Pierce & Oliver on homosexuality, ancient & modern

Image result for "christianity is homosexual

William Luther Pierce (‘Who We Are’):

As best we can judge from Homer’s epics, [homosexuality] was not a problem in the Heroic Age. All the heroes of the Iliad seem motivated by normal sexual drives; healthy heterosexual themes, in fact, underlie the entire epic, from the abduction of Helen by the Trojans and the Greek expedition to retrieve her to the squabble over slave girls which gave rise to the animosity between Achilles and Agamemnon. And one can also reasonably infer that it had not become a problem in Homer’s own time, presumably in the ninth century B.C.; otherwise it seems likely some homosexual flavor would have crept into his compositions.

On the other hand, we know that homosexuality was deeply ingrained in many of the native populations of the Mediterranean region, and not just among the Cretans. The ancient Hebrews, for example, practiced mass ritual masturbation and priestly buggery, and Moses was hard put to convince them to give up these habits. Even after Moses’ time, the traditional Jewish manner of sealing a bargain and of greeting was to seize one another’s genitals, a practice euphemistically described in the King James version of the Old Testament as “placing the hand under the other’s thigh.”

But we cannot say why this vileness, initially absent among the Greeks, later spread so virulently among them. Certainly it would be rash to attribute a special weakness for homosexuality to the Greeks. Our experience in America shows that, once certain weaknesses in the social structure have come about and public tolerance of depravity has set in, homosexuality can spread like wildfire. One would form an entirely different estimate of Americans’ inherent susceptibility to it from a survey made today then from a survey made even 20 years ago. Unfortunately, the problem seems certain to be even worse in America 20 years hence, as our society continues to degenerate unless a revolution has swept the practitioners of this perversion from our shores by then.

And the American experience is probably our best guide in judging the Greeks’ homosexual problem. Even when homosexuality was most widespread, there were a great many Hellenes who remained untouched by it, still as healthy in their sexual attitudes as their Nordic forebears had been when they first arrived in the Mediterranean world. At its worst, it was only one of many symptoms of decay which cast a pall over the essentially healthy and beautiful culture which the Greeks created.

Revilo P. Oliver (‘On Homosexuality’):

Consider the Germanic tribes who lived on the borders of the Roman Empire, which they later overran and sacked, and then occupied. Homosexuality was not unknown among those tribes, but they disapproved of it, and they signified their disapproval by simply hanging perverts to the nearest tree or, preferably, sinking them in mud under a weight of stones, if a swamp was conveniently available. In recent years, archaeologists have recovered quite a number of such bodies from peat bogs in which they were preserved. Those tribes were, of course, pagans, and I insist on that detail because the persons who distort history to poison our culture will assure you that disapproval of homosexuality is something peculiar to Christianity.

Among the Greeks, the extraordinarily gifted people who were the real creators of our civilization, homosexuality appears to have been an alien corruption. It was unknown in the Homeric epics, although in later times perverts, who are incapable of understanding masculine friendship and always seek any pretext to justify themselves, tried to read homosexual implications into the comradeship of Achilles and Patroclus. The aetiological myths all suggest a foreign origin: one states that the vice was invented by Laius in Thebes (where there was a pre-Greek Semitic element), and another claims that it originated in Crete (where the Mycenean Greeks ruled a native population of undetermined ethnic origin) — and we know that centuries later, as Aristotle (Pol., II, 10, 9 = 1271a) remarked with astonishment, on that island homosexuality was permitted by law, perhaps as a means of avoiding overpopulation.

At Athens, homosexuality appears to have been rare before the demoralizing Peloponnesian War, and certainly did not receive any kind of general sanction until long thereafter. It was forbidden by one of Solon’s laws, which was still enforced as late as 346 B.C., when one of the most prominent Athenian politicians, Timarchus, was prosecuted under that law and was probably convicted, although one account says that he committed suicide before the jury brought in its verdict. Plato has himself been suspected, not without reason, of homosexuality, but it is noteworthy that when he elaborated a model constitution for a city-state, he absolutely forbade (Leg., VIII, 8 = 841d) sexual relations between males.

At Sparta, where, we are told, paederasty flourished early, it was forbidden, under the same penalty as incest, by a law attributed to Lycurgus that was still in force in the time of Xenophon (De rep. Lac., 2, 13). It would be tedious to make the rounds of the other Greek states, or to try to determine at what time and under what influences the old legislation and the attitudes that seem to have been natively Greek were made obsolete by toleration and corruption. We may all suspect that first the tolerance and finally the vogue of homosexuality had much to do with the decline of the Greek world.

