The transgendered bathroom issue has typically elicited a tepid response from many on the Republican side of the aisle and among the more libertarian and economic types of conservatives, with the battle cry “this is not the hill to die on!” being echoed through the conservative camps, carried in Paul Revere fashion by many of the elites and the Sons of Libertine, who never seem to find any piece of real estate worthy of spilled blood. Still the question that must be asked is why isn’t this the proper place to do battle? The misnamed transgenderism (really transvestism) is a direct frontal assault on America, on American values, on tradition, on our Judeo-Christian heritage, and on our fundamental definition of man and woman. If this hill isn’t worth dying on what is?
The very fact that so many think letting men in women’s clothing use women’s restrooms (and don’t think for a minute that predators won’t understand that all they must do is don a wig in the old British fashion and they can play) shows how far America has declined in moral and ethical standards. But perhaps they don’t understand the issue? There are reasons for this sudden outpouring of support for the very tiny transvestite community, and it serves a much more important purpose in the scheme of things than so many on our side realize.
By way of preamble let me state that America is perhaps the most spiritually inclined nation in the West. This country was settled in large part by people looking to practice their religious beliefs - overwhelmingly variations of Christianity - in peace. The result was a polarization with America being a strongly Christian nation and Europe sliding into a secular abyss as the committed believers left. Is it any wonder that where the American revolution never turned into a major civil war the French Revolution turned very bloody? Why did the French philosophers adopt atheism, with Rousseau advocating Nationalism (a religion where the nation is god and the government equates with the church - a very radical secularism)? Why did the Germans adopt Nihilism that led to the Nazi movement? All of this stemmed from a rejection of the traditional Christian beliefs that had been the cornerstone of Medieval Europe. In some ways it was America’s fault, because we had absorbed many of the committed Christians who fled persecution in their homelands.
Is it any wonder that radical atheists would set their aim on the United States?
Many, if not most, of the pre-Christian religions had sex and fertility at the epicenter of their rituals. This was the great problem Israel had when moving into Canaan; the Canaanite gods were attractive because they meant the joys of licentious sexuality. Yahweh was considered a buzz kill; He banned sex outside of marriage. This was the fundamental problem the Church had in making inroads into the pagan communities; so often the easier sex made it hard to convert people. Even Islam, when it arose, saw the problem and solved it by allowing men to have four wives and an endless amount of hookups aka concubines. The manipulation of sex has always been a powerful tool in controlling how people think and what they seek in life. Pagan religions generally promote free wheeling sexuality as a sacrament, something that weds the person to the belief system. Take Hinduism, one of the world’s great religions, as an example; they wrote the Kama Sutra, a book devoted to sexual practices, and devised Tantra as a way to employ sexuality in the service of religion. It’s not just about the sex - that’s a perk. It’s about pagan spirituality, about a belief system in rivalry to the Judeo-Christian heritage of our forefathers. As the Bible says God called the Israelites out of Egypt, and ordered them to disdain the sexual religions of the Canaanites.
But old customs die hard, and while Christianity overshadowed many of the old pagan religions of the lands it inhabited there was always a yearning for the old ways, particularly for such old ways as the feminized ancient religions offered, including priestesses and goddess worship - a sort of ancient women’s lib that has returned to us. And contact with the Orient brought the Asian pagan ideas to Europe, where they were happily adopted by a number of prominent people. These religious ideas fit well with a spirit of rebellion that percolated under the surface of Renaissance society, and broke out into open rebellion with the coming of the Enlightenment and the rise of the French Philosophes.
Transgenderism is perhaps the ultimate rebellion, an attempt at sorcery. It is a direct repudiation of what God and Nature intended for the individual. It is a way of claiming the right to self-creation. As such it is a form of magic, sexual magic, and as such it is the child of a long line of pagan religions and libertine philosophies.
