Similar posts

Tobias Langdon #transphobia #wingnut #racist #pratt #dunning-kruger unz.com

image

Sex and race are, to the left, mere social constructs, abstract systems of delusion and injustice that can be overturned by human will and social engineering. It follows, then, that leftists will support and celebrate men who reject the social construct of sex and claim to be women. And leftists do support and celebrate such men.

Triumph of the Trannies

It also follows that leftists will support and celebrate Whites who reject the social construct of race and claim to be Blacks. But leftists don’t support and celebrate such Whites. Quite the contrary. While Bruce Jenner, a man claiming to be a woman, is worshipped and rewarded, Rachel Dolezal, a White claiming to be a Black, is ridiculed and punished. Steve Sailer and others have drawn attention to this contradiction, but I don’t think they’ve properly explained it.

Why do leftists cheer when men cross the border between the sexes, but jeer when Whites try to cross the border between the races?

I pose those questions deliberately in that form to draw out the links between the left’s love of transgenderism and the left’s love of open borders. The Jewish libertarian Murray Rothbard (1926–95) described this aspect of leftist ideology very well in this passage of an otherwise long-winded and boring essay:

The egalitarian revolt against biological reality, as significant as it is, is only a subset of a deeper revolt: against the ontological structure of reality itself, against the “very organization of nature”; against the universe as such. At the heart of the egalitarian left is the pathological belief that there is no structure of reality; that all the world is a tabula rasa that can be changed at any moment in any desired direction by the mere exercise of human will — in short, that reality can be instantly transformed by the mere wish or whim of human beings. (Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature, Modern Age, Fall 1973)

Rothbard was right in general about leftism, but failed to explain that highly significant exception: why does the “exercise of human will” allow Bruce Jenner and others to become women, but not allow Rachel Dolezal and others to become Blacks?

Sex and race are both aspects of reality, but the left believes that only one of those aspects “can be instantly transformed by the mere wish or whim of human beings.” Why so? I would explain it by supplementing Rothbard’s explanation. Yes, he’s right when he says the left have a magical belief in the reality-transforming power of “human will,” but he doesn’t discuss what happens when there is a clash of wills.

The high and the low

Let’s look at transgenderism first. Men like Bruce Jenner and Jonathan Yaniv (pictured) have “willed” that men can become women and must enjoy unrestricted access to all female spaces. At the same time, some women — the so-called Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists or TERFs — have “willed” that men can’t become women and must keep out of female spaces. There is a clash of wills that is settled, for the Left, by the status of the opposing sides. In leftist eyes, the men have higher status than the women, which is why the men’s will prevails and the women’s will is rejected. But hold on, you might be thinking: How can the men have higher status than the women in leftist eyes? It’s easy: the transgender men have cleverly aligned themselves not with men in general, who are indeed of lower status than women, but with homosexual men, who are of higher status than women.

Trangendered men are part of the “LBGTQ+ community,” which lifts them above women in the leftist hierarchy. Take Jonathan Yaniv, the perverted and probably Jewish male, who claims to be a woman and has been suing female cosmeticians in Canada for refusing to wax his fully intact male genitals. If Yaniv spoke the truth, he would admit that he is a heterosexual male who seeks perverted sexual pleasure by passing himself off as a woman and receiving Brazilian waxes or entering female toilets to share tampon tips with under-age girls, etc. Obviously, then, Yaniv can’t admit the truth. Heterosexual men are wicked in leftist eyes and are well below women in the leftist hierarchy. Heterosexual men definitely cannot pass themselves off as women in pursuit of perverted sexual thrills.

Actual authentic lesbians

Yaniv and other “trans-women” must therefore align themselves with homosexuals to pass leftist purity-tests. As trans-women they claim to be members of a sexual minority, which triggers the leftist love of minority-worship. Indeed, Yaniv and some others go further than simply claiming to be women: they claim to be actual authentic lesbians. A pinned tweet at Yaniv’s Twitter account states that he is “One proud lesbian. I’ll never give up fighting for human rights equality. #LGBTQoftwitter.” Yaniv isn’t a lesbian, of course. Real lesbians — that is, real women who are sexually attracted to other real women — quite rightly reject fake lesbians like him, so the fake lesbians exploit leftist ideology again and accuse real lesbians of bigotry and hate.

