by Stephen Sturgell

Created on: November 07, 2008

Well, now is not that a quaint and queer request? My answer is a resounding, of course not. How can we expect to accept a lifestyle that is obviously contrary to nature? Has anyone paid attention to the bees lately? And declare it as an alternative, okay, but, an alternative to what, normal? Okay you got me, it is abnormal then by default. Yes, no, maybe so? We are not to declare homosex as deviant, but then what is it to be considered to be? It deviates from the established practice of both the Laws of Nature and the Laws of the Spirit. So, we can conclude that homosex is both unnaturally and deviant in premise and practice. It is not founded in nature, it is not accepted by any major religion, so we can conclude that it is a product of mankind. And mankind is the foremost expert on what it concludes by amoral conjectures. Mankind can make a statement as if it were a fact then work to try to find the reasons to support its wants and whims.

I will not begin my dialogue and establish my points with any religion, for there is no need to address this topic with religion. This American society has pandered to all special interests groups and done so in such manner that there is more political correctness than correctness. Sure everyone has a right to exist, to seek their fortune, to live, love and be free. But, I will not give ground, nor let a society that is hell bent on inducing or forcing my hand, the hands of my children, nor the should it be allowed to force anyone to accept a biophysiologically act that is unfounded at every level, and out of kelter with of the laws of nature. Why? If mankind is a product of Primordial Stardust, stagnant water and a mixture of mud, then how can we explain nature's division and purpose of male and female in the species? Cockroaches, grasshoppers, birds, snakes, crocodiles, bears, mice, fish...and what of botany? Even plants have a definate role and purpose along the division of male-female.

Either, we are products of nature as the Evolutionist would have it. Or we are products of a higher bein, a God if you will. Even if I could not see this God of mine, even if I could not be permitted to go to and discuss the laws of the spirit that governs mankind, I could, merely, look at a cockroach and declare that insects mate male and female, I could look at the wild animals such as deer, elk, Dall sheep, or moose and find ways to declare that masculine traits are there and obvious, and that feminine ways are there and are obvious.

• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next Page >>