Similar posts

eyzwydopen #racist stormfront.org

Re: did the holercaust really happen?

It depends on what is defined as the holocaust.
Jews were rounded up and placed in concentration camps, that is an undeniable fact.
The tales of these jews being exterminated en-mass simply for being jews has been debunked to the point that the perpetrators of the lies have deemed it necessary to impose laws that criminalize the investigation of the story's.
The beginning of the fable of six million dead, dying and in peril can be traced way back before the German concentration camps during WW2.
The magical six million number is from a misinterpreted prophesy that says the jews can return to Israel when the prophesy has been fulfilled.
That is also an undeniable fact.
The jews had a motive for fabricating the story.
They have profited from the lie.
They got their own homeland from belief that the magical six million dead jew prophesy had been realized.
They control the Gentiles with the lie which gives them political power over the Gentiles.
They control the flow of information and finance shielded by the lie with the threat of accusing anyone who questions the lie with being in cahoots with the people who supposedly perpetrated the holocaust.
Witnesses have been caught lying, evidence has been fabricated and the story keeps changing.
The story tellers have a habit of ignoring the deaths of jews caused by the war, such as allied bombing of factories where they worked and the bombing of supply lines to the camps that resulted in mass starvation and disease.
Have you even seen a photograph of a corpse that didn't appear to have starved to death?
They also ignore the concentration camps in other country's so as to not lessen the impact of the fabled jewish holocaust.
They build memorials and museums and continue to produce countless movies, documentary's and speaking tours that pressure Gentiles with guilt and shame.
Guilt and shame is a powerful weapon in the jewish arsenal.
Jews themselves have admitted that they use guilt and shame to silence their opposition.
Did it really happen the way they said it did?
That is for you to decide.
When you weigh both sides of the story, the story tellers version becomes very suspicious.

Ted Olivas #fundie barbwire.com

The homosexual community's insidious demanding of acceptance stems from violating one's own conscience and ignoring the shame and guilt that result from doing so. Because they choose to turn from the truth they believe their shame, self-loathing, guilt, suicide and so forth are the fault of society, therefore society must be changed. The increasingly rabid homosexual agenda will never be satisfied until all echoes of conscience are silenced. With the promoting of actions that war against one's own mind they will usher in further delusions upon a spiritually ignorant society. The searing of one own conscience is the true suicide.

Tom Brock #fundie oneby1.org

I have struggled with homosexual temptation most of my life. By the grace of God I have always been celibate but the struggle for me has been intense. Sadly, the battle was also with my own denomination. In my 22 years as a pastor in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America I spoke at church conventions for the Biblical standard of celibacy for those with same-sex attraction. Sadly, in 2009 the ELCA adopted a more liberal view and began ordaining practicing homosexuals. I have left the ELCA but I continue in my television ministry to uphold the truth that homosexual behavior is sin, and the fact that I struggle with this temptation does not give me license to practice the behavior.

This summer I testified before a hearing at the convention of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) as they debated whether to change the definition of marriage to include homosexual couples. I explained that I am a person who struggles with same-sex attraction but the last thing I want to see is the Church endorse a behavior that hurts people in this life and which excludes them from the Kingdom in the next (I Corinthian 6:9-11).

I stated: "Is it not arrogant to think that we are somehow more enlightened than all the Christians who came before us?" I believe it is safest to interpret Scripture the way Christians have understood it for 2,000 years and the solid testimony of church history is against homosexual behavior. The Biblical interpretation that has led some denominations astray – notably the ELCA, Presbyterian Church USA, the Episcopal Church in America, and the United Church of Christ – maintains that the Bible does not condemn homosexual behavior per se, but only promiscuous homosexual behavior. As much as part of me – my flesh – would like to believe I can legitimately engage in homosexual behavior, the Bible remains a permanent obstacle. An objective reading of Leviticus 18:22, 20:13, Deuteronomy 22:5, Romans 1:26-27, I Corinthians 6:9-11, I Timothy 1:8-10, Jude 6,7 makes clear that the Bible's condemnation of homosexual behavior is a blanket one. There is never the added caveat: But it is okay if you love each other.

At the Presbyterian convention, one pastor testified that the denomination should allow her to marry lesbians in her congregation because "If I don't I will hurt them." I responded, "No, to encourage them to engage in a behavior which will rob them of salvation, that is what will hurt them."

I was interviewed on Minneapolis radio about my struggle and the interviewer asked, "Pastor Brock, why don't you just go with this orientation as who you are." I responded, "I'm glad I didn't. I'd be dead. Many men my age who went into this lifestyle are dead." Some liberal Lutheran bishops I know believe they are being loving by affirming homosexual behavior. The truth is they are hurting people. As one old Lutheran pastor said, "They are nicing people right into hell." I can't tell you how grievous it was for me with my struggle to hear bishops endorse something that I knew was evil.

So what does one do if one suffers from same-sex attraction? I believe the answer is: fight. Nowhere are we told the Christian life will be easy. I once heard someone say "But God would never ask you to deny something so central to your make-up as homosexuality." I thought, "Why not?" If we believe in the doctrine of original sin – that we are all born sinners because of Adam's fall (Romans 5) – then indeed every Christian is called to battle the sin that is so central to our make-up. One often hears "But I didn't choose this." I can relate. I never consciously asked to have these temptations. But most alcoholics do not wake up one morning and say "I think I'll have a drinking problem." Kleptomaniacs do not say "I think I'll have a problem with shoplifting." We may not choose our temptations in life, but we do choose what we do with our temptations. To be tempted is not sin. Jesus was tempted in Matthew 4. What we do with temptation shows whether we are endeavoring to follow Christ. And, praise God, even if we do fall under temptation, there is forgiveness when we repent and turn to Christ.