Feminism has the concept of the “glass ceiling,” whereby women are unjustly prevented by sexist men from reaching the highest positions in politics, business and academia. Inspired by this, the fake lesbians have invented the concept of the “cotton ceiling,” whereby men like Yaniv are unjustly prevented by real lesbians from removing the underwear of said lesbians and having sex with them. Here is a trans-lesbian activist lecturing a sceptical TERF (i.e. Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist for those not up on the latest jargon) on the injustices of the cotton ceiling:

Trans women are female. When our female-ness and womanhood is denied, as you keep doing repeatedly, that is transphobic and transmisogynist. As I said earlier, all people’s desires are influenced by an intersection of cultural messages that determine those desires. Cultural messages that code trans women’s bodies as male are transphobic, and those messages influence people’s desires. So cis queer women who are attracted to other queer women may not view trans women as viable sexual partners because they have internalized the message that trans women are somehow male.

The comparison to what cis males say also makes no sense. What trans women are saying is that we are women, and thus should be considered women sexually, and thus be considered viable partners for women who are attracted to women. What cis males are saying is that queer women shouldn’t be exclusively attracted to women, which is completely different. (The Cotton Ceiling? Really?, Femonade blog, 13th March 2012)

It’s not “completely different,” of course. In both cases, people with penises are “saying” (and willing) that real lesbians should have sex with them. In both cases, real lesbians would be encountering the male genitals of real men. But the trans-activist believes in an act of verbal transubstantiation whereby a trans-lesbian possesses a “female penis” that, despite all appearances, is “completely different” to the nasty and objectionable penis of a “cis male.”

Aspects of religious psychology

I use the term “transubstantiation” deliberately. It’s a term from Catholic theology that refers to the supernatural process whereby wafers and wine transform into the flesh and blood of Christ during the celebration of Holy Eucharist by a priest. No physical or scientific test can detect this transformation, and to all appearances the wafers and wine remain unchanged. But traditionalist Catholics will insist that the wafers and wine are now truly Christ’s flesh and blood. If you disagree, you’re probably safe nowadays, but you wouldn’t have been in the past. It was very unwise to openly deny, let alone ridicule, transubstantiation in Catholic nations during the Middle Ages. And disagreements over the concept were central to the murderous hatreds of the Reformation. Those who believed in transubstantiation got very angry when it was denied.

This anger, which is part of the odium theologicum, is an important aspect of religious psychology, whether overt or covert — leftism can in fact be explained as a mutation of Christianity and Judaism. Overt and covert religions gain power by demanding belief in things that defy everyday reality, because such belief is difficult and requires a greater emotional investment. When we invest more in a belief, we have more incentive to protect it more strongly. And it is precisely because concepts like transubstantiation and the “female penis” are absurd that they are powerful. When we have an emotional investment in something we can’t prove, we react strongly when it is denied or ridiculed. That applies even more when we ourselves are subconsciously aware or afraid that our beliefs are baseless or false. Crushing external heresies can be a way of stilling internal doubts.

The “female penis” vs the “unisex brain”

And so religion and other forms of ideology can gain power by their contradictions and absurdities. However, in the clash between transgenderism and feminism, both sides believe in absurdities: the trannies insist on the concept of the female penis, just as the feminists insist on the concept of the “unisex brain,” namely, that there is no genuine difference between male and female brains. These two concepts are both biologically absurd: there is no such thing as a female penis, but there is such a thing as a female brain. However, if transgenderism and feminism are both powered by absurdities, why have trannies been winning the battle over the TERFs? Well, it’s partly because the trannies have the bigger, and therefore better, absurdities. For example, the “female penis” is an obvious absurdity, the “unisex brain” is much less so. Penises are out in the open, after all, whereas brains are hidden behind the skull.

