Political Opposition to Homo Marriage Isn’t Bigotry

N.P.R.’s Mike Peska hosting the political radio show ‘Left, Right and Center’ said that opposition to homosexual marriage is bigotry. That show might consider changing its name to just 'Left of Center'. Peska was ostensibly the centrist indicating how far skewed the nation to the left after nearly 24 years of bad Presidential leadership. Opposition to queer marriage is just honorable and those for it, dishonorable. Homosexuality is a learned behavior, not a congenital fact. Opposition to corrupt behavior is the core of political democracy, not a form of bigotry. There may be some tiny percentage of genetically aberrant individuals to be understood, yet that understanding should not comprise a cause for corrupting society with mass social legislation to abandon reason.

Marriage was perhaps the first civil right established before there were civil rights. Monogamy protected the weak from victimization and was a social sanction against adultery and the conflicts attending the sexual exploitation of women. It is remarkable that the decline of social morals have gone so far and become so common under the corrupting broadcast media influence that social dishonor is regarded as virtually normative.

One can expect NPR to advocate for the rights of Sugar Plum Fairies, unemployment compensation checks for the employed and spousal benefits and quarters for soldiers sucking thumbs of other soldiers. The real bigotry is blaming the poor instead of the rich and middle class for the vast left and right wing public debt.

Hollywood might need to remake the Titanic again with Michael Douglas as the ship’s captain. He could call for ‘women, children and queers’ to the lifeboats. Single adults can open doors for one or the other of a homocouple and marriage while marriage can become disassociated with raising children. So many social traits and customs exist about men being gentlemanly with the fairer sex and probably will even in an era when women feel equal or more than equal financially. There are many forms of competition that men simply would not be comfortable with, being rough with women. Now homos too will desire to be treated ‘without bullying’ and go to the head of the class.

Mike Peska wrongly believes that it is bigotry to oppose the socially deleterious expropriation of marriage by homosexuals. Strait singles and society have made many sacrifices to let marriage be a supported social institution that would be utterly foolish of given to a pair of guys or women homosexuals. Defending one’s individual social equality as an adult means that the blatant corruption of political and social establishments should be opposed. Homosexual marriage is one glaring, blatant corrupt of political and moral reason.

The United States constitution does recognize the right of free association and liberty for individuals. Although moral reason rules against homosexuality it is politically a concern for individuals and for individual behavior within the paradigm of privacy. The fundamental causes for the homosexual marriage aggression probably include fear, delusion, greed, hatred of heterosexual normality and power. It is supported by many godless atheists with wrong ideas about the moral implications of science and evolution theory.

Peska and other N.P.R. radio-heads in their sniper-tower quality communication lofts of unfair political advantage may believe that evolution or atheism means that life is meaningless and morality is judgmental without reason. There are social moral practices that are functional and utilitarian in practice rather than in theory. Morality is not just a theory that can be applied or removed to an existential practico-inert social politik reformed to most reflect the moral nihilism of political leadership.

Christians may believe that morality stems from adhering to the will of God. Even so morality has a basis in real-world social stasis that is not a moral vacuum. To throw in bad political moral choices as law such as homosexual marriage develops inertia for political nihilism deeply to the ground of being and becoming in the transcending development of social history.

Homosexual marriage and other abominable practices sew the seeds of chaos into the cohesive fabric of civilization. Especially when there is a vast range of inductive, non-destructive ways for individuals to ensnare themselves within legal encumbrances unnecessarily it was and is entirely a gratuitous if not vicious assault upon traditional marriage and morality to force homosexual marriage upon society poisoning marriage in the process.

If marriage is of such substantive financial and social value that single individuals should be required by law to make tax sacrifices to support it and if queers are to benefit from that historically heterosexual practice then it would be utter bigotry to deny single adults the financial and tax benefits of marriage. That is if one uses same irrelevant sort of expropriative paradigm as advocates for queer marriage developed.

The moral nihilism of the Democrat Party forged in the existential swamp of moral relativism seems to be an oath of allegiance required for the broadcast media. Maybe some of them really believe that society are better off with a pervasive homosexual hegemony from military training to public educators and that homos would never ever exploit a social ecosystem of homosexual marriage renormalization and atheism.

Media swanks may be above it all for-themselves and disingenuously giving trendy support for their own narrow financial self-interest. Even so it is wrong to denounce political opposition to homosexual marriage or to any public policy change as bigotry. The right to dissent on political issues is fundamental to a democratic society. That little fact is something the nihilist media may hate.

In the brave new world of the age of fracture none will make sacrifices and all will be forced by law to be equal. From each according to his ability and to each according to his/her/its needs. At least in the affirmative era political set power, privilege and wealth will be redistributed from poor and middle class non-class members to class members except for the rich who overall will just accumulate more wealth and power going away while the remainder of the local populace gets poorer. Yet they will have legal dope and queer marriages in the society. How better could they be slopped?