.
If Sodomy is as culturally acceptable as it seems to be, then why not necrophilia?
After all, an individual gets to exercise their human right of sexual self-expression and, if the other party is as entirely passive as it inevitably must be, we can state with certainty that no feelings have been abused and, therefore, no suffering was inflicted.
Thus, according to enlightened 21st century moral sensibilities, all criteria for acceptable sexual behaviour are met.
There seems to be no possible moral objection that can arise that might impede the dedicated necrophiliac from marrying his (or her?, let's be fair) preferred corpse.
But maybe one is missing something in this analysis. Let us strain our imaginations.
What reasonable objections to necrophilia could possibly arise?
Perhaps the corpse in question might not have wished, while it was alive, for such a relationship after death. Perhaps he or she might have been very antagonistic to the idea that their inert bodies be allowed to participate in such a relationship.
We must surely admit this as a real possibility.
What principle, in this situation, is thus agitated by the desires of the living?
That we must take cognisance of and give due deference to the expressed wishes while living of those now deceased?
Umm, tricky.
We've already ditched this one.
Six thousand years of human hostility to sodomy carries no weight whatsoever in modern cultural or parliamentary discourse.
Perhaps we can find a compromise whereby individuals can hold true to personally held principles and thus western cultural development can be be projected forward in a reasonable manner while the integrity of all persons can be preserved?
Perhaps government might licence the construction of two different types of mortuary.
One kind for those who reject the injunctions of God-given nature and see the sating of desire as a human right provided no harm is done (necrophilia in this mortuary [obviously] permitted).
The other for believers who object to these kind of activities in principle (necrophilia not permitted).
There.
Solved it!
Now everybody can be happy.
Let's admit it folks. Jimmy Saville, with his privileged access, his sets of keys and his midnight trips to Stoke Mandeville and Leeds General hospital morgues, was an enlightened trailblazer in so, so many ways.
.
“We Got The Message…”
44 minutes ago
Actually, enlightened 21st century moral sensibility is that what two consenting adults decide to do in the privacy of their own home is permissible, including straight or gay sex, up to drawing nuclear bomb plans in food coloring on the ticklish areas.
ReplyDeleteIn the case of Necrophilia, clearly one party is unable to give consent.
Now clearly, there are serious health reasons not to engage in such practices, and those that do have some "firmware" issues akin to those who find small children sexually exciting (another case where consent is not involved).
But for this author to try to equate gay sex with necrophilia or pedophilia, while ignoring the issue of whether one is discussing activities between consenting adults, is a rather desperate and pathetic reach at demonization for the sake of demonization.
Please go back to the Bronze Age and please refrain from telling the rest of us what the voices in your head tell you. If you think it is a matter for the community or State to meddle in what goes on between two consenting adults behind closed doors, please move to Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia or some other benighted country that hates America.
ReplyDeleteDoug-
DeleteThe reason we do not want to see others engage in immoral sexual practices is because the Manufacturer of our planet told us that engaging in these practices would ultimately cause the earth to "vomit us out."
While practicing sodomy, bestiality, or any of the other sins recorded in Leviticus the 18th chapter, is wrong and corrupts what Yahweh created perfectly; He clearly warned that doing these things would cause the earth, which is a biosphere of which we are an integral part, to begin the rejection process to eliminate the human cancer we have become. The pathogens we breath out of our defiled bodies are distributed throughout the firmament and cause the beneficial microbes to mutate, rendering them unable to do their jobs. Their job is similar to our human immune system; to protect, cleanse and refresh the air we breath and to see that appropriate amounts of the sun's rays are allowed to strike our earth. A disruption to the firmament's microbes can, like in the case of human acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, wreck what it is trying to protect. Thus we have global warming (warning). If our appalling actions are not stopped, the earth will finish the job of removing us. How would you kike to have a hailstone of many hundreds of pounds hit your house or car?
Michael,
ReplyDeleteI accept gay culture. Things have improved for everyone since the days when people with such a compulsions led furtive, terrified lives.
