Previous Page/Table Of ContentsNext Page



B . Comments On Various Social Phenomena

The suggestions made in this book are clearly designed to address various social ills which we seemingly perceive as "wrong." This Section is intended to comment on some of the phenomena which should be altered in some respect if this plan is actually implemented to some great degree.

I must state that moral condemnation of gays and lesbians is the height of moral hypocrisy because these individuals are a natural product of an environment which our society created. If society chooses to foster same-sex relationships from birth, it should not be surprised that many adults decide that they are "gay" or "lesbian" in their sexual orientation. The vast majority of gay and lesbian individuals state that they knew they were "different" from some time in late childhood. One gay man I saw interviewed on television stated that he knew he was gay when, as a twelve year old sixth grader, he found himself strongly attracted to a fifth grade boy.
Whether homosexuality is an entirely learned behavior pattern, or whether there is some genetic and/or biological predisposition towards homosexuality, such as exists for left-handedness (which is sometimes now seen as a result of a difficult labor), is a subject for science to resolve if society wishes it to be resolved. What is absolutely clear is that homosexuality is a learned behavior pattern. If there is a genetic component, it will not be brought out if the behavior pattern is not learned.
Clearly, homosexual behavior is anti-survival for the race as a whole. If "everybody did it," humanity would die out in one generation. A small percentage of gay and lesbian individuals can be tolerated, particularly when we are over-populated in the first place, without impacting racial survival. If homosexuality becomes the majority sexual orientation, without altering any other aspect of society (such as fertility rates), it would essentially halve our population with every generation because only half of the population would form breeding pairs of humans. The desire for racial survival is deeply inbred into all species, and I believe that this desire manifests itself in mankind as a repugnance towards the idea of homosexuality. Accordingly, when we fight against discrimination for the gay and lesbian community, we are opposing a force which is very deeply inbred into all of us. We just need to recognize this, so that we are not unarmed as we enter the battle. The major opposition to homosexuality comes from the Christian church, and is in essence based upon scriptures which pre-date Christ by several centuries and which are generally being misinterpreted by the Christians. It is highly doubtful that the authors of the Old Testament could have ever even entertained the concept of homosexuality existing openly in society, so they just condemned it in vague terms, as they condemned many other unhealthy practices of the time, such as eating pork.
Modern public health concepts understand the dangers of pork as a potential food, and we train ourselves to deal with those dangers in properly preparing pork to be eaten. Accordingly, it is no longer necessary to condemn the eating of pork in order to ensure that we have a healthy society. Similarly, we understand the dangers of homosexuality becoming a majority behavior pattern. While we have not yet acted to protect ourselves from that occurring, the necessary acts are embodied within the teachings I present in this book. Thus, it is no longer necessary to condemn homosexuality in order to protect our society from the consequences of homosexuality becoming widespread. We only need to ensure that our children are raised to prefer relationships with members of the opposite sex as opposed to raising our children to prefer relationships with members of the same sex. While the necessary changes may be vast, I do believe most people will see that one of the side effects of making those changes will be a reduction in the number of homosexuals produced by our society.
Accordingly, the bottom line on gays and lesbians is that they are humans too; let them have their rights. And if we are upset by the large numbers of them in our society, and we should be (for reasons of racial survival), we must begin by blaming ourselves for raising our children to be homosexual. It is not the fault of homosexuals for being gay or lesbian; it is our fault for making them that way. Homosexuality is thus a symptom of a sick society, and when seen in that fashion, it is obvious that we must not bother ourselves with treating only the symptom; we must aggressively treat the disease. The "disease" in this case is the way that we raise our children; meaning (in this case) the way that we raise our children to prefer same sex relationships. When we begin to raise our children to prefer opposite sex relationships, homosexuality will all but disappear.

