but homosexuality is the only sin that has its own advocacy group,” Spokesman Norman Jameson said. “Those advocacy groups are pushing us into this stance. Other denominations that waffle and waver on the issue year after year are getting torn apart.”
Nice! What members of the Convention are saying is we don’t like what you homosexuals do … so don’t join us, but on the other hand, we’ll not avoid ministering to the homosexual community. Ogallala! That message should surely entice homosexuals to seek comfort and guidance and forgiveness for their ongoing practices that Lot avoided. The Baptists evidently want to take one last look towards Sodom, as did Lot’s wife, but sort of regret that they voted for leaving the place. That tells me the subject probably would not have reached the convention floor had it not been for the fate of those religions who waffled… not because it was the right thing they wanted to do but because the Gay advocacy groups forced their hand.
Tent preachers and television evangelists whose thunder and brimstone sermons about the wrath of God and the final days, leave their pulpits, climb aboard their jet liners and tryst with some male or female prostitute who provides the lustful satisfaction what their wives recoil from with loathing and disgust.
The fact is heterosexual practices depicted in pictures found in the Komasutra are the same as those practiced by homosexuals. The variations in real life sometime exceed anything depicted in that ancient book of human sexual practices. Some homosexual antics reach bizarre levels causing gross damage to their orifices.
Voyeurs, who watch the porn movies, are corrupted by outlandish exhibitions of the depths of human depravity. They become mentally and morally degraded as those who sexually perform for their viewing pleasure. Several studies on mental problems found that those who continue viewing pornographic material and movies ultimately become addicted, so much so that what they see actually controls their lives, overriding all other outside activities including intimate sex with their own wives.
They drift away from their religious beliefs. In other words, voyeurs are vicariously living within an unreal world watching degrading human acts that the lower animals couldn’t perform. In the case of pedophiles, they are not satisfied to sit before a screen in a dark corner; rather their goal is to trap the young into meeting them and then abusing them. Many gays go fishing for a partner no matter the age. In other words, the voyeurs, the pedophiles, the wolves that prey on children…their world is sex and how to use it. It is all about self-gratification, a form of idolatry where they revere their sex organs as gods.
What really is the problem with sex outside society’s perception of normal sex? Acts depicted in the Komasutra are stimulating activities prior to completing copulation. Using stimulations to the point of consummation thus aborting the normal function of heterosexual copulation is considered to be a variation of masturbation. Avoiding normal sexual intercourse, by making use of orifices not meant for the sexual act is defined as sodomy. It is wrong when it degrades the human soul; makes men or women slaves to its practice, causes harm psychologically, emotionally and physically. It is wrong for those who exclusively practice these acts and solicit others to perform them where otherwise they would not. That applies as well to heterosexuals as well as homosexuals who lead others into sex in order to quench their lustful thirst at the expense of their victims.
I received messages from a homosexual who objected to the statement I made in my article The Force BE with US where I wrote that the commencement of the collapse of Ancient Rome was because of immorality and sexual perversions. His beef, so to speak, is essentially what I stated earlier, that some heterosexuals practice the same type sex as homosexuals, so why am I condemning what homosexuals do? He states that when heterosexuals reach the age when the creation of children is no longer possible, subsequent sex is for pure pleasurable gratification, is it not? He asks, what is the difference between same sex and what a large number of married and unmarried straights practice for pure sexual gratification? So what then is my justification that gays shouldn’t have the right to marry since what they do sexually is the same? He mentions that dogs and other animals commit acts that are natural but to me, he assumes, the animals would be considered perverted. He didn’t address the difference between the nature of man compared to a species of a lower nature which is denied an immortal soul and free will.
The question comes down to what is normal and what is not normal? The homosexual, my critic, asks for more answers: Socrates, a Greek who committed homosexual sex, a practice condoned in Ancient Greece as a normal act, wasn’t he considered a moral man? Alexander the Great who took his male lover with him on his campaigns was he ridiculed? What about the Romans who believed buggery was unacceptable if being buggered, but is okay to be the one who is doing the buggering?
