Gays and ‘marriage’

According to the newspapers (!), the politically correct (pc) brigade - what an odd term, I prefer simply being manipulated as it’s a bit more honest - has decided that ‘marriage’ should be renamed ‘ceremony’ at registery offices so that gays (homosexuals) are not offended. I find the ethic... OFFENSIVE. It is irritating that this ‘pc’ crew of idiots (whoever these faceless people are that make these decisions) can attempt to influence my thinking.

There is clearly a long term effort to subvert long standing conventions. Most people end up in prison for subversion. Not this bunch: downplay marriage, remove tax advantages, allow adoption by homosexual couples and so raise children in a distorted environment as the new ‘natural’. Normality. The norm. If people choose same sex ‘marriage‘ that is their choice. I don’t want my choices restricted by pandering to minority groups (they still are I believe).

You see how it happens: the law was changed to allow same sex marriage. THEN the term was altered from ‘marriage’ to ‘ceremony’, but only afterwards. Imagine trying to introduce it any other way. It’s insidious. Nasty.

Procreation requires male/female to mate - we are after all simply a different sentient animal species: humans, orangutans and chimpanzees are the only three species on Earth to be selfaware (like it or not we are related and that doesn’t bother me) - so that’s why I term it natural. I have no political motivation. That’s so dull and boring. I don’t feel that I am on a powered ego trip. Straightforward genetics. In a Darwinian sense, I would select an orangutan or chimpanzee as a friend over some humans I know, or know of, certainly. I choose my friends selectively like most of us.

What these people would presumably prefer is parthenogenesis. Like the aphid that procreates without sex. The hermaphrodite: the boy and girl in the same pair of trousers (thanks to Phil Collins, ex Genesis - sad day when these guys disbanded - for that quote).