What will help people who struggle with same-sex attraction? Of course, regular prayer, Bible reading and being in a good church, a church that has not compromised on this issue. But for most people struggling with same-sex attraction, the crucial key is accountability. I have been part of a Christian support group for those who struggle with same-sex attraction. If you Google "Exodus International" you will most likely find a group in your area where you can join other Christians who have this struggle. Also very important for me are the weekly phone calls I make to my accountability partner who helps keep me on the straight and narrow.

Lastly, where does homosexuality come from? Is it nature (in the genes) or nurture (in one's upbringing)? I lean toward the latter but ultimately it does not matter. Wherever it comes from, we are called upon to follow Christ and say "no" to it. As our Lord Himself stated: "If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me" (Luke 9:23).

Michael Glatze #fundie mojpribeh.sk

[...] I am just one of millions who has stopped being homosexual, and become heterosexual.
The sick irony is that many people have absolutely no problems when someone goes from "straight" to "gay," suggesting that the person had a latent homosexuality that was just waiting to "come out!" But, what about the possibility that nobody has a latent sexuality that is anything other than the freedom to choose? Homosexuality is a choice, not a born identity. It may develop - those same-sex desires - in people for various reasons, but rather than focus on the reasons for same-sex desire, it's far more important to focus on the reality of choosing homosexuality, and the ramifications for society as well as the individual soul's relationship with God.
Those who claim they can't imagine a person leaving homosexuality are trapped in a mindset that - at its root - doubts Christ's ability to overcome. A person trapped in another sinful addiction will never be told, by any good-hearted person, that he can't possibly quit, so he should never try! But, seemingly "virtuous" people actually SAY that to friends and family members, with regards to homosexuality!? People who take the side of evil will INEVITABLY take the side AGAINST that which is good. This is a major sin; and, honestly, anyone who doubts the truth needs to seriously spend some time in prayer with God, before opening their mouths again and pushing people much further into bondage. Christ is liberty; it is up to Christians to get all of our arrogant assumptions and misconceptions out of the way, and let Christ free the trapped souls.
I don't have much patience for Christians who pretend they are "concerned" about this issue, but doubt God's truth - acting as though they, somehow, are more intelligent than God. Those people have issues.

[On those who can't "pray away the gay" even after years or fall back]

People spend too much time doubting the power of Christ, and living - instead - an entirely grace-less, self-indulgent life. The truth of the gospel is that Christ's life actually comes to life within your body, and you are no longer alive - you have been made dead in Him. So, there is nothing to complain about, if the God who created the universe and loved us enough to send His Son to become sin on our behalf, dwells in our very body!
Sure, life has its challenges; but, there is not a man or woman on earth who does not have challenges in life! People need to rise up out of their victim-mentality, their supreme self-indulgence, and let Christ have the pre-eminence in their lives. Only then will they be filled with the "fullness of joy" of glorifying God with every "word and deed," and they will love their lives in Christ so much, no matter where He takes them.
So, I reject the victimhood approach. If I were to say that a person who struggles with homosexual temptations were any different than a person who struggles with other temptations, I would be only observing one - selected - portion of reality, rather than the whole thing. And, in that unity of mankind, Christ understands what we're all going through, because he was in all ways tempted just as we are, but without sin. Thus, he can succor those of us that suffer - WHICH IS ALL OF US! It's about how you view your walk through life. If it's all about you, you, you, you're probably going to whine and complain a lot - ultimately, directly rebelling against God, doubting His Goodness, and suggesting He isn't powerful enough for you! But, if you submit - recognize, as a Christian you're dead in Christ... essentially "get over yourself," - you will find the true liberty in the grace of God, which will take you through some remarkable places, including deliverance from sins and a far better life lived for the true glory of the living God. But, don't take my word for it - or, you're bound to just think I'm an opinionated man with no compassion. Study the Bible. Get to know God yourself. It's your choice.
Many people fail because a part of them would rather wallow in despair than accept the fullness of God's grace. It is a subtle form of pride; no surprise full healing can't happen amidst that kind of a spiritual condition!!!

Patsy Lambert #fundie newberryobserver.com

Resisting temptations
By Patsy Lambert - Contributing Columnist

Satan temps us and he is called the tempter. He is called the source of all temptation, and he only succeeds because we let him. We let him succeed because of our weakness.

This is one reason Why we need Jesus. Only He can forgive us when we sin, and only He can give us strength to resist the temptations of Satan.

Remember how Satan tempted Jesus? The first one was "If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread."

The second was "If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down."

The third was "Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and he sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them. And saith unto him, all these things I give thee, it thou, wilt fall down and worship me."

"Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence Satan: for it is written, Thou Shalt Worship The Lord Thy God, And Him Only Shalt Thy Serve." Then the devil, leaveth him and behold the angels came and ministered unto him. Matthew 4:1-11.

We need the Word of God to help us resist temptations.

Mack Major #fundie facebook.com

Fornication. Masturbation. Adultery. Lust.

