Saturday, May 31, 2014

Same-sex pseudogamy and the domino effect in society

MCJ on The Single Greatest Moral Crusade In The History Of The Human Race™.

After state-approved homosexualism (pseudogamy), polygamy. Hard to argue against because of freedom of religion but the case against it seems due to the social evils: cults where the top men help themselves to all the girls so they kick out surplus boys - pretty much like early Mormonism (why townsfolk hated Joseph Smith) and essentially the mating market after the Sexual Revolution (the fallen natural order without Christian controls) as Roissy and others describe.

After that, while it's hard to believe now, maybe the left will go back to being sort of OK with sex with kids. Darling of the left Peter Yarrow got a pardon for doing an underage fan (not pedophilia: lots of teenage girls can pass for adults); maybe Roman Polanski will be next. (They'll find another excuse to hate Catholic priests; they always do.)

And after that, bestiality. After all, if the purpose of marriage isn't based on biology (reproduction) anymore, and the dog or donkey doesn't seem to mind...

Incest is probably the God-given yuck factor's final frontier (the only area where we all still agree* that marriage is based on biology), but again, straight people got that ball rolling by giving into temptation with contraception and no-fault divorce: redefining marriage long before people took homosexualism seriously.

The sound of a culture committing demographic suicide. Views like Bill Saletan's: why the Russians and the Chinese think we're idiots. The West made unprecedented steep advances in civilization in about 200 years (easy to understand why we fell for the lies of endless progress and the perfectability of man, Pelagian-style - the space-ageyness of Vatican II) and we're throwing them away.
If Pope Francis ever suggests that homosexual marriage isn’t that big of a deal, brace yourself for the biggest stampede into Orthodox Christianity in the history of the world.
No. Orthodoxy's ethnic and homeland-based (not per se bad things, when they're not schismatic/anti-Western; the Anti-Gnostic: the church is at its best when it's the Church Local); microscopic in the West - most Catholics still wouldn't be interested. The Pope can't change the teachings of the church. The most he's suggested is something I've thought about: the plausible left-libertarian case of having the state pseudo-marry same-sex couples while making it clear it's not something the church considers marriage. (A distortion of the truth that homosexuals should be left in peace just like everybody else. No special laws; just the same protection from harm as for you and me.) The trouble with that is the social evils: again, when society denies biological reality, it commits suicide. So that's not heretical but imprudent. Pope Francis' opinions can't change the facts that Catholicism includes the East but Orthodoxy excludes the West, so no sale for me, and the Orthodox view on divorce and remarriage doesn't make sense: "sometimes adultery is OK" in the form of church-approved remarriage. Francis making noises as if he could change doctrine in that area (caving on no-fault divorce; the culture's last holdout, gone) is the bigger scandal for Catholics. The sedevacantist scenario - where we don't have a real Pope; the occupant is an antipope - can happen (if a Pope gets above himself and tries to change our teachings) but it's far from the case now, as much as I don't like Francis and he apparently doesn't like me.

*100 years ago the Protestants agreed with us on all morals. Anti-contraception and anti-abortion weren't "just Catholic things"; they were Christian things.

No comments:

Post a comment

Leave comment