Many who oppose 'gay marriage', including me, are happy to accept gay civil partnerships.
However, the miracle of reproduction and all the responsibilities and commitments with which the sacrament of matrimony seals the bond is much more than a merely sexual matter.
Much more.
I and many millions like me object most seriously to homosexual relationships being given the same platform as normal intercourse between a man and a woman.
"... a rather desperate and pathetic reach at demonization for the sake of demonization."
Desperate? Yes.
Pathetic? Please yourself.
Demonisation? Perhaps. You want only measured and fair responses to the outrages of these Satanists? They are laughing at us.
"....For the sake of demonisation"?
Not on your fucking life.
I know a gay couple with an adopted child that I would call friends. I've never had a problem with them.
What I do, definitely do have, is a problem with accepting policies imposed on us that are deliberately designed to destroy marriage as an institution. Last year I taught in a school where somewhere between one half and two-thirds of students lived with a single parent. If you read the work of the Frankfurt School psychologists (or the Protocols of Zion for that matter) you will understand that the undermining of all the binds our societies is no accident?
If the above words offend gays then let them understand that they are pushing their case too far.
Too far, Michael.
How do you recommend we oppose the imposition of this agenda?
Let us allow ourselves to face reality. Is it right that we embrace sodomy as a fulfilment of marriage vows in an identical fashion to conventional child-creating sexual intercourse.
Good luck, Kev, but Mr. Rivero does NOT discuss the Talmud, the Protocols, Frankfort etc. He does go on about the evils of religion and corruption of the Christian churches, but his solutions are more "freedom" and more "free will."
DeleteIf "families" in our devastated societies choose porn, their choice is commendable. The full on selling our "gay lifestyles" and promiscuity at earlier and earlier ages by the Jewish media is merely "free speech" and something for individuals to attempt to regulate while working multiple low wage jobs or staying home in front of the box.
The staggering obvious Jewish dots that riddle all of the control centers - international banking, the media, the education system, vulture capitalism, etc - are beyond his ken however.
Mmm. Thank you. I don't follow his site particularly. The comment below is very Jewish though.
DeleteGlib. Irrelevant to the argument. Uninterested in causes. Or serious collective consequences. Accepting of our masters' agenda.
If you are opposed to gay marriage …
ReplyDeleteDon’t marry a gay. Problem solved.
But all of the evils of this world arise when one group of people thinks they have a moral right to force other people how to live their own lives.
Mike, I hope you'll take some time on air to read selections from the GLSEN Reading List. GLSEN, founded by Obama's "Safe School" Czar, Kevin Jennings, promotes "tolerance."
DeleteA quick look at selections from the now deep-sixed reading list is highly educational and reveals the other, much darker side of the agenda.
Here you go: http://politicalmercenaries.com/?p=853.
To whet your appetite, here's an excerpt:
Reflections of a Rock Lobster – Page 13
(At the age of six, the author frequently performed fellatio on his fellow first-graders in the school restroom, part of a “busy homosexual childhood.”)
“…a 13-year-old getting “my cock sucked and my ass fucked” or about a teenager enjoying the “exquisite bitter taste” of his friend’s semen …
That comment is incredibly shallow. If you really believe that meaning and right progress rests in the individual's ability to please himself, why do you bother commenting on any event that involves other people yourself? Are you saying that 'gay marriage' will have no effect on anyone other than the two gays involved?
ReplyDeleteDo you believe that the disintegration of marriage as an institution is some sort of natural event? In the school of 2000 children I mentioned, twelve or thirteen hundred, at least, lived with a single parent.
Angry as many of them were about their missing parent, most will probably repeat the pattern because today sex is mostly perceived as, first and foremost, a recreational activity.
Can you not see that this is a DISASTER for us all.
"....But all of the evils of this world arise when one group of people thinks they have a moral right to force other people how to live their own lives."
With 'gay marriage', we are being forced to accept a new moral reality, that sodomy is morally equal to normal intercourse. I don't accept this. If we are not spiritual beings we are nothing. People can live how they want but I will fight for my moral universe, just as you fight for yours.