Christians are very good at telling others not to do certain things. But we often do a poor job of explaining why.

We haven't adequately explained WHY a person should not do things like sleep around or engage in unbridled sexual indulgence.

In fact, we never really delved into why sexual sins are such pernicious, dangerous and defeating sins in the lives of a believer. We haven't looked into the SPIRITUAL ramifications of those things.

Just like there are laws that govern what can legally be done to people within a country, and laws that stipulate what can happen to you for breaking the law: there are laws that also govern the operation of the spiritual realm.

When we commit sexual sins and taboos, we are giving permission for spiritual tormentors to take over certain aspects of our lives. We are opening the door and allowing ourselves to be taken captive by evil forces that operate as divine enforcers.

Everything that violates God's divine law opens the door for Satan and other demonic entities to enter our lives and wreak havoc. That's why it's so necessary and important to live a clean life.

God isn't trying to stop you from having fun. He's trying to stop you from ruining your life and aborting your purpose!

Sexual sins cause you to throw away your divine assignment and your purpose. It causes you to expend your life on things that will ultimately send you into deeper bondage, illness, depression and eventual utter destruction.

How many of you right now are feeling the cold harsh bite of the sexual sins you enjoyed just weeks, months or maybe even years ago? Do you know why you suffer? You suffer because you made yourself a captive of the tormentors.

And now you belong to them until you can be set free and delivered.

"Diva, Goddess, Queen: Breaking the Power of Soul Ties, Lust and Sexual Demons" is my newest and latest ebook. I literally JUST released it. And if you open your heart and heed its message, it's guaranteed to transform your life forever.

This is by far the most detailed and powerful eBook I've written yet. I could literally feel the weight of responsibility on my shoulders as I wrote it. This will be a powerful tool to help many people step into divine freedom.

This ebook breaks new ground and goes where few books have ever gone before. Packed with research and plenty of photos, you will finally learn exactly why sex is such an important topic to both heaven and hell, and how to take your life back from those forces that have been successful at holding you back.

No more struggling with guilt, shame and the burden of sin.

No more suffering under demonic attacks and oppression.

Learn what you must do to finally break free from sexual soul ties, lust and demonic assignments that are keeping you away from God's higher purpose for your life.

Some of you weren't even aware that the person you slept with was an assignment from hell sent to derail your life and cause much personal destruction. But after finishing this eBook you will finally be able to walk in the absolute freedom that only Jesus Christ provides.

reyheyy #fundie hisrebelblue.tumblr.com

Posessing child pornography is a crime. So yes, he did deserve jail time.

I get that it’s a crime, but you are missing the point of what I’m saying. My question is what good does throwing someone in jail for child porn do? He wouldn’t emerge in 4-7 years a magically changed man, which is why I say he needed help rather than jail time. If he wasn’t physically hurting anyone, there was no reason for him to be held in prison. Where he belonged was a mental institution because he was clearly unstable.

Furthermore, if you’d ever done any research on pedophilia from the pedophile’s perspective, then you would know that their attraction to children is absolutely not a choice and is usually a result of some sort of abuse – physical, emotional, or otherwise. Most pedophiles even feel in their mind that they are the same age as the children they find themselves attracted to. They can’t help it. That fact alone doesn’t make them evil. What sets them apart is whether or not they act on their feelings. Mark never did, and likely never planned to. I think he probably had enough self-control in that respect, but he fucked up anyway. He gave in to his feelings, and he most likely felt an insane amount of guilt and shame for it. Who wouldn’t? After all, he didn’t ask for any of this, and probably felt death was his only escape.

And for all those people saying “he was a coward!” if you were being faced with a prison sentence lasting several years, I think you’d turn into a coward too.


I’ll say it again, possessing child pornography is A CRIME. In Mark’s case (maybe in all cases, hopefully) it warranted JAIL TIME. Not only did he deserve jail time, but he also needed help in the form of therapy and rehabilitation. You most certainly seem to be excusing his actions by feeling like he didn’t deserve jail time. If you feel like pedophilia is a disorder/mental illness that’s fine, but once that “disorder/mental illness” starts harming people in the way Mark’s did. It deserves JAIL TIME in addition to but limited to, therapy and rehabilitation.

he point of imprisonment is to condition a person into behaving or thinking differently so they won’t commit crimes in the future. How would prison stop someone from having pedophilic thoughts? I’m not excusing what he did or saying it was okay, but it doesn’t make sense for a person to go to prison for that. Our legal system is full of flaws; just because the United States government says something is a crime doesn’t necessarily mean it automatically warrants jail time. For example: smoking weed isn’t really bad, yet possessing marijuana is a felony in most states. Child porn is obviously terrible and possessing it is not okay, but that doesn’t make Mark inherently evil because of it.

I made my initial post because I was heartbroken to hear the news of Mark’s passing. Despite his flaws, he was extremely talented and was an inspiration to me and lots of other people. Plus, the ones who knew him and spoke out about his death all claim that he was a loving person who would never intentionally harm anyone. It just hurt me to see so many people being so disrespectful to a person they didn’t know or understand. That is all I wanted to say on the matter, and it’s crazy that people have to be specifically told that it’s rude to celebrate someone’s death.

thorin25 #fundie healingcd.wordpress.com

Steps for Giving up and Stopping Crossdressing:

I thought it would be helpful to compile a list of good beginning steps for those who want to give up crossdressing for good. This is just a starting point for those who wish to stop crossdressing completely. Stopping crossdressing altogether is a long process, and there is much more that could be said and be done, besides the brief steps I’ve outlined here. But for those that want to finally overcome crossdressing in their lives, this is a good place to begin.