My answer to these questions would never be satisfactory because the explanation involves subconscious development of man’s higher spirit. The ancients’ morals evolved from developing philosophies and certainly not all of the ancients practiced homosexual sex, nor would because all men and women have different appreciation of sex. Concern about the practice probably came about when the Romans first adopted unwritten postulations related to certain sexual practices that were perceived to demean the male ego.
A couple of thousand years before the twins Romulus and Remus were born, Jews developed religious practices to insure proper hygiene and safe foods, such as not eating pork which was considered an unclean meat and restricted sexual practices that were unhygienic. Moses set strict rules for his people when he received the Ten Commandments and there was no mention of adultery by persons of the same sex. There was mention of coveting the neighbor’s wife. There were also ancient historical writings by the scribes about Sodom and Gomorrah, and how the people of Sodom demanded that Lot turn over his visitors to them to be used for sex. The visitors were God’s angels, males in mufti, searching for one good person other than Lot so that the city could be saved from God’s wrath and total destruction. We know the rest of the story, but when I mentioned this to the homosexual who chastised me, he replied that Lot offered his daughter as a substitute in exchange to save the Angels who appeared as males. He said that proves that Lot believed the crowd would satisfy their sexual demands using a female substitute and therefore were not homosexual but considered both male and female acceptable for their purposes. His reply makes my case because many homosexuals today are also capable of being amoral “switch hitters” who, although married, have joined the homosexual fraternity just to take part in its depravity. Many, who have been threatened to be outed because of their denial of their secret lifestyle, come forth and say that they, in their latter years, finally discovered they were homosexual. It’s funny. It reminds me of the announcements by both Madeline Albright and John Kerry that they only recently discovered that they are Jewish.
Unlikely, I say.
I have digressed from my point which is that Jewish morality regarding sex stemmed from the writings in the Torah and many Jews in Rome’s early history became Roman citizens. Their views on homosexual practices differed from the Greeks and were known in some high Roman quarters with which they kept contact. However, the real impact of Jewish thought on the subject became widely accepted after Paul and the Apostles spread their Judeo-Christian beliefs which also include the Pentateuch of the Jewish Bible which later became the first five chapters of the Christian Bible and the New Testament.
Mankind’s view of morality progresses along concepts of what is ethical and what is not ethical based on human failures, successes and the vicissitudes nature plays upon us. What was considered ethical in ancient times, would not be tolerated today, such as slavery and having Vestal Virgins as a part of the state religion or the use of state authorized torture and murder to satisfy those voyeurs watching Christians burn and be torn apart by wild beasts. Wait! Stop right there! My critic would say: “What’s the difference in today’s world when equally horrible and weird practices exist?” My answer is we have been exposed to the truth of what are right and good based on Christian and Torah Jews religious convictions. That makes current immorality, criminal sexual practices and murder even more contemptible.
But let’s get down to the nitty gritty. To use substitutes for sexual gratification violates the laws of nature. The practices are physically dangerous, resulting in hideous diseases and infections unrelated to normal sexual intercourse … the kind that produces babies. The difference between the straights who commit sodomy and the homosexual who commits sodomy is that the homosexual, in order to satisfy his or her sexual desire, will not resort to any other practice but to sodomize his or her partner, whereas those who are not homosexuals have a choice.
According to scientific, research, sexual pleasure stems from the brain, otherwise there would be no attraction and consequently women would refuse an act that results later in the agony of giving birth. Man, as in mankind would become extinct during the first generation. Marriage is the total commitment between a male and a female for life. It is a pledge of devotion (love) that initiates the joining of two people in an act that fulfills the desire to participate in the creation of new life and the wholesomeness of the family unit, an entity held as a sacred trust that stands above all others. Any violation of that trust has a ripple effect in society as a whole. The dissolution of marriage also dissolves the entire social construct of a nation.
