Similar posts

David J, Stewart #fundie #homophobia #transphobia #conspiracy jesusisprecious.org

Queer rights, transgenderism, bisexuality, homosexual marriage, and gender transition—these are not the real battle ground. The real battle ground is against God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, the Church, the Holy Bible, and the Gospel. Any blasphemy against God comes from God-haters, Christ-haters, Bible-haters, Gospel-haters, and are fueled by the arch-hater, who is Satan himself! Since marriage is vital to God's design—His way to pass on order in society, sensible civilization, peace, temporal blessing and even righteousness from one generation to the next—the family has always been under assault. God made humans MALE and FEMALE (Genesis 1:27), nothing in between! After the fall of man in Genesis, we see all manner of sexual immorality in Genesis—polygamy, prostitution, incest, and rampant homosexuality by Genesis chapter 19. The true sinister agenda of demons and Satan is to DESTROY everything that God has made!!! They are the enemies of God, Christ, and the truth of Scripture, and the Gospel. Their objective is not simply to redefine gender and marriage, but to effectively destroy what God has designed!

Families provide a small sovereign unit that acts as a small barrier against the corruption that seeks to dominate. Destroy the family and the small sovereign barrier is disintegrated. The goal in all of this is not homosexual same sex marriage, but the total elimination of ALL MARRIAGE! Which then means, that you don't possess any privacy, you don't have that small sovereign unit, and your children are not yours! They're public children and they belong to the education system, and they belong to the country, and they belong to the village, but not to you! And so in Oregon your 15 year old child can have a sex-change, without parental permission, and the state will pay for it! This is not about same sex marriage, this is about the total obliteration of the family. So that there will be no more family, no more covenants, no more private sovereign units that stand up against the corruption!

Where did this all begin? It began with contraception, which allowed people to have sex without the risk of having children. This fueled the sexual revolution. But that wasn't good enough, so they legalized abortion to be more complete, eliminating all risk! So we've come all the way from sex without children, to children without sex!!! Laboratories can manufacture a baby nowadays! Two lesbians can have a baby today! A lesbian can have, planted in her womb, a living being from somebody else, manufacturing a child. This eliminates the need for a man and woman in a normal marriage. So we've deteriorated from sex without having children, to the insanity of having children without sex! They can just make them, so who needs a family? Right? It's going to get worse and worse and worse! Same sex, polygamy, anything to destroy the family!!! Just as Sodom tried to rape the angels sent from Heaven, who appeared in human form in Genesis, so also do queers today rape all that is pure, holy and chaste! HOMOSEXUALITY IS OF THE DEVIL!!!

victoriassecretpolice #sexist rtrixie.tumblr.com

imagine the world without men. imagine every little girl forced into sex slavery finally being freed, forever. imagine dancing with your friends under the streetlights without fear. imagine little girls exploring the world and being unafraid to be big and strong and brilliant. imagine getting our forests and oceans back, letting the world heal. imagine the beauty of this world without the plague of men.

Valerie Bright #fundie exfamily.org

Sex in Heaven!

By Marilyn Monroe

(This message from beyond was received through Valerie Bright.)

(Marilyn Monroe speaking:) Hello, Doll! My name is Marilyn Monroe! Have you seen any of my pictures? Did you like them? I did that all for you, Honey! And I'd do more for you if I had a chance! There isn't anything I wouldn't do for you, my fans, my loved ones, my friends, my family, all those wonderful faces, all you wonderful people, you gorgeous men, all of you who were so good to me and who loved me. I still love you! Can you feel my love? Come on over here a little closer. You remember me -- Marilyn Monroe. Remember some of my pictures? Well, just imagine I'm right there beside you right now, because I am that close to you in the spirit!

Maybe you're feeling lonely, or down, and at the end of your rope. Maybe you just had an argument with your wife or your husband, or you've just received another bill in the mail and there's no way you can pay it. Did you just have a flare-up with your next-door neighbor? I know how you feel, Honey, because there were many days in my life when I was so down and so lonely and at the end of my rope. Every day was so empty of hope, so mundane, so dry. I was so very unhappy, and it seemed that nothing could ever help.

That's why I'm reaching out to you now. That's why I'm speaking to you now from over here, because I know what it's like to be in your shoes. All I can tell you, folks, is to just hang on! You're going to find that Heaven is a place where no one will ever look down on you again. No one will ever hurt you. In Heaven you never hear the words "dumb," "stupid," "slob," or "lazy."

I had a wonderful life that many girls would dream of having, and they would give anything to be like me -- a beautiful star, a glamorous movie actress. But I was a sad child. I missed my mother and father. I really wanted to be a mother and have a family and a happy married life. I wanted a pretty house and a beautiful garden and a dog and a cat. I wanted so much to be loved and understood and cared for by a man who would love me and take care of me and watch over me and protect me. I wanted it so much. But because of my selfishness, my career, my goals, my desire for fame and attention, my desire to have people applaud me and praise me, I didn't give my heart to being a loving mother and wife.

When you have the chance, don't miss the opportunity to put your arm around your wife and tell her she's pretty; or put your arms around your hubby and tell him you love him. Our lives are so short; they're over before we even know it. Any one of you could die today. So if you have a family, a wife, a husband, parents, friends, even your boss, even those at work, I want to tell you that it's time to put down your grudges and your differences and put your arms around one another. If you can do that, a lot of your sadness, your loneliness, your sorrow, your bitterness and your emptiness will disappear. In its place you will find happiness and a renewed joy!

I spent so much of my life alone, in my hotel room, drinking and smoking and mooning and pining over the mistakes I made and the problems of life. I'd hate to see that happen to any of you. Life doesn't have to be like that for anyone, because no matter what anyone tells you, and no matter what anyone does, and no matter what happens in your day, there is Someone who loves you very much. Jesus wants you to know that He is real and that He loves you! Jesus wanted me to tell you that. He said, "Marilyn, you tell them. They know you, Marilyn. They've loved you, they've adored you, they've watched your films, they know you, and they think you're great."

Well, if you thought I was great before, you should see me now! If you thought I was sexy before, you're going to really like what you see when you get here! And you don't have to worry about "unsafe sex" in Heaven, because there are no diseases or hurts or earthly problems here! You won't have to worry about your loved one getting jealous either, because that doesn't happen here. Here we can love each other without envy or jealousy. We can share our love with each other and show our love to each other freely. I promise you, I'm going to give you a lot of love when you get here!

Has that been your dream? Well, I want to make it a dream come true! I can! I can be your dream come true! For those of you who believe in the spirit world and who know it's real and it exists, you know we will meet one day. For those of you who aren't sure, just look at a picture of Jesus and tell Him you love Him, tell Him you need Him in your life, and He won't fail you. He'll bring you safely home to Heaven, home to His arms -- and to my arms, too!

I love you and I'm glad I had a chance to talk to you. I want you to know that I'll be thinking about you. I can see you and I can watch over you, and I'm closer to you than you can imagine. So how do you like having Marilyn Monroe for your guardian angel?

Keep hanging on through life's ups and downs. Think about me and picture me if things get too tough. Jesus is right beside me. I'll pray for you and He will help you. And don't worry about how you picture me. I'm not dressed in a nun's outfit, so don't worry! I've got something on that you will really like! So let your imagination go wild, boys! That's the way I like it, the hotter the better! I'll warm you up when you're feeling lonely and sad. And when you feel that warmth and you feel that smile on your face, just know that it's God's love for you, and thank Jesus for it.

Don't worry, don't be ashamed, don't feel guilty, there's nothing wrong! I want you to be very, very happy, and Jesus wants you to be very, very happy. So let's really have a good time! Let's have a good time living! Just be happy and keep smiling so that I'll know that you're all right. Then I won't have to worry about you.

Are you going to be all right? Is everybody going to be all right? That's good. Here's a big kiss goodbye! And don't forget my promise. I'll see you one day soon and take you in my arms and fulfill all your wildest dreams. That's one of the things I do in Heaven, I keep the boys happy!

I love being sexy and I love sex, and there's no reason why you shouldn't too. But you do have to be more careful there in your present life than you will here in Heaven. Here you won't have any worries or fears about sex, and it will be so wonderful for you. You won't have any inhibitions or problems. You're going to be so happy. And the One you can thank for that is God, because He made it all! He created us to need sex, to want sex, and to enjoy sex.

There is sex in Heaven! That's the good news! That should be the news of the century! That should make headlines in all the newspapers, don't you think?! There is sex in Heaven, folks! We all need sex, you know, because God made us to feel that way.

You won't have any trouble here with impotence or frigidity; those things don't exist here! This is a world of love and loving sex, good and Godly, wonderful, beautiful, thrilling, ecstatic, gorgeous sex! I know, because I've been having sex with these wonderful men up here! You'll have sex too! If you don't think you can understand or accept what I'm saying now, well, don't worry, because like I said, you won't have any problem understanding it once you're here. It's divine and it's wonderful, just the way it should be. It should be that way for you now in your present life, but there has been so much propaganda against sex that hardly anyone can enjoy it to the full without feeling fearful and guilty.

I want you to know that in Heaven sex is looked upon without fear or guilt. It's looked upon as a beautiful, loving communication between a man and a woman. And if you have any problems or inhibitions or just don't know how, well, we'll be able to teach you. That's one of my jobs, I'm happy to say, and there are other very pretty women here who are very willing to be your new sex teachers, and handsome men for you women! Isn't that fun? Won't that be a fun course to enroll in?!

I know you're all interested in sex, so don't pretend you're not! That's why you men all spent so much time looking at me, and at all the other beautiful women! God's creation in the form of a female body always gets top billing. Wait till you get here and see some of the beautiful movies that artistically feature God's creation. We're not inhibited here about our bodies, about being naked, about touching one another and caressing one another.

You won't have any trouble having an erection and keeping it up for as long as you like! You may see a beautiful woman and that's just what might happen! There aren't any inhibitions here! It's a re-learning process -- re-learning that there isn't anything wrong with feeling those sexy feelings. That's why I told you that you're going to be so happy here and it's going to be so wonderful for you. You're going to be able to explode in beautiful orgasms of loving sex with others without fear or condemnation.

You're going to have a beautiful life in Heaven, a beautiful life after death. You're going to have a brand-new life, a brand-new body, and you won't become tired or weary. You women are going to feel so young and so sexy, like you've never felt before. And the men are going to all want you! And you're going to want all the men! That's just the way it's supposed to be. God meant us to love each other and show each other our love by good, Godly, loving sex. You will even be able to fulfill some of your beautiful sexual fantasies! You can make love under water, and in many new and beautiful ways that you don't even know about yet.

If sex feels so good to you now on earth, can you imagine how much better it's going to feel in Heaven?! You can go dancing and romancing and love your honey all night long! You're going to feel so young and virile and sexy, and people here won't condemn you.

Isn't love more wonderful when you feel someone loves you enough to make love to you? Aren't your days brighter and more cheerful, and don't you feel happier when you know someone cares enough and loves you enough to caress every inch of your body? And if you haven't experienced that yet, I want you to know that I'm your girl! I won't let you down, because I love you! You're going to be thrilled to find that not only me, but all the girls and women here are very loving. Like I said, we have a very sexy God!

But don't worry, there isn't going to be any pressure on you. No one's going to expect you to do anything you don't want to do or don't feel like doing. Perhaps you won't even be that interested, and that's just fine too. It's not a competition.

The reason why I've taken this time to talk to you about sex is because not many people have told you that there's sex in Heaven. Hardly anybody knows that, so I thought you'd want to know!

So are you surprised you have a sexy God?! Well, He is sexy, and that's why you feel sexy, too, because He created you in His image! But that's a fairly small part of life in Heaven and the spirit world; there are many more thrills here that are greater than sex. They're waiting for you, and all you have to do is just say "yes" to Jesus! Believe in Him, talk to Him, love Him, need Him and want Him, and one day soon you'll be here with Him. I love you!

Much love, Marilyn.

Graham Seibert #racist #sexist amren.com

Why Older White Men Should Start Second Families

Developed societies are not reproducing themselves. This includes the Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, and European peoples along with their former white colonies.

Societies must have children. At the same time, children of our peoples will enjoy better prospects if they can live among others like themselves rather than among a mix of other ethnicities. And governments, whoever their citizens may be, have a constant need for new generations of taxpayers and soldiers.

A significant number of older men become available for marriage. Though some are widowed, more are divorced. Whether they sought this freedom or not, many older men find themselves no longer bound by obligations to former wives, children, and grandchildren. They are free to start over.

Identitarians, who are making the strongest case for increasing the fertility of their own groups, should look at older men as natural allies and recruit them to the cause. Older men identify more strongly with the societies into which they were born. They retain traditional values. They have demonstrated by their survival and success that they have “the right stuff” worth passing on to a new generation. They generally have the material resources to support children, and if they do not already have a family, they should start one.

Men should not be encouraged to fritter away the last few decades of life traveling and playing golf. Like younger men who are re-discovering their identities, they should raise strong families to perpetuate their heritage.

Genetics

Genetics lie at the core of most arguments against older fatherhood. Although the bulk of the harmful mutations that appear in every person’s genome are inherited from parents, an older man is more likely to have de novo mutations to his genome — those that appear during his lifetime.

Still, the number of harmful de novo mutations is small compared to the thousand or so inherited mutations. Kondrashov includes a table showing that in the genome of a newborn, de novo mutations make up 10 percent of the worst mutations (which reduce fitness by 10 percent or more), 1 percent of those that reduce fitness by 1 percent or more, and 0.1 percent and .001 percent of the lesser orders of magnitude of deleterious mutations. However old a father may be, he can take comfort in the fact that a significantly greater percentage of his children’s load of deleterious genes will be ones he and his wife inherited rather than new ones he passed along to his children. The increase in the risk of harmful mutations is probably no more than about 25 percent. If the rest of his genome gives children a 25 percent edge — in terms of charm, good looks, intelligence — it can be a fair trade.

Genetic advantages of an older father

An older guy who is available for marriage probably inherited fewer harmful mutations than most. He obviously didn’t inherit anything that would kill him young. Heart disease is about 30 percent heritable. An older guy fit enough to marry probably doesn’t have it. Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia are about 50 percent heritable. The older husband who doesn’t yet show any signs of dementia is less likely to carry those mutations. An older guy on the marriage market is less likely to carry genetic mutations favoring bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, or other conditions that show up over the course of adult life.

An older man available for marriage has almost certainly been successful, and therefore above-average in intelligence. Intelligence is about 80 percent heritable. A woman can’t control her own contribution to a child’s intelligence — that’s baked into her genome. But if the older partner she attracts has a 20 IQ point advantage over a younger suitor, she can reasonably expect her children will be correspondingly smarter.

Part of the argument about de novo mutations is that since the rates of childhood mortality fell from about 50 percent at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution to today’s 1 percent, an increasing number of deleterious genes are retained in each successive generation. The older father is one or two generations closer to the Industrial Revolution. In all, though the older father will have somewhat more deleterious mutations, his genome may be superior to that of a young woman’s younger potential partners.

What do we want out of life?

There are other considerations, and each of the following has a particular point of view: the older man, the younger wife, the children, and the state. Finally, society has an interest in perpetuating its culture, values, and traditions and this interest may conflict with those of the individuals and the state.

Will children make an older man happy? Children take time and money away from the pursuit of commercialized happiness. A man whose concept of “happiness” is skiing, surfing, and rock concerts will find that children do not bring happiness.

Personal consumption is a major element in many men’s idea of happiness. They want the latest iGadgets, imported wines, and Swiss watches. Children are expensive, so all but the wealthiest men must make trade-offs, but children can also be a vehicle for conspicuous consumption. Sending them to private schools, exclusive camps, and Ivy League universities burns money almost as well as buying yachts.

It is impossible to measure the value of sex. The man raising children within a marriage can be reasonably sure of getting sex every now and again, but he can be equally sure that he will not get all he wants. The man who equates happiness with frequent sex is better off being a wealthy bachelor, frequenting prostitutes, or using Tinder. An older husband, presumably with a somewhat reduced libido, is likely to be better matched to his wife.

Responsibility for a family gives a man a reason for living. The family provides emotional support. A lifelong partnership gives a man an anchor in life, a sense of stability. Happiness comes with satisfying ones felt obligation to God and/or the church, one’s clan, one’s tribe, and one’s nation. For a patriot, serving his country also brings happiness.

Community involvement

Being married provides a man with a niche in society. Other people know how to peg him: married with children. He is automatically included in other groups: the PTA, parents who carpool, babysitting cooperatives, swimming pool parents, etc. These connections keep an older father involved in society. It is easy for a retiree to let go of life bit by bit as his family obligations are satisfied and no new ones appear. A late-life family poses real obligations, and keeps a man connected with society.

Why would an older man start a family?

Having children doesn’t offer material benefit for the older prospective father. If he is already old, he won’t last long enough for children to care for him in his dotage. Having a younger wife will confer some status whether or not she bears him children, but the tax and welfare benefits of children are laughably small. Ultimately, the only motive is to have children for their own sake, and perhaps to follow some higher calling, such as an obligation to ancestors, society, or the church.

Why would a woman have children with an older man?

Western society has been drenched for decades with anti-fertility messages. We are told there are too many people on earth and Westerners, because of our material consumption, damage the planet. Our societies are inherently unfair to women and racial minorities and sexual minorities; we should die out. Add to that the scare stories from women’s magazines about the genetic risks of an older father.

If a woman decides, despite all the opposition, that she wants children, what are the advantages and disadvantages of an older man? The age of the mother is dictated by biology. A woman’s fertility declines quickly after 35. If she is over 40, the couple may well seek medical help, and will probably stop at one child. This is asymmetric: he has three more decades of fertility than she.

In Western society, a woman who has decided to dedicate her fertile years to having children is in a privileged position for choosing mates. This is especially true for intelligent, educated women, because so many of their competitors are busy with careers. Such a woman can choose a partner from more or less her own age up to the limits of male fertility. Why would she choose an older man?

Financial resources

Raising a family takes money. A woman wants a man who can provide for her.

In choosing a younger man, a woman is betting on the future. It’s uncertain how far he will rise. He may burn out — and prove to be an unsuitable provider — or, he may become spectacularly successful, pull away from his wife and family, and become subject to all kinds of temptations. With an older man, you get what you see. The drama has already played out.

Older men tend to have more money. This is especially true of older men looking for younger woman in the marriage market. They would not be looking unless they were successful. It is also something specific to this generation. The baby boomers have been running society for more than 40 years, and have stacked the deck in their own favor. The baby boomers are the richest generation in America’s history, and also in Western Europe. Younger men are not likely to have as much money.

Men already on pension are probably receiving healthy ones. This is on top of the wealth they have accumulated. Gen X and millennial men have had such a hard time scraping together the down payment for a house that they have not benefited from the rise in stocks and real estate. Moreover, they could well be cheated out of social security; there will be nothing but a dry well for them.

Maturity

People tend to become more stable and predictable as they get older. They know more about life and they fall into habits that have proven successful. An older husband is less likely to make erratic decisions, such as changing careers, moving, or developing a newfound taste for drugs, alcohol, or video games.

Arguments and stress are part of every marriage. A mature man will understand his long-term interests better, and favor the long-term benefits of marriage over short-term concerns about one-up-man-ship or self-esteem.

A woman should enter marriage with the expectation that her partner will be there for the 20 years or so it takes to raise children. An older guy can be a good bet. Actuarially, an older suitor in good health is very likely to survive another 20 years, and psychologically, he is more likely to remain the same person.

Fidelity

A woman should not bet on a man who is unlikely to settle down. A man’s character becomes clear by the time he is 50. An older man is less likely to his affections wander, so long as he has a reliable partner.

To return to a previous point, the primary reason an older man would want to marry a younger woman and have children is because he wants children. The best way to succeed at that is to remain in a monogamous marriage. Children in a stable marriage are more likely to succeed, and the man himself is far more likely to have more children with a single loving spouse than he is with whatever paramours he may find by stepping out.

Traditional values

The rate at which society changes has accelerated dramatically. Members of the silent generation grew up attending church, not cursing (very much, anyhow), believing in the Golden rule and that honesty was the best policy, and expecting that we would marry and stay married. Our millennial children think we are hopelessly square. More than that, they slur us with epitaphs such as patriarchy, racist, bigot, homophobe, and whatnot when we utter what was merely common sense when we were younger.

A woman might conclude that the family values with which an older man grew up are a better foundation for a family than the social justice ideas that fill the minds of younger men.

Commitment to children

Convincing a much younger woman to have children is not an easy task. A man who does so has already shown his commitment to children. He probably already has children. A prospective bride can talk with him about what worked and didn’t, and how he will contribute to raising a new family. A man who has never married may not have given the subject much thought, and except for a few who have had the chance to help raising younger siblings, not much experience either.

Experience

Older men who are inclined to marry have probably done it before. They have experience changing diapers and babysitting. They probably know how to wash dishes and keep house. If the guy has kept himself in shape, as a great many have in this day of bicycling and health clubs, he should be up to the task. A man who works to stay in shape can sustain himself pretty well until he reaches his 70s, but at some point age catches up with him. An offsetting benefit is that an older husband is likely to have more time to spend with his wife and family

The wife’s career

The odds are strong that the prospective husband has already reached the peak of his career. If he is a workaholic, it will be evident — and he will probably not want to saddle himself with family responsibilities. If he truly wants children, there is a strong chance he will find time to spend with them. If her husband has more time to spend with children, his younger wife may find her own life easier. It will be easier for her to pursue a career if she wants, or to take music lessons, attend lectures, and do other things strictly for herself.

Predictable problems

An older man will have a different circle of friends and different interests than those of a younger wife. If both man and wife come from the same country and culture, he may expect his wife to socialize with people of his generation. If they come from different countries, as is often the case with modern May-December marriages, one of them will have to adapt to a whole new environment and make a new set of friends.

For an older man, the better option appears to be to rise to the challenge of learning a new language, making new friends, and adapting to new customs in his bride’s country. If it is the woman who is doing the adaptation — moving to a wealthier Western country — there is a chance the new environment will change her perception of her husband. Not a few older men have seen their tender Asian or Eastern European brides go feminist and decide that this marriage was not exactly what they wanted.

Advantages to children of an older father

The children of an older father will see more of their father. Spending time with their father doesn’t contribute to intelligence or the formation of personality, since these things are mostly inherited. However, boys, especially, turn out better if they grow up in intact families and spend a lot of time with their fathers. When mother and father agree that developing a child’s character is important, it seems they can do that. Even in a therapeutic society dedicated to the proposition that every child should be “happy,” parents who emphasize responsibility and hard work seem to be rewarded.

The good of society

Society needs children. A culture needs new generations to share everything that defines culture: customs, religious beliefs, history, dress and so on. The more fathers, the more children, and the more children, the better — at least in the West. If older fathers sire more productive children — intelligence, personality, etc. — their children make more positive contributions.

If we look at society as a gene pool, an older father’s increased load of de novo mutations is more than offset by the likelihood that he is perpetuating superior genetic material

The good of government

A government needs soldiers and taxpayers. Government benefits from children — and pays for their education and services — whoever the father may be. Older fathers do not impose any special costs on government. Their pensions do not go up. An older father is more likely to be solvent and less likely to be on welfare. This benefit is more than enough to offset the greater likelihood that he will die and his family will go on welfare.

Conclusion

We of today’s older generation have more education, resources, and time than any in history. Although we do not have as much of a feeling for our family, tribe, and nation as our ancestors did, we certainly have more than the generations following us. If there is going to be a renewed ethnic identity among our people, we have an important role. Many of us are already committed.

Awareness alone, however, will not solve the problem. We need new generations of people like ourselves. White people need to be raising white babies. Japanese need to be raising Japanese babies, and Chinese, Chinese. There is no danger in encouraging other groups. Given our shrinking numbers, the world has room for all of us.

We reached the zenith of human accomplishment when we had pride in ourselves and our people and believed that what we had was worth passing on. We can continue to do this by spending time with our grandchildren but, when possible, we should start new families.

Resolving to begin again and find a committed partner is not easy but it isn’t impossible. There are traditional women in our own countries, women who have not been swept up in the moral ambiguities of the age, who are looking for reliable partners. There remain countries such as those of Central and Eastern Europe where a majority of women of childbearing age want a traditional family.

Stop lamenting the unfortunate changes that have affected our countries and our society, and create a new generation to perpetuate all of the good that we inherited and cherish.

Brian S. Holmes #fundie quora.com

Anyone who lives a sinful life in rebellion to God, guilty of breaking His moral law, and dies in their sins, will go to Hell. This includes non-Christians and even some who consider themselves Christians alike.

God is Holy and righteous, and He is just. The Bible says “God cannot be mocked. We will reap what we sow.” Sin, evil, wickedness, etc will be accounted for. No one who does what is evil in the eyes of God will escape Judgment and Punishment. Nor will they inherit eternal life in the presence of God.

Anyone who dies in their sins will appear before the Judgment Throne of Christ. (Jesus is the Judge) and they will have to answer for all of them. The guilty will be sent to Hell. The innocent will be sparred. Anyone whose name is not written in the Lamb’s (Jesus) Book of Life will be cast into the outer darkness. (Revelation 21)

The reasons true “born-again” Christians can escape this Judgment is as follows:

1. They acknowledged their own sinfulness and repented (changed their mind, are going the other way towards God).

2. They humbled themselves and realized that they are not capable of being good enough on their own. Because if they could be good enough on their own it would mean that either they are wrong, arrogant and self-righteous, and not nearly as good as they think they are, or that God is just really not all that good.

3. They believe and trust in Jesus that He is the Son of God, God in the flesh, who came to Earth and stood in their place as a substitution for them who paid for all of their sins on the cross. They can escape dying for their sins and going to Hell because Jesus died for their sins for them. Fortunately, Jesus conquered sin, death, and Hell.

4. They allow Jesus to be the Lord of their lives from that point forward. They obey God’s laws to the best of their ability and when they fall short they confess it, repent, and trust in Jesus that they are forgiven for it. They no longer live ungodly but because of God’s grace saving them they persevere over the temptations in the world.

5. They allow the Holy Spirit of God to Guide and Transform them and help them become more like Jesus. They don’t walk by the flesh, but by the Spirit of God inside of them. They allow Him to heal, deliver, and empower them to live a life worthy of someone with God’s approval.

Christians (as a whole group) are not necessarily better people they are just people who are trusting in Jesus to pay for their sins and to transform them. Everyone else either thinks they are already good enough (good luck!), or thinks that they can make themselves good enough on their own (good luck!), or thinks that God isn’t real, just, and going to judge them. But He will.

So get right with Jesus… He’s the ONLY SURE-FIRE way.

Luke 13:5 I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish."

John 14:6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

David J. Stewart #sexist jesus-is-savior.com

I want to share with you the tragic account of a struggling marriage. Here's a poor guy who goes to work every day faithfully to support his family. His wife stays at home and is supposed to be a “homemaker” (I never liked the term “housewife” because she's not married to the house).

The man's wife has a problem... several problems. She doesn't clean the house. She lies all the time. She hides things from her husband. She slanders him on the phone while he's at work. She is unreliable and irresponsible.

...

The psychiatrists are worthless, doing absolutely nothing to help the woman. Her husband is tired and at the end of his rope, he doesn't know where to turn for help. His wife runs out the door for hours at a time every time he mentions anything negative concerning her lack of responsibility. She goes out in the middle of winter, barefoot in the snow, her feet are numb when her panic attack finally breaks. She is driving her husband nuts. Her husband is missing work because of problems at home with his wife. He tries not to get angry at her, but he is human and can only take so much.

He says mean things which he shouldn't say. Her overwhelming fear triggers more panic attacks and she leaves for weeks at a time, he has no idea where she's at. He is always sorry for getting angry at her, but living with her is the most frustrating thing he has ever tried to do. He counsels with others... some advise him to file for divorce... others advise him to take her for more "professional" help. Her mind is unstable. He is tired. She is predictably unpredictable. The marriage is on the rocks.

...

The father is worried she's going to take his children away in her foolishness, and they'll end up in a heathen court system that caters to rebellious women. Many father's and husbands are living in fear these days because of the brutal onslaught by the rigged court system. The system wants divorces (which mean broken families). Once in the court system, the judge and lawyers take complete control. The couple has no say in the outcome. THERE WILL BE A DIVORCE. The judge and lawyers are required by law to follow rules set by the New World Order, which operates from New York city. Judges are evil to the core in today's system. It's all about money and state control over the children.

His wife told him she wanted to find a new psychiatrist. She didn't drive a car so she asked her husband to drive her to the appointments. For three months her husband drove her to the appointments, dropped her off, and then came back an hour later to get her. We'll, he should have went with her because it turned out that there was NO DOCTOR in the first place. The man's wife made it all up for fear that she was going to be committed to a mental institution. She aimlessly wandered around for an hour each time, waiting for her husband to come back to get her. Once the man's wife found herself on a public transportation bus and didn't know how she got there.

One day she gave her husband a drink. He guzzled the drink down and then noticed soap suds in the glass (with a horrible aftertaste taste in his mouth). She had failed to rinse the Ajax dishwashing detergent out of the glass. Would you be upset? On another occasion the poor guy had food poisoning from eating one of her salads. She was just a walking accident everywhere she went, and her poor husband suffered day and night because of it.

The husband's wife doesn't want to kiss him, saying she doesn't like "mushy kisses." The poor man is frustrated with his wife's lack of desire for sensuality or sex. She tells her psychiatrist that she has no feelings for her husband. She openly admits to her husband that she has been cold-hearted for the past several years. Yet, she continues to be as cold as ice. He gets angry at her sometimes when he sees a pretty woman, feeling like he's been cheated in life. His wife won't spend five minutes in front of a mirror to pretty herself up for him. She just doesn't care.

He gives her a credit card and encourages her to buy whatever she needs to pretty herself up. She doesn't do it. He asks her to buy a book on "How to be Sensual." She won't order it. After several fights, she orders it, but then she won't read it. After several more fights, she finally reads it but won't try any of it. It's a constant uphill battle for the poor husband, fighting tooth-and-nail all the way to get his wife to be a wife. Then she leaves him when he gets angry with her. After 18 1/2 years of marriage she meets a religious feminist who influences her to divorce. That's always the answer of feminists... divorce, divorce, divorce!

Whereas the couple went down into the abyss of life's problems together, a helping hand from a meddling serpent pulls the wife out to move onto greener pastures. The husband is left on a sinking ship and drowns in his burdens and afflictions. The wife goes her merry way with her new friends, saying she doesn't love her husband anymore. It wasn't love, because loveth never faileth. There's no such thing as “I used to love you.” Either you loved then and still do now, and you don't now and never did to begin with! For anyone who's ever been abandoned by a loved one, divorce is the most painful experience in the world. There is nothing any more cruel than to forsake and abandon someone who trusted you with their life, love and future. Woe unto those who file for divorce!

The husband is devastated and refuses to sign the divorce agreement. The lawyer threatens that the judge is a lesbian and feminist who will likely take his children away if he doesn't sign. The lawyer threatens there will be lengthy and costly litigation, and ultimately the wife will get her divorce anyway, because one way or another the judge will give it to her. His wife gets a free lawyer for making allegations of abuse, but it costs him over $50,000 in legal expenses for an expensive lawyer.

various incels #sexist reddit.com

Re: r/Relationship_Advice: [25m] my girlfriend[24f] told me she had only slept with 3 guys, her best friend [24f] blurted out that they slept with a guy every city in Europe they visited

(SomeTurdInTheWind)

We were talking about some topic and it came to Europe and she told me that they slept with a bunch of super hot guys. It seemed that everyone tuned in then. I laughed it off and didn’t make it into a big deal.

"I laughed it off". Why do guys nowadays solve everything by grinning and smiling and laughing like chimpanzees when a bigger chimpanzee threatens to beat them up?

She had previously told me that she only been with three guys. Long story short she and her friend when they went to Europe would sleep with a hot local guy every city.

This always happens. No exceptions.

When we saw each other she didn’t even want to sleep with me for three months until we were official. And now hearing how she slept with guys hours after meeting them bugs the hell out of me.

Oh, look, the same thing as always.

(bcat124)
From the comments :

I know right now that's not the biggest priority in your brain. You're hung up on images of her fucking her way through Europe. That's just your lizard brain doing lizard brain shit. Set it aside for a moment. Difference in experience? Meh. Banging around in Europe? Meh. That's not the important shit here.

We live in a matriarchy where women have all the sexual capital and take full advantage of it. What a joke

(robfordscrakpipe)
Men, ignore your natural instincts that are hardwired in your brain to help you survive and pass your genes on, that's patriarchy. Ignore your repulsion towards promiscuous, overweight, loud, unattractive women, that's all social construction. Women, if you feel the urge to sleep with that stud at the bar, go for it! Do what feels right! Forget about your boyfriend! Anyone who tells you otherwise is a horrible person who hates women and has a fragile ego and small dick.

(elephant__dick)
If this stuff was meaningless women wouldn't freak out and lie about it. Also if it doesn't matter then why do they always make certain guys wait?

(arissiro)
Exactly - the crux of the issue here is why did her current boyfriend whom she supposedly loves have to wait 3 months, while randos all over Europe had to wait 3 seconds? Why could she make him wait and not them? Why did she feel compelled to make him wait?

(COPE_OR_ROPE)
A roastie inadvertently dropped a brutal blackpill in the comment section:

Also, many guys don't understand that women often wait longer to sleep with someone they really like and want to build something long term with. If the guy is just fun for one day of a trip it doesn't matter to wait. Quick sex doesn't equal a stronger liking of someone for women, though men seem to interpret it that way.

What's the blackpill here ?

She admits that women make betas wait months for sex while Chad get's to ravage her 10 minutes after meeting.

(Thrwwwwaway6)
The blackpill (hidden behind all that delusion) is that girls wait to sleep with guys who make good providers but aren't attractive.

(arissiro)
Yip, a lot of foid delusion there which soymales will fall for. Thing is the "reasoning" itself (if we can even call it that) is incoherent: if this sex thing is important enough for some men to have to wait for - why should it be the men the women "actually want to build something serious with" that wait, instead of random fucking strangers? That's like loaning money to random people immediately without doing credit checks whilst waiting three months on someone with a good credit rating.

You and I know what's going on of course.

(Magehunter_Skassi)
I like that one other roastie in the thread too. Honorary blackpiller. If you're going to be a slut, you may as well own it instead of lying.

I love sex. The idea of finding a different guy in every city I visit in Europe sounds exhausting, but also fun. That said, I’m not too worried about how that “makes me look”.

[...]

Like I get that some people will say shit. But why would you want to start a relationship with someone who judges you for your past anyway?

(PerfectCeI)
So basically the same as... I have a history of multiple arrests for workplace violence and thiefts, many companies wont hire me because of my criminal history but why would you want to start working for a company who judges you for your past anyway teehee

Foids really have the impulse control and accountability of a 4yo child, those Saudis are right in some ways

(mantrad)
Women are nothing, and I mean fucking nothing but cum holes, the more attractive and less used the cum hole the better, that's their only value

(GuacMerchant88)
whatever her claimed total is x by 7 to get an accurate body count. it used to by x 3 before tinder and other quick hook up apps, but modern tech has allowed instant hookups for average looking women to fuck chads at a moments notice. Although roasties are collecting a higher body count and are encouraged to do so by their fellow feminists, very few are willing to be honest with potential beta providers of their true body count. They know that even most betas will not want to finance a roastie who slept with 30+ men (which is more than 75% of women in their 20s today).

I am collecting data on this trend and will post back in a few months with charts/graphs. I will be banned when I report on it but will be good info. r/dataisbeautiful will downvote it to oblivion.

The data is indeed self-reported. The sample size as of right now is only 23 women who agreed to partake. My goal is 2000 women aged 18-40. This is just taken from Tampa. I will be in Boston, NYC, and DC in the next few months and will ask women there as well. The questions are simple:

How many men have you slept with?
Have you lied to your current partner or a potential partner about the amount of men you have slept with?
If so, what number did you tell them? (18/23 admitted lying about their number to current/potential spouse)
Why did you feel the need to lie about your number?

The first 20 responses indicate a 6.7x actual body count to claimed body count.

(arissiro)
Absolutely brutal blackpill mate. Remember this is what life's like for so many men who "aren't incel" - they get laid every now and then, sure - but it's like the homeless guy who sometimes gets to finish off some rich guy's leftover lunch at a restaurant.

(hopfield)
Ahahahhahaa look at this cope:

That's literally the opposite of how it actually is.

Like imagine you're hungry but you're too tired to do much so you just slap some baloney from Wal*Mart on dome bread and eat it. It ends the discomfort from your hunger but it still sucks and is unhealthy for you and not even very enjoyable.

But later on you get yourself together and decide to be healthier and decide it's worth it to do a bit of work to be able to eat actual good food so you learn to cook and start cooking really excellent cuisine for yourself, like 5-star restaurant stuff. It's s not only healthier but a million times more enjoyable than the stupid baloney sandwich which seriously wasn't even good at all, it was just easy.

That's how casual sex is for most women. It's the sucky baloney sandwich they didn't even enjoy, but it was just the easiest thing at the time. They know if they want an actual good meal, they have to put time and effort into it.

When a woman waits a while to have sex with you, she's not "making you wait," and it's certainly not because she thinks you're "beta," it's because she knows the only way the sex will be truly enjoyable and fulfilling for her is if she spends the time getting to know you and making a connection. Then there a chance the sex will actually be like a 5-star meal instead of a baloney sandwich. If she'd had sex with you sooner, it would have sucked for her and not even been enjoyable. She waits because she likes you enough that she'd actually like to have GOOD sex with you and maybe keep having good sex for a long time, instead of having bad sex that would make her want to never see you again.

Women aren't like men. They don't enjoy casual sex like men do. There are even numerous scientific studies showing women are unlikely to orgasm during casual sex and are likely to regret it and not really enjoy it. Putting the time in before having sex literally makes women enjoy the sex itself more, if they don't put the time in and just have sex right away the sex will be garbage like a Wal*Mart baloney sandwich.

They "make you wait" because they actually want the sex to be good and know it won't even be enjoyable for them if they just have sex right away.

"likely to regret it and not really enjoy it."

Then why the fuck do they willingly do it??? Almost as if these cucks are fucking stupid

Girls regret it so much that they go hunting for one-night-stands with Chad week after week after week.

Not even an incel. Just have to post and point out this guys a retard.

The making you wait is about making sure you've invested enough time and money into her so that you can't bail when you find out how much of a cunt she actually is.

This is some 'we wuz kingz' level coping right here. what a soy.

(Big_Iron_PP)
I wrote a poem for the OP:

Fish and dicks down in London

The two met near the Thames

He had a noble accent and

His name, I think, was James


In Paris, the Eiffel Tower

Wasn't what she tried to climb

Tho it was hard like ancient iron

Jaques was a stunning mime


In Amsterdam, where the smell

Of weed hung in the air

The dealer Daan van Dorn and her

Oh, they made a lovely pair


Madrid was hot and sticky

She siesta'd for a while

And after one bull fighting match

She dodged Juan's cum in style


In Venice on a galley

She nigh fell of and drowned

Cause it was all a shaking

When she the oarsman found


Berlin, she really loved to see

What a truly German city

She was a bit surprised when things

With Franz turned to shitty


Budapest of Hungary

She was eager to test

And Jànos did not disappoint:

He was well hung like the rest.


And finally, in Moskva cold

Her journey came to an end

She met you in a bar

And loved you as a friend

Some Incels #sexist reddit.com

Re: So female meets criminal online. They go to drinks and he has to stop by his grow house. Guy gets in a violent fight at 1am, covered in blood and had to skip town. Female goes to reddit to "see how to talk to him about violence". This is her response.

image

I would try to make sure that he's never able to contact or find you ever again.

So I understand why you would say that but I really like him. We have a lot of similar interests and the sex is really good.

These are not great reasons to stay with a dangerous man.

You know you can find these things from someone who doesn't beat people half-dead?

I haven't been able to yet. He's honestly the first person I feel I've really been able to connect with in years. Idk what that says about me. He’s usually so nice!

(I_actually_prefer_)

Why do women try so hard to make me hate them?

This is why all philosophers and religious leaders from the dawn of time have hated the nature of foids. Their very essence is of deception, dissimulation, monkey branching, disloyalty. It’s how they’ve survived and who they pave always procured resources. Even foids hate other foids because they see in other foids what they see on themselves,

(Kormaken)

initiate foid translator
.....
she is with him because the sex is good
.....
sex is good because he is chad
.....
conclusion: she is with him because he is chad

(bmaster00)

Foids rather get murdered by chad than to date ugly men. Purest form of black pill

(InternationalBrain4)

They keep proving the blackpill again and again and again... How can an unattractive man still be bluepilled nowadays?...

Enough of them get just a trickle of the satisfaction they're looking for so they assume they've 'made it.'

It's not hard to make an addict out of someone- just deprive them of something they need, put them in a life situation where they're constantly under stress and then provide them just enough of their craving that they wouldn't dare going off the reservation. Remember, most people who picked up a drug habit- cocaine and heroin- in Vietnam to cope with living in a war zone actually dropped the habit after they came home, and almost all of them dropped the habit without excessive intervention or rehab.

(letsgobish29)

he's high t and hot. but women always have to give these bullshit spiels about connecting and all the other cliches to make sure she's saying the 'right thing'. no thought process whatsoever, just complete mindless conformity to the safe socially acceptable responses.

(blazze)

femme would rather live "orange is the new black" lifestyle rather than a safe option !

"I would try to make sure he's never able to find or contact you ever again"

Other femme gives very good advice which is promptly ignore.

"He's honestly the first person I feel I've really been able to connect with in years"

Translation : I've been on the boyfriend carousel for so long, only the drama of thug maxx really gets me wet.

(Burnvictim-Chad)

If you think this guy is good in bed you are bluepilled still. Sex with him is good because he is good looking and he is a violent animal and not on account of him having good technique.

(vosidit98)

As I've said before: Women don't lke seeing violence but knowing "her guy" can crack the skulls of the rest makes them wet.

Women LOVE assholes. And if the asshole is good looking it's an even bigger boon.

She has literally no common interests with him, but women are massive copycats when it comes to their dream guy.

NSFL Award

Trigger Warning: Everything

pfta2a #fundie reddit.com

Children can never be sexual in our society because they cannot consent

Children are sexual. Just because society attempts to reject that fact, doesn't make it less of a fact. There is also no evidence that consensual early sexuality will screw up a child's life. Consensual sex play (or even consensual sex) between children is generally accepted as beneficial by child psychologists. It helps them learn about sex and also helps them to accept sex as natural and not something to be ashamed of.

Age of Consent laws are a problem because they don't account for child sexuality. You may believe that an adult should not be allowed to have sex with a child, but two children should be able to have sex without both of them being considered rapist.

Fuckin' gross, dude. Children develop sexually and sexuality. Like their other various forms of intelligences, they start simple and grow over time, so that at any observed moment, their level of sophistication falls on a continuum.
This does not mean that a statement like "children are sexual" is in any way, shape, or form correct or, considering what the likely motivation behind such a statement is, anything less than fucking abhorrent.
Consign yourself to a deserted island, you shitty predator. Any adult who takes and active and undue interest in children's sexuality is doing so for self-serving reasons, and needs to be monitored and contained. If you don't take steps to keep yourself physically removed from sources of temptation (in this case, meaning those not yet experienced, mature, or savvy enough to recognize your advances and protect themselves from your overtures), society needs to do it for you.

Did you know that most babies (under 1 year old) learn to touch their genitals as a form of pleasure. They can't orgasm at that age, but they can find the sensation pleasurable. In many cultures, parents also touch the genitals to sooth and comfort a baby.

Touch is healthy, especially from people you are comfortable with. Babies perceive (edit: non-forcible) touch to their genitals as pleasurable, unless they are taught not to. In sexually permissive cultures, children can learn to masturbate (for pleasure) by the age of 6 to 8. Children begin engaging in coitus by the ages of 6 or 7.

We live in a society that deliberately teaches children not to be sexual. We create a taboo around sex and sexuality, especially in regards to children. So in our society children are perceived as non-sexual, because we teach them not to be. We teach them that they should feel guilt or shame about sex. Many are harmed by this view; adults who grow up with feelings of guilt or shame about their sexuality. Children who are imprisoned or on the sex offenders list because they acted sexually.

Also I'm not going to have sex with a child. I believe that in our society the potential for harm to her from external pressures (society, therapist, law enforcement) is too great.

Men don't need to be removed from women because they are a source of temptation and might rape them. I don't need to be removed from association with kids, because I will not rape them. In another society I would be willing to have consensual sex with a child, but not in this one. I'm not will to risk the harm that society would do to her if they found out, even if she was a willing and enjoyed the act itself.

is the very definition of predatory, no matter what nickerson and the other virpeds say.

The VirPed's (who are anti-contact - which is to say they believe sexual contact between adults/children is always harmful) do not say this. The pro-contacter's do (which is to say, we believe sex between an adult and child would be non-harmful and even beneficial if social and legal views changed).

Sexual education and the ability to form their own moral compass in regards to sexual activity is very important.

But society does not allow them to form their own moral compass. It gives them the moral compass. It starts when a parent pushes their babies hand away from their genitals and continues throughout childhood as children are actively discouraged from exploring their own sexuality and are not answered when they ask about sexuality. Sexuality and especially child sexuality are taboo in our society.

However, they should be able to discover these things in their own way, at their own pace, with their peers.

I almost agree, I would say with whomever they choose, rather than their peers. Let them form their own moral compass, let them act on that moral compass. Even if their moral compass permits sexual contact with an adult. As noted above, our society does not do this. Our society pushes them away from self-discovery, purposefully slows their pace and discourages sexual interactions with others (especially adults).

taking advantage of a child if they had physical relations.

Why? What makes sex so special? An unrelated adult can have a emotional relationship, a friendship, even a physical but non-sexual relationship. Or should all adults avoid unrelated children unless it is a professional relationship with that child?

Randy Forbes & the AFA #fundie afa.net

Faith in God has been the foundation of the United States of America since Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, which refers to the "Creator" as the source of all our fundamental human rights and in which the Founders expressed their "firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence."

Rep. Randy Forbes of Virginia has authored the "In God We Trust" Resolution (H.Con.Res. 274), which reaffirms "In God We Trust" as our national motto and urges the motto to be publicly displayed "in all public buildings, public schools, and other government institutions."

This phrase was adopted in law as our official national motto in 1956, but has appeared on our coinage since 1865. In fact, the last piece of legislation Abraham Lincoln signed before his assassination authorized the use of "In God We Trust" on all coins minted in the United States.

The words "In God We Trust" appear over the entrance to the Senate Chamber and above the Speaker's rostrum in the House Chamber.

If these words are good enough for the chambers of Congress, good enough for all our coins and all our currency, and good enough to serve as our national motto, they are good enough to appear on the walls of every classroom in America.

Currently, 73 bipartisan members of Congress have signed on as co-sponsors of Rep. Forbes' resolution. If your representative is one of those 73, thank him today.

If your representative is not one of those 73, urge him to become a co-sponsor today. What possible reason could he have to oppose this?

We all recognize the need to return God to His proper place in our public life and especially in our system of public education. You can help return this nation to God by contacting your representative today!

Dawn Pine #fundie #sexist returnofkings.com

(Submitter’s Note: this is only half of the screed, cut for the sake of brevity)

11 TIPS ON RAISING YOUR DAUGHTERS ON THE RED PILL
[…]
Dawn Pine (aka TheMaleBrain) is an Israeli 40+ divorced father of 2, former casualty of the blue-pill. Since he has taken the red pill his hobbies are: working out, writing, mentoring, harem management and self improvement.
[…]
As a divorced father of two daughters, and a RVF active member, I see articles on raising sons (examples 1[http://www.returnofkings.com/93261/5-tips-to-raise-a-strong-son], 2[http://www.returnofkings.com/90283/5-things-i-learned-from-my-brothers-on-how-to-raise-a-son], 3[http://www.returnofkings.com/91029/why-you-must-raise-your-son-to-be-a-warrior] and 4[http://www.returnofkings.com/80115/5-things-i-will-teach-my-future-son], all from this year alone on ROK). Raising a son is an important matter, as most of us here at ROK are boys.

But wait a minute! 50% of the population is females. Those of us who are fathers (writer included) may also have daughters. The discussions here as I mentioned, are more about sons. What about daughters?

I could sit with myself, complain, or take it to the comments section. But that is not the way the manosphere practices. So I decided to write my own list of tips, based on my know-how so far. I have been on the red-pill for three years now, and I wish to share with my fellow readers what I have learned.

[…]
1. Teach her what guys and girls find attractive
We all know the answer to that one. But a child does not. Children are not blank slate, but they are unaware of “how the world works”. It is my responsibility as the patriarch to show them.

In order to starve the hamster in advance, I give my daughters tools and the language to understand. Kids have a very strong hamster, as do females (we all know that).