These steps are in an order. The order is just my own opinion on what I think would be most helpful. Obviously many people will disagree with these steps, or the order, or that crossdressing even needs to be stopped. But for those that do want to stop crossdressing, I hope this can be somewhat helpful for you.

It can take a long time to stop. For myself, I was doing almost all of these things for about 10 years and it still took until last year for me to stop completely. For me, I think primarily I was missing the belief that it was really possible to stop (Step #2). I knew logically that it was possible, but it just seemed too unlikely until I found others online who had already given up crossdressing. Then I was like, “hey if they can stop for good, I can too.” It was like a light bulb turned on and stopping finally was attainable and I finally stopped crossdressing for good.

1. Desire to stop crossdressing.

The first step obviously is that you have to actually want to stop crossdressing. Maybe you think crossdressing is sinful and so you want to stop. Maybe you think its destructive in your life and so you want to stop. Maybe its harming your marriage and so you want to stop. Maybe you are just afraid of the reality of getting caught. But whatever the case may be, the first step has to be some desire to stop. If you aren’t to that point yet, consider reading these posts.

2. Believe that it is possible to stop crossdressing.

Make yourself inundated with the truth about crossdressing and the ability to stop it by reading through the posts on my website, as well as the posts on the fellow fighters’ websites that I have links to on my homepage. Spend some hours reading. Read and watch testimonies on my links page. Most crossdressers are stuck in the belief that it is impossible to stop crossdressing and are stuck in the self-deception of crossdressing. Read some new perspectives from these websites.

3. Decide to stop crossdressing.

Following this desire to stop crossdressing and the belief that it is possible, make a firm decision for yourself that you are going to fight to stop crossdressing and get it out of your life. Make this a clear firm moment in your life and maybe even write down the date. We always have the freewill to make such a decision. After you make the decision, make a plan of attack for yourself. Don’t leave things up to chance. Change your old habits. Make a detailed strategy and plan to fight crossdressing.

4. Pray.

If you are not a Christian, I think figuring out what you believe about the meaning of life, what you believe about God, is far more important than anything to do with crossdressing. It’s more important that you think about life and death and why we exist than to read my website.

For those who already have a relationship with Jesus, prayer is vital. There are few components to this. 1. Prayer of confession and repentance and asking God’s forgiveness for past crossdressing and related sins. 2. Prayers of thanksgiving for forgiveness, salvation, and God’s love. 3. Prayer to ask God for help to overcome the crossdressing addiction. 4. Prayer as just talking to God, growing in your relationship with him. Praise him, thank him, worship him, talk to him. Become more intimate and purposeful in your relationship with God. Continue with this step until you die ??

5. Read, study, and memorize Scripture.

Delve into Scripture, the Bible, God’s Word. Fill your mind with truth. Fill your mind with God’s promises of forgiveness and grace. Fill your mind with God’s promises of him giving us the power to resist sin. Learn about God. Read about Jesus’ life. Grow in your relationship with him. Follow the Bible’s instruction about how to life a full, joyful, fulfilling, fruitful life as God intended. Continue with this step until you die as well.

6. Get rid of temptations.

Giving up crossdressing will be extremely difficult at first. To help ourselves as much as possible we need to try to lessen the amount of triggers and temptations in our lives. One obvious first step is getting rid of any secret stash of clothing right away. Take it to Goodwill and be done with it. There is no reason for you to keep it. If you think you might go back to crossdressing someday and therefore it would be a waste to get rid of the clothes, then, (in my opinion), you really haven’t committed to stopping yet. You need to go back to some of the first few steps again.

If the internet is a problem for you, consider getting an internet filter. If your wife’s clothing being left out is a problem for you, consider telling her what she can to help you better. Don’t do things that are technically “okay” if they will trigger your addiction. For me that meant little things like not wearing an apron. Be wise about how you take trips. Grow a beard so that crossdressing will be less satisfying and easy. (Plus this also might help you to feel more like a man again)

Be careful about being alone so much of the time. Get around other people. Spend more time with friends or outside hobbies. Fill your time with something different things.

I think it is important to stop crossdressing cold turkey rather than through gradual lessening of crossdressing in the attempt to lessen the desires and temptations. However, there are other forms of conditioning/unconditioning, mostly done with counselors, that could be helpful in stopping crossdressing.

Consider fasting – Fasting can be a good recovery tool.

Don’t expect it to be easy to heal from this addiction. Don’t expect it to be easy to reduce the temptations. You would put a lot of time into learning a language or an instrument. You would put a lot of effort into getting rid of a drug addiction. Why expect this to be different?

7. Dealing with temptations that come

It’s one thing to get rid of as many temptations as we can. But what do we do when temptations do make it through to us? What can we do when we suddenly have a strong desire to put on our wife’s sexy black high heels or really want to read the latest crossdressing fiction story online? We have to be ready to deal with the temptations and desires we will inevitably still experience. Here are a few ideas.