The Romans, to whom we owe more than to the Greeks, felt Western man’s natural abhorrence of homosexuality. Although degenerates were doubtless born from time to time, the contempt universally felt for perverts probably sufficed to restrain their tendencies, and when it did not, the stern ethos of the nation made short work of them. As late as 125 B.C., when the old paternal authority had been greatly restricted, a Roman of the old school, Q. Fabius Maximus Servilianus, who had held the highest offices in the Roman Republic, peremptorily put his own son to death for homosexuality. Such was the unflinching moral code that made the Romans great. It was only after Rome had become a dominant power in the world by decisively defeating the Carthaginians (202 B.C.), the Macedonians (197), and the Seleucid Empire (188), and had suffered a great influx of aliens, including Orientals, that we see the beginning of moral decay.

At Rome, the repression of the Bacchanalians checked the infection for a time, but not permanently. In 149 B.C. or thereabouts the Romans enacted the Lex Scantina de stupro cum masculo, which provided a heavy penalty for perversion. As everyone knows, such laws cannot prevent; they can only discourage, and their most important force is expression of the standards of the society that enacts them. Rome, however, was suffering from creeping moral paralysis that the Senate and conservative magistrates to the very end of the Republic sought to combat by such measures as the expulsion of subversive aliens (which was only temporary, since they, aided by wealth and influence, began to filter back almost at once) and measures to limit the spread of Oriental cults.

The Lex Scantina remained on the books; there were prosecutions under it as late as the Second Century after Christ and perhaps later. But the feeling that had inspired it was gradually eroded, and although homosexuality was never officially legalized, as has now been done in the State of Illinois and will probably be done in our entire nation as soon as Earl Warren gets around to it, the law became virtually a dead letter. Before the end of the Republic, Roman writers who wanted to be thought “intellectual” and “sophisticated,” imitating the literary fashions of Alexandria, which was the New York of the ancient world, did not hesitate to confess — perhaps falsely in some cases — that they were paederasts. And, paralleling what happens in the United States today, one of Cicero’s correspondents thought it a delightful joke when a homosexual pervert was prosecuted under the Lex Scantina before a presiding judge who was himself a pervert. Such a society is fit only for despotism, and despotism was, of course what the Romans got — a despotism under which the old Roman families quickly died out and were replaced by the descendants of their slaves.

During the Crusades Europeans came into contact with the Semitic peoples among whom homosexuality is accepted as normal, and one result was that the powerful order of Knights Templar, who held strongholds and rich fiefs throughout Europe until they were suppressed, were not only noted as homosexuals but evidently made sexual perversion a part of their ritual.

Revilo P. Oliver (‘Great Failure’):

The Knights Templar was an attempt to combine two incompatible things: knighthood and piety. They were warriors, but they were also ecclesiastics, and as such they were condemned to celibacy. They could not marry, and since Christianity had inherited and even exacerbated the morbid misogyny of its Jewish authors, they were even forbidden to have intercourse with those nasty and dangerous animals, women. The result, naturally, was that some became homosexuals while others, evading an inhuman law, kept concubines, usually women from the native population, and engendered mongrel bastards. As witness the famous Heiros Lochos of Thebes, if their sexual habits are correctly reported.

The Knights Templar, therefore, were a part of the racial ruin wrought by an alien and poisonous religion. They were part of the historical record that incites us to wonder that Europe could for so long sustain the constant genetic loss resultant from centuries of warfare on the one hand, and centuries of monasticism on the other.


Author: National-Satanist

Just another blue-eyed devil...

3 thoughts on “Pierce & Oliver on homosexuality, ancient & modern”

  1. Apparently a layer of water six miles high for a year had not noticeably affected the forests, the trees, the grasses and the meadows, nor the vineyards, for It says. Genesis 9:20,21: “And Noah began to be a husbandman and he planted a vineyard: And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered in his tent.”

    Poor Noah. Back to his old tricks of nipping at the kickapoo joy juice. He not only nipped, he was stinking drunk and naked in his tent, dead to the world. While in this shameful condition, his three sons. Ham, Shem and Japheth saw him. The latter two were embarrassed and covered him up. But apparently Ham was a fag, a homo, and he went back and committed an obscene act with his drunken father.

    It says in Genesis 9:24: “And Noah awoke from his wine and knew what his younger son had done unto him.”

    He roundly cursed Ham and doomed him to be a “servant of servants to his brethren”, in other words, a slave. Not only did he doom Ham to a slave, but, all his descendants as well. All the dark skinned, niggers and muds are considered by theologians to be the descendants of Ham.

    And so, we have another episode in the family of the Noah’s as they set out to become the progenitors of all future mankind. The Lord had goofed again, and made a lousy choice in picking such a drunken lout as Noah to be the father of future mankind.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s