Since early times, people have used stories and myths to educate. This is truer at a young age, as they are not yet teenagers. I often use stories and examples, as kids sometime struggle with “concepts” or “genralities”.
[…]
NEXT IS THE CONCEPT OF “THE WALL”
Taking CH advice[https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2015/08/04/oneitis-and-the-wall-the-two-most-important-life-lessons-you-can-impart-to-your-sons-and-daughters/]:
“Tell her with uncompromising bluntness that she is pretty now, and all the boys notice her, but her prettiness will disappear faster than she knows (or can possibly know at her tender age), and there will come a time, always much sooner than she had hoped, when none of the boys will notice her.’

My daughters know that they should be married by their mid-20s. I use their mom and other moms of their friends and asking: ”How successful will her boyfriend be, if she was single?”. They look at the fathers of their friends, and at least some of the time it is obvious. My eldest told me that her mom told her that being married at 25 is too young. I replied by stating that her mother has actually no strength running after them, and that they as young moms would have the strength to do things with their children. Message well understood.

2. Show her how guys hit on girls
I day game sometimes. I don’t do it much in front of my girls, because they will cockblock me. It happened a few times before I “stopped”. I recall one time that they ran interference at a wedding, when I was about to number close a young hot girl.

But if we are in a restaurant for example, I tease the waitresses. I use pet names, boss them around a little bit and treat her as a small child. The waitresses usually take it very well, and sometime even blush.

My daughters start to giggle. “Dad, I don’t know why, but I feel good when you do that,” my elder told me. “It is because older girls are like young girls. They love it when a successful man makes fun of them” I explained. “Also, you see that the waitress was responding well. She likes it,” I add. They witnessed it, and now they know how it feels and how it looks when a guy hits on a girl and what an interaction between boys and girls looks like.

Lesson hammered again. As a side benefit, now my daughters feel better knowing that their father is “Successful”. I’ll admit that my game level is intermediate at best, but good enough is good enough.

[…]
4. Work on their femininity
We are man and we practice masculinity. Femininity? Red-pill guys? How exactly? One would assume that this is the mom’s job. So what? We all know that women are not to be trusted with responsibility. So I gladly take some of this burden upon myself.

You can do it too. The funny things is that it is not that hard. It also correspond with the red-pill.
[…]
EXAMPLE: CHORES AROUND THE HOUSE
Not my best one (to say the least), but I try to have them do feminine chores around the house: Cook with me, fold laundry and so on. Just because I live alone and do masculine and feminine chores does not mean that my daughters can’t learn it also from me.
[…]
THIRD EXAMPLE: LOOKS
In this case I have a good deal of help from their mom. She emphasizes looks, dresses well and wears makeup. Kids need to have discipline and getting dressed, even for girls is sometimes tiresome. Trust me, I use to be like that. When they sometime complain, I remind them that looks are important (see tip #1). This is where a cooperation between parents really kicks it in, and a lot of people mentioned how well they dress.

Whenever they form an opinion on someone (based on their looks), I hammer it home again. Looks are women’s top and dominant SMV component.

FORTH(sic) EXAMPLE – FUTURE CAREER
Kids do a lot of thinking on what they want to do when they grow up. That may change on an hourly, daily or monthly basis. I had my daughters move from teachers to waitresses to babysitters and to doctors – all in the course of one day.

When they come to me with the new career, I remind them that they will need to also be there for their kids when they are young. Then you see them spin the wheel to show me how it works great with a child (or more). At that time I also remind them that since they will marry a successful man (god, I hope so!) he will be the one providing for them, and they will assist.

5. Reward feminine behavior
[…]
PUNISHMENT THEMES
Taking away their time with me (for example – not getting a bed time story). This is for when they disrespect my time. Time is important to me, as they know I make efforts to be on time.
Tactical anger – my daughters have told me that they fear me. Good. If kids have no fear there will be no discipline. Other dads (or moms) may say that it is not good, and that love is enough. YEH RIGHT! I ignore or take the time to explain that fear is crucial.
Never actually lose your temper. Calm down once the point was made. If you cannot calm yourself, walk away and breathe. Losing one’s temper completely is weakness.
Not paying allowance – if it is disrespect to my money. This happens when they break stuff (on purpose or that it could have been avoided). I use less of this punishment as it correlates poorly from a time perspective.
[…]
REWARDS THEMES
Verbally – most easiest reward. Giving a good word is immediate. One must not abuse it. When you give praise, look into their eyes and mean it. Kids know when you are “half arsing” it.
Treats – you may use this on occasion. Usually amounts to a few dollars. If it is an “all-for-dollar” store even better, It gives them a sense of independence and correlate good behavior with physical reward.
Activity – “You get to pick where will go on Saturday” is one of their favorites. My daughters in particular, and kids in general sometimes like to “steer the wheel”. Giving them that opportunity (not every week!) makes them feel loved and respected, which again is a good correlation between action and reward.

8. Show what happens to “Bad Girls”
There is an appeal for the “dark side”. Even if in movies the bad person gets what’s coming, my daughters (as every other female) have that attraction for “bad behavior”. They see that it is “cool” and has rewards in the form of attention and ability to “do what you want”.

Yes, female behavior should be controlled[http://www.returnofkings.com/73131/women-must-have-their-behavior-and-decisions-controlled-by-men], but that is easier said than done. What can a divorce father do? Spanking is out of the question (legally). I have a problem with blocking the TV and internet completely.

My answer is to inoculate them as much as I can. Introducing the concept of “wrong/bad kind of attention”.

You come across a YouTube clip, say of Katy Perry. “Dad, they are showing the wrong kind of attention,” my daughters come to inform me. “I know. You realize what will happen to girls who do it?” I ask. “They will get use to it, and have a difficult time using their brain or doing stuff because they are use to it,” they answer. “She will do bad things to herself to get attention.”
[…]
11. Pick your battles
My TV fight is a lost cause. I will limit it but not take it out of the house. I will watch with them to provide red-pill guidance. I know that advice on the manosphere is to disengage the MSM, but in this case I choose not to, for my own reasons.

However, I have shown them repeatedly that TV and media should not be trusted. They have witnessed it repeatedly. I sat with them during movies, shows of different kinds and negated the messages (girl power and boys being no good). I had a lot of talks with them about it. But I know that the TV will remain in the house.

I know that some of the fights are not worth fighting. We have a specific amount of energy. You need to pick your battles and not to alienate your kids. Also, sometimes if we win it will be a Pyrrhic victory.

I consider myself stricter than most of the fathers I know, but each year I give them more space and allow them to push the boundaries. It is part of growing up. If you boundary was breached, you can either tactically get angry, or sometimes just say “NO”. But again, know when to lose.

Conclusion
There is a lot of talk about raising red-pill boys. I understand the importance. There is very little discussion on raising girls, at least that I have seen. What I write here is my lesson learned of my last three years of red-pill awakening.

I’m already waiting for the time that they’ll have boyfriends. I may AMOG them, but for sure I’ll have the talk Roosh had with his sister. This is already saved on my hard drive and on my cloud storage. The day will come (in a few years’ time) when it will be relevant. I have practiced it sometimes with girls in my harem, and they all acknowledge that the message is strong and true.

That does not mean I will be successful. I have most of the world against me, including the education system and the media. However I feel comfortable that my daughters will be way less damaged than the rest. Who knows, maybe the change back to patriarchy we are discussing will happen during their generation. In this case they will have an upper hand on other girls.

Arkanabar Ilarsadin #fundie arkanabar.blogspot.com

I could have put this post up at Capes 'n' Babes, but that's not what Chris Flick's website is for, and he'd have every reason and right not to post it. He has the site mainly to sell his artwork, and my countercultural Catholic argumentation could reasonably alienate his customers. I couldn't wish that on him. I'm going to ask my two readers not to go and gunk up his site with a flamewar, either.

But as to why that's not good, I think we could learn from the lesson of Chesterton's Gate -- the idea that, before we go to reform an institution, we ought to understand why it is the way it is. I don't think gay marriage advocates have any understanding of why marriage was the way it was. Nor have they found or built any structures to do what marriage was originally meant to do.

The function of marriage has historically been to protect the children which are its natural result. It provides them with a bond with their father, and a incentives for him to protect them. If your spouse dies, then finding and marrying a replacement can be better for your children than staying a widow/er, which is why it's reasonable to allow people to remarry after the death of a spouse. Even if a woman has aged to menopause, it's easy to see how her entering marriage can be good for any children involved.

The giant blows against marriage were contraception and divorce. Divorce especially does grave harm to children, and remarriage is very hard on them, probably far harder than in cases of widowing. Much worse is when Mom just shacks up after divorcing Dad. Children are at greatest risk of sexual assault from mom's live-in boyfriend.

Homosexual marriage does not naturally result in children. Its advocates, like those for divorce and contraception, seem to either not consider the harm that their pet project does to children (which would include being in denial about it), or may actually hate children. Their arguments against these concerns vary from "What could it hurt?" to "Shut up."

I really don't think the SCOTUS considered these things when they struck down DOMA. I think there's compelling government interest in protecting marriage -- doing so gives children the best chance going forward that they can have. In addition to affirming DOMA, they could consider doing away with contraception (which promotes infidelity, which is ALSO very bad for the children) and divorce (which is the result of contraception, and even worse for children). They are far more important than the easy access to the benefits of marriage for gays (and to which they have alternative means of access).

Triweekly Antifeminist #fundie triweeklyantifeminist.wordpress.com

The esteemed commentator Chinzork wrote:

For one of the first posts on this blog, I think you should debunk all of the common talking points against abolishing the AOC. The talking points get repetitive after a while, so an article debunking all of them sounds good.

Alright then, you got it. Herein is a compilation of the 15 most popular Blue Knight arguments, each argument followed by a thorough dissection thereof.

#1: Teenagers only become sexually mature after completing puberty around 16.

This is a wholly metaphysical proposition; a statement of belief. The Blue Knight starts out from the premise that a “completion of puberty” is a prerequisite for this nebulous state known as “sexual maturity,” then makes the circular argument that, because a 13-year-old has not yet completed puberty, he or she are thus sexually immature. “Sexual maturity” is an altogether arbitrary concept, and there isn’t any way to measure it or test it.

The Blue Knight makes it seem like he or she has objectively examined the issue and reached the conclusion that the age of “sexual maturity” just so happens to start when puberty is over; but there has not actually been any such objective examination of the issue – it simply has been assumed (axiomatically) that this is the case, and the whole “argument” proceeds from this unproven, arbitrary, and essentially metaphysical assumption.

The Blue Knight argument posits that 1) without “sexual maturity” sex is harmful and as such should be illegal; 2) a full completion of puberty is a prerequisite for “sexual maturity.” You may well give the following counter-argument, accepting — for the sake of discussion — the former premise, while rejecting the latter, and say thus: “children become sexually mature after completing adrenarche around the age of 9.”

Fundamentally, however, I have seen no evidence whatsoever that a “sexually immature” person is necessarily harmed (or victimized) by sexual relations merely due to being, according to whatever arbitrary definitions one uses, a “sexually immature” person. I suspect that, as a matter of fact, “sexually immature” people often enjoy sex and benefit from it even more than the so-called “sexually mature” folks. And again, the very distinction between “mature” and “immature” is altogether metaphysical in this regard, like the distinction between “pure” and “impure” or “holy” and “unholy.” It is hocus pocus; theology not-so-cleverly disguised as biology.

According to Blue Knight “morality,” an extremely fertile 15-year-old female should be prevented from sex (because “sexually immature”), while a 55-year-old female who has no ovaries left should be free do get fucked however she likes. It is very clear that such a “morality” is really an anti-morality; it is against what is biologically natural, it is against human nature specifically, it is degenerate, and it is detrimental to the interests of civilization and the TFR.

#2: The Age of Consent protects young people from doing things (sex) which they don’t really want to do.

I have seen no evidence that young people “do not really want” to have sex. On the contrary, I have seen, and keep seeing, that young people greatly desire to engage in sexual activities. That is why they engage in them. If 11-year-old Lucy is a horny little slut who enjoys giving blowjobs to all the boys in the neighborhood (many such cases), the Age of Consent does not protect her from something which she is reluctant about doing; it prevents her — by deterring men from approaching her — from doing something which she does in fact desire to do.

The Age of Consent is simply not needed. Think for a moment about young people. Do you not realize that they are just as eccentric, and can be just as wild, as older people? Why is it that when a 19-year-old chick randomly decides to have an orgy with 3 classmates after school, that is okay; but when a 12-year-old chick likewise randomly decides to do just that, oh noes, she is a “victim” of a horrible crime? We accept that each person is unique, independently of age; and we realize that there are children –not to mention young adults — who are very much into X while others are very much into Y. Why, then, should it be so “shocking” when it turns out that some children, and plenty of young teenagers, are very much into sex? Being interested in sex is arguably one of the most natural things there are, on par with being interested in food; certainly it is more natural than being interested in physics and chemistry and mathematics, right? If we accept the existence of child prodigies, children who are naturally driven to pursue all kinds of weird and special callings, why can’t we accept that there are indeed lots of children who pursue the very natural thing which is called “sex”?

Young teenagers have extremely high sex-drives, and the idea that they “do not really want sex” is contradicted every single moment. This is all the more remarkable given that we are living in a puritanical, prudish, sex-hostile, joy-killing, pedo-hysterical, infantilizing society; yet teenagers manage to overcome this intense anti-natural social programming, and do what nature commands them to do. “Child innocence” is a self-perpetuating myth, which society shoves down the throats of everyone all the time since age 0, and then uses this self-perpetuating myth which has been forcefully injected into society’s bloodstream to argue that “oh gee, young people just don’t really want to have sex.”

The entire entertainment establishment is concomitantly brainwashing children to remain in a state of arrested development aka infantilization, while conditioning the consumers of this “entertainment” to only find old women attractive. That’s one reason why I believe that we must create Male Sexualist aesthetics – we must reverse the brainwashing done to us by the entertainment complex. The television box is deliberately hiding from you the beauty and the passion of young teenage women, and is actively engineering your mind to only find older women attractive. And yet, despite there being a conspiracy by the entire society to stifle young sexuality, young sexuality lives on and thrives. Well, not really “thrives” — young sex is in decline, which conservative total dipshits blame on pornography rather than pointing the finger at themselves for propagating a climate that is extremely hostile to young sexuality — but it still goes on, to the consternation of all Puritans and Feminists everywhere.

Blue Knights claim that young teenagers are “peer-pressured into sex.” This assumes that your average teenager is asexual or close to being asexual, and thus would only engage in sexual activities if manipulated into it by his or her environment. The reality, meanwhile, is that those 12-year-old sluts who have orgies after school time (or during school time) are often as horny as a 16-year-old male. They are not being pressured into sex – they are being sexually restrained by a society that is terrified of young sexuality.

#3: Young people who have sex grow up to regret it.

First of all, when the whole of society is determined to portray young sex as a horrid thing, it is no wonder that people — especially women, who possess a herd mentality — arrive at the conclusion that they’ve been harmed by it. If young sexuality were presented in a positive light by the media-entertainment-state bureaucracy-academia complex, people would be more inclined to remember it fondly than regretfully.

The second thing is that it doesn’t even matter. People feel regret about doing all kinds of things – so what? Does that mean that for each and every case of such “regret,” society needs to go on a witch-hunt for “victimizers” in order to inflict punishments upon them? It’s time to grow the fuck up and accept the fact that people sometimes do things which later on they regret doing, and that this is an integral part of life, and that the state has no business protecting the civilians from “bad feelings.” That’s literally what this Blue Knight argument boils down to – “the state should punish men because women experience negative feelings due to their own behavior.” No, women should learn to deal with their bad fee-fees without demanding the state to find “abusers” to penalize. We are living in a totalitarian emotocracy (rule by emotions) and I’m sick of it.

Also: what is the difference between feeling regret about fucking at 13 and feeling regret about fucking at 17? Women generally feel bad about promiscuous sex (hence the phenomenon of “regret rape” false accusations), and they feel it at the age of 21 as much as at the age of 11; actually, older women may be even more regretful than young ones about sexual activity, because they’v been longer exposed to Puritan-Feminist brainwashing, and because their biological clock ticks much faster. So, according to the victimization-based morality of Blue Knights, men who sleep with 23-year-olds should also be punished. Again, the Blue Knights want men imprisoned solely due to some vague negative fee-fees felt by some women. This is emotocracy in action. No wonder that testosterone and sperm counts are in sharp decline – society is ruled by catladies, and is structured according to catlady morality.

The state simply should not protect people from the consequences of their own behavior – and here “protect” means “punish men,” and “consequences” means “vague negative fee-fees.” Our society is severely infantilized by the victimization-based morality, and infantilization is degenerate.

#4: Young sexual activity is correlated with many bad things.

That may or may not be so, but what are the implications? Generally, people who are natural risk-takers will do all kinds of things, some of which may be positive, others negative, and still others just neutral. The conservadaddy making the “correlated with bad things” argument implies that punishing men (and women) for young sex would somehow reduce those negative things supposedly correlated with young sex. That, of course, is bullshit. If a risk-taking 12-year-old decides to have an orgy with her classmates, she will remain just as much of a risk-taker whether or not her classmates or other people are punished. Depriving her of the opportunity to take “sexual risks” won’t diminish whatever other risk-taking behaviors she is prone to.

The thing about Blue Knight arguments is that they aren’t arguments at all. There is no logic in stating “young sex is correlated with X, and X is bad” and then using that to support the criminalization of young sex. This is the same logic used by pedagogues to justify pedagoguery, only in reverse: the pedagogues argue that education is correlated with intelligence (as measured by IQ tests), then use that claim to imply that education makes people smarter, and therefore everyone should undergo education. This is a wholly fallacious argument. At the risk of sounding like a spergtastic redditor goon – correlation does not imply causation. The Blue Knight argument is not an argument at all. It’s plainly illogical.

By the way, I’d say that there are plenty of negative things correlated with young sexlessness – such as growing up to be a school shooter, for instance. You’ll never hear Blue Knights discussing that.

#5: Some Statutory Rape legislation allows teenagers to have sex among themselves, and only prohibits older people from predating upon them.

This argument typifies what I call the “victimization-based morality” aka “victimology.” The people making it assume — against all the available evidence — that within any relationship between a young person and an old person, the former is necessarily victimized by the latter.

The individuals making this argument (usually you’ll hear it from women) will often tell you that it is “creepy” for older men to be interested in young women. They will pretend that young women are exclusively attracted to young men, when in reality they are attracted to men of all ages – to men as old as their father as well as to their classmates. My own life experience confirms this, as I personally, in-real-life, know of women who fucked significantly older men when they were aged 14-15. It was all passionate and voluntary and enthusiastic, believe me. And the many accounts you can find on the internet leave no doubt that it’s common for young women, pubescent and even prepubescent, to be sexually attracted to significantly older men.

It is important to stress the point that the women themselves pursue and desire those sexual relationships, because the Blue Knights have created the false impression that the entire argument for abolishing the AOC rests on our attraction to young women, an attraction which according to the Blue Knights is completely unreciprocated; whereas in reality, it is incredibly common for young women to initiate sexual relationships with men as old as their father. It takes two to tango – and the tango is quite lively indeed. Given the sexual dynamics elucidated by Heartiste, wherein women are sexually attracted to “Alphas,” it makes perfect sense that young women would be sexually attracted to older men even more-so than they are sexually attracted to their peers, since older men possess a higher social status than young ones, relatively speaking. Again, life experience confirms this.

Thus, there is no sense in punishing old men who fuck young women, unless, that is, one embraces the whole “taken advantage of” argument, an argument which relies on a denial of the biological and empirical reality on the ground, and simply defines (as an axiom) all relationships in which there is a “power imbalance” as “exploitative.” That is, there is no evidence that any “exploitation” is taking place in such relationships, and Blue Knights assume its existence because they refuse to believe that young women can be horny for older men.

Also, the Blue Knights will bring up argument #1 to “substantiate” argument #5, and argue that due to the “sexual immaturity” of the younger party, the older party must be forbidden from being in a sexual relationship with it altogether – because otherwise there may be “exploitation.” Again, the moment you realize that a 12-year-old female can be as horny as a 16-year-old male (who are, needless to say, extremely horny), the idea that the slut is prone to be “sexually exploited” by a sexual relationship with a man who is statistically likely to be high-status (and thus naturally sexually attractive to her) become absurd. And as we’ve seen, the whole “sexually immature” line is ridiculous – it has never been shown that maturity, for whatever it’s even worth, is reached at 16. In saner, de-infantilized times, 12-year-olds were considered to be mature, were treated as such, and evidently were mature. Hence my saying: “child (and teen) innocence is a self-perpetuating myth.”

#6: You only support abolishing the AOC because you’re a pervert.

A common ad hominem. Now, it is expected that possession of a naturally high sex-drive would be correlated with sexual realism (i.e. being woke about the reality of sex), because a high sex-drive individual would be much likelier than a low sex-drive individual to spend hours upon hours thinking about the subject of sex in its various and manifold aspects. But that only goes to prove that it is us, the “perverts,” who were right all along about sex – and not the catladies and the asexuals who haven’t ever thought about sex in realistic terms because they never had any incentive to do so. Our “bias” is a strength, not a weakness.

There really isn’t anything else to add here. When they accuse you of being a pervert, just agree & amplify humorously: “oh yeah, I jerk off 8 times each and every morning before getting out of bed – problem, puritan?”

#7: You only support abolishing the AOC because you are unattractive and trying to broaden your options.

Also known as “projection.” Well, actually, there also are men who make this argument and not just dried-out wrinkly femihags, so let’s address it as if a man said it. Again, this is an ad hominem that presupposes that your motivation to engage in sexual politics of the Male Sexualist variety is merely your desire to improve your personal situation in life. Now, even if it were true, that 1) wouldn’t matter, because what matters is the arguments made and not the ostensible motivation behind them; 2) there is nothing essentially wrong with trying to improve one’s situation in life – and “there are no rules in war and love.”

By the way, abolishing the AOC, by itself, is not going to get all of the incels laid over-night. There are other measures that must and will be taken to ensure sexual contentment for all of society. Abolishing the AOC is a crucial part of the program, but it’s not the single purpose of Male Sexualism, in my view. What I personally would like to see in society is maximal sexual satisfaction for everyone. There are many ways to try reaching that point.

Anyway, the point is that “you are motivated by a desire to increase your options” is not even true regarding most of the prominent Male Sexualists. Presumably. I won’t speak for anyone else, but I’m married, and very satisfied with my great wife.

14376_7
Big Beautiful Women are not for everyone, but I’m cool with it. In this scene from the Israeli film “Tikkun,” my wife — who is an actress — plays a prostitute. Sorry, Nathan Larson, I’m not sending you her nudes; this one should suffice.
As a matter of fact, as I wrote in one of the last posts on DAF, my own kind of activism would not be mentally possible for me if I were not sexually satisfied. I’m not driven by a personal sexual frustration; on the contrary, as I keep saying, what drives me is essentially a spiritual impulse, which has awoken to the extent it has as a result of getting laid.

#8: If you support the abolition of the AOC, it’s because you’re a libertine who believes in “everything goes.”

Some Male Sexualists are, unmistakably, libertines – and proud if it. However, others are faithful Muslims. The notion that opposition to the AOC must necessarily be tied to libertinism is nonsense. Look at traditional European societies 350-300 years ago – almost none had an AOC at all, yet they were hardly “libertines.”

This Blue Knight line is somewhat related to the “LGBTP” meme – they think that we are Progressives trying to advocate for pedophilia as part of a Progressive worldview. I think that it’s safe to say that no one in Male Sexualism belongs to the Progressive camp, which is the camp where Feminists and SJWs reside. That said, some versions of libertinism (sexual libertarianism?) aren’t so bad, anyway. As TheAntifeminist said in a comment at Holocaust21:

[M]y utopia as a male sexualist would be somewhere like 1970’s Sweden or Holland.

This is a legitimate view within the movement.

#9: If young people are allowed to have sex, their innocence will be ruined; sex is exclusively for adults.

Here we see the Enlightenment-spawned Romantic idealization of “childhood” as a period that, due to whatever values one attaches to it, must be preserved against encroachment and incursion from the “fallen world of adults.” This is the Romantic basis of modern-day infantilism.

It used to be understood that the purpose of “childhood” is growing up into adulthood. The so-callef ‘child’ should be made into an adult, should be given adult tasks, adult responsibilities, and — all the sooner — adult rights. Today, society does just the opposite, and infantilizes people with a historically unparalleled intensity. That’s the result of elevating “childhood” into an ideal form. No wonder that now, it’s not just teenagers who are called “children,” but people in their 20s. That’s the process of infantilization which society goes through.

As usual, conservative dipshits, addicted to their own Romantic conceptions, claim that “actually, children are not nearly infantile enough these days.” They don’t see the pervasive “kid culture” that has completely zombified kids into being basically a bunch of drooling retards; no, what the prudish-types care about is “MOAR INNOCENCE,” as usual.

Fact is, kids today are not shown anything about the real world; a whole culture of idiocy, blindness, silliness, and clownishness has been erected like walls all around them. It is the culture of the TV channels for kids, the culture of Toy-Shops, the culture of child-oriented video games. Muh “birds and bees.”

Look, I get the temptation to indulge in infantilism. In fact, I’m probably a hypocrite, because I haven’t yet begun doing anything to de-infantilize my own 19-month-old son. He, like most toddlers, also watches the stupid TV shows and has all of these damn toys all over the place. It’s not easy resisting the ways of the system. But the real problem is that society is not structured in a way that allows children to be de-infantilized. When people only get a job at 18 or at 21 or they are NEETs, and there is an age-ist Prussian School System that is mandatory and which brainwashes its prisoners to believe that “school is good,” and Feminist careerism is pushed on all potential mothers by the media-entertainment-state bureaucracy-academia complex, it’s no wonder that people are very immature nowadays. That only goes to show how radically modern society must be transformed, in my opinion.

To get back on point: “childhood” and “adulthood” are both fictional concepts. These may be useful fictions, but they are still fictions. The telos of childhood is adulthood. It’s a transitional state, and if we must choose an arbitrary age when childhood should be officially and finally over, that age should be 9. That is, if we discover that 10-year-olds behave in an infantile manner nowadays, it’s because their parents — and, crucially, society at large — have not properly de-infantilized them. It’s a wholly artificial state of affairs, rooted in Romantic delusions.

Young people should have sex, because young people should experience real life in order to become functional adults; and an integral part of real life is — and should be — the sex life. Far from constituting a “problem” for young people, sexual intercourse is one effective way for getting young people to see the broader picture of reality. Deprived of sex, ‘kids’ grow up with warped and unrealistic notions about reality, and suffer dysfunction as adults. They don’t get to learn what’s important and what’s unimportant in life when they should learn it – young. Getting laid gives you a mentally clear vision of priorities in life, gives you a clarity of mind which allows you to deeply reflect on what’s actually going on in the world. Sex is necessary for young people, whose one and only task is to — repeat after me — become adults. Sex is a fundamental part of a fulfilled adult life.

#10: Young sex leaves young people traumatized.

No, it doesn’t. The ‘trauma’ stems entirely from being repeatedly and incessantly told by Blue Knights (Puritans, Feminists, Conservadaddies, Catladies, etc.) that a horrible crime has been committed against you by a wicked individual, that you have been “taken advantage of,” “deprived of innocence,” “ruined forever,” “sexually exploited,” “abused,” and the rest of the victimological jargon. The sex itself and the relationship itself feel good, and are indeed good biologically and psychologically; they bring fulfillment to one’s life and a satisfaction for one’s fresh and burning biological needs. The whole “trauma,” such as it is, is inflicted by society on the younger party, due to society’s strict adherence to a victimization-based morality.

That’s why I call for a Moral Revolution. This is not a troll. As long as people adhere to a victimization-based morality that sees “power imbalances” as inherently and fundamentally victimizing, people won’t be able to think logically about young sexuality. The current prevailing system of social morality must be replaced with a new one. Once that is achieved, all of this “trauma” — which is inflicted by the Blue Knights on horny young people — will dissipate and evaporate altogether

Young people greatly enjoy sex, and will go to great lengths to achieve it, overcoming the very many mechanisms of sexual oppression established by Blue Knights.

#11: Young people don’t know what’s good for them, and therefore need to be protected from risky situations.

If young people don’t know what’s good for them, it’s because society itself has successfully destroyed their ability to know what’s good for them. I mean, by the age of 10, a person should have a basic idea about what life is all about. If that’s not so for most or all people, something is deeply rotten in society.

And the reason for this indeed being the modern state of affairs is exactly because the protectiveness of parents, combined with wholesale cultural infantilization, has rendered young people incapable of independent thought. Thus, instead of “MOAR PROTECTION,” young people need infinitely less of it – so that they will learn to deal with reality.

And at any rate, sex is not as risky as the Blue Knights claim it is. They scare people about STDs, but then the solutions to that problem are well-known, and are completely independent of age – if instructed properly, and possessing a responsible personality, a 10-year-old can behave just as carefully — if not much more carefully — than many 40-year-olds.

Then there is the issue of pregnancy. First of all, what I wrote in the above paragraph about responsiblity applies here as well – the pregnancy-avoidance methods are well known. Secondly however, there’s a great differences in here: pregnancy is not a disease. It’s not a bad thing, but a good thing. I support young pregnancy and young parenthood. That is the primary “risk” which Blue Knight scare-mongers warn about, and I don’t see it as a risk at all. Instead of being protected from reproduction, people need to be instructed about how to reproduce. I once wrote, trollishly as usual, that if there should be any schools at all, then the “homework” of young females should be getting impregnated. The essence beneath the statement is on-point: pregnancy is good, because reproduction is good; fertility is good, while sterility is bad.

So, in my view, young people should not be protected from the “risk” of pregnancy. They should be instructed about it, made to comprehend the how’s and why’s of it, and then allowed to use their mind-faculties to figure-out what should or should not be done. That’s the gist of any de-infantilization program.

#12: Young people don’t desire to have sex.

Young people do, as a matter of actual fact, very much desire to have sex; much more-so, even, than many old people.

#13: If the AOC is abolished, parents will no longer be able to control their children.

What is the purpose — the very raison d’etre — of parental control over children? To turn children into functional adults, so as to allow them to form families and continue the bloodline. This cannot be achieved by hindering the ability of children (or “children”) to engage in the one thing that marks the arrival of maturity – sexual activity. Sexual activity is the thing that most unequivocally transforms an un-developed person into a developed person. Since the purpose of parenthood is the creation of adults, parenthood should serve to (at the very least) give-way in face of the natural maturation of children, rather than artificially prolonging “childhood” in order to extend the period of parental control. Parental control is only good insofar as it allows parents to facilitate the de-infantilization of their children; when, as in our deplorable times, parental control is used to exacerbate the infantilization of children, it is in the interest of society to tell parents to fuck off.

Since parents these days abuse their parental power and authority by artificially prolonging the infantilization of their own children, the abolition of the anti-natural AOC is exactly a thing that is needed in order to put parental control in check. The power of parents vis-a-vis their children must be drastically reduced when the child reaches the age of 8. That’s usually the age when sex, reproduction, and marriage all become relevant. If you want to argue that 8 is still too young, perhaps (maybe) we can compromise on 10. Point is, between 8 and 10, parental power should be dramatically restricted.

As a 23-year-old father, I can tell you that parents and family in general continue to significantly shape your life long after you cease being under “parental control.” An abolition of the AOC won’t result in all teenagers running away from home never to be seen again. But it will, God willing, result in the establishment of many new young households. That is something that we should strive for – getting teenagers to form families. That is the meaning of creating adults.

#14: Without an AOC, there will be grey-zone situations of child prostitution.

Child prostitution should be legal.

#15: Abolishing the AOC will increase pre-marital sex, which is a bad thing.

First of all, I couldn’t care less about whether or not sex is “pre-marital.” I had fucked my wife and impregnated her before we were married; so what? What matters is the bottom line: the creation of a patriarchal and stable household.

The second thing is, people today marry extremely late, and many forgo marriage altogether. This is related to the war against young sexuality: not reproducing when young, people struggle to reproduce when old; and living in sexlessness until the late teens or early twenies (or until later than that), a total sexual dysfunction takes over society, and people find it difficult to form long-lasting relationships at all. Young love shines the brightest, the younger the love, the brighter it shines; couples who start young last longer than those who start old.

Puritanical Blue Knights have brought about the plummeting of the TFR in Western Society. In my view, pre-marital sex should be accepted, as long as everyone involved understands that the purpose of any “romance” is the formation of a household. Early teenage marriage should be encouraged, and if early teenage sexual intercourse facilitates that, so be it – it’s all the better. It is not sex that is harmful to young people; sex is good for them. It is sexlessness that is the central and overarching problem of our times.

In conclusion
Man, that was exhausting, I gotta say. But hopefully, this post will serve as a guide to answering Blue Knight talking points. All of you must remember this: before you can annihilate Blue Knightism, you must mentally internalize what it is that we Male Sexualists believe in. In moments of uncertainty and doubt, consult this post, and you may find the core idea needed for you in order to formulate your own Male Sexualist position about any given issue.

There is a new revolution on the horizon. I don’t know how long I personally have left in this world. Perhaps the intelligence operatives threatening me will decide against killing me, or maybe they’ll slay me this very night. Who knows. What I want you to do is to take the ideas provided on DAF and now on TAF, understand them, and spread them. This is not a cult of personality or a money-making scheme. This is a political movement that has its own ideas, ideas that may initially appear groundbreaking but which in reality may also be primordial, ideas which we hope will be implemented in reality – be it 30, 80, or 360 years from now. At some point in the future, somewhere on the face of our planet, there will be a Male Sexualist country.

If during the next half-decade we manage to bring into the fold both edgy 4channers and 8channers (“meme lords”), and serious, intelligent, competent, affluent, deep-thinking, and strategizing supporters, we will be able within several decades to achieve our political objective.

Nya Nya Jo #fundie edendecoded.com

People want to say that religion and politics doesn't mix, but it does!

Biblical history shows us that the law of the land IS a religion; and the religion IS the law of the land. Ultimately, the politics (religious beliefs) of every society was based on what god or gods were worshiped. And this is no different to what we are witnessing now in our political arena.

SO THE QUESTION is what religious doctrine did Black women overwhelmingly subscribe to, that can be credited for destroying the traditional Black family?

We can NOT say it's Christianity. Because the black church never taught nor endorsed single motherhood as a viable option to Christian motherhood: which is found within the sanctity of a marriage covenant between a man and a woman.

The Bible, along with the Christian faith that rests on it, is replete with admonishments and warnings to avoid the type of sexual activity that leads to whoredom becoming the culture of the land. Nevertheless black women by and large (to the tune of 72% by recent stats) have rejected the biblical Christian standard. So what spiritual standard are they living by?

I believe Black women subscribed to the religious doctrine of Liberalism. You may be thinking that liberalism is not a religion, but it is. Liberalism is a very old ancient religion started over 3,000 years ago.

DID YOU KNOW the following about liberalism?

• Liberalism is based on the Roman god Liber.

• The Roman god name Liber means 'the free one;' its alternate Roman name was Bacchus; and the Greeks referred to this god as Dionysus.

• Liber is described as androgynous, man-womanish, sensuous, naked or half-naked.

• Liber is the god of wine, fertility, debauchery, uninhibited freedom and free speech.

• Liber's worship centered around large phallics; consisted of orgies, drunkenness, intoxication through various potions, and sexual activities (including homosexual acts).

• The Liber cult conducted human and animal sacrifices.

• Originally, Liber rituals were only attended and conducted by women, who practiced sexual masturbation rituals with carved life-sized phallic objects.

• Liber was the patron deity of the common people of Rome (the lower social classes); such as women who had lesser rights than the common man in ancient Roman society; slaves and foreigners.

• Worship of Liber taught civil disobedience to the established social order and the transformation of religious authority. Very much like what we've seen recently in the news with the riots and angry protests after the Presidential election that was won by Donald Trump and the Republican Party.

• In 186BC, the Roman Senate banned Liber worship because it was considered to be a threat to the security of the Roman Republic due to their political conspiracies, crimes and debauchery.

Now, let's take a look at our modern (current) Liberal politics.

Americn Liberalism is obsessed with sex - especially the kind that deals with homosexual and other alternative sexual infatuations. It also has an unhealthy focus on redefining family structure and twisting gender roles and identity.

The driving force behind liberalism is to create anarchy through 'anti-establishment' rhetoric; and to ultimately destroy traditional social principles by using the political system and process.

Modern liberalism aims to:

• End 'partriachy;' which means to prevent men from fulfilling their God-given right of leadership in home, government, moral authority; thus stripping men of their role and rights as fathers.

• Endorse free speech of every type and hue - except for free speech that contains traditional Christian principles.

• Teach sexual liberation; challenge the traditional codes of sexual behavior through LGBTQ special rights, laws and overwhelming media coverage.

• Promote free love; and that sexual freedom is a direct expression of power and authority.

• Normalize birth control (abortion), public nudity, masturbation, sex toys, pornography, premarital (casual) sex, sex with children (pederasty) and homosexuality.

• Reshape the image of the traditional family to include open marriage, spouse swapping, swinging and same-sex marriage.

• Make recreational drugs and alcohol easily accessible.

SO I ASK YOU: How could the black family remain intact with women that chose to adopt a liberal mindset that involved twisting gender roles, pushing the natural boundaries of sex, fighting against the God-given role men were given as leader in the home, indulging in all types of anti-biblical forms of intoxication, and devaluing their children to the point where they see nothing wrong in aborting them?

Liberalism is anti-god in all its ways.

Under liberalism black women have become gender confused, domineering over men (which is a hallmark of that confusion), whoreish (unable to get married, or maintain a marriage), excessive masturbators, sexual predators, cold and callous towards children (including the unborn), promoters of abortion (infanticide), drunkards (excessive drinkers), with a desire to assume final authority over men in the workplace, in government, in the church, and in their homes. These women rather pattern themselves after the image of liberalism, rather than the image of the virtuous women in the Bible who chose to honor God by becoming wives and mothers under the authority and headship of husbands.

And just like that, over the past 50 years, the Liberal political system converted the minds of women into pagan worshipping harlots of the god called Liber.

The Devil used Black Women as a 'legal and lawful' satanic attack on the black family. Ana if not rectified, this is the blueprint the Devil will use to destroy families of other races, ethnicities and cultures.

Satan has the blueprint for family destruction, and he will continue to use it across our country and the world.

Leviticus 19:29 (KJV) warns us: "Do not prostitute your daughter, to cause her to be a whore; lest the land fall to whoredom, and the land become full of wickedness."

So what we are witnessing right now is the result of generational self-prostitution of women; women choosing the lifestyle of whoredom over the standards of the Bible. And unashamedly, Black women voted for laws that led to the destruction of the Black family all so she could have laws that supported her ability to live a life of whoredom.

Hard truth: You don't have the mind of Jesus Christ if you choose to live life as a whore. You have the mind of some other god.

It is our lifestyle that shows our dedication to a specific set of religious beliefs. And we make sure our beliefs are cemented and protected through the laws and policies of our land via civil rights or identity rights.

I plead with Christians - particularly black Christian women and men to get involved in changing this damnable mindset of liberalism that has crept into our churches. Get involved in reshaping the political ideology to be pro-Christian!

We have a mandate and duty to be that light on the hill; I like to think of that hill as also including Capitol Hill.

Will YOU be that light? Become part of the movement to overthrow liberalism in the Church and in the black community. And let's restore the biblical perspective as the right foundation on which to build our homes, lives, communities and nation on.

pfta2a #fundie reddit.com


Some children initiate adult contact and are active participants.

Sorry, just trying to get your facts correct. You and u/herrhiskelig imply that a child would never choose to initiate or willingly participate in a sexual relationship with an adult. Studies show that you are both wrong.

You imply (wrongly) that only a person who is not entirely sound of mind would believe a child want to have sex with them.

Quote from: http://www.mhamic.org/sources/constantine.htm

research and clinical reports leave little doubt that some children do initiate the contacts and many participate willingly. Nine studies in the review confirmed this, although initiative on the part of the child was rare in father-daughter incest.

Children can enjoy sex and masturbation, many do. Children can initiate sex and some do. Children can be willing and even enthusiastic participants.


you should understand that NO, a child does not want to have sex with you

Yes, sometimes a child does want to have sex with an adult


No, a child cannot make choices in sexual matters b/c he/she is not developmentally capable of understanding the consequences and complexities of adult sexuality nor the risks involved. He/she doesn't yet know who to trust and why, how to protect himself, how to advocate or be an equal partner, etc. In many cases, the child isn't even physically developed enough for that level of interaction.

No, a child cannot make choices in sexual matters b/c he/she is not developmentally capable of understanding the consequences and complexities of adult sexuality nor the risks involved. He/she doesn't yet know who to trust and why, how to protect himself, how to advocate or be an equal partner, etc. In many cases, the child isn't even physically developed enough for that level of interaction.


Many children know how to be quite firm with their opinions, many are more firm with their opinions than adults. Though not all do, the study I linked originally found that passively unwilling children were the most often harmed by an adult/child sexual experience, actively unwilling children generally sought help quickly and actively or passively willing children generally enjoyed the experience and thus were less often harmed (some even benefited from the experience).

The "consent" part it mostly just opinion. This Alderson would disagree.

Alderson performed seven studies (some in collaboration with other scientists) throughout the 1990s on children’s capacity to give informed consent to medical procedures, and concluded that children as young as 5 or 6 are capable of informed consent if adequately informed. Waites (2005) argued very convincingly that her work and its conclusions translate readily into the sexual sphere, though he argues (badly) that children are not adequately informed about sex in our society and therefore cannot give informed consent to sexual activity. (The answer to that is obvious.) As far as I know, Alderson’s work constitutes the only sustained and detailed scientific analysis of children’s capacity to give informed consent, and before the 1990s no such analysis existed. Ages of consent were certainly not set on the basis of such capacity, and Waites shows how consent was not a genuine factor in so-called ‘age of consent’ legislation until the second half of the 20th century.

So 5 or 6 year olds are capable of making decisions on medical procedures (including "informed consent") if adequately informed, but not of consenting to sex. The only reason for this is that our society tries very hard to make sure that children are not "adequately informed" when it comes to sex. Which ironically, can lead to higher rates of unsafe sex when young t(w)eens begin to engage in sexuality, but have not been educated on safe sex - though I'm assuming we both agree that "abstinence only" sex education is a terrible idea.

You make a few more assumptions/implications about the sexuality. One is that any adult/child interactions are "adult sexuality", but in reality only a small minority of "sexual abuse" involves actual penetration and intercourse; likely because when the child is a willing participant and respected by their partner, than the child will say no when they don't enjoy something (and many children are not physically ready for intercourse) and have that choice be respected.


"oh this 10 year old wants to have an adult sexual relationship"

Again, you seem focused on the "adult", but you don't know that they original subject (the pedophile from the podcast) was in or wanted an adult sexual relationship. As I said above, most child/adult sexual interactions do not involve intercourse. It is more likely that the adult was participating at the child's level in order to make it fun for the child, or because the child did not want to participate in intercourse.


There are quite a few online communities (including r/pedofriends) of pedophiles who don't harm anyone. I am a pedophile myself and would never harm a child. Over 50% of child molesters are not pedophile (they have some other mental condition that leads them to molest a child).

Many pedophiles avoid children to avoid sexual feelings. I am not part of that group, I actively associated with children and have one girl I am very close with. I love her and would rather hurt myself than hurt her.

That said, there is a question of what exactly constitutes "harm". What if the child is a willing participant (maybe even the one pursuing more), society would say that kissing a child; even one who wanted to be kissed by you, is harmful. I don't agree with that, but I do follow the social rules in order to avoid legal issues (and to be able to keep seeing her)

Total Imbecile #psycho #sexist incels.co


[ToxicFemininity] Its seriously pisses me off that women cant see how privileged they are that they can get sexually assaulted and raped


Like every 2 days theres a post on reddit about a woman complaining that shes tired of guys hitting on her, how she has to worry about getting laid if she gets drunk or too close with a guy

BOO FUCKING HOO

Imagine people throwing themselves at you to have sex with you

Imagine having to actively try not to have sex because of how easy it is

Imagine when you make a post you have to specify that you have a boyfriend because you dont want guys hitting on you

I was browsing this sub for women trying but not being able to have a baby and I was raging, imagine complaining about muh 4th miscarriage when you can have sex any time you want, literally 0 of their thought goes into appreciating that fact

I cant imagine living a life where you take sex for granted like that

Meanwhile I cant get one girl to acknowledge my existence, so fucking easy being a female, any problem they have is a first world problem, seriously fuck women, just exist theory

carico #fundie christiandiscussionforums.org

Once people started to deny that sin exists and make up their own "morals" here is what happened:

In the 1960's when the pill was introduced, people began to challenge the idea of "sin" which led them to think that there was nothing wrong with premarital sex. This led to the rise in std's and many more unwanted pregnancies which then led them to figure out what to do with them. So since sin was no longer considered sin, then instead of abstaining from sex, the idea of killing the unborn babies became another viable option. Killing babies then became legalized and many people began to think that we were finally becoming civilized.

Then in then 1970's, premarital sex wasn't enough so the next step was open marriages. This led to swinging, adultery, divorce, and broken familes. Then in the 1980's when adultery wasn't enough, homosexuality began to make its public appearance. This led to the AIDS epidemic which is now considered to be on track as the number one cause of death in the world.

This led to the 1990's where still claiming there's no sin, homosexuals were given socieity's sanction to marry each other. And now the definition of marriage has changed for the first time in the history of mankind from being between a man and a woman to being between one person and another. This shows that the secular world has no clue why people were created male and female. Only religious people know. And it's still being debated about which person can marry which person, i.e. a mother and her child, a father and his child, etc. Now society has to change the definition of a husband and wife! A husband can now be a woman and a wife can now be a man!

And this is just the tip of the iceberg of what can happen when people deny sin. Not only do they have no clue what marriage is, but what is right and wrong, period. And this confusion is what we are passing along to our children all to deny that God and sin exist. And then we wonder why our children are murdering people today? An adult first has to know what right and wrong is before he can teach his children anything! This shows that we are definitely not fitter than the previous generations but in an escalating state of decay. And what's sad is that many adults who consider themselves so intelligent can't see that. That's how arrogance clouds judgment. Only Christians appear to understand why the above is decadent and leads people to death because we don't deny that sin exists. And atheists calls us evil. Yes indeed, Satan can deceive people into believing that the truth is a lie and that lies are the truth.

basedKRN #racist koreansentry.com

My brothers, my heart burns for the love of our people and I'd like to give a sermon (lol)
Not much I say will be new to you, but I bare my soul to you.

I am a newcomer. I was born in Seoul, but grew up in America. I returned a few years ago to learn our language, our culture, and the way of our people.
It has been a wonderful spiritual journey.
Even though I will never be "full Korean" and always be ???, I have a deep sense of kinship to our people and a connection to our sacred homeland.
However, now I live with almost a very deep fear for the future of our minjok...

Race is real.
I exist. Our people exist.
Our way of life is superior to that of others.
We have a right to exist and to enforce it.

We can all see what's happening in the West.
Whites are called "racist" for wanting their own homogeneous homelands and flooded with third-world savages and propaganda to promote race-mixing, white guilt, white privilege, self-hatred.
Their birthrates and populations are dwindling.
Their once great civilizations, like America and Europa, are on the decline and I predict race wars to erupt in the next 10-20 years.
It's happening to the mighty caucasoids who essentially conquered the world.

It can happen to us.
It is happening to us, the early stages.
We are following the West's neoliberal delusions, following America and losing our identity to globalism.
If we believe this egalitarian bullshit that we are all equal, don't insist on our identity, fall for the lie that discrimination is inherently immoral, don't have enough children, don't keep in touch with our roots, then we will open the borders, let our women be taken by foreign men, and make way for "new Koreans."
Cultural Marxist influences will find a way to condemn us for having "Korean privilege" and we will have "Korean guilt," like whites are brainwashed into believing they have "white privilege" and white guilt.
We could turn into Sweden or some other fucking ?? cesspool like Paris, if we're not vigilant.

God dammit, we are not perfect. I have my personal grievances with Korean people, I do. I'm a very individualistic person, that's my American side.
I used to shun Koreanness and identify myself as strictly American.

But these days, I can feel the savage heart of my ancestors beating inside me, their blood flowing through my veins.
When I walk outside and I see our people walking in the streets, speaking Korean, it is a beautiful sight I did not have as a child, as I was one of very few Asian kids growing up.
When I see Korean children run and laugh and play at the playground, it is so beautiful.
Even with all its problems and the daily grind, South Korea has peace and prosperity that our ancestors never saw.
Sometimes I truly think this is paradise.

Out of a world of 7.5 billion people, there are only about 80 million Koreans. That's 1% of the total human population. We are a minority. I feel a strong sense of kinship to complete strangers, other Koreans walking on the street, getting on and off the bus. It's strange.

There is nothing more important to me than the unification, health, peace, prosperity and enlightenment of our people.
There is nothing more beautiful than Korean children and the sound of their laughter.

Imagine if all that was gone. Imagine if we became extinct. Imagine if there were no more Korean children.
We should never take these things for granted, our very life.

