Tuesday, 24 April 2012

Voting NO to JFK

I never thought I would bitterly regret my YES vote for JFK in 1960. I couldn’t even laugh at the cartoon of an older man leading a young lady inside to the tune of “Don’t ask what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your president!” (The International Herald Tribune, March 15, 2012, p.7.) The sedulous seduction was appalling enough, but JFK’s supervising a blow job on his own whoremaster staggers belief.

That is hubris of an unforgiveable degradation.

I say this as an ex-Catholic who has come to believe that the true cause of my deplorable divorce after only twenty years derived from both our parents’ sexually dysfunctional Catholic marriages: My father fled to Las Vegas with his secretary when I was three and my only sibling Mike, ten. His birth came promptly nine months after my father returned from the AEF in France in1919 to my virgin mother.

And my first wife’s father died an abusive drunk not too long after spending time in Jackson State Prison for fiscal shenanigans in the Detroit Mayor Reading’s administration. Notice neither too much sex (in France) or too little sex in Detroit are confronted only by a Catholic intimate “education” in the confessional. I laugh bitterly decades after fatuous counsel in my adolescent confessions.

Celibates are bad enough when they know nothing. They are abominable when pedaphilic. The same ignorant celibate “authorities” who pontificate from their bishoprics about the evil of contraception have been suppressing the evil corruption of innocent young children by “celibate” corruptors. It makes you want to believe in hell.

In Fareed Zacharia’s indispensable “Global Public Square” (CNN, Sundays 9:00 am. EST) for April Fools Day, four diverse voices explored the sexual complexities of the 2012 election. (See their podcast at www.CNN.org/Fareed Zacharia.) JFK’s famous Houston speech to Baptist preachers is exposed for the doubletalk that it was. Catholic doctrine holds that condoms and day after pills are “murder”, diverse interruptions of Nature. And we learn that Roger Williams was protecting minority religions against a manipulating state.

Today we are being asked by believers who argue their diverse religions can all contravene the state. The separation of Church and State has been turned upside down. The sanest voice in this discourse was Charles Murray’s, who deplores the way the 1960’s have destroyed a culture of maturity among the working classes. One person can be either heroic or hellish in the raising of children. And he urges the upper middle classes to Preach What They Practice!

No comments: