Homosexuality might be a life-style choice but family is not

For many years I’ve heard that we shouldn’t judge gays for their life-style choice to be gay. Nowadays the Cultural Marxists seem to be saying that homosexuality isn’t a choice, but people are born that way. I don’t really care either way what the cultural norm on the matter is. The fact is homosexuality is an aberration since a man and a woman who get together can and tend to produce children, gay couples can not. Homosexuality serves no biological purpose (except maybe to prevent overpopulation?). That is not to say homosexuals, or childless couples, are some way inferior as human beings compared to others.

In the traditional sense a man and a woman marry, they have children and start a family. That is the norm, not because of any arbitrary cultural construct, but because of the very practical natural reality of perpetuating the species. The purpose of marriage is to start a family. This is something homosexual couples are not equipped to do, which is why in traditional societies homosexuality has not been praised nor promoted, as their life-style does not perpetuate life. I don’t think homosexuals should be hated for this, certainly their life-style should not be celebrated.

The fact that the upper levels of our world’s governments are actively promoting homosexuality and transgenderism, and that they wish to dismantle the family unit, clearly suggests they wish to limit or eradicate the population. Maybe they merely hate all things natural and want to destroy it, or convert humanity and nature to correspond to their cybernetic dreams.

The family is the natural way for human beings to organize themselves. Marriage is usually the prerequisite for it. I personally don’t really see much need for the religious or bureaucratic rituals that precede marriage, but I do believe in the de-facto marriage of man and woman living together to form a family. The recent gay marriage legislation and media hulabaloo is simply to confuse our view of marriage, which based in biology and nature, not social constructs. There was one Korean guy who married a Japanese dakimakura pillow with picture of an anime girl, and a Japanese guy who married a character from a Nintendo DS game. Any rational adult knows that’s not a real marriage. Homosexual marriage is not that far off from this scenario either, since their “marriage” cannot be the foundation for a family.

I have no problem if gays want to live together, nor do I think the government should stop them from calling their relationship a marriage, but the fact is their marriage cannot be the foundation for a family since they cannot reproduce with each other. It is more of a play-marriage.

Being a musician, gamer, athlete, horticulturist or gay may be a life-style choice. Their main goal is enjoyment. Starting a family is something more serious.


Natural News posted an article about an experiment to turn moths gay to stop them from breeding. Sounds similar to what I said about the social purpose of promoting homosexuality.



2 thoughts on “Homosexuality might be a life-style choice but family is not”

  1. Homosexuality is not a choice. DNA determines from the start what we are going to be like in terms of our intelligence, physical appearance, personality, and sexual characteristics. And contrary to what this author says, also, producing children is not a prerequisite for legally marrying someone. People get married for reasons of companionship, love, security emotionally or financially, for the ability to share their life with another person. We have all known or read about individuals who have become parents , but who have failed miserably in their child-raising practices. Parenting should not be expected from all marrying couples. To say that gay couples should not marry because they cannot biologically produce a child is clearly illogical. I would like to discuss this issue further with those who either agree or disagree with Haukipesukone’s assertions.

    1. Producing children is not the absolute requirement of marriage, but it’s the logical conclusion of marriage. Even if not all married couples, or simply couples, have children that’s the underlying assumption biology and society places upon people. Throughout history “most people” have started a family, and produced offspring. For various reasons some people haven’t done that, such as becoming a monk, being infertile or simply being unable to find a spouse, but they are generally viewed as the exception. For a good reason though, the model for a human being, in most societies, is regarded as someone who gets married and has children. It simply makes sense for the perpetuation of the species to do so.

      Quite frankly I don’t know what makes someone gay, and I doubt you do either. DNA does not simply dictate how you become. For example epigenetics suggests some genes may become activated while others do not.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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