They call them ‘queer’; and sometimes they are!

When still a teenager, I was uninterested in anything else than my engineering studies and apprenticeship, girls; and of course how to find one who would go out with me; loud and ever louder pop music: and of course that most desirable item: beer. The Korean War had been fought, and the 38th parallel Armistice still rules today. I noticed that Americans, along with a smaller British contingent, fought and died to prevent a Communist takeover of the South, and only with the intervention of China and, to a lesser extent, Soviet Russia, did the North Koreans avert obliteration. America, and its politics, was but a small shadow on my horizon; but one of THE nastiest of political opportunists was beginning to make his presence known in mainstream American politics.

Senator Joe McCarthy, a reptile who, single-handedly destroyed hundreds of American lives by simply asking ‘When did you become a Communist?’ He asked and made these leading, destructive and disgraceful questions and commentaries because his position, as a U.S. Senator, gave him unrivalled power, and few dared to stand against him. He was a bully, a hypocrite of the first order, a boastful braggart; but also an intensely professional politician, who single-handedly raised the ‘witch-hunts’ for supposed ‘Reds under the Bed’ to a new, and very sinister degree.  His menacing ‘invitations’ to testify before his Committee led to disturbing excesses. His browbeating tactics destroyed careers of people who were not involved in the infiltration of our government. His freewheeling style caused both the Senate and the Subcommittee to revise the rules governing future investigations, and prompted the courts to act to protect the Constitutional rights of witnesses at Congressional hearings. Two things meant that he was finally brought low; when he attempted to take on the Army, and was humiliated by their counsel, the other was the famous soliloquy by Edward R. Murrow on CBS-TV.

The reason for this drift back in time is to hold up to the spotlight of criticism the new McCarthyism; the really nasty witch-hunt being played out against anyone in political or public life who states, or indeed has even hinted, that there is something deeply unsavoury; or actually wrong, about homosexuality, and whether the avalanche of words and statements glorifying this truly unedifying practice is actually of benefit to both homosexuals, and to the Nation as a whole.

We have the case of Tim Farron, pilloried all over for hesitating to state, as is given within his Christian beliefs, that homosexual activity is a sin. Personally, I have very little time for Mr. Farron, whom I believe to be a deeply-deluded politician; but I do respect his right to believe in whatever his religion preaches.

We also have the case of Tory M.P. Andrew Turner who was pilloried after stating his opinion that homosexuality was wrong to a class of sixth-formers; he is believed to have stepped down after a vicious campaign against him.

We also read of one Robert Peston, who seems to have placed himself as the modern ‘witchfinder general’, stating that he will ask every would-be M.P. the same question in order to establish the ‘truth’.

I have written many times of my opposition to the gradual leniency afforded people who hold to this perversion in their private lives, this same leniency which has ended up with Cameron’s  insane idea of ‘Same-Sex Marriage’ which placed this union of perverts on the same basis as the untold millions of marriages between men and women, made according to rites which have descended from antiquity. I oppose this farrago, and will continue to do so until my dying breath. I do not state that it is wrong on any religious point, although there are so many: I oppose it because sex, and the very act of love itself, is purely for the purpose of procreation, and any such activity which is, of itself, barren, because procreation cannot take place between two people of the same sex was named a perversion as such by no less an authority than Charles Darwin.

4 comments for “They call them ‘queer’; and sometimes they are!

  1. graham wood
    April 30, 2017 at 7:24 pm

    Well said Mike and I fully agree that homosexuality is indeed a sexual perversion.
    I oppose it on every ground possible, but primarily because of my own Christian belief, in the clear words of Christ (and all the Christian scriptures OT and NT), that normal marriage is exclusively heterosexual.
    Thus so called gay marriage is an outrageous imposture bearing no relation to the norms of reality.
    As you say, the perversion is being promoted by an army of homosexual activities not only in the UK, USA, but also world-wide, and as you suggest is a McCarthyite witch hunt of huge proportions.
    What many may not know is that the re-definition of marriage has also been a deliberate attempt by the British government to impose it world-wide.
    For example Robert Harris in his excellent appraisal (Is there a case for SSM) cites:
    “The government (at the time Cameron’s) is using its global influence to ensure that countries around the world recognise same-sex relationships…. its ultimate strategy is clearly global so that all other countries, irrespective of their cherished and well founded beliefs are deemed to be “backward” if they reject SSM” (quoting a specific comment by Francis Maude).
    Harris continues:
    “Even though ALL the world’s religions reject the practice of same sex relationships – let alone the concept of same-sex marriage – the UK government believes it knows better and holds the moral right to negatively judge those whose beliefs differs from its own” It is not the role of governments (democratic or otherwise) to decide that it holds the moral and legal right to devise a new meaning for the institution of marriage”
    ” It is a ‘legal fiction’ – i.e. where something may be legal on paper but its meaning is not intelligible enough to point to anything that accords with reality”.
    Incidentally, although you may not accept the premise, the New Testament explains with clarity why God rejects this sexual perversion and outlines its terrible consequences (Romans 1:18-32).
    I also share your distaste for Farron who declared in one TV interview that he did not wish his religion to be discussed during the election. One must ask why not? After all he should be prepared to defend his view on such a prominent issue in terms of principle when challenged to do so.
    Clearly he was covered with embarrassment and disinclined, knowing that a frank endorsement of a Christian position could well re-open up a fierce debate on the issue that could imperil his electoral chances.

  2. Errol
    April 30, 2017 at 9:00 pm

    What people do in private is entirely their own business. No one else is involved, as long as it’s two consenting adults that’s as much as need be said.

    Gay marriage though, is a travesty. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Suggesting it provided ‘equality’ is absurd, as that makes a sexual proclivity grounds for legal differentiation, which is bonkers.

  3. James Strong
    May 1, 2017 at 6:35 pm

    Sex is most certainly not just for procreation.
    Were that to be the case there would be , and in your implication there should be, no sex involving post-menopausal women.
    By clearly making this point I have holed your argument below the water-line.
    Your argument, as stated, cannot survive.
    To some extent that is a pity because there are nuggets of sense elsewhere in what you write.
    You might like to re-visit your post.

    • Brightside Bob
      May 2, 2017 at 9:16 pm

      “…no sex involving post-menopausal women.” Indeed.

      Add to that heterosexual couples who, for any reason, are unable to produce offspring.

Comments are closed.