The Sodoma Experiment, Part II: “Telegraph” Not Much Better Than Dame Elton

 

What this blog post is about.

I have written only yesterday about the extraordinary times we live in; times when an old pervert who, together with his perverted (er, what….. mistress?) decides to have a new and unusual toy can easily “rent a uterus” and, through the help of sperm of not yet revealed origin, provide to what he probably calls “procreation” and certainly “fatherhood”.

Today, the “Telegraph” has an additional article about that. The article shows at the same time the pit in which the “Telegraph” has descended, the indifference to perversion of its journalists and more broadly the indifference with which vast parts of society – even among those calling themselves “conservative” – looks at abominations of this sort before happily moving back to the enjoyment of Cheryl Cole’s secondary sexual characteristics.

The article’s position first. It is in the “celebrities” section of the Telegraph’s “news” internet presence. From this we infer that a) the “Telegraph” finds it necessary to have a “celebrity” section, and b) the “Telegraph” considers celebrity gossip “news”. Not many years ago such rubbish would have been considered something for the working classes; which, by the way, is still the case.

The content of the article is also revealing. Elton John’s childishness is heavily criticised, his decadent habits utterly (and, I must say, rather amusingly) exposed. Still, not one word about his perversion, the scandal he gives, the monstrosity of men “adopting”. Yes, the sperm-uterus-concoction used in this case does cause a certain discomfort, but I fail to detect any moral message in that. Basically, the fact that the man buys a tram and has it shipped through a couple of oceans is seen as morally reprehensible, the fact that he is an openly homosexual old perv living with his concubine isn’t.

So much so, that the article’s author considers clearly reprehensible that an Ukrainian child suffering from Aids could not be adopted by the “couple”. How backwards, these Ukrainians who continue to insist on a family being….. a family! “With a rubber stamp, a small boy’s life chances were crushed”, says Ms. Woods in an emotionally charged, X-Factor-cum-Dickens moment….. (I failed to cry, though. It must be me).

What? Crushed because the poor child has not been adopted by….. a couple of homos? What “adoption” is this? What “family” is this? And for Heaven’s sake let us set aside the donations. Donations don’t buy one the right to be above the Law and I am rather pleased that the Ukraine showed more integrity than Madonna’s Malawi (or whichever other tin-pot African post-colonial disaster it was).

So there we are: two homos go around a) trying to adopt children and – failing that – b) proceed to hire alien uteruses (and perhaps even sperm; who knows, they might have quarrelled about who is “the father” and I really wouldn’t want to see two aged homos in a kitchen fight…..) and the “Telegraph”‘s journalist doesn’t criticise the obvious monstrosity of all this, but merely the infantile, ego-driven, diva-like character of one of the two (good Lord, there we are again…) “fathers”.

Sometimes I have the impression that just as we speak, up above dear old Abraham is haggling with God again, trying to spare us the angel’s visit…….

Mundabor

Posted on December 30, 2010, in Catholicism and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 6 Comments.

    • Only read the first part, Shane.
      I think it is a mixture of right ideas and intellectualist impure acts. I always mistrust people who see the working of democracies in the light of something external to them (the government need to fuel consumption, or such like). This is just conspiracy theory by another name. I also do not approve of those seeing a “process” going back to the first three idiots who said something.
      The decadence of the West began really in the Sixties, not before. It didn’t have anything to do with consumerism (which has always existed, there was just less money around) and it spread because the silent majority had lost the gut of defending their values even of they largely didn’t approve of the new ones. We see this even today. The idea that abortion or homosexuality have anything to do with, say, the new deal is preposterous.

      Still, very interesting and with a brilliant, lucid description of Christian societies at the beginning.

      M

  1. Hi, Mundabor,

    Things are as fetid here in Salt Lake City. The local Tribune, thanks to an Associated Press wire, ran a gushing story about the ol’ pervert’s status as a new father. I felt sick and very saddened at the same time. Imagine taking an innocent little newborn boy from the bosom of his mother and handing him over to two frickin’ perverts.
    There is so much sin involved in this scenario I can’t even began to contemplate the network of “players” here. First there is the woman who is inseminating herself with sperm obtained via masturbation. It is not even the sperm of the man she loves. Very likely, the person delivering obstetrical care is probably very approving of the “rent-a-uterus” approach. The workers at the hospital likely know the fate of the newborn and are probably gushing that this is “Elton John’s new son”. The lawyers for all parties, the people reporting, the massess approving….How many of them would want to have been adopted by two old Queens? It’s okay for this wee child, however. Yes, he will be cared for “materially”. But what of a mother’s love?, a wholesome role model in a loving “Dad”, siblings? Why doesn’t this little fellow have a shot at all that. All for the selfish whims of a lot of selfish adults.

  2. The DT had a series of comments from readers below the article, and the natural gack factor had kicked in for everyone responding. Even atheists were passing the chunder bucket. It was so interesting to see how quickly all of them were deleted.

    • Not sure I understand everything you say Nigella (“gack factor” and “chunder bucket” got in the way I’m afraid 😉 ), but if you mean that the “Telegraph” PC-Polizei has Gestapo-efficiency, I don’t doubt it in the least 😉

      M

%d bloggers like this: