The HQ Tome, Part 2

Last week, I endeavoured to show that homosexual behaviour was dangerous to Dixie, and that upright moral Southerners and Christians must oppose this degenerate subset of the ‘spirit of the age’. I illustrated the high-time preference of the sodomite lifestyle, and showed an example of the cultural subversion which members of this ‘in-group’ have perpetrated in order to move about more easily in our society. This week, I will address the historical memes which homosexuals and their fellow travelers use to disarm the average American who still senses the wickedness of homosexual sin.

The Illusion of Historical Normalcy

Homosexual pederasty, which still remains a taboo in our culture, was widely practiced by the ancient Aryan peoples of the Mediterranean world. The Persians, Greeks, and Romans all practiced it, including some of the manliest men in history and legend, like Achilles and Alexander the Great.

There is no question that homosexual behavior was not only tolerated by ancient Aryan peoples, it was considered normal, in some cases even ideal. It was ascribed to the gods (Zeus and Ganymede) and lauded by poets, philosophers, and historians. It is hard to maintain hateful Jewish attitudes toward homosexuality if one really understands and appreciates the greatness of classical pagan civilization … Queer-bashers are in the grip of Jewry without even knowing it.  –Greg Johnson

 An argument often made by the advocates of homosexual degeneracy is the ‘argument from historical normalcy’. According to this position, what Christian Europe condemns as sinful was simply viewed as natural and normal in civilisations both great and small throughout human history. The collective opposition to homosexuality which all Christian peoples have shared since the time of St Paul is simply a manifestation of ‘sexual repression’ along the lines of Freudian psychology, or the ‘hateful intolerance’ typical to vengeful, bigoted Christianity.

Tolerance is a Jedi trait

Hardly any serious thinker on the Right will waste time debunking the transparently ridiculous arguments of Sigmund Freud on Christianity, psychology, or sexuality. While the ignorant mainstream might still find value in his doctrines, we Rightists recognise the base and Talmudick spirit behind his incessant urge to tear down; to deconstruct. Freud’s non-stop demonisation of Jesus Christ and the Church traces itself back to the Czech nanny of Sigmund’s childhood, a devout woman who ‘taught him Catholic prayers and devotions and may have secretly baptized him’, according to E. Michael Jones. Her firing and departure from the young Jewish boy’s world scarred him irreparably, providing the catalyst for his lifelong hatred of God and the institution that stood as His visible representative on Earth. Freud’s deconstructive theories can provide no answers in any arena of human endeavour. He is a lost soul to be pitied, not a thinker to be admired.

Serious advocates of ‘historical normalcy’ will fall back on what information we possess from the records of the ancients. However, even there the evidence is scarce. Contrary to the common conception, every society we have record of either had no concept of homosexuality, or possessed legal and moral proscriptions of it.

First, the Spartans. Plutarch is often quoted by homosexual advocates as a source in support of their arguments. When describing the ‘Lover- Loved One’ relationship of antiquity, we find Plutarch describing a surprising penalty for those who would take advantage of the relationship:

“The aim was to love the moral and intellectual self of earnest boys and, when a man was accused of approaching them with lust, he was deprived of civic rights for life.” Georgiades, p.32-33

”A Man of Sparta loves a boy, but he loves it in the way many people love and admire a beautiful statue or one [person] many statues. But sensual pleasure coming from lust is prohibited among them.” –Maximus Tyrius, ‘Lectures’ (20.8) –Ibid., p. 33

”Spartan love had nothing base because neither the boy dared to accept lewdness, nor the lover dared to be lewd, since it was no good for either of them to dishonour Sparta. If this ever happened they were exiled or, what is worse, killed.” – Aelianus, ‘Varia Historia’ (III: 12) –Ibid., p. 33.

The Greek historian Xenophon described the legal views of the legendary Spartan King Lycurgus as follows:

“Because Lycurgus was against all these [shameful acts], he approved only of when a person, being such as he had to be and admiring a boy’s moral and intellectual self, tried to be his blameless friend and associate with him; he… even thought of this as the most noble form of education. But, when one turned out to yearn for the boy’s body, which was the basest thing to do according to Lycurgus, he ordered that lovers should hold themselves off the loved boys, just as parents or brothers abstain from having sexual intercourse with their children or brothers.” – ‘Respublica Lacedaemoniorum‘ (II:13)
–Ibid., p. 29-30

No wonder Leonidas looks uncomfortable.

Well perhaps the pugnacious Spartans, that noble nation whose martial spirit would find favourable comparison with the armies of the South some two and a half millennia later, are an outlier among the Greeks. After all, they were only one of the two ‘poles’ that dominated Greek city-state politics in the centuries before Christ. What about the decadent Athenians? Surely we can find such enlightenment and tolerance among those lovers of Democracy, right?