And there is a continuum between a typically male brain and a typically female brain that doesn’t exist between male genitals and female genitals in the vast majority of cases. The psychological differences between men and women are a question of averages and tendencies, but the physical differences are generally stark and obvious (inter-sex individuals are rare). A certain group of trannies also have the stronger male will-to-power and love of battle, which is another reason they are winning the battle with lesbians. All this explains why the left supports and celebrates trannies as they cross the border between male and female. As a sexual minority, they have higher status than ordinary women. As a novel and exhibitionist sexual minority, they also have higher status than lesbians, who also have less will-to-power.

Better than Black

Indeed, as I pointed out in “Power to the Perverts!,” transgenderism has allowed some White heterosexual men to leap above the Black-Jewish lesbian feminist Linda Bellos in the leftist hierarchy. The White men are “transgender” and Bellos, although Black, is a TERF. In current leftism, transgender trumps TERF. Leftists therefore support the border-abolishing White men and not the border-erecting Black woman.

However, leftists would instantly support Bellos if those White men were claiming to be Black rather than female. Leftists want the border between male and female abolished, but not the border between Black and White. Why so? Again I would argue that higher and lower status settle the clash of wills. Rachel Dolezal “willed” that she was Black, while Blacks “willed” that she wasn’t. Dolezal was trying to abolish a border, Blacks were trying to maintain one, so a naïve reading of leftism would say that leftists should support “trans-racialists” like Dolezal just as they support transgenderists like Bruce Jenner. But leftists didn’t support Dolezal, and Blacks easily won the battle of wills. The border between Black and White stayed up, and Dolezal was ridiculed and punished, despite being more convincing as a Black than most transgenderists ever are as women.

{Submitter’s note: Langdon rants on and on… see the source link if you’re really interested about the rest of it}

Rabbi Eliezer Kashtiel and Rabbi Giora Redler #racist #psycho #wingnut #fundie timesofisrael.com

Two rabbis at a pre-military religious academy in a West Bank settlement were recorded making derogatory and racist comments about Arabs, defending Adolf Hitler’s worldview, and openly promoting Jewish supremacy.

In a series of undated recordings published by Channel 13 news on Monday, Rabbi Eliezer Kashtiel, the head of the Bnei David academy in Eli, can be heard calling for the enslavement of the “stupid and violent” non-Jews due to their genetic inferiority.

“The gentiles will want to be our slaves. Being a slave to a Jew is the best. They’re glad to be slaves, they want to be slaves,” he told a class in one of the video clips. “Instead of just walking the streets and being stupid and violent and harming each other, once they’re slaves, their lives can begin to take shape.”

“All around us, we are surrounded by peoples with genetic problems. Ask a simple Arab ‘where do you want to be?’ He wants to be under the occupation. Why? Because they have genetic problems, they don’t know how to run a country, they don’t know how to do anything. Look at them.”

In the lecture, Kashtiel goes on to embrace racism against non-Jews.

“Yes, we’re racists. We believe in racism… There are races in the world and peoples have genetic traits, and that requires us to try to help them,” he said. “The Jews are a more successful race.”

In another clip from the Bnei David Yeshiva published by Channel 13, Rabbi Giora Redler can be heard praising Hilter’s ideology during a lesson about the Holocaust.

“Let’s just start with whether Hitler was right or not,” he told students. “He was the most correct person there ever was, and was correct in every word he said… he was just on the wrong side.”

Redler goes on to say that pluralism is the “real” genocide being perpetrated against the Jewish people, not Nazi Germany’s Final Solution.

“The real Holocaust was not when they murdered the Jews, that’s not it. All these excuses — that it was ideological or systematic — are nonsense,” he said. “Humanism, and the secular culture of ‘We believe in man,’ that’s the Holocaust.”