First of all, stick to your commitment not to give in to crossdressing at all. And I would add, do not to let yourself fantasize about crossdressing at all. You don’t need to kick yourself for having a crossdressing thought come into your mind. But don’t let yourself dwell in pleasurable crossdressing fantasies. If you want to really successfully stop crossdressing and find healing from it, you have to fight these fantasies as well. Fantasizing about it only adds more power to it, and you’ll probably eventually manifest the fantasies through concrete actions of crossdressing. (Not to mention God cares about what goes on in our hearts and minds beyond just what we do).

But this is not to say we should suppress our crossdressing desires. When they come we should acknowledge them and deal with them. Trying to ignore them or bury them will probably either just cause them to bubble forth like a volcano at some later point, or cause you mental anguish. It’s important we be honest with ourselves about the thoughts that come into our minds, but then deal with them without burying them.

Something I’ve found most helpful is telling myself affirmations of truth during times of temptation. I break through the crossdressing rationalizations and lies by reminding myself, “I don’t really want to crossdress.” “I don’t want to sin because I love God and am thankful for his forgiveness.” “I always feel stupid after crossdressing.”

I also have found distractions to be helpful during times of temptations. The sexual power of crossdressing temptations often makes me lose my head. But if I do something else briefly, rational thinking returns and the strong temptation subsides. For me playing an engaging video game helps a lot. For others it could be playing an instrument, taking a walk, working out, etc.

It also helps to have some way to get rid of sexual build up and tension. For those of us who are married, finding ways to have more sexual or just physical time with our wife can be very helpful. And if you’ve opened up to her about your fight against your crossdressing addiction, she may be more willing to help you out with more sexual time together. Another way to release the sexual tension is to use masturbation as a crutch. But you have to be careful with this one.

For many crossdressers it might be nearly impossible to masturbate while thinking about anything other than crossdressing. If this is the case, you may have to avoid masturbation altogether. But for me, I found it very helpful to give up crossdressing and increase my desire for my wife by thinking about her while masturbating. It took discipline. But releasing that sexual tension at times was very helpful when tempted.

8. Get some accountability.

Realize that you probably are not going to be successful doing this alone. Find others in your life to support you, some for indirect support, and some people for direct support who know about your crossdressing struggle. Part of this support could be going to church. It could be finding a specific church small group to admit your struggle to. It could be joining a sex addicts anonymous group.

It could include telling a couple close friends about your addiction and getting their encouragement and accountability. It could involve telling your wife. Telling close friends and my wife was immensely helpful to me. We all need people to confess our sins to because when we confess to someone, temptations lose their power over us. We need people to ask us regularly how we are doing. We need people who will stick by us through thick and thin. We need people who will encourage us. We need people who will celebrate with us when we are successful at beating crossdressing, and people who will help pick us back up and remind us of God’s grace at times that we fail. We need to commit to telling the truth if we are going to be successful.

I’d highly encourage you to tell your wife about your crossdressing struggle. Being a woman, and being in such an intimate relationship with you puts her in a unique position. Just telling her will help you, even though it could be very painful for both of you at first. But the truth may just set you both free. Having your wife know brings a reality check to your actions that is hard to match. She can help you realize the foolishness of what you were doing and encourage you in your new fight against it. She can help you think through your own personality and struggle with crossdressing. I also think this kind of honesty is terribly vital for such an important and intimate relationship like marriage. Crossdressing is something that has shaped your entire life, and it would help her to understand you better to know about it.

You also might want to consider confessing sins of crossdressing to your wife, sister, mother, or others in your life that you might have confused or hurt by your crossdressing, as well as asking them for forgiveness. Last, I have an email prayer list I’ve created for those of us who are fighting and struggling together or have a heart to pray for those who are struggling. It’s a great way to receive prayer and help from others who are also fighting crossdressing

9. Find a valuable purpose in life and positive ways to use your energy

I think a lot of us can’t seem to give up our struggle with crossdressing we don’t take life very seriously. We don’t get much fulfillment out of other things in life. We are just ticking the time away, not working hard at our jobs, not finding ways to contribute to the world and help other people. We have no ultimate purpose in life, such as the purpose of loving God, living for him, and loving other people because of God’s love for us. If life is pretty meaningless for you, and nothing really stretches you, or gives you joy and fulfillment, then of course you’d keep turning back to crossdressing or pornography for fleeting pleasures. So my first piece of advice here again is to find your ultimate purpose and meaning in life in God. And then figure out what his specific purpose is for you in your life. What has he created you to do? How can he use you to impact the world and make it a better place in some small but meaningful ways?

Besides just finding a purpose in life, we need positive ways to use our energy. Volunteering, helping people out, fun hobbies, and getting involved in church are just a few ways to learn how to spend our time differently. Instead of spending all of our free time hiding in closets in our wives’ clothes, we can do things that have value, and things that help others. Try something new. Read some good books. Stretch yourself out of your comfort zone. Find some adventure in life beyond crossdressing.

I also include in this step rediscovering who we are as men. Start letting your male traits out. Enjoy being a man. Have your wife affirm your manhood. Upgrade your male wardrobe. Enjoy taking care of your appearance as a man. Enjoy looking good as a man.

Find out what the Bible says about true manhood and personhood. Many of the stereotypes about masculinity and femininity in our culture are at best stifling, and at worst destructive, and may even have contributed to our developing desires for crossdressing. Learn to integrate the contrasting aspects of your personality that were divided into your male self and crossdressing self. Be a whole complete human being. Those aspects of your personality that you stifled in order to be a man of our culture, and which came out in your crossdressing times, integrate them into your real self.