What then is the cause of this unnatural drive, a drive that violates the human anatomy? The term that deviants of the great majority of the population are unwilling to call by name is perversion. The perversion may have come about because outside influences such as early exposure to sex by a person of the same sex over a period of time. My homosexual critic disagrees with that conclusion. He states that a single homosexual act can trigger the homosexual’s realization that he or she is homosexual and if that proclivity is not there, the person would not become a homosexual.
My reply to that statement is that is exactly the reason homosexuals are on the prowl looking for other homosexuals and the reason their victims are not exclusively young. They want to find the victim whose trigger mechanism can be unlocked. But in the meantime they continue to test the entire lake to find that one fish.
How can we honestly question homosexual practices as normal even for them or being homosexual is as normal as being heterosexual when as little as five percent of the total population is actually truly homosexual? If not normal, then the kind of sex they exclusively practice is degrading to themselves. Hence most of them wish to closet their practices. Should we of the majority accept the minority’s views to allow their aberrant life style to be acceptable when they attempt to recruit our children through story books, TV programs and movies? Should we stand by while this minority abominates the meaning of marriage between a man and a woman? The institution of marriage was created to protect children and insure the survival of mankind. It is an institution that existed long before the time of Sodom and Noah’s Ark and now it is being challenged to afford same sex couples the legal, social and monetary benefits that marriage provides including the adoption of children.
The sad and really deplorable consequences of what this rush towards accepting homosexuality as just an aberration of the human condition is the attitude by the Episcopal Church that marriage of same sex couples is acceptable. That part of Episcopalism has gone over the edge by disregarding the purpose of the institution of marriage in exchange for a warped political correctness. Modernism weakened the Christian Church, but accepting sodomy as normal goes beyond the pale.
Why should the general population quietly accept this propaganda when in reality they have a mental disorder, a moral disorder and their life of created depravity? They are constantly looking for converts as rutting wolves. The Log Cabin Republicans have gained access to the political arena carrying their special agenda. Both political parties have their homosexual representatives in congress backed financially by organizations such as NAMBLA whose goal is to end the oppression of men and boys who have mutually consensual relationships.
Lesbians have a very powerful backer in Wal-Mart. Recently, Wal-Mart was brought to the attention of the Internets World Net Daily Exclusive by a man by the name of Ben-Ami, who heads a watchdog group covering publications that have an adverse effect on youth. He reported that Wal-Mart, afraid of being exposed, abruptly pulled from its shelves “the little black book for girlz, a book for healthy sexuality.” The graphic manual promotes lesbianism to young girls, gives explicit instructions for enjoying oral and anal sexual acts and instructs girls that only 10% of the population is heterosexual. The purpose is a thinly veiled propaganda piece that undermines healthy parent-child relationships, substitutes voodoo myths for actual science and provides advice, if actually followed, will certainly result in real serious harm to those who follow it. It tells girls that parents are homophobes. The center was started by the Anglican Diocese in 1962 and was a Christian based organization until 1974. It now receives government money in the amount of $8 million dollars annually. Wal-Mart confirmed that it has joined the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce and contributed $60,000 to the homosexual activist group.[1] In Canada, the book was being considered to be included in school libraries.
There is no doubt that some of the greatest minds the world has ever known were homosexuals. That fact does not mean that these mental giants were normal. It does mean that because many of them are extremely intelligent, they have been able to sell their peculiar sexual preference as being innocuous and not a danger to public orthodoxy.
For the most part, gay males and females are predominantly far left liberals who have shown a real hatred of the Catholic Church and religions in general because of their not so benign attitude towards homosexuals. A few years ago, radical gays marched in a parade up 5th Avenue in New York City. Some of them entered St. Patrick Cathedral, urinated and defecated between the pews; overturned statues and broke open the tabernacle and removed the Sacred Hosts therein. Some even had sex in the back rows. The excuse for why they did such despicable acts was provided to me by my homosexual correspondent. He stated that the reasons why homosexuals are liberal should be obvious because their personal behavior is considered wrong and it is the conservative values that condemns them where liberal values accepts them and liberality as a political arm appeals to the rejected or dejected. If homosexuals were accepted by the controlling elite they then would be conservative.
