opinion pages and articles on the beauty of life: friendship, family, love, romance, marriage, parenting, etc...
Decadent Sex and Money
Published on August 10, 2007 By jesseledesma In Current Events
Homosexual rights are not as simple as just saying we are protecting the individual’s rights to be part of society. In the USA there is a big political movement that wants to skew civil life in their favor. In other words they want to be in charge of society.

Before the last congressional election in America I wrote about the state of California government debating a law that would require public school teachers to discuss the transsexual and homosexual lifestyle with children as young as 6. I see this as a strict violation of the right of the parent not have the morality that he and/or she wants to teach their children interfered with by any level of government.

In addition, as a student of human psychology I can see no reason to discuss with very young children the details of the transgender and homosexual lifestyle. However, people in the gay agenda want to cram their politics down our throats.

Personally I have no problem with what people do in the privacy of their homes. I take great offense in having some else try to force me to defend their political agenda, especially when that agenda has more to do with physical pleasure and money.

I am not asking for congress to let me drool while I look at a picture of Joan Jett or Angelina Jolie. In addition, I am not walking down the street drooling while I look at said pictures.

Personal pleasure is a personal issue. It should be something maintained in the home. Even in this so called sophisticated society, I do not see openly gay people walking the street, holding hands, looking lovingly into each others eyes, while they go to kiss each other, and eyes are very grateful for it. I make this point because the lack of such group of people in society means they are regulating their own behavior in public. Therefore, the idea that it is about gay individuals roaming in society free to be gay just does not seen genuine.

Therefore, in the question should gays be allowed to marry I say no. Marriage is a heterosexual invention. I thought gays hated heterosexuals. If you hate the mainstream, why do you want to be like it?

The dirty little secret is that gay marriages are about money. Gay partners want to be the spouse so they will have spousal inheritance rights in the event of a death. Well don’t you know that you can put anything in your will, such as I leave all my earthly possessions to my gay lover Jack Smith who resides at such address?

I personally am not in favor of the gay lifestyle. I do not believe that it is a born trait. I do think that it is all about decadent sex and not love. A week ago I drove to self-described lesbians who “left their husbands at home” (their lesbian lovers). Even though they said they were lesbians and I am about as ugly as you can get, you could cut the sexual tensions with the edge of piece of paper. I wonder if these self-described lesbians know that being attracted to both genders makes them bi-sexual.

In addition, I do think gay behavior is a mental illness. In psychology we divide illness in to two categories. One is neurosis, which is an emotional base illness. The other is psychosis, which is a loss of reality base illness. The old guy wearing a cape as he wonders down the street yelling he is Jesus Christ is an example of loss of reality. When it is obvious that you need a male and a female in a marriage in order for the species to continue the avoidance of this necessity to represents a loosing touch with a species reality.

If you take the left leaning Darwin approach to life, which is “survival of the fittest” homosexuals loose out. The only way the species can survive is by continued procreation. Gays cannot produce offspring. Therefore, they are nowhere fit to survive. What advantage can homosexuality have to the human species?

Now you cannot offer that gays are better nurturers. Out all the crazies I know, gays are the craziest. Not only are they neurotic-highly emotional-they are also confrontational, angry, and violent aggressive.

How do I see homosexuality and every other perversion of human sexuality, like cyber sex with a thing you really cannot identify in a chat room? Well, I look at it as I look at my life.

God prefers us to the devil and his demons. This brings about a lot of hate in the heart of Satan. Therefore, Satan is actively involved in doing everything to destroy us before we accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and savior.

In addition, sex is one of his most lethal weapons. It feels good; very very good. In our modern time of sexual liberation you can bop anyone you want without having to worry about guilt or other moral conflicts, like shame. Even if you are judged or feel judged you can overcome it because society has conditioned us to be selfish about being indulgent.

Moreover, the one that looses is you. I am a firm believer that you can do what you want. I have no interest in anyone’s sexual practices. When people try to brainwash me with their gay agenda when I know it is about having all the sex you want and spousal inheritance I look at them like the disingenuous fools they are.

Living a life blind to the reality of life is a sad way to live.

Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Aug 10, 2007
Living a life blind to the reality of life is a sad way to live.


Some info on a new tool you might use
on Aug 10, 2007
Living a life blind to the reality of life is a sad way to live


Sure is, and I suggest you re-evaluate your definition of "reality of life", imho its a little wanting.
on Aug 10, 2007
"I will say that this is one of the most ignorant, ill-informed, bigoted, hateful, and moronic pile of steaming dung than I've seen on these forums for quite a while"

Glad I didn't rate THAT comment.
on Aug 10, 2007
God prefers us to the devil and his demons.