Last, a little tidbit. Take your desire for female beauty and interest in fashion and point it towards your girlfriend or wife. Talk to her about fashion and what you find beautiful. Go shopping with her and help her find things that look good on her. You can enjoy the female clothes in the way they were supposed to be enjoyed by you, that is, on your wife or girlfriend. This way you can utilize your healthy attention to female beauty in a healthy non-deceitful way.

10. Make peace with the reality that the temptations might never go away.

Like most temptations to sin, the reality is that the temptations might never completely go away. This is just the reality and should not make us depressed. Treat crossdressing like an addiction. An alcoholic might always have certain small desires to drink, but they continue to resist the rest of their life. Similarly, we might desire it at times for the rest of our lives, but we can still resist. And we can still lead a healthy fulfilling life.

But don’t focus so much on the future, just to take things one day at a time. The day’s problems and temptations are enough to worry about.

I would like to encourage you though that it is of course possible for your crossdressing desires to completely go away. Each person is different and there are some who seem to have no more temptations. For me, my crossdressing desires are largely nonexistent these days. Once in a while, rarely, I’ll have some crossdressing temptations, but they’ve become easy to resist. I think that for any of us who stop crossdressing, after the first really hard withdrawal period, the crossdressing temptations slowly start to lessen in strength.

11. Deal with failure in a healthy way.

If you fail, spend time confessing to God and enjoying his forgiveness, and then get going again in your fight against crossdressing. Don’t let Satan use your failure for evil. Satan hits us hard in our failures. He loves to make us wallow in condemnation, thinking we aren’t good enough to be forgiven by God. It’s true we aren’t good enough, but God forgives us because of his merciful and loving nature, not because we deserve forgiveness. And Satan also likes to use failure to make us think we have no power over sin and so we might as well give up. But God promises us that he has given us the power to resist any temptation that comes our way.

Satan also likes to encourage us to conquer sin using our own strength. This only leads to failure or pride. The true way to fight sin, is to find joy in God’s forgiveness, and be transformed by that forgiveness and grace. Then we fight sin, not for our own pride, not using our own strength, but we do it with God’s strength. We fight sin out of thanksgiving for God’s grace, not in order to earn God’s grace. Keep going back to God’s forgiveness and grace. It should be the motivation for all the good that we do. We aren’t trying to earn anything.

12. Try to understand yourself more deeply.

I’m convinced that an important part of the healing process from crossdressing, is trying to understand ourselves more deeply. Rather than just stopping crossdressing and leaving it in the past, we should spend some time researching, studying, and thinking about what caused us to develop the crossdressing desires we have. But be careful about doing this. Wait until you’ve successfully stopped crossdressing for a while, otherwise studying it and thinking about it could cause you to stumble.

When you are in a safe place in your journey of giving up crossdressing ask yourself these questions. What emotions and thoughts were going on behind the actions and behind the temptations? Think about how crossdressing has shaped your personality both positively and negatively. How did God use this part of your past for good, or how will he use it for good? Think through gender issues. Think through personality issues. Think through the ways crossdressing has affected your life. You could also consider seeing a counselor to help you work through these issues, but realize you may know far more about crossdressing and its effects than your counselor. It’s a subject that hasn’t been studied enough. Further, many counselors seem to think its harmless and don’t realize how destructive it can be.

HoneyBadgerDC #fundie boards.straightdope.com


There seems to be entirely too many people in this thread who are entirely too willing to dismiss completely abhorrent behavior as "kids being kids." It's very disquieting.

I think parents are looking for the best possible outcome. I believe that parents should have that right to raise their kids. Parents should be trusted to make family decisions until they have proven themselves to be lousy parents. Any attempt to be premptive in these types of issues will cause more harm than good.


you're OK with that? Why do we send any molesters to jail then?

when did I ever say i was ok with anything to do with molestation. I said for best possible outcomes families in most cases could best handle it themselves. When you involve social workers who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground and have an agenda going in you are flirting with disaster worse than the molestation.

View Post
Really? Really? This sounds more like people who have been badly victimized blaming themselves for what happened. Even assuming that a little girl who was asleep/lying there did "want it" (ugh), how does that make the guy any less of a molester--how is he supposed to know the girl wanted it?

These posts are starting to make me feel like I took a left turn off the the Fighting Ignorance one onto some Incest Is Best site.


Just the opposite of what you are saying, the adult is always at fault. What it does say is that a big part of the damage associated with molestation is a result of repressed guilt and shame and blaming themselves. Often they feel guilt about getting someone else in trouble when they feel it is their fault. It is always the adult fault regardless of wether or not a kid was flirting with them.

The young Dugar boy souns like he has some serious issues while in a lot of cases all the parties involved grow up to be responsible well adjust adults with no interference from law enforcement. Trying to be too preemptive and bringin law enforcement or social workers too soon would end up compounding the damage done.

Yeah, I'm not seeing the difference between that and "kids will be kids." And, just because "nobody said it was right" doesn't mean that people are not dismissing this. 'Dismiss,' in this context, meaning that the people chalking this up to "teens doing stupid stuff" are not reacting to this with nearly enough revulsion.

I have no idea what the statistics on things like this happening are but I do know that it is common enough to be considered a challenge of raising kids that we all hope we will never face. Adding guilt and shame to a bad decision driven by hormones does nothing for either of the children involved. It does not have to be a dramatic life changing event. If it does happen a best outcome might be turned into a learning experience and a little blip in the childrens lives.

