This new year will bring with it many surprises and interesting events. One of the most interesting will be the presidential election in November.
Of the many candidates running on the Democratic side all hold to the common denominator of left wing politics. If past history remains true we can believe that the Democratic nominee will, after the primaries, shift their politics to the center in order to gain more votes from right-thinking folks. However, once they get into office they are, like past presidents, apt to abandon the center and instead govern from the left.
And so it is we wonder about each candidate, how they think, how they make decisions, and whether we can believe that what they say they will in fact do. For example, Obama as a candidate said he believed marriage was between one man and one woman. But as president he championed the absurd notion that a man can “marry” another man. As opposed to Trump, who has in fact acted on everything he said he would as a candidate: the wall, China’s trade abuses, religious freedom protection, and so on.
In this respect, caution bells ring out with several of the Democratic candidates. There is one though who has admitted he is sexually attracted to other men. His relationship with men is more than friendship, it’s sexual. In fact, he understands himself to be “married” to a man with whom he is having sexual relations. While such a presumed relationship is, sadly, “legal” in this country, it remains, spiritually-speaking, illicit for all who live in Truth. For some, this is nothing out of the norm. No more abnormal than blowing one’s nose or passing gas. For many others it’s an abomination and causes one to wonder about such a man’s thought processes and decision-making ability while holding such a high office, especially in light of the totalitarian mindset necessary to coerce others into believing homosexual acts are normal.
Should we vote for a man who will never know what it means to feel the warmth from the soft skin of a woman? Might such a lack affect a man in thinking differently, errantly, hazily, or crazily, about diplomatic matters?
Should we really vote for a man who will never experience the complementarity of what it means to be one in the flesh with a woman, to be in union with something divine? Might such a defect cause one to have errant urges that are domineering and tyrannical than those of a more compromising approach to problem solving?
And should we vote for such a man who will never know what it means to receive the feedback from a woman with whom he’s intimately involved, thereby missing the feminine side of decision-making, (a woman of course lends leaven to a man’s ways) having to mentally operate more or less with one arm behind his back.
Yes, it is indeed an abomination, but not so much for the abhorrent homosexual acts themselves as it is rather for the absence in him of that which makes life so rich, so rewarding, and so meaningful -- the integration into one’s soul of the essence and influence of one’s complement – in his case, a woman.
How often has it been in the country’s history that a mayor, one of a city of 102,000 residents, has been elevated to lead the nation? Did anybody outside of South Bend really know who he was? I would suggest he would still be, to the nation, an unknown politician were it not for the powerful and wealthy men, men interested in advancing the homosexual culture, who thrust him onto the national political stage, controlling through him their political desires, hiding behind the curtain as it were.
Blowing one’s nose, or passing gas is normal. But a man engaged in a homosexual act, like a person eating their own vomit, is not normal – it would be an understatement to say it is a perversion.
It’s the candidacies of men like Buttigieg that should remind us of the reason why nature is rife with complementarian ways. Like the ying and the yang; not the ying and the ying. The to and the fro; not the fro and fro. The ebb and the flow; not the flow and flow.
Notwithstanding the fact that men have a particular tendency to certain vices, a social relation with a woman, more so an intimate one, can help curb such urges. Social science continues to show that where men are not tied to women by marriage that they often try to prove their masculinity in destructive and socially damaging ways, the result of inability to control the will, and their passions. While the extreme of this phenomenon might not be manifest yet with Buttigieg vis-à-vis his male sex partner, one must wonder in light of these findings whether the pressures of major life and death decision-making might cause such a man to err toward the side of violence and aggression, than the ability to measure his actions and reactions to domestic and international crises as they arise.
The homosexual mind is perpetually restless, searching for approval, and turning over tables and disrupting the order of things until it is satisfied, which it can never be, that their acts are normal. The political order, as we are now witnessing, will for years to come be infested with the homosexual mind and the only remedy for complementarians will be to oppose in thought, word, and deed their machinations at every turn.
With the exception of Buttigieg, Trump and every other Democratic candidate’s acts proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. While Trump’s foibles are more than a few, the dignity of what it is that makes him, as well as the other Democratic candidates, a complete person in the order of things, is that they all have and live with their complement. For Buttigieg, he’s chosen to live without his – a woman.
Leave a Reply.