Date: 07-02-93 (20:55) To: ALL Subj: DESENSITIZING AMERICA PT1 Conf: (9) Debate The Politi
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 07-02-93 (20:55)
From: STEVE WORLEY
To: ALL
Subj: DESENSITIZING AMERICA PT1 Conf: (9) Debate
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Political Correct Desensitizing of American Morality
An Article Written by A Concerned American
You may define this article as "one man's opinion" or maybe "one crazy
man's opinion" but no matter how you interpret the following, I sincerely
hope it opens up the thought process that God gave you. Why? Because I
believe this country is on the verge of falling prey to "immorality" as
"acceptable behavior" which will eventually destroy the moral fiber which
holds this country together. That moral fiber is known as a belief in "
God."
"Morality" by definition: conformity to the rules of right conduct; moral
or virtuous conduct. 2. moral quality or character. 3. a doctrine or
system of morals. (The Random House College Dictionary, revised ed)
Think about and refer to the above definition of "morality" as you read
through this article. It may help you in understanding what the Political
Corrects and Homosexual Activists are working at redefining.
If you are not taking notice of how the liberal and bias news media,
homosexual activists and the political corrects have been manipulating the
American people into believing falsehoods about homosexual behavior and
the homosexual agenda, you need to be aware of it, providing of course,
you really care about moral values, morality and traditional family values
as Christians and people who firmly believe in God, know them to be.
We could also say many things about the ills of our society. However, one
ill in particular stands out in our nation. That illness in our society
is a commonly referred to special interest group of people known as:
homosexuals. They introduced AIDS into our society, are known carriers of
an assortment of diseases, deal in perversions and degradations uncommon
to a heterosexual populace and mask their immoral behavior patterns with
semantic terminology such as "gay","sexual orientation" and "homophobia."
The media, political corrects and homosexual activists would prefer you
identify them as,"Gays". Why? Well, if we as a nation identify them as
"gay" and proliferate that term throughout our society long enough and
frequent enough as to reflect a normal term for an immoral class of people
which practices perverted behavior as a norm, then society in general will
tend to forget the immoral behavior patterns associated with the identity
of people known as "gays." Thereby, furthering their goals becomes easier.
Sound a little unreal? Think about it. What do you associate with the
term "gay?" Do you think of the behavior of homosexuals, their lifestyle,
political agenda or think them to be an abomination upon humanity?
As long as the news media to include but not limited to liberal and bias
television Talk Shows, National magazines, newspapers and key Politically
Correct so called leaders in government, endorse the "Gay" approach, the
more people will be fooled by this sanitization of immorality. Americans
in general are experiencing a desensitized association of not only immoral
homosexual behavior to just its opposite, moral behavior. They are also
experiencing a redefinition of what is considered to be moral behavior as
opposed to immoral behavior.
Case in point. January 1993. For some of us I believe, we heard the term
"Sexual Orientation" originate from within the Oval Office of the White
House. This term was used and has been used extensively in reference to
"homosexuals" and the President's quest to lift the ban on homosexuals in
the armed forces. The logic here is not to make you believe the Armed
Forces has high moral standards and a Uniform Code of Military Justice,
which are necessary components in order to uphold the high standards of
morale, discipline and esprit de corps within its internal structure.
It is to make you tend to believe the Armed Forces discriminates based
upon ones sexuality. When most people tend to associate ones sexuality
with gender (male -female) the Political Corrects threw out the term
"sexual orientation." (Sounds as if one had to enroll in a class at some
school for indoctrination into ones sexual being!) Homosexuals therefore
became armed with semantic terminology in order to justify their immoral
behavior and raise the issue of "discrimination."
Fact is, the Armed Services are very selective and have high moral
standards of conduct. Homosexuality has been defined by the society it
resides in, to be "immoral behavior" otherwise there would not be laws
against it. To accept homosexuals into the Armed Forces would then
advocate (accept) the "immoral behavior"as "moral behavior." Thus a
lowering of moral standards within the Armed Services would occur.
However, the subject of "morality" is not a preferred topic of discussion
for homosexual activists, political corrects or the news media in general
if it is militarily related.
Why not? Think about it. If any special interest group declares the
Armed Forces "discriminates" based upon "sexual orientation" it is allot
easier to convince the American people that there is a "civil rights"
issue, than there would be should the same group declare that the high
moral values of the Armed Forces prevented homosexuals from entering a
branch of military service.
If that were the case, then the issue would not only be what is morally
correct for the Armed Forces but what is also morally correct for the
nation it serves. Morality would then be the issue before the public, not
discrimination. And the government would then be forced to redefine
"morality" for its people. Considering the Christian populace in this
country, I can see where the Political Corrects do not want or raise the
issue of "morality."
However, should the ban be lifted on homosexuals in the military, our
government Political Corrects will be telling its people that
homosexuality and the associated behavior of its class is acceptable by
the United States Government. Acceptance of homosexuals into the Armed
Forces will not only be an acknowledgment by our government that
homosexuality is an acceptable alternate lifestyle, it will generate a
redefinition of morality throughout the Armed Services. This will be
accomplished by desensitizing moral behavior for that of sanitizing the
immoral behavior of homosexuals.