I addressed some of this in the context of Environmentalism back in 2007 and that dovetails in many ways with the rebellion against sexual identity we are seeing today. And many of the same players are at the epicenter of both movements; Aleister Crowley, for example, a man who called himself The Beast 666 and who practiced black magic and perverted sexuality in the service of his pagan magic. Crowley once said:
“The sexual act is a sacrament of WiIl. To profane it is the great offense. All true expression of it is lawful; all suppression or distortion of it is contrary to the Law of liberty.” —Crowley, The Law is for All
And indeed Crowley believed Mankind was entering a third aeon, after a feminized first and a masculinized second:
“In this aeon the emphasis is on the self or will, not on anything external such as gods and priests.”
Does this sound familiar? Isn’t this exactly what the left is doing by promoting transgenderism?
Of course, Crowley was echoing the sentiments of Frederic Nietzsche, who believed Mankind could essentially transform themselves into gods if they stiffened their will. It should be pointed out that Crowley was a Plymouth-born Puritan who rejected his faith. Strange; the places where Puritans lived - who were extreme killjoys who thought everything was sinful - are today the most leftist parts of America, the most libertine and degenerate. The Puritans rejected a loving God for a fierce judge and their children rejected them. Now many of those children are in the service of the Enemy.
Continued below...
Sex: Spiritually and psychologically destructive
Crowley, and other occultists and sexual libertines of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, was the intellectual heir to Donatien Alphonse François, the Marquis de Sade, whose influence over Western society extends far beyond Fifty Shades of Gray and woman beating. De Sade, a late 18th century and early 19th century philosopher, writer, and pervert extraordinaire, promoted a world that is startlingly modern. He argued:
“Sex’ is as important as eating or drinking and we ought to allow the one appetite to be satisfied with as little restraint or false modesty as the other.”
Which is unquestionably the goal of modern Liberals. Aldous Huxley understood that, which is why sex in his dystopia “Brave New World” was as commonplace as using the bathroom - and was spiritually and psychologically destructive. Huxley understood that the goal of a desacralized sex would turn people into hunk of meat, mere things. Making people into things is a vital component of Leftism, which seeks to transform the world into a tyranny of “philosopher king” style elites. People have to be broken, much like a horse, and willing to accept the saddle and bridle. Sex is a huge part of this mission, and it is done by opening the sexual spigot and pouring out the spiritual essence. The Family - the fundamental social unit - will thus be destroyed. We’ve seen that with the modern “blended family” and it will only accelerate as free wheeling sex becomes the norm, and as sexual roles are mixed together.
De Sade also said:
“Never lose sight of the fact that all human felicity lies in man’s imagination, and that he cannot think to attain it unless he heeds all his caprices. The most fortunate of persons is he who has the most means to satisfy his vagaries.”
And
“I assumed that everything must yield to me, that the entire universe had to flatter my whims, and that I had the right to satisfy them at will.”
also
“You say that my way of thinking cannot be tolerated? What of it? The man who alters his way of thinking to suit othere is a fool. My way of thinking is the result of my reflections. It is part of my inner being, the way I am made. I do not contradict them, and would not even if I wished to. For my system, which you disapprove of is also my greatest comfort in life, the source of all my happiness -it means more to me than my life itself.”
In point of fact De Sade had a profound influence on many later thinkers, including Jean Paul Sartre and Sigmund Freud, Picasso, Salvador Dali, even Alfred Hitchcock and was the father of the “Free Love” movement, the harlot mother of the Sexual Revolution.
De Sade had some other gems. He stated;
“All universal moral principles are idle fancies.”