GUR-R-R-R! HUMBUG, SAY I! That excuse on its face is as specious as it can get, given the fact that the majority of homosexuals have been the most outspoken defenders of the right to choose, the right to abort, even during the last month of pregnancy; they stand tall for euthanasia, for far left socialism; against prayer in public schools; against celebration of Christmas in public squares and public displays of crosses or other religious symbols. Some, not all, have the mind set of Rosy O’Donnell and Bill Maher… cynical and condescending.
I can sympathize with the real homosexual that is morally conflicted, who desires to live a moral life, who feels guilty in being sexually active and envies those who can lead a heterosexual lifestyle, have a traditional family and not live in sin. Those in that situation are aware that heterosexual sex is normal and that exclusively deviant sexual practices are not. That being celibate is the only way he or she can be accepted in most major religions. I’ll never forget what one man said to me. “Do you think I want to be homosexual? Do you think I choose to be this way?" My answer to that man is: Of course, you couldn’t because the problem is mental. My problem with homosexuals is that because your way of life is so foreign to mine and to 95% of the rest of us, we can not share your situation any more than we would share willingly an affliction such as Alzheimer’s disease, schizophrenia and leprosy. All we can do is sympathize and pray for you.
Footnotes:
1. Report provided by World Net Daily Exclusive, November 17, 2006.
© 2006 Joe Kress - All Rights Reserved
Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale
The "Curmudgeon", Joseph H. Kress, Lt. Col. USAF (Ret) obtain a B.S. in Business Administration, with a major in economics and minor in accounting.
He served in England and Viet Nam where he received the Bronze Star during the TET Offensive, then he was appointed Chief of Supply for two state-side assignments; the DOD's Defense Disposal Agency where he was chief of disposal operations for all of Southeast Asia, based at CINCPAC Headquarters in Hawaii. He retired from Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio as chief of supply with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel at the age of 52, and now he and his wife reside in Summerville, S.C.
Since leaving the military, he was involved in political campaigns, writing articles for the local papers, and as a realtor.
By Joe Kress
November 26, 2006
NewsWithViews.com
The caption read: “Catholics plan gay outreach.” This headline was above an article published, November 14, 2006 by the Post and Courier, South Carolina. Just below that article was another article with the caption: “N.C. Baptists adopt anti-gay policy.” The day before, there was the announcement that the Episcopal hierarchy elevated a female priest to bishop. Her first announcement was to condone same sex marriage, approve the use of fertilized embryos for stem cell research and equate the homosexual lifestyle with the heterosexual’s as the natural, progressive understanding of the human condition. The Episcopal Church announced that deformed and imperfect new born babies should be allowed to die without undue medical care. Evidently these little ones struggling for life are the new throwaway class of non-productive humans.
These captions and statements are examples of modern day Christianity and its new age dissimilitude. There was a time in the early Church when serious sins could be forgiven only if the penitent spent long days, even months standing, draped in sackcloth and ashes before the entrance of the church.