It makes me sad to see Korean people so tired, miserable, going to work, arguing with each other, glued to their phones, glazed with apathy and boredom.
Slaving as cogs in a machine in this industrial society.
To see how cold we can be to one another.
Getting stuck in the day to day routine of just trying to get by.
Wearing suits instead of hanbok, a cityscape that overshadows our traditional Korean architecture, in our desire to modernize and be like the rest of the world.
Our women becoming whores and delusional feminists and our men weak, emasculated, cowardly, incompetent.
Victims of pain and unconsciousness that cause pain and unconsciousness to each other.
Slowly losing our identity into the globalist melting pot.
As dark and sinister influences creep into our society and threaten our future and what little freedom we have.

We need a spiritual revival, a political revolution, a deep call to personal enlightenment and nationalism.
I pray to our ancestors and I bow down to them everyday.
I exercise and I practice self-defense. I always try to improve myself in every way.
We must turn inwards to our deepest hearts, meditate, improve ourselves in every way, be prepared for war, train, and have children.
Otherwise this Illuminati New World Order Globalist Establishment or other peoples may take it away.

You may not like Hitler, but I found these words of his inspiring:

“The most precious possession you have in the world is your own people.
And for this people, and for the sake of this people, we will struggle and fight!
And never slacken!
And never tire!
And never lose courage!
And never despair!”

In the past, I hated being Korean.
Now, I love our ancestors.
I love our people so much.
I would fight and die for our tribe.

Even now tears flow from my eyes in love, appreciation and admiration for our ancestors and our people.
Brothers, we must take action and do all that is within our power to secure the existence and independence of our people and a future for Korean children.
We must speak up and warn our people of the lies of neoliberal globalism and diversity, find our roots, love and treat each other with dignity and respect, build strong families and communities.

For the glory and honor of our ancestors, for our people, for our minjok and all the virtue, joy, and love within our spirits.
For all that is right and true and beautiful in this world, to set an example for other peoples to follow.
We must secure the existence of our people and a future for Korean children.

KOREA FOREVER.

The Sacred Sandwich #fundie sacredsandwich.com

In a recent Steven Crowder YouTube video, Alexa, the interactive virtual assistant built into Amazon’s Echo, was asked the question, “Who is the Lord Jesus Christ?” Her answer was short and to the point: “Jesus Christ is a fictional character.”*

We may gasp at that shocking response, but the answer really shouldn’t surprise us. We live in a day and age where biblical truth is marginalized and the once-distinct line between reality and fantasy is blurred. Nowadays, a fetus isn’t a person, there are more than two genders, and Lucifer is a semi-fallen angel with a heart of gold on a successful Fox TV series.

No wonder Alexa can answer the question as she does. The existence of the biblical Jesus is up for debate in these wishy-washy times, so why mince words just to appease a fading orthodoxy in Christianity? Besides, any post-Christian church can still flourish these days without objective truth or a historical basis in fact. Today’s “spiritual-but-not-religious” people are more informed by their emotions than by an external revelation from the one true God. Jesus is now whomever they want Him to be, as long as it “feels right.”

Mark Steyn, in fact, gave the scathing opinion that many mainline Protestant churches, especially in Europe, have turned Jesus into nothing more than a soft-left political cliché. According to their sentimentality, Steyn writes:

“…if Jesus were alive today he’d most likely be a gay Anglican bishop in a committed relationship driving around in an environmentally friendly car with an “Arms are for Hugging” sticker on the way to an interfaith dialogue with a Wiccan and a couple of Wahhabi imams.” ? America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It.

So how did Jesus Christ, whose incarnation divided the world’s measurement of history, begin to be relegated to fictional status? The Bible has shown us that the attacks against Jesus have always been about tearing down His legitimacy in one way or another, and this is no exception. The current approach, however, is to lump the historical Jesus together with every “Christ figure” that mankind can conjure up in its imaginations. In fact, Jesus warns us of this sort of thing: “If anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘Look, there he is!’ do not believe it. For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform signs and wonders, to lead astray, if possible, the elect” (Matthew 24:23–24).

Current signs indicate that we are allowing the real Jesus to lose His distinction among the mythological “Christs” of the present world. Therefore, who’s to say which Christ is hard fact and which Christ is idealized fiction? To be sure, Western society’s current obsession with mythology and other popular products of the imagination, both new and ancient, have brought us to a point where the biblical Son of God is no more significant than any other literary or cinematic character imbued with religious symbolism. Jesus, it seems, has become just another “archetype” among many in which to inform our postmodern spirituality.

The concept of archetypes, first theorized by Carl Jung, put forth the idea that universal mythic characters, or archetypes, reside within the collective unconscious of all humanity and have emerged through our art over the centuries. Not surprisingly, this Gnosis-based theory has so infiltrated the religious sentiments of the current population that a savior like Jesus Christ doesn’t have to exist in reality; it is only the internalized “idea” of what He symbolizes that brings one closer to enlightenment and divinity. Who needs the Son of God slain on the cross when we can find comfort in an imaginary archetype of sacrificial love and acceptance that allows each person to rise to the higher Self by their own power?

Sadly, the dependable eyewitness accounts of the New Testament now have to compete with the fantastical tales of the Marvel/DC universe, Hogwarts, Middle Earth, or even Narnia. In the end, the Gospel record is far too mundane for a world mesmerized by glowing screens filled with CGI candy. Jesus and the apostles, much to the chagrin of some, never wore superhero costumes, flew Firebolt brooms, or slew mythical creatures with swords or light sabers. Is it any wonder, then, that the mythic archetypes of our popular culture are considered more compelling than the real men of God who toiled in a ministry that often brought ostracism, suffering, and ignominious death?

The Confusion Of The Younger Generation

My immediate concern, of course, is for the younger generation growing up in this current crusade of make-believe and religious skepticism. It’s one thing for grown-ups to deal with these assaults upon truth, but young children are not intellectually developed enough to make a distinction between what is real and what is imaginary. Some people who are involved in early education, even in the most progressive schools, have found this to be true in their experience:

“A child who spends too much time in a world of fantasy may find it difficult to relate to others, to interact in a group, to be in the here and now. It can also be scary for a child… When a child under 5 or 6 hears a fairy tale with a wicked witch, they then also imagine this witch to be real as a child of this age has a very concrete understanding of the world. They visualize it as if it is real as they are not yet able to clearly separate fantasy from reality.” – Montessori And Pretend Play: A Complicated Question

This childhood interaction between fact and fiction can be even more complicated when you, as a Christian parent, begin to introduce your child to the real person of Jesus Christ. This should be an exciting and joyful truth to share with your little one as you begin the process of rearing your child under the instruction of God’s word, but it can oftentimes be a difficult education if Jesus has to compete with Santa Claus, Superman, or Harry Potter as the object of your child’s fledgling hero-worship.

Recent research has proven this confusion among children to be a real issue. Case in point, a 2014 research study at Boston University where it was discovered that young children with a religious background were less able to distinguish between fantasy and reality compared with their secular counterparts:

In two studies, 66 kindergarten-age children were presented with three types of stories: realistic, religious and fantastical. The researchers then queried the children on whether they thought the main character in the story was real or fictional.

While nearly all children found the figures in the realistic narratives to be real, secular and religious children were split on religious stories. Children with a religious upbringing tended to view the protagonists in religious stories as real, whereas children from non-religious households saw them as fictional.

Although this might be unsurprising, secular and religious children also differed in their interpretation of fantasy narratives where there was a supernatural or magical storyline.

“Secular children were more likely than religious children to judge the protagonist in such fantastical stories to be fictional,” wrote the researchers. “The results suggest that exposure to religious ideas has a powerful impact on children’s differentiation between reality and fiction, not just for religious stories but also for fantastical stories.”

– BBC News, Study: Religious Children Are Less Able To Distinguish Fantasy From Reality

The researchers concluded (as most college researchers are prone to do) that exposure to a religious education is probably the main culprit in a child’s difficulty in identifying fact from fiction. This conclusion, however, seems to indicate an anti-biblical bias that completely ignores the alternative possibility. Why is religion the problem? Isn’t it just as plausible that fictional stories involving magic are the real cause of confusion, especially when these fanciful tales, like Pharoah’s magicians, are the ones mimicking God’s miracles in the Bible?

In light of Scripture, this alternative conclusion is clearly confirmed. For starters, God is not a God of confusion. God’s word will not return void, but will accomplish what He pleases and will prosper in that thing for which He sent it. Over and over again, the Bible confirms that scriptural instruction from the word of God is essential to a child’s proper upbringing. It keeps them far from folly, equips them for good works, and makes them wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus (Proverbs 22:15 / 2 Timothy 3:14-17).

The one thing that is likely to undermine this God-ordained training is when an unaware parent interjects inappropriate fantasy stories from movies and literature as a compatible resource for their child’s development. This misstep is compounded when the parent’s reason for doing this is not because Disney movies or similar entertainments have any legitimate educational value, but because they don’t want their children to miss out on what the popular culture has to offer, even if it contains unbiblical content. To be blunt, raising children with such an indiscriminate use of worldly influences is almost a cultural form of Moloch worship which the faithless Israelites succumbed to when they delivered their infant children over to paganism for the sake of their temporal prosperity (Psalm 106:34-39).

Think about the possible consequences. Should we really be surprised when little Suzy suddenly has trouble maintaining the reality of Jesus walking on water after watching Luke Skywalker use the Force to levitate himself? And what should Suzy’s parents do after this happens? Do they let Suzy try to figure it out for herself or do they attempt to adequately explain the unexplainable to a kindergartner? And does it really matter at this point?

Some may suggest (and rightly so) that we can’t always shield our children from the world’s influences and the confusion these things might engender. Surely this is part and parcel of the average childhood and will no longer be an issue once they grow older and gain the intellectual capacity and religious understanding to correctly divide fact from fiction or right from wrong.

This is a valid point, and yet not particularly the issue at hand. The concern is not so much in how such exposure might temporarily affect a child, but how it might impact the child later on and into adulthood. A childhood immersed in “make-believe” might well lead to a misguided adulthood that finds more “truth” in paganism or occultism than in the Bible. It might also lay the groundwork for the idea that God’s word is just another fairy tale of human invention. And eventually, these adults might find themselves falling into the ditch of full-blown skepticism or atheism.

This possibility, in fact, was recently explored in a research study titled, Make Believe Unmakes Belief?: Childhood Play Style and Adult Personality as Predictors of Religious Identity Change. Published in 2014, the study looked into the relationship between childhood imagination and religiosity, finding that people who intensely engaged in pretend play as children were more likely to change their religious identity later in life, with apostasy being the largest category. As reported by Merrill Miller:

“The study assessed the role of ‘pretend play’—creating and acting out imaginary scenarios in made-up worlds—in the childhoods of individuals… and found that individuals who did not change their religious or nonreligious identification were less likely to have engaged in pretend play. Converts and switchers, however, were more likely to have played pretend, and apostates were the most likely to have often engaged in pretend play.” – The Humanist, Are Nonbelievers More Imaginative? A New Study Suggests They Might Be

Why were children who actively pursued a fantasy world more likely to abandon their religious upbringing as adults?

“The study’s author, Christopher Burris speculated that the higher correlation for apostates is because of the shift from structure — common among religious institutions — to unstructured — that is found in pretend play. ‘The realm of the nonbeliever is much less structured than the realm of belief is,’ he explained. ‘People’s cognitive, intellectual and emotional needs are not met sufficiently by faith traditions, so they strike out on their own way.'” – Massarah Mikati, Deseret News

The Biblical Approach For Christian Parents

The Bible, of course, has already anticipated the possible spiritual fallout from cultivating a child’s wild imagination instead of grounding them in reality and the clear instruction of God’s revelation. The biblical remedy?

Train up a child in the way that he should go; even when he is old he will not depart from it. – Proverbs 22:6

This is not to say that Christian parents shouldn’t encourage their child’s emerging creativity. But it should be grounded and fostered in reality. To truly instill an active and abiding love for God and neighbor, a child’s imagination must be connected to this real-life task and to exposing the child to those faithful people in their lives who emulate Christian duty in their various talents and occupations.

Even without the benefit of this biblical insight, Dr. Maria Montessori made the academic observation that reality was the key to a more profitable imagination:

“The true basis of the imagination is reality, and its perception is related to exactness of observation. It is necessary to prepare children to perceive the things in their environment exactly, in order to secure for them the material required by the imagination. Intelligence, reasoning, and distinguishing one thing from another prepares a cement for imaginative constructions… The fancy which exaggerates and invents coarsely does not put the child on the right road.” – Spontaneous Activity in Education p 254, Chapter IX

Don’t misunderstand this point. Pretend play is not necessarily a bad thing, but it is an activity meant to assist children in processing the real world around them. “For example, if they see an excavator at work in the street,” writes one teacher, “they may then be attracted to working with a model of an excavator, to reading books about construction vehicles and to play based on this. This is a child’s imagination at work.”

The fact is, even children themselves would much rather engage with real-life activities when possible. Many educators are well aware that a child is much more excited by helping Mom or Dad prepare a meal in the kitchen than pretend-cook with a toy stove. And Scripture finds great wisdom in this approach. Notice how God instructs His people to teach their children in the course of their daily activities:

You shall teach [the words of God] diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise. – Deuteronomy 6:7

Here we see no significant time set aside for daydreaming or chasing after empty phantasms. This is an all-encompassing lifestyle that weaves God’s truth into one’s daily labor from dawn to dusk, and from childhood to adulthood. It is the command from Genesis and throughout the Bible to bear fruit in every good work and increase in the knowledge of God (Colossians 1:10) “until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ” (Ephesians 4:13).

Brothers, do not be children in your thinking. Be infants in evil, but in your thinking be mature. – 1 Corinthians 14:20

The Mature Approach For All Christians

Where is this maturity of which Paul speaks? Truly, one of the problems with American Christianity today is that too many professing believers have failed to see the importance of sobriety and maturity as a biblical imperative for discipleship. They twist the meaning of Luke 18:16-17 and simply refuse to grow up. They see their childlike fascination with games, fairy tales, and the playthings of their youth as a crowning virtue instead of a possible impediment to spiritual growth. In turn, these parents immerse their children in the same enthrallments and find great satisfaction in molding little ones into their own image, forgetting that the Bible instructs them otherwise.

On the contrary, God is the only object of wonder we need to focus on:

We will not hide them from their children, but tell to the coming generation the glorious deeds of the Lord, and his might, and the wonders that he has done. – Psalm 78:4

I ask you: How could anyone fully submit to this sacred task if Jesus is only viewed as a mythological “archetype of Christ” or a good teacher who said wise things but never really existed except in our collective unconscious?

Any confusion about the reality of the Son of God is never going to serve this dark world, especially in an age where fantasy is actively usurping real life. As Christians, we have a holy calling to go into the world to make disciples, not to go into a fantasy-land to do so. God’s word and the Holy Spirit have shown us the only mind-altering vision we need to ignite our passion. We need to humbly submit to our Lord’s charge to deny self, follow Him, and stay true to our Gospel witness and testimony for the sake of the lost.

We know, of course, that shielding people, young or old, from the counterfeit fictions of this world won’t guarantee their eventual conversion. Ultimately, it is only by God’s grace and power that hearts are changed and the lost through faith are saved. Yet, we also know that if salvation does come to an individual, it won’t be because of fairy tales or myths, but despite them. Our job as Christians is to stay on point with the pure Gospel message, and not capitulate in any way to the world’s insatiable desire for an alternate reality. To give in to that desire does nothing more than bring confusion and cast doubt on the existence of the living Savior and the faith that brings eternal life.

The next time Alexa, or anyone else, dares to tell you that Jesus is a fictional character, ask them what the Bible says about Him. Why? Because the biblical answer to that question is the only response that truly holds the power of the Gospel to heal the brokenhearted, preach deliverance to the captives, recover the sight of the blind, and set at liberty them that are bruised (Luke 4:18).

“Whom do you say I am?” – Jesus Christ, Matthew 16:15

AbysmalDescent #sexist reddit.com

Re: 'Shy and awkward’ student, 19, who googled 'how to make a friend' then touched a schoolgirl, 17, on her arm and waist while trying to chat to her faces JAIL after sex assault conviction

Imagine a world where men could send women to jail just for touching them. Like, just permanently end their future(judicially, professionally and socially destroy them) and incarcerate them(with other far worse criminals no less), just because of a touch. No violence. No ill-intent. No danger. No harm. Literally just light tactile contact(not even skin-on-skin).

Imagine a world where men could actually think this is an appropriate and equal response to a woman touching them. I can't even imagine such a world and, yet, this is what is considered normal when the genders are reversed. It is just insane the level of power that women have, and the level of hatred and disregard that exists for men(regardless of their intent or the circumstances placed upon them) for this to even be possible.

This also wouldn't even have happened if it was another woman who had touched her, nor would it happen if it was a man touching another man or a woman touching a man. At best they would think "oh, that's a bit awkward/inappropriate" and then moved on. They wouldn't see themselves as victims or respond with violent anger. The only punishment I could even justify in this scenario is a course in etiquette, and even that seems excessive given the circumstances.

I've been touched without consent by females ever since high school. One even grabbed my dick during a pair assignment while the teacher was out of the room. Everyone thought it was funny. Her only punishment was not being paired with me again. Such male privilege. And don't get me started on parties and bars.

I've had women grab my ass when I worked at a bar, and they weren't doing it in a nice way at all, and yet the thought of sending them to jail was not even remotely on my list of responses. There was no response of anger, vitriol or violence.

To me, this would be as much of an over-reaction walking on the street and having a stray dog come up to me, looking for food, and poking me with its nose(with no sign of violence whatsoever), and then me going "that dog needs to be put down, it's oppressing me".

If a woman attacked violently, then I would consider pressing charges because she is a danger to herself and others(ironically, she would probably still not face any jail time because she's a woman).

”Imagine a world where men could send women to jail just for touching them.”

Yeah, on the waist, without saying a word, and the girl having said "stop" before.

Pretty sure that is not how it went down but, even if it was, that still doesn't justify the type of overreaction it got.

It's not normal to go up to someone, touch them on the waist without saying anything, and leave.

It doesn't matter whether it's normal or not, the point is the type of response you would have to it and why you have that response. If a woman touched you on the waist, under any circumstance, you would not consider sending her to jail for it. You would also not just presume the worse of intensions against her character either.

If a stray dog came up to me on the street and touched my knee with his paw, that wouldn't be "normal" but it also would justify me kicking that dog or calling for that dog to be put down either. And, people are capable of basic empathy or sympathy for a dog, surely they are capable of doing the same for an awkward, sheltered and inexperienced teenage boy too.

lmao imagine actually defending this.

Are you are not familiar with the concept of critical thought? I understand how fair judgement and fair treatment might seem like radical concepts to you, at least when it comes to men, but surely these concepts aren't beyond your comprehension. I also understand how ingrained misandry is into our daily thinking and rationalizing, which these types of cases exemplify perfectly, which is why I pointing these things out.

A woman can never be too cautious with a man who touched her fucking waist without permission.

"can never be too cautious"? What are you even talking about here? Are you going to instantly die from someone touching you? Are you going to fall ill or be crippled from a light touch? Or are you just speculating and escalating on other shit that didn't happen? if someone walks next to me, does that give me the right to punch them in "self-defence" because "you can never be too cautious"? And, yes, you can be too cautious how how you exercise that caution is overt and detrimental to others.

A man doesn't have a "right" to touch any woman like that.

Who said anything about having a "right" to anything? Is this another projection? You can certainly say "hey, don't touch me" to anyone you like and you can communicate that clearly and constructively to anyone. You can certainly take some steps to prevent it from happening, including removing yourself from the situation or removing them from the situation. The's not the point. The point is the type of reaction you have being disproportionate and targeted. It's like no one has the "right" to insult me or "offend" me, and yet that doesn't mean I get to assault them or send them to jail if they do.

I'll concede that the punishment is disproportionately severe, but he deserved to be punished nonetheless.

Do you think a woman would warrant that type of punishment if she touched another woman? Or if a woman touched a man? Or if a man touched another man on the waist? How is it that you can only truly justify this type of overt vitriolic reaction when it comes to men, and only men, touching a woman?

Maybe a fine + hours of community service and some classes on how to not creep women out.

Have you ever considered the possibility that the way women see/treat men, or how easily/quickly women can be "creeped out" by men(and only men) might also be majorly detrimental or inherently bigoted? That, maybe, society is teaching women to have an irrationally negative disposition towards men or a strong prejudice against men that is just culturally accepted. What if, for example, it was a black person touching white person, and then that white person had an overly-violent reaction to being touched by a black person because they are black, and then called for jail time or "community service and classes on how not to creep white people out"?

klery #fundie forums.catholic.com

[In response to a Catholic using birth control.]

Saying "The world is overpopulated enough" is a pure excuse and alame one. You lack the facts. One main reason there are so many problems in the world is because there are not enough younger people- there is an entire gemeration of people who shoudl be here but aren't! These people could have solved the problems we have today....instead the older people are more in abundance than us younger people and it is getting worse because WE ARE NOT HAVING ENOUGH CHILDREN!!! Do you realize that the muslim nations will take over the world soon if we do not start having more children? You need to wake up- I suggest you call your Diocese immediately so you can be re-schooled in the Catholic Faith.

exit82 #fundie freerepublic.com

We’ve known how to prevent AIDS since 1983.

That we still have it today is a testament to the gay coimmunity’s refusal to practice safe sex. Even AIDS infected gays have unprotected sex.

I am sick of World AIDS day, and “We must spend more to stop the spread of AIDS”.

You first, gays.

If we spent one fourth the money on cancer we spent on the worldwide guilt trip on AIDS the gays have made us ride for the last 25 years, cancer would have gone the way of polio by now.

fishersofmen #fundie rr-bb.com

Just another step closer.
Who would have thought a few years ago, something like Broke Back Mountain would be allowed on the screen. It won't be long before it's illegal to say homosexuality is a sin and that it is wrong, those statements will become 'hate speech', if you would have told my gparents 30 years ago, that this would be the way it is, they would have laughed themselves silly, they wouldn't believe the country we are living in now if they were alive.

So this is the next step, the breaking down of civilization, divorce, abortion, fornication (sex outside marriage), homosexuality, sex with children, multiple wives, sex with animals. It'll all be legal and acceptable. And anyone who disagrees with it or calls it sin, will be prosecuted for hate speech and bigotry.
Thats how it will go if the Lord tarries. (my guess)

When a civilization, our country starts 'accepting' this sin (and movies like this desensitize the masses, brainwashing those who watch it so the 'act' becomes more acceptable, then you need something 'more' degenerate to get the tintilating shock value, because 'last years degenerate act' has been nulled by the repeating of it before your eyes, dulling your senses to what once was considered horrible and wrong, so you move to the next deplorable act on the list, something more shocking, this will be either sex with animals or multiple wives)

It's like drugs, you gotta get a better fix every time, because your tolerance grows.
Its why kids are so violent now a days, they see violence in video games, hear it in music, watch it on tv and cartoons, see it in the paper and in their schools, it is nothing to hear about someone being killed on the street in your city-thirty years ago it would have been news and shocking.
Kids so more sex acts on tv, in music and video's by the time they are grown ups that having sex is really no big deal. Its just a 'thing' to do.

Its terrible what hollywood is doing to this country, and we let them in our homes.

Personalityinkwell #sexist #pedo #psycho incels.co

[Blackpill] Saying a 41 year old man wanting to throat fuck an 11 year old girl is wrong because it's "creepy" is a circular argument.

Let's think about this. How do you define "creepy"? SOCIAL NORMS

Where do laws come from? SOCIAL NORMS

Where does perceived socially acceptable morality come from? SOCIAL NORMS

You're creepy = "you don't conform to social norms even if you obeyed the law, therefore you are immoral"

It is creepy though. 11 is still a kid. Not even a teen yet. Pretty sure most 11 year olds don't have their periods yet. 14+ imo is okay

I dunno what to tell you. Wanting to harm children is pretty creepy.

"I dunno what to tell you"

and then you follow it up with

"wanting to harm children is pretty creepy"

you think I'm stupid you faggot NPC?

11 year olds are not "children" in the same sense that 5 year olds are, they are adolescents, you do realize a lot of 11 year old girls fuck right? like millions of them right? they suck dick and bounce on cock

having sex with them is not "harming" them, when these girls want to get cocks rammed in their holes

That's my opinion. Deal with it. No need to get so triggered, damn.

no, it's not your opinion, it's just brainwashing you stupid moron.

you're WRONG

There's nothing wrong with wanting to fuck an 11-year-old.

There's something wrong with actually fucking an 11-year-old.

NOPE

Just throatfuck an 11 year old girl bro.

Stop pushing your pedo psyop bullshit, OP. This shit is getting absurd.

nope, i won't stop because it's not pedophilia

in fact, i will keep going, as long as i want. keep feeding me bro

Idk what an 11 year old thinks, and at 11 I was probably watching pokemon. Even if I know that 11 year foids these days are fucking chad and using bad dragon dildos, I still am unable to equate 11 year olds being old enough to have sex.

11 year old boys and 11 year old girls are different

Its pedophilia if the 11 year old hasn't been through puberty yet.

true but many 11 year olds have already started developing, the soy in the food causes this

True, science says they're about as attractive as a 29 year old. 12 is when they start wait uh

naturally all men are gonna be hebephiles because that's when girls have their eggs and are fertile

11 year olds are fully capable of handling intercourse. and they want it too

What's "actually wrong" with fucking an 11 year old? If she is a pubescent, she is developed to handle sex, understand sex, want sex, and enjoy sex.

that won't be good enough for the agecucks i'm afraid

let them be cucks. it's not like anything we argue here will change much.

having a young wife is the most sure-fire way to ensure she will be loyal, faithful, and obedient to you. Remember that thread I posted of that loli being groomed by a chad? females bond to stronger males, and older males tend to be stronger/more well-off. Plus, since a loli's brain has more plasticity, she will more readily submit herself and be molded into a loyal wife. That's not even getting into the fact that the 11 year old will be easier to please and more eager to please you in return.

I remember I used to cope hard about Pr. Muhammad marrying Aisha at 9, almost made me leave Islam tbh but being blackpilled, I can 100% say that every social and scientific study shows that young brides are the best brides

9 does seem a tad young, but in certain cases they have hit puberty

Andrew Levinson #fundie returnofkings.com

Christians in general, and Catholics in particular, are portrayed as puritanical and anti-sex. This raises a question: if Catholics hate sex so much, then why did they historically tend to have so many children? As recently as 100 years ago, child rearing was considered the proper object of marriage and sex. The blue pill script – go to college, get a good salaried job, marry young and for life, have two or three kids – retains its staying power because it used to be sound advice. The manosphere exists in part because it is sound advice no longer.

Pope Paul VI, who reigned from 1963 to 1978, was in many ways a weak and vacillating man. His predecessor, Pope John XXIII, described then Cardinal Giovanni Battista Montini as, “our Hamlet,” always indecisive to the last. In an uncharacteristically bold move, he published the encyclical letter Humanae Vitae in 1968 that reaffirmed the Catholic Church’s opposition to all forms of artificial contraception.

At this point, many RoK readers may be thinking, “I’m sure this is terribly interesting to you Levinson, but I’m not a Catholic and the pill and the condom have been great for my sex life. Why should I care about this?” You should care because Paul VI called it: the easy availability of contraceptives paved the way for no-fault divorce, unleashed hypergamy, and sodomite “marriage.”

Marriage Then

Most of us take atomistic individualism for granted, in contrast to the ancient understanding of man as the political animal. “Who are you to say what two consenting adults can and cannot do in private?” is taken to be an unanswerable rejoinder to traditional understandings of sex and marriage. Sex seldom remains a purely private affair, especially in the era of social media. Among other things, sex can lead to love, marriage, hate, murder, children, disease, happy homes, broken homes, social cohesion and social disintegration.

As Pope Paul described it:

"Married love is also faithful and exclusive of all other, and this until death. This is how husband and wife understood it on the day on which, fully aware of what they were doing, they freely vowed themselves to one another in marriage. Though this fidelity of husband and wife sometimes presents difficulties, no one has the right to assert that it is impossible; it is, on the contrary, always honorable and meritorious. The example of countless married couples proves not only that fidelity is in accord with the nature of marriage, but also that it is the source of profound and enduring happiness."

In other words, marriage was once considered a more public institution than it is today, not through legislation but through social convention. Young men were incentivized to make themselves good husband material if they wanted sex and children. Young women were encouraged to remain chaste and marry young. Divorce was unthinkable for our great-grandparents. Then, as now, women were much more ruthless about slut shaming than men.

Above all, marriage was ordered toward children:

"Finally, this love is fecund. It is not confined wholly to the loving interchange of husband and wife; it also contrives to go beyond this to bring new life into being. “Marriage and conjugal love are by their nature ordained toward the procreation and education of children. Children are really the supreme gift of marriage and contribute in the highest degree to their parents’ welfare."

Marriage Now

In paragraph 17, Pope Paul predicts the consequences of the contraceptive mentality:

"Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue if they reflect on the consequences of methods and plans for artificial birth control. Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and a general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law [emphasis mine – AL], and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law. Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection."

Players and sluts ye shall always have with you, but the world now incentivizes us to be this way. Men must constantly perform or else their unhaaaappy wives will blow up the marriage for cash and prizes. That is, if men choose to marry at all. Fewer do, and in all honesty, I can hardly blame them. Why should they? If they want sex, they can find plenty of willing ladies provided they have even a modicum of game, and they won’t have to risk losing their homes, their jobs, their children, and their sanity in the divorce grinder.

Women too have grown to devalue men. Would the carousel exist to the extent that it does if it weren’t for the pill? If they can have consequence-free sex, then they will pursue the apex alphas and ditch the frustrated betas who were the good husbands and providers of yesteryear. Women are more exquisitely sensitive to social pressure than men, and the social cues that existed in our great-grandparents day aren’t there anymore.

The key here is that artificial contraception radically separated marriage and sex from child rearing. Marriage used to be a recognized public institution that carried with it certain legal and social obligations to which the couple was expected to conform. If children are removed from the occasion, then marriage becomes all about romantic feelings.

Fuzzy Feels Are Optional

If marriage is nothing but a public declaration of romantic feelings, then two consequences follow: if the feelings go away, that’s a legitimate reason to end the marriage; and if sodomites have romantic feelings for each other, then what reason do we have to exclude them from marriage?

Traditionally, Christianity has taught that if you burn with lust, you should marry. The specific woman you married was a question of prudence like choosing a career or a new house. Nowhere did the Church say that God had created “the one” or your soulmate. Unfortunately, this thinking has infiltrated all Christian churches today with disastrous consequences.

Jesus Christ famously prohibited divorce in the Gospels but many Christian churches have creative methods for getting around that. In theory, the Catholic Church has stood strong alone among all Christians. Strictly speaking, she does not recognize divorce but she makes “declarations of nullity,” which means a couple never formed a sacramental marriage at the time of their wedding vows. The American Catholic Church in particular has been handing out annulments like candy for fifty years, so it’s understandable why outsiders think of them as Catholic divorces.

The Basis Of Civilization

The building block of civilized society is not the individual but the family. The great evil of our time is that our progressive overlords actively undermine the family at every turn. My tradcon friends vacillate between believing game is either a placebo or a set of irresistible Jedi mind tricks cads use to deflower innocent virgins. The media wonders why young men refuse to grow up, man up, and marry those sluts. I say the men of today are responding rationally to the incentives of a world gone mad.

Be honest gentlemen: if Marriage 1.0 were still the rule instead of the exception, how many of you would happily marry? The contraceptive regime radically disrupted the natural formation of families. Sex became an end in itself. From that conviction came the scourge of pornography. The logical conclusion is the development of sex bots. And an elderly, celibate Italian bishop saw it all coming more clearly than all of the experts.

Anna Diehl #fundie 924jeremiah.wordpress.com

Why does God let children die of cancer?

image

AUDIO VERSION: YouTube  Podbean

Why does God let children die of cancer? To answer this question we need to understand some fundamental truths about how this world works.

THE INJUSTICE OF DISEASE

Why does it feel so wrong to us when a child slowly wastes away with disease? There are many reasons. It goes against the natural order of things: children aren’t supposed to die before their parents. It also hurts us and we hate things that cause us pain. We think that the things that hurt us must be evil, therefore cancer is evil. Who do we associate with evil? Satan, of course, therefore Satan is to blame for cancer. This is the theological trail many Christians go down: they end up blaming Satan or else they sigh heavily and say “It’s a fallen world.” Still others personify the disease itself and treat it like a conscious being. “#&%$@ cancer!” is a phrase we see posted on internet profiles by those who are feeling frustrated and helpless as their loved ones suffer in front of them. But is cussing out cancer really getting us anywhere? And is plastering colored ribbons all over the earth really rushing us towards a cure? Suppose they found a cure for all cancers tomorrow and began passing it out for free in every country. Do you know what would happen? A new, nastier, scarier disease would suddenly spring up in our midst. Why is this? Because the One who created this world wants disease to be a part of it.

THE ORIGIN OF DISEASE

The way Christians try to blame everything on the Fall is ridiculous. When we talk like Eve sent the universe spinning out of control the moment she bit into the fruit, we are completely denying what is right in front of our eyes. We need to start back at the beginning of Genesis and try again. No one forced God to curse Adam and Eve with pain, hardship, and physical death. He came up with the idea of making our lives a trial all on His own because this planet was always intended to be a place in which we grow through suffering. So what does this tell us about God? Is He some kind of ogre? No, He’s not. But from our perspective, His methods can seem very cruel.

GOD’S PRIORITIES

In order to understand why God inflicts kids with cancer, we need to understand what His priorities are. Keeping us comfortable, happy and healthy while we are on this earth is not at the top of His list of important things. If He had wanted this place to be a perpetual paradise He would have made it one. Instead, He made Heaven a paradise and arranged for almost our entire existence to be there, provided we properly submit to Him (see Understanding Salvation: Meeting the Demands of Three Gods). We’re only on this earth for a brief blip of time, and while we are here, we are supposed to be growing closer to God. Everything that He does to us down here is with our spiritual best in mind. That includes inflicting children with malignant tumors.

Whenever we find ourselves feeling enraged about some form of suffering, it is because we’ve zoomed the lens in far too close. When we get upset about kids dying of cancer, we are only thinking of ourselves and our immediate earthly happiness. We’re not considering the long-term view. We’re putting the temporary above the eternal in value and worth. God does just the opposite. He says the eternal health of souls is far more important than our momentary sorrow on earth. We say pain is pointless. He says pain is a catalyst for causing great change in people’s hearts. We see a child suffering and say that God is cruel. He sees one child’s experience affecting hundreds of lives and shocking souls out of a fatal stagnation. God hurts us in order to heal us. Everything He does is for our best, but too often we refuse to put any trust in His motives, even though He has proven Himself to be infinitely more loving, faithful, and wise than we are.

No one is more dedicated to the well-being of humans than the One who created them in the first place. This world isn’t something that God stumbled upon one day and took a mild interest in. We are His carefully crafted, intricate masterpieces. He hovers over us constantly, meticulously arranging every detail of our lives. Tumors don’t just happen to people because of bad genes or exposure to toxins. God creates tumors in bodies with the same precision as He creates all of our internal organs. Tumors grow because He makes them grow. They are detected late because He blocks us from finding them early. They are cured because He cures them, and they kill us because He wants them to. God works through medicines, doctors, and a host of other things, yet we must not get so focused on His methods that we miss seeing Him. No child comes down with cancer by random chance or because God abandoned them to the clutches of Satan. God personally selects all the victims of cancer with great care, and it is not because He hates them or is just trying to punish someone.

THE FATHER OF OUR CHILDREN

All children belong to God. He is their true Guardian and when He involves us in their care it’s understood that it will only be for a temporary amount of time. At some point, He takes all of His children back again to an eternal dimension where He parents them directly. On earth, we human parents are simply mediators whose primary job is to teach children who their eternal Father is. Sometimes He gives us a lifetime to love and care for His children on earth. Other times, He reclaims them after only a few years. Do we really have the right to accuse God of being unfair in taking back what is rightfully His? Yes, it hurts terribly, and we shouldn’t pretend otherwise. But to tell God that He was wrong to take what His own hands have made—well, that simply doesn’t work. Other souls are not our property.

DEATH

From God’s perspective, no one dies prematurely and no one dies late. We say they do because we have preconceived notions about how long people should live. We’ve decided that there’s a rule that all children are supposed to outlive their parents. God never gave us any such guarantee. We’ve decided that anyone who dies from diseases or violence has been cheated. This simply isn’t true. God is clear that He predetermines the number of days that each soul will live on this earth, and no one fails to complete their full assignment. This is because no one can end a life without God’s cooperation. He alone has the power to separate soul from body, and to withdraw the breath of life that He put into us.

Humans try desperately to control the lifespan of themselves and others, yet God says that no one can do anything without His cooperation. We can plot and scheme all day, yet it is God who ultimately decides whether our plans fly or flop. We come up with new miracle drugs for cancer, yet it is God who decides who they work on. Some survive chemo, others die from it. Some are cured and stay cured, while others get constant recurring growths. Why is every case so different? Why can’t we find a formula that always works? Because God is involved. He has a far more important goal in mind than curing our physical bodies. He is after our souls.

GETTING OUR ATTENTION

God wants creatures who willingly choose Him, He doesn’t want robots. So while He controls every atom in existence, He also gives us some degree of choice. On a soul level, we are given the option to accept or reject Him. God wants His relationship with us to be a two-way street, not something He rams down our throats. He then spends our whole lives arranging events and experiences that will entice us to seek Him out. What happens when we see a child dying in front of us? We start asking why. We start looking for a cosmic source of justice. We start wondering if life really is some random set of coincidences, or if there could be some purpose to it all. We reevaluate our own lives and wonder if we’re really living for what is important. When the child dies, we look for some external source of comfort that can fill the void in our hearts. We wonder what our child found on the other side of death. We wonder what we will find when our turn comes.

It is when we feel helpless and distressed that we remember God. Too often that is the only time we remember Him. If we had our way, we’d erase all pain from this world and thereby take away one of God’s most effective means of securing our attention. Then we’d all become completely self-absorbed and totally ignore His existence. Does God smile on this plan? Not hardly. Our Creator loves us too much to let us walk away from Him without a fight. He will do anything it takes to intensify our interest in Him

God is the One who makes pain feel stronger when children are involved. Any good parent would much rather suffer themselves than watch their children suffer. This is the way it is supposed to be. God has set up levels of suffering on this earth. All trials are not equal. Some we can easily cope with, others temporarily devastate us. God inflicts children with incurable tumors when He has determined that only extreme measures will accomplish the soul changes He is after. It doesn’t always mean people are fighting Him. Sometimes there is no rebellion at all, yet God has decided it is time to push souls on to the next level of maturity. In every case, He carefully arranges which lives will cross paths, and the intensity of each person’s exposure to the suffering child. Some will sit at the bedside in hospitals, up close to the agony, while others will only receive brief updates through the internet. Every position is carefully arranged by God to spark conversations between Him and us. When a friend of ours is hurting, our natural instinct is to pray for them and tell God to stop doing what He’s doing. Our advice is utterly useless, and our wishes often misguided, but by getting us to talk to Him, God hopes that we’ll be willing to do some listening as well. He has things He wants to teach us in these moments. He isn’t just stirring us up so we can tell Him how to better run His universe. If we want to grow from these experiences, we must be willing to let God lead us instead of trying to lead Him.

When souls cooperate with God beautiful things happen. We change into something better than we were before. Our trust in God deepens. Our perspective of life shifts closer to the eternal viewpoint. Our priorities improve. Even if the changes are only temporary, they are worth it, for we will be all the swifter to respond to Him the next time a crisis arises. It is only when we close our hearts to God that we stagnate. When we demand healing, and even threaten to walk away from Him unless He gives us what we want, we only end up harming ourselves. God is not going to take orders from us. He will continue to do what He knows is best for hundreds of people, even though we selfishly demand that He care only about our personal pain.

If we are to thrive through suffering, we must recognize that there is a bigger picture involved. God is a multitasker who is always accomplishing many things at once. Yes, our suffering matters to Him very much, but to ask Him to stop caring about every other soul who is being positively affected by our pain is going too far. Instead of accusing God of being cruel, we need to give Him the trust He deserves. God knows what is best for us. As parents, we should be well acquainted with the principle that what a child needs is not always what a child will enjoy receiving. It is the same with us and God. He has promised to do what is best for us, even when it requires some misery on our part. The question now becomes, are we going to trust His judgment? Or are we going to insist that we know better than He does and wallow in self-pity? If we are wise, we will not go through life defining ourselves by the pain we have gone through, and the loved ones we have lost. Instead, we will let pain accomplish its good work in us and then let it go. In this world, God uses evil to bring about a greater good. If we align with His Spirit, He will teach us how to thrive through all forms of suffering.

David J. Stewart #fundie jesus-is-savior.com

Parents are Under Attack

Families are under attack in America. Children don't belong in public schools. If there's a mark on your child, the school nurse (known as a “mandatory reporter”) will call CPS and the State confiscates your kids forever. Even if a child gets hurt playing, a parent will likely be blamed and charged with abuse. God forbid that you actually spank your child when they misbehave. CPS will take your children from you. It happens every day. You'll lose your kids forever.

The United Nations is planning to take control over America's children. Good parents lose their children every day in America, because of CPS thugs who think they are God. Even yelling at your child is considered mental cruelty and abuse nowadays. It's insane! Hell will be hot enough!

Berit Kjos #fundie crossroad.to

Delightfully gruesome images and scary creatures become part of their memory, for the author, Joanne K. Rowling, knows how to make her characters come alive in a reader’s mind. "Oh, but it’s just fantasy," you may argue. "We were raised on scary tales. It can’t hurt."

Actually it’s not that simple. The stories and the times have changed, making the new generation of children far more vulnerable to deception than we were. Consider some of the changes:

1. Different times and culture. Unlike most children today, their parents and grandparents were raised in a culture that was, at least outwardly, based on Biblical values. Whether they were Christian or not, they usually accepted traditional moral and spiritual boundaries. Even the old fairy tales I heard as a child in Norway tended to reinforce this Christian worldview or paradigm. The good hero would win over evil forces without using "good" magic to overcome evil magic. Social activities didn’t include Ouija Boards, Seances, and an assortment of popular occult role-playing games. Nor did friends, schools or Girl Scouts tempt children to alter their consciousness and invoke the presence of an "animal spirit" or "wise person." Occult experimentation was not an option.

Today it is an option. Children now learn their values and world view from a variety of sources. The entertainment industry is one of the most persuasive agents of cultural awareness, and it usually teaches global and occult values, since that’s what their global market buys. In fact, children have become so familiar with profanity, occultism, and explicit sex, that they barely notice – just as in Old Testament days: "They hold fast to deceit, they refuse to return. . . . No, they have no shame at all; they do not even know how to blush." (Jeremiah 8:5,12)

In this context, the occult images evoked through traditional fantasies threaten a child's faith far more today than they did three decades ago. Reinforced throughout our culture, the old beloved books such as the Hobbit can stir curiosities and cravings that can easily be satisfied by darker, real-world attractions.


Tactics for Change
2. Different type of fantasy. Books, movies, games, and television all involve the imagination, and the specific fantasy directs the child's imagination. In other words, the imaginary scenes and images in books and movies are not neutral. As with guided imagery, the child's feelings and responses are manipulated by the author's view and values. For example, the stories and books children read in the classroom are usually selected or approved by each state because their message teaches the new global values, and because they provide useful discussion topics for the manipulative consensus process. "Good stories capture the heart, mind, and imagination and are an important way to transmit values," writes Louise Derman-Sparks in the influential Anti-Bias Curriculum: Tools for Empowering Young Children, which is full of classsroom strategies for eroding traditional boundaries and teaching the new spirituality.

Books such as the Harry Potters series fit, because they reinforce the global and occult perspective. Page after exciting page brings the reader into the timeless battle between good and evil, then trains them to see the opposing forces from a pagan, not a Biblical perspective. In this mystical realm, "good" occult spirits are naturally pitted against bad occult spirits, just as in pagan cultures where frightened victims would offer sacrifices to "benevolent" spirits who could help ward off evil curses and other threats. Few readers realize that from the Biblical perspective, all occult forces are dangerous. But today, it seems more tolerant and exciting to believe this illusion than to oppose the lies. The words of Old Testament prophet Isaiah ring as true now as they did over 2000 years ago: "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil…." (Isaiah 5:20)

3. Different purpose. Children don’t read Harry Potter merely to reach the conclusion and resolve the suspense. Many read the books over and over because they delight in identifying with the "good" wizards in this newly discovered world -- and sometimes even with the obviously evil wizards. They build memories based on felt experiences in an occult virtual reality, and they are desensitized to the danger. The talent and knowledge of the author makes this seductive world all the more believable. Just ponder these diverse bits of wizard philosophy:

* Professor Snape who taught Potions: "I don’t expect you will really understand the beauty of the softly simmering cauldron with its shimmering fumes, the delicate power of liquids that creep through human veins, bewitching the mind, ensnaring the senses…." 1

* Two centaur’s views on astrology - "We have sworn not to set ourselves against the heaven. Have we not read what is to come in the movements of the planets?" …."Or have the planets not let you in on that secret?" 2

* "He is with me wherever I go," said Quirrell, referring to the murderous wizard Voldemort. "I met him when I traveled around the world. A foolish young man I was then, full of ridiculous ideas about good and evil. Lord Voldemort showed me how wrong I was. There is no good and evil , there is only power, and those too weak to seek it.... Since then, I have served him faithfully." 3

* Headmaster Dumbledore: "To the well organized mind, death is but the next great adventure." 4

* Hagrid, the grounds-keeper at Hogwarts, telling Harry about the strange power that saved his life, "Happened when a powerful, evil curse touches you – didn’t work on you, and that’s why yer famous, Harry. No one ever lived after he [Voldemort] decided ter kill ‘em, no one except you…" 5 [Harry seems almost Christ-like, doesn't he, with his wound or mark, his psychic powers, and his victory over death and Voldemort?]

Once introduced to spiritism, astrology, palmistry, shape-shifting, time-travel (the third book) and the latest version of popular occultism, many crave more. They can easily find it. In their neighborhoods and schools, our children are surrounded by peers who are fascinated by occult empowerment and would love to share their fun discoveries. Few children have the Biblical knowledge or discernment needed to evaluate good and evil or to resist such threats to their faith.

4. Different kind of classroom. It’s not surprising that Harry has suddenly soared to the peaks of popularity in schools across the country. His story fits right into the international program for multicultural education. The envisioned global community calls for a common set of values which excludes traditional beliefs as intolerant and narrow – just as the Harry Potter books show. The Biblical God simply doesn’t fit into his world of wizards, witches, and other gods.

Feminist writer Naomi Goldenberg knows that well. In her book, Changing of the Gods, she predicts that "God is going to change…. We, women are going to bring an end to God. We will change the world so much that He won’t fit in anymore." She and other radical feminists must appreciate Ms Rowling’s part in this process.

Of course, God will never change. But people, beliefs, and cultures do. And some changes, such as today’s cultural shift away from loving God to hating His truths, have occurred a multitude of times. The words Jesus spoke to His followers long ago now fit our times: "If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you. . . . because they do not know Him who sent Me." (John 15:20-21)

5. A different education system. UNESCO’s "lifelong learning," now being implemented through Goals 2000, takes education far beyond the boundaries of the classroom. Its goal is socialization and preparation for a global workforce. Everyone - in homes, schools, and workplace – must be mentally prepared to participate in the consensus process. In the name of "unity" and "community," people of all ages must help form new values, challenge contrary beliefs, report non-compliant friends and relatives, and oppose all other obstacles to compromise, "common ground" and "mental health."

There are many ways to persuade the masses to reject uncompromising Christianity and embrace a changeable blend of all kinds of religions – including a cross-less and universalist perversion of Christianity. Schools do it through books such as the Harry Potter series, through multicultural and environmental education, and by integrating social issues and politically correct ideology into more mundane subjects such as math and science. The media does it by selective reporting, redefining words like "fundamental," vilifying labels such as extremist, religious right and homeschoolers, and by equating such groups with narrow-minded bigotry and hate.

Harry Potter’s author does it by creating a captivating world where strength, wisdom, love, hope – all the good gifts God promises those who follow Him – are now offered to those who pursue occult thrills. Likewise, her main characters demonstrate all the admirable traits our God commends: kindness, courage, loyalty, etc. But the most conspicuous muggles (ordinary people who are blind to these mystical forces) are pictured as mean, cruel, narrow and self-indulgent. These subtle messages, hidden behind exciting stories, turn Truth upside-down. But fascinated readers rarely notice the deception. This power-filled realm with its charms and spells soon becomes normal as well as addictive to those who immerse their minds with its seductive images.

The Harry Potter books, first introduced in England, are unlikely to fade from public consciousness in the near future. Scholastic, a major provider of popular books for classroom use, bought the rights to publish the books in the United States. Devoted readers who can't wait for the sequel to be distributed in the U.S. are purchasing it on the Internet from Amazon.com's British division [see reviews]. The series has already caused great consternation among those who fear the seven books will eventually crowd out adult fiction on the coveted New York Times best-sellers list. This concern will surely grow, since Warner Brothers (owned by Time Warner) bought rights to the live-action movie.

