SSM: THE 'GOD' POINT OF VIEW

Dear Editor,

As a society, we have been swamped with a permissive 'world' point of view. But what might be God's point of view of same-sex relations, the Creator of sexuality and the whole Symphonic Cosmic Creation?

Are we to conclude that in His design of the sexes, that when He designed the male gender that He had another male in mind? Or that, when He designed the female gender, He had another female in mind? How is it possible that such ludicrous propositions could be attributed to the Mind of the Divinity? Physically, they simply do not work!

Is it NOT self-evident, and unarguably true, that each of the two sexes was designed with the other in mind, and that they together comprise a unitive procreative complementary relationship capable of generating a child in their own image? How is this not a clear discernment of the mind and will of God? This is the true magic and nature of sexuality properly ordered.

How then, may naturally sterile sexual relationships which are contrary to the right order of nature, ever be deemed to be rightly ordered, normal and of status equal to natural marriage and compliant with the Mind of God?

How could a truly rational mind be rightly exercising its capacity for right-reason, when it claims normality and 'equality' for relationships so patently contrary to the Divine Mind as expressed in His complementary design for the right use of our sexual faculties? Such minds, which openly conflict with the Divine Mind, challenge the rationality of the whole human society with their irrational challenge to every individual person's capacity for right-reason.

Why can't media members, who have provided huge platform to the case for approval of the erroneous nature of same-sex relationships, find 'equal' space for unedited, clear rebuttals of their fundamentally false and deviant propositions?

Just note, for example, the number of high profile politicians and other public figures and business organisations who have loudly capitulated to the lie that these deviant practices have moral validity. Shamelessly, they lend their voices to the call for our parliaments to give legal sanction to practices at patent odds with Natural Law. They fail to recognise that any such contrived 'law' could never be a true law, but only a corruption of law in its rejection of Natural Law.

With all the space and voice media has given to errant minds, my challenge to you is to make space to print this refutation, as is, in full, unedited......I wish... What folly for any society, to dare try to challenge and confute the Divine Mind?


Yours, in huge disappointment to this date, and most sincerely,

Alan Mitter