The Roman Catholic bishops approved guidelines for gay outreach, November 15, 2006, to be an open invitation to the homosexual communities that this is the religion to belong to, but don’t have sex, because you can’t receive Holy Communion if you do. The bishops equated buggery, fallatio, and cunninlingus as benign as the use of prophylactics to avoid conception between married couples. Sodomy is no longer looked upon so serious an evil that it brings down the wrath of the Almighty and more Sodom and Gomorrah
The appearance as some would say is that Catholic Bishops evidently want to live in Sodom City to fill the pews, with special sections set apart for non-abstaining Sodomites so that the rest of the faithful can snicker past as they march up the aisle to receive communion. That is certainly not the case. I would not agree with that perception. The Catholic Church would never turn away any sinner. The fact is, the Catholic Church probably is more aware of the homosexuals’ dilemma than any other religion and has a greater sympathy for those who are afflicted. The problem is not a problem, if sexual abstinence can be observed. It’s like the military, don’t ask, don’t tell. The Church is well aware of what happens to those children that have been violated and suffer the scars of sexual abuse for a lifetime. It could never approve of the homosexual lifestyle. Those who are afflicted are given sympathetic counseling with the sincere hope that the homosexuals can be either cured or can remain celibate.
I cringe that a priest or bishop would say the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, perform the Consecration of the Sacred Host in the morning and later have, abnormal, disgusting, weird intimate relations with adolescent altar boys. The violation of their vows of chastity and celibacy are sacrilegious, adding another serious sin to the abnormal act itself. Nearly as bad, in my opinion, were the straight Catholic bishops trying to hide what can only be determined to be widespread pedophiles in the seminaries and within the sacristies committing crimes against man, God and His Church. What must be recognized is that homosexuals had found a deep cover and a great avenue to prey on the innocent by infiltrating the clergy.
The Baptist State Convention of North Carolina’s spokesman is quoted in the article as stating, “It’s not something that we wanted to do, (the national Southern Baptist with its 4,000 churches and 1.2 million members is more strict than the national Southern Baptists), but homosexuality is the only sin that has its own advocacy group,” Spokesman Norman Jameson said. “Those advocacy groups are pushing us into this stance. Other denominations that waffle and waver on the issue year after year are getting torn apart.”
Nice! What members of the Convention are saying is we don’t like what you homosexuals do … so don’t join us, but on the other hand, we’ll not avoid ministering to the homosexual community. Ogallala! That message should surely entice homosexuals to seek comfort and guidance and forgiveness for their ongoing practices that Lot avoided. The Baptists evidently want to take one last look towards Sodom, as did Lot’s wife, but sort of regret that they voted for leaving the place. That tells me the subject probably would not have reached the convention floor had it not been for the fate of those religions who waffled… not because it was the right thing they wanted to do but because the Gay advocacy groups forced their hand.
Tent preachers and television evangelists whose thunder and brimstone sermons about the wrath of God and the final days, leave their pulpits, climb aboard their jet liners and tryst with some male or female prostitute who provides the lustful satisfaction what their wives recoil from with loathing and disgust.
The fact is heterosexual practices depicted in pictures found in the Komasutra are the same as those practiced by homosexuals. The variations in real life sometime exceed anything depicted in that ancient book of human sexual practices. Some homosexual antics reach bizarre levels causing gross damage to their orifices.
Voyeurs, who watch the porn movies, are corrupted by outlandish exhibitions of the depths of human depravity. They become mentally and morally degraded as those who sexually perform for their viewing pleasure. Several studies on mental problems found that those who continue viewing pornographic material and movies ultimately become addicted, so much so that what they see actually controls their lives, overriding all other outside activities including intimate sex with their own wives.
They drift away from their religious beliefs. In other words, voyeurs are vicariously living within an unreal world watching degrading human acts that the lower animals couldn’t perform. In the case of pedophiles, they are not satisfied to sit before a screen in a dark corner; rather their goal is to trap the young into meeting them and then abusing them. Many gays go fishing for a partner no matter the age. In other words, the voyeurs, the pedophiles, the wolves that prey on children…their world is sex and how to use it. It is all about self-gratification, a form of idolatry where they revere their sex organs as gods.
