The Virtue of Heterosexuality

When i first heard about 'LGBT conversion therapy', i thought it referred to the now rampant attempts to impose, enforce, normalise and promote LGBT, aka, sexual depravity, to children in schools and via entertainment, the corporate news media, radio broadcasts, the Whitehouse, and the United Nations, amongst other tentacles of the globally murderous and insurrectionist capitalist elite.

However, perhaps due to some deficiency - perspectival,  vitamin, or otherwise - on my part, i just couldn't see how getting children to 'identify as' another gender, or both genders, or not have a gender, and have sex with one's own, the other, or both genders, was supposed to have a socially, spiritually, morally, intellectually-enriching effect. 

What i did recognise, logically, was that all this 'fluid' 'identify as' at a primitive sexual level was a prelude or prep school for the consequential eradication of ALL identity, and the reduction of all to mindless consumerism wholly led by, what might metaphorically be construed as no different from an alien force bent on enslaving humanity and eradicating it down to manageable and adequate numbers.

Well, It was only after seeing this term bandied about time and again, that i thought, 'now what are they (the west/white people) talking about THIS time.'  And that's when i realised that the term, 'gay/LGBT conversion therapy', was a term referring to efforts to UNDO the grooming effects of what the LGBT and their media, etc, were embarking on on a global scale, and that efforts were being made to ban reversion to decency across the world.  In other words, being turned 'gay' or more accurately, sexually depraved, by LGBT 'education' is alright, but not efforts to challenge it.  This was abject Heterophobic, decentphobic, moralphobic, and basically, civilisationphobic.

So the 'logic' of these harem of harpies is, if you don't normalise perversion, it will be demonised and discriminated against?  And that makes it an issue of discrimination and bigotry and must be eradicated? 

So, according to that logic, someone who dangles his dingle dongle in public is deemed perverse because kids are not taught that it is alright?   I suppose that to them, rape is a problem only because people have not been trained to say yes in the face of any advance because they are sexophobic.

So rapists are arrested because people and children in schools haven't been taught to say yes and give their consent as adults whenever someone one's to have sex with them?  So a man telling off his wife for sleeping with all the men and women in the neighbourhood is doing so because he hasn't been taught as a child that it is just 'freedom to love without limits'?  Isn't this an effort to get people to give their consent to the perverse?  And then say it is alright because it is between consenting adults?  Isn't this the very illustration of grooming and indoctrinating? If all this was natural, this would already be the case without an ounce of legislation. 

But these degenerates are trying to link this with racism, which required legislation to eradicate.  So they turn gross depravity into a discrimination issue.  And with that, they link aversion to any form of depravity to 'patriarchy' and 'heteropatriarchy' and whatever other insensible rubbish they can think up to legitimise the destruction of humanity's moral compass, religion, philosophy, the family, and through that,  history and all cultures.  But this is not the same issue as it is an issue of morality, not bigotry.  It is not an issue of race but one of proclivity.

So now they are basically turning schools into LGBT-education centres accompanying maths and geography, and transferring ownership of children globally to the LGBT and all those bodies like 'Big Tech', the 'UN', Hollywood, Corporate News, etc, like they are when it comes to having 'pop-up vaccination centres' outside schools luring children to be bioraped away from the prying eyes of parents as a blatant effort to transfer parental authority to  terroristic bourgeois regimes throughout the forceJabbing world.

It doesn't make logical sense of course.  After all, to say that efforts to de-homo a person was an effort to 'convert' them, was to imply that people's natural state was to be homosexual or bisexual in nature, or that one is born to confuse his anus for a vagina, or his cock for a clit, or to slice off his or her cock or breasts because they 'identify as' the opposite gender.  What sort of self-mutilating insanity has taken hold of whatever's left of the western mind?  Any effort at 'converting' is to turn someone FROM an original state isn't it.  So efforts to bisexualise a person would be the effort to 'convert' them from their nature-endowed heterosexual nature wouldn't it. 

How about brand-conversion therapy then?  Telling people that they should prefer armani over hugo's balls must surely lead to confusion, loss of large amount of funds, and hysterical discarding of products so as to allay sleepless nights around 'outdated' fashions to phones.  Why aren't such advertisements branded as 'conversion therapy' and banned?  The assininity of the western 'mind' never fails to shock those with a non-fabricated  one.

So that would make LGBT the ones whom are guilty of 'converting' cocks to clits and vice versa wouldn't it?  Logically speaking that is.  Perverts, bigots, and racial supremacists hate logic, just as pea soup-spewing demons hate holy water. 