This reminds me of homophobia, kind of a contest to see who can show the most disgust. Everyone is afraid if they don't show major revulsion they will appear to approve of this behavior. Evidenced by the number of politicians and civic leaders who come out the strongest against it.

I really don't see why it would be a bad thing for someone to feel guilty and ashamed about molesting someone. Why should hormones be a get out of jail/guilt free card?

They should feel guilty if they are normal kids, if they don't feel guilty they may have deeper problems. They also need to learn to forgive themselves and move on. there is a process involved in this that starts with an apology. If an apology is not possible then simply resigning themselves to never repeat behavior like this again is all that should be neccessary to resolve them of guilt and allow them to live a normal life.

Believe it or not, hormones are a powerful drug that can influence behavior. Some kids aren't driven as much as others and some have better self control. But the bottom line is that if they learned their lesson they should feel good about forgiving themselves and moving on.

Denny Burk #fundie dennyburk.com

I am sometimes asked why we should regard this issue [gay marriage] as essential when marriage and sexuality aren’t mentioned in the Apostle’s Creed. If sexual morality is so important, why isn’t it mentioned there? My answer to that question is simply to highlight another apostolic document–the New Testament–which strongly condemns not merely deviations in doctrine but also deviations in sexual morality.

Jude’s epistle is a classic example of this. Jude commands Christians to “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3). Why? Because false teachers had crept into the congregation. These false teachers are under “condemnation” because they “turn the grace of our God into licentiousness” (Jude 4). In other words, these false teachers had introduced a poison into the congregation that appealed to God’s grace as a basis for immorality. In effect, they had denied the Lordship of Jesus Christ, which is the essence of spiritual death.

We are not fighting a mere culture war. Much more is at stake in this conversation, and if the church of the Lord Jesus Christ fails to bear witness to that, then who will?

Becket Cook #homophobia cbmw.org

TGC recently published a fascinating interview with Becket Cook, a former Hollywood set designer in the fashion industry who was living an openly gay life. Cook left all that behind when he met Jesus — or, rather, Jesus met him — and now he is in Christian ministry as a recent graduate of Talbot School of Theology at Biola University. This summer he published the story of his conversion, A Change of Affection: A Gay Man’s Incredible Story of Redemption.

As with every Christian (cf. Rom 6:11; Gal 2:20; 1 Cor 6:9–11; 2 Cor 5:17), the issue of identity stands at the center of Cook’s testimony. When asked in the TGC interview about “gay Christianity” and whether he thought it was possible to reconcile following Jesus and having a “gay identity,” Cook answered emphatically:

"They are irreconcilable. It’s strange to me to see these attempts. I had such a clean break from it, and it was entirely God’s grace upon me to see that it was necessary. Would you call yourself a greedy Christian? Would you call yourself a tax-collector Christian? It seems strange to identify yourself with sin. It’s a square circle. Defining yourself as a “gay Christian,” even if you are celibate and not active in a homosexual relationship, is wildly misleading. And it’s almost like you’re stewing in your old sin, hanging onto your old self in a weird way. It’s not helpful to have that moniker over you and to continually identify as such. Why would you identify with your old self that has been crucified with Christ? So I flee from that term as far as I can. It’s not who I am at all. If people ask me how I identify, I’m just like, “I don’t identify by my sexuality. I’m a follower of Christ who has a lot of struggles, including same-sex attraction.”

These attempts at reconciling gay identity and following Jesus which Cook refers to are being made by those who call themselves Side B “gay Christians.” While they confess the incompatibility of homosexual sexual desire and so-called “gay marriage” with historic, orthodox Christianity, they still identity as “gay.”

One of the reasons Side B “gay Christians” give as to why they continue to identify as “gay” or as “gay Christians” is because the word “gay” uniquely describes their experiences in this world, their particular struggles with temptation and sin, as well as their outlook on the world that grows out of these realities. Since these experiences are unique in the lives of same-sex attracted Christians, how else can they relate their testimony of God’s grace in their lives? They believe the Bible is true and right when it forbids same-sex sexual relationships. But shouldn’t they identity in a way that is true to their particular struggles?

I can sympathize with this line of reasoning, and I know how powerful it can be when believers share the work God has done and continues to do in their lives, particularly where they have struggled, where they continue to struggle, and how God’s grace is sustaining them even in the midst of these struggles.

In other words, I can imagine a possible world where the words “gay” and “Christian” may find themselves in proximity to one another in a believer’s testimony. But when such a testimony is shared, I think something that is not always clear among Side B “gay Christians” needs to be made crystal clear, as Cook does above. The modifier “gay,” is it describing the old man or the new man?
Paul teaches in a number of places that there are two “I’s” or “selves” in the believer this side of glory. For instance, in Ephesians 4:17–24 Paul writes about the “old self” and the “new self”:

17 Now this I say and testify in the Lord, that you must no longer walk as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their minds. 18 They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart. 19 They have become callous and have given themselves up to sensuality, greedy to practice every kind of impurity. 20 But that is not the way you learned Christ!— 21 assuming that you have heard about him and were taught in him, as the truth is in Jesus, 22 to put off your old self, which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful desires, 23 and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, 24 and to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.

While those who do not know God have hard hearts that are marked by sensuality, greed, and every kind of impurity, this is the opposite of what marks those who are in Christ.