What really is the problem with sex outside society’s perception of normal sex? Acts depicted in the Komasutra are stimulating activities prior to completing copulation. Using stimulations to the point of consummation thus aborting the normal function of heterosexual copulation is considered to be a variation of masturbation. Avoiding normal sexual intercourse, by making use of orifices not meant for the sexual act is defined as sodomy. It is wrong when it degrades the human soul; makes men or women slaves to its practice, causes harm psychologically, emotionally and physically. It is wrong for those who exclusively practice these acts and solicit others to perform them where otherwise they would not. That applies as well to heterosexuals as well as homosexuals who lead others into sex in order to quench their lustful thirst at the expense of their victims.
I received messages from a homosexual who objected to the statement I made in my article The Force BE with US where I wrote that the commencement of the collapse of Ancient Rome was because of immorality and sexual perversions. His beef, so to speak, is essentially what I stated earlier, that some heterosexuals practice the same type sex as homosexuals, so why am I condemning what homosexuals do? He states that when heterosexuals reach the age when the creation of children is no longer possible, subsequent sex is for pure pleasurable gratification, is it not? He asks, what is the difference between same sex and what a large number of married and unmarried straights practice for pure sexual gratification? So what then is my justification that gays shouldn’t have the right to marry since what they do sexually is the same? He mentions that dogs and other animals commit acts that are natural but to me, he assumes, the animals would be considered perverted. He didn’t address the difference between the nature of man compared to a species of a lower nature which is denied an immortal soul and free will.
The question comes down to what is normal and what is not normal? The homosexual, my critic, asks for more answers: Socrates, a Greek who committed homosexual sex, a practice condoned in Ancient Greece as a normal act, wasn’t he considered a moral man? Alexander the Great who took his male lover with him on his campaigns was he ridiculed? What about the Romans who believed buggery was unacceptable if being buggered, but is okay to be the one who is doing the buggering?
My answer to these questions would never be satisfactory because the explanation involves subconscious development of man’s higher spirit. The ancients’ morals evolved from developing philosophies and certainly not all of the ancients practiced homosexual sex, nor would because all men and women have different appreciation of sex. Concern about the practice probably came about when the Romans first adopted unwritten postulations related to certain sexual practices that were perceived to demean the male ego.
A couple of thousand years before the twins Romulus and Remus were born, Jews developed religious practices to insure proper hygiene and safe foods, such as not eating pork which was considered an unclean meat and restricted sexual practices that were unhygienic. Moses set strict rules for his people when he received the Ten Commandments and there was no mention of adultery by persons of the same sex. There was mention of coveting the neighbor’s wife. There were also ancient historical writings by the scribes about Sodom and Gomorrah, and how the people of Sodom demanded that Lot turn over his visitors to them to be used for sex. The visitors were God’s angels, males in mufti, searching for one good person other than Lot so that the city could be saved from God’s wrath and total destruction. We know the rest of the story, but when I mentioned this to the homosexual who chastised me, he replied that Lot offered his daughter as a substitute in exchange to save the Angels who appeared as males. He said that proves that Lot believed the crowd would satisfy their sexual demands using a female substitute and therefore were not homosexual but considered both male and female acceptable for their purposes. His reply makes my case because many homosexuals today are also capable of being amoral “switch hitters” who, although married, have joined the homosexual fraternity just to take part in its depravity. Many, who have been threatened to be outed because of their denial of their secret lifestyle, come forth and say that they, in their latter years, finally discovered they were homosexual. It’s funny. It reminds me of the announcements by both Madeline Albright and John Kerry that they only recently discovered that they are Jewish.
Unlikely, I say.
I have digressed from my point which is that Jewish morality regarding sex stemmed from the writings in the Torah and many Jews in Rome’s early history became Roman citizens. Their views on homosexual practices differed from the Greeks and were known in some high Roman quarters with which they kept contact. However, the real impact of Jewish thought on the subject became widely accepted after Paul and the Apostles spread their Judeo-Christian beliefs which also include the Pentateuch of the Jewish Bible which later became the first five chapters of the Christian Bible and the New Testament.