This concept will force the rest of our society to eventually redefine its
moral values to coincide with those of the political corrects within our
government and the homosexual populace. In other words, white wash the
behavior through the desensitizing process, let's use the military as a
starting point and if successful, the rest of society will have little
recourse except to fall in line.
As the target is presently the military environment, once it has been
reached by these homosexual activists with government endorsement, then
their agenda to integrate homosexuality lifestyle philosophy into other
closed environments such as school classrooms across the country, will be
allot easier to accomplish. The Political Corrects know this will occur
and it is part of the homosexual agenda.
Sound far fetched? Not really, because there can't be a dual set of
morality definitions i.e. one for the Armed Forces and one for the
society it serves. That is like saying, society will condone the immoral
behavior of homosexuals, however within the confines of a military
installation, immoral behavior will not be condoned or perhaps the just
the opposite will true. No matter how you look at it, morality (moral
behavior) will be redefined to suit its environment. Only in this case,
the Political Corrects have chosen the environment of the military to
experiment with "immorality" disguised as a "civil rights" issue.
Are we to lower the moral standards of the Armed Forces and not the moral
values of the society in which it serves? There are currently 26 states
which have laws against homosexuality and associated perverted homosexual
practices. Are those states mentioned to succeed from the Union in order
to maintain morality laws? Not hardly. However and not to be overlooked
are probable "forced changes" through Liberal Supreme Court rulings that
State Statutes which outlaw homosexuality practices, will be declared
unconstitutional?
Thus "morality" will be redefined to include the "immoral behavior" of
homosexuals.
Of course, this is just one man's opinion or is it a "crazy man's"
opinion...
You decide.
*The End*
==========================================================================
From: C. J. Henshaw Kill
To: All Msg #442, 14-Jul-93 10:52pm
Subject: THE LAST HURRAH - !CROSSPOST!
Hello All!
Remember that "Desensitizing of America" post that someon forwarded here a
few days ago? Well here's the form letter that Biggot Worley sent out as a
reply to most arguments: Read and laugh, or cry.
=============================================================================
* Forwarded by C. J. Henshaw (1:250/820)
* Area : DEBATE (DEBATE Conference)
* From : Steve Worley, 1:147/20 (Monday July 12 1993 14:25)
* To : All
* Subj : THE LAST HURRAH
=============================================================================
Psychology: the science of the mind or of mental states and processes.
This message goes out to all who responded to the posting of an article
entitled "The Desensitizing of America."
The responses I received were 99.9% negative in nature. In addition, the
same percentage of responses were all from that of homosexuals, bisexuals,
lesbians, transvestites, pagans, satanic and idol worshipers. One person
was so kind that he corrected all the grammatical errors of the article
and sent it back to me. Such thoughtfulness. Above all else, I just
can't express my gratitude enough to the weirdo who was in love with and
married to his horse. His response was a real work of art!
Some of you decided to try and convince me of your chosen lifestyles which
advocate practice of deviate sexual behavior, are moral lifestyles. Also,
there were those of you who advocate homosexual equal rights. However no
one ever bothered to explain moral justification of homosexual behavior.
Nor did I receive voluntary input on homosexual lifestyle teaching to
preschool children as is advocated by the Rainbow Coalition League. Did
receive plenty of rhetoric which did not substantiate the integration of
homosexual lifestyle philosophy into the public school systems across
this country.
There were those of you who decided that since I posted a controversial
article, it was neccesary to label me as a bigot, homophobic, ignorant
religious fundamentalist and other words to generate arguments. Did you
see my name on the article? Answer: no. Did anyone ever stop to consider
that perhaps the article was generated by someone other than myself?
Answer: no. If you had taken offense to anticipated rebuttals, who was to
blame...
As for the article, it was posted to generate information. Your responses
were greatly appreciated. Unfortunately, most of you who responded
assumed the article was written as a direct insult upon your moral
character. It was also misinterpreted as a declaration of morality by
definition. As far as my responses to your inputs, they were also meant
to generate information. Again, my responses to yours were what was
expected, were they not? Did you forget if you can't see the forest for
the trees, don't enter the forest?
From a personal standpoint I vehemently oppose homosexuality in every
sense of its definition. I object to the promotion of homosexuality as an
acceptable alternate lifestyle. Therefore, I will continue to legislate
against the homosexual agenda. Politicians who advocate support for the
homosexual agenda as well as those who identify with the anti-christian
concept of political correctness will also receive my nonsupport.
If you feel this is bigotry, homophobia and or discrimination, so be it.
Remember, millions upon millions of Americans do not accept homosexual
philosophy and they represent the moral majority of this country.
Lastly, there is no need to submit replies to this message or prior posts
in reference to the article. The subject is closed. Your replies will
not be answered. It will be a waste of your time. Thanks again for all
the responses. Rest assured your prior replies will be used in a
professional and literary manner.
==========================================================================
* Origin: Wanted: Pat Robertson, for crimes against humatity (1:250/820)
E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank