Wednesday 29 February 2012

Back To Basics

Lauren Laverne has just expressed her hilarity, shared by an audience apparently half the age of her and me, that the valiant Dr Hans-Christian Raabe, removed from the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs for denying the assertion that cannabis was harmless, had dared to suggest a link between the homosexualist and the pederastic political movements.

That latter, one might add, included Harriet Harman, as exposed by Martin Beckford in the 9th March 2009 edition of the Daily Telegraph, but that newspaper was too spineless or too compromised to put it on the front page where it belonged, so the story was allowed to die, at least for the time being. (By the way, Dr Raabe was dismissed quite some time ago. Look how some people still cannot get over the fact that an opponent of cannabis was ever appointed in the first place.) It is obviously time for some remedial education.

Alfred C Kinsey was pre-eminent among the sexual psychopaths who avowedly set up the sexology industry, from scratch, in order to supplant the Christian sexual ethic. They fabricated research, and they relied heavily on current and former prostitutes, and on convicts. Thence the oft-quoted figure of 10 per cent as the number of men who have had a homosexual experience, usually exaggerated further into the notion that one tenth of the population “is homosexual” (which no one is – acts, not persons, are homosexual or heterosexual). On the same figures, one man in 12 has committed bestiality. Is one twelfth of the population zoosexual, or zoophile, or whatever the word is? And even if it is, then so what?

Kinsey held that children in the earliest stages of infancy could experience orgasm. How, exactly, was such “research” conducted? He taught child sexual abuse techniques to the Gestapo. He filmed himself raping his wife and the wives of his staff. He circumcised himself without anaesthesia, and hung himself by the testicles from a pole. He was a devotee of the Satanist Aleister Crowley, acting out Crowley’s teaching that pederasty was a laudable form of human sacrifice. Kinsey and his followers were largely funded by the pornography racket and other organised vice.

So there you are. Practically the only views any longer permitted to be expressed about sex are based on fraudulent research and extreme criminality carried out by a clique of sexual psychopaths. Unsurprisingly, adherence to a model designed by and for sexual psychopaths has resulted in a massive increase in sexual psychopathology. Yet that is the only model for the training of anyone who needs a certain number of credits in “sex education” in order to qualify as anything.

Kinsey and his followers had created an intellectual climate conducive to the likes of those who frequented The Stonewall Inn and who founded the North American Man/Boy Lovers’ Association (NAMBLA). Just as the entirety of sexology goes back to Kinsey, so the entirety of homosexualism, the emergence of which postdates by several years our own humane and necessary decriminalisation of male homosexual acts between consenting adults in private, goes back to the buggery of boys as young as eight, if not younger.

Thus, here in Britain, homosexualism has organised around demands for apparently endless reductions in the age of consent, as well as around equally Kinseyian calls for the legal, social and cultural legitimisation of sadomasochism, transgender activities, substance abuse, every degree of promiscuity consistent with physical possibility, hardcore pornography, and sex in public places. Such legitimisation is not in itself confined to homosexual contexts, so that the unrepentant combination of recreational cocaine use and heterosexual sadomasochistic prostitution is now considered compatible with one of the very highest offices in the land, and is if anything treated as a gigantic joke. No one asked us, the electorate at large, if that was now our view of such practices. It is not.

The Catholic Church of the late 1960s and early 1970s lost confidence, due to the misappropriation of the name of the Second Vatican Council by pre-existing secularising tendencies in the Western world, rather than from anything in the Conciliar documents themselves; see my book, Essays Radical and Orthodox.

This loss of confidence made the internationally trend-setting American Catholic Church, which might have held the line against Kinsey and then against Stonewall and NAMBLA, susceptible to those twin forces of evil. So the views and methods of Kinsey and his disciples were incorporated into the training of priests and into the selection of candidates. At the time, the advocates of sex between adult men and adolescent boys were the most vocal of the lobbies looking to Kinsey, giving them the most influence over that training and selection.

We all know what happened next, although it is worth pointing out that the acts which have brought such shame on the Church have hardly ever involved pre-pubescent children, or indeed girls of any age; for that, you need a book long recommended to Criminology postgraduates at Cambridge. Rather, they are acts between men and teenage boys, which anti-Catholic media, academic and political types have been seeking for decades to make legally, socially and culturally acceptable, applying no social disapproval to those, such as Jonathan King, who engage in them, any more than, for example, to those who use cocaine. Such types’ hypocrisy over the scandals in the Catholic Church has been, and remains, sickening. Nor may one overlook the fact that these scandals have been presented in a manner agreeable to calls for the large-scale ordination of married men, for the “ordination” of women, and for the purported incorporation of homosexual genital activity into sacramental marriage.