“Teachers should not open the schools before sunrise and they should close them before sunset. No one above the age of thirteen is allowed to enter the school while the children are still in, unless he is the son, the brother, or the brother-in-law of the teacher. The law breakers will be sentenced to death […] Patrons named by the people should be above forty years old.” —Aeschines, ‘Against Timarchus’ 12 –Ibid., p. 51-52

”If an Athenian [is lustful towards] a free boy, his tutor should sue the wrongdoer in front of the six junior archons and ask for his punishment. If he is found guilty by the court, he should be consigned to the eleven executioners and put to death that same day…” –  Aeschines, ‘Against Timarchus’ 16 –Ibid., p. 55

The case quoted above, ‘Aeschines Against Timarchus‘, is a useful example of the moral approbation which surrounded homosexual behaviour in Athens. Timarchus was accused, according to Georgiades, of being a ‘hetairos’– that is, a homosexual companion– and not merely a ‘pornos’, or male prostitute. His lover was another grown man, a fellow citizen of Athens. Timarchus is found guilty and stripped of his civic rights. This would not have occurred in a society that tolerated, let alone encouraged, homosexual behaviour.

Let us close the case against Greek homosexuality with Plato, in one of his final works, ‘The Laws’.

”I think that the pleasure is to be deemed natural which arises out of the intercourse between men and women; but that the intercourse of men with men, or of women with women, is contrary to nature, and that the bold attempt was originally due to unbridled lust.” –‘The Laws’, p. 15. Jowlett trans.

Such wisdom would be mirrored centuries later in St Paul:

For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. –Romans 1:26-27

The Greeks were conquered by the Romans, who absorbed their wisdom and philosophy. The Romans also had laws against homosexual behaviour,  the ‘Lex Scantinia’ originating from about 225 BC and the ‘Lex Julia’, made law under Caesar Augustus. The Christian Roman Empire codified the pre-existing laws, in both the Theodosian Code and the later ‘Corpus Juris Civilis’ of St Justinian the Great.

First, the Theodosian Code’s penalty for homosexual behaviour :

Cod. Theod. IX. Vii. 6: “All persons who have the shameful custom of condemning a man’s body, acting the part of a woman’s to the sufferance of alien sex (for they appear not to be different from women), shall expiate a crime of this kind in avenging flames in the sight of the people.”

For those interested, I suggest reading up on Theodosius the Great. An interesting character, who took his new-found Christian religion seriously.

Next, we have St Justinian’s laws regarding sodomy and related crimes/sins:

‘…since certain men, seized by diabolical incitement, practice among themselves the most disgraceful lusts, and act contrary to nature: we enjoin them to take to heart the fear of God and the judgment to come, and to abstain from suchlike diabolical and unlawful lusts, so that they may not be visited by the just wrath of God on account of these impious acts, with the result that cities perish with all their inhabitants. For we are taught by the Holy Scriptures that because of like impious conduct cities have indeed perished, together with all the men in them.

…For because of such crimes there are famines, earthquakes, and pestilences; wherefore we admonish men to abstain from the aforesaid unlawful acts, that they may not loose their souls. But if, after this our admonition any are found persisting in such offenses, first they render themselves unworthy of the mercy of God, and then they are subjugated to the punishment enjoined by law.

For we order that most illustrious prefect of the Capital to arrest those who persist in the aforesaid lawless and impious acts after they have been warned by us, and to inflict on them the extreme punishments, so that the city and the state may not come to harm by reason of such wicked deed. And if, after this our warning, and be found who have concealed their crime, they likewise shall be condemned by the Lord God. And if the most illustrious prefect find any who have committed any such offense. And shall omit to punish them according to out laws, first he will be liable to the judgment of God, and he will also incur our indignation. >> Novella 77 of Justinian, trans. Bailey, ‘Homosexuality and the Western Christian Tradition’, p. 73-74

For, instructed by the Holy Scriptures, we know that God brought a just judgment upon those who lived in Sodom, on account of this very madness of intercourse, so that to this very day that lands burns with inextinguishable fire. By this God teaches us, in order that by means of legislation we may avert such an untoward fate.>> Novella 141 of Justinian, ibid., p. 74-75

We will quote from St Justinian at greater length in our conclusion. Suffice it to say, far from being at odds with the Greco-Roman world it eventually conquered, Christianity fulfilled the moral potential of that culture, affirming the ethical standards that the best of the pagans taught and aspired to, condemning the lapses, and granting the newly-baptised society the spiritual weaponry it would need to triumph over sins ‘contrary to nature’ in a way mere legislation could not achieve.

Next, we shall examine the way forward for Dixie, and the solution which exists for homosexuality on a personal and social level.

For Further Reading:

-By Ambrosius Aurelianus