It's not too soon to prepare your child for the increasing peer pressure to conform to the new social standards.

Nathaniel #fundie jesusloveseverything.blogspot.com

Just imagine vast fields of our sisters in Christ -- sisters brain damaged and comatosed, never to mentally return to this Earth full of sin -- inserted into pods that are themselves connected to a myriad of wires and hydraulic tubes (I know, it sounds exactly like the Matrix, and I freely admit, although it's certainly a very evil movie, some of the imagery is inspiring and inspired this post). The pods will be the most comfortable places on Earth, playing soothing music like Bible hymns and Mozart, their insides like a massage chair and covered in silk. A few intruding wires and tubes will, of course, have to connect to the women inside the pods to monitor their temperature and overall health, as well as the babies' of those that are pregnant. And of course there will be one tube reserved for the insertion of a man's seed whenever the women are at their most fertile. And only the best semen will be used. I haven't quite settled on a selection process yet, but I'm thinking some sort of Christian council could perhaps vote on the man who is honorable and moral enough to breed generations of these children. Perhaps one man won't be enough, for a little bit of diversity is always good. We should, therefore, most likely have a multitude of different men, one of each race. When the children are born, they can be sent off to special adoption centers, where they can be delivered to good Christian parents who are unable to themselves breed. Those that may be left over can be raised in God, brought up in Christian schools, where prayers are said thrice daily (at least), and in the summer, they can be sent to Jesus camp. If the schools are as good as I envision, then these children will make the perfect leaders for our future. But not just leaders, for if this idea is near as good as I am thinking, we will breed enough of these children to one day make up a huge percentage of our population, such that they can elect only the most Christian of people to the government. So even those that are not the brightest and best can contribute to God in some way.

natsumihanaki20 #fundie natsumihanaki20.deviantart.com

1# Homosexuality is inborn


There's no proof that homosexuality is inborn. All of the studies often used to prove that homosexuality is inborn are fallacious. Why? Well, let’s begin with LeVay’s brain study. When looking at the methodology of the LeVay study, one of the key problems is that the study has never been reproduced. Another problem is that out of nineteen homosexual subjects used in the study, all had died of complications of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). AIDS has been shown to decrease testosterone levels, so it should be expected that those who suffered from that condition would have smaller INAH. Furthermore, in a scientific environment where controls and standards are a necessity, LeVay did not possess a complete medical history of the individuals included in his study. He therefore was forced to assume the sexual orientation of the non-AIDS victims as being heterosexual, when some may not have been. Also, there’s brain plasticity which is a fact acknowledged by most scientists. Given that we know today that the brain exhibits plasticity, one must ask if the act of living a homosexual lifestyle itself might be responsible for the difference LeVay noted? Another study often used by gay activists as a proof that homosexuals are ‘born’ that way is Bailey and Pillard’s Study. In this one there isn’t much to explain as the whole fallacy of the study can be proven with this one statement: If there was in fact a “gay gene” or “a gay combination per se” then all of the identical twins should have reported a homosexual orientation. This observation suggests that there is no genetic component but rather social component in homosexuality. In fact, more adoptive brothers shared homosexuality than non-twin biological brothers. If there was a genetic factor in homosexuality, this result would be counter to the expected trend. The other fallacious study we will be covering here is Dr. Alan Sanders’ study of x-male chromosome. Dr. Alan Sander’s study fails for this one reason: the results exhibited on the gay men were never compared to that of heterosexual males. Another thing as to why homosexuality cannot be inborn from an evolutionary standpoint is that: Being gay is a disadvantage as if gay people where everywhere this race would not produce offspring. Besides, there's no proof that homosexuality is caused by hormonal misbalances such as low testosterone, such claims are naught but mere hypothesis and thus, invalid. In fact, low testosterone has been associated with low sex drive and infertility so, there really isn't any ground for such hypothesis. So even if it did exist at one point it would be dissolved within a few generations. Things will evolve or die, since we are still here chances are it evolved away if it even existed. As you can see there's no study that even suggests that homosexuality is inborn.

2# Homosexuality is not harmful, it is just fine

Nowadays, there’s this myth that homosexuality is not harmful and an equal to heterosexual relationships; however, this couldn’t be further away from the truth. Homosexuality is a very harmful practice that results in many illnesses, it’s kind of like smoking a misbehavior that feels good but destroys your body. How can this be true? How can homosexuality be harmful when so many LGBT are such wonderful people? Well, let’s begin with how gays have shortened lifespan. Yes, homosexuals have shortens lifespan and this isn’t just my word as there are studies to back my claims. It isn't just the 1997 study that pointed to this grim truth, according to the article you attached, the 1997 study is fallacious because the lifespan of gays should have improved over time thus, so it shouldn’t be valid today. However, other recent studies have reported similar findings. Such studies include an study done by Paul Cameron and Kirk Cameron of the Family Research Institute and who held a poster session and presented the study at March, 2007 Eastern Psychological Association convention in Philadelphia. The facts of the Cameron's studies were these: the lifespan of homosexuals is 20 years lower than that of straights. They found that in the Canadian database, a decline in homosexuality was evident by the fourth decade of life. Those who identified themselves as homosexual constituted a relatively stable fraction of adults only for those aged into their mid-40s (e.g., one of every 47-48 adults). Thereafter, their proportion dropped regularly, down to one of every 234 adults in old age (65+), resulting in an overall estimate of 1.4% of adults who ‘were. In both the table and abstract done by the Cameron a precipitous decline in the homosexual population following middle age was noted. Taking a look at the statistics and studies regarding homosexuals, both old and new, it becomes evident what’s the real reason as to the reduction in homosexuals’ lifespan. Unlike what most pro-gay activist like to claims this reduced lifespans is not due to discrimination or stigmatization because these studies were conducted in countries were homosexuals are not persecuted, there's very little disapproval of homosexuality, and were homosexuals even enjoy special rights. The reason for this statistics is the nature of homosexual sex itself is harmful, and many of the harmful acts committed in such relationships are not committed by straights as often as by homosexuals. Like Diggs said the anus is not made for penetration and anal sex is extremely harmful for both homosexuals and straights. However, straights have the option to indulge in traditional sexual intercourse which is way safer than those homosexual practices. There's no such thing as safe homosexual sex for all the practices involved in their so called making 'love' ritual have been proven to be dangerous practices that often result in many illnesses. The use of a condom reduces the chances of HIV; however, it does not eliminate the risk especially during anal sex practiced mostly by homosexuals as 1 in 27 condoms will break during anogenital homosexual sex. Also, there’s no scientific evidence that condoms prevent the transmission of Gonorrhea, Chlamydia, and Herpes simplex virus. The prevention of the these three STDs has not been absolutely quantified, because no one is suggesting that a person known to have one of these treatable infections have regular intercourse with an unaffected partner. Though, health professionals assume the usage of condoms reduces the risks of getting these diseases; however, as to what extent condoms prevent these diseases are unknown. Back to anal sex, this kind of sex is extremely dangerous and harmful. The use of artificial lubricants doesn’t make this practice any safer, in one study involving nearly 900 men and women in Baltimore and Los Angeles, the researchers found that those who used lubricants were three times more likely to have rectal sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Even after controlling for gender, HIV status, city, condom use, and number of sex partners in the past month, the association between lubricant use before receptive rectal intercourse and rectal STIs remained strong. Another study that subjected popular over-the-counter and mail-order lubricants to rigorous laboratory tests discovered that many of the products were toxic to cells and rectal tissue. Thus, lubricants don’t really make anal sex safer if anything it makes anal sex more dangerous. Anal sexual intercourse as Mr.Diggs noted does increase fecal incontinence as shown in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2009–2010) done by Alayne D Markland and others which included 2,100 male participants. Anal sex is also known to increase anal cancer and it’s no surprise taking into account anal sex is done mostly by homosexuals that, gay and bisexual men are 17 times more likely to develop anal cancer than heterosexual men. Other physical problems associated with anal sex are: hemorrhoids, anal fissures, anorectal trauma, retained foreign bodies. Oral sex practiced amongst heterosexuals and homosexuals but particularly among homosexuals is dangerous as well. Fisting is far more dangerous than anal intercourse; results of fisting can include infections, inflammation and enhanced susceptibility to STDs. Rimming a practice done by most homosexuals which increases the risk for Hepatitis A or B, gonorrhea, syphilis, and herpes/genital warts, though low, the risks are still there especially when most people perform unprotected oral sex. Another illness that is very prevalent among homosexual communities is Shigella, it can be transmitted through person-to-person contact, oral-anal sex, or sucking or licking of the anus (anilingus or "rimming"), may be especially risky.Many shigellosis outbreaks among MSM have been reported in the United States, Australia, Canada, Japan, and Europe since 1999. Frottage, when done naked or simply if the infected skin of a partaker rubs against the uninfected skin of the partner, can result in STDs transmitted by skin-to-skin contact which include: Herpes, HPV, genital warts, mononucleosis, Molluscum Contagiosum, and syphilis. Also, another risk of frottage is clothing rubbing on a lesion as it can irritate it risking either a secondary infection or a disease spreading through self-inoculation. Tribadism includes the risks of frottage as well. There is almost no published research addressing the question of whether fingering is transmits STDs or not. However, common sense says it should be extremely low but still, fingering is not risk free from STDs. The usage of latex condoms does not completely eliminate the risks of STDs during mutual masturbation and other forms of sexual contacts as it is not 100% effective and there’s also the risk of developing latex allergies. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported that while men with same-sex attraction make up only 2 percent of the total population, they accounted for 63% of all newly-diagnosed HIV/AIDS cases in 2010. Despite what gay activist would like to believe, HIV among msm seems to be increasing as in 2014, gay and bisexual men accounted for an estimated 83% of HIV diagnoses among males and 67% of all diagnoses (CDC). When into account that gays are about 1.6% or 2.3% (counting bisexuals) of the population, according to a recent survey done by the National Health Statistics Reports (2014), it can be concluded by using basic math that being gay drastically increases your chances of getting many illnesses. In 2014, gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men accounted for 82.9% of all male syphilis cases and 61.2% of all syphilis cases in the US. In your article it was claimed that over time Homosexual’s ailments would become less common but it seems the opposite is happening as the Center for Disease Control and Prevention(2014) noted that the number of cases of Chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis is increasing among men and particularly the msm populace. A study done by Damien Stark(2007) resulted in indicating that MSM were more likely to have multiple parasites in their stool compared to non-MSM (43.5% versus 8%; P < 0.001). In a sexual health survey of MSM in Vancouver, 18% of men had been diagnosed with genital warts, 62% were infected with a strain of HPV, and screening for anal cancer detected abnormalities in 64% of HIV-positive men and 34% of HIV-negative men (suggesting anal cancer may be present). What’s more, it seems most homosexuals infected with HIV are unaware of their infection! A CDC study found that in 2008 one in five (19%) MSM in 21 major US cities were infected with HIV, and nearly half (44%) were unaware of their infection. Another study conducted by Marc Martí-Pastor,Patricia García de Olalla, and others (2015) concluded that an increase in cases of STIs was observed in 2015, most of which affected mainly msm. The Marc and Patricia’s study revealed that 66.8 % of the HIV cases were men who had sex with men (MSM), 45.5 % of the gonorrhea cases were MSM.74.2 % of the syphilis cases were MSM and 95.3 % of the LGV cases are MSM. Homosexuality increases the risk to HPV as shown by the statistics presented in the journal Cancer (2004): 60% of gay men without HIV, 90% of gay men with, have human papilloma virus infection in their anal canal. A study conducted n 2002 by Susanne L. Dibble and others concluded that lesbians are at a higher risk of developing ovarian cancer. HPV (human papillomavirus) is common in WSW as HPV can be transmitted through skin to skin contact. A study published by the Gay and Lesbian Association concluded that lesbians have higher rates of breast cancer. The lesbians that chose not to do the screenings do them for the same reasons straights chose not to. Since oral-genital sex is a frequent practice of women who have sex with women, genital herpes transmission with both HSV-1 and HSV-2 can occur. A National survey from 2001-2006, reported that 30% of women who reported having same-sex sexual contact in the past year, had positive blood tests for HSV-2. This finding is contrasted with women who report no same-sex sexual contact, among whom 24% had positive blood tests for HSV-2. Other diseases abundant in homosexuals include: Hepatites A, Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C, Proctitis, HSV, BV, HEP B, Giardia lamblia, Amebiasis, and mental disorders. The tendency of gay men to acquire many of these plethora of diseases, contrary to what most gay activists suggest, isn’t due to discrimination as public acceptance of gay/lesbian relations as morally acceptable grew slowly but steadily from 38% in 2002 to 56% in 2011 and is now holding at the majority level; the problems with the American LGBT community aren’t also due to lack of knowledge about ‘safe’ homosexual sex practices as since 2013 in The Real Education For Healthy Youth Act, an act that promotes homsosexual sex education by providing federal fund solely to programs that educate about ‘safe’ homosexual sex partners, has been in place. Also, there have been numerous LGBT education programs receiving federal funding before and many school districts teaching about safe homosexual sex education that date back prior the 2013. On the web there’s also a plethora of websites that cover safe gay sex available to homosexuals of any age, when you write the word ‘safe gay sex’ on Google you will get 36,100,000 results many of which cover on ‘safe’ gay sex practices with tips. So, it can be concluded that the many illnesses present on the homosexual community are more due to the harmful nature of the homosexual lifestyle and homosexuality per se rather than due to discrimination or lack of homosexual sex education. Homosexuality is asexual behavior, not a characteristic like a skin color, and when looking at all this statistics we can determine that homosexuality is a harmful sexual behavior such as smoking is a harmful behavior.

3# Children of gays parents do as well as those of straights

Children raised by homosexual parents don’t fare as well. Studies that indicate that children from homosexual households fare as well as those with heterosexual parents are fallacious. Such studies usually have relied on samples that are small and not representative of the population, and they frequently have been conducted by openly homosexual researchers who have an ideological bias on the question being studied. In addition, these studies usually make comparisons with children raised by divorced or single parents--rather than with children raised by their married, biological mother and father. They have also used selective recruiting instead of using random samples. And usually the reports are given by the parents instead of the kids themselves. Studies that prove kids under the care of same sex parents don’t fare as well as those raised by heterosexual parents include: Regnerus(2012), Allen(2013), and Sullins(2015). Most of these studies have random samples with numbers that are representative of the children raised in same sex households.

4# Homosexuality cannot be changed

there's evidence that shows intervention to change ones' sexualities are actually pretty successful.Robert Spitzer conducted a study on 200 self-selected individuals (143 males, 57 females) in an effort to see if participants could change their sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual (2003, 32:403-417). He reported some minimal change from homosexual to heterosexual orientation that lasted at least five years (p. 403). Spitzer observed:

The majority of participants gave reports of change from a predominantly or exclusively homosexual orientation before therapy to a predominantly or exclusively heterosexual orientation in the past year (p. 403).
In summarizing his findings, Spitzer declared: “Thus, there is evidence that change in sexual orientation following some form of reparative therapy does occur in some gay men and lesbians.” He thus concluded: “This study provides evidence that some gay men and lesbians are able to also change the core features of sexual orientation” (p. 415).
Six years earlier, the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) released the results of a two-year study stating:
Before treatment, 68 percent of the respondents perceived themselves as exclusively or almost entirely homosexual, with another 22 percent stating that they were more homosexual than heterosexual. After treatment, only 13 percent perceived themselves as exclusively or almost entirely homosexual, while 33 percent described themselves as either exclusively or almost entirely heterosexual (see Nicolosi, 2000, 86:1071).

The study also reported:
Although 83 percent of respondents indicated that they entered therapy primarily because of homosexuality, 99 percent of those who participated in the survey said they now believe treatment to change homosexuality can be effective and valuable (p. 1071).

These data are consistent with the ongoing research project of Rob Goetze, who has identified 84 articles or books that contain some relevance to the possibility of sexual orientation change (2004). Of the data reported, 31 of the 84 studies showed a quantitative outcome of individuals able to change sexual orientation. These studies are not mere speculation as they have numbers to back up their results. These studies are more than enough proof that homosexuality can be changed.

#faggots #gay #homosexuality #homosexuals #lesbian #religion #statistics #yaoi #yuri #antigay #boyslove #homophobe #homophobia #lgbt #misconception #myths #science #study #truths #boys_love
Once again God is right and humans are wrong.

metabuxx #sexist incels.co

RE: [RageFuel] women have it so good

i have no job prospects, no money and no future. Not even a college diploma. Any job i can get will at most be 1k to 2k a month, meanwhile women will just become some simp's housewife and never worry about employability. Women are clowns and the government is useless

Every foid ever - "We will marry a guy and tell him we will never cheat and then when we are ovulating we will have sex with Chads and orgasm to retain his sperm and fake orgasms with our beta husband expelling all of his sperms. He will never know that he is supporting Chad's babies.

After we have our children we divorce him, take the children, most of the property and half of his salary. We will leave leave the man with enough to live on so he can continue making child support payments.

We rock queens!! Slay that man. We are strong and independent!!"

FUCK THESE WHORES TO HELL

Dr. Tommy Mitchell #fundie google.com.au

Why Is the World Broken?

“Something is terribly wrong with this world. Where’s God in all of this?” If you’ve ever heard these questions, or wondered them yourself, then this article is for you.

It is hard to deny that the world we live in is broken. Terribly broken. We are constantly bombarded with news of senseless shootings and terrorist attacks. Wars continue without end. Natural disasters such as tornadoes, earthquakes, and floods claim many lives each year. Despite our wonderful modern medical technology, thousands and thousands of people die every year of cancer, stroke, diabetes, or some severe infection.

Beyond this, we see greed, poverty, abuse, jealously, racism, and seemingly every possible manifestation of man’s inhumanity to his fellow man. It’s an ugly picture. This world is broken and can’t seem to find its way.

So where is the all-knowing, loving Creator God in the midst of all this pain and suffering?

Denying God

Many people think death and suffering are reasons to deny the very existence of God. They contend that a good God would not, could not, allow all these horrible things to continue. If He exists, if He is indeed a good God, would He not want to stop all these things? Therefore, they reason, God cannot exist. Sometimes they hedge their bets by adding that if He does exist, He cannot be a good God because He continually allows bad things to happen to good people.

Ultimately, though, this is faulty logic. Let’s think it through.

How Did We Get Here?

If God does not exist, how do we explain the physical world around us? If there is no God who created the universe, then where did everything come from? The world’s simple answer is that everything came from nothing. Matter just popped into existence from nowhere. Then over billions of years molecules randomly collided, resulting in the formation of planets and stars and galaxies.

From this lifeless matter sprang life. The first simple cell just assembled itself. Then through random mutation and natural selection (survival of the fittest), life forms became more and more complex until ultimately man came into being. This is called evolution.

No God. Nothing but chemicals banging together over millions of years.

The Basis of Morality

In a universe that is merely the result of random chemical reactions over millions of years, there would be no “god” to whom we are accountable. But in such a universe, a universe without an ultimate moral authority, how are right and wrong, good and bad, determined? In the final analysis, how are moral judgments made? Who decides? The answer is, everybody decides for himself or herself what is right and wrong.

Charles Darwin understood this. In his autobiography, Darwin wrote, “A man who has no assured and ever-present belief in the existence of a personal God or of a future existence with retribution and reward, can have for the rule of his life, as far as I can see, only to follow those impulses and instincts which are the strongest or which seem to him the best ones.” So in a universe without God, morality is up for grabs. Everybody gets to set his or her own moral standards.

Good People and a Broken World

When people deny the existence of God because of all the death and suffering they see, they have a problem. Even if evolution were true, the world is still broken. So if you can’t blame God, then whom do you blame?

You see, most people think they themselves are good, or at least better or more deserving than the many bad people they see around them. Therefore, they reason, it is unfair that bad things happen to them. Often they also say it is unfair that bad things happen to others they think are good or innocent.

However, without God, these same people have no basis for determining good and bad other than their own opinion. Further, it is inconsistent to claim that people are basically good and then complain about the death and suffering humans inflict on each other. After all, wouldn’t that mean that good people are suffering at the hands of other basically good people?

God Is Unfair?

People are generally quick to make God a scapegoat. He gets the blame for everything from cancer to murder to tsunamis. If the suffering we see is evidence that God is cruel or unfair, then why isn’t the good we see equally evidence that God is loving and just? After all, we see lots of good in the world. Children are rescued from burning buildings, people donate organs to strangers, food banks feed the homeless, volunteers work in nursing homes, and the list goes on.

It seems people never take the blame. Just the credit.

Okay, So What Is the Problem?

Yes, it is obvious that there is suffering in the world, but God is not to blame. Whose fault is it then? Quite simply, it is our fault. The world is broken because of our sin. Most people fail to factor this into the equation.

Various academics and Tom O’Carroll #fundie telegraph.co.uk

"Paedophilic interest is natural and normal for human males,” said the presentation. “At least a sizeable minority of normal males would like to have sex with children … Normal males are aroused by children.” Some yellowing tract from the Seventies or early Eighties, era of abusive celebrities and the infamous PIE, the Paedophile Information Exchange? No. Anonymous commenters on some underground website? No again. The statement that paedophilia is “natural and normal” was made not three decades ago but last July. It was made not in private but as one of the central claims of an academic presentation delivered, at the invitation of the organisers, to many of the key experts in the field at a conference held by the University of Cambridge.

Other presentations included “Liberating the paedophile: a discursive analysis,” and “Danger and difference: the stakes of hebephilia.” Hebephilia is the sexual preference for children in early puberty, typically 11 to 14-year-olds. Another attendee, and enthusiastic participant from the floor, was one Tom O’Carroll, a multiple child sex offender, long-time campaigner for the legalisation of sex with children and former head of the Paedophile Information Exchange. “Wonderful!” he wrote on his blog afterwards. “It was a rare few days when I could feel relatively popular!” Last week, after the conviction of Rolf Harris, the report into Jimmy Savile and claims of an establishment cover-up to protect a sex-offending minister in Margaret Thatcher’s Cabinet, Britain went into a convulsion of anxiety about child abuse in the Eighties. But unnoticed amid the furore is a much more current threat: attempts, right now, in parts of the academic establishment to push the boundaries on the acceptability of child sex.

A key factor in what happened all those decades ago in the dressing rooms of the BBC, the wards of the NHS and, allegedly, the corridors of power was not just institutional failings or establishment “conspiracies”, but a climate of far greater intellectual tolerance of practices that horrify today. With the Pill, the legalisation of homosexuality and shrinking taboos against premarital sex, the Seventies was an era of quite sudden sexual emancipation. Many liberals, of course, saw through PIE’s cynical rhetoric of “child lib”. But to others on the Left, sex by or with children was just another repressive boundary to be swept away – and some of the most important backing came from academia.

In 1981, a respectable publisher, Batsford, published Perspectives on Paedophilia, edited by Brian Taylor, a sociology lecturer at Sussex University, to challenge what Dr Taylor’s introduction called the “prejudice” against child sex. Disturbingly, the book was aimed at “social workers, community workers, probation officers and child care workers”. The public, wrote Dr Taylor, “generally thinks of paedophiles as sick or evil men who lurk around school playgrounds in the hope of attempting unspecified beastliness with unsuspecting innocent children”. That, he reassured readers, was merely a “stereotype”, both “inaccurate and unhelpful”, which flew in the face of the “empirical realities of paedophile behaviour”. Why, most adult-child sexual relationships occurred in the family!

The perspectives of most, though not all, the contributors, appeared strongly pro-paedophile. At least two were members of PIE and at least one, Peter Righton, (who was, incredibly, director of education at the National Institute for Social Work) was later convicted of child sex crimes. But from the viewpoint of today, the fascinating thing about Perspectives on Paedophilia is that at least two of its contributors are still academically active and influential. Ken Plummer is emeritus professor of sociology at Essex University, where he has an office and teaches courses, the most recent scheduled for last month. “The isolation, secrecy, guilt and anguish of many paedophiles,” he wrote in Perspectives on Paedophilia, “are not intrinsic to the phenomen[on] but are derived from the extreme social repression placed on minorities …

“Paedophiles are told they are the seducers and rapists of children; they know their experiences are often loving and tender ones. They are told that children are pure and innocent, devoid of sexuality; they know both from their own experiences of childhood and from the children they meet that this is not the case.” As recently as 2012, Prof Plummer published on his personal blog a chapter he wrote in another book, Male Intergenerational Intimacy, in 1991. “As homosexuality has become slightly less open to sustained moral panic, the new pariah of 'child molester’ has become the latest folk devil,” he wrote. “Many adult paedophiles say that boys actively seek out sex partners … 'childhood’ itself is not a biological given but an historically produced social object.”

Prof Plummer confirmed to The Sunday Telegraph that he had been a member of PIE in order to “facilitate” his research. He said: “I would never want any of my work to be used as a rationale for doing 'bad things’ – and I regard all coercive, abusive, exploitative sexuality as a 'bad thing’. I am sorry if it has impacted anyone negatively this way, or if it has encouraged this.” However, he did not answer when asked if he still held the views he expressed in the Eighties and Nineties. A spokesman for Essex University claimed Prof Plummer’s work “did not express support for paedophilia” and cited the university’s charter which gave academic staff “freedom within the law to put forward controversial and unpopular opinions without placing themselves in jeopardy”.

Graham Powell is one of the country’s most distinguished psychologists, a past president of the British Psychological Society and a current provider of psychology support services to the Serious Organised Crime Agency, the National Crime Squad, the Metropolitan Police, Kent Police, Essex Police and the Internet Watch Foundation. In Perspectives on Paedophilia, however, he co-authored a chapter which stated: “In the public mind, paedophile attention is generally assumed to be traumatic and to have lasting and wholly deleterious consequences for the victim. The evidence that we have considered here does not support this view … we need to ask not why are the effects of paedophile action so large, but why so small.”

The chapter does admit that there were “methodological problems” with the studies the authors relied on which “leave our conclusions somewhat muted”. Dr Powell told The Sunday Telegraph last week that “what I wrote was completely wrong and it is a matter of deep regret that it could in any way have made things more difficult [for victims]”. He said: “The literature [scientific evidence] was so poor in 1981, people just didn’t realise what was going on. There was a lack of understanding at the academic level.” Dr Powell said he had never been a member of PIE.

In other academic quarters, with rather fewer excuses, that lack of understanding appears to be reasserting itself. The Cambridge University conference, on July 4-5 last year, was about the classification of sexuality in the DSM, a standard international psychiatric manual used by the police and courts. After a fierce battle in the American Psychiatric Association (APA), which produces it, a proposal to include hebephilia as a disorder in the new edition of the manual has been defeated. The proposal arose because puberty in children has started ever earlier in recent decades and as a result, it was argued, the current definition of paedophilia – pre-pubertal sexual attraction – missed out too many young people. Ray Blanchard, professor of psychiatry at the University of Toronto, who led the APA’s working group on the subject, said that unless some other way was found of encompassing hebephilia in the new manual, that was “tantamount to stating that the APA’s official position is that the sexual preference for early pubertal children is normal”.

Prof Blanchard was in turn criticised by a speaker at the Cambridge conference, Patrick Singy, of Union College, New York, who said hebephilia would be abused as a diagnosis to detain sex offenders as “mentally ill” under US “sexually violent predator” laws even after they had completed their sentences. But perhaps the most controversial presentation of all was by Philip Tromovitch, a professor at Doshisha University in Japan, who stated in a presentation on the “prevalence of paedophilia” that the “majority of men are probably paedophiles and hebephiles” and that “paedophilic interest is normal and natural in human males”. O’Carroll, the former PIE leader, was thrilled, and described on his blog how he joined Prof Tromovitch and a colleague for drinks after the conference. “The conversation flowed most agreeably, along with the drinks and the beautiful River Cam,” he said.

It’s fair to say the Tromovitch view does not represent majority academic opinion. It’s likely, too, that some of the academic protests against the “stigmatisation” of paedophiles are as much a backlash against the harshness of sex offender laws as anything else. Finally, of course, academic inquiry is supposed to question conventional wisdom and to deal rigorously with the evidence, whether or not the conclusions it leads you to are popular. Even so, there really is now no shortage of evidence about the harm done by child abuse. In the latest frenzy about the crimes of the past, it’s worth watching whether we could, in the future, go back to the intellectual climate which allowed them.

Peter LaBarbera #fundie onenewsnow.com

With yesterday’s historic “coming out” by an NBA player, one cultural commentator is very concerned how that announcement may influence children who view professional athletes as role models.

NBA veteran Jason Collins disclosed in a first-person account posted Monday at SI.com that he is “gay.” Collins, 34, is a 12-year veteran of the National Basketball Association and has played for six teams during that time.

“I’m black. And I’m gay. I didn’t set out to be the first openly gay athlete playing in a major American team sport. But since I am, I’m happy to start the conversation,” he states in the article.

White House spokesman Jay Carney on Monday called Collins’ decision to come out “courageous,” and added the White House supports him. The seven-foot, 255-pound center becomes the first active male player in one of the four major professional sports to publicly reveal his homosexuality.

Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality tells American Family News that Collins is actually struggling with homosexual sin.

“He was born with genes that made him tall. He wasn't born with a gay gene,” says LaBarbera. “I feel sorry for this man. He's being celebrated, which will encourage him to stay in his sin, and he needs to leave it like so many men and women have before him.”

The family advocate adds there is "a huge push to have homosexuality embraced in professional sports." Teams in the four major professional sports have special events to draw positive attention to the lifestyle – and LaBarbera contends that is not healthy for children.

“These professional athletes are models for children, whether we like it or not,” he says. “And so this will lead the children embracing homosexuality and saying, Hey, it's good enough for Jason Collins it's good enough for me.”

It is LaBarbera's hope that Collins will encounter Christians who will help him leave the lifestyle by embracing Jesus Christ.

Purple Gurl #fundie topix.com

I never said God hated homosexuals. In fact, there is no such thing as homosexuals, just those who choose to commit homosexual or heterosexual acts. All are created to be heterosexuals, just that some choose to deviate from that for whatever reason. People are born awkward or nerds, not as "gays," and some mistake their differences as meaning they are supposed to commit this great evil. And other straight people accuse them falsely of being "gay" and say that because they like art, music, or are non-aggressive, that they must be sexual perverts who have unstoppable lust for members of the same sex. It is society who turns persons who were intented to be non-sexual into homosexuals. Orientation is not inborn nor are people to be considered a group or class. As long as you are choosing to commit homosexual acts, you are cutting yourself off from God. You can accept God's love at any time and show your gratitude for that by repenting.

As for the other poster, anyone who is caught in or admits to adultery, homosexuality, pedophilia, underage sex, or premarital sex deserves death. Yes, that would probably take out 60% of society, and the world would be much better for it. Of course, there would be no victims, since they know the risks of practicing any sex outside the bounds of a legal marriage between adult humans of the opposite sex. If you don't want to die, don't cheat. If you don't want to die, don't participate in oral or anal sex. If you don't want to die, don't mess with animals. If you don't want to die, don't eat like a friggin' hog. If you don't want to die, don't act on lusts, whether they be for members of the same sex, someone who is not yet an adult, or someone to whom you are not legally married.

Anonymous #fundie rapidnet.com

"Christian" Fantasy

Biblical or Oxymoron?

- The dictionary defines fable as:

"fantasy/fiction/falsehood dependent for effect on strangeness of setting (as other worlds or times) and of characters (as supernatural or unnatural beings); the setting is usually in a non-existent or unreal world, the characters are fanciful or unreal, or the conflict focuses on physical or scientific principles not yet discovered or contrary to present experience."

- Fantasy is especially dangerous for children. While most children in the 1970s knew enough truth to place divination in the forbidden realm of the occult, today's children -- who often feel more comfortable with occult games than Biblical truth -- see nothing wrong with pagan practices. Fantasy movies, like Disney's The Lion King, are good matches for the new earth-centered paradigm or world view that is transforming childrens' views of reality. While God told us to continually communicate truth to our children (Deut. 6:5-7), today's culture trains children to see reality through a global, earth-centered filter. This "new" mental framework distorts truth, stretches the meaning of familiar words, and promotes mystical "insights" that are incompatible with Christianity. Packaged with entertainment, this message usually bypasses rational resistance, desensitizes opened minds, and fuels general acceptance of pagan spirituality (Berit Kjos, "The Spirit Behind The Lion King," 1/95, The Christian Conscience, pp. 32-34).

- Most true Christians would recognize fantasy, such as the movie Star Wars, as being extremely wicked (in this case, sorcery -- "The Force" being equivalent to black magic and white witchcraft). Yet, apparently, when we call it "Christian," this somehow sanctifies what we do with our minds (imaginations), or what we allow our minds to entertain. For example, one can look in any issue of the Christian Book Distributors Fiction Catalog and find the most outrageous fantasy literature, yet it is all dubbed "Christian." The following is taken from the CBD Fiction Catalog, 9/94 premier edition:

" ... now there's no more compromising for those who love Christian fiction, because you are holding the key to your next escape-from-it-all right in the palm of your hand ... CBD's brand new Fiction Catalog? It's filled with the latest and the best refreshing, thrilling, inspiring, wholesome fiction for you and your family" (p. 2).

Wholesome? The following is a sample of that which CBD considers "wholesome." [Much of this type of writing comes from medieval mysticism, which God hates (cf. Deut. 18: 10-12).]:

(a) Millennium's Dawn, by Ed Stewart (p. 25):

"June 2001. The future never seemed brighter for Dr. Evan Rider and his new bride, Shelby, as they prepare to embark on the honeymoon of their dreams. But the dream quickly becomes a nightmare as a long-buried secret shared by three college friends erupts, engulfing the couple in a sinister plot of blackmail, terror, and betrayal."

(b) Till We Have Faces, by C. S. Lewis (p. 34):

"The unlovely Orual, eldest daughter of the King of Glome, becomes so consumed by her mingled love and jealousy of her beautiful half-sister that she makes a complaint to the gods -- and receives an answer she did not expect. This novel, possibly Lewis' best work and the one he considered his own favorite, is his compelling rework of the myth of Cupid and Psyche." [Sound like something you could want your children to read -- about "the gods"?]

(c) The Song of Albion, by Stephen Lawhead (p. 33):

"Wolves prowl the streets of Oxford. A Green Man haunts the Highlands. A breach has been opened between our world and the Celtic Otherworld and anything, anyone, may now enter [sounds similar to Poltergeist, one of the most wicked movies ever produced]. But it's Lewis Gillies, an American graduate student at Oxford, who reluctantly stumbles through. In the savagely beautiful Otherworld, Lewis finds himself caught in an epic struggle between light and darkness -- a struggle that will determine the fate of his own world. Memorably penned with vivid and poetic imagery, Lawhead's breathtaking reworking of Celtic myth will keep you reading long into the night" [no doubt, and right into the DARKNESS! -- the Celtic civilization is the culture from which we have received much of our modern day Halloween practices.]

- "Well," someone might say, "I'm not doing anything wicked, I'm just reading about wickedness." But does this align with godliness? There are four things about fantasy which must be considered:

I. It is Anti-Truth.
II. It Slips Into Reality.
III. It Does Not Fit True Godliness.
IV. A Love for God Will Oppose It.


I. Fantasy Is Anti-Truth

Isaiah 32:6 describes error against the Lord. All lies are against God (1 John 2:21; John 8:44). Satan is the father of lies. Since fantasy is not true, then it is a lie! We have been duped into thinking there is some spiritual gray realm out there in which something can be neither true nor a lie. It's just called fantasy! But fantasy is made up of lies, deceit, and unreality, all wrapped up in a pretty (or sometimes, not so pretty) package.

How about the popular 1994 Disney occult/New Age "children's animation" film, The Lion King, which some consider wholesome "fantasy." One observer wrote this about The Lion King:

"The Lion King packs a powerful New Age symbolism and philosophy. Its theme, the 'Circle of Life' is a variation on the cycles of nature: life, death and rebirth, particularly as it relates to the theory of evolution. The film presents this theme from the perspective of the nature religion, more so than Disney films of the past -- 'We are all connected in the great circle of life.' The accoutrements of shamanistic ritualism is graphically portrayed in the dedication of the baby Simba to the spirits of the earth" (Media Spotlight, Vol. 15, No. 2, p. 3).

Yet, we have others who claim the name of Christ, like James Dobson's Focus on the Family, who would like to encourage you to go and see this film that is filled with abominable contents. (See the 8/15/94 Parental Guidance magazine, which is published by Focus on the Family.) FOTF claims that The Lion King has only a few slight imperfections, otherwise it is "a wholesome, brilliantly animated picture relating the importance of family and responsibility."

A "few slight imperfections"? How about the character Rafiki speaking of the eternal state of life and his connectedness with it when Simba, as an adult lion, asks the question, "You knew my father." Rafiki's answer: "Correction! I know your father." Recalling that his father had once told him that the stars are former kings who look down on the earth and guide its inhabitants, Simba looks up at the stars and cries out to his father, "You said you'd always be with me, but you aren't." Shortly thereafter his father appears to him [spiritism; cf. Deut. 18:10ff] in a cloud and reminds him of his responsibility to assume his rightful place in the circle of life. -- "Look inside yourself, Simba," he says. "You are more than what you have become."

Besides the spiritism in the film, ask yourself a question -- "Do animals talk?" Just on this fantasy alone (animals talking) it is a lie.


II. Fantasy Subtly Slips Into Reality.

It becomes very difficult to separate fantasy from reality, especially in the minds of children. There was an interesting article in The Newhall Signal (newspaper) in light of this. Noting one of the teachings of the popular fantasy games, "Death is usually seen as a temporary state with characters returning 'from beyond' to play again" (7/22/87, The Newhall Signal, "Fantasy Games Linked to Real Deaths," p. 16).

Notice a few more books in the CBD Catalog:

(a) A Skeleton in God's Closet, by Paul L. Maier (p. 25):

"Move over, Indiana Jones! In this novel, Harvard archaeologist Dr. John Weber has just discovered a shocking secret -- Jesus' bones. The evidence [an obvious denial of the resurrection] seems incontestable. When word of the discovery leaks out, pandemonium ensues and millions abandon their Christian faith. But which is the hoax -- the archaeological find or the Resurrection itself?" [How can this be edifying?]

(b) The Guardian, by Jane Hamilton (p. 25):

"A new frontier for Christian fiction! Tabris [a guardian angel] has been given a second chance. As a guardian angel, he was found guilty of committing the one unforgivable act against his human charge and against God. Yet God, with mercy and grace, has forgiven Tabris and given him one more assignment -- one more human being to protect. Why? Find out in this celestial parable that will illuminate the indefinable love God has for his creation -- you, me, even angels. " (Emphasis added.) [See the jump from fantasy to reality -- cf. Heb. 2:16 -- any angel who has ever sinned is a demon. Sinning angels are never forgiven, but doomed eternally!]

(c) Darien: The Guardian Angel of Jesus, by Roger Elwood (p. 22):

"The ultimate adventure with an unforgettable guardian angel! Of all the guardian angels in heaven, God chose only one to protect Christ during His time on earth. He chose Darien. (That's the Darien who questioned God's decision to throw Lucifer from heaven and was sent to earth to witness Lucifer's destruction of the world in the novel Angel Walk.) You can imagine that Darien has quite a tale to tell, protecting God's own son -- and he tells it with poignancy and originality. Through this angel's eyes, you'll go on a fascinating and even disturbing journey from the time of Lucifer's rebellion, to creation, to the miracles of Jesus' birth and life. If the stories of Christ's life have become just matter-of-fact Sunday school lessons to you, then here's the breath of fresh air you need!" [Notice the move from fantasy into reality? How are lies, deceit, and fantasy going to freshen one's love for the Word of God?]

This move from fantasy to reality, by definition, affects one's view of reality. Remember when Close Encounters of the Third Kind came out? People believed it! Fantasy gets people to fantasize about reality. It is a slippery slide into lies unknowingly.
III. Fantasy Does Not Fit True Godliness

What is godliness (1 Tim. 6:3; Prov. 3:5-6; 28:14)? Romans 1:18 teaches that God's wrath is against "ungodliness." And as shown above, fantasy is ungodliness. Diving into fantasy, which, by its very nature is against the Truth, is a denial of God, what He says, and the Truth of His Word. How can a lie be used for evangelism, worship, or anything else godly? By its very nature, fantasy removes the person from the Truth (reality) and moves them into a realm away from God. This ungodliness is well depicted in the CBD Fiction Catalog, where it says on page 2:

"It's been said that reading fiction is one of the best ways to 'escape' from the cares of everyday life. Since the beginning of time, great thinkers and writers (even Jesus himself) have been inspired to create allegories, parables and epics, as well as the good, old-fashioned novel itself. What a tragedy to think we have to settle for fiction that merely grabs our attention, but lacks the values and spiritual insight we could carry with us when we return to the 'real world.'" [Again, the move from fantasy to reality.]

Is this what the Lord wants us to do -- "escape" from reality? No! Fantasy is an attack on the very core of one's being as a follower of Christ! And what about the claim that Jesus' parables and the allegories in Scripture, or figurative speech, are parallel to the use of fantasy? No! The Bible's parables, allegories, and figurative speech are not about fantasy at all. They are all about Truth!


IV. A Love For God Will Oppose Fantasy

God would not have His children take refuge in unreality. A love for God is equal to a love for the Truth (John 14:6). Matthew 22:34-40 teaches to love the Lord with all your mind (imagination). What does the Lord say in Ephesians 4:25? -- Speak the Truth to one another! Do we ever stop speaking the truth and speak fantasy to one another, or write fantasy to one another? Is this how God would have us live? Notice Ephesians 4:29. What's the goal? Build each other up in the TRUTH! (not in fantasy). If a Christian is loving the Lord with all his MIND (imagination), he will be dwelling on truth, reality, His Word, and Him, NOT FAIRY TALES AND FANTASY!

Fantasy typically is filled with evil. What should be the Christian's perspective of evil (Rom. 16:19)? If we love the Lord with all our MINDS, then we will not only avoid taking any pleasure in fantasy, but we will hate it. Because fantasy is anti-reality, it is against godliness, it opens the door to deceit, and is an affront to the very core of your being as a Christian. And what is that? -- Taking refuge in God, not escaping reality (Psalm 73:25-28).


- In 2 Timothy 4:3-4 ("For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths"), the Greek word translated myths means tales, stories, or fables (untrue stories). So what about Pilgrim's Progress and other so-called Christian stories like it?

Pilgrim's Progress (by John Bunyan) is claimed by many to be a good illustration of the truth -- the truth of a Christian's pilgrimage in this life. Some would say, "The Bible uses (a) parables, (b) allegories, (c) figurative language, symbolism, etc., and (d) dreams and visions, so what's wrong with Pilgrim's Progress doing the same? A few examples follow:

(a) Parables are not fables.

Matt. 12: 33-35 (using a real idea, expressing another real idea)
Matt. 13:3-9/18-23 (real/real)
Matt. 13:24-30/13:37-43 (real/real)
Matt. 13:31-32 (real/real)
Matt. 13:33 (real/real)
Matt. 13:44 (real/real)
Matt. 13:45-46 (real/real - He does not fly out of the realm of reality)
Matt. 13:47-50 (real/real)

(b) Allegory is symbolic, not mythical -- Gal. 4:22-31 (real/real)

(c) Figurative is not mythical -- John 6:53-63 -- Jesus does not fly out of the realm of reality. In fact, He uses such explicitly (real) language that people are having a hard time understanding Him. Yet, He explains that He is speaking in a figurative way (John 6:63).

(d) Dreams and Visions are not untrue stories -- Daniel 7:1ff; 8:17 refers to truth; 8:26 ("is true"); 9:21 (writing of Truth). These are not untrue stories (fables). Ezekiel 1 &10 -- these are real creatures!

So what about Pilgrim's Progress? There are serious problems in what that book teaches. For example, Christian leaves his armor behind and eventually his sword for the rest of his journey. This does not at all square with Ephesians 6.

Of course, someone would say, "It just a story." Exactly. It is a story that is supposed to illustrate truth, and when it fails to do this, it falls short and becomes an untrue story (fable), which is not doing a good job (at times) in illustrating truth. No doubt, there are many aspects about the story that are interesting and thought-provoking, but that does not excuse the twisting of truth into a lie. Here are some more problems:

(a) Is it a myth? Yes. "But, it is a 'Christian' myth!" Is this supposed to make it okay? No, it makes it worse! That's what Paul was talking about in 2 Tim. 4:4? Pagan myths? No -- "Christian" myths! That's why it is so dangerous.

(b) Another possible danger with Pilgrim's Progress is that the Christian life could be seen through the eyes of the story rather than solely through the Word of God. Romans says to transform our minds (12:1). Only the Word of God can do that, not "Christian" fantasy. A Christian's affection should be upon God's Word and His truth, not the fables of men. This type of Christian fable can pull our affections away from the Word.

(c) Has the Word of God become so dull, dry, drab, or undesirable to us that we would even think we would need such a book as Pilgrim's Progress to spur us on in the faith?
- A few more Scriptures indicate our concern with "Christian" fantasy:

(a) 2 Peter 1:16 -- We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

(b) Titus 1:14 -- and will pay no attention to Jewish myths or to the commands of those who reject the truth.

(c) 1 Timothy 1:4 -- nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. These promote controversies rather than God's work -- which is by faith.

(d) 1 Timothy 4:7 -- Have nothing to do with godless myths and old wives' tales; rather, train yourself to be godly.

- Considering the present distress (2 Tim. 3:1), how can fantasy, no matter how supposedly good it may be, be found profitable? We need to concentrate on reality -- the truth of the Word of God -- and leave the fantasizing to those who are perishing (especially in light of the prevailing ignorance of the Word). And, especially when Paul describes the "against the true church" as those who will "be turned aside to fables," we ought to hold fast to the truth -- the Word of God (1 Thess. 5:21).
An Example from a "Christian" College

A recent FrontLine magazine (Vol. 6, No. 4) with a cover theme, "The Christian and the Arts," carried a lead article titled "The God of All Beauty." The article is very disturbing because it lists so many Scripture references [out of context/misapplied], but the author's rationalizations fail to give due consideration to Pauline Epistle truths for this Church Age and the warnings about this world/age. Two other articles in this FrontLine issue are by Donna Lynn Hess of Bob Jones University (BJU), one on fantasy and the other on selecting reading material for children.

The first article refers favorably to C.S. Lewis, a devotee and author of occult fantasy with unbiblical metaphors; yet Hess claims that this kind of fantasy is useful in helping children "develop valuable literary skills" and in developing an understanding of "similar literary elements used in Scripture." In the second article by Hess, she states: "As Christian parents, we recognize the need for choosing books in which the theme is morally sound. But it is just as important to be sure that this theme is artfully expressed"; she also says that it's okay to expose children to stories with themes "antithetical to Christian beliefs" in order to "help inoculate them against the false ideas, attitudes and behaviors these writers promote."

BJU's ShowForth video division ("The video source you can trust.") also markets three video productions of C.S. Lewis' fiction, and a documentary biography of Lewis himself. ShowForth's catalog layout (p. 7), under "Inspirational," lists C.S. Lewis as one of the "Warriors of the Word" along with C.H. Spurgeon. Considering Lewis' many theological errors, it is dangerously deceptive to place him in such august company. A pastor knowledgeable in the unbiblical teachings of Lewis wrote to BJU documenting Lewis's errors. BJU responded with an involved, articulate, but off-the-mark defense for using "fantasy" as a teaching tool.

In the articles in FrontLine, as well in articles sent out by ShowForth, Hess gives an unusually broad description to the term "fantasy," and does not give adequate consideration to the whole counsel of God. "Fantasy" should not be used, as BJU does, to describe the figures of speech and literary techniques found in God's Word. More serious study ought be made of the nature of God, the condemnation of all forms of spiritism throughout Scripture, the recurring theme of sober/sound mind (especially in the New Testament), and the disassociation in the Epistles with "fables" (myths) in presenting God's message.

In these times we live in, we believe pastors and parents must exercise extreme caution regarding the literary use of fantasy. But caution is apparently not in BJU's vocabulary concerning this matter. BJU Press has published Medallion, a popular fantasy reader for elementary age home-schoolers. There are strange similarities between Medallion and two explicitly pagan books -- one a sixth-grade reader for public schools called The Dark is Rising, and a Wiccan manual by Starhawk called The Spiral Dance. In response to a review of Medallion by Berit Kjos, BJU trivializes the similarities, and states, "It appears that what this critique requires of Medallion rules out all fantasy for the Christian. We hold that no story can mix fantasy with the supernatural facts of Scripture without dangerously trivializing Biblical truth by associating scriptural realities with a dream world." [Couldn't have stated the truth more clearly if we had tried!] Contrary to the scholarly opinion of BJU's Literature and Language departments, "Christian" fantasy parallels the occultic literature for children, using similar images, story-lines, symbols, and characters. Literary fantasy, rather than being neutral, has occultic roots. (This paragraph was excerpted and/or adapted from the 10/96, The Christian Conscience, "Pagan Story for Christian Children," pp. 40-42; see page 41 for a detailed comparison of Medallion and The Dark is Rising.)