Mankind’s view of morality progresses along concepts of what is ethical and what is not ethical based on human failures, successes and the vicissitudes nature plays upon us. What was considered ethical in ancient times, would not be tolerated today, such as slavery and having Vestal Virgins as a part of the state religion or the use of state authorized torture and murder to satisfy those voyeurs watching Christians burn and be torn apart by wild beasts. Wait! Stop right there! My critic would say: “What’s the difference in today’s world when equally horrible and weird practices exist?” My answer is we have been exposed to the truth of what are right and good based on Christian and Torah Jews religious convictions. That makes current immorality, criminal sexual practices and murder even more contemptible.
But let’s get down to the nitty gritty. To use substitutes for sexual gratification violates the laws of nature. The practices are physically dangerous, resulting in hideous diseases and infections unrelated to normal sexual intercourse … the kind that produces babies. The difference between the straights who commit sodomy and the homosexual who commits sodomy is that the homosexual, in order to satisfy his or her sexual desire, will not resort to any other practice but to sodomize his or her partner, whereas those who are not homosexuals have a choice.
According to scientific, research, sexual pleasure stems from the brain, otherwise there would be no attraction and consequently women would refuse an act that results later in the agony of giving birth. Man, as in mankind would become extinct during the first generation. Marriage is the total commitment between a male and a female for life. It is a pledge of devotion (love) that initiates the joining of two people in an act that fulfills the desire to participate in the creation of new life and the wholesomeness of the family unit, an entity held as a sacred trust that stands above all others. Any violation of that trust has a ripple effect in society as a whole. The dissolution of marriage also dissolves the entire social construct of a nation.
What then is the cause of this unnatural drive, a drive that violates the human anatomy? The term that deviants of the great majority of the population are unwilling to call by name is perversion. The perversion may have come about because outside influences such as early exposure to sex by a person of the same sex over a period of time. My homosexual critic disagrees with that conclusion. He states that a single homosexual act can trigger the homosexual’s realization that he or she is homosexual and if that proclivity is not there, the person would not become a homosexual.
My reply to that statement is that is exactly the reason homosexuals are on the prowl looking for other homosexuals and the reason their victims are not exclusively young. They want to find the victim whose trigger mechanism can be unlocked. But in the meantime they continue to test the entire lake to find that one fish.
How can we honestly question homosexual practices as normal even for them or being homosexual is as normal as being heterosexual when as little as five percent of the total population is actually truly homosexual? If not normal, then the kind of sex they exclusively practice is degrading to themselves. Hence most of them wish to closet their practices. Should we of the majority accept the minority’s views to allow their aberrant life style to be acceptable when they attempt to recruit our children through story books, TV programs and movies? Should we stand by while this minority abominates the meaning of marriage between a man and a woman? The institution of marriage was created to protect children and insure the survival of mankind. It is an institution that existed long before the time of Sodom and Noah’s Ark and now it is being challenged to afford same sex couples the legal, social and monetary benefits that marriage provides including the adoption of children.
The sad and really deplorable consequences of what this rush towards accepting homosexuality as just an aberration of the human condition is the attitude by the Episcopal Church that marriage of same sex couples is acceptable. That part of Episcopalism has gone over the edge by disregarding the purpose of the institution of marriage in exchange for a warped political correctness. Modernism weakened the Christian Church, but accepting sodomy as normal goes beyond the pale.
Why should the general population quietly accept this propaganda when in reality they have a mental disorder, a moral disorder and their life of created depravity? They are constantly looking for converts as rutting wolves. The Log Cabin Republicans have gained access to the political arena carrying their special agenda. Both political parties have their homosexual representatives in congress backed financially by organizations such as NAMBLA whose goal is to end the oppression of men and boys who have mutually consensual relationships.
