This comment was censored on the First Thing/First Thought blog (I’m banned from commenting there). Yet David Nickols, a disgusting man with a homosexual problem and an aggressive homosexuality agenda is given full reign to write on FT promoting his agenda.
David said: “Priests who abused minors were not part of the “gay subculture.” They did not subscribe to gay publications, hold positions in gay-rights organizations, and march in gay parades. “
My banned comment:
Paul Shanley, as just one example, proclaimed everything that “gay subculture” proclaimed, from complete normalization of homosexuality/bisexuality to the sexual exploitation and abuse of adolescents as normal.
Of course, the examples David cites above would not have been permitted by the hierarchy.
Shanley “just” sexually abused and exploited in real life youngsters with a homosexual problem – instead of buying a porn magazine showing the same. After years of this, he abused young boys, and afterwards he had sexual activities with men.
In this respect, he is much more an embodiment of the grotesque homosexual subculture than those who merely “subscribe” to homosexuality magazines.
This was a smart comment on the ideological strategy behind the push for homosexual “marriage.” (I have more to say, but not much time to blog right now))
Matt in TX says: (The American Conservative thread)
Mr. Raimondo’s argument — gay people are already so high-functioning, they don’t need marriage! — is really something.
Check out the HIV statistics, buddy. And I mean the HIV statistics *today*. People may not be dying en masse, but even now, in 2013, 1 in 5 gay men are infected, according to the CDC.
Think about when gay marriage first started to get advanced among gay people themselves. Here’s a hint — look in Larry Kramer’s “The Normal Heart.”
Read Steve Sailer’s theory on why gays decided to go for gay marriage.
“By superimposing the legal and social constraints of heterosexual marriage on gay relationships, we will succeed only in de-eroticizing them.”
Yeah. That’s the point. Gay men in the 1970s and 80s literally killed themselves with their debauchery. Jonathan Rauch may not be able to come right out and say it, but people like him know that.
In short, Americans hate to face how dysfunctional and deformed they are regarding sexuality and relationships.
Something just occurred to me. Think about what is written above: in a way it is as silly to claim that you are going to resolve how perverted and perverse LGBT people are with “marriage” as it is by the claim that it can all be “prayed away.”
Although many actions and interactions in life, such as prayer and other religious-based interactions, can impact a person’s psychology, including any profound problems a person may have, religion still does not have, by a long shot, the knowledge that is available through psychological investigation and treatment for mental illness or disorders. Religion acts more on a moral and ideological level, and it can also act on an interpersonal level. So religion can act more on underlying causes for homosexuality that relate to these last mentioned spheres, but do less for other more profound or unconscious causes. (So this needs better articulation, but I have no time now).