As Francois Du Plesse Gray, De Sade’s biographer noted:
“More horrifying were the attempts to desecrate the Host in sexual acts. One prostitute was forced to listen to Sade’s frenzied arguments against the existence of God over the course of a long night. As news got out, Sade became a hate figure for the press, and was found guilty by public opinion.[...]Sade’s distress at his confinement, combined with his sense of entitlement, sexual peculiarities, hatred of religion and an obsession with numerology, gave rise to his precisely ordered fantasies of lust, omnipotence, cruelty and revenge – fantasies that some argue prefigure Nazism.[...]In many ways, Sade was a startlingly modern thinker. He despised the notion that women were merely vessels for procreation and celebrated their orgasmic potential. His laying bare of institutional misogyny made him a paradoxical hero for some feminists. Angela Carter wrote a book on him called The Sadeian Woman.Sade’s notions about the ungovernable violence lying at the core of civilised society, prefigured psychoanalysis (Sade himself does seem stuck at Freud’s anal phase of development). The rise of the internet troll bears out his most pessimistic thoughts about the veneer of public civility, though Sade at least was never afraid to have his name associated with his vilest imaginings”
De Sade was also a virulent hater of the Jews, it should be pointed out, and yet both De Sade and his Mini Me Leopold von Sacher-Masoch would be ardent advocates of Women’s rights, something that, in my view, had nothing at all to do with rights but rather with twisting both men and women into deformed shapes, changing the fundamental relationship between men and women and destroying the traditional sexual roles. (To beat or be beaten by one’s lover is not a natural act.)
Of course, if one sees oneself as a god, then it is not just permissible, nay it is absolutely necessary, that you rebel against norms and standards of conduct. You have to establish your own, lest you not be the self-willed deity that you have coronated yourself to be.
Historian Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn argues in Leftism: From de Sade and Marx to Hitler and Marcuse that De Sade is, in many ways, the father of the modern era, a most influential force in the creation of the dystopic world in which we live-In many ways he’s right. This ties directly to the Potty Peril argument about transvestites using women’s bathrooms; it is about a fundamental redefinition of who we are as a People, what we believe, and where we are taking our society.
So what’s the point? As the Bible says “God made them male and female” and “...the effeminate… shall not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven” but our modern Liberal masters now deny this, and worse, impose it on our persons. There is little in this world more private than the restroom, and assaults of concepts of sexual identity and modesty - the keys to a healthy sexuality - are intended not to promote freedom but to create chaos both outside and within the individual.
This is the revenge of the Pagan and the Satanist.
It is clearly intentional, too. Part of the Progressive strategy is to use the techniques employed by the military and by cults to brainwash the public, and they have had a large measure of success.
The military uses psychological techniques to reprogram recruits to get them to act in ways counterintuitive of nature. These techniques include verbal abuse, isolation, changes in appearance, physical and psychological distractions, dietary manipulation, and attacks from multiple directions. Cults use these tactics, too, and often impose a sexual component; the Moonies marry off their neophytes to strangers, often ones who do not even speak the same language. As psychological warfare goes, nudity and shame have a powerful impact, and the violation of the bathroom, the locker room, the shower and general modesty is intentional. The Left verbally abuses any who disagree with them. The liberals push anything that breaks the bonds of family and culture; the so-called “generation gap” was an artificial construct, with the Progressives promoting alternative music and culture as a way to split children from their parents (we know it was artificial; the Payolla Scandals, where radio stations were being paid to play rock music, shows how important this new generational split was to some wealthy people.) You have multiculturalism, which isolates the mainstream, indeed, makes it where there is no mainstream. You have radical changes in fashion, in hair styles, etc. that are promoted in the pop culture. Tattoos, body piercings etc. Mrs. Obama’s “let’s move” campaign is an example of an effort to get people over involved in athletics and exercise, and when they aren’t running about they are busy wearing their thumbs to the nub with texting. Of course there has been a huge push to fundamentally transform the American diet. Mo has the kids in schools eating swill barnyard pigs would reject. And the last? Transgenderism is just one of many attacks from multiple directions, all at once, all aimed at making us despair and surrender our will.
So does everyone finally understand why it is so important to that we should be willing to die on this hill? This is a full frontal assault by neopagans and atheists, with the ultimate intention of destroying our fundamental beliefs and way of life, with the purpose of crushing will to resist them. Yes it is worth the fight. If it weren’t, why would the Progressives be fighting it? They know it is important otherwise THEY would be unwilling to die on this hill. They have pulled in their horns in the past; Hillarycare, women in combat, gays in the military, etc. and have bided their time, waiting for their chance. They have gotten most of this (and hurt America terribly in the process) as we have become less vigilant. If we push back hard enough they will withdraw. But we have to stop this nonsense of surrendering the field without a fight.
This is a battle to the death for the soul of America.
No comments:
Post a Comment