Although one often hears “gay rights” campaigners complain that homosexuality remains a taboo even today, this taboo actually plays into their hands.
Persistent and intensive re-education by politically correct politicians and mass media have produced their effect: people are conditioned to view sodomites as a cultural minority that is disadvantaged and discriminated because of its “being different”, but nobody seems aware of what this difference is about. As it appears, people do not understand that this difference is not about a condition (i.e., what people are), but about a behaviour (i.e., what they do), nor are they aware of the harm that this behaviour causes. If they were aware, they would probably stop seeing homosexuals as victims of discrimination, and instead view them as victims of self-destruction.
Ireland is going to hold a referendum on the re-definition of marriage in spring, and “gay rights” activists gleefully report that according to opinion polls a majority of respondents say they are going to vote in favour of same-sex “marriage”. Not just a majority, but – if the polls are to believed – even quite a large majority.
Strangely, this time one hears none of the usual pro-sodomy MEPs complaining that “such a referendum, in which the majority decides on the rights of a minority should not be allowed to take place”. Nor do they seem to have any problem with the fact that the referendum will be binding irrespective of the turnout. (Had that rule applied to the referendum in Slovakia last week, there would have been hue and cry – just as there was after the referendum in Croatia where a strong majority voted in favour of a constitutional amendment to protect marriage as a union between one man and one woman. As it appears, it is the result that counts for them, and every concern about procedure etc. is just a pretext – so much for their consistency…)
If the proposed amendment according which marriage “may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex” gets a majority, this would make Ireland the first country in the world in which same-sex “marriage” would be introduced not as a result of judicial activism or legislative wilfulness, but by a direct popular vote.
But is it at all possible that in Ireland, where sodomy was a criminal offence until 1993, a majority of voters would seriously consider sacralising it by defining it as a possible basis for marriage? What has happened to this once Catholic country?
Two hypotheses seem plausible:
The first is that, disappointed and angered by the scandal of child abuse by priests and other Church employees, voters view the referendum simply as a chance to take their “revenge” on the Church and its hierarchy. This would correspond to a general mood of anti-Church-resentment that the current Government led by Prime Minister Enda Kenny has been fuelling throughout the last few years. However, although the disappointment with the Church seems understandable, such a reaction would just be incredibly childish and self-defeating: those child-abusing priests have not complied with the moral teachings of the institution they represented – but does that mean that those teachings were wrong? Whatever those priests may have done and however badly the hierarchy may have handled this, the Church has always been consistent in condemning the sexual abuse of minors. Legalizing same-sex “marriage”, by contrast, would mean to institutionalize and celebrate not only the sexual self-abuse of adults, but also – as a consequence of the adoption “right” that is part of the package – the abuse of minors: they would be turned into a commodity for any adults who want to “play family”.
The second explanation that comes to mind is that many Irishmen simply do not know what homosexuality (or “sodomy”, which appears to be the more appropriate term) actually is.
Those wishing to protect marriage against wilful re-definition will probably not be successful if they continue avoiding this delicate subject, however disgraceful and unpleasant it may be.
This is a veritable dilemma. The sexual behaviour that homosexuals typically engage in is not at all “gay”, and it is hardly a good subject for conversation. This is also why many parents believe it should not become a part of school curricula – and indeed one of the problems with the “sexual education” programmes that some politicians are promoting and so many parents are protesting against is that they misrepresent and trivialize sodomy rather than providing correct information. The consequence is that while society believes to be well informed, most non-homosexuals are in fact clueless about what homosexuals are doing as part of their constitutionally protected “private life”. No, they are not just dressing up funnily, or holding hands. They also do some other things.
This is a painstaking subject for us to tackle, and certainly not something we enjoy sullying the pages of our website with. However, it is information that needs to go out to the public.
We therefore refer our readers to a very useful website that, whilst not using obscene or lewd language, describes homosexual behaviour and the health risks associated with it in sufficiently clear detail for everyone to understand.
Here are some extracts:
Men having sex with other men leads to greater health risks than men having sex with women not only because of promiscuity but also because of the nature of sex among men.
Male homosexual behaviour is not simply either ‘active’ or ‘passive,’ since penile-anal, mouth-penile, and hand-anal sexual contact is usual for both partners, and mouth-anal contact is not infrequent. Mouth-anal contact is the reason for the relatively high incidence of diseases caused by bowel pathogens in male homosexuals. Trauma may encourage the entry of micro-organisms and thus lead to primary syphilitic lesions occurring in the anogenital area… In addition to sodomy, trauma may be caused by foreign bodies, including stimulators of various kinds, penile adornments, and prostheses.
Anal intercourse is the sine qua non of sex for many gay men. Yet human physiology makes it clear that the body was not designed to accommodate this activity… the anus is a delicate mechanism of small muscles that comprise an “exit-only” passage. With repeated trauma, friction and stretching, the sphincter loses its tone and its ability to maintain a tight seal. Consequently, anal intercourse leads to leakage of fecal material that can easily become chronic.
The potential for injury is exacerbated by the fact that the intestine has only a single layer of cells separating it from highly vascular tissue, that is, blood. Therefore, any organisms that are introduced into the rectum have a much easier time establishing a foothold for infection.
Furthermore, ejaculate has components that are immunosuppressive. … The end result is that the fragility of the anus and rectum, along with the immunosuppressive effect of ejaculate, make anal-genital intercourse a most efficient manner of transmitting HIV and other infections. The list of diseases found with extraordinary frequency among male homosexual practitioners as a result of anal intercourse is alarming:
Herpes simplex virus
Human immunodeficiency virus
Human papilloma virus
Viral hepatitis types B & C
Sexual transmission of some of these diseases is so rare in the exclusively heterosexual population as to be virtually unknown. Others, while found among heterosexual and homosexual practitioners, are clearly predominated by those involved in homosexual activity.
The rate of new HIV diagnoses among men who have sex with men (MSM) is more than 44 times that of other men and more than 40 times that of women. The rate of primary and secondary syphilis among MSM is more than 46 times that of other men and more than 71 times that of women.
There is more – make sure to read it and inform yourselves. Read also the page on female homosexual behaviour. Then ask yourselves: is this really something that contributes to the common good? Is it really something that should be celebrated and given a legal status?
This information does not come from mean-spirited reactionaries who are seeking to denigrate and “bully” homosexuals, but it is the result of serious medical and social research. In fact, those (allegedly) mean-spirited reactionaries would certainly prefer not to know, and in most cases probably do not know, what homosexuality is about. But given the point to which the debate on “gay rights” has progressed, this is a lack of awareness that society no longer can afford. It is insufficient to issue well-intentioned but naive statements about the “gifts and qualities that homosexuals have to offer to society”, or about “equality”. Get in touch with reality: sodomy is an irresponsible and risk-laden behaviour that should neither be downplayed nor encouraged, and most certainly not be rewarded or otherwise institutionalized. If we mean well to those engaging in it, we must instead help them in finding ways to overcome their unhealthy inclination.