Darrel #fundie kasuto.net

You know, when we started this war, I was so angry I couldn't see straight. I wanted to see them suffer for killing our countrymen. For coming onto our territory and starting something up. Saddam is an evil man and needed to be taken out..even if he doesn't have to do with 9/11. Think about it - he was gassing his own people! It's cruelty to just turn and look the other way, knowing that people are dying. It's like Germany and the holocaust (atleast then we didn't know exactly). We may not be the "world police," but I think someone has to look out for those who can't look out for themselves. I wish America had come into Germany long before it did; I'd have the majority of my family. But all I have is my grandma, her brother, and her sister. Everyone else died on my mother's side. (Until people realize that Saddam = bad, I'm going to keep repeating this story.)

Most of America makes me sick. It has no memory. "Der, what's a flag?! What's Nationalism?! EL OH EL! I HATE AMERICA EVEN THOUGH I'M AMERICAN!" I wish I could just ship all of these people back to their "native" country so that America will have a little more elbow room and a little more common sense. If you hate America and are living in it, then GET THE FUCK OUT!!!! We don't want you here, bashing your own country, and bashing those in it. I don't like to be called an 'idiot' just because a big majority of America is stupid. Hell, a lot of America is the smartest, too (Bill Gates, anyone?), and we have some of the highest technology. But I see that that is overlooked.

If I could have my way, I would blow up just about the entire world. I'd bomb Canada for calling us stupid Americans, I'd bomb the UK because they have their head up their butts and think America is foolish and never ever has common sense what-so-ever, and I'd bomb Mt. Fuji in Japan because the damn Japos are racists!! XD (That really doesn't have to do with the state we're in, but I felt I had to include it. Come on, laugh! :3) Pretty much the only places I wouldn't bomb would be the poles and Australia. Rest of the world can kiss my patriotic ass, because I'm sick and tired of them always ganging up on me like I'm a bad guy. I never did anything - look at our side for once. Yes, we're evil because we go in and attack people, but we're also good too. We supply places with food, medicine, and rush out immediately to go help.

Here's an idea, and I wish I could give it to Mr. President ;
Let's become isolated for one week. There is proof that we could run on our own without any exports or imports. It wouldn't be as decent quality of life, but it would be doable. We should not go out and help anyone, trade with anyone, or do anything with any other country. Pull right out Iraq, Iran, Korea, all of those places, and especially Africa. No longer help anyone - just help ourselves. We'll see how well the world can survive without America.

(I personally think we should go into other countries and stop their fighting and tell them what to do. They're like children fighting; someone has to be the responsible adult and break up the fight. If they can't see that they are fighting like little children, then someone has to prove it to them and make it stop. We can't have the world falling to pieces because the "UK" is afraid of stopping it.)

[ on abortion ]

I am against abortion.

o sum this up, rape/abortion victims seem to have a more negative outcome than a woman who was raped and kept her child. Emotionally, she is weakened from the rape, and losing her own child will take it's toll. Physically, she may never have children again.
"Good can come from evil." Rape is evil, and a baby is good.

I'm kind of in the middle of this whole thing. I see both sides. I don't agree with either (but I do agree mostly on no to abortion)
I don't know about the mother health thing though. I mean, if she's going to die, at least she lived a good life (hopefully), and the baby would get to live. Mothers usually love their children, and would give up their life for their children. Most women feel this motherly bond. They would hope their baby got to live a good life, and make something out of themselves. It's a choice the mother should make, but on the downfall, the baby will never get to live if the mother gets the abortion.

[ on war ]

If I could have my way, I would blow up just about the entire world. I'd bomb Canada for calling us stupid Americans, I'd bomb the UK because they have their head up their butts and think America is foolish and never ever has common sense what-so-ever, and I'd bomb Mt. Fuji in Japan because the damn Japos are racists!! XD (That really doesn't have to do with the state we're in, but I felt I had to include it. Come on, laugh! :3) Pretty much the only places I wouldn't bomb would be the poles and Australia. Rest of the world can kiss my patriotic ass, because I'm sick and tired of them always ganging up on me like I'm a bad guy. I never did anything - look at our side for once. Yes, we're evil because we go in and attack people, but we're also good too. We supply places with food, medicine, and rush out immediately to go help.

Here's an idea, and I wish I could give it to Mr. President Bush;
Let's become isolated for one week. There is proof that we could run on our own without any exports or imports. It wouldn't be as decent quality of life, but it would be doable. We should not go out and help anyone, trade with anyone, or do anything with any other country. Pull right out Iraq, Iran, Korea, all of those places, and especially Africa. No longer help anyone - just help ourselves. We'll see how well the world can survive without America.

(I personally think we should go into other countries and stop their fighting and tell them what to do. They're like children fighting; someone has to be the responsible adult and break up the fight. If they can't see that they are fighting like little children, then someone has to prove it to them and make it stop. We can't have the world falling to pieces because the "UK" is afraid of stopping it.)
(^?^)?(^?^)

Matt Forney #sexist mattforney.com

It’s time to stop beating around the bush: feminists want to be raped.

It’s the only logical explanation for how they behave. It’s the only way to understand why they can cheer on hordes of Muslim “refugees” swarming into Europe to rape and pillage. It’s the only way to comprehend why they can whip themselves up into a frenzy over masculine men meeting up for a beer and smearing them as leading “pro-rape rallies.”

Everything feminists do, from holding up “Refugees Welcome” signs at airports to passing affirmative consent laws, is geared around encouraging men to assault them.

This isn’t a conscious urge. No feminist wakes up in the morning and thinks to herself, “I’m gonna try and get raped today!” There’s no Protocols of the Elders of Seneca Falls laying out a secret plot to turn females into walking fuckdolls for rapist men.

But deep in the recesses of her lizard hindbrain, the average feminist wants nothing more than for a man to shove her into a wall and force himself deep inside her.

Here are the reasons why feminists want to be sexually assaulted, and why they’re working around the clock to aid rapists.

1. Feminism is an r-selected ideology, and rape is an r-selected sexual strategy.

As Anonymous Conservative has shown repeatedly, leftism and conservatism are merely expressions of two competing reproductive strategies: r-selection and K-selection. To review quickly, K-selection breeds children to compete in a world of limited resources through a two-parent upbringing, defined by high sexual dimorphism, monogamy, late sexual maturation, and loyalty to the in-group (i.e. wolves). R-selection breeds children for a world of abundant resources through a single-mother upbringing, defined by low sexual dimorphism, promiscuity, early sexual maturation, and disloyalty to the tribe (i.e. rabbits).

The conflict between leftism (of which feminism is a subset) and conservatism is the conflict between r and K. K-selected individuals want a world that encourages competition and meritocracy, while r-selected individuals want a world of free resources: free food, free money, free shelter and free sex. In a K-selected world, men and girls have to compete to earn the right to mate with one another; in an r-selected world, men and girls have sex with no thought as to the consequences.

What does this have to do with feminism and rape? Simple: rape is the ultimate r-selected sexual strategy.

By its very definition, rape is an act of entitlement: forcing yourself on someone who doesn’t want to have sex with you, whom you haven’t earned the right to sleep with. Much in the same way leftists feel entitled to take other peoples’ money away through taxation and welfare, rapists feel entitled to stick their penises in girls’ vaginas. In fact, you could say that rape is an inherently leftist form of sex, which would explain why so many male feminists, such as Jian Ghomeshi and Hugo Schwyzer, enjoy assaulting and abusing girls.

Sexual assault is sexual socialism: redistributing nookie to the least privileged in society.

Feminists, being leftists, are r-strategists themselves. The purpose of feminism is to eliminate restrictions on female sexuality: allow girls to sleep around without getting pregnant, let them legally kill their unborn babies when they do get knocked up, and have it all funded by the taxpayer.

From an r-strategist’s perspective, rape is a good thing, because it allows a female to have children without having to do anything, aside from breathe.

It’s well-known that a great many girls have rape fantasies, and a significant number of rape victims claim to have orgasmed during their assaults. Both these points serve as evidence that a portion of the female population—the r-selected, leftist portion—not only wants to be raped, but is physiologically adapted for it.
Once you accept the premise that feminists subconsciously desire to have their vaginal walls torn up by psychopathic men, their behavior suddenly makes sense. For example, feminists are unwilling to condemn the Muslim “refugees” who have been assaulting girls in Germany and other European countries (and indeed, have accused those who talk about the story of “racism” and/or “Islamophobia”) because they want those refugees to keep raping.

The Muslim “refugees” streaming into Europe from the Middle East are the consummate r-selected cowards. Instead of fighting for their families back home, they’re fleeing to safe countries where they can live off government benefits. Instead of being grateful that Europeans are willing to take them in, they throw temper tantrums because their Internet isn’t fast enough, their food isn’t tasty enough, or they don’t have enough to do, showing that they are parasites looking for someone to leech off of.

Muslims rape European girls for the same reason that they riot over slow WiFi: they believe they deserve to get something for nothing.

Some right-wing personalities have tried to explain the left’s embrace of Muslim “rapefugees” with such nebulous concepts as “pathological altruism,” but the reality is much bleaker. In the darkest recesses of their minds, feminists want swarthy refugees to punch them in the face, tear their clothes off, and spit roast them like plump, juicy swine. Don’t expect them to suddenly realize the truth, either, because…

2. Feminists encourage girls to get raped, then deny all responsibility for their actions.

In the past few years, even the slightest suggestion that girls have a responsibility for their own safety is met with a chorus of “MISOGYNIST!” “DON’T BLAME THE VICTIM!” The oft-repeated feminist chant, “Don’t teach women not to get raped, teach men to not rape,” is an explicit call for girls to place themselves into situations where they’re likely to get sexually assaulted, then dodge all blame.

While some feminists are no doubt doing this out of naivete, the subconscious motivator for many of them is their r-selected psychology.

Personal responsibility is a K-strategist concept; in the rabbit warren, things just happen. By discouraging girls from protecting themselves, feminists are implicitly encouraging them to get violated, then pinning the blame on an undefinable “rape culture.” Which brings me to my next point…

3. Feminists talk about the West having a “rape culture” because they want a rape culture.

As mentioned above, the worldwide leftist outrage against Roosh and the Return of Kings tribal meetups far outstripped their reaction to the Muslim gang rape attacks in Germany and Sweden during New Years’ Eve. This isn’t just because of hysteria and slander: r-selected leftists are more threatened by masculine men than by cowardly Muslim rapists.

One of the most laughable claims feminists make about game/red pill/PUA culture is that it encourages men to feel “entitled” to sex and female companionship. Even skimming a manosphere blog will show that this is the opposite of the truth. “Game” and “red pill” philosophy teaches men that they have to earn girls by improving themselves: lifting, dressing better, having interesting hobbies, and being entertaining conversationalists.

If a morbidly obese basement dweller came onto the Roosh V Forum and started whining about how he couldn’t get laid, he’d be laughed at and told to hit the gym and get a life.

The reason why there’s always been an overlap between the seemingly hedonistic manosphere and the more traditionalist alternative right is because both groups have the same view of sexual relationships: men and women need to earn the right to sleep with and marry each other. The end destinations may be different, but the road is the same.

Feminists oppose this because leftists oppose competition in general. Feminist obscurantism in regards to sexual relationships (e.g. their claims that the “friendzone” doesn’t exist or claiming that men just need to “treat women like human beings” if they want to get laid) is about stripping men of their ability to compete for a mate. Similarly, pushing “fat acceptance,” tattoos and piercings, and encouraging girls to be “bossy” and sarcastic is about crippling females’ ability to compete for men.

To make matters worse, feminists have been trying to train men to rape girls for years. Their constant claim that the West has a “rape culture” is just wishful thinking: in actuality, rape has been on the decline for decades. Because of this, feminists have tried to legislate masculinity away through “affirmative consent” and “yes means yes” laws, which force men to explicitly beg for permission at every step of a sexual encounter, branding them “rapists” if they don’t comply.
Affirmative consent laws and “rape culture” claims are a two-pronged attack on masculinity, designed to advantage sneaky males and hurt masculine men, and there’s no sneakier male than a rapist.

Unfortunately, despite all the rape hoaxes the mainstream media conjures up, the “rape culture” that feminists screech about has yet to materialize.

The UVA rape story, for example, turned out to be a lurid, masturbatory fantasy passed off as “news.”

Because feminists couldn’t create a rape culture, they imported one from the Middle East.

From here, all the pieces fall into place. We see clearly why the European Union is debating banning one man from their borders and libeling him as a “rape advocate,” while letting millions of actual Muslim rapists flood their countries.

We see why leftists are driven to protest masculine men but not sneaky “refugee” cowards who abandon their families in search of government freebies and “easy” white women.

The goal of feminism is to turn women into rape-meat.

Every feminist, deep down, wants nothing more than a rapist’s baby in her belly. The armada of horny, restless, greedy Muslims storming into Europe is a bounty for the r-selected feminist. Leftists will wave “Refugees Welcome” signs no matter how many girls are forcibly DP’ed by angry Arab invaders, because Europe’s skyrocketing rape rates are a feature, not a bug.

The only thing that will stop the rape-lust of feminists and their poorly-endowed Muslim abusers is Western men having the courage to call it out.

There can be no compromise, no peace with these traitors inside the walls. While more moderate women can be saved, no one will ever be able to convince the termagents of the left that they should be more afraid of Muslim rapists than white “racists.”

They are our enemies, just as much as the dusky hordes planting their flags on our soil

Navaros #fundie imdb.com

(from a discussion of the movie Pleasantville, when asked why he'd called the film evil):

I haven't seen this since I was tricked into doing so when it was originally in the theaters, therefore my answer won't be as comprehensive as it could be if I'd seen it recently, but here are some of the reasons:

1. It glorifies Onanism.

2. It glorifies fornication.

3. It misrepresents people who have wholesome family values as idiots.

4. It misrepresents people who have wholesome family values as racists.

5. It says the world is bad if it is a good world that has morality.

6. It says the world is good if it is an evil world that has no morality.

Paul Dohse #quack paulspassingthoughts.com

“And I might mention the following: her video reeks of an adult putting a subject in cartoonish terms so the great unwashed children of the world can understand it. The motif of the video alone exposes her elitist mentality.”

Folks, the pro/anti-vax controversy is a brutal arena. In the arena of discussion, neither side is taking prisoners. Why is this issue so volatile? Answer: for the same reason present-day politics is volatile.

People in general, want to be free to exercise commonsense. Unfortunately, elitism has a strong tendency to dismiss commonsense based on a person’s cultural status. This goes past a person’s educational status and flirts with the idea that commoners are unable to discern reality itself. In other words, commonsense is rejected as an intrinsic ability within humanity to know things.

On the one hand, elitist presuppositions grounded in Platonist ideology underpinning much of Western thought has little patience with serfs not accepting elitist unction. How strongly do the elitists feel about this? Look at history; no pain of death has been spared those who dare question the ruling class. On the other hand, the common folks have little patience with freedom to apply commonsense being hindered, and the suggestion that intrinsic commonsense is not an epistemological reality.

If a peasant’s child goes into convulsions right after receiving vaccinations, and those peasants who know of it are getting their children taken away for refusing to get their children vaccinated, that’s when pitchforks are used for things other than throwing hay.

The internet is a potent tool for sharing the experiences of people worldwide, and when people see a recurring trend, they take note of it. The internet enables the public at large to connect dots.

Let’s talk about some commonsense stuff regarding medicine. Even though I am only a MAC (state tested medication aide), I can apply some commonsense to what I know about the administration of medicine in nursing facilities. It is evident, in my field, that one size doesn’t fit all. There are these things called, allergic reactions, intolerance, adverse effects, right dose, right time, right drug, right route, and I could state more. A lot of drugs are substitutes for other drugs that target the same medical problem because a medication for the same condition may, well, kill the resident. These standards apply to vitamins, minerals, antibiotics, OTC, and every other kind of drug.

But regarding vaccines, one size fits all? Sorry Doc, I may be a lowly MAC compared to your medical degree, but you are obviously full of it. And, if you and your elitist buddies are behind legislation that abducts children of people who question that logic, I might even state my opinion in stronger terms.

Locally,  a pediatrician  named Nicole Baldwin attempted to debunk concerns about vaccinations with a short video on Tik Tock. The blowback was significant enough to make her the latest martyr in efforts to calm the great unwashed herd of commoners. Her great struggle was reported on CBS This Morning, a bastion of liberal elitist wisdom. Curiously, the same kind of red herrings, straw men, and doublespeak are used in political venues against those who dare believe in man’s ability to self-rule.

For example, “There is no link between vaccines and Autism.” First, the so-called “antivaxx” crowd is not saying Autism is the only issue or it is Autism per se, but Autism-like symptoms and other symptoms such as convulsions. Secondly, there are no links between the two; so what? There are no direct biological or physiological links between allergic reactions to medications and unique physiology of the individual. For the most part, adverse and allergic reactions to medicines can only be determined by observation. This is why MACs are not allowed to give the first dose of a medication, but are responsible for observing the resident for a period of time after the administration of the drug by an RN or LPN.

Here is my point: the dialogue used by the medical community in this debate is disingenuous and endowed with truth as authority. It’s the same verbiage and deceptive forms of communication used by elitists in the political realm. And it’s like the police saying a traffic accident never occurred because there is no direct link between a cause for the accident and the mangled car with the injured driver inside. Furthermore, the injured person sitting in the car wasn’t necessarily injured by the accident. Really? Even though harm is taking place at the time of some vaccinations, the two are unrelated. A person begins choking while eating a sandwich, but the sandwich is dismissed as the cause. It’s nonsense.

And I might mention the following: her video reeks of an adult putting a subject in cartoonish terms so the great unwashed children of the world can understand it. The motif of the video alone exposes her elitist mentality.

I will summarize and conclude this post with the comment I left on her FaceBook page:

As a STNA and MAC attending nursing school I find the medical community’s collectivist attitude towards this problem very sad. The experience of many parents tells us that something is going wrong with a small percentage of children who get vaccinated. When parents experience their children suddenly becoming cognitively disabled or going into convulsions within hours of receiving vaccines, you can bet they are going to be skeptical of vaccines.

And by the way, 46% of parents are not skeptical of vaccines because they are uneducated serfs, they are skeptical because of what parents are experiencing, and that is what they are finding on the internet, NOT the mere beliefs of dumb hillbillies. I find the attitude that a few children are expendable for the collective good of most children detestable [viz, “The benefits outweigh the risks.” I suppose, if it isn’t your child!].

EVERY child matters. Again, the notion that the internet is a conduit for misinformation by the great unwashed and uneducated is an excuse for not addressing what is actually happening.

What people are experiencing is the issue, not superstition. I think it a little arrogant to tell people their experiences are invalid because of research. I am no doctor, but you only need to be an STNA to know doctors are wrong often and don’t know everything. Trust me, I have many firsthand testimonies.

paul

Glory2YAHUVEH! #fundie endtimeprophecies.nl

[intro]

The Hem of MY garment, it’s not enough to just touch it anymore. Keep knocking at MY door, then when the answer doesn’t come fast enough, pound. When you get weary, keep on asking, seeking and ye shall find, but don’t stop till you hear from Heaven.

For I have promised you MY Children, bread and not the crumbs of this world. For you see judgment has come to the house of YAHUVEH and it’s not as easy as touching MY hem, or knocking softly for your answers, you better be prepared it may take wrestling for your blessing, like Jacob. But it only proves your faith and makes it stronger, which is needed in these end times. So keep on saying no more crumbs. You will not be denied. For you’re the Blood bought Bride of YAHUSHUA ha MASHIACH.

I will answer and deliver you. I do not lie. For you are promised not the crumbs of this world, but the bread of life, the children’s bread of healing, deliverance, prosperity, life abundantly and full of glory. For YAHUSHUA is your Bread of Life and I want to see if you will still praise ME, and hang on to your faith though I don’t answer right away. I am not always a microwave God.

Yes, I know about microwaves, who do you think gave you the invention? You have scripture to stand on, read Matthew 15: 22-28 about a Canaanite woman’s faith. She was worshipping YAHUSHUA, yet he ignored her, let the disciples rebuke her, call her a dog, said the blessing was for another not her. You say, “Why YAHUSHUA, why would you have done all this?” Because in these last days, all of this will happen to MY most faithful followers, those that worship ME, this will be done by others in MY Name.

You will be insulted, rejected, persecuted, yet if you continue to hold on to your faith, though I don’t rescue right away, then like this Canaanite woman you will be rewarded. For I will see how great your faith is. For in these end-times I am preparing MY body in this way, when I come again how many will have hung on to their faith? How many will turn away when they call out in prayer for a need and I don’t answer right away?

You must tell them to be willing to wrestle with ME for their blessing like Jacob did. For I desire to bless. I only want to test and see how badly you want this blessing. Will you still worship ME when I don’t answer right away? It’s not MY chastisement that is causing this, for the woman fell and worshipped at MY feet. You are worshipping at MY feet. But judgment has started at the house of YAHUVEH and one of the things I am testing is how strong is your faith?

How loyal and how much will you rely on ME? Like the Canaanite woman, your faith and loyalty will be rewarded for you shall see what you desire, and even more exceedingly and more abundantly will I shower down MY blessings like a river overflowing. You will have so much joy. And I will bless you so much. You will be forced to give unto others. Hold on tight to the hem of MY garment. Don’t let go. Keep knocking till the door opens to your blessings you have asked for. I will answer eventually. Lean not unto thy own understanding but in all thy ways acknowledge ME and I shall direct your paths.

Remember the trials of your faith are more precious than gold. Keep your eyes on your Savior and not on the turbulence of the sea or the waves will drown you. But I am here to save you. For I am your Savior and redeemer am I not? I will not fail you nor forsake you. I know how much pressure to put on the clay before it breaks, how much fire to allow you to go through before you get consumed. The waves of despair will not drown you. For I am here to rescue and deliver not only your soul, but mind, body and Spirit. Trust ME and ye shall see it come to pass. Then remember who delivered you ’twas no man or woman, but your God who created you.

Yet it is I who will answer your call, for I know what you want even before you ask. In the spiritual realm it is finished, I am only waiting for MY perfect timing to manifest in the physical realm. Your faith helps this to come forth. Does not MY Word say it’s impossible to please YAHUVEH without faith? You please ME by showing your faith in a God who cares and hears and knows all.

You show your faith when you realize you cannot deliver yourselves, but need ME, your Savior to deliver you, and so I shall. For am I not your Master and Savior? Is the God you serve deaf? No. Is MY arm too short to deliver you? No. Is your faith being tested? Yes. Do I desire to bless you? Yes. Will you be one of those that hangs on tight to the hem of MY garment, and keeps knocking? Will you be one of those that stands and waits for MY deliverance and the blessings I have promised you? It’s your choice. I have spoken forth this day from this handmaiden, so you will understand why some things promised have not yet come to pass. Keep holding fast to the measure of faith I have given you and deliverance you shall soon see at last.

Given to Prophet Sherrie Elijah (Elisheva Sherrie Eliyahu)

* * * * * * *

This is the latest prophecy given to me to pass on and feed YAHUVEH’s sheep. Hold on tight to the hem of his garment. Though my long blonde hair is trailing in the dirt as he passes through the crowd, my face is looking upward at his, and I am not going to let go. When you’re going through this and I was meant to read this when I did, to receive it so I could pass this on to others that want to know why they are not getting their prayers answered quickly.

Is YAHUVEH deaf? No! Is his arm too short to reach us? No. As YAHUSHUA said, our faith is being tested, not a pleasant experience is it? But necessary for it to grow. I am right now like Jacob wrestling with God till he blesses me with the deliverance he has promised me. But I have ground in my heels and told my Master YAHUSHUA I will not be denied for he has promised me no more crumbs. The world gives crumbs, but we are promised the bread of life, the children’s bread of healing, deliverance and prosperity. We have been promised life and life more abundantly. My knuckles are sore from pounding. My eyesight is dim from weeping. But we must persevere on. When YAHUSHUA comes again how many will he find that still have faith? I want to be counted in that number, don’t you?

In the Master, Savior YAHUSHUA ha MASHIACH service a broken vessel of clay but a mighty warrior in YAHUSHUA, Pastor Sherrie Elijah (Elisheva Sherrie Eliyahu). Now if you have not been tried yet with a prayer you have waited so long for and not have seen it come to pass, (I have waited 21 years) then you will not understand what I am talking about. But I am sent to those that have not had their prayers yet fulfilled in the physical realm, although it was promised in the spiritual realm. That’s why in these end-times even YAHUSHUA said, “Will he find faith when he comes back?” I must warn the people. Now you must warn the people. So they will understand and not give up on YAHUSHUA and turn to the world for answers or turn to the spirit of the antichrist.

Mack Major #fundie edendecoded.com

Santa's a Demon! The Uncomfortable Truth About Christmas.

Chemosh: A god of the ancient world. First noted in Babylon, but also known throughout the world in different fForms and under different names.

Chemosh was represented as a huge cast iron statue in the shape of a person seated high on a throne with a large pot belly. Its hands were extended as if ready to receive something. It was known as the god of prosperity.

The people in ancient times would make a list of all the things they wanted Chemosh to do for them in the upcoming year. Then on a certain day of the year, during the Winter solstice of December 25th, they would line up with their children in hand, along with the list of things they had made.

Chemosh being made of cast iron would be heated up until the iron was so hot that it turned cherry red. And those who were seeking prosperity in the upcoming year would take their babies and small children and place them into the burning hot hands of the idol statue as an offering of prosperity in the upcoming season, burning their children alive until nothing remained except charred ashes. The ashes were then buried along in cemeteries.

Amidst the hideous stench of burning flesh, and as screams and cries of hundreds of babies pierced the night air, the people in the ancient world celebrated their gods of prosperity. This practice was known in the bible as making your child pass through the fire. It was ritual child sacrifice: absolutely forbidden by the God of Israel and highly detested by him.

Burial sites for the bones and ashes of sacrificed children have been unearthed. These places were known as a Tophet, after the location of Israel where ritual child sacrifice was also practiced, during times when Israel abandoned the exclusive worship of God. Mentioned in Jeremiah 7:31-34

Fast forward to this holiday season. The pagan god of Chemosh has gone through many transformations and changes over the centuries. But the basic premise has survived to this day.

Right now in malls across America, parents are taking their young children and babies, marching them right up to another large potbellied person seated high on a throne, whose appearance is cherry red. And they will offer their children to this person, sitting them on his lap or placing them into his arms; just like their ancestors did thousands of years ago.

Their children will be asked to share their 'list' of things they want this large potbellied 'god' to do for them. And just to make sure the experience is cemented in their minds: pictures will be taken creating fond memories in the years ahead.

If this isn't bad enough for you: wait! There's more!

We also know from scripture that behind every pagan idol there exists and actual demon. "The sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to be participants with demons." [1 Corinthians 10:20]

Chemosh was no exception. There was a demon behind it too: and this bloodthirsty, despicable demon is known by the name of Krampus. In pre-Christian Germany and throughout other parts of Europe, Krampus was known as the horned god of witches.

Remember all those tales from back in the day like Hansel and Gretel, of witches kidnapping children and eating them? The god that witches serve is the same god as Chemosh! It's the pagan god of witches! They just dropped the statue and now deal directly with the demonic spirit behind it, known today as Krampus.

In old European lore, it was believed that every year Krampus would go searching for all the kids who've been naughty or nice that year. The nice ones he would leave alone: but the naughty children were his to take away and lead away to certain death. This is where the root of the whole 'He's making a list, and checking it twice, gonna find out who's naughty or nice' really comes from. Krampus is the real spirit behind your modern day Santa Claus.

And every year clueless parents (even Christians!) take their children to sit on this demonic figure's lap!

This is the true tradition of where Santa Claus, aka Chemosh, aka Krampus comes from. Hey, don't hate the messenger! It blew my mind when I found out too. The cast iron potbellied statue where babies were once sacrificed in its red hot arms has now been replaced by the arms of jolly old Santa, dressed in a red uniform. Santa Claus is basically Chemosh and Krampus, remixed and reloaded.

So this Christmas season, as you're marching your screaming kid up to 'Chemosh' to be seated on his lap, ask yourself: where DID this stuff come from? And if you really don't know, instead of cursing Mack under your breath and calling me the Grinch who stole Christmas... why not educate yourself instead?

Let's put our thinking caps on here. EVERYTHING about Santa Claus is occult; even though those who did his modern repackaging tried their best to hide this. But they didn't do a good job. Just follow the clues:

• We have a 'man' with god-like powers.
• He knows everything there is to know about every child on Earth. (It's actually kinda creepy that a grown man has a fixation on kids in the first place.)
• He has the power to judge your kid, whether it's been naughty or nice.
• He lives in a mythical land somewhere near the North Pole: believed to be where the opening for Middle Earth (Hollow Earth) is located. Middle Earth is the world of the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings trilogies.
• He also has a bunch of "elves" that assist him in his work. Elves are elemental earth demons used for invoking magic in witchcraft.
• He has a team of 'horned' reindeer that fly him through the night on his "magic" sled. Cernunnos was the Celtic name given for the horned god of witchcraft. Under that name he's usually depicted with reindeer antlers. And in the Finnish version, Santa road a goat.
• He flies through the air... can someone say "Prince of the power of the air..."
• And he enters your home by sneaking down your chimney late at night, during witching hour (roughly between midnight and 3am); and he enters through your fireplace. That's weird: he's not phased by flaming hot fire?

Christians need to be aware that there's nothing 'Christian' about this whole Santa Claus fairytale.

And the roots of Christmas are actually horrific. You might be thinking that you're making your children's holidays memorable: but use your common sense here.

When you mix Jesus Christ with a mythological person, you automatically seed into your child's mind that Jesus could be a myth too. It's a subconscious connection that can easily be made by someone who finally comes of age. "Well, if my parents lied about Santa Claus, what else have they been lying to me about? Maybe this Jesus isn't real after all!"

See how that works? There are enough challenges to a life of faith in this world without being handicapped by one's own parents. Teach your kid the TRUTH about the holidays, not the myths. And don't be afraid to not celebrate Christmas. That doesn't make you any less of a Christian if you choose not to. Look on the bright side: you may actually save some money going into the new year!

HaifischGeweint #fundie freethoughtblogs.com

For the purposes of relative brevity only, I am limiting the content of this post to HIV/AIDS discrimination in Canada, and will not be addressing the racial component (i.e., which racial groups are at highest risk). It should go without saying that this is already a loaded topic. I’m going to warm this post up by providing you readers with a video link for the trailer of a powerful documentary about the life-long effects of discriminatory North American laws (specifically in the U.S.) on HIV-positive people, before I break down some basic terminology:

HIV Is Not A Crime – A 2011 Documentary by Sean Strub

Relevant Terminology

Now, partly for the purposes of reducing the space it takes to say “living with HIV/AIDS”, and partly as a sign of compassion for those individuals who are thusly described (some of whom are my friends), for the rest of this post, I am going to use the word poz instead. I will be using it like any other adjective, just like how I don’t talk about my friends who are poz any differently than anyone else unless the topic at hand is specifically about social barriers against people who are poz. Previously, one might have said “infected”. But is this person a zombie or a rabid animal? I think we can all afford to be a lot more sensitive, and just use the word poz instead.

Furthermore, on the issue of the term “infection” (and sometimes even its cousin, “transmission”) — some people are born poz, some people became poz relatively unintentionally (i.e., not engaging in high-risk behaviours, such as bare-backing with someone they knew at the time was poz or sharing needles), and some people who became poz at one time now have such a low viral load that it can’t even be detected (let alone transmitted in any way to another individual). It is for sensitivity to all of these people and, really, most people who are poz (and not currently dying from complications of AIDS), that many prefer to speak of becoming converted. Most people who are poz aren’t walking around with such an active and excessively contagious infectious process coursing through their circulatory system that it is in any way appropriate to refer to them as “infected”. And in fact, even for those who are so unfortunate to be dealing with a hyperbolic bloom of the virus in their system, this is usually a temporary state, often associated with the earliest phases in conversion (which can easily go unnoticed for many newly converted) or the final stages of AIDS (in which case, they are unlikely to just be out for a casual stroll like anyone else).

The point is that words like “infected” and “infection”, when talking about people who are poz, carries a connotation of uncleanliness, filth, and/or viral transmission — again, medical intervention has actually advanced to the point that many poz people are no-transmissible or even un-detectable (I’ve seen it with my own eyes while working for a doctor whose only poz patient had been non-transmissible for 13 years and started testing un-detectable). You don’t personally have to agree with this argument, but I do, so I will be referring to people as becoming converted (or at risk thereof) unless I’m quoting a source that uses different language, such as the Supreme Court of Canada.

Finally, a major component of anti-poz stigma is when people look at someone who is poz and perceive of their condition first (as though it were a disease, an infection, or otherwise just icky in socially significant ways) and then perceive of the person in front of them after the fact. Many people will see the fact that This Individual Is Poz as more important (or of a higher priority) than the fact that they are an individual. A human being, not just a body that carries a perceived threat of invisible death and some sort of unseen contagious filth. A person. This attitude of seeing some isolated quality before recognizing the full personhood (or even not being able to see past this isolated undesired quality) of the individual concerned is called essentialism. If you’re already familiar with the role of essentialism in racism, sexism/misogyny, homophobia/transphobia, and ableism, among many other forms of systemic oppression, yes I am talking about the same thing here. Essentialism is the driving principle in anti-poz stigma, but bigotry is the behaviour of application of that principle — the line is razor-thin.

Criminalization Of HIV In Canada

Now that I’ve established the terminology you will be seeing in this blog post and likely elsewhere if you choose to look for resources (especially in gay and queer communities, where I’ve personally seen poz and converted/conversion used most often), I can start talking about the criminalization of HIV. I’ve actually known about a law that exists in Canada now for a few years, whereby if a person who is poz engages in unprotected sex without disclosing their status to their partner, they can be tried and convicted of aggravated sexual assault (i.e., rape). I found out about it because, though he had not converted either of two known casual partners with whom he engaged in unprotected sex, a CFL football player named Trevis Smith was being put on trial and his reputation permanently destroyed for not disclosing his status to his partners. To the best of my knowledge, Smith’s wife has never charged him, presumably because she’s not looking at her husband as some sort of infectious pustule. Other people have been convicted on similar charges under similar circumstances prior to and since Smith faced sentencing that marked him a sex offender, but his particular case was what brought this issue to my attention. I’ll be getting to what the law actually states momentarily.

First, for the record, while I personally very strongly disagree with engaging in unprotected sex without first having an honest conversation about STIs and safer sex (no matter what your status), I can fully empathize with someone who can’t quite get the words out until after the first encounter. This is also simply not the same as lying when a partner enquires. I talk about why that is in this blog post I wrote in May 2011 when I found out that a bunch of my friends-at-the-time, who all still claim to be sex-positive, were apparently sex-positive-unless-you’re-HIV-positive. The short version is I have experience not being able to get the words out soon enough, and though that person continued to see me and not use protection for nearly a year, when we broke up, he threw it back in my face — I’m talking about human papillomavirus, which I was exposed to before the first time I consented to sex as a young adult (take all the time you need to think about that). But what I didn’t mention in that post is that I also have experience being directly lied to about someone else’s STI status, and being directly lied to about someone going to get tested . While I can be compassionate to someone who couldn’t find a way to bring it up (assuming we are speaking of someone who is poz and either non-transmissible or undetectable, or someone who knows their poz status and uses a condom to protect their partner), I cannot stand by someone who lies about their status when asked about it or who (regardless of their status) deliberately avoids getting tested and/or practising safer sex. Full stop.

I firmly believe that the media circus around Trevis Smith, and the existing law around non-disclosure, bolstered already pre-existing widespread stigma and a dangerous avoidance of personal responsibility (that really need not be further exacerbated) on the part of people who can’t rest assured of their status because they won’t get tested for fear that they will test positive for conversion. People already avoid getting tested so that they can keep a false sense of security. I dated multiple such individuals and have talked to countless people who haven’t the faintest idea of how to actually practice safer sex (it’s more than just a fucking condom) or who assume that if their prospective partner doesn’t say anything, it’s because they have nothing to disclose (these are people who are recklessly negligent towards themselves). Criminalizing HIV isn’t going to make it go away, any more than not getting tested will reduce your chances of conversion. So what does Canadian law actually say about HIV?

In 1998, R. v. Cuerrier set the precedent for HIV criminalization in Canada. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled, at the time, that someone who is poz who is engaging in protected or unprotected sex without disclosing their HIV status to their partner, obtained consent under fraudulent circumstances, and therefore has committed an aggravated sexual assault. The default assumption here is that people who are poz are frightening, are rapists, and unsuitable sexual partners for anyone who isn’t poz. Whether or not the sexual partner(s) pressing the charges was/were converted is irrelevant, as is whether or not the person who is poz even has a sufficiently high viral load that they can convert anyone else; and in fact, as in Trevis Smith’s case, Cuerrier’s two partners were not converted. It’s also unclear whether or not the complainant must demonstrate to the court that they were of HIV-negative status prior to the encounter, although in one case, a failure to demonstrate that resulted in an aquittal. Well, the law changed recently. Very recently. Now you can be charged even if you are undetectable or non-transmissible, if you didn’t use a condom. And you can still be charged even if you did use a condom, no matter what your viral load was at the time. Of course, the media spins it as “now you can be HIV-raped without a condom and you won’t even know it! Clutch your pearls!” Here’s the actual statement in the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision two months ago:

[ “This Court, in Cuerrier, established that failure to disclose that one has HIV may constitute fraud vitiating consent to sexual relations under s. 265(3)(c) Cr. C. Because HIV poses a risk of serious bodily harm, the operative offence is one of aggravated sexual assault (s. 273 Cr. C.). To obtain a conviction under ss. 265(3)(c) and 273, the Crown must show, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the complainant’s consent to sexual intercourse was vitiated by the accused’s fraud as to his HIV status. The test boils down to two elements: (1) a dishonest act (either falsehoods or failure to disclose HIV status); and (2) deprivation (denying the complainant knowledge which would have caused him or her to refuse sexual relations that exposed him or her to a significant risk of serious bodily harm). Failure to disclose may amount to fraud where the complainant would not have consented had he or she known the accused was HIV-positive, and where sexual contact poses a significant risk of or causes actual serious bodily harm.

[…]

The evidence adduced in this case leads to the conclusion that, as a general matter, a realistic possibility of transmission of HIV is negated if: (i) the accused’s viral load at the time of sexual relations was low and (ii) condom protection was used. This general proposition does not preclude the common law from adapting to future advances in treatment and to circumstances where risk factors other than those considered in this case are at play.” ]

In other words, if you would consent to sex with someone assuming that they are HIV-negative but doing nothing to either rule out the possibility that they are poz or even protect your own sexual wellness (as any responsible sexually active adult should), but your attitude towards that person does a 180 in the event it turns out they are poz, the Supreme Court of Canada will answer you by registering your former sex partner as a sex offender and sentencing them to prison, for up to a maximum of a life sentence. And yet the Supreme Court of Canada just can’t see how this could possibly be abused. Well, the BC Civil Liberties Association can. So can Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network and their coalition of allied organizations, which released this statement on the same day as the Supreme Court’s decision. Because not every person who is poz who dares to have sex with a consenting adult is actively trying to convert HIV-negative people without their consent (again — in that case, I do not stand by his actions and think he should be criminally punished), but the Supreme Court of Canada ruling criminalizes every HIV-positive body in the country; unless, as Michael Vonn says, you freeze and label your used condoms and get signed waivers from all your sex partners indicating that they knew your status before you had sex. Anyone with a bone to pick against a poz sex partner in Canada now has a golden ticket to ruin that person’s life, livelihood, public reputation, and ability to maintain and secure gainful employment, safe housing, or custody of their own children, by dragging them through a guaranteed media circus and criminal court. Race is a significant factor in this, that is already too complex to address even briefly, except to say that the guaranteed majority of people who will be impacted by this are racialized individuals. You can take that to the bank.
Changing The Record

To some people, sex-positivity means sex is a positive thing that you should gleefully embrace at every possible opportunity. If that’s what floats your boat, fine, but sex-negative abstinence “activists” and pro-lifers alike would like nothing more than to paint all sex-positive activists and their ideology thusly. And of course, it is this very slippery misappropriation of the term “sex-positive” that leads the same people who embrace it to recoil in disgust at the audacity of anyone who is poz to have a sex life at all — to say things like “Well if I found out I had sex with someone who was HIV-positive and they only told me afterwards, they may as well have held a gun to my head and raped me, because if I knew they were HIV-positive, I never would have given them my consent.” One of my long-term partners actually posted this online in a discussion led explicitly towards this conclusion by a local self-proclaimed sex-positive activist (who, funny thing, has since used that website and Twitter to repeatedly libel me and multiple others — but especially me, because I’m too poor to hire a lawyer to stop her). I just about barfed on my keyboard when I read the words my so-called friends, allies, and lovers had contributed to this conversation, and when I managed to contain myself, I seriously contemplated spontaneously ending my romantic relationships over it. Amazingly, these are people who rub shoulders with, fuck, and maintain a leather family with at least one person who is terrified to tell anyone too loudly that they have herpes, for fear of being treated like a Pariah. But none of them see the connection.

Sex-positivity is for everybody. It means an approach to sex education that teaches individual people that they have the right to prevent unwanted pregnancies and unwanted sexually transmitted infections, the right to self-respect, the right to say “no, not right now, but maybe later”, and the right to say what they want without fear of being ridiculed or shamed (and to stand up for themselves if they are ridiculed or shamed). It means being aware, up-to-date, and educated about what safer sex means and your individual and general risks of inheriting or transmitting a sexually transmitted infection with any of your sexual partners. For instance, if you aren’t having penile sex, how do you protect yourself (obviously condoms are out) and what is your risk of inheriting or transmitting something like HIV or chlamydia from the different activities you are engaging in? (Hint: enzymes in human saliva eliminate the HIV virus but not chlamydia; some infectious processes such as heat blisters from herpes or aphthous ulcerations from bad oral hygiene or smoking can compromise either your lips or gingiva, increasing your risk of inheriting even infections that your saliva would normally eliminate.) Sex-positivity means not feeling ashamed to be tested regularly for sexually transmitted infections while you’re sexually active (and for a few months after) and even encouraging your primary sexual partner to go with you so you can get tested together (or even immunized where possible and desired, such as for Hepatitis A & B). It also means all sorts of fun stuff like dropping in together at the sex shop down the street from the clinic and picking out a new toy to play with.

Don’t want to be converted? You don’t have to be an anti-poz bigot to reduce your risk of exposure and promote prevention. Both risk-reduction and prevention are critical aspects of sex-positivity. It’s sad that both “sex-positive” activists and the Supreme Court of Canada have left poz people even further marginalized on this issue than they already were. And if you think it’s pretty bleak in Canada but haven’t watched that 8-minute video, I’ve got news for you: it’s so much worse in the states, I might wind up doing a second blog post just about that.


Assuming that someone has nothing to disclose because they didn’t say anything isn’t informed consent. I realize my opinion is going to be unpopular among people who are not poz, but please (everybody). Take some responsibility for what you’re doing with whatever you’re packing between your legs. It’s one thing if you asked and they lied — which I flat-out disagree with and think they should be criminally punished in that case — but it’s another thing entirely when you don’t ask (especially when they used a condom anyway) and then get the person registered as a sex offender because YOU failed to take the same degree of personal responsibility as you secretly expected from them (but only if they were poz, because if they weren’t, then you don’t expect them to take that degree of personal responsibility because you don’t)

THAT’S where the discrimination is taking place here. One standard of behaviour for people who are poz, and another for people who aren’t. Criminal punishment for people who are poz (even with low viral load, non-transmissible status, or undetectable status), but never for people who aren’t. Are people who are poz not entitled to be assured that the person they are about to have sex with is a safe partner, because they’re already poz?

I find this “informed consent” requirement from people who are poz, but not from people who aren’t (because I guess… why… because they have nothing to disclose, and they’re the “victim” here?) motivated by thinking of HIV/AIDS as how the SCC laid it out: threat of bodily harm. Only it’s not that black-and-white. Low viral load, non-transmissible viral load, and even undetectable viral load, do not present threat of bodily harm.


Have you ever had unprotected sex with someone who was not, at the time, a virgin? Congratulations. You’re INFECTEEED with HPV, and your body can now INFECT your future partners with a virus that could kill them with cervical cancer over roughly the same time span in the absence of treatment as untreated HIV typically becomes AIDS and takes a life.

Shouldn’t you be telling all your partners about your status? After all, you’re potentially killing someone by having sex with them.

HPV is even transmitted via skin-to-skin contact, so either one of you wearing a condom doesn’t protect you. And if you think oral sex is your way out, think again. That’s how people get throat cancer from HPV.

David J. Stewart #fundie jesus-is-savior.com

I respect the right of other people to choose their own beliefs; but I also have a Biblical obligation as a born-again Christian to expose lies, falsehoods and evil to warn others. Judaism is a Satanic religion rooted in rejection of Jesus as the Christ. The Talmud is a sexually degenerate manuscript, which debases Gentile women, children and motherhood. From beginning to end, THE BIG BANG THEORY sitcom is saturated with filthy talk, dirty-mindedness and sexual licentiousness (lewd and lascivious). It is evil.

Due to the evils of Zionism that has infected our churches, Judaism is not preached against as it should be. I love Jewish people and exposing Judaism doesn't mean that I don't love Jews, any more than exposing Islam would mean that I don't love Arabs. It's sadly ironic to me that the Jews and Arabs, who both descended from their biological father Abraham, deny the Lord instead of believing Him as did Abraham (Genesis 15:6; Romans 4:1-6). Jesus Christ is the ONLY way to Heaven!

“THE BIG BANG THEORY” program is filthy, disgusting and saturated with sexual perversion of every sort. The show has endured for many seasons now. In July of 2015, The Big Bang Theory is as sexually perverted as ever!!! Sheldon is extremely effeminate with homosexual traits, clearly. They're a bunch of girly-boy sissies! I noticed in the January 6, 2013 news online that the CBS show was the highest rated program on TV this week. According to Wikipedia, the show's actors receive $350,000 PER EPISODE!!![1] In a recent episode titled, "The Egg Salad Equivalency," dozens of sexually perverted comments are made throughout the sitcom, including:

"A woman is like an egg salad sandwich on a warm Texas day... full of eggs and only appealing for a short time." ~The Big Bang Theory, highest rated CBS sitcom

Isn't that terrible? Women have been degraded in American culture to the level of animals, commodities. Why don't women complain to the television networks, to the newsmedia and speak out against this garbage online? Why don't more Christians expose the evil television networks? I often feel like John the Baptist, crying aloud alone in cyberspace against the wickedness of this generation. I encourage others to speak out online. Perhaps get your own website. I knew nothing about making a website when I started. I learned as I went, determined to do what it took. There are a lot of places where you can post free webpages, but most of them are filtered from the search engines. You're much better off having your own website for $59 a year.

Let's all speak out against the filth and perversion of this generation. Let's preach the truth of God's Word, and expose all the falsehoods and lies online, in churches and in society. Why does everyone hate the Bible-preacher instead? The Talmud teaches a disparaging view of women (Abodah Zarah 36b. Gentile [Non-Jewish] girls are in a state of filth [niddah] from birth.). So it shouldn't be surprising that Jewish produced TV sitcoms degrade women as dogs. In the same aforementioned episode of the show, Rajesh says with an India accent, "I give her a shoulder to cry on and then I give it to her good" (a sexual innuendo). The same episode makes reference to: menstrual cycle, calls an African-American woman 'brown sugar,' speaks of sexual desirability, a six-breasted sex-robot, sniffing around your goods, take your pants off, inappropriate sexual advance, STD's, just to list a few. THE BIG BANG THEORY is a sinful show produced by unsaved heathens, sexual degenerates, who are bold Christ-rejecters.

David J. Stewart #fundie jesus-is-savior.com

Dancing is just as sinful at high school proms, ballrooms, town gatherings, etc. Dancing and immodest dress are synonymous. Dancing leads to lasciviousness (i.e., immoral sexual desire). The ONLY place where dancing is acceptable is between a husband and wife in the privacy of their own home, and without observation by others. America has deteriorated into a sexually perverted nation, where sensual and suggestive dancing is commonplace. As a result, millions of unwanted babies continue to be murdered every year through abortion. This is a great evil in America! We have earned the title from Muslims of being THE GREAT SATAN!

Think about it ... the average person today can't help but laugh at the thought that dancing is a sin; yet millions of unplanned pregnancies continue to be terminated through murderous abortions. Is it surprising that a nation that sees no harm in murdering children would also see no harm in premarital sex, petting, dancing, pornography, stealing, divorcing, and filthy conversation? I think not.

God will not bless a wicked nation whose citizens disobey His Word. America today as a morally-toxic society. This is a dangerous place to raise a family. Children are being indoctrinated and corrupted by the Communist public school system. Men are being corrupted by the sensual filth and pornographic smut that has overtaken and ruined our country. Women are being brainwashed by feminism, indoctrinated to destroy their marriages.