Have you read Frankfurt Schoolers and their advice to the elite about how to create global socialism?
In my view it the solemn responsibility of any thinking person to protect marriage as an institution in its traditional form. It's about the children. They deserve better than the reality they often suffer today.
Should we protect marriage or shouldn't we? If so, how, or is it's demise the least of our problems?
I would say that there are also "serious health reasons" related to men buggering each other. One is called AIDS and has cost us untold billions and put a strain on healthcare in certain locales. Some serious economic reasons are the complete shut down and closing of countless highway rest areas, parks, roadside picnic and rest areas, etc. as a result of so many of these people having a desire to engage in their activities with complete strangers in public places. The homosexual PR machine trying to make the average gay your friendly next door teacher or plumber is a little too much to swallow.
ReplyDeleteWhat two consenting adults do is Not the Question here.
ReplyDeleteThe question is whether we legalize and protect this behaviour.
Everyone get's the same rights, deal with it you backstabbers.
This is totally a question of Morality.
The facts seem to bother the homosexual sympathizers,
Corn Holing a Man is not Natural.
The Human species would not exist with out male and female sex.
And the "you are born that way argument" is ridiculous.
It is a choice.
Do you adjust the 90 something percent who are not Gay by force
to accept this by Government decree, or do you let the people
decide what legal marriage should be.
By Voting.
The people of California said no, and the courts and the Government nullified the voice of the people.
States now issue license for Marriage, Fed's get out,
and the Courts too.
"If you are opposed to gay marriage …
ReplyDeleteDon’t marry a gay. Problem solved.
But all of the evils of this world arise when one group of people thinks they have a moral right to force other people how to live their own lives."
I find it immoral and especially when they adopt children, there are many cases of those children being raped, although this goes on more with queers as they are very promiscuous and its not absent from heterosexuals it all stems from immoral reasoning.
And Marriage is a Godly word, also abused with mans interpretations, so queers cannot ever be Married.
I don't hate them, but I hate the crimes.
Copied (see below) from today's post on the Henry Makow site:
ReplyDeleteIn his novel Lothair (1870) , speaking of the aims of the Illuminati, Benjamin Disraeli wrote:
"The foundation of the Christian family is the sacrament of matrimony, the spring of all domestic and public morals. The anti-Christian societies are opposed to the principle of home. When they have destroyed the hearth, the morality of society will perish."
"But all of the evils of this world arise when one group of people thinks they have a moral right to force other people how to live their own lives."
ReplyDeleteThe liberal mantra.
But break morality and people are easier to enslave, as more people are accepting of anything goes, even if it hurts others. Even war criminals walk about with selfish "esteem" because they have "human rights" when will it stop with liberalism, it can't, it can only get worse.
Insanity.
Mike R. the label 'enlightened [21st century..] is purely arbitrary. Deciding to call it enlightened, doesn't make it so. There is really nothing enlightened about it. Actually, If anything its an en-darkening, darkening the heart from the correct way God has told us how to live.
ReplyDeleteWhat people do in their own home is NOT in fact 'permissible', rather, it's opportunistic. The two are quite different. Gods laws are applicable everywhere and are unwavering in the eyes of a believer. That opportunities come to us in which we can go against God doesn't and shouldn't make them permissible.
I posted before about 1969 German legislation allowing bestiality (thankfully now under review) which means the Germans were probably closer to legally (man-made legal) permitting necrophilia than any other nation.
I heard one of the Self entitled 'one of the four (now three) horsemen', Richard Dawkins scoff 'What does it matter where you put your private parts' hence I think Dawkins is OK with a slice of beast or corpse too.
Doug D, contemporary homosexuality is reforging a very old perversion, so try again.
And Kev I am very surprised to hear you say you you accept gay culture and civil partnerships. You are accepting sin when in fact that sin should be opposed. By trying to construct some 'middle ground', you only build a bridge between outright normalization of this major sin in society which in turn actually does make the door to necrophilia slightly more ajar. The issue should not simply be put down un-want of gay marriage / standing against it being raised to the par of marriage between a man and a woman. In fact acceptance of gay culture is worse than just the marriage issue. Sometime it appears you take the whole but many other times you reduce it to just gay marriage.
