THE CHANGELESS COURSE OF NATURAL LAW AND TRUTH

What was certainly true for the biblical Adam or, if evolved cave men existed, the first human being thousands of years ago is probably as true today as it was in prehistory. The basic fundamental course of human existence has essentially not changed. Fire was hot and ice was cold, rain was wet and the parched desert was dry, as it is presently in the 21st Century. Gravity still causes an object to fall at 32 feet per second and the earth has not ceased to revolve around sun and rotate on its axis. Even though it was unnamed, gravity existed in prehistory as well as the rules of astronomy. Early scientists defined and called the existence of this natural phenomena the immutable laws of nature. People who tried over the millennia of time to defy the laws of nature usually suffered grave physical consequences for trying to do so. As there were physical laws of nature, there were also physiological and biological laws of nature that were, from the beginning, immutable, such as the profound differences in the species between male and female lower-level animals, insects, and human beings. If there was an Adam and an Eve as the first man and woman on the earth, the natural laws of procreation or childbearing set the man, or the male specie, as the planter of the sperm seed and the woman, or the female specie, as the bearer of the fertilized egg and as the bearer of the reproduced human child. Likewise, all male and female species of the lower-level animal kingdom and the insect kingdom served their reproduction in like manner, the male specie impregnating the female specie. Two male pigs, cows, horses, tigers, or lions would not “naturally mate” to procreate their own kind. Neither would two male whales, sharks, jellyfish, etc. get together to procreate. More succinctly put, the world as it has existed for 10,000 years or more would not exist today if the animal and insect kingdoms of the earth had not followed the biological and physical laws of nature either voluntarily or involuntarily just as the planets and stars obeyed the laws of the universe, since lower-level animals, fish, and insects were, by nature, imprinted to follow the laws of nature. Put together in an enclosed pen, two male pigs, cows, horses, dogs, cats, or any other two mammals of the same gender in a a enclosed pen would never resort to anal or oral sexual intercourse for purposes of erotic satisfaction.

Regardless of how much a human being born from a woman as a natural man wants to be a woman in his mind, there is no unnatural process that can followed to change that man into a natural woman. Even if the natural man’s genitals are removed and female genitals surgically contrived, gallons of estrogen injected into the male body, artificial breasts implanted, and cosmetic surgery performed to change the masculine appearance into a feminine appearance, the natural human man will forever identify genetically and biologically as a male human specie. Such a deranged human aberration will never be able to get pregnant and lactate in the process of human procreation as a natural woman. When compared with a natural woman, this aberrational human changeling will retain the strength, bone structure, and muscularity of a natural man. A colorful anecdotal analogy of this useless and abnormal transition used by ranchers and farmers in the USA for over two centuries is “such is about as useful as tits on a bull.”

Transvestitism actually started with the Greeks as men impersonating women and women impersonating men for purposes of dramatic entertainment. From the advent of Aeschylus, who established the basic rules of tragic and comedic dramas, men have performed roles as women on the stage, but historically none of them ever believed that they were the natural biological women and men they were impersonating. That is, until the 21st Century. Much like the pathology of homosexuality, the rewriting of true history through sophistry has vainly tried to change what is as utterly black as coal to what is as lily white as the driven snow. Truth, it seems, does not matter any more. The truth, of course, is that human homosexuality has existed since ancient times as an unnatural aberration of nature that has been officially regarded by all ancient moral civilizations as against the laws of nature. A great example of laws created anciently against the practice of homosexuality was the Code of Hammurabi, codified laws created by the King of ancient Babylonia, Hammurabi, who ruled from 1792 to 1750 B. C. In that great code of moral laws, homosexuality was a crime given the death penalty and the reason given was that homosexual acts were bestial and against nature and served to destroy families. Even though Babylonia was pagan and polytheistic, the civilization had borrowed the same same moral laws that the monotheistic Hebrews practiced at a much earlier time.

Since around 1985, revisionist historians, such as Anne Balay, Robert Beachy, and Allan Berube have tried to sophistically rewrite the history of the ancient world by trying to convince reasonable people in their writings that homosexuality was condoned and practiced as a viable lifestyle in ancient Egypt, alleging, for example, that in 2400 B. C. “Khnumhotep and Niankhkhnum” were a celebrated homosexual Egyptian couple accepted by the Egyptian culture perfectly normal. This feat of sophistry was done during the same time period when black revisionist historians were trying to assert that the Egyptian civilization were of the same black African race as the black Africans in the lower-Saharan regions of Africa. These blatantly ridiculous assertions have not stood-up to subsequent academic peer review and archaeological discovery during ensuing decades, but, alas, many good reasonable people have been deceived into believing them.

