LGBT: Let's Get Behind 'Torum!

As a Santorum supporter, I am commonly asked if I share the candidate’s fear that the legalization of gay "marriage" will lead inexorably to wholesale bestiality and other even more unspeakable perversity. In candour, I do not, but only because the vast majority of Americans now reside in urban and suburban environments in which they rarely encounter the sorts of animals that are good for sex, such as sheep and a couple of the more docile breeds of goat. I do of course accept that once a man has rammed his lubricant-coated procreative organ into another man’s anus, only a fool or so-called progressive would suggest he might have few qualms about ramming it into livestock, just as a woman who has stimulated another woman’s clitoris with her tongue is apt never to look at a stallion in the same way again.

That I don’t believe that homosexuality leads inexorably to bestiality doesn’t mean that I don’t recognise the homosexual's natural promiscuity. We are forever being deluged by stories of so-called gay couples who’ve been together 37 years, since they were sophomores in college, and asked why such a couple isn’t allowed to marry while a secular homosexual like Kim Kardashian or Newt Gingrich is. What’s never mentioned is that over the course of those 37 years, the homosexuals have probably had countless hundreds of affairs between them — not all, as we've seen, with other human beings. Do you suppose they stay at home in the evening, watching Glee with bowlfuls of microwave popcorn? Hardly. They are out dancing to Gloria Gaynor’s I Will Survive at garish discotheques, or wearing different-hued handkerchiefs in their back pockets at leather bars. And on the rare evening that fatigue or illness or lack of cabfare does keep them home, you may be assured it isn’t with popcorn, but with amyl nitrate.

If the homosexual kept his promiscuity to himself, or between him and his countless partners, it would be one thing. But study after study has affirmed that he enjoys nothing more than “turning” a normal Christian young person into a pervert exactly like himself, usually as a way of getting back at the so-called straight world for ridiculing or otherwise bullying him or her in adolescence.

The homosexual commonly prides himself on his taste, but one need look only at his flag to realise that gay tastefulness is an invention of the liberal media; rather than a subtle grey, it garishly contains all colours of the rainbow. Where’s the great tastefulness in being unable to decide on only one, or a complementary pair? When the homosexual does deign to imitate heterosexual style, as during the period when every gay man on earth had short hair and a mustache like Freddie Mercury’s, there’s invariably something palpably ironic about it. The mustache will be rather too carefully trimmed, or the hair too artfully cut. The body odour won’t be the result of honest toil — the homosexual sweats only when at the gym — but a designer fragrance.

You may have heard about something called lipstick lesbians, but the feminine female homosexual too is a creation of the liberal Jewish media. Your genuine lesbian is actually more masculine than most normal heterosexual men, stocky, close-cropped, and with a gait that suggests bellicosity. She enjoys softball and bowling, and reeks of cigarettes and testosterone. She cannot cook or sew, but can plumb. She is no threat to livestock, but for anatomical, and not moral, reasons.

As for the transgendered, it is my belief that no such thing actually exists — though I am of course aware of RuPaul — and that the liberal media dreamed the whole idea up in an attempt to make so-called gays and lesbians seem relatively more palatable. It didn’t work.