After all, psychologically speaking, LGBT-conversion is basically telling children of another option when it comes to dressing, sex, or marriage isn't it. It's called 'Socialisation' via role modelling, the power of suggestion, the power association, attribution, etc.  That's psychology.  Going into schools and encouraging children to have sex with their own gender when they hit puberty is grooming, and is the real homo or depravity conversion therapy. Who are these sexual indiscriminates to say that heterosexuality is NOT normal.  One can't justify right by choice, or the LGBT might risk getting their teeth kicked in by the choice of a parent who wants to protect his children from grooming.

Kids, despite their innate heterosexual nature, can be taught anything.  They can even be taught that having sex with their own parents, siblings, or with a squid, or a twinkie, or donut even, is alright.  It's all down to the 'power of suggestion' via 'socialisation' and 'role modelling'.  And that is what the LGBT are doing.  In more logical times,  these people would be rounded up and tossed into an asylum for grooming children with their indiscriminate proclivities.  Are the LGBT crackpots saying that there was an insidious heterosexual movement dating back to the time of the caveman forcing everyone to go with the  Unlike the LGBT, even neanderthals to homo sapiens had commonsense, or the LGBT idiots wouldn't be here to eye every nook, corner, crevice, cranny and crack with lewd imaginings.


It's Normal to be Heterosexual

To clarify, by saying something is 'normal' doesn't necessarily mean that it is virtuous and right.

*

Of course, naturally, guys would go with gals, and that is preconditioned by evolution.  > Nobody is going to pour water down a bottomless cup unless one is led by the simple urge to pour.  And that's when the cup becomes irrelevant. <  Think about what i just said, as therein lies the essence of what logic, and I, its messenger, is saying.

So if kids, dogs, cats, etc, were left alone, without any efforts to 'convert' them, or 'normalise' alternatives to what is evolutionarily prudential, then people wouldn't normally become LGBT.  It only arises out of a quirk, desperation, a product of familial dysfunction and rearing, an abberation, a desire for immediate gratification, convenience, alienation from the opposite gender, etc, UNLESS It is normalised within a climate where mindless consumerism, immediate gratification, and reaction over thought, gradually becomes the norm. 

Therefore, scientifically, psychologically, logically speaking, that would make LGBT-normalisation an effort to convert people to what any living creature would normally not engage in - that, by implication, means that LGBT is abnormal. 

Like i've stated, when people are left alone, they would normally be heterosexual.  Or are LGBT saying that from the time of the caveman, the church was up and about telling them which hole to stick their pole into?  Or that animals were policing themselves via a 'heteropatriarchy' to ensure that koalas to kudus to kardashians behaved themselves?  No.  That comes naturally.  That comes normally. 


It's Virtuous to be Heterosexual

From that sprung different sorts of loves and obligations, and from that, different sorts of self-development.   With the confining of sex to heterosexual marital relationships -  except amongst barbaric and degenerate peoples like the Vikings who'd kill or fuck anything that moves -  other sorts of loves bloomed in different ways.  And this all came about naturally, normally.  It gave birth, or contributed to, great philosophical and religious movements, culture, dances, art forms, musical styles, and so.   

From that sprung the ideas of friendship loves, (known as platonic love....though i don't know why it's called that as friendship loves predate plato), love of community, parental love, sibling love, appreciation of people in general, and so on and so forth, with sex being confined to marital love between heterosexuals.  Nonsexual love, with the sexual impulse being kept out of it, enabled altruism to bloom, or at the very least, kept at least one highly self-gratifying impulse out of social relationships, this allowing altruism a greater chance of expression.

From that came different sorts of gratification.  One was gratified by sex, amongst other wonders, in marital relationships; Buddha was gratified through self-sacrifice; Jesus was gratified through giving up his life for his desire to teach humanity about the true meaning of limitless love; a mother was gratified by self-sacrificial and unconditional love; a son was nourished by this love by becoming filial through defending his mother and loved ones to the death. 

All these loves enabled people to appreciate other aspects of others' and their own human persona by completely and utterly setting aside their sexual impulse.  In fact, that sexual impulse was transmutated to a spiritual impulse and brought great wisdom, insight, and depth.  Have you ever tried it?  I have.  The energy actually leads to a greater blooming and acceleration of development, expression and insight in other arenas.  So there must be something in the ancient wisdoms that state that restraint in one can unshackle in another.

With all this self-development that goes on in nonsexual relationships, identities and roles, one develops into a more profound person to a point where when one does finally engage in sex with one's loved one  it becomes far more meaningful, fulfilling, and actually leads to further growth for oneself and one's husband or wife.  One being developed into being more in nonsexual relationships - and especially if it is altruistic, and without self-gratification in more intense primitive forms - makes one greater enough to appreciate one's fiance, committed girl or boyfriend, or husband or wife, as more, and that leads to more mutual appreciation, development, adaptation, and involvement.