These anthropological distortions of established verifiable history have been perpetuated on the American electorate via the Internet by 21st Century LGBTQ activists, and as a result many unfortunate heterosexual men and women under 55 years of age have believed them as truth. Since 1980, especially in California, Oregon, and Washington State, the psychology and sociology curricula of prominent universities have been pragmatically geared to represent and normalize the practice of homosexuality as a viable lifestyle instead of the vile psychopathology it is, and as it was before the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders was revised in the early-1980s to define homosexuality as a normal healthy lifestyle and the human opposition to homosexuality added as a psychopathology called homophobia. In 1979, a tenured PhD professor of psychology teaching at the University of Texas at Tyler, as well as a prominent practicing clinical psychologist said the following to a classroom of undergraduate psychology students. “If the psychopathology of homosexuality can be changed to be called a lifestyle in the DSM III solely by political decree, it won’t be long before transvestitism, voyeurism, fetishism, and pedophilia will also be declared lifestyles instead of psychopathologies by an aberrantly popular demand. The truth can never be changed to lies by political decree.”

Natural law is quite immutable and firmly entrenched in fact and truth, regardless of the efforts of the homosexual minority and its proponents in the USA to change it. Six thousand years of world civilizations declaring homosexuality perverse and aberrant cannot be historically erased by 50 years of a concerted hiccup of sophistic effort during the 20th and 21st centuries to declare natural law unnatural through the use of what are scarce few ancient examples of a defiance of human normality. Yet, what would actually incentivize seemingly intelligent and educated professional adults to openly advocate in the American society for the legalization of the practice of pathological unnatural law? On understanding that the human beings representing the homosexual, LGBTQ, community can only reproduce their own kind through social solicitation, the illusory propagation of men believing that they are women and women believing that they are men is also a process fueled totally by perverse falsity, and not truth. The perverse behavioral shaping of young children through this solicitation process by homosexual adults and parents, and the viral advocates of homosexuality, pragmatically result in pseudo-psychologists and pseudo-sociologists proclaiming that children are born with genetic disposition for homosexuality and transgenderism. Perhaps this is why the vocal proponents of the homosexual community strive to label the biblical examples of Sodom and Gomorrah as fiction fantasy and not as historical fact. While, at the same time, purporting that the biblical accounts of the Hebrew Exodus from Egypt and the crumbling of the walls of Jericho are historical and based upon archaeological fact, the practitioners and advocates of homosexuality deride and label the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah as fantasy fiction. Why could this be so? The pseudo-historian PhD, Howard Zinn, supposedly once stated in defense of his textbook, “A Peoples’ History of the United States,” “anything that is believed can be regarded as a truth and as an historical fact.” Truth be told, this “Zinn premise” accounts for the gross absurdities in his book that Dr. Zinn regards as pure historical fact, which arrogantly defy and belittle the histories written by genuine scholars for the past 300 years. Before his death in 2022, Zinn identified himself as “a liberal anarchist and something of a Marxist,” having learned his trade from master liberal socialist Dr. Henry Steele Commager while at Columbia University, who happened to be a fan of activist Marxist Herbert Marcuse, who wrote the book, “The One-Dimensional Man” while at Brandeis University in 1964.

The sociopolitical doctrines and philosophies of fascism, communism, and Nazism became prevalent in Italy, Russia, and Germany during the early 1900s as a result of the deceitfully false propaganda that was forcefully disseminated upon the citizens of these nations by word of mouth, radio and the printed word. This state-controlled dissemination of lies about the leaders Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin and their polices, which made the European people believe that the three sadistic egomaniacs were saviors instead of the monsters, culminated in a desolated Europe during the period of the 2nd World War. In the same vulgar fashion, the electronic computerized technology of television, radio, and the Internet, and printed propaganda has filled the minds of the impressionable American electorate with information about homosexuality and transgenderism since around 1990 that is neither factual or scientific, and a great many people have believed it.

During the Constitutional Convention of 1787, three years before his death, Benjamin Franklin supposedly wrote pessimistically to a dear friend in a personal letter, “I am not convinced that a constitutional republic will be vigilantly preserved by an electorate as free and libertarian as the American people, for contained in that precious freedom and liberty are the seeds of human apathy, despair, immorality, and debauched dissolution. Where else on this earth would one have the proposed freedom to plan and commit a crime and then only fear being caught and punished while possessing the delicate rights of the accused afforded him?” This letter was written in the same time frame when Franklin had supposedly remarked to a woman, while he was descending the steps of the Philadelphia Constitutional Convention Hall, in answer to her question, “Mr. Franklin, what are you making for us in there?” “A republic, Madam, if you you can keep it,” he had replied.