A "gang" is simply one form of social organism. In most cases, any such social organism which can properly be called a "gang" is, almost by definition, a "sick" social organism. The formation of gangs by young people is yet another symptom of a great sickness in our society. Yet again, we must try to treat the underlying illness, not merely the symptom itself. We must address the reasons gangs form if we ever hope to eliminate their existence.
Gangs form because of several factors: 1) a failure to provide sufficient moral indoctrination to our young; 2) a lack of alternative social organizations for our young; 3) a breakdown in our families and neighborhoods as the principal source of social "togetherness" for our young; 4) the ingrained preference in our society for same-sex relationships; and 5) the tremendous strength of "peer pressure" as a motivational factor.
The prescription of the Christian "Right" is to increase penalties and the jailing of those who do run afoul of the law, force moral indoctrination into our public schools (in the form of disguised religious training of various sorts), and to cut the amount of governmental funds for social programs specifically designed to attack some of the more obvious factors stated above, such as the lack of alternative social organizations for the young. It ought to be intuitively obvious to the most casual observer that this "prescription" is a recipe for failure because: 1) you cannot force feed religions training down the throats of our young, no matter how you might disguise it as part of our school's basic curriculum; 2) cutting funding for alternative social organizations will only exacerbate the lack of such organizations, thus tending to make the problem worse rather than better; 3) jails and prisons tend to exacerbate the crime problem because they are essentially used by many of the incarcerated criminals as a means to "cross train" for other types of crime; and 4) this "prescription" does nothing at all to attack the root of the gang problem, which again lies in the way our families raise our children.
The presence of a gang is almost the definition of a "bad neighborhood" in which to live. Many inner city neighborhoods would be fairly nice places to live if the gangs could be removed from the streets in a wink of an eye. Because belonging to a gang is seen by its members as virtually a license to commit crimes, there is a very strong association between the presence of gang members and the level of crime in any given neighborhood. Since dealing drugs is a lucrative source of revenue, and since the gangs are well positioned to control what goes on in the streets of the neighborhood, there also tends to be a strong correlation between the presence of gangs and the presence of drugs in any given neighborhood. The combination of drugs and money leads to "turf wars" between various rival gangs; and those "turf wars" lead, in turn, to drive-by shootings and many other obvious social ills which we all decry.
Once a child joins a gang, that child enters a school for antisocial behavior which virtually eliminates the ability of parents, church, or school to train the child otherwise. Accordingly, the first step to combating gangs is to prevent the gangs from gaining new members. This is an extremely difficult goal to meet in areas which are already infested with gang culture because of the very natural peer pressure to "be just like" the older kids in the neighborhood. But we must find an answer to this problem.
We must cause our youngest children to despise gangs and the gang culture which pervades our neighborhoods. Most people will not join organizations which they despise. We have a long track record in training people to hate one another. This experience can be put to good use by training our youngest children to despise gangs and their members in the same way we have trained them to despise other groups of people and their individual members. If we cut off the source of young members in this way, the gangs will eventually disappear from our streets as the gang members age and die. Because it is mostly gang members in an age group which is about fifteen years wide, from youngest to oldest, which commits the vast majority of gang-related criminal acts, it would only take about fifteen years of preventing new gang members from joining before the bulk of the ill effects would disappear.
However, we must be cognizant of the fact that "nature abhors a vacuum."4 We cannot expect our youngest children to choose "nothing" in preference to a "gang." We must provide an alternative to gang membership. In essence, all right-thinking members of human society must form a rival gang which is, at the instant of its formation, the largest gang known to mankind, because it consists of the vast majority of humanity.
Younger children quite naturally idolize older children and adults outside of their own families. Inside their own families is the familiarity which breeds contempt.5 Thus, for us to form an alternative social organization to a "gang" we must focus on something which is outside of the immediate family, but still so localized as to be attractive to, and easy to join for, our youngest children.
Traditional rural communities fulfilled that mission simply by the nature of the rural community itself. In other words, the alternative to a gang for a rural community was the very rural community itself. This concept manifests itself in many a "B" movie where the plot is a battle between a gang of criminals and the local residents. It is truly unfortunate that the formation of cities, and the devolution of cities into suburban sprawl, has led to the disintegration of the automatic feelings of community which formed in any rural population. One of the missions of the proposed altered value system is then to restore this feeling of community in spite of dwellings which exist in an area of suburban sprawl. Accordingly, we give new meaning to the term "community involvement" and require such activity as a part of all individuals who live in any given community. We simply cannot afford for large numbers of families to be uninvolved in their communities.


4 This statement is attributed to Benedict [Baruch] de Spinoza (1632-1677), Ethics, 1677, Part I, proposition, 15:note.

5 The familiar phrase, "familiarity breeds contempt," is from Aesop (fl. c. 550 b. c.), The Fox and the Lion.

Copyright 1994-1999 by the Agnostic Church

Please send us your feedback!

Previous Page/Table Of ContentsNext Page