The ‘Big Lie’ that Homosexuality is Morally Equivalent to Race

Responding to this comment under my previous “My Initial Reaction to the Supreme Court’s Ruling Imposing Homosexual Pseudo-Marriage Nationwide” post:

The idea that race is equivalent to gender or sexual orientation is a “big lie.” A lie told repeatedly and often in an effort to make this lie “the truth” for manipulation purposes to push first the feminist female supremacist agenda and now to push the “homosexuals as normal” agenda.

What is race? Some people are white, some are Hispanic, some are black, etc. The difference is what continent ones ancestors originate from and in particular the climate conditions of that continent that led to evolved differences in pigmentation of the skin. A white person is a fully functioning person just like a Hispanic person is a fully functioning person just like a black person is a fully functioning person; the fact that these different people have different skin colors is not important.

Gender; whether one is male or female; is entirely different from race. The male person evolved to have certain characteristics to play a particular role in relation to the other gender of female. Likewise the female person evolved to have certain characteristics to play a particular role in relation to the other gender of male. The male and female then combine together to make babies and work together in support of the well being of such children to then continue the human species for another generation. It is entirely legitimate to view men and women differently and to treat men and women differently in ways that support each gender’s respective sex role because men and women are indeed different!

Sexual orientation is entirely different from race and it is also different from gender. Being another race just means your ancestors originated on a different continent. Being male or female just means one has either the male position or the female position in life and is therefore due the privileges of ones gender and is duty bound to fulfill the responsibilities of ones gender. Sexual orientation is quite a different thing from either race or gender however; sexual orientation is about whether one is healthy or sick, normal or abnormal, functional or dysfunctional, able to effectively serve ones purpose regarding family life or not. Heterosexual is healthy, normative, functional, and consistent with well ordered high functioning family life. Homosexual is sick, abnormal, dysfunctional, and contrary to well ordered high functioning family life.

So definitely obviously it is legitimate to treat homosexual as different from heterosexual and indeed to treat homosexual as inferior to heterosexual as heterosexual is good while homosexual is bad.

White is equivalent to Hispanic is equivalent to black; one race being equivalent to another race. Male is different from female but a male is fully functional as a male with a female being fully functional as a female; male and female being equal but different in a complementary relationship with each other. Heterosexual is healthy while homosexual is sick; the two not being equal to each other in any way.

Another thing I will add; it is scientifically impossible for a person to be “born gay” in the sense of one acquiring a genetically heritable trait of homosexual preference passed on from parent to child. The reason for this is very obvious. A “gay gene” will be eliminated from the gene pool very quickly due to such a gene’s serious harm to the reproductive success of the person carrying it. This being due to the biological fact that sexual behavior with a member of ones own gender does not lead to the creation of new life. So the idea that people are “born gay” is an obvious total lie.

A lie does not become the truth no matter how often or how forcefully the lie is repeated. Furthermore a lie does not become the truth simply because the law or the Supreme Court declares the lie to be the truth. A lie is intrinsically false due to it in fact being a lie.

The idea that gender is equivalent to race is a lie, a “big lie.”

The idea that sexual orientation is equivalent to race is a lie, a “big lie.”

One race is equivalent to another race and so the races should be treated as equal. Men and women are different from each other but a man should be respected and honored as a man and a woman should be respected and honored as a women. The heterosexual however is superior to the homosexual and the homosexual should definitely be discriminated against and viewed as being “less than” the heterosexual as the homosexual is sick and in need of treatment and should not be in a parental role in relation to a child and the homosexual identity and lifestyle should definitely be discouraged and shunned and kept to a minimum with the goal or trying to minimize how many people become entrapped by homosexuality to the greatest extent possible.

Love for homosexuals as human beings is perfectly legitimate and honorable and noble and homosexuals definitely deserve sympathy for their plight but you don’t want to get sucked into the homosexual disorder yourself and you don’t want your children to be harmed by misguided sexual experimentation or by the propaganda lie that there is nothing wrong with being a homosexual.

About Jesse Powell TFA

Anti-Feminist, MRA, Pro-Traditional Women's Rights Traditional Family Activist (TFA)
This entry was posted in Homosexuality and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to The ‘Big Lie’ that Homosexuality is Morally Equivalent to Race

  1. Britneh says:

    Are infertile marriages banned?

  2. SitandWonder says:

    Just because a trait is detrimental for reproduction doesn’t mean it cannot be genetically passed down.

    The genetic link could be weaker one like the multifactorial genes (this is the seed and soil hypothesis were the genetics create the soil for the seed or in this case the condition grows.) two examples of this are schizophrenia and cancer. We know that genetics places a role in both these conditions, it runs in families, but we equally know not everyone who has the gene will get the condition. BRCA1 is a gene linked to breast cancer and ovarian cancer 55-65% of people that inherit this harmful gene will get breast cancer. So that means that 45-35 will carry the gene and not get cancer. This is because the gene is multi factorial in its expression, it increases the risks but other things that happen to the person are involved the genesis of the cancer.

    It could be a gene with weak penetrance, these are cases in which the cause is entirely genetic, but not everyone expresses the gene in the same amount so that the actual result is variable. The familial form of ALS is a gene with weak penetrance.

