90% of unborn children diagnosed in pre-natal tests revealing downs syndrome are aborted. To suggest that the fate of unborn children with the 'high risk gene' showing the likely sexuality of the unborn child would be vastly different is to underestimate precisely what it was that drove the British Eugenics Society and their ilk to long for days such as this. Let's get this 'straight'. Both Margaret Sanger and Marie Stopes had no time for homosexuals. Zero time. The 'great eugenicist thinkers' still lauded today, like Bertrand Russell and the other elites of the Royal Society were not into the homosexual thing at all. They wanted and many still do want a utopia - a perfect society formed by an elite vanguard.
As Catholics we hold that all human life is sacred. All human life is made in the image and likeness of God. Whether such a 'gene' exists will, no doubt, become a matter of faith, rather than science. It doesn't really matter whether it genuinely exists or not since the science will remain dubious. What matters is that the scientific high priests can say that it does exist and the people will believe them.
Going by the writers and members of the British Eugenics Society and their chief obsessions I would tentatively suggest that they wouldn't be looking for the 'gay gene' if they didn't think it was worth worrying about. They are not doing these experiments 'just to find out'. If I had to make a guess, I would tentatively suggest that gays do not get a free pass into the Brave New World. We know what screening and pre-natal tests means for unborn children diagnosed with downs syndrome. It means death before seeing the light of day.
"Vee are only looking during zee experiments to see vezzer zees genes exist ya? Zer is nothing to vurry about. Move along now, zer is nussing to see here!"
10 comments:
Thank you for this timely peace. Today's eugenicists use 'health and choice' as their watchwords. The late-nineteenth and early-twentieth century British eugenicists appealed to concepts of 'race and nation'. But the agenda is the same: elimination the 'degenerate' - i.e those who do not conform to the eugenic vision of 'human perfection'.
So-called 'progressives' appear oblivious to where this leads.
Bob Hayes
'scuse my happy little comment.
I do wish people would realise that offending God Almighty is bad, and homosexual acts and agendas, like all that comes from the spirit of fornication (libera nos, Jesu), offends God. And clergy who pacify sinfulness offends God, and misleads souls, and diminishes Grace.
the sort of arrogance it would take to mislead souls, thinking it can be done with impunity:
http://veneremurcernui.wordpress.com/2013/03/25/anibale-bugnini-prime-architect-of-the-novus-ordo-also-wanted-to-wreck-the-rosary/
The worry is not that they belong there but rather that they are the only people left in it. If there's a gay gene, there's a heterosexual one too... But sooner or later (give it two or three hundred years) and the work of rebuilding civilisation should be well under way - lead by that small remnant who never bought into the idea that there was such a thing as 'sexuality'. By then the hyper nominalism of today will have been replaced by a more balanced philosophy. Gradually, people who think will come to see such jargon for what it is - claptrap in the service of globalised liberal capitalism (aka the deceiver himself).
If I were a betting man (which in fact, I am), I would bet that the only characteristic of an unborn child that the authorities and 'clinics' would not allow as a reason for abortion is homosexuality. 'It's a girl/he's Downs/She has a facial deformity/ etc. - Don't worry, we can get rid of it'. But - 'He's gay, oh how wonderful. What? You don't want him? How dare you suggest killing him, I am calling the Police, you homophobe'.
A good summary of the latest research into homosexualty...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26089486
It's not so simple as some people here would like to think!
A 'good' summary about the latest 'research' on homosexuality by the BBC? A contradiction in terms, surely. That wouldn't be the same BBC which is soooooooo impartial about assisted suicide, would it? Or sooooooooo impartial about climate change? Or soooooooooo impartial about clerical abuse in the Catholic Church? Impartiality and the BBC go together like oil and water.
- does the latest research take into account the sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance?
does that mean we have to fund a commission for the pooh-pooh to the poor gene? and misunderstood murderers gene? and the bitter old boss, gene? and then will the Pope finally abolish sin? because after, God what? it's all in the genes.
DNA profiling has now advanced to the point that a wide selection of undesirable genes can be identified. It would not be too difficult to screen the entire population and remove everyone with such genes,to improve the overall fitness of populations. This is of course not a new idea, and has been done before, as we all know.
I am suire you are right. The RC Catechism outlaws homophobia. The church does noit laud heterosexuality as such; it lauds marriage between men and women. It is not just the progressives who are undermined by what you say. If those with a gay gene were to be eliminated by abortion, the church would stand by those souls as it does the souls of the disabled.
Post a Comment