The Sins of the Sons

Ohio Republican Senator Rob Portman is now for gay marriage, because his son is gay.

Isn’t this a reversal of the natural order? Aren’t fathers supposed to tell sons what is right, not the other way around? If a son disagrees with his father, is he not supposed to be respectful of his father’s belief and not openly challenge it?

This change in family dynamics is a big way of promoting all kinds of leftism, not just homosexuality. Leftists tell children to challenge their parents, they will have the support of the system. Communists even encouraged children to report their parents to the secret police.

Weak parents will cave in, afraid of losing the affection of their children, not acting as moral teachers and examples. Portman has failed society and his son by not standing up for what is right. Portman apparently belongs to the United Methodists, a pseudo-Christian heretical group that supports homosexuality, in clear violation of Christian teaching. There is little chance Portman can persuade his son to be celibate. He still has a responsibility to tell him, “Son, I love you and always will. However you are obligated not to act on the same-sex attraction you feel. This is a matter of both Christian teaching, and if you don’t accept that, natural law. I hope you will conduct yourself with wisdom and discernment.”

Rob Portman has failed as a responsible man. He is not fit to lead his own family, much less hold any office.

Advertisements

About thrasymachus33308

I like fast cars, fast women and southern-fried rock. I have an ongoing beef with George Orwell. I take my name from a character in Plato's "Republic" who was exasperated with the kind of turgid BS that passed for deep thought and political discourse in that time and place, just as I am today. The character, whose name means "fierce fighter" was based on a real person but nobody knows for sure what his actual political beliefs were. I take my pseudonym from a character in an Adam Sandler song who was a obnoxious jerk who pissed off everybody.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to The Sins of the Sons

  1. Well said. Portman is caving in to what’s trendy. I wonder if he knows it will win him accolades from the mainstream press for being so “open-minded.” (People only ever tell you to be “open-minded” when they want you to agree with them, by the way. When’s the last time a Jewish liberal admonished someone to be open-minded about Holocaust revisionism, for example?)

    Fun fact: I was for gay marriage (or at least lukewarm about it) until I became friends with a couple of gay people. Darth Stirner makes a great argument against it here, for anyone trying to put their thoughts into words.

    • Here’s my favorite quote from that article:

      [Leftists] say we’re all consenting adults, and that two consenting adults in love should be able to marry. But this argument reeks of a poisonous individualism. Society is not obligated to treat homosexuals the same way that it treats heterosexuals because they are not equal or the same. One relationship is constructed to continue human civilization, the other is not.

    • Also, for whatever it’s worth, here’s my take on gay marriage.

  2. Matt Strictland says:

    I just can’t bring myself to care much about the gay issue. While gay marriage is a stupid idea primary same sex attraction is a birth defect for which we do not have a workable treatment (its not mental illness so congntive therapies don’t help) and the political spehere won’t allow us to research anyway.

    Now of course if our society was functional we’d make people be discrete and all but the most family and procrative expressions of sexuality but its not and we won’t be getting there any time soon.

    Eventually I suspect we wil though do to differential birth rates , till then there are bigger fish to fry.

    • Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo says:

      Protip: Exclusive (and/or preferential) homosexuality is too common and too detrimental to reproductive function to be a genetic birth defect. It would have been selected out of the gene pool long ago.

      Something else is going on.

      • PA says:

        The theory that makes most sense is that homosexuality is a congenitl disorder caused by hormonal abnormalities in utero, possibly a function of envoronmental factors or accident of mother’s health. As such, it’s not somethign that gets selected out because the conditions that create this reoccur.

      • Heil Hizzle says:

        Cynthia Nixon, of “Sex and the City” drew a lot of fire a few years back saying that she “chose to be gay,” and despite the blowback from her liberal lemming friends, she maintained this position.

      • I think being a lesbian is complicated. Many lesbians like having sex with men on occasion.

    • rosey says:

      “primary same sex attraction is a birth defect”
      I disagree. Homosexuality has nothing to do with sex with the exception that it strokes the ego of the individual with a kind of acceptance thru self gratification. Homosexuality is a behavior and all behavior is learned either thru positive or negative stimuli.