Young girls today, they want to have fun. Young girls today just wanna party. Today young girls wanna go to a nightclub and have open sex on the floor of the nightclub, and then put it on YouTube, and if they should get pregnant they want to throw the baby into a dumpster. That's the new America! No morals. No self-respect. No nation. No borders. No language. No culture. No responsibility. Now that's America today!

Liam Scheff #fundie reducetheburden.org

AIDS, as in immune deficiency, is real enough. It certainly can be ‘acquired,’ either through drug abuse, poverty, toxic exposure, or antibiotic overload. It can be congenital – some people are born with broken, weak or deficient immune systems. AIDS is real enough.

HIV, as in “HIV tests,” and the ‘wily retrovirus,’ however, is an invention, or really, a conglomeration or accumulation of separable phenomena – cross-reacting protein tests, budding ‘exosomal’ sub-cellular particles, bits of broken cellular structures – brought together over time, by different researchers at different labs, all believing that this hodge-podge of cellular detritus adds up to one thing (but only in the gay men and African women they like to target for the make-believe ‘HIV test’ rigmarole).

The drugs that come next will knock out any fungus or bacteria that’s growing in you – but it will destroy your blood, intestines and bone marrow too, leaving you lifeless after extended use. It makes the drugs dangerous to take, and hard to quit.

AIDS is real enough. Immune deficiency exists, and has many causes. It’s the idea that this diagnosis has one, and only one cause, that is the greatest medical fiction of our age.

JustBe1ngHonest #fundie reddit.com

CMV: Children Should Be Allowed To Consent To Sex.

I think that children are capable of consenting to sexual contact with adults, and it's actually incredibly harmful to take that right away from them, and a violation of human rights. The normal arguments you hear against it are that the adult is always going to have more power in the relationship so it's inherently abusive, the child isn't ready for sex, developed enough, etc., and that there's too much risk for harm and anyone who isn't traumatized is an exception.

The idea that power dynamics makes a relationship inherently abusive is just outright wrong. Power dynamics only matter if the party with the power exercises it, and laws are an equalizer because they make there be reasons not to exploit power dynamics if empathy and compassion wasn't enough of a reason already. We only extend this idea of power dynamics to sexual situations with children, in all other areas it's actually expected and socially acceptable to exercise power against children (using hierarchy to get them to do what you want, physical punishment as deterrence, lack of consideration for their will, etc.).

Any sort of argument about development and puberty ignores the reason people have sex, people don't have sex just because hormones compelled them to do it, they have it because it's a pleasant and meaningful experience to achieve sexual release and increasingly so if someone you want to be involved is involved to. The idea that children aren't sexual creatures is to say they can't receive pleasure and have positive sexual experiences.

This is probably going to be the meatiest counter-argument that I have. I'll say it bluntly, no scientific evidence that uses unbiased samples (samples that represent the population as a whole) comes to the conclusion that willing sexual participation, or EVEN unwilling, is incredibly traumatic by itself. A study into the most impactful combinations of abuse on a child's happiness, finds that sexual abuse (defined as unwilling) isn't even in the top ten combinations of the most harmful abuse (Ney, Fung, & Wickett, 1994). Countless other studies find that early sexual experiences with adults are incredibly unlikely to cause lasting harm (Rind & Tromovitch, 1997; Rind et Al, 1998; Clancy, 2009) and other studies show that children who are willing participants in sex are statistically identical to the control group when it comes to issues of mental health (Arreola et Al, 2008; Arreola et Al, 2009). There's research that shows that minors who have first time experiences with adults have nearly indistinguishable experiences as minors with peers and adults with adults (Rind & Welter, 2014; Rind & Welter, 2016; Rind, 2017) and a study done of Finnish children that found that children are far more likely to report forced sexual contact than willing because they don't consider the willing sexual contact abuse (Lahtinen, 2018).

I personally see no reason to disallow child from having sexual freedom given all the research (there's more even) and find it immoral to deny them sexual freedom. I hope that having a conversation on a sub about reasonable discussions will bring me some actual solid and impactful evidence/arguments against rather than the usual moralistic squabble and argument avoidance of other places. I want an actual discussion about this and reasons why, in the presence of immense evidence that I believe is contrary, that children shouldn't be allowed to consent to sex, reasons the research is flawed, skewed, biased, or in anyway "junk science", or research that uses non-biased samples (i.e. not samples with a disproportionate amount of clinical patients) and come to the conclusion that sexual contact the child is willingly involved in is going to cause them some kind of lasting harm or problems. Thank you.

David J. Stewart #sexist jesus-is-savior.com

Women's Rights Are Destroying America!

Feminism, the "right to commit adultery," is an abomination before God!

- Granting women legal rights precipitated a fifty fold increase in the US divorce rate.

- Implementing the "family law act of 1970" caused the divorce rate to jump almost 40% in just one year.

- 21 million Americans died as a direct result of this increased divorce rate, including one million divorce related suicides and one million divorce related homicides in the 20th Century alone.

- 8 million of these deaths were due solely to the 44% increase in the premature mortality rate of the children of divorce.

- Altogether, feminists cost 55,000,000 American Lives in the Twentieth Century.

- Our divorce rate is four times higher than countries like Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan--and Afghanistan!

- Feminism, the "right to commit adultery", is an abomination before God!

In the four minutes it will take you to read this page, eighteen more fellow Americans will be divorced, and nine will die as a direct result of that divorce, which means that giving American women legal rights was tantamount to mass genocide. The US Surgeon General reports that divorce is a bigger health risk to men than smoking tobacco. The Centers for Disease Control report that divorce triples the risk of suicide. Twelve different scholarly studies demonstrate that divorce significantly increases the premature mortality of fathers, mothers, and the children of divorce.

Divorce and illegitimacy put almost half of the nation's children in fatherless households where they are up to 73 times more likely to be fatally abused. One child of divorce dies prematurely for each 15 divorces in the US. The increased divorce rate in the US killed 21 million Americans in the 20th Century alone. Each additional one hundred divorces nationwide parallels five additional suicides, ten additional murders, twenty additional rapes, and three hundred more men in prison. The fifty fold increase in the US divorce rate paralleled a ten fold increase in the murder rate and a seventeen fold increase in the incarceration rate.

Divorce contributed to the increase in the percent of US managers and administrators who are women from 19% to 43%, which decreased the purchasing power of the average American family by two thirds. It caused a $7 trillion increase education spending at the same time that SAT Scores decreased 98 points, putting the US DEAD LAST in TIMSS. It contributed to the US having the industrial world's only negative Personal Savings rate, reducing the net worth of the average American household to a negative $77,000 each. It contributed to our record high personal and corporate bankruptcy filings.

Worldwide, each additional one hundred divorces parallels two additional suicides, one additional murder, six additional rapes, thirty three additional armed robberies, and puts one hundred more men in prison.

Feminism, the "right to commit adultery", the unwarranted demand for legal rights for women, the root cause of divorce, an abomination before God, must be outlawed and female criminals must be punished. Blind dumb feminists cannot point to one single economic or social statistic with pride and say "It was all worth it".

Bobby #fundie answers.yahoo.com

Why cant they make premarital sex illegal?
My children are not allowed to listen to mainstream music,Gospel music is the only music played in our home and my daughters cannot wear pants,shorts,or wear make up or date until they are married and I will chose their partner .Females should only wear skirts meaning long skirts and look like females and not wear clothes that expose their sexuality.I feel that premarital sex should be illegal because it is wrong to have sex before marriage cause your virginity is supposed to be for one person and I think we need to teach the next generation this so they will turn out right.

Various depraved aid workers #sexist dw.com

Oxfam sex scandal is not an isolated case
Oxfam is not the only charitable organization fighting to maintain its credibility after a sex scandal. Crisis relief workers abusing their power isn't a new phenomenon.

One would expect that humanitarian workers take care of the people urgently in need of assistance during and following a crisis. But the image of the altruistic aid worker is too often a myth because anyone who is in the position to help others is the one wielding the power - and some take advantage of it.

Staff members of Britain's non-governmental organization Oxfam allegedly organized orgies with prostitutes in the organization's villa after the devastating earthquake in Haiti in 2010. But the scandal doesn't stop there. Sex parties were reportedly also held during relief missions in Chad in 2006. Oxfam staff members apparently even raped women in South Sudan.

It is not the first sex scandal that has shaken the world of international aid, according to Burkhard Wilke, managing director of the German Central Institute for Social Issues (DZI).

"Employees or partners of aid organizations in aid regions have repeatedly made themselves complicit in the sexual exploitation of the local population," he told DW.

The medical aid organizationMedicines [sic] sans Frontieres (Doctors Without Borders) recently reported 24 cases of abuse or sexual harassment in the past year. The International Rescue Committee (IRC) admits that there have been three cases of sexual abuse during operations in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Brothel in the Balkans

Cases of aid worker misconduct reach back to the Yugoslavian wars in the 1990s. International aid workers were involved in the sexual exploitation of girls and women during the wars in the Balkans. UN blue helmet soldiers and humanitarian workers were all said to have visited prostitutes on a regular basis.

The German women's rights organization Medica Mondiale helped traumatized women in Bosnia during the Balkan conflict, and the Cologne-based NGO still helps girls and women in war and crisis regions.

Ara Stielau, Medica Mondiale's director of the international programs, said the aid worker scene regarded visits to prostitutes during missions as a "trivial offense and private pleasure." Stielau said she still remembers the words of a German aid organization's executive when he was confronted with the sexual misconduct of some of his employees. He apparently replied, "I can't watch what my men are doing between the sheets."

Inhibitions are lower

Economic hardship is among the reasons why women in crisis regions work as prostitutes. Women often suffer so much that they lose their inhibitions and are willing to accept food or money for sex, Stielau said. That is how local women in need of help can become dependent on male aid workers from abroad who ultimately have resources and the power to distribute relief supplies.

"Employees of an organization have money and thus the power to help one person and not another - and that creates temptation," Wilke added.
Uk Oxfam-Sex-Skandal | Logo (picture alliance/AP Photo/N. Ansell)

Oxfam was caught most recently, but it's not the only aid group with ethical lapses

Most international aid organizations are aware of these dangers and have put in place special codes of conduct for all employees.

"However, the Oxfam case reveals that the necessary consequences are not always drawn when it comes to sexual misconduct," Wilke said.

A trust crisis

"Using the services of prostitutes may not necessarily be against national laws, but it violates all codes of conduct issued by relief organizations," Wilke said, adding that organizations risk losing their reputation if their employees are caught acting immorally.

That loss of trust can be a huge problem as credibility is key in the world of international charity. NGO aid organizations depend on donations — and on the trust of donors who want to know that their money is going to the people who need it.

For this reason, Wilke said misconduct should be reported "unsparingly" to the public. Transparency is the top priority. In Germany, Wilke's institute awards a seal of approval to organizations for ethical and transparent work. In the event of misconduct, NGOs may lose the seal of approval.

Jonathan Van Maren #fundie lifesitenews.com

Alfred Kinsey was a pervert and a sex criminal

He is known as “The Father of the Sexual Revolution,” and if you’ve ever taken a university course on 20th century history, you’ll have heard his name: Alfred Kinsey.

Kinsey was not only the “father” of the Sexual Revolution, he set the stage for the massive social and cultural upheaval of the ‘60s, ‘70s and ‘80s with his 1948 Sexual Behavior in the Human Maleand his 1953 Sexual Behavior in the Human Female.

These books revealed to a shocked and somewhat titillated population things they had never known about themselves: That between 30-45% of men had affairs, 85% of men had had sex prior to marriage, that a staggering 70% of men had slept with prostitutes, and that between 10 and 37% of men had engaged in homosexual behavior.

Much less talked about were his other disturbing “findings”—an in-depth study on the “sexual behavior” of children, as well as claims that nearly 10% of men had performed sex acts with animals (as well as 3.6% of women), and that this number rose to between 40-50% based on proximity to farms

Kinsey’s research portrayed people as amoral and sex-driven, and is credited as fundamentally changing the way our culture views sex.

But was he right?

To begin with, the integrity of much of his work has long since been called into question: among his questionable practices, Kinsey encouraged those he was working with to engage in all types of sexual activity as a form of research, misrepresented single people as married, and hugely over represented incarcerated sex criminals and prostitutes in his data.

But beyond this is the simple fact that Kinsey himself was a pervert and a sex criminal.

For example, where did he get all of his data on the “sexual behavior of children”? The answer is nothing short of chilling. Dr. Judith Reisman (whose research has since been confirmed time and time again) explained in her ground-breaking work Sex, Lies and Kinsey that Kinsey facilitated brutal sexual abuse to get his so-called research: "Kinsey solicited and encouraged pedophiles, at home and abroad, to sexually violate from 317 to 2,035 infants and children for his alleged data on normal “child sexuality.” Many of the crimes against children (oral and anal sodomy, genital intercourse and manual abuse) committed for Kinsey’s research are quantified in his own graphs and charts. For example, “Table 34” on page 180 of Kinsey’s “Sexual Behavior in the Human Male” claims to be a “scientific” record of “multiple orgasm in pre-adolescent males.” Here, infants as young as five months were timed with a stopwatch for “orgasm” by Kinsey’s “technically trained” aides, with one four-year-old tested 24 consecutive hours for an alleged 26 “orgasms.” Sex educators, pedophiles and their advocates commonly quote these child “data” to prove children’s need for homosexual, heterosexual and bisexual satisfaction via “safe-sex” education. These data are also regularly used to “prove” children are sexual from birth."

The man heralded with enthusiasm by mainstream publications such as Timeand Life Magazine was nothing less than a monstrous facilitator of child-rape. In fact, he even went so far as to record children shrieking and thrashing in pain, passing out and convulsing as the result of the hellish abuse he was putting them through, as evidence of “orgasm”—especially for children who could not yet speak.

Kinsey’s so-called research was simply a quest to justify the fact that he himself was a deeply disturbed man. Dr. Reisman writes, “Both of Kinsey’s most recent admiring biographers confessed he was a sadistic bi/homosexual, who seduced his male students and coerced his wife, his staff and the staff’s wives to perform for and with him in illegal pornographic films made in the family attic. Kinsey and his mates, Wardell Pomeroy, Clyde Martin and Paul Gebhard, had ‘front’ Marriages that concealed their strategies to supplant what they say as a narrow pro-creational Judeo-Christian era with a promiscuous ‘anything goes’ bi/gay pedophile paradise.”

Got that? The Father of the Sexual Revolution was a sado-masochistic bi-sexual sex criminal who facilitated the sexual torture of infants and children. His goal was not just to engage in scientific research in order to see where the data took him, but rather, as one of his prominent biographers Michael Jones notes, to launch a crusade to undermine traditional sexual morality. He did so to wild success—Kinsey’s influence on sex education and law in the Western world is absolutely staggering.

Some have claimed that even though Kinsey may have been disturbed and engaged in immoral behavior, his fundamental conclusions and his data still remain accurate. This, too, proves blatantly false. According to Dr. Reisman:

1. [Dr. Kinsey’s team] ‘forced’ subjects to give the desired answers to their sex questions, 2. Secretly trashed three quarters of their research data, and 3. Based their claims about normal males on a roughly 86 percent aberrant male population including 200 sexual psychopaths, 1,400 sex offenders and hundreds each of prisoners, male prostitutes and promiscuous homosexuals. Moreover, so few normal women would talk to them that the Kinsey team labeled women who lived over a year with a man ‘married,’ reclassifying data on prostitutes and other unconventional women as “Susie Homemaker.”
It is crucially important that people become aware of the truth behind the Kinsey Reports.

Today’s pornified sex educators, legal experts, academics, and more disturbingly, pedophile groups such as NAMBLA pushing “inter-generational intimacy,” all use Kinsey’s work to justify their agendas and lend their causes scientific credibility.

Most people have no idea who Alfred Kinsey really was and how his so-called research was actually performed. I myself first heard of Alfred Kinsey in the first year of my history degree at university, where my professor announced that there “was no Sexual Revolution at all”—because the Kinsey Reports proved that people had been engaging in all sorts of bizarre and criminal sexual behaviors all along.

The real story is horrifying. It is stomach-churning. But it is also crucial that we know how, exactly, we got to this place in our culture of such sexual nihilism.

Spider58x11 #fundie youtube.com

+equarg Oh shut up idiot. I hate you one-sided hypocritical moralist liberals. Women weren't the angelic poor helpless victim they show them here as if they were arbitrarily beaten regularly for no reason at all. Just look at what modern women devolved into, fat, ugly , man hating feminist who often kill their own children and sexual molest others while divorcing men and taking alway their children and their assets with government force. Women are downright sociopathic sick people. Women got what they deserved back then. People back then knew what women were and treated them as such.?

Paul Abramson #fundie cseblogs.com

Only a few short years later, the teaching of evolution over Genesis began to take its toll. In 1962 and 1963, prayer and the Bible began to be removed from the classrooms. Premarital sex, divorce, drug use, violence, and general rebellion filled the 1960s as evolution’s conclusions were taken and applied en masse.

No longer could one neglect to lock their home, auto, and business. Evolution in practice encouraged “survival of the meanest” and “survival of the most deceitful” instead of “honesty is the best policy”.

Then “no fault insurance” became the norm as enough persons (believing evolution, whether consciously or subconsciously) decided to lie when recounting an auto accident. Wall Street deals used to be done on a handshake. No longer. Eventually it has become necessary to have drivers pay for gas first, then pump, as evolutionary tenets took hold in men’s hearts and minds.

David J. Stewart #fundie jesusisprecious.org

The Power of Suggestion: What We Expect Influences Our Behavior, for Better or Worse

Research Study by Maryanne Garry
June 6, 2012

...In a new article, psychological scientists Maryanne Garry and Robert Michael of Victoria University of Wellington, along with Irving Kirsch of Harvard Medical School and Plymouth University, delve into the phenomenon of suggestion, exploring the intriguing relationship between suggestion, cognition, and behavior. The article is published in the June issue of Current Directions in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

Over their research careers, Garry and Kirsch have both studied the effects of suggestion on cognition and behavior. Kirsch focused mostly on suggestion in clinical psychology, while Garry, whose work is supported by the Marsden Fund of New Zealand, was interested in the effects of suggestion on human memory. When the two got to talking, “we realized that the effects of suggestion are wider and often more surprising than many people might otherwise think,” says Garry.

Across many studies, research has shown that deliberate suggestion can influence how people perform on learning and memory tasks, which products they prefer, and how they respond to supplements and medicines, which accounts for the well-known placebo effect.

But what can explain the powerful and pervasive effect that suggestion has in our lives? The answer lies in our ‘response expectancies,’ or the ways in which we anticipate our responses in various situations. These expectancies set us up for automatic responses that actively influence how we get to the outcome we expect. Once we anticipate a specific outcome will occur, our subsequent thoughts and behaviors will actually help to bring that outcome to fruition.

So, if a normally shy person expects that a glass of wine or two will help him loosen up at a cocktail party, he will probably feel less inhibited, approach more people, and get involved in more conversations over the course of the party. Even though he may give credit to the wine, it is clear that his expectations of how the wine would make him feel played a major role.

But it’s not just deliberate suggestion that influences our thoughts and behaviors – suggestions that are not deliberate can have the very same effects.

SOURCE: The Power of Suggestion: What We Expect Influences Our Behavior, for Better or Worse - Association for Psychological Science

This information was not obtained from an obscure blog in cyberspace, but from a highly credibly scientific research institution. There are hundreds of legitimate institutions and psychology websites which will support this research concerning the incredible power of suggestion on the human mind. Our youth are under satanic attack! ...

•They Still Hate Jesus (by Pastor Danny Castle; exposing Hollywood's satanic hatred for Jesus!).
•Hollywood's Satanic Agenda (1:28 hour documentary exposing the occult roots of Hollywood).
•Danny Castle—Exposing Lil Wayne, Kanye West, SpongeBob TV, Katy Perry And Hollywood.
•THE SATANIC MUSIC INDUSTRY | PART TWO (we are living in the last days; by Pastor Danny Castle)

According to the truthful research you've just read, if our youth expect to be encouraged by a song to drink alcoholic beverages and abuse it by binge drinking and getting drunk, then they are FAR MORE LIKELY TO DO IT!!! If young girls are encouraged to dress seductively and behave like prostitutes, then they are FAR MORE LIKELY TO DO SO!!! Young men these days have lost respect for females, viewing them as a commodity to use at leisure. What has caused this deterioration in American society? Look no further than the dirty Playboy philosophy, the $29,000,000,000 ($500 x 58,000,000) abortion industry, the insane man-hating feminist movement, immoral Hollywood, lewd Walt Disney, et cetera.

Disney encourages youth to indulge in premarital sex and “score” as a form of sport. Literally, young women have been cheapened to the level of being heifers (female cows) waiting to be mated with by a stud bull. Forget courtship. Forget a marriage commit. Just fornicate, get pregnant and then have an abortion. Then do it again and again. Young women are so entranced by the Godless music industry that one pimp can easily be a father to dozens of children via 4 or 5 women (and it gets much worse). In an episode of The Suite Life Of Zack And Cody, Zack dresses up as a girl, promoting crossdressing. In the same episode, a young boy tells a girl to take her dress off. This is the sick twisted minds at work in Walt Disney. Anyone honest person with a brain and a sense of morality can see the abundance of sex-appeal in Walt Disney's numerous shows targeting teenagers.

And to think, independent Baptist churches use Walt Disney themes for the music programs to teach their kids... say it Baptist children... “HOORAY FOR WALT DISNEY!!!” Never-mind that Walt Disney himself was a bigtime pedophile who was so lustful toward children that he had to pack his genitals on ice (no kidding, search the internet). Better yet, read the shocking details about the entire Satanic Walt Disney family. ...

•The Disney Bloodline
•The Disney Deceit Part 1
•The Disney Deceit Part 2

Walt Disney's pathetic programs are aimed at teens, teaching teens that premarital sex is proper and expected of them to be a normal teenager. The Bible calls premarital sex “fornication” (Colossians 3:5-6; 1st Corinthians 5:1-5; 6:9-10). Walt Disney openly promotes premarital sex. Disney's programs (including animated) are saturated with lasciviousness and lewdness.

My heart's desire is not to condemn those of you who have messed-up your lives (God forbid); but rather, to help steer as many young people as I can away from the Satanic entertainment industry that wants to recruit you to hate Christianity, reject Jesus Christ, embrace homosexuals and their vile lifestyle of Sodomy, indulge in sexual immorality and become a revolutionary against authority. The only hope for America is repentance toward God and believing the Gospel, not getting people worked up to riot and revolt against the government. Rebels overthrowing rebels is not going to restore God-given liberty and freedoms which exist only by faith in God. America is very Communist today, but most people are so woefully ignorant that they don't see what's happening.

In the Old Testament book of Proverbs, God warns against the clothing and behavior of a harlot (prostitute). This describes Taylor Swift's videos in accurate detail ...

Proverbs 7:10-13, “And, behold, there met him a woman with the attire of an harlot, and subtil of heart. (She is loud and stubborn; her feet abide not in her house: Now is she without, now in the streets, and lieth in wait at every corner.) So she caught him, and kissed him, and with an impudent face said unto him.”

Do you know what an “IMPUDENT FACE” is? It's that rebellious, casual look of disrespect, that prostitutes and whores use to seduce men. The following two screenshots show some examples of impudent faces. No Christian lady ought to ever look at men with an impudent face, because it is the look of whoredom, the look of a lack of respect for God and authority. ...

fschmidt #dunning-kruger reddit.com

For many years I had a fantasy about forming a sane community. The fantasy was to gather the sane remnant from this insane world and form a community for reasonable people. This was partly inspired by the concept of the remnant of the Israelites in the Old Testament after the fall of Israel and Judah. But this idea has a fatal flaw. There is no remnant. Humanity has become pure trash, there are no reasonable people left.

The Old Testament talks about such a time in the story of Noah. Clearly most of humanity needs to be wiped out. We have another example of this in the fall of Rome. If you read original source material from decaying Rome, you will see that these people were complete morons at a similar level to the morons of today. In The Antony Option I described the "good" people as those covered in Early Christian Lives who left Roman society to live in the desert. But from this book it is clear that these people were also complete morons. They had no interest in intelligence or quality or anything of real value. They just wanted to get close to God and hoped that this would give them supernatural powers. Eventually monasteries formed and some people moved near them. This had a slight beneficial effect in removing these people from dysgenic Roman culture. But the reality is that it took 1000 years and huge population drops before these people could escape the idiocracy caused by the decay of Rome.

I see no significant difference between the decay of Rome and the decay of modern culture other than that modern culture is almost universal. When Rome fell and Europe became a pure idiocracy, at least the Arabs, guided by Islam, were able to produce a civilized culture. But the fall of modern culture is producing a worldwide idiocracy that would take at least another 1000 years to escape from, if ever.

I view the traditional Anabaptists as the best group today. But they are not good enough. Besides the obvious problem of their pacifism, they are not eugenic enough to produce real intelligence. But even with these faults, it would impossible to form anything like traditional Anabaptist communities from any other population today. The conservative Mennonite groups were fully formed by the end of the 1950s, a time before today's idiocracy. Today people are just too stupid and undisciplined to form any kind of real community. This applies to all people of all races and all religions, all are just worthless.

Even trying to form any kind of informal group around some sense of quality is hopeless. My /r/GoodSoftware was an attempt to do this for good software, and it clearly failed. No one cares about quality in today's decayed idiocracy.

Having described the current bleak situation, I will propose a solution. The solution must be intrinsically eugenic since the best that one can hope for is to produce reasonable people in another 200 years. The current population must essentially be viewed as subhuman mammals with the potential to once again evolve into full humans. So the question is how can one breed such mammals in a positive way.

While humans have lost all intelligence and all sense of quality, there still remains a range in human reproductive strategy based on r/K selection. So what needs to be done is to form an informal community of human K-strategists where people can cooperate in raising their children. Such a community would naturally select strongly for K-strategy genes. When modern culture inevitably collapses and strong survival pressure reasserts itself, this survival pressure applied to a K-selected community would produce rapid evolutionary advancement.

Now I will describe how to do this. I would have an informal organization called something like "raising good children". It is critical that this organization have no rules and membership. This prevents it from being hijacked and taken in another direction. Anyone who wants to participate can, but the nature of such a group would only appeal to K-strategists. We would focus on things like improving education and health of children in the group, and in passing the religion of the parents to the children.

Who would I target for such a group. The obvious choice is Muslims. While Muslims are generally stupid (like everyone else) and undisciplined, at least they understand that modern culture is a threat to their children. And they understand that the modern world is a mess. They are too lazy to do much to fix this, but they would support in principle something that could improve the situation for their children. What I am describing here is based on my experience at my local mosque.

But there still remains a problem of motivation. The group should be willing to take real action of at least a basic kind to actually produce better children. The goal is to first improve the culture by actually raising better children, and then wait for selection pressure to improve the genetics. This should mean that each generation should be better than the one that came before it, reversing the current trend. So for example, parents should get rid of their televisions. But Muslims are extremely unmotivated to take action of any kind.

My solution to this is to get Muslims to visit conservative Mennonite churches. Most Muslims view things as basically hopeless, and a visit to a Mennonite church should cure this. Again I know this from experience, from taking the leader of my local mosque a Mennonite church. He was very impressed and was motivated for a while to try to follow the Mennonite example. But the problem is that the closest Mennonite church is too far away for easy trips. So I want to move where Muslims and Mennonites live close together, and I am looking into Harrisburg, PA for this. My hope is that when Muslims see how Mennonites successfully raise children outside of modern culture, and how Mennonites keep their religion across generations, Muslims will be motivated to follow this example.

But unlike Mennonites, I don't want to form a religious community. Islam has a lot of baggage that Muslims won't be able to fix until their IQ goes up by 20 points. So the solution is to make the "raising good children" organization clearly not religious and open to people of any religion. But I can't see anyone other than Muslims actually being interested in such an organization because no other religion recognizes the problems of modern culture.

If such an organization can be formed, I would hope that children raised in the organization would remain as adults. Naturally many wouldn't, many would leave. And this is good because this process would purify the K-strategy genes in the community.

For me personally, the next steps are visiting Harrisburg, PA often so I can judge it, and developing at least something of value for children to serve as a starting point. For this, I plan to add a 2D game API to Luan and use that to offer a programming class for children.

I have discussed this idea with my main contact at my local mosque, and he is supportive of this idea. I will visit Harrisburg, PA for a week later this month and hopefully learn enough to decide if this works as a location.

David J. Stewart #fundie jesus-is-savior.com

Girls from 4-16 are being indoctrinated by television to become prostitutes. As the documentary points out, the 8-12 year old age group in the U.S have $43,000,000,000 in spending power each year (fashion, toys, movies, shoes, music, Disney, et cetera). Since sex sells, companies target children (both teens and tweens) with sex. It is called “CORPORATE PEDOPHILIA!” Premarital sex is promoted by Disney. People need to go to Prison! Walt Disney's executives ought to be in prison!!! Hollywood executives ought to be in prison! This is a shocking 38 minute YouTube video showing how young girls are taught from the earliest age to become slutty whores. I wouldn't promote this video unless I thought you needed to know about this stuff. OUR CHILDREN ARE UNDER ATTACK BY PEDOPHILES AND MONEY-HUNGRY PERVERTS! Little girls don't play with dolls anymore; but rather . . . PLASTIC PROSTITUTES!!!

America's Sex Sicko Society

The United States has become a cesspool of iniquity. Everywhere we turn all we see is sexual perversion, promiscuity and disobedience against the God of the Bible. There was a day in America when women wore dresses. It was the style of the time, and it was a time of decency. It was rare to see women wearing pants in public 100-years ago. Today, American culture has deteriorated to where women don't wear hardly any clothes anymore. It is wickedness according to the Bible (1st Timothy 2:9).

Ken Ham #fundie answersingenesis.org

Boys and Girls and Geese

Use This Evolutionary Children’s Book To Teach Your Kids the Fairy Tale

Imagine a dad sitting down with his children to tell them a story. He begins, “Children, did you know you are related to every moose, every dog, every goose, every finch, every tortoise and every cat?”

The dad continues, “But it’s not just animals you are related to. You are also related to all living things, every plant too.”

Can you then imagine the children’s questions and the dad’s answers?

“Dad, am I related to a banana?”

“Of course, Son, you are related to everything—bananas, tapeworms, ticks, bacteria, flies, ants, bees, camels, pigs—yes, every living thing is related to you.”

Another child responds, “But, Dad. That’s a fairy tale—it doesn’t make sense.”

“Well, children, I have this new book that I’ll read to you called Charlie and The Tortoise.1 The author tells a story about a man named Charles Darwin who popularized an idea to explain how living things arose by themselves. Let me read you the story.”

Yes, there is a recently released children’s book that tries to indoctrinate children into believing that a fairy tale is true!

Notes about Darwin and his book On the Origin of Species are found at the end of the book. They include this statement:

His book showed how all living things are connected, and how animals and plants adapt over long periods of time!
The children’s book states the following:

After years of study, Charlie taught the world, that we’re all connected, every boy and girl. Every horse and every moose. Every dog and every cat. Every finch and every goose. Even tortoises that chat!
Now, what is the author’s main evidence to show children that all life is related and that all boys and girls evolved from ape-like creatures?

Well, it’s depicted in this diagram:

image

Now, isn’t that powerful evidence? Isn’t it obvious that different species of finches prove that all life is connected, and that boys and girls are related to all animals and plants? Unfortunately, generations of high school and college students have already been led to believe that speciation in finches is evidence of molecules-to-man evolution.

Following the finch illustration, the book shows a diagram of reptiles supposedly evolving into birds, and ape-like creatures evolving into humans.

image

From variation in finches to reptiles becoming birds, and from ape-like creatures becoming humans! Actually, I think I might use this book with my own grandchildren to help them see that evolution is simply a fairy tale! Then I will take our grandkids to the Creation Museum and show them our display of Darwin’s finches, plus an exhibit on our dog skulls.

image

I would explain to my grandchildren that there is actually more variation in species of dog skulls than in finches. Then I would talk to them about the fact that finches remain finches and dogs remain dogs. I would then read God’s Word in Genesis out loud, where we are told that God created each kind of animal after its own kind. According to the Bible, we would expect each kind to produce its own kind—and that’s exactly what we observe in nature.

Sadly, many parents will read this new Darwin book for children and present the evolutionary content as true! To counter the massive indoctrination of evolution in popular books and videos, public schools, media, and museums, Answers in Genesis has made a large range of books, DVDs, and other resources available to help parents teach children the truth of Creation, the Fall, and the saving gospel.

What are the implications of teaching generations of children that they are just animals who are related to all living things like animals and plants? The more such a view permeates their thinking, the more they will see human life as nothing special. This would have an effect on how they view abortion, for example. After all, humans are just animals—if you can get rid of an animal you don’t want, why not also get rid of a child in the womb? It would also have an effect on how young people view suicide. After all, if we are just animals and we cease to exist when we die, what’s the point of living anyway? Unfortunately, there is an alarming increase in teenage suicide (as reported recently). Also, why not kill fellow humans if you don’t like them, as they are just animals anyway in a survival-of-the-fittest world?

Now don’t get me wrong. A young person will not wake up one day and say, “Oh, I’m just an evolved animal; therefore, I’m going to abort a baby, or kill someone, or commit suicide.” But in reality, what they are being taught concerning atheistic evolution will permeate their thinking. Over time, they will begin to act consistently with this evolutionary mindset that has saturated their worldview.

Indeed, evil ideas like atheistic evolution have evil consequences.

I urge you to do your best to raise up generations of children who understand that they are special—made in the image of God. But at the same time, we need to share with them that they have a problem called sin, and that’s why God sent His Son to pay the penalty for our sin so that the relationship with our God can be restored. After all, God is “not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9). God loved the world so much that He gave His one and only Son to provide a gift of salvation for us.

No, we’re not related to geese, finches, dogs, cats, or bananas. We were created in the image of God, separate from all living things (Genesis 1:27). That’s why God sees us as so valuable, in fact, so much so that He Himself paid the price so we can be saved and live with Him for eternity.

To help your children understand the true purpose and meaning of life, bring them to the Creation Museum and take advantage of our More Kids Free program through June. Also, visit the Answers in Genesis online bookstore and obtain resources that will teach your children the truth about who they are, where they came from, what their problem is (sin), and what the solution is in Jesus Christ. And plan to bring them to the life-size Ark that opens July 7 here in Northern Kentucky and teach them the truth about God’s Word and its accounts of the Flood, Ark, and Christ coming to earth to offer salvation.

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)

Janna Darnelle #fundie thepublicdiscourse.com

[Janna Darnelle explains how her life was ruined when her husband came out as gay, divorced her, gained custody of the children, and married another man.]

My Children Deserve Better

Our two young children were willfully and intentionally thrust into a world of strife and combative beliefs, lifestyles, and values, all in the name of "gay rights." Their father moved into his new partner's condo, which is in a complex inhabited by sixteen gay men. One of the men has a 19-year-old prostitute who comes to service him. Another man, who functions as the father figure of this community, is in his late sixties and has a boyfriend in his early twenties. My children are brought to gay parties where they are the only children and where only alcoholic beverages are served. They are taken to transgender baseball games, gay rights fundraisers, and LGBT film festivals.

Both of my children face identity issues, just like other children. Yet there are certain deep and unique problems that they will face as a direct result of my former husband's actions. My son is now a maturing teen, and he is very interested in girls. But how will he learn how to deal with that interest when he is surrounded by men who seek sexual gratification from other men? How will he learn to treat girls with care and respect when his father has rejected them and devalues them? How will he embrace his developing masculinity without seeing his father live out authentic manhood by treating his wife and family with love, honoring his marriage vows even when it's hard?

My daughter suffers too. She needs a dad who will encourage her to embrace her femininity and beauty, but these qualities are parodied and distorted in her father's world. Her dad wears make-up and sex bondage straps for Halloween. She is often exposed to men dressing as women. The walls in his condo are adorned with large framed pictures of women in provocative positions. What is my little girl to believe about her own femininity and beauty? Her father should be protecting her sexuality. Instead, he is warping it.

Without the guidance of both their mother and their father, how can my children navigate their developing identities and sexuality? I ache to see my children struggle, desperately trying to make sense of their world.

My children and I have suffered great losses because of my former husband’s decision to identify as a gay man and throw away his life with us. Time is revealing the depth of those wounds, but I will not allow them to destroy me and my children. I refuse to lose my faith and hope. I believe so much more passionately in the power of the marriage covenant between one man and one woman today than when I was married. There is another way for those with same-sex attractions. Destruction is not the only option—it cannot be. Our children deserve far better from us.

This type of devastation should never happen to another spouse or child. Please, I plead with you: defend marriage as being between one man and one woman. We must stand for marriage—and for the precious lives that marriage creates.

Henry Makow #fundie henrymakow.com

The following examples are evidence of Cabalist satanic possession:

1. The exaggerated place of romance and sex in our culture is unnatural and unhealthy. Essentially, romantic love is a surrogate religion. The loved one has replaced God as the object of our love. Almost all music is devoted to extolling her imaginary qualities, adoration mostly motivated by sexual attraction. "Relationships" are hyped as essential to personal development which they are not. Society is besotted by young fertile females, who are idealized and fetishized. The vagina is the Holy Grail. Orgasm is a Holy Sacrament. The result is a mass psychosis, co-dependence and male impotence.

2. The divorce of sex from love, marriage and procreation. Anonymous sex degrades all relationships to the level of sex appeal. This is characteristic of the homosexual disorder. The cocaine for sex addicts, pornography, is widely available. 70-80% of teenage boys watch online porn regularly. Girls must behave like porn stars to be loved. The sexualization of children takes place and eventually, acceptance of pedophilia. This is gradually killing heterosexual relations. Occult possession takes the form of obsession with sex.

Sexual intercourse is a means to an end not an end in itself. It is intended to bond and build marriage and families. Anything else is perversion.

3. Feminism and the war on marriage and family. Heterosexuality is based on the exchange of female worldly power for male worldly power expressed as love. Thus female empowerment neuters both sexes. Feminism's hidden agenda is for women to have careers instead of marriage and children. Only Satanists would pit men against women, and undermine the love of husband and wife, and mother and child.

4. Gender bending - the relentless media promotion of
masculinity for females & femininity for males is Occult. "Gay rights" is a disguise for
a vicious attack on heterosexual identity and values, based on marriage and family. The aim is to replace heterosexual norms with homosexual norms. This has already happened. Look at what has happened to "dating." Courtship has been partly replaced by "hooking up." Charities openly discriminate against boys and promote female empowerment in order to destabilize traditional culture.

5. Incessant wars have no purpose other than to increase the wealth and power of the Illuminati and undermine nation states. All wars are contrived by the Illuminati to kill off natural leaders and demoralize, degrade and destroy humanity. Ironically, they are used as an excuse for Illuminati "world government."

6. Naturalism. Erasing the line between spirit and matter by pretending man's Divine spirit doesn't exist. Characterizing people strictly in terms of physical lusts and needs with a reductive focus on defining ourselves in terms of carnal desire and bodily functions.

7. The dumbing down of the public through sports, entertainment and a defective education system. The espousal of collectivist over individualistic values. Modern art, including painting, film and music, border on fraud.

8. The pervasive idea that Truth is relative and cannot be known. God is Truth. Knowing and obeying God is the essence of religion.
The attempt to marginalize scientists who affirm an universal intelligence at work in nature. The general effort to make scientific results conform to "political correctness" i.e. Satanic coercion.

9. The mainstreaming of gambling (i.e. stock speculation) under the guise of "investing." Now when they are not watching porn, millions are fixated on stock fluctuations. Lust, whether sex or greed, is the tool of satanic possession. (See my "Stock Market Porn" scroll down)

10. Multiculturalism, migration and diversity are underhanded attacks on the European heterosexual Christian heritage of the West.

My whole website is devoted to this topic. The point is — mankind is satanically possessed.

Charles Sledge #fundie charlessledge.com

The Most Important Thing A Man Can Study

Sales, game, marketing, a good part of common sense, wisdom. All of these words are largely describing the same thing. The right understanding of this thing has made kings of men and made legends of commoners. It has allowed for take over of vast empires and was required for the empires to be built up in the first place. Without it you’d have a hard time consistently making sales or scoring dates, much less winning a war, cultural or otherwise. This thing has allowed evil to prosper when evil takes advantage of it. Likewise this thing has also allowed for good to grow in a fallen world.

Now I think I’ve teased enough and you’re probably wondering what on earth I’m talking about. What I’m talking about is the most valuable skill that a man can learn and that is to have an understanding of human nature. This goes by many names I always thought of it as wisdom but I’ve heard it called other things. And like I said sales, game, marketing, politics, and pretty much everything else on this earth revolved around it. If you fail to grasp it you’ll fail to attain success in life likewise grasp it and gain a deep understanding of it and the world will be putty in your hands for better or for worse.

The Irrational Ape

I do not mean to say that we are nothing but brute beasts completely enslaved to our lessen nature but rather to say that for the most of humanity the animal nature holds sway over the angel nature. As many wise men have pointed out man is a “cross” between an animal and something higher. In order for a man to attain success he must master both nature’s. He must bring the animal nature under his control and work towards the higher nature and cultivate it. But we are talking about a select group of any population.

The masses as a whole for better or for worse are completely controlled by their animal nature. The study and understanding of this animal nature therefore is essential for getting what you want from this world. Whether you simply want to get rich and go retire to a nice island and watch the world burn from a safe distance or whether you want to change the path that we’re on for the better, you’ll need a deep understanding of this.

As great as logic and morality are, and as essential as they are for all the best things in man, they in and of themselves are not good motivators and not enough to affect change. Hence those who appeal to the baser instincts often win out against those who try to raise everyone higher. I remember good copywriting was once described to me as essentially telling people which of the 7 deadly sin that the product or service would fufill but in flowery language. This may have been a bit of an exaggeration but there is truth to what was said.

Hacking The Human Animal

Those who are power in today’s day and age did not get there through sword (or gun) or through might. They got there through understanding the human animal. Identifying weak points or things that could be exploited and then doing so. They found that wisdom (meaning understanding of human nature) was more powerful than the sword, or the pen, or anything else for that matter.

Right now you have many conservatives reading “Rules For Radicals” after being soundly defeated since…well since their inception essentially (has the world gotten more or less conservative?) because they are starting to learn that without a understanding of human nature all the good intentions in the world are worthless. The same could be said of any political party, tribe, business, or anything else.

Those who understand human nature lead men for better or for worse. The two most valuable attributes you can develop are strength and wisdom. And in today’s day and age when a giant global power structure has legions of sheep dogs to call down on you should you display strength against them I’d say that wisdom is the more important one (but obviously both should be developed as much as possible). Things are more determined by the pen than by the sword today.

To Lead Mankind

Again whether you want to start a successful business, start a cult with lots of groupies, or lead mankind to the next golden age the development of wisdom meaning the understanding of human nature is critical. I’ve talked about many important skills on this site and how to develop them but broken down they basically fall into developing strength or wisdom. I’ll break this down further eventually but for now just understand the critical importance of grasping human nature.

Adam Grey #wingnut #sexist faithandheritage.com

Can anyone name a female politician who has actually accomplished anything of worth for traditionalists in the last 50 years?

Asking for a friend.

It’s 2018, the so-called “Year of the Woman,” and while the Left is pushing their vagina privilege with reckless abandon, the faux Right is trying to keep pace by dumping feminists onto their voter base with impunity.

The question any half-witted conservative/traditionalist should ask himself before pulling a lever this November is, are these women part of the solution or just more of the problem?

Even if we exclude the non-white “conservative” female pols that the GOP has forced on us, such as Condoleeza Rice and Nimrata Randhawa (aka Nikki Haley), they’ve convinced us over the past half-century to gush over white “conservative” female politicians such as Elizabeth Dole, Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Carly Fiorina, Liz Cheney, and Pam Bondi.

I have previously written about the influx of pretty blonde conservatives into American politics that picked up speed in the early 2000s during the George W. Bush administration and the early years of Fox News. Today, any media outlet that is slightly to the right of center has more than its share of pretty “conservative” faces telling their mostly-male audiences what to believe and how to live.

The Alt Right/Alt Lite has had its own slate of female media celebrities since 2015. Now one of them, Faith Goldy, is running for mayor of Toronto.

This relevant observation by Brandon Martinez poses a good question.

Women like Goldy, Lauren Southern and others are little more than fame-hungry opportunists who saw a growing niche market with the alt-light, alt-right and pro-Trump movements. They’re simply capitalizing on these sentiments in order to make money and get men to gawk at them on YouTube. That’s just what women do, always on the hunt for opportunities to increase their profile and status. And stupid men give it to them. Why do we need bimbo broads like these to become leading voices for nationalism when all they do is sell us half-truths and dumb cuckservative talking points that half-witted male alt-lighters like Cernovich, Yiannopoulos and Watson have been expressing more intelligently?

If we look at female candidates like Goldy and ask, “Will she support those policies I believe in, more than the other candidates?” we might well find ourselves answering in the affirmative. If it’s a simple lesser of two evils choice, sometimes the “conservative” female is less evil.

However, if the question is, “Is this female candidate part of the solution or just more of the problem?” then the answer is simple.

In a sane world there would be no need for these ladies to take up the political battle ax. In a sane world, there would be plenty of men to do the job and those ladies would be willing to let the men do it.

In our world, the presence of these women in leadership positions may be partly due to the absence of men willing to step up and lead. However, I place greater blame on the ideological force of egalitarianism vis-à-vis feminism for keeping those men in their homes and pushing those women out of their homes.

It’s not as if for centuries there were chronic shortages of men to do the work of governance. That is, not until feminism convinced women to shove their way into governance, and shamed men into giving up their positions of governance. That includes more than serving in elected offices. The basic tool of civic governance is the right to vote. By giving women the vote, men abdicated half their power to govern their society. Eve had suddenly become independent of, and equal to, Adam. Goodbye traditional America, hello clown world.

Today men on the Left believe it is morally virtuous to elect women instead of men. Men on the faux Right are just a few years away from adopting that same moral view, just as they adopted the once-radical Leftist notion that electing non-whites instead of whites is the morally virtuous thing to do. See the presidential candidacies of Alan Keyes and Ben Carson for reference.

The solution is not to elect “conservative” women or non-whites. The solution is for white men to lead in every part of our society. And where right-minded white men are lacking, you dear reader, can be the solution. Remember Gideon.

The best politically-active women have been those who championed traditional gender roles and nationalism, such as Phyllis Schlafly and Ann Coulter. But even they have not been the shining lights of our people. They themselves would tell you that white men have fulfilled that role.

So this November, electing the “conservative” white female candidate is not the answer. The answer might take a little longer to see in positions of leadership, but the answer is obvious. And it wears pants.

Got Questions Ministries #fundie gotquestions.org

While nothing can justify the Holocaust, we do see at least one good thing which came from World War II: Israel now exists as a nation. The Holocaust was a primary reason the White Paper of 1939 was rescinded, freeing Jews to immigrate to Palestine. The fact that, as of 1948, the Jews have a restored national identity helps to fulfill such biblical prophecies as Ezekiel 37 and Matthew 24. Defeating Nazism and giving the land of Israel back to the Jews is a classic example of God’s thwarting Satan’s plan and bringing about good in spite of the evil.

In all of His doings, God is just (Psalm 145:17). The blame for the Holocaust lies squarely on the shoulders of sinful humanity. The Holocaust was the product of sinful choices made by sinful men in rebellion against a holy God. If the Holocaust proves anything, it is the utter depravity of man. Just fourteen years after "the war to end all wars" (World War I), Hitler rose to power. What is even more shocking is that millions followed him, enabling his horrific policies and pursuing a path to national destruction.

And while Nazism took hold in Germany, where were the European churches? Some, it is true, stood fast against the evil in their midst, and some churchmen, such as Dietrich Bonhoeffer, paid the ultimate price for dissenting. But they were the minority. Most churches of the era acquiesced to Nazi Party rules and remained silent while the Jews were slaughtered. Where were the world leaders? Other than England’s Winston Churchill, the world’s politicos took the route of isolation or appeasement. Neither worked. Where were the good, decent people? Edmund Burke is often quoted as saying, "All that is necessary for evil to triumph in the world is for enough good men to do nothing." Although there were a few Germans and other Europeans such as Oscar Schindler and Corrie ten Boom and her family, who risked their lives to save thousands of Jews from annihilation, most remained silent and the Holocaust ensued. The question is not so much "Why did God allow the Holocaust?" but "Why did we?"

God gives mankind freedom of choice. We can choose to follow Him and take a stand for righteousness, or we can rebel against Him and pursue evil. The problem resides in the heart of man. "The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?" (Jeremiah 17:9). Until man’s heart turns to God, the world will continue to witness "ethnic cleansings," genocides, and atrocities such as the Holocaust.

themaskandrose #fundie themaskandrose.wordpress.com

Womens’ “liberation” celebrated the bucking of the traditional female sex role paradigm. Instead of creating a new role for themselves, they largely simply tried to adopt the male role instead. To nobody’s surprise, this has resulted in increased female unhappiness, decreased interest from men in traditional relationships and marriage, and the dissolution of the basic family unit on which most of human society has thrived.