    It could be a recessive gene were you can be a perfectly normal carrier and you have to marry another person who carries the gene in order to have affected offspring. Think of cystic fibrosis and sickle cell anemia. These are often genes in which having one copy has some benefit to the organism virtually guaranteeing their continuation. Perhaps males with one gene towards homosexuality are better are cooperation and relation to others males.

    They could be a trineculitide repeat expansion. In these cases you have a normal presentation until the point that the gene expands to become non-functional. The gene is variable getting larger and sometimes smaller each time it passes. Think of Fragile X-syndrome and Huntington’s Disease.

    Finally you could have a freaking De Novo mutation. In which the mutation is literally new to the offspring and caused by a failure in early embryo genesis. Conditions related to this are Down Syndrome, Turner’s Syndrome, and possibly autism.

    Now surely you can agree having any of those conditions I listed as examples is going to reduce your chances of reproduction, however they are all genetic they can and they do pass down. This is all without mentioning conditions of genetic imprinting, x-linked conditions, or mitochondrial inheritance. It is beyond too simple to say, it would reduce reproduction therefore it can’t be in your genes. Genes that make reproduction impossible exist and they keep existing. Do I believe they are born that way? I don’t know, and I am woman enough to say that.

  3. Hannahd says:

    This is where I disagree with most other traditionalists. I agree completely with what sitandwonder has to say. Sexuality and gender identity are not things that a person has any control over and for some people genetic mutations may happen in the womb to cause what is known as homosexuality or gender dysphoria. Doctors and psychiatrists have been trying for years to treat these people with the hope of making them normal but they have had no luck. I honestly don’t think these people are a threat to society since their behaviour doesn’t generally appeal to normal men and women. People who were born healthy are not going to turn gay or lesbian or have a sex change because disordered people do it. It simply just doesn’t work like that. I say we allow people to have homosexual relationships and have sex changes. It’s never something that is going to catch on and become increasingly popular. The only people who want to do these things are already disordered and will crave them whether it is permitted or not, often risking everything to do so, as proven in societies where these things are not legal or socially acceptable. I also think that if someone has a sex change they are taking on the privileges and responsibilities of that gender. For example, a transwoman should be expected to obey men and find a husband to provide, become a housewife and adopt children. She should not be allowed to have the privileges of a man if she chooses to become a woman. I also don’t buy this ‘gender fluidity’ nonsense on tumblr and on the rest of the internet. I don’t believe that’s something that is legitimate. Your brain generally knows if it’s male or female and more than 99 times out of 100 the body that person is born with matches. In a few people it doesn’t and I believe that those few people have the right to a gender reassignment as long as they can take on the roles and responsibilities suited to that particular gender and live within the rules of society. As with homosexuality, I believe the issue is more complex. With gay men I see a consistent pattern. Men are either heterosexual or homosexual. They don’t generally have sexual relations with other men unless they can’t possibly see themselves with a woman and they are 100% gay. With lesbianism however, I think this is a bit more harmful. I do think there are a few girls who catch onto lesbianism and lesbian behaviour when they are not biologically lesbian. I think much of this is down to some heterosexual men and their sexual fascination with lesbians. This should be highly discouraged as it not healthy for a straight man to be thinking of 2 women having sex. It is detrimental to women and puts them at risk of sexual abuse or exploitation. I think unless a woman can prove that she is 100% lesbian through medical and psychological tests then lesbian behaviour should be discouraged and her father/husband and the other men in the community should step up and control her behaviour. I also think that gay men should undergo medical tests just as a precaution, then these people should perhaps be given a certificate to say they are diagnosed as lesbian or homosexual. If we could cure these people, then I would be all for it, but the fact is, we can’t. Our only option is to accept them and be kind to them and understand that they cannot be reformed, but that they deserve a good quality of life and to live within a community that accepts their disorders.

  4. Sophia says:

    “diagnosed as lesbian or homosexual”? It’s not a bloody disease. They are just people trying to live their lives and to love who they want to love. They are not harming anyone, unlike this site that is trying to patronise and infantilise women and take away every last right that women have gained over the past century. That’s what I call harmful and sick.
    I wouldn’t want to live in your intolerant, bleak, fascist world, Hannah. And meanwhile in the normal world, psychiatrists have long abandoned the thought of homosexuality as something harmful or out of the ordinary. Homophobia is a different matter, however. The same with trying to control women and force them to obey men. You might want to check out ‘malignant narcissism’ for that.

    • Diamond says:

      Yeah, I mean damn, and it won’t work anyway, because women are used to their power, even the traditionalists, all of them have a job, or a blog, or make a lot of noise in the public spear, by blogging and complaining other women live in a way they disagree with. for someone who wants to stay in the house and live in the house and slave away in the house and serve their master, a very very public life.
      As a women it isn’t attractive when people treat me like a baby or make my decisions for me, or try to control me, or any of what Jesse and his brothers and sisters in backwards want. It just doesn’t work out in reality. if it worked we would’ve stayed there.

  5. Lux says:

    This is some odd focus for a straight man who wants to marry a girl and has no interest in homosexual affairs, to say the least. If I ever find a women who I can love, as another women and we live in America I may want to marry her. Back off Jesse. Way to over step!
    Sophia is right, another voice of reasons on this blog, bless her sweet moral soul.

  6. Pingback: How Social Conservatives should respond to Bostock vs Clayton County | Secular Patriarchy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s