What is being explicitly explored in this essay really started in the 1960s with the federally legalized practice of sodomy and male oral homosexuality in the private bedroom between consenting adults being declared by the SCOTUS a fundamental constitutional right. This led to the practice of sexual sadomasochism being freely allowed in private bedrooms between consenting adults, and being declared a fundamental right. This led inexorably to the practice of bestiality, or sex with animals, in the privacy of private bedrooms being declared a fundamental right. Then federal courts egregiously declared that any type of sexual activity between consenting adults in private homes was lawful. In California, and a few other States this legalized extension of immorality and pornographic obscenity led directly to commercial pornographic studios being legally created in private dwellings for the making and selling of homosexual and pornographic heterosexual films and videos. So, was it all about the freedom and liberty given to people to violate with impunity natural law, if those supposedly reasonable people merely derive pernicious carnal pleasure from such violations?

To many leading conservative jurists in the USA, the immoral sexual aberrations that were declared as fundamental rights for consenting adults by the very liberal SCOTUS under Chief Justices Warren and Rehnquist were tantamount to allowing assault, battery, and frequently resultant murder to occur with impunity in the private American bedroom. Consider for a moment that abortion-on-demand was declared a fundamental constitutional right by the Warren Court, which resulted in the subsequent slaughter of over 60 million healthy babies in the USA from 1974 until 2023. Most reasonable members of the American electorate would prefer not to read or know about such sad history because of personal apathy and indifference, for there has been a logical progression from bad to worse to insufferable in the way that immorality and obscenity have become the norm in society within a period of nine decades. One of the American judges at the Nuremberg Nazi war crimes trials in 1945 stated that, “certainly the American people will learn from this criminally immoral and unnatural debauchery of Jewish genocidal murder and will never allow such crimes against humanity to occur in the American republic.” Was the systematic process of abortion-on-demand and the slaughter of 60 million innocent babies any less a crime against humanity than the planned extermination of 11 million Jewish men, women, and children during the period of time from 1938 to 1950 by Hitler and Stalin?

During the 1940s the American film and movie industry rarely showed women in their panties and bras on the silver screen in theaters, and rank-and-file women literally shrank at the thought of being seen by others, and in public, in their underwear. Then came color pornography in the form of widely circulated magazines, such Hugh Hefner’s Playboy, and the introduction of the bikini swimwear, which actually exposed more of the female body than Playtex panties and bras exposed. The digression from traditional modesty in dress style soon thereafter led to an inexorable reduction of the standards of modesty and decency in the wake of SCOTUS justice Potter Stewart’s infamous 1964 statement, “I may not be able to define obscenity, but I know it when I see it.” Stewart’s “test” for obscenity was totally in the eye of the beholder, which made the determination of moral decency a personally and loosely construed standard, if at all a standard. Soon, thereafter, the string and see-through bikinis became outlandishly popular and exploited by the male applauded Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition, which was actually more erotic to its readers than Playboy. These pornographic magazines were popularized in American movies and television in the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s as what the all-American boy-turn-man would read for sexual thrill.

The pornographic homosexual film industry began and went from erotic homosexual and heterosexual films and videos made in private bedrooms to extraordinarily violent snuff films, where women and men were subjected to horrific sadomasochistic rituals and actually murdered to add to the film’s carnage. What pray-tell is the reasonable difference between the paid sadistic and merciless voluntary beating of a man or woman beaten and battered to the point of voluntary death, and that of the shooting and killing of such a beaten person? If the victim of such a horrific beating is taken to a hospital, his or her chances for survival would be very low. Hence, shouldn’t both of the hideous atrocities be regarded as violent crimes unto death? If such crimes are being committed in private bedrooms, shouldn’t those crimes be codified and actionably enforceable?