Just for a moment, let’s all do a thought experiment together. Before we begin, I hope we can all agree (based on all available science and rational thinking) that sexual dimorphism serves every species of which it is a trait. Each sex has a role to fulfill, which supports and complements the role of the other. This is clearly obvious, yes?

Good. Now let’s imagine for a moment, that all of a sudden, one or both sexes in all sexually dimorphic species decided that their natural role was actually “oppression,” resulting in the complete overthrowing of the system which was fundamental to the survival of the species as a whole. I want you to imagine all kinds of animals doing that…monkeys, horses, birds, dogs, cats…I want you to imagine that all of them suddenly have no idea what to do because they accidentally disengaged from the one thing holding their species together. Imagine some of them are so confused they no longer even know which sex they are, a pattern we are seeing with humans right now.

Now I want you to ask yourself, what would the world look like a day after this transition happened? A week? A month? A year? A decade, century or millennia? Really think about this, close your eyes and imagine the effect this would have on the ecology of the Earth as a whole. Just let your imagination take you wherever it leads and see a world full of confused animals that couldn’t even stay together anymore long enough to support the species in a healthy way.

This, unfortunately, would be the result of a world in which all animals took on a feminist ideology. If you were able to imagine the destruction I hinted at earlier, you might find yourself asking why this wasn’t more obvious to the people who allowed such poison to take hold in our culture to begin with.

That’s a great question, and the answer is that they knew exactly what would happen and specifically injected feminist ideology into our culture in order to speed its decay. If that sounds crazy–which it should–consider that this is exactly what the Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion mentioned as a strategy for helping a society destroy itself. Liberal ideology is a very well-crafted mental virus and it is not an accident that it is currently undoing everything that once made our society thrive.

If we don’t stop this nonsense, we are going to “equal” ourselves right into extinction as a species.

Mr. Bond #racist youtube.com

(Lyrics to song "White America (ANTI-JEW EDITION)" a parody of "White America" by Eminem)

[Intro]
America! You're dying
What happened to this beautiful 90% white
country of ours, the European culture and heritage it was built upon and the traditions that men thought they would die for to protect?
The women and men who have broke their necks
For the freedom of speech the United States government has sworn to uphold… Or so we're told
(If you still don't know what the fuck is going on, you better listen to this)

[Verse 1]
I never woulda dreamed in a million years I'd see
So many young Europeans red-pilled like me
Who share the same views and the same exact beliefs
it's like a fucking army marchin' in back of me
Jewish lies and deflections, have our anger aimed
In no particular direction, just sprays and sprays
while fake news and disinformation, plays and plays
'Til it stays stuck in your head, and you hate your race
Who woulda thought, posting frogs, merchants
and pics of Hitler, with some statistics
looking for some libs to trigger
That we would catapult to the forefront of politics?
How could I predict our memes
Would have an impact like this?
We must have rustled some elite jimmies up in ZOG office
'even Congress was kvetching
We're causin' nothin' but problems
cause we oppose being displaced by our own governments
I'm lovin' it, they been anti-white all my life
We've had enough of it …

[Hook]
White America, we built this nation from scratch
White America, then the Jews gave it to Blacks
White America, they put us in unpayable' debt
but our children won't be slaves no we're taking it back
White America, we built this nation from scratch
White America, then the Jews gave it to Blacks
White America, they put us in unpayable' debt
but our children won't be slaves no we're taking it back

[Verse 2]
Look at my eyes, baby blue, baby just like yourself
a million years evolution, they got under their belt
shady Jews making moves trying to plunder our wealth
and they induce crazy views playing humble and frail
Let's do the math: if we were African our IQ would be half; I just have to read Charles Murray's Bell Curve to know that
Yet they push these stupid rappers like it's cooler being black
till we're all wiggers and niggerfucking zoophiliacs
so deracinated we don't give a fuck that we're white
group cohesion is evil goy, it always leads to a Reich
which is why you need to be castrated just look at your past
And then they cry when we light a fire up under their ass
when the fascism and NatSoc is back at the top
and the laughter has stopped cause the hate of the Saxon cannot, be put back in the box
parasites go, wow
if not Whitey who will be working for our benefit now

[Hook]
White America, we built this nation from scratch
White America, then the Jews gave it to Blacks
White America, put us in unpayable' debt
but our children won't be slaves no we're taking it back
White America, we built this nation from scratch
White America, then the Jews gave it to Blacks
White America, put us in unpayable' debt
but our children won't be slaves no we're taking it back

[Verse 3]
See I'm the voice of White kids in a world of shit
we inherited from our parents as a birthday gift
about our future, boomers never gave two squirts of piss
they just wanted to splurge without disturbances
but their disillusioned youth figured out who's to blame
and they flip cause suddenly traitors and Jews get named
we mixed humor and racism and kids were hooked right in
fed up with all the hate against people who look like them
now we put their narratives under our microscope
expose the lies they told, we are like this rope
Waitin' to choke, tightenin' around Shlomo's throat
while he's yelling "crime-think, shut it down, I'm exposed!"
All I hear is: "nazi, nazi, time to end all this white supremacist patriarchy" from kikes and feminists, commies
telling women that man is the problem, and chopping the dick off a toddler
cause you think his gender is wrong is an commendable option
but this degenerate present has us reminiscing the past
when the same satanic shit was met with swastika flags shit
so now the Führer is our closest pal
Our posterchild, the motherfuckin' spokesman now, for…

[Hook]
White America, we built this nation from scratch
White America, then the Jews gave it to Blacks
White America, put us in unpayable' debt
but our children won't be slaves no we're taking it back
White America, we built this nation from scratch
White America, then the Jews gave it to Blacks
White America, put us in unpayable' debt
but our children won't be slaves no we're taking it back

[Outro]
Make no mistake it was the Aryans that came to America,
that gave this great nation its character
only to be subverted and fleeced by a semitic elite
that later drove them to fight their own kin oversees
the same parasitic, venomous tribe that's been plaguing our race
since the beginning of time
is still the ringleader of this circus of worthless traitorous whores
we call our democratically elected representatives
and the main purveyor of this sick depravity that we call modern western culture
Fuck democracy! Fuck you Jews!
Fuck you with the freest of speech this Divided States of Weimerica will allow me to have! Fuck you!?

David J. Stewart #conspiracy jesus-is-savior.com

While Dr. Kent Hovind rots in prison for 10-years for not applying for a $50 state-license because of his religious convictions, Casey Anthony's mother is acquitted of murdering her child and slapped on the wrist for lying to police repeatedly. Talk about a rigged jury! Scott Peterson didn't receive the same treatment, they crucified him in California. Florida is a corrupt state, which is also where poor Terri Schiavo was murdered. Florida's judges are evil... punishing the righteous, acquitting the wicked, and killing the innocent.

There is no justice anyone in America. While murderers go free, mothers receive life in prison for possession of $40 of cocaine. While people are arrested and dragged into court for growing tomatoes in their front yard, treasonous criminals have taken over the White House and the evil newsmedia protects them, demonizing citizens instead. Sean Hannity is a paid professional liar and a rich stooge for the global elite.

There is a New World Order AN AGENDA to put undue stress upon families in America, to cause as many divorces as possible, to take your home, to take your children... to STEAL, KILL AND DESTROY (John 10:10). Out of chaos the global elite are plotting to build a Godless Global Totalitarian Communist Police State!!! This will be the Beast System of the coming man of sin, a charismatic and influential world dictator, the Antichrist.

Mike King #conspiracy tomatobubble.com

Those of you who have had some degree of understanding about the New World Order -- that fiendishly clever conspiratorial movement to slowly bring about a super-centralized one-world dictatorship -- have no doubt experienced the frustration of trying to convince family and friends that A: You are not "crazy," and B: The trans-generational monster plot to take down America is real and not even that well-concealed any more. The torment that comes with seeing the world as it really is, while the willfully blind ridicule you, is a terrible burden that we "conspiracy theorists" ™ have always had to bear, in spite of the world's stupidity and hostility. After all, "He who dares not offend cannot be honest." (Thomas Paine).

But what if one of the 20th Century's best known and most trusted news media "rock stars" was to confirm, on camera, the validity of our nutty "conspiracy theory" ™. And what if an equally famous woman, the First Lady of the United States at the time, who came damn near close to becoming our 45th President, then congratulated that same man for his honest remarks while expressing full agreement with his totalitarian world government scheme? Would the doubters still be laughing? Try using this piece on them, and let us know what kind of reaction you get.

The logo of Cronkite's CBS depicts the same all-seeing eye as the logo for the "Novus Ordo Seclorum" (New World Order for the Ages) found on the back of a $1 dollar bill.

THE SETTING

CBS propaganda had dubbed the legendary anchorman "the most trusted man in America” and the people believed it. From those early 1962 days of TV News (when there were only three networks and no cable stations) through 1981, Cronkite's carefully cultivated marketing image as a grandfatherly sage was unquestioned. In those naive pre-Internet, pre-talk radio days, "Uncle Walter's" leftist propaganda was difficult for amateurs to detect -- but it was always there.

In 1999, Cronkite, who was by then retired, appeared at a United Nations room to accept the Norman Cousins Global Governance Award from the openly pro-world government World Federalists Association. He told those assembled, including First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton (watching by video feed), that he had always believed in world government but could not say so openly because of his position as CBS Anchorman.

Some excerpts, coupled with editorial analysis:

Cronkite: I am greatly honored to receive this award for two reasons: first, I believe as Norman Cousins did that the first priority of humankind in this era is to establish an effective system of world law that will assure peace with justice among the peoples of the world; second, I feel sentimental about this award and this organization because half a century ago Norman offered me a job as spokesman and Washington lobbyist for the World Federalist organization, which was then in its infancy.

Analysis: Norman Cousins was a Jewish-American journalist, author, professor and tireless activist for world government. The fact that Cousins offered young Walter a job with the World Federalists a "half century ago" confirms that Cronkite was always a Globalist-Socialist, if not a full blown "McCarthy-era" communist.

Cronkite: For many years, I did my best to report on the issues of the day in as objective a manner as possible to achieve. When I had my own strong opinions, as I often did, I tried not to communicate them to my audience.

Analysis: Nonsense! Cronkite's reporting was always heavily slanted leftward. It was harder to notice in those days because the viewing public had few alternatives to compare with.

Cronkite: Now, however, my circumstances are considerably different. I am in a position to speak my mind. And by God I'm gonna do it! (loud applause)

Analysis: You see, now that the retired old man has got nothing to lose, he can finally and completely drop his mask of "objectivity."

Cronkite: Those of us who are living today can influence the future of civilization. We can influence whether our planet will drift into chaos and violence, or whether through a monumental educational and political effort we will achieve a world of peace under a system of law ...

Analysis: A "monumental educational and political effort." -- Cronkite is talking about mass brainwashing, beginning in grade school, such as is now the case with the Global Warming ™ / Climate Chamnge ™ hoax to usher in world taxation.

Cronkite: ... where individual violators of that law are brought to justice.

Analysis: An "individual violator" is any foreign government that dares to defy the New World Order. The term "brought to justice" means that the "violator" is to be killed.

Cronkite: For how many thousands of years now have we humans been what we insist on calling "civilized"? And yet, in total contradiction, we also persist in the savage belief that we must occasionally, at least, settle our arguments by killing one another.

Analysis: Classic projection tactic. It is the warmongering "one worlders" who have, directly or indirectly, engineered just about every major conflict of the past two centuries! (Read: "Planet Rothschild")

1. "Peace...Peace ...Peace" -- the phony mantra of Globalists like Norman Cousins.

2. The "Planet Rothschild" two-volume set blows the cover off of this monster plot to turn humanity into a global bee-hive of raceless alienated tax and debt slaves.

Cronkite: While we spend much of our time and a great deal of our treasure in preparing for war, we see no comparable effort in establishing peace.

Analysis: Here is the "inside joke." -- In the Globalist code language, "peace" ™ is defined as the absence of resistance to the Globalists. When all nations finally and unconditionally surrender to the New World Order (a global EU), then and only then will the Globalists finally stop their endless bombings, sanctions, bribing, blackmailing, coups, assassinations, "color revolutions," wars, and proxy wars against the "violators" -- thus bringing about "world peace." See the trick?

Cronkite: It seems to many of us that if we are to avoid the eventual catastrophic world conflict we must strengthen the United Nations as a first step toward a world government with a legislature, executive and judiciary, and police to enforce its international laws and keep the peace. ... We Americans are going to have to yield up some of our sovereignty. That's going to be to many a bitter pill. It would take a lot of courage, a lot of faith and a lot of persuasion for them to come along with us on this necessity. ... But the American colonies did it once and brought forth one of the most nearly perfect unions the world has ever seen.

Analysis: Cronkite leaves no doubt. He and his ilk seek the end of America (and all nations) and the emergence of all powerful one-world-super-state to be erected behind the phony platitudinous facades of "federalism" and "democracy" ™ and "peace" ™ and "human rights" ™. And if they don't get it done "peacefully," they will have no choice but to unleash an "eventual catastrophic world conflict." (World War III)

Cronkite: Today we must develop federal structures on a global level. We need a system of enforceable world law --a democratic federal world government. ... Today the notion of unlimited national sovereignty means international anarchy. We must replace the anarchic law of force with a civilized force of law.

Translation: National sovereignty = chaos and anarchy. Nations = bad. World Government = good.

Cronkite: Ours is never going to be perfect world, nor a world without disagreement and occasional violence. But it will be a world where the majority of national leaders will consistently abide by the rule of world law, if we have our way, and those who won't will be dealt with effectively and with due process by the structures of that same world law.

Translation: Those who dare to defy our New World Order will be "dealt with" (Hussein of Iraq, Chavez of Venezuela, Qaddafi of Libya, Lil' Kim of North Korea, Assad of Syria, Putin of Russia et al.)

Cronkite: Consider... the possibility of a more representative and democratic system of decision making at the U.N. This should include both revision of the veto in the Security Council and adoption of a weighted voting system for the General Assembly. The World Federalists have endorsed Richard Hudson's Binding Triad proposal.

Analysis: By removing the veto of Security Council members (US, UK, France, China, Russia) each of the major powers will be powerless before the General Assembly's mob rule -- a mob directly controlled by the top Globalist mobsters who will have by then discarded "hit man" America like a used-up lemon.

Cronkite: George Soros, in his recent book "The Crisis of Global Capitalism," has given serious attention to this concept which would be based upon not only one-nation-one-vote but also on population and contributions to the U.N. budget.

Analysis: There it is!!! Mafia journalist Cronkite and George Soros (a "capo" of the Rothschild gang) dream of a "one-nation-one-vote" system in which hundreds of Turd World mini-gangster states get to rob the "evil rich White people" of America and Europe blind while flooding the West with their dirt-poor and criminal elements -- all done "democratically," of course. (rolling eyes sarcastically) Mind you, this was stated 20 years before the Soros-funded immigration invasion that we are witnessing today!

For nearly 40 years, the notorious billionaire George Soros has been pumping hundreds of millions of dollars in radical leftist causes, Globalist political campaigns worldwide, and world government groups. Gangsters like Soros make and promote men like Cronkite.

Cronkite: Resolutions adopted by majorities in each of these areas would be binding, enforceable law.

Analysis: "Binding, enforceable law" means that no power on earth, including the de-balled USA of the future, will ever be able to rebel against the New World Order. And that is why "liberals" are so obsessed with disarming all those millions of American "good ol' boys" who might find world government to be "a bitter pill to swallow." And you thought "gun control" was about "saving children." Ha!

Cronkite: Within the powers given to it in the Charter, the U.N. could then deal with matters of reliable financing,

Analysis: "Reliable financing" means a system of world taxation. That's what the Climate Change ™ hoax and its proposed "solution" of imposing "carbon taxes" on "wealthy nations" is really all about.

Cronkite: ... a standing U.N. peace force, development, the environment ....

Translation: Cronkite envisions a multi-ethnic global goon squad enforcing tax collection and compliance with the world system.

Cronkite: ... and human rights.

Analysis: More code language. When Globalists speak of "human right," ™, they are referring to the "rights" of their paid trouble-makers within any "violator" nation to subvert that particular government. When the target government is forced to crack down on the CIA-NGO backed agitators, saboteurs, terrorists and subversives, the Globalist media, led by the New York Slimes, will immediately accuse that nation of "human rights violations" and call for sanctions, bombing, war etc.

Cronkite: As with the American rejection of the League of Nations after World War I, our failure to live up to our obligations to the U.N. is led by a handful of willful senators who choose to pursue their narrow, selfish political objectives at the cost of our nation's conscience. They pander to and are supported by the Christian Coalition and the rest of the religious right wing.

Analysis: In order to avoid the sound logical and moral arguments against One World Government, Cronkite is setting up the straw-man of the goofy televangelist Pat Robertson.

Cronkite: Their leader, Pat Robertson, ....

Analysis: I didn't know that Pat Robertson was "our leader," -- did "youse guys" (New Jerseyese for the plural of you) know that?

Cronkite: ... has written that we should have a world government but only when the messiah arrives. "Attempts for world order before that time must be work of the Devil." -- Well, join me, I am glad to sit here at the right hand of Satan.

Analysis: Given the freaky fascination with the occult that many of these elites have been known to dabble in, Cronkite's shout-out to Satan might very well have been literal. Indeed, Cronkite was, for many years, the voice of Molech the Owl for the creepy-as-all-heck "Cremation of Care" ceremony at the secretive annual gatherings at the Bohemian Grove in Northern California. (here).

Cronkite: The only way we who believe in the vision of a democratic world federal government can effectively overcome this reactionary movement is to organize a strong educational counteroffensive stretching from the most publicly visible people in all fields to the humblest individuals in every community.

Translation: We still have got a lot of brainwashing to do before the American people will accept the New World Order as a good thing.

Now, here's the kicker. After Commie Cronkite wrapped up his open call for treason and full NWO "democratic" takeover, First Lady, future US Senator, future Secretary of State and 2016 Presidential nominee Killary Rotten Clinton appeared on the big screen to congratulate "the most trusted man in America" on his treason award.

IN HER OWN WORDS

Clinton:
"Good evening and congratulations, Walter, on receiving the World Federalist Association's Global Governance Award. For more than a generation in America, it wasn't the news until Walter Cronkite told us it was the news. Every night at 6 o'clock, we listened as you explained the complex events of the day. ... You became a trusted member of my family and the families across America. For decades, you told us "the way it is," but tonight, we honor you for fighting for the way it could be. .. So thank you, Walter. Thank you for inspiring all of us to build a more peaceful and just world. We are still listening to your every word. And with your continuing leadership, we can sail across these un-navigated seas into the 21st Century, and there is no better captain that I can imagine than you."

Cronkite and Clinton --- "the most trusted man in America" and the neurotic hag who, were it not for Donald Trump, almost became "the first woman President" -- just a couple of meaningless and non-influential "conspiracy theorists" ™, eh? Believe it, there are plenty more big names who think just like them. Actually, the entire PRC (Predatory Ruling Class) is on board with the America-busting New World Order, or at least afraid of bucking "the tide of history."

Now, as much as the pro-Globalist prostitutes of the Piranha Press, Hollyweird, Corporate America (and Europe) and Academia all love Killary and Walter (who died in 2009), that's as much as they hate Trump and Putin. So why do the "great and the good" of the bought-and-paid-for pseudo-intelligentsia all hate on Trump and Putin so much? Read the quotes below, and the world situation will begin to make more sense to you.

Trump: “We will no longer surrender this country or its people to the false song of globalism. My foreign policy will always put the interest of the American people and America security above all else. That will be the foundation of every single decision I will make.”

“America First will be the major and overriding theme of my administration,”

Putin: "What is a unipolar world? However one might embellish this term, at the end of the day it refers to one type of situation, namely one centre of authority, one centre of force, one centre of decision-making.

It is world in which there is one master, one sovereign. And at the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within....I consider that the unipolar model is not only unacceptable but also impossible in today's world. "

Putin and Trump certainly sound like "violators" who need to be "dealt with" -- eh Walter? If you still think the New World Order is just "paranoid conspiracy theory," then there is little else that can be done to enlighten you --- short of an economic calamity and/or World War III with Russia and China (which kingpin George Soros had already strongly hinted at (here)). But if you are intrigued by this subject and would like to learn more, then please have a look at "Planet Rothschild" (also linked below). Your world-view will never be the same.

JustAGirl #fundie forums.backpage.com

“”“I've never even been to a bath house or sex party yet her hatred for gay men is so strong that she assumes that that's what all gay men do.”””

Oh sure you haven’t! you're all a bunch of sex crazed dick worshipping scums of the earth!!! otherwise you wouldn’t be sticking your dicks in shit to begin with! and there wouldn’t be aids or any other STD for that matter. you sickos are the ones spreading these diseases.

“””And I'm even more sorry that you have missed Jesus's message entirely and twisted it into one of hatred and judgement”””

if you actually believe Jesus is ok with what you are doing, you are even more twisted than I ever imagined. you may be able to fool yourselves but you can’t fool God. you are no better than murderers in his eyes. you slimebags have commited the biggest mass murder of all time with aids. and for what? your own sick pleasure! just so you can stick your dick in shit!!!!! i cant think of a bigger sin than that youre no better than scums like hitler and gaycy the clown!

“””for people who you don't like for whatever personal reason.”””

for whatever reason? YOU FUCKING STARTED AIDS!!!!!!!!!! IS THAT GOOD ENOUGH REASON FOR YOU, ASSHOLE???

Eternal Choice #fundie eternalchoice.com

Atheism vs. Christianity

- Atheism does not have missions to feed the hungry.
- Atheism does not have programs to give shelter to the homeless.
- Atheism does not trouble itself to help the poor or give to the needy.
- Atheism does not clothe the naked or visit the imprisoned.
- Atheism does not give hope to the despairing, does not give love to the needy soul, or open arms to the broken-hearted.
- Atheism does not seek to bring healing to any person.
- Atheism does not intend to encourage the down-trodden.
- Atheism seeks to tear down Love and stop its flow into the hearts of the un-loved.
- During the 20th century, atheists (mostly communists, such as those who followed Stalin) slaughtered untold millions of Christians, Jews, and people of many other religions for the sake of their faith. This still goes on today in places like China.
- Atheism seeks to destroy the hope of Jesus Christ and take love away from a world of people in need of care. In the name of science they proclaim, "there is no God", "we evolved from slime", "the cosmos is an accident". Declaring as gods the foundations and fate of the universe, they ignore the needs of the hearts of men to know that there is a Divine Creator who loves them.
- Because an atheist got God banned from public schools, our children must pass through metal detectors on their way into school where they score worse and worse on educational tests and morals are at an all-time low. They must remember each day the school massacres of the past few years and wonder... if... when... where... who... Does anyone stop to think that this downward trend started the year God was banned from schools?

- Churches have missions to feed the hungry.
- Christians help the poor and clothe the naked.
- Bible-carrying evangelists visit the sick and imprisoned to bring redemption to those that are forgotten and thrown away.
- Preachers minister the healing power of God to those who dare to have faith and forget that miracles are impossible.
- The children of God travel the globe to give light to those in the dark, to show the love of Jesus living through themselves to the ones that He died for 2,000 years ago.
- Jesus gives the world His hope of eternal salvation, His gospel of love, His healing for body and mind and heart.
- It is the Christians, believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, who care for the world enough to take a chance on alienating themselves by sharing the hope of salvation with others.

weuripgc #sexist #psycho #crackpot reddit.com

The pussy economy

How Beckys and Stacies with low standards are our actual worse enemy. I truly couldn't care less about how many guys a woman has slept with. My initial reaction would be to be happy for her and that she's living her best life. I do not think of them as a nasty person or lesser than for it. I do think they are kind of playing themselves though by letting men (especially men not within their looks match!!!)use them as a masturbation toy without anything in return. Dick is an abundance, pussy is valuable. They are decreasing the value of pussy. I think about how her actions affect what men think is attainable and how that affects ME. It's the most conflicting feeling. It is selfish I know but it fucks over all of us femcels in the end. Yeah, this is a bit like hypergamy in a way but the thing is... it's not about men dating up like women it's them being able to give nothing in return for sex. Which is all they care about and want until they are 35, old and ugly and finally want to settle down. This is why they are the way they are so freely (TRASH). Women with an actual say (desirable normies) allow this shit. They have the chance to set the rules and they fucking DON'T. Pick me bitches are the BANE OF MY FUCKING EXISTENCE AND ALL SHOULD BE EXECUTED ON SIGHT. Imagine if women all around the world set a standard for men. If men wanted pussy then they have to meet these standards to get it. It would filter out all shitty entitled below average men in like 10 years tops. We already have this with men who are undesirable and insufferable with NO redeeming quality. Natural selection automatically filters them out of the gene pool.

If Becky's bar wasn't so low, life for us femcels would not be as bad. The below average man would actually have to date within their looks match. We will never have this way of life but it's nice to think of it. This is why I make sure all my attractive friends know they can do better than whatever average loser they are dating (I usually go for their looks and stature). This is how we keep balance. If you have attractive family members and friends the best you can do for your self is to make sure they date up as high as they can. Don't encourage them to settle for average moids. The average moid now thinks they are better than what they actually are and it fucks up our choices as femcels even more. Theres a few different points of this thread, it's more about how much I hate pick me bitches and girls that have no idea how much better they can do. I hate seeing ugly men with attractive nice women. The only way this would be acceptable is if the man has money, I have a lot of respect for gold diggers bc they know their worth. The modern male, for the most part, is only good for money. They should work 23 hours a day with 30 minutes for sleep and 30 mins to eat. I truly believe the media selling very average looking men as desirable to the masses of women is a total con job by higher-ups to ensure the average moid gets to reproduce. So many of the men that get that silly magazine title of "sexiest man in the world" are average as fuck and nothing more.

Here's the kicker: women in general don't think they are good looking enough (even if they're attractive) for good looking men. There is this huge myth that good looking men are inherently more shitty than your average man, but in reality they have the exact same personality. Men are told to date up, women are told to date who they think they deserve.

So attractive women date guys that they settle for, and end up realizing that not only are they settling for looks, but that their boyfriends personality is shit. Those attractive girls don't leave their mediocre partners because of a myriad of reasons ultimately caused by internalized misogyny which makes them feel like they need to take care of their inadequate boyfriend, slut shames them, tells them they're not good enough, and that they're worthless if they're alone.

This cycle will continue until women realize that being alone and having standards is better than accommodating a man that only brings them stress and heartache.

This is exactly what I thought, you worded this so well! Average men are really scamming them. These blue pilled Beckys need to get pink pilled. Attractive women, most of the time are already pink pilled bc of dealing with stupid horny men since they hit puberty. It's the Beckys that need it the most. Some of them are already pink pilled but still succumb to men afterwards bc they are weak and want to live that nuclear family life. On the positive side, I see that "men are trash" has become a universally agreed-upon truth by women that are more socially aware and non traditional ways of living are becoming more popular.

Obedient Wives Club #fundie komonews.com

ome 800 other Muslim women in Malaysia are members of the "Obedient Wives Club" that is generating controversy in one of the most modern and progressive Muslim-majority nations, where many Muslim Malaysian women hold high posts in the government and corporate world.

The new club, launched Saturday, says it can cure social ills such as prostitution and divorce by teaching women to be submissive and keep their men happy in the bedroom.

"Islam compels us to be obedient to our husband. Whatever he says, I must follow. It is a sin if I don't obey and make him happy," said Ummu [...]

"Sex is a taboo in Asian society. We have ignored it in our marriages but it's all down to sex. A good wife is a good sex worker to her husband. What is wrong with being a whore ... to your husband?" she said.

"This way, the family institution is protected and we can curb social ills," said Rohayah, the club's vice president who is also a trained physician.

She said wives must go beyond the traditional roles as good cooks or good mothers and learn to "obey, serve and entertain" their husbands to prevent them from straying or misbehaving.

Indirectly, "disobedient wives are the cause for upheaval in this world" because men are not happy at home and their minds and souls are disturbed, she said. [...]

SchrodingersDick #crackpot #sexist #homophobia #transphobia incels.co

[Blackpill] My theory on lesbianism and feminism.

(It’s kind of all over the place. Not meant to be an essay; I copy pasted what I wrote offhand in a group chat with some homies.)

Possible lesbian formula:

1: Ugly: can’t get chad, sexually unsatisfied, never experienced submission to a larger-than-life dominant man

2: High standards: only wants gigachad because she is aware of his existence. No other man can match up, doesn’t want anything less than the best she’s aware of. It would be settling but she doesn’t see it as settling. finds herself not attracted at all, so thinks she’s not attracted to men period, except for the exceptional men.. Keenly receptive to mogging. Also prob damaged from being ugly in high school. Had a bad time immediately after being thrust into the sexual market/adult social hierarchy as a low value female.. did not recover.

3: Low self awareness: doesn’t realize that her disgust of 99% of men doesn’t mean she hates men with very very few exceptions/flukes, just means she’s a normal, healthy eugenicist

I dont have any personal experience with lesbians, but I seriously doubt that if you were to put one (any girl really) in a room with a gigachad, that she wouldn’t get wet, submit, and love every second of it. “You know even though I’m a lesbian, I weirdly liked it teehee I’m quirky I had these feelings I can’t explain and I felt so safe” .. shit like that. MAYBE some robust high T lesbians wouldn’t like that.. like the masculine one in a dyke relationship..

And girls turning dyke faster and with less resistance than guys “turning” gay or coming to the conclusion that they’re gay could just be female to female dynamics being unlike male to male dynamics. Foids are ok in close proximity with eachother, sharing a mate and shit.. men in proximity with eachother are sexual competition and will kill eachother for eggs.

The default life strategy for women is to trade their looks for the best deal they can get. Whether this be through prosecution, marriage, onlyfans, dating, even applying to jobs while wearing makeup, getting promotions by being hot/putting out, etc... so the Formula for a feminist is just be ugly and unable to leverage your eggs to make it through life comfortably. Be unable to exercise the default strategy for a women because you have very little value to trade and hence can not trade it for a good enough deal.. Be unsettled by this and imagine a world with an alternate source of value for women, one in which you could be considered high value (mandatory that this value metric be malleable. Personality, career, education, sense of humor, emotional strength, etc)... And then campaign and screech for society to recognize some other, malleable, source of value for women, in which, conveniently, you would have value and power in the eyes of society and most importantly your own eyes. “Women are more than their looks” - says the ugly girl.. “men are more than their height” - says the manlet. Same principle as trannies thinking their problems will go away, they will get to live in a new world with a new, more enlightened metric of value, and they will accept themselves but only after everyone else accepts, validates, and entertains their delusions. It is expecting the non malleable to adapt to the malleable. That is not how adaptation occurs. Adaptation takes the path of least resistance.

It’s really a defensive reaction to learning an uncomfortable truth about personal value, it being non malleable, and the unequal nature of people’s value. The world being generally cruel and unlike what Disney said it would be. So the world must change and there is nobility in being on the front lines. And like kaczynski said, it’s an outlet for hostility and satisfies the need for power.

The ugly feminist will stop being a feminist if she becomes hot. She won’t believe any of it anymore and won’t care about women’s progress or w/e the fuck unless doing so conspicuously confers social status to her. Feminists don’t want to be feminists, they just want to be hot. Feminism/striving for an alternate source of value is the next best option for curing their low self esteem.

The manlet will stop saying “height doesn’t matter” if he gets taller, unless for the same reason the now hot former feminist still preaches feminism. And like the feminist, the manlet doesn’t really want height acceptance, he just wants to be tall. Advocating manlet acceptance/bluepill ideology is the next best thing for his self esteem/life outcome/sexual success.

I don’t have an explanation for hot feminists. Strictly status seeking/herd mentality/tribe acceptance, or seeking high value in both metrics, both in looks, and in malleable metrics. or the handicap principle is applied. “Teehee I’m a feminist that just so happens to be hot, And I think girls shouldn’t be judged on their looks, even though I’m judged positively on my looks.. I dont put effort into my looks (because I don’t have to) and I’m still hotter than you.. im more than just my looks, I’m beauty AND brains”. Still, I’d imagine a girl with conservative friends would assimilate their beliefs and attitudes pretty quickly. Bitches are like water.

Every fake aspect of a removed-from-reality worldview is either a convenient lie or a supporting lie to back up some other convenient lie. Most people are professional copers.

precipitous120 #fundie precipitous120.deviantart.com

I'm pretty sure many of you have already heard about the Transgender kid that went and off-ed themselves with a semi. ie suicide.Why? Because his parents refused him the surgery that would set him to the 'right' gender.I want to get every reaction you guys have, positive negative and even the WAAAAT factor too ere is what his ultimate goal was That's the gist of it, that';s why I feel like killing myself. Sorry, if that's not a good enough reason for you, it's good enough for me. As for my will, I want 100 percent of the things that I legally own to be sold and the money (plus my money in the bank) to be given to trans civil rights movements and support groups, I don't give a sh*t which one. The only way I will rest in peace is if one day transgender people aren't treated the way I was, they're treated like humans, with valid feelings and human rights. Gender needs to be taught about in schools, the earlier, the better. My death needs to mean something. My death needs to be counted in the number of transgender people who commit suicide this year. I want someone to look at that number and say thats f***ed up& and fix it. Fix society. Please.Personal I think his parents were right to refuse him the surgery, and that he did us a huge favour by just killing himself. As you can see by his comments he was a completely obnoxious person and even if he was straight, I'm sure people would have rather had him dead.Here's a link to the full story... just in case you haven't had the chance to catch up on the local news during this festive season.http://www.inquisitr.com/1715736/transgender-teen-leelah-acorn-kills-himself-by-walking-in-front-of-semi-truck-blames-christian-parents-in-viral-suicide-note/If your going do die for a cause, make sure your a nice person first... else who's going to care when your gone.For me, I just hope his parents don't take his death to hard. At the end of the day, they are the real victims not some stingy kid who was already an adult and surly could have waited 3 years to have the surgery with his own money.

[ It isn't because they simply refused her surgery. It's because they put her through MONTHS of isolation and hell. They never let her see her friends or be social at all. They never let her do anything. They tried to ""fix""" her with "therapy" that only traumatized her. She was berated and bullied every single day by her FAMILY who are supposed to support and love their children NO MATTER WHAT. Go redo your research. ]


yet he had enough freedom to find himself on a highway, which is illegal, and kill himself.

so ya I truly believe they isolated him.

not

he had parents that loved enough to try and treat his condition yet he only saw it as a burden

he was.a truly evil person


[ it's not a condition to treat

derp

that's like trying to condition you to be gay when you're happily straight. It would never work and just upset you. ]

but he is talking about changing his sex totally?!

That can not possible be nature

that is just madness

[ Try to have an open mind.

Think about feeling like you were born in the wrong body. It sucks. ]

"Think about feeling like your were born in the wrong body"

See what I did there... feeling

Because it's a condition of the mind and not an actual fact

meaning it's a condition...

Treatable.

If I were to electric shock treat a person like him, would his now newly born brain feel he is in the wrong body?

NO

Because when the brain is wiped of Feelings and reboots again, new Feelings come into play


[ Rot in hell, you piece of shit. This poor GIRL'S awful, transphobic parents are not victims nor will they ever be victims. They're narrow-minded, backwards ass way of thinking, and lack of support and love is what killed they're daughter.

Fuck you for taking their side, fuck you for misgendering, and insulting a dead teenage girl, and especially fuck you for staying she did a huge favor for committing suicide.

FUCK YOUR TRANSPHOBIC, HOMOPHOBIC ASS ]

Do you understand why I will never take you seriously?

because where I use simple language to talk and convey my understanding and perspective of the world.

You use violent and vulgar insults to express yourself, which to me reflects your mentality, a mentality of someone who is insane and without any logical reason

Ashley #conspiracy answers.yahoo.com

Um both sides are corrupt. God fearing republicans?? If I'm not mistaken the man they claim to be the first president of the united states was a 33rd degree mason...All government is corrupt..oh and the first president was not Gorge Washington he was a man named John Hanson. If u ever have the luck of getting ur hands on a Free Mason bible u will see my claims are true...the illuminati has caused us to be divided they created republicans,democrats to make it seem like we are the ones that have the choice to choose the fate of America "the fallen" when intact what they want to happen will happen. The elites control everything and the illuminati believes out of distruction comes prosperity. They believe that they will be immortal in the end and we are just pawns in their sick game...but when the economy has not one glimpse of hope and it finally crashes for good and all the world goes bankrupted that is when they will make way for the Antichrist, and the NWO the Antichrist will claim that he has the answer and can fix the world economy and they world will embrace him as the good book says well I can go on and on but I'll stop now. The love of money is really the root of all evil. I APOLOGISE 4 my grammar I really couldn't be bothered to make this perfect I'm too lazy. Sorry if it sounds like a rant my thought pretty much came out jumbled.

David J. Stewart #fundie jesus-is-savior.com


I believe with all my heart that God is disgusted and saddened about what Christmas has deteriorated into in the minds of MOST people. I sincerely believe that God hates Christmas in America. Christmas has become so synthetic, so phony, so meaningless.

It's a mad rush by businesses after Thanksgiving to make as much money as possible before Christmas day. Christmas has sadly become VERY commercialized in America. Money, money, money! Christmas isn't supposed to be about spending and giving, it's about the birth of Jesus Christ. It's about God's free gift of eternal life to a world of undeserving sinners. We all deserve to burn in Hell for our sins, but God in His wonderful love provided a way of escape for mankind, a plan of redemption. God wanted to redeem man back to Himself. So God sent His only begotten Son into the world to be rejected of men, despised, spit upon, beaten, mocked, tortured, bound and ultimately crucified to death as a criminal.

Oh that people would seek the truth. Santa Claus is a mockery of the Savior, who knows everything and can be everywhere at one time. Interestingly, Santa spells S-A-T-A-N if you rearrange the letters. Coincidence?


X-mas Has Become a Favorite Holiday of the Wicked Unsaved
Tragically, nearly all of the people celebrating Christmas aren't even saved. Most of the people observing the Christmas season don't know the Lord as their personal Savior. Even atheists celebrate Christmas by renaming it "X-MAS."

"Independence Day" is much longer than "Christmas," yet no one ever calls it "X-Day." "Thanksgiving" is much longer than "Christmas," yet we never call it "X-giving." Why is it that out of all the holidays in America, the ONLY place where people feel compelled to place an "X" is over our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. It is blatant evil. If you are reading this article and love the Lord Jesus, make sure to speak aloud to any business that displays the godless term "x-mas."

If it weren't for Santa Claus, reindeers, mistletoe, sparkling ornaments, tinsel, and a bunch of meaningless silly songs... the heathen world would abandon Christmas like a hot-potato.

So do you think that God Almighty is pleased with a holiday that EXCLUDES Jesus Christ? No way! God hates Christmas. And may I say again, there is NOTHING in the Word of God which leads us to recognize the birth of Christ in any way.

By the way, the Bible never lead anyone to recognize Mary in any way either. The entire Catholic religion is based upon the humongous lie that people are supposed to praise and adore Mary. Just as a child with candy all over his face who denies going into the candy jar, so are Catholics found guilty when they claim they don't worship or pray to Mary while continually bowing to her image and statue. The truth cannot be denied... Catholics worship Mary!

[...]

Christmas has become a joke in America. If we took all the money spent on Christmas trees, tinsel, ornaments, wrapping paper, snowmen, flashing lights, and everything else imaginable... we could literally feed millions of people in several starving third-world nations.

Are we really celebrating Jesus' birthday? Don't you think it would mean much more to God if you helped someone for Christmas instead of decorating your home inside and out? Sure it would. We are nuts in America! We go out of our way to teach children in the public school system the importance of recycling soda cans, while never a word is said about reducing the number of abortions. It's "save the whales, murder the children." Americans spend BILLIONS of dollars spoiling their dogs and cats at home, while people starve to death around the globe (2.8 BILLION people on this planet live on less than $2 per day). That's about half the population!

[...]

Satan Claus Has Come to Town!

Santa Claus the Great Imposter

The Plain Truth About Christmas (it's Babylonian occult origins)


Biblically, Jesus couldn't have been born in December (see the above article, The Plain Truth About Christmas). I am not against celebrating Christ's birth, not at all. I am against the Satanic deceptions which the Devil's crowd has integrated with Christ's birth to manufacture the worldly holiday of Christmas.
Santa Claus became extremely popular when Coca Cola really began promoting him in the 1940's. Today, Santa has replaced Jesus in the minds of most children. Ask any child what they know about Jesus, and then Santa, and see what answers you get. Most children know a lot about Santa from singing all the songs about Santa, but there are no Christmas songs for children which describe the Lord. The world's Christmas songs are designed to instill a picture into the child's mind of "WHO" Santa is.

Tragically, Santa is an exact clone of the Lord Jesus Christ. Children are taught that Santa (Not Jesus) watches them all the time, knows if they're bad or good, and will reward them if they are good. Children do believe these lies of Satan. The FACT that the U.S. Postal Service receives millions of letters each Christmas addressed to "Santa Claus" is proof enough of this fact.

God does NOT make a big deal out of Christmas and I think we would be wise to do the same. In fact, God does not make an issue of it at all. If God was concerned about us celebrating Jesus' birth, then He would have given us a date or time to celebrate, but He didn't.

I think God hates Christmas for many reasons:

1. The greed of Christmas. Let's face it, Americans alone spend billions of dollars just on Christmas.

2. The massive amount of money spent on decorations while the poor go hungry. Christmas to most people is all about having fun.

3. The heathen formalism of false religions like Catholicism. God doesn't care about mass or the seven sacraments...NOT AT ALL! God wants you to call upon Jesus to forgive your sins and come into your heart. God wants your heart, not religion.

4. The "give to get" mentality of most people. It's really quite sickening as I listen to all the Christmas music. Santa Clause is the hero of Christmas, not Jesus Christ. "What's Santa going to bring me?"...gimme, gimme, gimme!

5. The wicked diminishing of "Christmas" to "Xmas." This is so wrong! I see "Xmas" everywhere I go. Should it be any surprise that Christ would be removed from a holiday which centers around commercial greed.

6. Christmas charity is not righteousness. Just because you give some charity away at Christmas doesn't bring you one bit closer to God unless you have come through the blood of Jesus Christ. Your good works are filth to God (Isaiah 64:6). You need to ask Jesus to forgive you of all your wicked sins.

7. Worldly Christmas parties. All across America at Christmas time, booze flows and the whores take off their clothes. Every company I have ever worked for has invited me to their godless Christmas party. To date, I have never gone to one of them (and never will). All I hear afterwards is reports of nudity, booze, worldly entertainment, and immorality. No thanks Satan, I'll stay home with Jesus!

8. The utter hypocrisy of people. Everywhere you go throughout December in America, you will hear Christmas music. Openly homosexual singer, Elton John, has a Christmas album. Homosexuality is an abominable sin according to the Bible! Radio stations play his music all across America. When sinners living in wicked rebellion against God sing Christmas praises, do you think God is pleased? I tell you, God is extremely angry! (Psalm 7:11). God has no pleasure in the song of fools (Ecclesiastes 7:5). You'll hear "Holy, holy, holy" one song, and then godless Michael Jackson the next. The radio-waves at Christmas time are filled with the most ungodly and reprobate heathens singing Christmas songs...it is a horrid STENCH in the nostrils of God.

It is for these reasons and others that I believe God hates Christmas. God is angry with the wicked every day (Psalm 7:11). God is not pleased by a child-murdering nation. God is not pleased by a nation that invades innocent countries to steal their oil (Iraq). God is not pleased by a nation that loves witchcraft (Harry Potter). God is extremely angry with America for her many sins. We are a woeful people in need of God's judgment.

What right do we have to celebrate Christ when we spit on the Bible and disobey the plainest teachings in the Bible... "Thou shalt not kill." Some sinners even mock God by making a joke of abortion at Christmas time... see Planned Parenthood's "Choice on Earth" (instead of the Bible's "Peace on Earth"). America needs a serious whipping from God!

If you truly want to celebrate Jesus' birthday, then do it quietly without making the retailers richer. Use that money to help the poor. Jesus is in Heaven today, He wants us to help the poor. Don't be like the wicked world who only give ONCE a year, we should give to the poor at all times. Is it nothing to you?

Ray Fournier #fundie nogreaterjoy.org

Public school teacher says, “Get your children out!”
As I step out of my car and begin my long walk across the parking lot I can already feel the oppression in the air. With each step I take the darkness increases and I know deep in my soul that I am now behind enemy lines. Walking through the gates of the public high-school where I teach feels as if I were walking into a concentration camp dedicated to the spiritual death of those imprisoned behind these walls. As a missionary masquerading as one of the “guards” I am an eyewitness to the daily indoctrination and spiritual torture that is inflicted upon those who have been sentenced to come here by their own well meaning parents. The defiling effects of the government curriculum, the media, and the student culture can be seen everywhere you look, but especially in the faces of every student that I teach.
When I look around the room as I’m teaching one of my classes, I am all too aware that 15 out of 30 of these dear children are sexually active (1). You see, sexual immorality with several partners throughout high school is the norm. Our sex-crazed American culture has defiled the minds and bodies of our sons and daughters. So much so that 23 out of 30 believe that homosexuality is acceptable (2). 12 out of 30 have used marijuana. 14 don’t see a great risk in heavy daily drinking (3). 18 have cheated on a test during the last year, 9 stole from a store, 24 have lied to their parents about something significant, and even though they have done these things 28 out of 30 are satisfied with their personal ethics and character (4). My heart breaks over the moral decline of our youth, but we have an even bigger problem.

Between 70-88% (5,6) of children from Christian homes walk away from the visible church by the end of their freshman year in college. Less than 1% of all Americans between the ages of 18 and 23 have a Biblical worldview including those that came from Christian families (7). The fastest growing religious group in America is made up of atheists and agnostics including many of our own children (8). God is being mocked as the minds and hearts of our children are being stolen by the world leading millions of them to spiritual destruction. The question is why is this happening? There are many contributing factors to this crisis, but there is one factor that almost 9 out of 10 Christian families have in common. 89% of Christian parents send their children to the public schools (9).
The idea that public school curriculum is religiously neutral is a lie. Evolution based science classes discredit the reliability of the Bible and get rid of God as Creator. History classes get rid of God as Sovereign King and demonize Christianity. English classes reinforce this message through the literature they assign their students to read. This deliberate indoctrination encourages students to break each and every one of the Ten Commandments and sabotages the message of the gospel. By getting rid of God, they get rid of His absolute moral law. Without God and an absolute moral law, the idea of sin and God’s judgment becomes a figment of someone’s imagination leaving students to sin to their hearts’ content. Without the reality of sin and hell, Jesus suffering God’s wrath on the cross in our place becomes an unnecessary myth, and the call to repent of our sins and trust in Jesus as our Lord and Savior becomes foolishness to the minds and hearts of public school indoctrinated youth. This has led millions of our own children down the broad road to spiritual destruction.

You might think that you are doing enough in the personal discipleship of your children to counteract this ungodly teaching or that by taking your children to a strong Bible believing church your children will be able to survive the public schools, but that is not what the statistics say or what I have personally witnessed during my 13 years of experience as a public school teacher. On the contrary, what I have seen is the destruction of countless children from Christian families, including many who went to doctrinally sound churches.

One such family that I knew from church was the Walsh (10) family. The Walsh family home-schooled their children for many years but when two of their daughters reached high-school age, they decided to send them to the public school where I teach. As soon as I found out about their decision, I warned them about the spiritual dangers of public education, but sadly they ignored my warning. It was as if their daughters where placed inside a spiritual gas chamber. It didn’t take long for the poison to take effect. Within a year’s time one of them even became a lesbian. My heart broke each and every time I saw her walk around campus with her girlfriend. I can only imagine how utterly devastated her family must feel.
Stories such as this one have become all too common, but not all corruption is out in plain sight. I have seen many of our children pretend that they are who their parents want them to be, only to change their outfits, their personalities, and their moral values as soon as they get to school. The public schools steal the hearts and souls of our children long before they walk away from the visible church; many as early as elementary school, 40% by end of middle school, and 80% by the end of their senior year of high school (11). As a result, our families are crumbling, our churches are weakening, and our nation is on the road to becoming the next Sodom and Gomorrah.
At the end of every day, as I walk through the halls and glance into the empty classrooms, the whispers of lawlessness haunt each corner and desk while the stench of spiritual death lingers. I think back to everything that I witnessed throughout the day and I wonder how Christian parents could possibly think that this godless institution is the type of “education” that God intended for their children. If they only knew what was happening to their children “behind enemy lines” and what God actually says regarding education, they would not hesitate to rescue their children from the public schools and provide for them a Biblical education for the glory of God.
In the end, only God can save our children, only God can save our families and churches, and only God can save our nation. With that said, God often uses our obedience as a means to protect our children from evil and to lead them to a relationship with Christ. Seize the day! Even if you are in the middle of the school year, rescue your children from the public schools and return to the Word of God for His commands and principles on how to educate your children for His glory.
To learn more about what God says regarding education and a firsthand public school teacher’s account about what is really happening “behind enemy lines” please go to www.EducationReformation.org to read my book Education Reformation for free.