Well, that may be a nice blanket statement, but I'm pretty sure bigoted morons such as yourself rate pretty low on the list, too . . .
on Aug 10, 2007
they said they were lesbians and I am about as ugly as you can get, you could cut the sexual tensions with the edge of piece of paper


at least we won't be too surprised by this headline on the front page of some future edition of the 'el paso times': 'Whacko Undocumented Cabby Sexually Assaults Two Men In Drag"
on Aug 10, 2007
Hello.....

Would all of you who think this is such a bad article care to stop the name-calling and attacking the messenger and put some meat behind your objections to the content of his message?

I happen to agree with a good portion of it and would like to know what is so bigoted, moronic, ignorant, ill-informed, etc. ad nauseum about it.
on Aug 10, 2007
I happen to agree with a good portion of i


do you agree with this:

I do not believe that it is a born trait.


on Aug 10, 2007
I most certainly do agree that Jesseledesma does not believe that it is a born trait.  
on Aug 10, 2007
Hello.....

Would all of you who think this is such a bad article care to stop the name-calling and attacking the messenger and put some meat behind your objections to the content of his message?

I happen to agree with a good portion of it and would like to know what is so bigoted, moronic, ignorant, ill-informed, etc. ad nauseum about it.


If only there was some "meat" behind the content of his message, then perhaps.
on Aug 10, 2007
I happen to agree with a good portion of it and would like to know what is so bigoted, moronic, ignorant, ill-informed, etc. ad nauseum about it.

The first half for me was fine, albeit I thought strong and I disagreed with the general tone and proposition, but fair enough, we all have our views. The second half contains my strong objection. Personal views below.

I am a firm believer that you can do what you want. I have no interest in anyone’s sexual practices. When people try to brainwash me with their gay agenda when I know it is about having all the sex you want and spousal inheritance I look at them like the disingenuous fools they are

No interest? Followed by so many generalisations its unreal. "when I know", how do you know, your not gay. "when I know it is about having all the sex you want and spousal inheritance I look at them like the disingenuous fools they are" sorry thats a deliberate insult based on no facts.

Out all the crazies I know, gays are the craziest. Not only are they neurotic-highly emotional-they are also confrontational, angry, and violent aggressive.

Pre-qualify a prejudiced statement as much as you like, there is no evidence for the allegations.

Gays cannot produce offspring. Therefore, they are nowhere fit to survive. What advantage can homosexuality have to the human species?

We faught Wars over this one, it hardly needs explanation as to why its obnoxious. Without this statement, well maybe - just maybe - by a long stretch of flexibility - one could say it was somewhat extreme, but that happens in the world. But with it, that statement puts it all in a very bigoted perspective.

on Aug 10, 2007
Would all of you who think this is such a bad article care to stop the name-calling and attacking the messenger and put some meat behind your objections to the content of his message?


when the content is vacuous, vapid nonsense, it's just more fun to ridicule the messenger.

It's much more worthwhile.
on Aug 10, 2007
"Gays cannot produce offspring. Therefore, they are nowhere fit to survive. What advantage can homosexuality have to the human species?"

... That's... true... except, you know, for all those gays who produce offspring. I can think of one that produced three offspring, right off the top of my head. An entire article was written about it, even. That wasn't the point of the article.
on Aug 10, 2007
That wasn't the point of the article.

Maybe so, and we will agree to differ there. However the statement:
"Gays cannot produce offspring. Therefore, they are nowhere fit to survive. What advantage can homosexuality have to the human species?"

beggars belief, and in itself sets the whole article in a very bigoted light.

If individuals cannot see the blind unacceptable bigotry there, particularly as at least one War (WW2) was in part fought over such foul motivations, then I would have to again agree to disagree, as any further debate on such a statement will go in fruitless circles.
on Aug 10, 2007
Oh, sorry, I was talking about the other article... the point of that article wasn't that a lesbian was producing.

The point of this article was to point out the gay agenda, and probably to be generally anti-gay, which I cannot approve of. The person themself is not to be reviled, just the behavior. But, to those who believe they have no choice, that's just as bad, isn't it?
on Aug 10, 2007
If individuals cannot see the blind unacceptable bigotry there, particularly as at least one War (WW2) was in part fought over such foul motivations, then I would have to again agree to disagree, as any further debate on such a statement will go in fruitless circles.


Wonderfully stated, Zydor.

For anyone who doesn't see this as bigoted tripe, let's play Mad Libs for a minute here:

We'll start with the phrase "What advantage can (insert word here) have to the human species?"

Hmm . . . let's add some nouns. How about

What advantage can Jews have to the human species?


or

What advantage can blacks have to the human species?


or here you go:

What advantage can Catholocism have to the human species?


See the bigotry now, Lula? Or are you still not seeing what's offensive about this article?
2 Pages1 2