The foregoing issues about the nature of natural law and the essence of unchangeable truth culminate in a vicious circle of sophistry created by serpentine pragmatists in the current 21st Century. If, perchance, a bill was formally proposed in Congress to make murder, defined as the premeditated killing of one human being by another with malice aforethought, in all of its many forms, natural and nonpunishable behavior, would the bill be supported by a majority of senators and representatives, or would it be called a perverse proposed legislation against natural law and order? In 1870, such a bill would have been considered a revolting insult to law, criminal justice, and humanity and the person proposing it insane. It would have been discarded then into the trash heap immediately, but not so in the 21st Century. There are supposedly reasonable people in legislatures today who would propose and support such idiocy. But have the basic conditions of human life that existed in 1870 changed to any degree in 2024? Were human conditions any different in 1950, in 1974, or in the year 2000? Obvious it is that the supposedly reasonable educated heterosexual individuals who are proponents of homosexuality, homosexual marriage, and transgenderism have never dealt closely with the day-to-day lives of the people who actively participate in the LGTBQ lifestyles. These individuals have not seen and witnessed the problematic social behaviors intimately associated with homosexual/lesbian/transgender adults. Most male homosexuals over time assume traits and proclivities that are anti-social and inimical to mainstream behaviors of normal heterosexual adults. Numerous studies over five decades have shown that unless the heterosexual families of homosexual men accept, tolerate, and endorse their sons’ aberrant behaviors, there is frequent severe depression and anxiety that will manifest itself in the day-to-day activities of 98 percent of these homosexual men. For homosexual men whose families shun and actually disown them as their children for their sexual perversions, the suicide rate in this group is very high, probably over 60 percent. In California, legislative bills have actually been proposed in the state legislature in Sacramento to make pedophilia an acceptable practice for assisting the homosexual community to cope with rejection. This occurred several times shortly after the 88% vote of the California electorate to accept the state proposition to make homosexual marriage illegal in the California Constitution was declared unconstitutional by one homosexual federal judge, and after the passage of the Defense of Marriage Act by a plural congress during the Clinton era.

So, a valid conclusion draws near based upon fact, truth, and reality. Is the freedom and liberty to do what is unnatural and harmful to those who allow it to be done to them to be regarded as more important to society than laws to prevent such behaviors from occurring? As laws have been created to prohibit people from attempting to defy natural law, such as defying gravity by jumping off a skyscraper without a parachute to commit suicide, shouldn’t laws be created to keep men from hurting other men by sodomizing them in the act of homosexual anal sex? Sodomy has been determined to injure 30 percent of the men and women upon whom it is done. The human rectum is very a very delicate organ and penal penetration of it can cause serious ruptures and hernias inside the bodies of the victims of sodomy, which, if repeated frequently, can cause cancerous lesions to appear. How can someone be regarded as responsibly free to choose infliction of a sordid invasive penetration into his body causing severe pain while creating for the aberrant person inflicting the pain erotic pleasure? Wouldn’t this be tantamount to a person allowing another person, sadistic and essentially sociopathic, to cut-off portions of his fingers in order to satisfy a sexual ritual? Wouldn’t a reasonable and competent court judge rule the victim of such a ritual non compos mentis, and the person doing the awful cutting criminally culpable? In the case of a six year old male child cajoled by perverse adults into believing that he is a girl instead of a normal biological boy and persuaded to undergo a gender reassignment surgery to remove his penis and testicles, how could a reasonable jurist believe that such an act would be anything but unnatural and criminally wrong? Hammurabi the Babylonian anciently saw the many awful ramifications of homosexuality on the Babylonian family and criminalized it in his famous Code. This precedent was followed by all succeeding world civilizations.

Norton R. Nowlin was born in Oklahoma City, in 1951, and grew up in rural East Texas, where he was graduated from John Tyler High School in 1970. After a year studying engineering at Tyler Junior College, Norton enlisted in the Vietnam-Era U.S. Marine Corps and spent six years working as an engineering electronics technician, rising to the rank of sergeant E-5. In 1977, Norton was honorably discharged from the Marine Corps and returned to Tyler, Texas, where he continued his undergraduate education and began his writing career as a poet, essayist, and fiction writer. In1980, Norton took a B.A. degree in psychology and political science from the University of Texas at Tyler; and after completing a semester of graduate work in the social sciences at UT Tyler, he successfully finished one year of law school at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, in San Diego, California, in 1982. After leaving law school, he spent three years working as a litigation paralegal for a prominent San Diego County attorney and judge. In 1985, Norton was appointed as a deputy sheriff for the San Diego County Sheriff's Department, and graduated from the 660 clock-hour 73rd San Diego County Sheriff's Academy, at Southwestern College, in Chula Vista, California in June 1985. After spending a successful year with the San Diego County Sheriff's Department, Norton decided to return to graduate school at UT Tyler, and began his experiences as a classroom teacher. In 1992, he took an M.A. degree in political science and psychology from UT Tyler in addition to a Texas Teaching Certification in political science, psychology, composite social studies, government, and generic special education. From 1992 until 2001, Norton accumulated 7 years of classroom teaching experience in public and private schools in Texas and Washington State. In 2004, Norton took a post-baccalaureate ABA-approved advanced paralegal certification, from Edmonds Community College, in Lynnwood, Washington. Later, in 2006, he was hired by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, where he works presently for the Veterans Health Administration in Washington, DC. From 1977 until the present day, Norton R. Nowlin has published over 70 widely-read essays (many on the Internet) on a diverse array of interdisciplinary topics, over 100 poems, 6 regular opinion-editorial guest columns for the Seattle Times publication, "The Times of Snohomish County," and several short stories.