CAUTION: Some of The Thoughts Contained In This Post May Be Offensive To Some (if they’re not too bright)

To paraphrase someone who used to be able to turn a phrase: Never in human history has so much been done for so few, for so little reason.

Bullet points for ease of reading:

  • Think of it:
    • A President of the United States considers it a major campaign issue.
    • Piles and piles of legislation have been promulgated in support of people for what reason? They do something. They engage in an activity. That’s it. Nothing more.  No such blessings for two loving, monogamous model train collectors, apparently.
    • The biggest ovation that the President of the United States got when he was speaking at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner was when he said that he had ended “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.” Whew! Now there’s BIIIIIIG stuff!
    • Various brainless Hollywood (but I repeat myself) stars and starlets wax positively operatic in their support of gay marriage and in their withering condemnation of those who would oppose giving the state’s official blessing to two people — because they do something.
    • For a population representing less than 2% of the whole, we’re busily redefining “marriage” as not necessarily having  anything to do with actual sex. Wow! Now that turns society upside down! Seriously. Again, legislatively at least, the self-evident is no longer true.
    • The society of Psychologists and Psychiatrists, who had long understood homosexuality as a disorder, re-defined the self-evidently abnormal as normal. What are they, nuts?!?!
  • Gay Marriage. First off, in my lifetime it’s NEVER, ever, not ever, been illegal. Any gay person can go find any other willing gay person and marry that dude or dudette; even in a church, or a synagogue, or even in a mosque  if the presiding cleric is willing.
  • Gay Marriage? Uhhhhh… Whuh?!?!? Now we give the state’s blessing  to two people (only two so far) — stating that for all legal and (most importantly) financial purposes they’re hitched —  based not on who they are (a man and a woman), but on what they do (perform sex-like activities with each other)? What are we, nuts?!?!
  • Gay “Sex:” Sorry, it’s not actual sex. It’s playing around with sexual organs. Hey, if I’m a guy, I can go find a congenial fence post somewhere and use that. I might even climax, but it’s not sex. If I’m a babe, I can go to any sex paraphernalia store and purchase, for not much money, any number of a vast array of items that simulate a man’s equipment, and then I can use it or them. It’s not sex. Heck, an adventurous babe can even go find a machine that will simulate not only a man’s equipment, but his movements! It’s still not sex. (Don’t ask me how I know this stuff. Ok, ok…I know: everybody knows this stuff!) One more: even if you were to produce a robot perfectly indistinguishable in word, reaction and deed from a man or a woman, and if you were able to make that robot perform all the same physical acts of the perfect lover, it would not then be the perfect lover. It would be a robot. It might be fun, and pressure-free, and risk-free, and look a whole lot like sex, but it wouldn’t be sex. It would be playing with sexual organs using a robot. It’s elaborate masturbation…that’s it. Gay “sex” is nothing more than elaborate masturbation. You can’t just pretend that what everyone knows to their deepest level is no longer true. Sex is between a male and a female. Anything — anything — else is nothing more than elaborate masturbation. If it weren’t tragic, it’d be funny that anyone would have to make that point. It’s a lot like having to defend the conclusion that 2 + 2 = 4. Apparently, there are plenty of people out there who are persuadable that 2 + 2 does not equal 4. These people consider themselves “open-minded.” They’re really just dumb.

2 + 2 = 4.


  • Gay “Sex:” Sorry, it’s not normal. Perfectly natural, but not normal. It’s like a cold, or cancer, or psychosis: all perfectly natural, just not normal.
  • Gay Marriage: Now we give the states’s blessings to two same-sex people, calling them “married” because they perform sex-like activities with each other. I suppose the next big “civil rights” movement is “Stamp Collector Marriage.” Then, “Illicit Drug User Marriage” (that’ll be useful because a spouse can’t be compelled to testify against his or her spouse in court.). All this because, apparently, now actual marriage is divorced from actual sex.
  • You can be against re-defining marriage, the cornerstone institution of civilization, and not hate gay people. Quite easily, in fact. Those who say otherwise are bigoted, vile heterophobes :). Heck, they’re also racists and sexists, they hate poor people, and want to toss old people over cliffs (<– might as well throw the whole panoply of lefty reflex accusations at ’em, eh?).
  • If you’re gay, your gay partner can visit you in the hospital if he/she wants to. There are no restrictions against this.
  • If you’re gay, you can leave your property to your gay partner if you so choose. There is nothing preventing you from this. (These last two are fake themes I hear frequently.)
  • If this teeny tiny population, gay people, notable for nothing except performing sex-like activities with members of their own sex, can turn society upside-down, then surely we conservatives, who represent well over 50% of the population, can fix society!

Gays: one really tiny, really inconsequential, really squeaky wheel, that got really greased.

And, you know how all this nutty stuff this happened? Some, really rich dude said to some other really rich dude: “I’ll bet you a round of golf that I can get entire states to sanction ‘Gay Marriage’ officially.” The other really rich dude said, “No way! You’re on!”

It’s the only possible explanation.

Right now some really rich dude is paying for a round of golf for another really rich dude, shaking his head incredulously, and saying of the American public: “Man! You can sell them anything!”

C’mon conservatives! Surely we, an actually consequential group, can lower taxes, lower government spending, stop the killing of babies, reduce the size and scope of government…should be child’s play for us!

— xPraetorius

One thought on “CAUTION: Some of The Thoughts Contained In This Post May Be Offensive To Some (if they’re not too bright)

Please Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s