All areas of God prescribed life are under attack. Acceptance of homosexuality needs rejection in its entirety. Each hacked-off lump from this way of life is significant and aids other attacks. If there is only one thing you consider from this comment, it's that point.
I see almost exactly the same mind-bending on homosexuality as I do about Zionism, people trying to 'prove' how liberal and tolerant they are - which is what those who direct society tell us what we should be.
lwtc247,
ReplyDeleteMaybe 'accept' is too strong a word. I accept the people I know who are involved in such partnerships. They are business colleagues and good friends of one of my children. I don't lose sleep over it. I know their life stories and how very difficult life has been since early childhood for one of them in particular. On this relationship (and therefore, others) I "judge not".
I see homosexuality as a developmental disorder and all the rest but if one is very pure and very strict any sex outside marriage, any sex that is not about the creation of children can be seen as sinful. How many people live up to that? Where does our moral severity begin and end? For me, I know there is homosexual activity out there. I might, mentally, take the Catholic view about it but you can't go around grieving about everything.
'Gay Marriage', however, crosses a line. The corrupters and invereters of all that binds society have pushed us across many lines over the last decades but here is one on which it is important we make a stand.
Maybe it is only when confronted by such an outrage that we are forced to go back and examine all our ideas of 'principle' including how we live up to them ourselves.
"I "judge not".
ReplyDeleteYou are judging though and making the Law up as they do which is a sin. At the end of the day your responsible for you too, not just helping others see the chaos caused by all this sin.
"any sex that is not about the creation of children can be seen as sinful."
Fornication is sex outside of Marriage, Adultery, you must know what that means too.
And there are those that by choice are celibate.
Personally and not knowing that much different because of all this corrupt culture thrust on us, I was a fornicator and adulterer. I was later told about morals, then looked for myself and then I could see all the harm I had help cause, so stopped and have become celibate now because of the complete mess I had made of it.
".....You are judging though and making the Law up"
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean by this?
Dear Kevin. Thanks for elaborating your view, although if you'll forgive me, I don't think you're quite consistent on the matter. We wouldn't tolerate a Murderer just because we know them and they seem 'ok' in our personal interactions with them. Neither would we or should we accept an embezzler or a rapist or anyone else who does a serious crime, why should we accept a homosexual? OF course non-religious people won't see it as a crime, but I don't give a hoot. God said it's a religious crime so it is. The story of Lot is quite telling.
ReplyDeleteI understand that 'gay marriage' crosses a line, but I hoped you would see that because it has been 'normalized'(again), then consequentially it all but made it inevitable.
As you clearly understand, Satan has been very successful in pulling many away from the teaching of God and those via the prophets. He does so in little steps so that it's not too difficult to move onto the next corrosive step, although no doubt I am a victim of creeping godlessness too in ways I'm not aware of. There does seem to be a conflict between cordial human interaction and taking a stance on a principle. I don't think any individual has the right to attack a homosexual however, but I do think they should be shunned.
Also we don't need to judge as God as already told us what His judgement of homosexuality is.
I thoroughly enjoy reading this blog.
"".....You are judging though and making the Law up"
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean by this?"
Judging God and His Commandments etc. Of how you should be and encourage others to be. And although other people are important too, the only knowing difference you can make is to make sure you do your best to keep them for your own sake and then encourage others not ever to stray from them one jot. Onwards and upwards.
I think you are showing the strain like all of us truthseekers in these difficult times.
ReplyDelete"........but if one is very pure and very strict any sex outside marriage, any sex that is not about the creation of children can be seen as sinful. How many people live up to that?"
Certainly not me. It is surely Catholic and controlling religious claptrap (forgive me) to suggest that sex is only about procreation? How on earth can someone marry somebody (for life) anyway without having loved and known them sexually? It's almost bordering on the insane and irresponsible. Religions are of Satan and not of God. We were warned about them. I love God but hate religion.