  3. Ryu says:

    It’s a good study. Gay marraige is wrong! ….until my own son is gay. Then it becomes alright. He’s a supportive father. If his son was a murderer or a pedophile, those two would become alright. It’s clearly a political play for him to show off how tolerant he is. Now he can tour the country and tell parents how to handle their kids turning fag.

  4. PA says:

    This is analogous to when white white men marry black or mestiza women, they are very race-liberal. This is my observation with a couple of white guys I know who married black or brown girls. Not so with blacks who shack up with white females — they still hate whitey, and regard their white girl as plunder.

    The analogy with Portman is that in both cases, white/hetero acommodates the black/homo. And this is rooted in the frame of whites, and our culture, not beeing seen as having a substance of its own. “Vibrancy” (black, homo) is the player, white is they field on which it plays. Vibrancy is the actor, white is the blank canvas. White is the feed, not the eater.

    This frame of white nullity has to be overcome. Overcoming the power of the word “racist” (ie, white man’s recognition and assertion of his substantial existence) is a key step.

  5. Heil Hizzle Mein Nizzle says:

    A communist, a Muslim, and a homosexual walk into the bar, and the bartender says: “What can I get for you, Mr. President?”

  6. Jan Rogozinski says:

    (1) You don’t understand how genetics is said to work. What matters is the genetic DNA. Over the long term, homosexuality made a positive contribution to a family or tribe’s having children that survived and carried on its genes (including the gene for homosexuality), For example, an unmarried uncle to take over supporting the family when the father is killed.(Note that uncles are very important in European literature prior to 1800.) So it is “selected in” not “selected out.”

    (2) Homosexuality is not contrary to Christian teaching. It is not mentioned in the Gospels and Epistles. It IS mentioned in the Jewish scriptures. But in the “Old Testament” it is only one among hundreds of rules. Either Christians must keep all those rules or none. When you say that we can ignore the other 600 some rules but keep only the one against homosexuality, what are you saying? You are saying that you can pick and choose among God’s rules because you are superior to God. Not a very Christian point of view.

    • tuji says:

      You need to relearn genetics.

    • Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo says:

      That uncle argument has been debunked pretty thoroughly by Cochran.

    • SixtusVIth says:

      “Either Christians must keep all those rules or none.”

      LOL no. Sodomy is condemned in Genesis, long before the promulgation of the Torah (“600 some rules”). Take your lies elsewhere.

    • rosey says:

      What gene for homosexuality? In what world are all uncles homosexual? Do parents breed a spare male for the purpose of initiating the younger males into homosexuality and perhaps a place to stay if the parents pass? You need to study some more on understanding Christianity also.
      Let’s assume you believe in and understand the process of evolution. If there ever was such a thing as a homosexual gene it would have been filtered out because it does not move the species forward. There is no such thing as a homosexual gene because homosexuality is a behavior not rooted in the physical.

  7. PA says:

    The danger of fully liberated (male) homosexuality is that it either openly or secretly leads to buggery of boys.

  8. I think being a lesbian is complicated. Many lesbians like having sex with men on occasion.

    I think there are very few true lesbians. The ones that look like lesbians (bull dykes, high school gym teachers, etc.) are dyed in the wool lesbians. Their boyish to mannish physiognomy suggests that there’s a biological reason for their true lesbianism.

    Then there’s lesbianism which is to one degree or another an affectation. Lesbians until graduation, or urban lesbians/bisexuals who dabble in lesbianism because of lax or encouraging attitudes towards their behavior, as well as advantage of forming bonds in an atomized society, as Heartiste suggests. This could possibly become a lifelong affectation if the woman in question has no desire to start a family, or to stay thin to please her husband. However, such lesbians would still enjoy a man as you say.

  9. Matt says:

    Portman heard his son was gay, and immediately had visions of anonymous trysts in park bathrooms, along with maybe a few stints in a pride parade, along with all the diseases and publicity that come along with those things. He decided nope, none of that, my son is going to have a bourgeois life with a “wife”, kids maybe, and a house in the suburbs. None of that freaky nonsense.

    You want to know why people support gay marriage? There it is. It has nothing to do with equality or religion, except maybe the religion of bourgeois normalcy as the American Dream. Unfortunately for Portman, his son may have different ideas about how he wants to spend his life. Wishful thinking is a powerful thing.

  10. eyeslevel says:

    The union of opposites is a different concept from the union of likes, has different consequences, and needs a different word.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s