The comments drew wide condemnation from opposition lawmakers who called for pulling all state funding to the Eli-based academy over Kashtiel’s and Redler’s remarks.

[...]

In 2017, then-defense minister Avigdor Liberman vowed to defund the Eli academy, but the move was blocked by the attorney general for legal reasons. Instead, Liberman announced that he would restrict the number of students as a punitive measure for the “constant sexism” at the Eli academy.

Steve Crisp #fundie wral.com

(On local churches paying $700,000 to host CA evangelical entertainer Greg Laurie in Raleigh, NC):

A lot of people could have been fed and homeless people sheltered for $700K. But when that money ran out, those same folks would still be hungry and homeless. Greg Laurie, in preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ is giving people who accept it the ability to feed their souls and house their eternity. And that is worth all the money in the world.

Peter Sprigg #fundie #homophobia mediamatters.org

Extreme anti-LBGTQ group Family Research Council regularly traffics in extreme language, but it recently published a post by Peter Sprigg about LGBTQ Pride Month, which was particularly vile even by its own standards. In the blog, Sprigg said gay men should not be proud because HIV is "a direct result of that sexual behavior" and that mental illness in the LGBTQ community is evidence its members are not "natural."

Sprigg, a senior fellow at FRC, has called for homosexuality to be criminalized and has said, “I would much prefer to export homosexuals from the United States than to import them into the United States because we believe that homosexuality is destructive to society.” Sprigg has pushed his anti-LGBTQ views internationally at the global summit of World Congress of Families (WCF), where he “argued that transgender identity is unscientific,” according to Right Wing Watch. The WCF is an international coalition of anti-choice and anti-LGBTQ groups led by former National Organization for Marriage President Brian Brown, and it promotes extreme right-wing policies around the world under the guise of protecting the “natural family.”

Domestically, Sprigg has given public comment at a committee meeting urging the Food and Drug Administration’s to uphold its policy banning men who have sex with men from donating blood, advocated to the Maryland Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee against nondiscrimination protections for transgender people, and testified before state legislatures in Vermont, Hawaii, and New Hampshire against protections for LBGTQ youth from conversion therapy. Moreover, Sprigg’s boss, FRC President Tony Perkins, was appointed by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) to be a commissioner of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom.

Sprigg also writes articles spreading anti-LGBTQ misinformation across several right-wing platforms, including The Daily Signal, Washington Examiner, and The Christian Post. Right-wing and evangelical media, in turn, quote Sprigg as an expert on conversion therapy and the health needs of transgender people even though he is not a medical professional.

In an article posted on June 11, Sprigg railed against the LGBTQ community under the deceitfully reasoned headline “Should Christians Recognize ‘LGBT Pride?’” Anti-LGBTQ organizations often try to pit religious rights against LGBTQ equality in a fallacious “God vs. Gay” dichotomy, though the majority of religious groups think homosexuality “should be accepted,” according to Pew Research. Here are some of the worst anti-LGBTQ comments that Sprigg pushed in the FRC blog post:

"The high rates of mental illness that accompany such feelings is strong evidence against the idea that homosexual and transgender feelings are ‘natural.’”

"Men who have sex with men, in particular, have high rates of HIV infection and other sexually transmitted diseases as a direct result of that sexual behavior—so is it something to be ‘proud’ of?”

"To accept ‘LGBT Pride’ is to accept the assertion that these feelings are a normal and natural variant of human sexuality.”

"Some individuals who identify as transgender ask surgeons to mutilate or remove otherwise healthy body parts—often with serious long-term consequences—in order to make their bodies resemble more closely their desired sex. Is this something to be proud of?”

"To endorse ‘LGBT Pride’ is to endorse all three—to affirm that LGBT feelings are normal and natural (which is untrue), that LGBT behaviors are harmless or even admirable (also untrue), and that their LGBT ‘identity’ is innate (untrue as well).”