Alex Manley #fundie thelinknewspaper.ca

The whole ‘Movember’ thing is cute and all, but can we stop and be real about it for a second? Movember is a movement to celebrate North American guys not practicing basic facial hygiene for a month in order to raise money towards saving a group of extremely privileged people—themselves.

Yes, if Movember was to raise money for people in third-world countries, for illiterate people, or homeless people, or for anything but what it is—which is privileged guys pretending they have it as hard as people with real problems—then it might come close to approaching something vaguely resembling worthwhile.

As far as I can tell though, the whole thing is just a really well-disguised tantrum that guys are content to throw to make it seem like prostate cancer research is as important as research towards curing women’s cancers, or, say, getting food and clean water to starving people.

Let me be clear—I don’t want anyone to get cancer. I don’t think a man getting cancer is less tragic than a woman getting cancer. I think it’s valid to want to raise money towards curing anything that’s killing human beings, and I appreciate the fact that the Movember movement is educating men with the intent to save lives.

But I’m realistic. Charity is often a bit of a zero sum game. People give a little money to one charity, and what’s the result? They have a bit less money left over to give to others, and, perhaps worse, they feel good about their good deed—good enough that they don’t have to feel guilty about not donating anywhere else.

The Movember people brag that their cause, fuelled by the Internet and well-meaning well-to-do people, has raised $176 million worldwide so far. Unfortunately, that’s $176 million taken away from more pressing issues in the world than prostate cancer, largely, I imagine, from individual donors, rather than governments or corporations.

It might not be much on the global charity scale, but ask yourself what that money could do to make a difference somewhere where people dying is a day-in, day-out matter of getting food and water or vaccines, rather than having a latex-gloved finger inserted gently into their rectum once a year.

Furthermore, it’s worth mentioning that, as far as cancers go, prostate cancer is not much of a cancer.

It’s slow acting, and it has relatively low death rates. Men diagnosed with prostate cancer are more likely to die from something else than they are from prostate cancer.

It also affects North American men way more than anywhere else in the world, largely due to living and eating habits. Men in Detroit get prostate cancer at about 100 times the rate of men in Hanoi. One hundred times. That’s not even close. Prostate cancer is a first-world problem.

Instead of not shaving, these Mo-Bros, if they were really concerned about the actual prostate issue, should consider exercising more and eating less red meat.

Perhaps Movember has become so popular because of the way we’re treating it—like it’s a cute little initiative worth supporting, like a child with a lemonade stand. It doesn’t feel serious, because, let’s face it, it isn’t when compared to other problems.

Men, by and large, are doing okay for themselves. They’re still out-earning women by significant amounts. Cancer doesn’t exist in a vacuum—it affects the whole of a person’s life. Disease aside, the richer a person is, the better their chances are, especially in countries where your cash inflow influences the quality of your care.

Men—or any privileged group—will have an inherent advantage when it comes to beating cancer and landing on their feet than more disadvantaged people.

So this November, let’s not keep patting the Mo-Bros on the head and tolerating this childish self-involvement-fest disguised as selflessness and the propagation online and in the media of the inherent importance of North American men and their problems.

Guys—keep shaving. Educate yourselves. Get checked. Be a man about it—don’t act like you’re hard-done-by.

There are a lot of people in the world who would trade your slight risk of prostate cancer for their serious risk of being raped, being killed, starving to death, or dying of preventable diseases. Prostate cancer is a hallmark of privilege. Deal with it.

And for everyone, if you’re going to donate money somewhere this month—and I encourage you to—look around for a cause more worthy, that’ll help some group that needs it more. I assure you, you won’t have trouble finding one.

Ken Ham #fundie answersingenesis.org

Atheists don’t want Christians teaching kids about God—they want to teach your kids there is no God! They really are out to get your kids, and they are using the public schools, secular media, museums, and other outlets to do this. The public schools (despite a minority of Christian teachers who are trying to be missionaries in the system) have by and large become churches of secular humanism.

Yes, the atheists, like Hitler and Stalin, know that if they can capture the next generation (through the education system, media, etc.), they will have the culture.

Christians need to take heed of God’s Word and ensure they are capturing the next generation for the Lord—passing that spiritual legacy along to the children, so they will not be captured by the world!

Yes, it takes only one generation to lose a culture. And America is on the brink of such a change right now! God’s people need to wake up and understand a battle for their kids is raging around them—a battle that is being won, at the present time, by those who seek to destroy the next generation spiritually!
A Call for Radical Change

In view of such relentless indoctrination that bombards our young people every day, giving a couple of thirty-minute lessons at church or home isn’t enough. While many parents have already opted to put their kids in Christian schools, weekly church programs, and homeschools, few appear to be doing a very good job filling in the gaps. More is needed.

Teaching young people how God’s Word—rather than the atheistic worldview—makes sense of our world requires intense study, commitment, and fervent prayer on our parts. The church and parents must reevaluate their old assumptions about the way we should be teaching our kids in a hostile culture, and work together to build the next generation by following the directives from God’s Word.

Imagine what would happen if God’s people raised up generations of kids who knew what they believed concerning the Christian faith, why they believe, and how to defend that faith against the secular attacks of the day. They could then proclaim the gospel with authority because they believed the authority upon which it stands. We would change the world!
Connecting Answers to the Gospel

America has long resisted the trend among Western nations to slide into secularism and unbelief, but that is changing. A 2012 survey found that the fastest-growing “religious” group in America has no religion at all. One in five Americans claims no affiliation with religion, and this category is even higher among young adults (one in three).

This downward spiral has impacted churches and Christian homes, as well. Two-thirds of children will leave the church after they leave home. So what’s missing in their lives? And what can we do to stop the exodus?
Answers

“Faith in Christ” isn’t blind. True faith must be built upon a knowledge of the truth, as revealed in God’s Word (2 Timothy 3:15–17). To be saved and walk with God, every believer first must know what he should believe and why. That’s our job . . . telling young people answers from the Bible. We’ve got to address the hard questions that are uppermost in their minds, including the origin of sin and death in this world.
Biblical Authority

The next link in the chain, once young people learn the truth, is for them to submit to the authority of God’s Word (John 14:21; James 1:22). They need to understand why we know the Bible is true: the authority of the One who gave it to us (Hebrews 4:12). They also need to see that, once they accept the Bible’s authority, it will make sense of the world around them.
The Gospel

Most Christians realize they need to proclaim the gospel if they want to see anyone saved (Romans 10:14). The definition of the gospel by which we are saved is quite clear: Christ died, was buried, and rose again “according to the Scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:3–4). But the power of the gospel rests on the authority of God’s Word (Romans 1:16).
Salvation

A young person’s salvation is ultimately a work of God’s grace. Yet that does not excuse us from responsibility. We have the duty to plant and water the truth (1 Corinthians 3:6–7) and pray to God in faith. But God is the one who “gives the increase” and we should give Him the glory. God has designed this plan for conveying His grace, and we need to make sure we’re doing our part. We are the ones appointed to instruct children with clear answers, to show them the Bible’s ultimate authority, and to share the gracious promises of the gospel!

raven55 #fundie raven55.livejournal.com

[I'll tell you some of the questions that were asked in an actual sex-ed class;

"can I get pregnant from kissing?"

"can oral sex lead to AIDs?"

"if I have sex on my period, I can't get pregnant, right?"

"I heard the only way to get pregnant is to swallow semen, because that's how it gets to your tummy. Am I right?"

"I can't get pregnant if it's my first time, right?"

How does learning about how humans reproduce violate their childhoods?]

It's a violation, period. I know my children will be taught much better and not at school.

[Someone has to tell these kids that inserting A into B = C. If you're not going to do it, who the frell is?]

If they are told that they can get pregnant their first time then it's their fault. Anyone with a brain knows you can get pregnant the first time.

That's why children don't need to know about sex, they need to be taught to abstain. If they chose to have sex before their bodies and minds are ready, it's their fault.

Sex isn't brain surgery, if someone can't figure out where there genitals go then they don't need to have sex, and sterilization would be a good idea.

William Estrada #fundie rawstory.com

Homeschoolers says it’s unfair that they must prove they’ve obtained high school-level academic skills to become a police officer or enter trade school.

The Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) is challenging requirements by cosmetology and vocational schools that incoming students show a high school diploma or pass a GED exam to gain admittance.

“A homeschool graduate is accepted into a cosmetology or vocational school — but then, like a bolt from above, the admissions office reverses course,” said William Estrada, HSLDA director of federal relations. “Officials tell the applicant that the school cannot accept homeschoolers.”

The Christian legal advocacy group has handled numerous calls from homeschooled young adults who say they were turned away from trade schools or police departments because they had not passed a General Educational Development exam — which they say graduates of traditional high schools are not required to do.

“Vocational schools are more likely to be audited for compliance with federal higher education laws,” Estrada said. “They’re worried that if they accept a homeschooler who doesn’t have the documentation of a public school graduate, it could cost the vocational school its accreditation.”

The HSLDA is representing two candidates who Christian legal advocates say were turned away from the Ithaca, New York, Police Department because they had not earned high school diplomas or the equivalent — even though both went on to graduate from state colleges.

“One had a bachelor’s degree and the other was a qualified emergency medical technician,” said TJ Schmidt, a staff attorney for HSLDA. “Despite their success in higher education, these graduates were essentially being told to go back to high school.”

The HSLDA claims the police department is violating state law governing educational requirements for officers, which the group argues should permit the two women to join because they hold “a comparable diploma” to high school or its equivalent.

The group is awaiting a response from city officials in Ithaca and will pursue further legal action if the two homeschooled women are not accepted as candidates.

Estrada admits his group had not succeeded in all of its challenges because most vocational schools are privately run and may therefore set their own admission standards — which he complained allowed them to “discriminate against homeschoolers.”

The legal advocate melodramatically related comments made by the president of a cosmetology school — whose voice, he said, was “shaking with rage.”

“I will not let a homeschool graduate into my school unless he or she has a GED,” the school official allegedly told HSLDA attorneys. “My brother had a GED, and if it was good enough for him, it’s good enough for a homeschool graduate.”

The HSLDA has been urging the National Accrediting Commission of Career Arts and Sciences (NACCAS) to loosen its requirements for homeschooled students, and the legal group said the board’s leadership had encouraged affiliated trade schools to accept those students “with open arms.”

Estrada recommended that homeschooled students should present “a parent-issued high school diploma, a high school transcript, and evidence of compliance with your state’s homeschool law” when applying to cosmetology or vocational school.

He urged families to contact HSLDA if the school refuses admittance or requires a GED.

toadthroat #fundie pso-world.com


Is sex with underage girls so bad?
Before we start, I don't mean 8,9,10 or anything younger than that. That is disgusting and wrong.
When I say underage, I mean 14, 15, 16, 17.
I mean, the way I see it, these girls are old enough to understand sex and the consequences. They're old enough to get behind the wheel of a car, why aren't they old enough to decide who they want to have sex with?
Lets take a COMPLETELY hypothetical situation:
I'm a 20 year old dude. I got to college, I got a job, a car, I might live with my mom or a friend, or I got my own 1 room shack or whatever. Lets just say I make friends with a 16 year old girl. Its innocent enough at first, but we one night shit gets steamy and we wind up makin' whoopy, and its completely mutual on both sides. Now, society and law would call me a sick perv, throw me in the slammer, and then make me stick a sign outside my house.
So my question is: Is this really such a horrible offense?


Alright. So a lot of people have been bringing up some cases like "young girls are immature and can't relate to older men, older men just want easy sex, etc etc." And while yeah, thats the case sometimes, its not ALWAYS the case and it shouldn't used as a reason to why two people can't date just cause they got a little age gap.
I had a friend who's parents had a BIG age gap between them. The mom was like in her late 40s, early 50s and the dad was around his mid 30s. Is the dad dating the mom just cause he's into older chicks? Did the mom just want some easy sex? No, it was nothing like that. It was two people who just GENUINELY had an attraction towards each other.
My aunt and uncle, same story, they got about an 8-11 year gap between them. Started dated when my uncle was like 20 something and my aunt was still in high school, like 15-16. Now they're married with children, with a huge house, and 3 cars. Think my uncle just wanted some easy poontang? Nope, nothing like that. Just a genuine attraction.
Age COULD be used as a GENERAL indication of maturity, but its mostly the person themselves that should be judged on their maturity, because theres too much of a variation. I know older chicks that still act like they're in middle school, and on the flip side they're plenty of young girls that KNOW THEIR SHIT.

Jeanice Barcelo #conspiracy birthofanewearth.blogspot.co.uk

Dear friends - I am writing this special blog for the people in my online community who seem to despise President Trump and who resist, often with great venom, the possibility that Trump may actually bring very beneficial changes to America. In response to the naysayers, I have put together a list of things that have recently occurred thanks to President Trump. These changes have occurred in just the last few days, with President Trump being in office only four days. Although this list is not all-inclusive, if he can do this much in 4 days, imagine what he can do in 4 years.

I have also gathered a few links below filled with Jewish hysterics and kvetching -- all indicating that many Jews are terrified of a Trump presidency. From where I am sitting, this is a very good thing. If organized Jewry does not like Trump, that is all the more reason for true Americans to love him.

Please glance through all the links, read the ones that seem important to you, and share, share, share. If you have links that you think I should add, please email me at [removed by submitter]

Also, at the very end of this blog, I have included a heartfelt request. If people join me in this request, I am certain that things in America are about to move strongly in the direction of The Good.

Here are the links. Please do read through to the end and join my in my heartfelt request. Thanks!

[...]

HERE'S MY HEARTFELT REQUEST


Friends - I am about to make a heartfelt request. There are many in my facebook and online community who absolutely, steadfastly believe that no good can possibly come from a Trump Presidency or from anywhere inside the U.S. government or from any government at all, no matter where it is and no matter who is involved with it. Despite these belief systems, we have evidence on our planet today that governments CAN and DO move toward The Good, and in fact, this has happened in Russia thanks to Vladimir Putin who has now banned GMOs in Russia, is giving away free land to any Russian family that wants it, and is supporting the growth of Russian families by giving away $500,000 rubles to each family every time they have a child after the first. Putin plans to make Russia the leading producer and exporter of organic and healthy foods. He and his government have moved to ban at least two major porn sites. He has kicked George Soros out his country, and he has spoken out about vaccines and the dangers of pharmaceutical drugs. He has indicated in myriad ways that he is working in service to the energy of Love, despite the fact that he is a politician and despite the fact that he is a leader in government.

The reason that so much good is happening in Russia today is simple. It is happening BECAUSE THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE BELIEVED IT WOULD HAPPEN!!! They read the Ringing Cedars books, they felt the Truth of what was being shared in their hearts, and they moved to create a bright future, including using the power of images to bring that future into form. The Russian people are doing this with the help of their government and this is exactly what needs to happen BASED ON WHERE MANKIND IS IN CONSCIOUSNESS AT THIS TIME. It is likely that governments will fall away naturally in the future as we move more and more in the direction of our pristine origins. But right now, we need to work with the governments of the world in order to effectuate positive change.

And so for those who insist that no good will ever come from a Trump Presidency or from any President or any government whatsoever, and for those who feel compelled to prove that their dark vision of the future is correct by posting all manner of negative and hateful images and videos that are aligned with the dark future they have envisioned -- I ask you to please consider that by your actions and thoughts, YOU are contributing to the creation of an evil future for America and the rest of the world. Every time you post a hate-filled video, comment, or picture insisting that the dark forces are controlling everything and that things are going to get worse and worse, you are calling that future into form. Every time you use images and videos and words to assert and/or try to prove your point that evil is in control, this only serves to bolster the power of a dark future for America and for other parts of the world. Every time you insist that the good people of the world have no power and are stupid to even imagine that we could make a difference, you are empowering the dark side and you are making things harder for those of us who dare to imagine a bright future for America and who dare to imagine that Trump may be able to contribute to creating this.

I ask that instead of using your energy, words, and visuals to bring a very dark future into form, why don't you sit down and write out a beautiful vision for America's future? If you are an artist, why don't you draw a beautiful vision of what America might look like in the near future? Why not consider using your words, time, and energy to imagine and visualize a bright future for America instead of focusing so much energy on hideous thoughts and dangerous expectations for our future?

What I am asking for is so simple. Please just start using your power to create The Good and STOP allowing the dark forces to use you to create the future that THEY want to bring into form. Every time you have an expectation that evil will prevail, and especially when you speak it and post things to bolster that thought -- you are aligning yourself with that future and making it harder for those of us who are trying to bring The Good into form.

PLEASE START USING YOUR POWER FOR THE GOOD. PLEASE KNOW IN THE DEEPEST PART OF YOUR BEING THAT THE EVIL ONES ARE GOING DOWN AND THEIR WINDOW OF TIME IS CLOSING FOR GOOD.

This outcome can only happen when the good people of the world make a choice that they are DONE with evil and will no longer allow it in their lives or their world. We have been much too complacent - much too accepting - much too compliant - and denying our own power. We must all get on board with a bright vision for the future and in so doing, we will override the dark forces vision of Armageddon.

If great things can happen in Russia, they can happen here too. Please do your part to envision The Good.

Pedometer #fundie archive.is


´
I am an "active" pedophile

Before the morality police jump on me, I'll point out that this is the "confessions" subreddit, and that I'm posting because I normally have to keep this secret and I felt like it'd be liberating to just say openly what I'm into and what I do, and if you want to be retarded and judgmental, you can just go fuck off. I know that my preferences and actions aren't consistent with "traditional morality," but of course that's all relative to culture, and it's just been my bad luck to live in a time and place where my sexual preferences are considered taboo.
So I'm an "active" pedophile, which means that I regularly have sex with children. My preference is for children between the ages of 7 and 12.
Professionally, I am a child psychologist; I have two PhDs, and I work part-time as an adjunct at a major research university. Obviously, it's part of my job to understand how kids think, and my work has put me in contact with hundreds of children over the years. I have only had sex with a small percentage of them--those whom I can be reasonably confident won't tell anyone, and whom I believe may enjoy the experience. Of course, child sexuality is a complex issue, but while I find it fascinating from a scientific point of view, my desire to fuck them is basically independent from my scientific/professional interest in them, and in general I don't care whether my actions will "harm" the child when I choose to get sexual with him or her.
I have two daughters, aged 9 and 16. I never touched the 16 year old. Their mother, my wife, died from breast cancer three years ago. The older one goes to a boarding school in Michigan, where she studies flute. I have been having regular sex with the younger one since she was six.
I don't necessarily prefer boys or girls. Both are attractive to me. I have always been attracted to children, since I myself was a child. I guess as I grew older, I never stopped finding people of that particular age range sexually desirable. I suppose I generally prefer "consensual" sex, although I also find "forced" scenarios also arousing.
I don't keep a tally, but I'd estimate that I've had some form of sexual contact with 50-60 children; full penis-in-vagina penetration with approximately 20 girls, anal sex with three girls, and anal sex with about a dozen boys. I would classify five of those encounters as "rape," but the vast majority were in the gray area of "consent," as is generally the case with children.
I suppose something that some readers may find interesting is that I have met several other pedophiles, who have similar preferences to mine. I suppose that many of you would be surprised about several things that I have learned in my interactions with other pedophiles. First, about how many secret pedophiles there are, how exceedingly common this sexual preference is; second, how common sex with children is; third, how often the child enjoys it; and fourth, how easy it is to "get away with it" in a society that basically treats pedophiles like "witches." If anyone wants to ask me details--note, I will not stupidly reveal any identifying information, so don't bother trying to "trick" me into giving up my address--then feel free to PM me, and I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Lady Checkmate #fundie disqus.com

NOTE: This was posted not on Lady Checkmate's "Faith & Religion" channel but instead the "news" channel she runs on Disqus.

(Commenting on story "The lies gays want you to believe: "Consenting Adults," but what about the children?"):

Lady Checkmate:

Myth 1: Homosexuality is only between consenting adults....ignore the children at the parades and all night drag shows.

Myth 2: There are no homosexual pedophiles: all pedophiles are straight, even if they rape children of the same sex. (They ignore the single adults as well as the married gay couples who rape children of the same sex and then attempt to explain away their depravity as if their pedophilia is ok because they just can't control themselves and often accuse the children of seducing them.

Children are being exploited, sexualized, groomed, abused, and introduced to homosexual sexual play and adults are allowing it because they're afraid to offend a group of adults who are targeting children.
Consider actions and events like those currently happening: an eight-year-old drag queen performing for a group of adult homosexuals, gay parades where children are exposed to adult nudity, S&M, simulated sex acts, etc., Canada passing a law that would remove children form their parents if the parents don't support the gay life style, the 40/50 year-old drag queen who put on a sexually-charged performance/crawling on the floor and flicking his tongue at an elementary school's talent show in lingerie, the gay "couple" who raped elementary and middle school boys as a "couple", etc. and note that under normal circumstances they would be illegal.

rev2000:

LC, it is fear mongering without any scientific or common sense substantiation. Fear mongering feeds on those who indeed, are most vulnerable through ignorance. They are easily "led" by other insecure individuals. There is no correlation between homosexuality and pedophilia . . .in fact it is the opposite. There is a correlation, however, between religious rigidity and skewed sexuality issues including pedophilia and child molestation. I'm sorry people are so needlessly fearful and life is so burdensome. We pray for them and their lack of trust in the Lord.

http://mental-health-matters.com/profile-of-a-pedophile/

Are primarily (but not always) male, masculine, better-educated, more religious than average, in their thirties, and choose jobs allowing them greater access to children.
Are usually family men, have no criminal record, and deny that they abuse children, even after caught, convicted, incarcerated, and court-ordered into a sex offender program. The marriage is often troubled by sexual dysfunction, and serves as a smokescreen for the pedophile’s true preferences and practices.

Lady Checkmate:

You are an arrogant fool professing himself to be wise.
You put alot of stock into college degrees (mocking red necks/hill billies/southern blacks/etc.). (edited) What you need is common sense, humility and a heart to seek and obey God (and to protect children).
I rarely agree with you, obviously, but this time your advocating for child rapists is too much to ignore. I do not value the thoughts nor opinions of pedophile apologists and you will answer to God for your lies and abuse against children.
*Do not ever comment to me again. Move on. I do not value your opinion and will not interact with you as a human being.
Anyone who protects and defends child rapists deserves nothing.
DO NOT EVER COMMENT TO ME AGAIN. Children are OFF LIMITS HERE.

womnaretrashyskanks #fundie reddit.com

Aspects of Sharia Law that Will Improve Society

I am not a muslim or starting a religious debate, but there are many aspects of sharia law that would be benefit society, incels especially, listed below. I will explain how each of these aid men's rights. Clitorectomies prevent the sluttiness of women, as we all know female pleasure comes from the clitoris, removing it with will reduce their sluttishness and ensure they become prim and proper housewives. Beating a woman maybe necessary at times, since unforgivable actions such as cucking or even just female bitchiness towards their husbands, can be prevented. Also women are like children and need strict discipline to be productive housewives. Preventing women from divorcing will prevent cucking and lead to women being good. A woman not gaining custody of children, means children will go to the man who can raise them better. Children raised in single family homes, led by mothers are most likely to be incel or criminals. There are plenty of false rape accusations going on today, rape is a weapon women use to subjugate men, by preventing women from testifying in court and requiring 4 male witnesses, women dare not lie about rape and this ensures the validity of the crime actually occuring. Also women being prevented from speaking to other men, greatly reduces the possibility of cucking. These aspects will greatly improve society, and men's rights.

• Girls' clitoris should be cut (Muhammad's words, Book 41, Kitab Al-Adab, Hadith 5251).

• A man can beat his wife for insubordination.

• A man can unilaterally divorce his wife; a woman needs her husband's consent to divorce . • A divorced wife loses custody of all children over 6 years of age or when they exceed it.

• Testimonies of four male witnesses are required to prove rape against a woman.

• A woman who has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist(s).

• A woman cannot speak alone to a man who is not her husband or relative.

Macrocephalus #sexist #moonbat #kinkshaming incels.co

Sex is ubiquitous in today's western world. Sexual promiscuity is not only condoned but encouraged. Some argue that this is just the way things are naturally supposed to work. Actually though, this wasn't the case for a long time. People actually invested little time and resources dealing with sex. It was pretty much took for granted. Most people would eventually become of age, seek a partner through networking in communities (a small village, the church etc.), get married and that was pretty much it. They'll eventually move on to deal with less worldy and animal-like aspects of life rather than sex. It would play a small part in the rest of their existence, and mainly for reproductive reasons.

Ironically this glorification of sex happens in a time where many people are having less sex than their ancestors used to (there are many studies you probably already know, I'll just link one)

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/12/the-sex-recession/573949/

By the way this is absolutely consistent with modern sexual dynamics, since of course when a resource is scarce, it becomes fetishized.

This mechanism also features a key characteristic of capitalism, which is unequally allocating resources: on one hand you have attractive people who are so awashed with sex, and take so much pride in succeeding at something so glorified by society, that they make it one of their main focus in life; then you have normies who delude themselves into thinking they'll eventually get to live the same life as attractive people if only they try hard enough and invest enough time/money; and finally on the other spectrum we have incels who are completely deprived of sex, and thus end up making something so worldly, something they were supposed to take for granted, their main source of pain, misery and motivation (or more often, lack thereof)


Quoting from Marx's "Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844" regarding the estrangement of labor in the factory based system of production:

As a result, therefore, man (the worker) only feels himself freely active in his animal functions – eating, drinking, procreating, or at most in his dwelling and in dressing-up, etc.; and in his human functions he no longer feels himself to be anything but an animal. What is animal becomes human and what is human becomes animal.

Certainly eating, drinking, procreating, etc., are also genuinely human functions. But taken abstractly, separated from the sphere of all other human activity and turned into sole and ultimate ends, they are animal functions.

There's only a finite amount of resources (time, money, intellectual capabilities) one can dedicate to a given number of activities. If a mundane activity such as sex ends up absorbing a hefty share of them (either because you're good at it and like indulging in it, or because you can't get any and won't stop brooding about it) there will be less resources to dedicate to something else (e.g. questioning the status quo)

Obviously we now live in a post-industrial society. People are now consumers first, rather than producers. Capitalism has thus switched from exploiting labor, to exploiting consumption. This is where the commodification of sex comes into play. Sex being promoted, advertised, fetishized, and unequally distributed just like any other commodity, only broadens the spectrum of consumption, and the broader it gets, the more there is for capitalism to exploit.
Labor -> Consumption -> Sex.
As a consequence, stemming from the estrangement of labor, WE CAN RIGHTFULLY TALK OF ESTRANGEMENT OF SEX as the main tool to degrade mankind.


What is animal becomes human and what is human becomes animal.

[A picture of Karl Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and then Elliot Rodger]

nikita46 #sexist #kinkshaming removeddit.com

[ in response to a man confessing to cheating on his asexual wife with an escort ]

Congratulations. The only thing more pathetic and gross than a dude who cheats on his wife because he's too much of a pussy to divorce her...is a dude who cheats on his wife with a filthy used-up hooker and is stupid enough to pay for it. At least stay away from your wife so she doesn't catch your disgusting STD. Stay classy.

Good point...his wife already figured out how gross he is and won't touch him. That's why he has to pay someone to lower themselves to have sex with him. Hopefully, she divorces him and takes whatever she can.


[ In response to a man admitting to sexually abusing his underage sister ]

She needs therapy...you need therapy....not self-therapy but you actually need to go speak to someone and so does she. If you guys are in an ok place to talk, I would talk to her candidly about it and honestly ask her what she needs you to do. Whether that's to turn yourself in...or to tell the family...or whatever she needs. You need to seek redemption from her and put yourself in a position where she can tell you what she now needs you to do so she can move on. After you do that, you'll be able to move on too. But both of you need to get some professional help.

William Grimes #fundie conservatism.referata.com

Sermon 3: The Lord's Table

By Rev. William H. Grimes

When we take communion, we may see it as a little cracker and a shot glass filled with grape juice. However, it symbolizes much more than that. Ir is simply a symbol of the body and blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. Papists claim that it is a literal reception of the Lord's body and blood, but this is flat out heresy. God has banned cannibalism! "Consubstantiation" as practiced by liberal Lutherans and Episcopalians is also mystical hocus pocus. Papists have "Eucharistic adoration" where idolaters worship a piece of bread! It is NOT Jesus! It IS a mockery! I Corinthians 11:2 says "Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you." These are ORDINANCES. The Bible says absolutely NOTHING about "sacraments!" You will go to Hell if you dare mock God by claiming that "sacraments" do the work of God on command!!! Heresy is what this simply is!!!!!!!!!!

Just like baptism is an outward symbol of an inward transition into a life of Christ, which BABIES CANNOT CHOOSE IN THEIR INFANCY, the Lord's Supper doesn't contain the body and blood of Jesus, and if some atheist loser takes a cookie it is NOT a hostage situation! It IS A SYMBOL AND NOTHING MORE, PAGAN IDOLATERS!!!!!!

"For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come." Ye do SHEW the Lord's death, not recreate it and act like cannibals! It is a MEMORIAL, and NOTHING ELSE! Jesus spoke in parables and metaphors, and any idiot can plainly read that it is a SYMBOL except papists and other heretics apparently. The cup was not filled with wine as it is known today, but it did not cause drunkenness since the Bible says to stay away from strong drink, so if you have communion and you use wine or WATER as the Mormons do instead of grape juice, you are simply a HERETIC!

"Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body."

Therefore, eat only if you are of clean mind and spirit! Do NOT take the Lord's Supper if you had premarital sex and did not repent! Do NOT take if you got drunk the night before or engaged in self abuse right before church! GET RIGHT WITH GOD! THERE IS NO MORTAL SIN, THERE IS NO VENIAL SIN, THERE IS NO PURGATORY, THERE IS JUST SIN! THERE IS JUST HEAVEN AND HELL! IF YOU DO NOT REPENT OF YOUR SINFUL WAYS AND YOU DIE WITHOUT HAVING REPENTED AND WALKED AWAY WITHOUT SIN YOU WILL BE DAMNED! SIN IS SIN! NO HERESY, APOSTASY, LUST, FORNICATION, ADULTERY, THEFT, LYING, SELF ABUSE, CURSING, TAKING THE LORD'S NAME IN VAIN, OR ANYTHING ELSE! NO POPERY! WORSHIP ONLY GOD! DO NOT EAT AND DRINK DAMNATION! LET THE COMMUNION PLATE PASS YOU BY IF YOU ARE NOT RIGHT WITH GOD! God's people said AMEN!

Steven R. #fundie simplychristian.referata.com

Sermon 7: The Lord’s Supper

By Bro. Steven R.

When we take communion, we may see it as a little cracker and a shot glass filled with grape juice. However, it symbolizes much more than that. Ir is simply a symbol of the body and blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. Papists claim that it is a literal reception of the Lord's body and blood, but this is flat out heresy. God has banned cannibalism! "Consubstantiation" as practiced by liberal Lutherans and Episcopalians is also mystical hocus pocus. Papists have "Eucharistic adoration" where idolaters worship a piece of bread! It is NOT Jesus! It IS a mockery! I Corinthians 11:2 says "Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you." These are ORDINANCES. The Bible says absolutely NOTHING about "sacraments!" You will go to Hell if you dare mock God by claiming that "sacraments" do the work of God on command!!! Heresy is what this simply is!!!!!!!!!! Just like baptism is an outward symbol of an inward transition into a life of Christ, which BABIES CANNOT CHOOSE IN THEIR INFANCY, the Lord's Supper doesn't contain the body and blood of Jesus, and if some atheist loser takes a cookie it is NOT a hostage situation! It IS A SYMBOL AND NOTHING MORE, PAGAN IDOLATERS!!!!!!

"For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come." Ye do SHEW the Lord's death, not recreate it and act like cannibals! It is a MEMORIAL, and NOTHING ELSE! Jesus spoke in parables and metaphors, and any idiot can plainly read that it is a SYMBOL except papists and other heretics apparently. The cup was not filled with wine as it is known today, but it did not cause drunkenness since the Bible says to stay away from strong drink, so if you have communion and you use wine or WATER as the Mormons do instead of grape juice, you are simply a HERETIC! "Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body."

Some Baptist churches nowadays have these little soup crackers that they pass out for communion. That’s also WICKED! You need to BREAK bread in order to symbolize the body of Christ which was broken for you!!! Get some unleavened bread and BREAK it and share it along with the grape juice! We need to have a seriousness even with the mere elements in which we use to obey Christ! No Wonder bread like the Mormons either! LEAVEN IS NOT PURE! UNLEAVENED BREAD IS THE ONLY WAY TO HAVE A RESPECTFUL MEMORIAL! Some Baptist Churches celebrate the Lord’s Supper every week! Only do it once a month or quarter or year so that it’s a special memorial and not rote paganism like the Papists and the Episcopagans!

Therefore, eat only if you are of clean mind and spirit! Do NOT take the Lord's Supper if you had premarital sex and did not repent! Do NOT take if you got drunk the night before or engaged in self abuse right before church! GET RIGHT WITH GOD! THERE IS NO MORTAL SIN, THERE IS NO VENIAL SIN, THERE IS NO PURGATORY, THERE IS JUST SIN! THERE IS JUST HEAVEN AND HELL! IF YOU DO NOT REPENT OF YOUR SINFUL WAYS AND YOU DIE WITHOUT HAVING REPENTED AND WALKED AWAY WITHOUT SIN YOU WILL BE DAMNED! SIN IS SIN! NO HERESY, APOSTASY, LUST, FORNICATION, ADULTERY, THEFT, LYING, SELF ABUSE, CURSING, TAKING THE LORD'S NAME IN VAIN, OR ANYTHING ELSE! NO POPERY! WORSHIP ONLY GOD! DO NOT EAT AND DRINK DAMNATION! LET THE COMMUNION PLATE PASS YOU BY IF YOU ARE NOT RIGHT WITH GOD!

Faith Facts #fundie faithfacts.org

When the subject of Gay Marriage comes up, how are Christians doing at communicating the harm to society with the secular world? Do we have logical reasons to present without being perceived as being "Bible-thumping"?

Here are 20 reasons which may help communicate to our secular friends that Gay Marriage is not only a moral issue for Christians, but a societal ill. All but a few of these reasons are secular rather than religious:

1. The whole fabric of gay rights disappears with this fact: There is no scientific evidence that people are born gay, and much evidence exists that proves the opposite. People leave the homosexual lifestyle and desire all the time. (See http://www.faithfacts.org/christ-and-the-culture/gay-rights#born.)

2. Marriage is the fundamental building block of all human civilization, and has been across cultural and religious lines for 5000+ years. By encouraging the norms of marriage—monogamy, sexual exclusivity, and permanence—the state strengthens civil society. Society as a whole, not merely any given set of spouses, benefits from marriage. This is because traditional marriage helps to channel procreative love into a stable institution that provides for the orderly bearing and rearing of the next generation.

3. Contrary to the liberal and libertarian viewpoint, marriage is not merely an institution for the convenience of adults. It is about the rights of children. Marriage is society’s least restrictive means of ensuring the well-being of children. Every child has the right to a mom and a dad whenever possible. Numerous studies show that children do best with two biological parents. Here is just one study: Two Biological Parents.

4. Marriage benefits everyone because separating the bearing and rearing of children from marriage burdens innocent bystanders: not just children, but the whole community. History shows that no society long survives after a change that hurts the sanctity of marriage between one man and one woman.

5. Law cannot be divorced from reality—from nature. The two sexes are complementary, not undifferentiated. This is a fact of nature, thus given by God. No government has the right to alter what is true by nature. (See America’s Declaration of Independence.)

6. Redefining marriage would diminish the social pressures and incentives for husbands to remain with their wives and BIOLOGICAL children, and for men and women to marry before having children.

7. The results of redefining marriage—parenting by single parents, divorced parents, remarried parents, cohabiting couples, and fragmented families of any kind—are demonstrably worse for children. According to the best available sociological evidence, children fare best on virtually every examined indicator when reared by their wedded biological parents. Studies that control for other factors, including poverty and even genetics, suggest that children reared in intact homes do best on educational achievement, emotional health, familial and sexual development, and delinquency and incarceration. In short, marriage unites a man and a woman holistically—emotionally and bodily, in acts of conjugal love and in the children such love brings forth—for the whole of life.

8. Studies show domestic violence is three times higher among homosexual partnerships, compared to heterosexual marriages. A large portion of murders, assaults, other crimes and various harms to children occur along with, or as a consequence of, domestic violence. Half of pedophilia attacks are homosexual, for example. Normalizing homosexual marriage also encourages non-marital homosexual activity, and thus the social pathologies associated with it.

9. Promiscuity is rampant among homosexuals, including those who are married. Various studies indicate that gays average somewhere between 10 and 110 different sex partners per year. The New York Times, among many other sources, reported the finding that exclusivity was not the norm among gay partners: “With straight people, it’s called affairs or cheating,” said Colleen Hoff, the study’s principal investigator, “but with gay people it does not have such negative connotations. ‘Openness’ and ‘flexibility’ of gay relationships are euphemisms for sexual infidelity.” One study showed that only 4.5% of homosexual males said they were faithful to their current partner, compared to 85% of heterosexual married women and 75.5% of heterosexual married men. Promiscuity is a destabilizing influence on society.

10. The confusion resulting from further delinking childbearing from marriage would force the state to intervene more often in family life and expand welfare programs. If marriage has no form and serves no social purpose, how will society protect the needs of children—the prime victim of our non-marital sexual culture—without government growing more intrusive and more expensive? Without healthy marriages, the community often must step in to provide (more or less directly) for their well-being and upbringing. Thus, by encouraging the norms of marriage—monogamy, sexual exclusivity, and permanence—the state strengthens civil society and reduces its own role. (Libertarians, do you see the importance of this? If you want the state to be less intrusive, get off the gay marriage idea!)

11. Promoting marriage does not ban any type of relationship: Adults are free to make choices about their relationships, and they do not need government sanction or license to do so. People are free to have contracts with each other. All Americans have the freedom to live as they choose, but no one has a right to redefine marriage for everyone else.

12. Law is a teacher. Just as many people, even some Christians, thought that slavery was okay when it was legal, will think that gay marriage is OK when it is legal.

13. Gay marriage is undeniably a step into other deviances. What will result are such things as plural marriages and polygamy. These things could not logically be turned back, and will initiate a further plunge of societal stability.

14. Only a small percentage of gays who are given the right to marry do so anyway (4% by one study). This proves that the gay marriage movement is not about marriage, but about affirmation.

15. Anal intercourse leads to numerous pathologies, obviously because the parts do not fit! Among items in a long list of problems listed by researcher and physician James Holsinger are these: enteric diseases (infections from a variety of viruses and bacteria including a very high incidence of amoebiasis, giardiasis, and hepatitis, etc.), trauma (fecal incontinence, anal fissure, rectosigmoid tears, chemical sinusitis, etc.), sexually transmitted diseases (AIDS, gonorrhea, simplex infections, genital warts, scabies, etc.). Anal cancer is only one of other medical problems higher in gay men that heterosexual men, especially monogamous heterosexual men. Society at large pays for these diseases. (Speaking to “Christian Libertarians,” unlike certain activities that also contribute to national health problems, such as obesity, homosexuality is morally wrong. Poor eating habits are not a moral issue; gluttony is not a sin.)

16. The ravages of the gay lifestyle are severe upon the gay community itself but also for society at large. The best available evidence shows that those practicing homosexual behavior have a 20% to 30% shorter life span. A much higher rate of alcoholism, drug abuse, sexually transmitted disease, domestic violence, child molestation and more occur in homosexual populations. (See http://www.faithfacts.org/christ-and-the-culture/gay-rights#ravages.)

17. It is okay to discriminate. We discriminate all the time in our rules and laws. It is illegal to marry your parent. It is illegal to be a pedophile or a sociopath, no matter how strong the innate tendency might be.

18. Gay marriage and religious freedom are incompatible because it will marginalize those who affirm marriage as the union of a man and a woman. The First Amendment is at stake! This is already evident in Massachusetts and Washington, D.C., among other locations. After Massachusetts redefined marriage to include same-sex relationships, Catholic Charities of Boston was forced to discontinue its adoption services rather than place children with same-sex couples against its principles. Massachusetts public schools began teaching grade-school students about same-sex marriage, defending their decision because they are “committed to teaching about the world they live in, and in Massachusetts same-sex marriage is legal.” A Massachusetts appellate court ruled that parents have no right to exempt their children from these classes. Businesses that refuse to accept gay marriage as a legitimate institution will be penalized. It is a certainty that the church will at some point, be unable to preach the full council of God. It will be considered hate speech to speak of traditional marriage as right. Churches will begin losing their tax exempt status. Individuals who speak out against gay marriage will be penalized. This is only the tip of the iceberg. (Speaking again to "Christian Libertarians” who are OK with gay marriage: Do you see the issue here? This is important! Legalizing gay marriage nationally will lead to an assault on religion.)

19. Homosexual practioners cost more than they contribute via disproportionate diseases and disasters such as HIV, hepatitis, herpes, mental illness, substance abuse, suicide, assault, etc. The Center for Disease Control estimates that each HIV infection ALONE generates $700,000 in direct and indirect costs. (Source: Family Research Report, April 2014)

20. Homosexual activity and marriage robs our future by: having fewer children, poorly socializing the children they raise, commit about half of all child molestations recorded in the news. (Source: Family Research Report, April 2014)

The question is asked, why shouldn't two people who love each other be allowed to get married? ANSWER: Marriage is not about love. In many countries around the world, marriages are arranged. Marriage is about the rights of children and thus is about supporting the next generation. Anything that weakens the institution of marriage is an injustice to children and a travesty to the culture.

sweetkitty #fundie christianforums.com

Not many things upset me on these forums..but the LIE that homosexual activists like to bandy about that any relationship in the Bible was a homosexual one really gets under my skin. It's not enough that you people want to legitimize a perverse behavior in the eyes of the world..it's not enough that you have to inudate our children with your sick thinking every day...you have to take what is Holy and good to us and try and pervert that.

Sally Kern #fundie rightwingwatch.org

[a resolution submitted to vote in the Oklahoma state government]

WHEREAS, the people of Oklahoma have a strong tradition of reliance upon the Creator of the Universe; and

WHEREAS, we believe our economic woes are consequences of our greater national moral crisis; and

WHEREAS, this nation has become a world leader in promoting abortion, pornography, same sex marriage, sex trafficking, divorce, illegitimate births, child abuse, and many other forms of debauchery; and

WHEREAS, alarmed that the Government of the United States of America is forsaking the rich Christian heritage upon which this nation was built; and

WHEREAS, grieved that the Office of the president of these United States has refused to uphold the long held tradition of past presidents in giving recognition to our National Day of Prayer; and

WHEREAS, deeply disturbed that the Office of the president of these United States disregards the biblical admonitions to live clean and pure lives by proclaiming an entire month to an immoral behavior;

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that we the undersigned elected officials of the people of Oklahoma, religious leaders and citizens of the State of Oklahoma, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world, solemnly declare that the HOPE of the great State of Oklahoma and of these United States, rests upon the Principles of Religion and Morality as put forth in the HOLY BIBLE

Dani #fundie worstgenerationseed.blogspot.com

Almost all risk of STD and out-of-wedlock pregnancy can be avoided by saving intercourse for marriage. The lives and souls of our children are in our hands. Parents must take drastic measures to ensure the safety of their children by eliminating the primary elements of teenage sex: divorce, the media, and public schools.

MercyBurst #fundie christianforums.com

[After "quoting" UberLutheran on something he did not post]

God COMMANDED Peter to hit the seafood buffet 3 times.

(Acts 11)

Quote:
5 I was in the city of Joppa praying: and in a trance I saw a vision, A certain vessel descend, as it had been a great sheet, let down from heaven by four corners; and it came even to me:

6Upon the which when I had fastened mine eyes, I considered, and saw fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.

7 And I heard a voice saying unto me, Arise, Peter; slay and eat.

8 But I said, Not so, Lord: for nothing common or unclean hath at any time entered into my mouth.

9 But the voice answered me again from heaven, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

10 And this was done three times: and all were drawn up again into heaven.

If it's good enough for Peter then it's good enough for me.

Besides, it's just common sense.

Niata #racist stormfront.org

This issue bothers me, too. I have had a White guy tell me that he prefers Asian women; I'll never understand why. I don't find their facial features attractive in the slightest and recognize them as foreigners. Why would you turn down your own women to date a foreigner, someone who doesn't share your history, heritage, or culture? Do you really hate your own people that much?

I figure if they're good enough to date, then they're good enough to live amongst. Let these White men move to Asian countries and forgo the benefits of living in a country created by the White people they've shunned.

HolyGuardianAngels #fundie christianforums.com

["I would like to know what scientific (non-biblical) basis there is for Creationism"]

IF It Is Good Enough For America
THEN It Is Good Enough For Me . . .

I pledge allegiance to the Flag [America]
of the United States OF America
and to the REPUBLIC for which
it stands: ONE NATION
Under GOD, indivisible
with liberty and justice for [some] . . .


The above is The Pledge of Allegiance . . .
with personal emphasis and interpretation added . . .

However, the POINT being:

* In God WE Trust

is also on American, MONEY . . .

However, you can't see it on electronic funds . . .

YET,
No matter WHO may remove it (the above mentioned religious phrases). . .

For time and eternity, these phrases will be
recorded in HISTORY . . .

Thusly, demonstrating that the MASSES
gave testimony, that GOD EXISTS and LIVES . . .

Kinda like: USA Cigarettes . . .

Michael #fundie rr-bb.com

Not eating meat on purpose (when it is available, but you still avoid it) is not something Jesus instructed us to do.

You don't have to eat McDonald's everyday or anything like that, but to avoid meat is to imply you don't trust the Bible when it states (sorry for no verse) all food has been made clean to eat.

What do you not agree with here?

If it is good enough for the Word, it is good enough for me and you.

End of story.

Samantha Allen #fundie unpitchable.tumblr.com

i’m a misandrist. that means i hate men. i’m not a cute misandrist. i don’t have a fridge magnet that says, “boys are stupid, throw rocks at them.” my loathing cannot be contained by a fridge magnet.

i am not an equality feminist. i don’t believe that an asymmetrical world will be cured by polite obsequence to male-dominated systems. i am not a liberal humanist. i don’t believe that i need to stand up for men when they’ve been standing on top of everyone else.

misandry is not a political program; it’s a stance. i don’t care whether hating men is a good or bad feminist strategy (and i care even less what men think about misandry). i don’t think i have a responsibility to change the world. i think i have a responsibility to survive.

imagine being born into a world where your experiences are not represented, where your work is undervalued, where your body is always open for comment, where your friends are routinely harassed and abused, and where this situation will literally be your reality for your entire life. if you’re a woman, you don’t have to imagine that world because you already live in it.

if you’re a man, you never have and never will live in that world. but try to imagine what it feels like. i’ll tell you: when i think about the kind of world we live in, i feel simultaneously hopeless and infuriated and i oscillate so quickly between those two emotional extremes that i literally start to get dizzy.

being a woman in this world feels like getting buried alive. think about that. think about feeling that every day.

why do i have to answer the question “why do i hate men?” when men don’t even stop to ask why they have always hated women. i have to answer the question because men can’t tolerate for one second the sort of contempt they’ve had for women for thousands of years.

why do i hate men? because life is short. my life is getting shorter by the day and i want to fill it with women. in this sinking ship of a world, i just want to enjoy a tiny little space, a room, if you will, of my own. i want that room to be full of women and free from ego, hierarchy, sexual advances, and violence. i hate men because i can’t even have that fucking room without them knocking on the walls. you have the entire fucking house. go play in it. find something else to do.

i hate men because it’s not my job to fix masculinity; it’s my job to heal from it and to be together with my sisters as we try to make it through a hostile world. and yet i am expected to patiently educate men on how not to be an asshole. here’s my only tip: stop spending so much time around men. they’re assholes.

i hate men because men hate me and the burden to take the high road should not fall on my shoulders.

i am friends with some men, yes. usually these are men who have some experience of marginalization (whether via their race, class, gender identity, sexual identity, what have you) or who have gone through the self-interrogation and relational deprogramming necessary to build meaningful community with women. you don’t just get to read a book and you’re golden. you have to get fucking baptized in menstrual blood as far as i’m concerned.

i hate men doesn’t mean i hate you. it means i hate your position in this world. it means i’m not obligated to like you. it means i don’t have to talk to you if i don’t want to. it means i get to have my space and i don’t have to dance for you, smile at you, or soothe you. and you can put up with me being wary of you, can’t you, because the world has a fucking red carpet waiting for you wherever you go.

Robert Oscar Lopez #fundie thepublicdiscourse.com

Let’s be clear: I am not saying that same-sex parents are automatically guilty of any kind of physical, sexual, or emotional abuse to the children they raise. Nor am I saying that LGBT people are less likely to take good care of children.

What I mean is this: Even the most heroic mother in the world can’t father. So to intentionally deprive any child of her mother or father, except in cases like divorce for grave reasons or the death of a parent, is itself a form of abuse. (Though my mother raised me with the help of a lesbian partner, I do not feel I was abused, because I always knew that my mother didn’t intend for my father to divorce her.)