(M)oral Sex?

October 19, 2016 in Columnists, News by RBN Staff

The Confusion of Tongues by Gustave Doré (1865)

The Confusion of Tongues by Gustave Doré (1865)

By Je Suis Spike

(Mis)using the Mother Tongue to Destroy The People, Our Standards, Our Culture, Our Land


The perverts keep, (guess what?) perverting the language, our language, American English, the mother tongue of the vast majority of Americans and the rest of those who live here, the language that has united our people.  It’s the language that people coming to America aspired to learn so that they could take their place in our land and begin to join us in- and contribute to- the great experiment started more than 200 years ago, an experiment in liberty of individuals.  This liberty benefits from the diversity of the people who live here, but only as we unite in a common language and culture so that we can unite in the purpose of individual liberty with individual initiative animating many millions of people improving life for all of us.

The perverts change words to change the way decent people view perverts and their perversions and also other acts foisted upon us against our will.  “Homosexual” becomes “gay,” “taxes” becomes “contributions,” “marriage” goes from a union between  a man and a woman to a union between any two people; (at least it appears limited to only two people at this time and to only people so far but the bestiality crowd is screaming “discrimination!”).   When these people have governmental power over us, there is no telling what might happen. 

The Bible describes this thusly:  When the wicked rule, the people groan.

When you deny that true things are true, terrible things can- and certainly will- come true, plaguing us with the continuation of sexual perversions made “normal” in our land.

YOU MUST FOLLOW THE LOGIC and have the GUTS TO BELIEVE THE TRUTH if you wish to awaken others to hard truths.

I am about to discuss, tangentially, President Clinton’s “oral sex” escapade with Monica Lewinsky and how it has led to people empowering more and more evil.  Yes, I know we’re all tired of it, but THIS TIME IT’S IMPORTANT.
If, as so many defenders of President Clinton maintain, oral sex isn’t sex, then neither can it be incest.  Ok, I warn you, if the premise that oral sex isn’t sex is taken as truth, then the conclusion that oral sex isn’t incest is also true and, that being bad enough, you’re really gonna hate the ramifications of this; this is going to be hard to swal, er, um, uh, oh this is going to be hard to read and accept, but until we start to call out those who would pervert ANYTHING and EVERYTHING in their attempt to rage at God and destroy our land (through our tacit acceptance and inaction), we will continue to suffer what they deserve because, failing to call them out, we protect what they project, we empower what they empower and we deserve what they deserve.  Judgement does begin, after all, at the house of God.

And The Lord DID NOT say that He would heal our land if the wicked changed their ways- but if those (WE) who are called by HIS name change their (OUR) wicked ways and seek His face, He will heal our land.

So, the Clinton lovers, those who have no love of the truth, and the hard-of-thinking should probably leave now, this is going to be hard to write, harder to read and impossible for those who do read it to explain to others without somebody feeling revulsion; I am repulsed just writing about the work of these sick, sinful perverts.  (No, I am not without sin.)

Those people who claim that oral sex isn’t sex are very dangerous people, the sort who deny the most obvious truth.  They’re not dangerous because they’re stupid or because they are willing to support patently, abjectly false positions to protect a Clinton, (and maybe themselves?), they’re dangerous because they teach our children that up is not up, down is not down and, in using government schools to destroy our children’s ability to think logically, they empower the great perversion that the bible warns of; good being called evil and evil being called good. 

The logic below is impeccable, it is inarguably true; it is “textbook” Introductory Logic.

We’re going to utilize a logic convention called a three-part syllo- (you should excuse the expression when speaking of President Clinton) -gism.  The three-part syllogism, among the most elementary of reasoning tools to discover truth, will demonstrate that those who claim oral sex is not sex have an agenda that is not healthy, but perverse.

IF we accept, as the Clinton-protectors have- that, “Oral sex is not sex,”

AND, as anybody with a brain would accept, that “Incest involves sex,”

THEN we MUST accept that “Oral sex cannot be incest.”

Granting that the first two are true, the third is necessarily true.  So, keep in mind that Clinton-protectors who claim that oral sex is not sex MUST- and probably love to- claim that oral sex cannot be incest.

Let us now practice a little valid binary thinking:  In many ways the world can be divided into two groups: Light and Not Light; Here and Not Here;  God and Not God; Water and Not Water; and then there is Sex and Not Sex;  among the things found in the Not Sex group we find bowling, eating Cheerios, shredding paper, reading, writing, arithmetic and, among countless other things, as just proven above by perverted Clinton-protectors, oral sex.  Also, we can divide all things into the two groups Incest and Not Incest.  In the Not Incest group we MUST find oral sex by the logic of the Clinton-protectors.

Grab your barf bag and prepare to be repulsed if you’re not a liberal, Clinton-protecting sort…

This perverse conclusion “oral sex cannot be incest,” given the premises, is inarguable, and I fear for the children who have a parent or a trusted neighbor who believes oral sex is not sex because a man who believes oral sex is not sex would, in his mind, not be committing incest with (his) child(ren) if he got them to engage in oral sex with him.  Might we, in fact, not consider that men who claim oral sex is not sex may just be asserting this perversion to be true just to excuse perverse actions in which they choose to engage?  Of course this is not limited to fathers and children; it could be mothers and children; two (or more) sisters, two (or more) brothers; those not related to each other.  Sure these men might believe they can engage in this behavior without cheating on their wives, but how would they feel to find that their wives are engaging in oral sex with their brothers or their friends, or their brothers AND their friends?  I hesitate to go here for it is the most vial implication that has come to mind, but the liberal perverts have implicitly made the argument that oral sex with minors is not sex.  So how can anybody be prosecuted for a sex crime with a minor if their activity is limited to only oral in nature?  Under the liberal pervertist’s thinking they cannot be prosecuted.

Those who propel the claim that oral sex is not sex are anathema to decency and they empower just the sort of evil described above.  But we have known for quite some time, just by observing the agenda of the pervertists on the left that the “normalization” of all sexual perversions is a goal that they seek, and it sure appears that they shall not waver from attaining the normalization of all of their personal perversions.

The takeaway from this absolutely logically-proven assertion is that:

Clinton-protectors who believe that oral sex isn’t sex implicitly claim they can engage in oral sex with their children or their siblings or anybody else and that it is not immoral.

In fact, by their reasoning, oral sex with their children has all the moral authority of- and is as innocuous as- bowling, eating Cheerios, shredding paper, reading, writing and arithmetic.  These people are undermining our nation as they inflict this and other perversions upon us AND WE LET THEM.

Thank you for getting through this,

I am also repulsed by the perversions they normalize,

Je Suis Spike