That is why the ancients sought to confine sexuality to just heterosexuality, which is meaningful in its procreative potential - whether it leads to it is not important, so long as it reinforces it as a moral exemplar, or stresses the importance of everything needing meaning apart from one's feelings - and to marriage, which adds further meaning to sex where commitment in the various aspects of a relationship makes it more meaningful and self-developing than it would in a self-serving western-style 'casual sex', 'one night stand', 'friends with benefits' 'relationship'.

This altruistic nonsexual self-development facilitates the further growth of both reason and empathy, which keeps sturdy the twin pillars of democracy.  It is actually the continuation of the mother and child altruistic relationship which is the foundation of it all.  The mother-child relationship is the origin of morality, comprising Reason and Empathy. That is when we learn to appreciate things and people beyond its immediately gratifying use-value.  This is that which serves as a check against evil within oneself and society  and the tyranny.  The more we turn people into use and dispose-value, and appreciate others less as a result, and we ourselves are underdeveloped as a result, the more we are incognizant of it being done to us.  And that serves as the cultural foundations upon which evil festers, ferments, and gradually takes flight.

The existence and promotion of such foundations is the means by which evil forces can gain control.  Why else do you think the corporations zealously promote anything from LGBT to Prochoice to Gory 'entertainment', amongst others?

Confining one's sexual impulse to what Mother Nature, or God, intended is hence virtuous.  You could say that a homosexual also could confine his love to just one person of his own gender.  But that doesn't work, because that proud and public-marching pansexual - one who copulates with everything and anything, pr one who sexualises all love and turns it into lust - would by that action serve as a moral exemplar to people to consider sex with another gender as well, and in the long-run be rid of gender and all identity so as to remove all boundaries to a wholly debauched, depraved, and thus easily-manipulated existence.  And that is when one won't be able to confine one's sexuality to just one gender, person, or species.  And all roles, identities, etc, is thus exsanguinated of its altruism and significance, and compromises all one can achieve self-developmentally for the benefit of people as a whole and themselves.



SEXUALISING Love

They are reducing the idea of Love into a mnemonic for, 'let's fuck!'. 

It is said by pansexual LGBT-promoters that human beings are the only ones out of all species who are homophobic.  Well no.  If dogs fuck their own gender, it isn't because they are enlightened and want to 'love without limits'.  It is simply because they are in the need for a fuck and therefore any hole or pole would do.  If humans do it, it is called being depraved.  Those who stand against it aren't therefore 'homophobic', but dont' want to promove depravity.    You can't just stick a 'phobic' as a suffix to something you want to promote in order to demonise those who don't want to eye everything from a poodle to a person with lascivious intent. 

Next,

However, LGBT are saying that there is more to human relationships than procreation.  That just because the sexual union of 2 people cannot biologically result in children, doesn't mean it is wrong.    After all, if we went by that rule, then heterosexual couples whom can't have children will also have their relationship deemed as wrong.  So there is more to a human relationship where sex is involved.

I am in complete agreement with them.  There IS more.  So why are they trying to sexualise the idea of Love and narrow the idea of love to lust then? 

LGBT, are in effect, narrowing the idea of love to being inseparable from sex, whilst not stipulating that there must be love for that to be sex.  In other words, love for sex is enough for sex with anyone, and that any form of attraction should have sex as a benefit, and one should embrace this idea or deemed an oppressive 'heteropatriarchal' stalwart who is LGBTphobic.

That sexualises all creation doesn't it. 

Incest, infidelity, the death of the marital institution, sex between children, pedophillia, etc, are all validated in principle and in consequence by such an idea of 'lust without limits', logically speaking.

LGBT are not a celibate organisation, but at the core, are promoting the notion, when put simply, 'if you love it, fuck it'.  In other words, where there is attraction, there can be sex.  And that simply means that that attraction can be sexual attraction itself without the precondition of love.  And that in turn means that lust does not have to be limited by love.  In other words, there is nothing wrong with just fucking anyone even if there isn't love.  All there has to be is attraction due to their availability.  And since everyone is attracted to sex, attraction to a person as a person becomes superfluous as all people are largely reduced to their use-and-dispose sexual value. 

This is a prelude to disregarding all other more meaningful aspects of others and ourselves through such depreciation of others.  And that is when all identities, from mother to friend becomes superfluous.  That is when the only identify that is left is an economic and consumerist one.  And the only authority thus naturally becomes the Mephistophelean corporation, with the likes of mass-murderous terrorists like Bill Gates to forceVaxxing presidents and prime ministers.