OK, but Christ did say "or there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it."
ReplyDeleteThis is an extreme statement but Christ says for the perfect spiritual life sex is to be avoided..... This does make sense.
Got to agree about marriage for mere mortals though.....sex is always about much more than mere reproduction.
Love in all its manifestations, is sacred, and whichever way two or more consenting (and of course living) adults choose to express it is sacred as well. True Christians are free of Old Testament strictures, as St. Paul repeatedly emphasized, so why do you advocate adherence to the evil laws of Leviticus, which among other things condone the owning of slaves? Are you prepared to live by all the strictures of Leviticus, or only by some? From your photo I see that you trim the hair on the temples of your head. That is an abomination according to Leviticus. If you want to combat evil, Kevin, come out against torture and all forms of abuse, violence, sadism, hazing, drone warfare, and especially the huge organisations dedicated to killing human beings on which every country on earth heaps ungodly amounts of its national wealth. It is Eris (Strife) you should be combating, not Eros. You can learn much about Eros in his various manifestations by reading Plato’s Symposium. Maybe you will then realise how silly and misplaced your current crusade really is. As Plato explains, Eros is the greatest and most powerful of all the gods. You don’t stand a chance against him, Kevin.
ReplyDelete"Love in all its manifestations, is sacred"
DeleteEnough said. Even the love between that of a 50 year old and that of a 15 or 5 year old? Paedophile worshipping and supporting bastard. Rot in Hell.
You stopped reading after the first seven words; you should at least have read the whole of my first sentence. Children of course deserve and need a different kind of love, parental affection, that is. If they don’t receive it in ample amounts, they grow up with a psychic wound that never really heals. In what I wrote I specifically excluded pedophilia, which is harmful to children. But the important point that I tried to make, and that you seem to have missed entirely, is that Leviticus and Old Testament law in general is as a whole wicked, as well as being anti-Christian, as St. Paul amply demonstrates. We’d be much better off under Sharia law than under Levitican and Mosaic law. Fortunately, the Christ has freed His followers from such oppressive and evil laws. That is why I took Kevin to task for using Leviticus as an argument against Eros.
DeleteKev, another point I would like to make regarding your statement "any sex that is not about the creation of children can be seen as sinful" is... what happens when a woman (or man) cease to be fertile? Forget sex? I'm getting on in years and the only thing that keeps me going (at times) is the occasional run-in with the spouse of several decades if you get my drift. As they say in Bucket List "Never waste a hard on". There's not a cat in hell's chance of a baby being made but it's a lot of youth-like fun all the same. I'm sure God approves. I know I do.
ReplyDelete"the evil laws of Leviticus, which among other things condone the owning of slaves?"
ReplyDeleteNo it doesn't, It had Laws like this.
"REDISTRIBUTE THE LAND. CANCEL ALL DEBT.
One point that people bring up is that over time, economic inequality happens again, and if it does it’s simply a matter of declaring another Jubilee. The matters of debt forgiveness are even simpler to resolve, because unlike with land, cancelling debt does not require a physical transfer of objects, but a simple shuffling of paperwork and computer numbers, the simplicity stemming from the fact that the bulk of paperwork will be considered void and computer databases simply wiped out."
"The savings on mortgages can be considered as credit to be used to boost the economy. Paying for rent and debt does not actually produce anything, but simply transfers wealth to those who own land and banks from those who don’t. By removing the burdens of rent and debt, people can focus on working towards actually creating wealth doing what they are best at and people should also have more money to spend on the products and services of others. Land ownership provides additional opportunities, because it gives people places to set up shops and small businesses. If people don’t have to take jobs to pay rent or mortgages, they can start businesses to develop their talents and have the time to nurture the businesses. People are more productive when they do what they enjoy doing and what they are best at and small businesses help build strong communities. Increases in productivity, additional economic opportunities that come with land ownership, and more available funds should translate into greater wealth for the whole nation that everyone should be able to benefit from."
I'm going to build a boat :)
ReplyDeleteI'm going to build a boat :)
ReplyDelete