"TRADITIONAL" MARRIAGE or TRUE MARRIAGE?

YOUR CHOICE OF WORDS DOES MATTER!

Aberrosexualist Ideological Propaganda Terms, or Newspeak, Undermine the Pro-Marriage Cause

By New Era Communications Corp., Social Communications Team

Nothing pleases more the enemies of the institution of Marriage, than hoodwinking those defending this institution into undermining it by adding adjectives that bastardize, distort, falsify and relativize it.

Anti-Marriage extremists, or aberrosexualists, understand well the impact of words on the battle’s outcome. They understand that control of words, controls thoughts. Control of thoughts, controls actions. Control of actions, controls the future. This three-fold formula by Italian Communist ideologue Antonio Gramsci is used today by aberrosexualist ideologues to force on society the macabre ideology that pushes the legalization of unhygienic, anatomically incorrect, biologically aberrant sexual behavioral choices.

Several decades ago, when aberrosexualist extremists began their totalitarian assault against traditional Western concepts of human sexuality, monogamous marriage and the family, they started off with the phrase "homosexual marriage." This phrase soon morphed into the ideological propaganda phrase “gay [sic] marriage.” It did not take long for them to develop, through extensive message testing and focus group research, a "new, improved" propaganda phrase: “marriage equality.”

Within months, aberrosexualist partisans throughout the country had substituted the phrase “gay marriage” for the new one: “marriage equality.” Pro-Marriage leaders, however, continue to naively use aberrosexualist ideological propaganda terms, or Newspeak, as well as fail to communicate that marriage comes in only one version: the true one.

Is it any wonder that pro-Marriage leaders across the nation are losing the battle? Is anyone really surprised that important sectors of the pro-Marriage camp are falling under the relentless aberrosexualist ideological propaganda bombardment?

Yet, in light of the legal and political defeats, and the alarming erosion of public support for the institution of Marriage, too many pro-Marriage leaders are in total denial of the immense damage they inflict to their cause by using enemy Newspeak. Incredibly, they refuse to acknowledge that use of enemy Newspeak is central to many of their defeats.

Many pro-Marriage leaders suicidally ignore the important role enemy Newspeak plays in controlling the thoughts that control the actions that ultimately determine the outcome of the war being waged for the heart, mind, and soul of America. Renowned Brazilian intellectual, Prof. Plinio Correa de Oliveira warned that this Newspeak, whether used by Communists of yesteryears or Aberrosexualists of today, invariably results in what he called “unperceived ideological transshipment,” or brainwashing, simply put.

By ignoring their enemy’s rhetorical firepower or Newspeak, pro-Marriage leaders are doomed to defeat before the battle even begins. All modern propaganda wars rely on the astute manipulation of language to rhetorically deceive, disarm, and ultimately destroy the enemy.

Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh understood this well when he said: “We lost the [marriage] issue when we started allowing the word ‘marriage’ to be bastardized and redefined.” Indeed, humanity is ill-served by bastardizing and redefining marriage with adjectives that relativize and trivialize the word. There is no such thing as “hetero marriage,” “gay marriage,” “traditional marriage,” “non-traditional marriage,” “opposite-sex marriage,” or “same-sex marriage.” Marriage is either true or it’s not!

Ideological falsifications of “marriage” undermine the institution’s purpose, corrupt its meaning, and violate its essence. Respect for the institution of Marriage, therefore, demands that no adjective be added to the noun. And should we ever need to distinguish true marriage from its impostors, let’s simply refer to it as true or real marriage. All other adjectives either distort its meaning or muddy the waters.

SEVEN KEY POINTS REGARDING

THE INSTITUTION OF MARRIAGE

1. Gay means delightful, happy, joyful; not aberrosexual or same-sex. All marriages should be gay, but not aberrosexual or same-sex. Marriage requires a husband and a wife. Two men can’t get “married” any more than they can get a hysterectomy. Two women can’t get “married” any more than they can get a prostatectomy.

2. Aberrosexualist extremists, those forcing society to accept biologically aberrant sexual behavioral choices, are not really interested in marriage. Through the flagrant judicial violation of constitutional equal protection, due process and voting rights, aberrosexualists seek to undemocratically force society to accept biologically aberrant sexual behavioral choices, or aberrosexualism, as “normal,” “healthy,” and “sane.”

3. Marriage is either TRUE or FAKE.. There’s really no such thing as “gay [sic] marriage,” “traditional marriage,” “non-traditional marriage,” “opposite-sex marriage,” or “same-sex marriage.’’ Same-sex so-called "marriage" is an ideologically-contrived legal fiction that violates true marriage’s purpose, corrupts true marriage’s meaning, and disrespects true marriage’s essence. Respect for Marriage demands that no adjectives be added to the name.

4. Since the dawn of civilization, the marital embrace, or sexual intercourse, i.e., the penetration of opposite sexual organs*, is required to legally consummate a marriage. Because it’s biologically impossible for two same-sex individuals to have sexual intercourse, or maritally embrace, the ideologically-contrived legal fraud (a fraud created to impose an ideology), of same-sex so-called “marriage” is just that, a fraud and a hoax!

5. In plain English, discrimination means treating unequally those who are equal. In America, marriage license applications never ask anyone’s sexual behavioral choices or preferences. Full marriage equality is a reality in all 50 states as all Americans enjoy the same equal right to marry under the same equal rules and conditions. Can anyone sanely say two men or two women equal one man and one woman? Treating two men or two women differently from one man and one woman can never be discrimination.

6. The institution of Marriage is a matter of public policy, not constitutional law. No U.S. Supreme Court holding, precedent or authority exists to strike down a state’s constitutional or statutory respect for the institution of Marriage as the union of one man and one woman. None! Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito states in United States v. Windsor (12-307), (2013): “same-sex marriage presents a highly emotional and important question of public policy – but not a difficult question of constitutional law.”

7. There is absolutely no constitutional right to same-sex so-called “marriage”. In United States v. Windsor, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito wrote: “The Constitution does not guarantee the right to enter into a same-sex marriage. Indeed, no provision of the Constitution speaks to the issue.” 

* Those that engage in anatomically incorrect, biologically aberrant sexual behavioral choices may argue that penile penetration of another man’s rectum somehow constitutes sexual intercourse. The rectum, however, is not a sexual organ. The rectum is a gastrointestinal organ. Sexual intercourse requires the penetration of opposite sexual organs, not the penetration of the rectum or any other non-sexual organ, object or thing.

Please share this with your relatives, friends, and neighbors.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 REMEMBER 
The truth has never stood in the way of ideological fanatics, any more than reality has ever stood in the way of delusional psychotics.

© 2014 New Era Communications, Inc.