Lesbians have a very powerful backer in Wal-Mart. Recently, Wal-Mart was brought to the attention of the Internets World Net Daily Exclusive by a man by the name of Ben-Ami, who heads a watchdog group covering publications that have an adverse effect on youth. He reported that Wal-Mart, afraid of being exposed, abruptly pulled from its shelves “the little black book for girlz, a book for healthy sexuality.” The graphic manual promotes lesbianism to young girls, gives explicit instructions for enjoying oral and anal sexual acts and instructs girls that only 10% of the population is heterosexual. The purpose is a thinly veiled propaganda piece that undermines healthy parent-child relationships, substitutes voodoo myths for actual science and provides advice, if actually followed, will certainly result in real serious harm to those who follow it. It tells girls that parents are homophobes. The center was started by the Anglican Diocese in 1962 and was a Christian based organization until 1974. It now receives government money in the amount of $8 million dollars annually. Wal-Mart confirmed that it has joined the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce and contributed $60,000 to the homosexual activist group.[1] In Canada, the book was being considered to be included in school libraries.
There is no doubt that some of the greatest minds the world has ever known were homosexuals. That fact does not mean that these mental giants were normal. It does mean that because many of them are extremely intelligent, they have been able to sell their peculiar sexual preference as being innocuous and not a danger to public orthodoxy.
For the most part, gay males and females are predominantly far left liberals who have shown a real hatred of the Catholic Church and religions in general because of their not so benign attitude towards homosexuals. A few years ago, radical gays marched in a parade up 5th Avenue in New York City. Some of them entered St. Patrick Cathedral, urinated and defecated between the pews; overturned statues and broke open the tabernacle and removed the Sacred Hosts therein. Some even had sex in the back rows. The excuse for why they did such despicable acts was provided to me by my homosexual correspondent. He stated that the reasons why homosexuals are liberal should be obvious because their personal behavior is considered wrong and it is the conservative values that condemns them where liberal values accepts them and liberality as a political arm appeals to the rejected or dejected. If homosexuals were accepted by the controlling elite they then would be conservative.
GUR-R-R-R! HUMBUG, SAY I! That excuse on its face is as specious as it can get, given the fact that the majority of homosexuals have been the most outspoken defenders of the right to choose, the right to abort, even during the last month of pregnancy; they stand tall for euthanasia, for far left socialism; against prayer in public schools; against celebration of Christmas in public squares and public displays of crosses or other religious symbols. Some, not all, have the mind set of Rosy O’Donnell and Bill Maher… cynical and condescending.
I can sympathize with the real homosexual that is morally conflicted, who desires to live a moral life, who feels guilty in being sexually active and envies those who can lead a heterosexual lifestyle, have a traditional family and not live in sin. Those in that situation are aware that heterosexual sex is normal and that exclusively deviant sexual practices are not. That being celibate is the only way he or she can be accepted in most major religions. I’ll never forget what one man said to me. “Do you think I want to be homosexual? Do you think I choose to be this way?" My answer to that man is: Of course, you couldn’t because the problem is mental. My problem with homosexuals is that because your way of life is so foreign to mine and to 95% of the rest of us, we can not share your situation any more than we would share willingly an affliction such as Alzheimer’s disease, schizophrenia and leprosy. All we can do is sympathize and pray for you.
Footnotes:
1. Report provided by World Net Daily Exclusive, November 17, 2006.
© 2006 Joe Kress - All Rights Reserved
Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale
The "Curmudgeon", Joseph H. Kress, Lt. Col. USAF (Ret) obtain a B.S. in Business Administration, with a major in economics and minor in accounting.
He served in England and Viet Nam where he received the Bronze Star during the TET Offensive, then he was appointed Chief of Supply for two state-side assignments; the DOD's Defense Disposal Agency where he was chief of disposal operations for all of Southeast Asia, based at CINCPAC Headquarters in Hawaii. He retired from Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio as chief of supply with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel at the age of 52, and now he and his wife reside in Summerville, S.C.
Since leaving the military, he was involved in political campaigns, writing articles for the local papers, and as a realtor.
posted by shummer60 at Sunday, December 03, 2006
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home