|Gay objectivists seem to be obssessed with sexual self-justification when it is something that shouldn't be a factor for any objectivist.|
Objectivism presupposes that everyone has a right to go to hell in their own way, so long as they do so with other consenting adults, and do not infringe on anyone's personal liberty in so doing.
However, in an objective sense, I see little justification for the assertion that homosexuality is a "normal" lifestyle.
Male homosexuality could aptly be described as a pathological sexual addiction, one predicated upon youth, physical beauty, fleeting sexual encounters and always looking around for the next bit of fresh meat.
Why is it that all the gay men of my acquaintance seem forever unable to find the meaningful permanent relationship they all claim to want?
Why is everyone they meet somehow "not right" after a while?
How many gay men have been in a committed monogamous relationship for more than five years? Next to, if not nil, I think you'll discover.
Those who haven't done so should read "Sexual Ecology" by gay activist Gabriel Rotello and ask whether the sort of piggish sexual gluttony detailed in its pages is not a flight from commitment and intimacy symptomatic of deep psychological wounds in the childhoods of those concerned. Rotello, of course, ducks the question totally.
Is reducing sexual interaction to the expulsion of surplus bodily effluvia in a public lavatory amidst the reek of anonymous excrement without having even spoken to the other party or learned anything about them evidence of a psychologically and sexually healthy individual?
Why are many gay men (acknowledged by Rotello) in apparently "committed" relationships driven to continue this sexually compulsive behaviour on the side?
In an objective sense, sexual addiction of the type described is surely evidence of deep pyschological disturbance for anyone, gay or straight, as are certain sexual practices.
Are the practices referred to in Rotello's book as widely prevalent among sections of the gay community mentally (or physically) healthy and normal?
Why are activities like fisting, scats, mud sports and water sports are so widely practised in certain gay subgroups? Is this evidence of a healthy sexuality?
I think not.
Gay activists tell us that sexual addiction and bizarre sexual practices are due to "internalised homophobia" and the fact that society refuses to accept homosexuality as normal. Arrant nonsense. The more accepting society has become of homosexuality, the more extreme gay sexual behaviour seems to have become.
Not all gays are sexually compulsive (although percentage-wise far more gays than straights seem to be). Even less engage in hard-core sexual practices, which a small minority of straights also get into.
But whatever one's sexual preference, sexual addiction, fisting, coprophagia, coprophilia and micturation on one's partner have little to do with human intimacy and can only be symptomatic of massive self-disgust and self-hatred.
I accept that a minority of people [1 - 3 percent according to recent research] prefer their own gender sexually (for whatever reason) and that this is normal for them. I do not believe that they should be persecuted or ostracised for exercising that preference, as long as their sexual relations with other adults are not coercive.
I do however have grave objections to gay activists manipulating public debate and trying to tell me that what is "normal" for them on a personal level ought to be "normal" for everyone when it clearly isn't.
For 97 - 99 percent of people, "gay" is not a "normal" expression of sexuality. I place no moral judgement on it, but how can homosexuality be objectively "normal" when it is biologically redundant behaviour?
Homosexuality can't even be a naturally programmed form of population control when for most of human history we eked out a precarious existence and needed all the progeny we could get. It is simply something that has always been a sexual preference for a minority of individuals and therefore "normal" only for its practitioners.
I also have a problem with the more evangelical gay activists (with the connivance of anti-family leftists) selling homosexuality as a viable sexual alternative to kids in our schools .
As Joe Sobran says: "How bright do you have to be to work out the consequences of inserting a life-giving organ into the poop chute"?
Joe's right, in both a physical and spiritual sense.
Most objectivists and libertarians are happy to extol the spirituality of a beautiful piece of music or a wonderful architectural achievement.
Yet they cannot see that human behaviour has spiritual consequences (No, Im not a God-botherer, but an agnostic). What occultists commonly refer to as "the right-hand path" symbolises light, health, growth and life. "The left-hand path" on the other hand symbolises disease, ignorance, decay and death.
An act of heterosexual intercourse is therefore a celebration of life due to its potential to create life, while the anus is an organ of excretion, not procreation.
The bodily waste expelled from the anus has had all the life extracted from it. It is dead, not living matter. In a spiritual sense, sodomy is accordingly a celebration, not of life, but of death.