That notion is already promoted by western 'entertainment' since the 60s, and to a more subtle degree in their productions from the 1930s even, but mainly in the heterosexual arena, and via movies and sitcoms where people have sex without knowing each other's second names, and then ask if they like each other.  That is a western white thing, not necessarily a human thing.  It is found in all cultures, but where it is deemed uncultured in most, in the west it is a celebrated part of it for quite a long while.  Given this background, the western-based LGBT is in no position to talk about 'LOVE without limits'. 

Heterosexual 'love without limits' has already seen close to 50% divorce rates in laughably 'greatest nation on earth'.  So what, pray tell, is LGBT talking about when they talk about love without limits other than widening the sexual buffet to include one's own gender, siblings, parents, etc, as well. 

So now, when it comes to 'quickies' behind the bin or bush, one can double one's chances by doubling the variety, or just going with what one is already familiar with in terms of one's own gender or family.  Their 'love without limits' goes by the unstated but explicitly implied slogan, 'If you let platonic love, friendships, family ties, etc, get in the way of a good bang, you're a bigot and oppressed'.  In other words, no identity must be allowed to stand in the way of lust.  It is this way that they want to get rid of the family and replace all authority with the Corporation.  It may not be the intention of most retards of the LGBT, but it most certainly is the consequence.

So that demolishes the idea of platonic love, parental love, sibling love, and introduces sex into it.  So how, logically speaking, can that be 'love without limits'.  Rather, the slogan of the LGBT sexopaths is, 'limit the idea of love so that you can fuck em all'. 


SUM

So what we are seeing here is 'LGBT conversion therapy' that is getting more and more successful on a daily basis of converting humanity to the sexual version of Nike's slogan - Just Fuck It!. 

So all this talk about banning 'gay' or 'lgbt conversion therapy' is nothing but an effort to cover up the fact that it is the LGBT whom are going about converting children to their sexual ideology of, 'just fuck it'.  It is they whom ought to be rounded up globally, and socially distanced from humanity, preferably in an asylum or california. 

I'm not against anything LGBT like, but I'm certainly against its normalisation and promotion.  Many have their fetishes and perversions, from drinking whisky to doing the bump with sheep.  But our salvation, or the chance of us discovering our better nature and making more of ourselves to discover it, and making more of ourselves through our discovering it, lies in acknowledging our evils, or recognising that it can be, and confining it to the shadows of our lives rather than validating it in the light of day and and thus confusing the dark for day.  It isn't hypocrisy, but an effort to keep fighting against our evils by keeping the better part of the day and our lives for good in the effort to gradually extinguish the dark within.

In Hindu philosophy humans have an energy that can be situated in different aspects of the persona.  The sexual arena is viewed as the most and relatively debased, whilst spirituality and transcending base impulses were another location of the human persona, and great thinkers through ancient Indian history sought to locate their energy in that realm of human nature.  

In the west, the LGBT, and prior to that, in their 'sexual revolution' or their culture in general for thousands of years, they sought the opposite, and thus turned 'love' into a 'fucking thing' and is now making an effort to relocate human historical and primordial energy at the crotch.  In Indian philosophy, that is the definition of degeneracy and depravity. 

Yes yes, you could put it all down to choice, and in which case, it is a choice between a great thinker, or a motherfucker.  You can make the world of nothing, provided you make nothing of yourself first. 

I suppose that was the Devil's deal with Christ when he said he'd give Christ all if he bowed down to him.  Because, to bow to the devil is the first step toward eradicating all meaningful parts of your persona, and then the little that the devil has to offer - unbridled wealth, fame, power, lust - will be more than enough for you to betray anything or anyone of value to satisfy that small part of the human persona that is this developed at the expense of the rest.  The hadean LGBT want's everyone the world over to mistake the sexual component for its entirety through the eradication of non-consumerist identity.  Their their 'identity as' technology, they hope to make all identity superfluous, and have lust as the only identity. 

Do not be fooled into thinking this is just a homosexual thing.  LGBT are a body of various sexual proclivities that together is pansexual in character.  In being as such, they in essence stand against all identity that conflicts with it. And in that,  they are eroding all the best elements of history, philosophy, religions, cultures, wisdoms, that is transmitted through identities of all sorts, from mother, father, brother, sister, priest, friend, man, women, child, daughter, son, uncle, aunt, etc, etc. 

Pansexualism is a significant means to eradicate all the troublesome aspects of history that has been a thorn in the arse of the elite.  To get rid of identity through pansexualism is to finally be rid of history, and usher in the rule of the elite in perpetuity.

This must stop.  

Identities carry meaning, history, responsibilities, understandings, wisdoms, of various aspects of rights and wrongs, that in the final analysis, serve as a bulwark against all forms of evil, and the evil of the elite throughout the ages, with the family being the most potent prism through which the best elements of all history is transmitted through. 


edX