"Homosexual activists and their allies in the states have even been invading the privacy of the relationship between mental health providers and their clients, by passing laws to prohibit sexual orientation change efforts, or SOCE (which critics refer to as ‘conversion therapy’) with minors.”

"The former tennis star and self-identified lesbian Martina Navratilova said, ‘Catholic clergy has been a lot more dangerous to kids than LGBT’ (apparently without irony, since there is reason to believe that most of the Catholic priests who have molested children are themselves homosexual).”

Supersport #fundie christiandiscussionforums.org

My first Hitler thread

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok so it seems to be a form of entertainment for some Christians to point out that darwinism and Hitler's behavior (killing) goes hand-in-hand. I usually stay out of those types of arguments because I already have enough enemies as it is. But my honest opinion about it is that atheism -- which ToE is the offspring of -- offers absolutely nothing in the way of a moral reason not to engage in the killings and other atrocities that Hilter and other atheists (such as abortionists) engage in. Of course this is not to say that people of faith are perfect, but at least Christians have a moral foundation of what's right and wrong.

But what gets me is the tenacity that evos will distance themselves from Hitler and deny that (at least in part) he used darwinism as justification for the murders he committed. But seriously, what's the big deal?...why be ashamed of it? Hitler may have killed millions of people and done all sorts of torcher on thousands or millions of others -- but what's wrong with that?...under ToE, the world was built on survival of the fittest....so just because someone happened to come along who enjoyed killing people for his own pleasure and/or power should not be looked down upon by evos....just as a butterfly who flutters around in the garden shouldn't be looked down upon. They're just different animals ----- one isn't better or worse than the other because each was just an accidental product of evolution. How can we expect someone or something to act moral and "right" when they are nothing but an accident and also a prisoner of the genes they were dealt in life? We certainly don't look down on lions for killing zebras...why should evos be afraid of being associated with Hitler, who killed the Jews? What's the difference? Why try to act all moral on these boards when there is nothing inherently immoral about killing? Heck, your whole theory is built on the construction of life via death -- you evos are obsessed with it....so why not embrace it openly and in public?

Starcatcher778 #fundie youtube.com

When was the last time a Christian killed Jews in mass? Are you going to tell me Hilter was a Catholic Christian?

[Next post:]
Yes I do condone the total distruction of societies and paganism that is beyond any hope: For example the Aztecs where they practiced Human Sacrafice? Or would you have sent them to Siberia or re-education camps?

Shizuru-Minamino #homophobia #fundie deviantart.com

image
The Holy Bible makes this quite clear. The Bible is the law and the written Word of God, himself. It doesn't matter if something that is sinful is made legal. What is sin is the product of the Devil. God made us man and woman, for one man and one woman to marry and bear children. That's what we are intended to be.

The people who created the U.S, were Christians, following the Word of God. They used the Ten Commandments to create our laws and constitutional amendments. Our country was created with the love of Jesus in mind. He wants all of us to follow his Father's plans. There is no lie about this and it's not something ancient, because the Bible is never ancient. It never has set dates in history. It's written like the events in it are always present.

There's a man in prison for 15 years in Iowa for burning the Rainbow Flag that was posted outside of his church. He did the righteous thing, because the Rainbow Flag is really a symbol of lust. It's not love. It's not a Christian flag. Real love is about loving everyone, but also it's about a husband and a wife loving each other. What this man burned was a flag symbolizing lust. And Satan enjoys confusing people under this flag by saying it's love. He claims being gay and lesbian is the way to be. That we must accept LBGTQ for the new way. This is what Satan wants to trap us with.

But, LBGTQ is never the new way. It's just a way to sway people to the realms of Hell after death. The man that was sent to prison, will be receiving judgement from God, the real judge of this world. He'll have his place in Heaven for burning a symbol of lust that was forced upon the House of God. The real path to Heaven, is to stay with God's plans. Swallow your gay/lesbian pride and be straight. One husband and one wife creates children. One man and one woman creates a home for the presence of God to be made welcome. And one man and one woman at the time of death creates less to no sin that needs to be pardoned, in order to enter God's kingdom. You can't have anything sinful to hang off you. Being gay/lesbian is one of those sins. Claiming it as love is another. And saying, "but my country says it's okay" doesn't make it any less sinful. All that says to Him is "that country needs to be gotten rid of, if it's forcing my children to obey sin instead of me".

