Poor Ben Carson!
What gives? He proffered a stray idea, an impromptu hypothesis, and now he is public enemy #1.
What is up with the gay-mafia’s, homo-fascist’s stranglehold on our society? Since when do fags, all 5% of them, call the shots and sway public opinion and political conversation to such a dictatorial degree?
In an open, intellectual society, why is it not fair to question the motives and origins of homosexuality? If homosexuals enjoy the right to practice their lifestyle openly and shamelessly, why should we not likewise be allowed to scrutinize its practices and proclamations? Why must Ben Carson be vilified for such a simple proposition?
Homosexuality is a bizarre, anti-evolutionary sexual behavior that appears intertwined with deviant cultural affectations. Why must we be expected to presume that such behavior has natural origins in the first place? Furthermore, how did it happen that such a marginal minority was empowered to prevent open and sincere dialogue?
I’m not sold either way on the What-Is-Gay issue. Four years ago I wrote something here…it was a “thinking out loud” conjectural post about homosexuality and it was not roundly received, to say the least.
I value the honest discussion of homosexuality’s elemental, physiological genesis more than the petty and hysterical sensitivities of the homo crowd.
I posted elsewhere tonight and I thought it appropriate to elaborate even though I had no intention of posting shit tongiht.
Gayness is a conscious affectation.
There is not doubt they are ultimately chosen lifestyles.
I believe man has an ingrown affinity for the male in early life in order to cement his own image. Some men succumb to a breach in the natural order of sexuality.
Some surmount the shame factor and overcome the inherent sociological risks present for a man who enjoys embracing the worship of the masculine figure. Such men may assume it to become a token of idolatry in the absence of developing a true masculine persona.
Gay men are bred. They are not sprung.
I am not a homophobe. And simply questioning homosexual motives does not make one a homophobe. I realize this is a nuanced stance that our nice 21st Century society seems unable to palate in response to most dialogue regarding groups of varying, competing interests; my beef with homos (heh) is that I resent the inhibition of fair and open-minded discussion. There can be no such thing as reasonable discussion in the realm of homosexuality in today’s society because the backlash and dramatic reaction that is sure to swell in response to anyone questioning the sweet lies of sweet men and butchering the motives of butch women is tantamount to a social dictatorship.
Western culture’s baffling drive to accept and welcome homosexuality as a niche beyond reproach is nothing but that: a social dictatorship. Any expressed doubt or suspicion of homosexual motivations is soundly drummed off the stage of public discourse, long before it has a chance to be greeted with reason and objectivity.
Frankly, I don’t care what the origins of homosexuality are. If people wish to have sexual relations with their own gender, who cares?
Butt-fuck or scissor to your heart’s content. I don’t care. Just don’t ever presume to dictate society’s legitimate discourse merely for your own questionable existence. And homosexuals are of dubious essence. They are of utmost questionable proclivity and the normalization of such deviancy must not be allowed to prop up such a social dictatorship as seems to have coated our culture like a sickly coat of suffocating semen.