But married men sometimes abuse children. So do women, probably in vast numbers given their far easier access to children even in the nude; like, for example, domestic violence against men, those who control this field ideologically refuse to conduct the necessary research, in this case because it does not fit their presupposed agenda of excluding (heterosexually inclined) men from the socialisation of children. The priests who had sex with teenage boys were not repressed, but the very reverse.

Especially in America, the Priesthood has been packed with such unrepressed, so that their inevitable exposure could be used, in due season, to demand so-called reforms that would not improve the situation in the slightest. And such has now come to pass. It is inconceivable that the priestesses lobby, in particular, was not fully complicit in this, since for decades it has effectively controlled access to ordination in many American dioceses, while its influence is also still growing in Britain and elsewhere.

Given this enormous amount of medical malpractice, consumer fraud and other offences, class actions need to be filed against the Keepers of the Kinsey Flame: Johns Hopkins University, the Kinsey Institute at the University of Indiana, the San Francisco-based Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality, AASECT (American Association of Sex Educators, Counsellors and Therapists), SIECUS (Sex Information and Education Council of the United States), the SSS (Society for the Scientific Study of Sex), Planned Parenthood, the ever-generous Rockefeller Foundation, and numerous subsidiaries around the world. Just for starters. Those interested should contact Dr Judith Reisman, who describes her own perspective as non-religious: info@drjudithreisman.com or jreisman@liberty.edu.

Buy the book here.

8 comments:

  1. I see we are discussing homosexual behaviour.

    David, I would be interested to know if you have a view on the book by theologian David Berger “The Holy Illusion. Being a Gay Theologian in the Catholic Church”. The original is in German.

    http://www.praytellblog.com/index.php/2010/12/11/the-perfumed-traditionalists/

    "Everything began with his fascination for the old Mass, a gateway drug for so many gay men who are magically attracted to a religious fairy tale world. Today Berger sees the Latin liturgy, which presents the sacred in an overemphasis on the aesthetic, as essentially a “product of homosexual sublimation.”"

    This is a reference to the The Tridentine Mass used more commonly before 1962.

    ReplyDelete
  2. What he says is only true of, undeniably, much of the subculture that remains attached to the Old Rite. By no means all of it. But enough of it to be worth worrying about. It can hardly be said to describe, for example, the coal and steel communities of County Durham and Pennsylvania, or the dockers of Liverpool and New York, before Vatican II.

    ReplyDelete
  3. David I take your point that when the Old Rite was commonly used the vast majority of the congregation would have been heterosexuals.

    I think Mr. Berger's claims can only be made about some of those attending the Old Rite in the present time.

    ReplyDelete
  4. And he has a point. But he does not address the fact that women were always very numerous among Mass-goers, and are the clear majority of those who remain attached to the Old Rite. Perhaps, like many homosexually inclined men of a certain vintage, he just doesn't quite see or hear a woman in the room? Or even a large number of women in the room.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think we all know who we are talking about here. People can have a go at you for having to publish your very serious and important work through lulu, but exactly how many people bought his book on Brian Brindley? Yet the mighty Continuum, run by another of the gay Catholic mafia in media London, managed to publish that. I think we can also all see who is the vanity publisher.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It is absolutely impossible for an orthodox Catholic voice to be heard in the media in this country.

    The market has been cornered by the public school, neoconservative, homosexual (or at least high-camp) clique around Damian Thompson, a situation which the over-clericalisation of the Ordinariate, and what might well turn out to be its high proportion of the total number of Catholic priests in this country, will only make worse.

    As I say bluntly in Essays Radical and Orthodox, the homosexuality of Anglo-Catholicism is why he is so keen on the Ordinariate, and an important part of why I am so lukewarm towards it.

    Although it is obvious that I mean him, I wish that I had used his name. I have done in comments saying this on the Catholic Herald blogs site, which have never been taken down.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Today Berger sees the Latin liturgy, which presents the sacred in an overemphasis on the aesthetic, as essentially a “product of homosexual sublimation.”"

    If I may be blunt - BOLLOCKS. It seems to me that the contributors to this blog who continually harp on about this theme are the ones with the problem'.

    ReplyDelete
  8. David I don't know much about the Ordinariate, but I shall certainly take your word on this & begin my own enquiries. It is good to know that we have the support of Miner's Boy on this delicate matter.

    ReplyDelete