WCG777 #fundie rr-bb.com

I have a girlfriend i have been dating for 6months now and meet her on eharmony. she also is a virgin. I find it quite disgusting to even think about dating a non virgin. For me it was either my girlfriend be a virgin or I was prepared to stay single for the rest of my life

Brian Michael C #fundie myspace.com

[Replying to someone calling Hilter a faggot]

Conquering almost all of Europe and taking on the entire world and almost winning doesnt sound much like the work of a fag to me. Hitler was someone to reckon with, he no doubt made his mark on history forever. And to top it all off this man did all this with a battered country which he himself rose up.

Hitler is also no doubt, probably the most famous person next to Jesus that most people know world wide.

Will humanity remember your name after you die? So whose really the fag.

jwobstj #fundie wired.com

This is a hilarious attempt to demonized the alt-right for the very things you apparently idolize being done by the lunatic left. Nice try. You could replace all of the references to alt-right in your article with LBGTQ, BLM, or Occupy Wallstreet and come to the same conclusions about those organizations. All you've really done is make an extremely weak and lame attempt to legitimize the lunatic leftist groups at the expense of one on the other side of the pendulum swing.

SoDepressedAndScared #fundie moonbattery.com

[Re President Obama]

Hmmmm. This all is kind of sounding like another guy everyone thought was so super great that they followed him blindly without question. Who tried to conceal his Jewish roots by entering Austria and chasing down his Birth Certificate. Who held political rallies in Berlin, Germany and stadiums. Who gets his real family identity and his Jewish name Schickelgruber buried in the media. Can you say Adolf Hilter?

Declan Finn #fundie declanfinn.com

The French revolution murdered tens of thousands of people. Many of them were priests -- even priests who had supported the revolution fell to The Terror. But they knew enough to not destroy Notre Dame.

In 1944, Adolf Hilter wanted Paris burned as his forces were driven out.

The military, however, knew better, and did nothing. If they had burned Paris to the ground, they feared that their lives would be forfeit. Considering the conclusion of the war, it was a smart play on their part. The Nazis knew not to destroy Notre Dame.

Modern day is not so smart.

2019 has seen a rash of destruction of Catholic churches throughout France. It's countrywide.

There are only two real culprits.

The first is the same people from 1792. I don't care if you call them Robespierre or "Occupy" or whatever form the commie bastards are choosing this week, they're all the same pricks. They're anti-theist, they're nasty, and they have no qualms about destroying the past to further their agenda. In fact, the destruction of the past and the Church itself is part of their plan for success.

The second group of the usual suspects .... is exactly who you're thinking they are. If you're one of the few people who can't guess, some hints.

They like destroying other people's iconography (like big Buddhist statues)
They're responsible for trashing parts of Germany (like Hamburg on New Year's)
They've gotten a free pass in Europe for years because to arrest them for their crimes would be "racist against migrants."

That's right! The Amish!

No, of course not. I kid. I mean the Jews.

Oh, did I say that out loud? Sorry. I've been listening to Congresswoman Omar lately.

I meant Muslims.

[...]

Look at that blaze and you tell me that went from zero to sixty before the fire department could reach them, and you tell me with a straight face that it's not arson. Given how many churches have been trashed this year alone in France, to ask me to consider that it's NOT arson is an insult to my intelligence.

To the people who did this, I ask that you read these books [Amazon link to his novels] and learn what your fate will be. You want to play by these rules? I war gamed the outcome.

Whoever did this will burn. We know the French are too cowardly to arrest the real perps (with luck, they'll have a quiet accident).

But that's what Hell is for.