You are speking from ignorance. Most historical cultures had ways that accommodated homosexuality. What you mean is that it is unprecedented in your narrow christian-centric world view. Anthropologists know better. You are just an ignorant Christian.Gustav Bjornstrand wrote:If we are going to be 'fixing' minds and spirits, and perceptual structures, I suggest it may go both ways, friend.GIA wrote:Homophobia is so ugly. You might want to have that fixed.
I notice - again - that people who have been brought up in 'radical liberalism', when they hear a statement that seems to them to operate against their politically-correct idea (a total metaphysic with an established ethics), cannot really hear what one is saying. It is the strangest thing, really. So, let's break it down, again. It may take ten re-phrasings or a hundred. It is also possible that the content can never be heard. Yet, inevitably, someone, somewhere hears.
Homosexuality is a part of human culture, has been and will always be. The so-called 'closeted variety' must be accepted, in my view.
The creation of a homosexual culture, or the 'selling' of homosexuality, or training people up in homosexuality, or introducing it to children, or the inculcation (by visual image, through public relations techniques, and other means) of homosexual practice and behaviour; the introduction of homosexuality as a 'normal social attitude', or as a desired social attitude or practice, is a significant, an unprecedented event in culture.
I shall forgive your ignorance, but not your persistent evil.
You are just responding to a childish homophobia, what exactly are you scared of big boy. Mwah! Give me a big kiss you naughty thing!
The 'homosexualisation of culture', according to me, and based on a designed, a practical, a coherent and a thought-out strategy, is not desirable, not good, and should be actively discouraged. (I have not mentioned the governmental support or valuation of homosexuality, yet it should also be brought out as discussable. I suggest that it might be considered a wee bit strange - unsettling? - that the US White House was lit up in 'pride' colours recently).
How ignorant and stupid can one man get? "metaphysically corrupt". You are on a different planet. I don't think you know what metaphysics is.
I further suggest that homosexuality, at the most basic level, is metaphysically corrupt, yet I doubt that this will be understood (without much explanation. But in radical liberalism many many strange things are not seen as strange at all! They are seen as 'normal' and 'necessary', indeed they flow out of metaphysical predicates, predicates that can be named and explained).
What are you scared of? Have you ever asked yourself that?
In the 1980s and 90s, there was a concerted and rational effort made within the entertainment industry, the psychological industry, in collusion with the PR industry, and also within business sectors, to mainstream homosexuality. Now, 30 years or so on, we are seeing the 'fruit' of these efforts. To understand better what I am saying, you'd need to do some research, to understand the strategy that was implemented. You might say: I support that. You might say Hmmm. Seems a bit odd. Or: I don't agree with that at all.
You could start with "After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's" It is a 300+ page manifesto, by Harvard-trained psychologist and a PR man, outlining a strategy of manipulation of public attitude. We generally refer to this as 'propaganda', yet we are so inured to it that we call it Public Relations and advertising, forgetting that it is mind-control.
The gist of the book appeared first as an essay in a gay publication (The Overhauling of Straight America) and can be found here in PDF.
"But are any of us in a position INDIVIDUALLY and UNIQUELY to do anything more than guess?" That is both a statement and a question. How would you go about answering that? When you do so, I suggest you will uncover and enunciate much about your own 'operative metaphysic'. If you are in no position to do more than guess: Say so. 