But notice what Paul does in verse 22 above. He says that the old self of the believer must be associated in the mind and life of the Christian with their former manner of life that had more to do with the ungodly Gentiles than Christ. In place of the old self, the new self must be actively put on, actively associated with and owned as an identity that is, as Paul says, “created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.”

In other words, hostility toward the old self and hospitality toward the new self should characterize the Christian. Why? Because the old self is no longer the true self, the authentic self. The old self has been crucified with Christ (Rom 6:6) and therefore we are called to mortify it and its desires (Col 3:5–10). The new self is who we are.

Which brings us to the concern for how Side B uses “gay Christian.” When they use and embrace this identity, what — or who — do they map the modifier “gay” onto? For this person, is the old self “gay,” or the new self “gay”? Unless this question is answered unequivocally with the former, I believe Side B “gay Christianity” will continue to be suspect and inconsistent not only with the teaching about mortification of the old self and sin in the New Testament, but also with God’s purposes in creation and redemption. If Side B uses “gay” to describe an aspect of the new self in Christ, as many in the movement have insinuated, then we are no longer dealing with how the orthodox have everywhere and always spoken about temptation and indwelling sin.

I am thankful for Becket Cook’s clarity on Christian identity. It is a faithful application of Scripture to who we are in Christ as redeemed sinners. I hope many more will follow his lead.

Ryan T. Anderson #fundie mercatornet.com

In Sunday’s New York Times, Andrea Long Chu writes a heartfelt and heartbreaking op-ed on life with gender dysphoria. Titled “My New Vagina Won’t Make Me Happy,” the op-ed reveals painful truths about many transgender lives and inadvertently communicates almost the exact opposite of its intended argument.

Next week, Chu will undergo vaginoplasty surgery. Or, as Chu puts it: “Next Thursday, I will get a vagina. The procedure will last around six hours, and I will be in recovery for at least three months.”

Will this bring happiness? Probably not, but Chu wants it all the same: “This is what I want, but there is no guarantee it will make me happier. In fact, I don’t expect it to. That shouldn’t disqualify me from getting it.”

Chu argues that the simple desire for sex-reassignment surgery should be all that is required for a patient to receive it. No consideration for authentic health and wellbeing or concern about poor outcomes should prevent a doctor from performing the surgery if a patient wants it. Chu explains: “no amount of pain, anticipated or continuing, justifies its withholding.”

This is a rather extreme conclusion. Chu writes: “surgery’s only prerequisite should be a simple demonstration of want.” This is quite a claim. And we’ll come back to it. But as the op-ed builds to this stark conclusion, Chu reveals many frequently unacknowledged truths about transgender lives—truths that we should attend to.

Sex isn’t “assigned,” and surgery can’t change it

First, Chu acknowledges that the surgery won’t actually “reassign” sex: “my body will regard the vagina as a wound; as a result, it will require regular, painful attention to maintain.”

Sex reassignment is quite literally impossible. Surgery can’t actually reassign sex, because sex isn’t “assigned” in the first place.

As I point out in When Harry Became Sally, sex is a bodily reality—the reality of how an organism is organized with respect to sexual reproduction. That reality isn’t “assigned” at birth or any time after.

Sex—maleness or femaleness—is established at a child’s conception, can be ascertained even at the earliest stages of human development by technological means, and can be observed visually well before birth with ultrasound imaging. Cosmetic surgery and cross-sex hormones don’t change biological reality.

People who undergo sex-reassignment procedures do not become the opposite sex—they merely masculinize or feminize their outward appearance.

Gender dysphoria Is deeply painful

Second, Chu acknowledges the deep pain of gender dysphoria, the sense of distress or alienation one feels at one’s bodily sex:

Dysphoria feels like being unable to get warm, no matter how many layers you put on. It feels like hunger without appetite. It feels like getting on an airplane to fly home, only to realize mid-flight that this is it: You’re going to spend the rest of your life on an airplane. It feels like grieving. It feels like having nothing to grieve.

“Transitioning” may not make things better and could make them worse

Third, Chu acknowledges that “transitioning” may not make things better and could even make things worse. Chu writes: “I feel demonstrably worse since I started on hormones.” And continues: “Like many of my trans friends, I’ve watched my dysphoria balloon since I began transition.”

Indeed, as I document in When Harry Became Sally, the medical evidence suggests that sex reassignment does not adequately address the psychosocial difficulties faced by people who identify as transgender. Even when the procedures are successful technically and cosmetically, and even in cultures that are relatively “trans-friendly,” transitioners still face poor outcomes.

Even the Obama administration admitted that the best studies do not report improvement after reassignment surgery.

In August 2016, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid wrote: “the four best designed and conducted studies that assessed quality of life before and after surgery using validated (albeit non-specific) psychometric studies did not demonstrate clinically significant changes or differences in psychometric test results after GRS [gender reassignment surgery].”

What does that mean? A population of patients is suffering so much that they would submit to amputations and other radical surgeries, and the best research the Obama administration could find suggests that it brings them no meaningful improvements in their quality of life.

Suicide is a serious risk

Fourth, Chu acknowledges a struggle with suicide ideation: “I was not suicidal before hormones. Now I often am.”

In 2016, the Obama administration acknowledged a similar reality. In a discussion of the largest and most robust study on sex-reassignment, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid pointed out “The study identified increased mortality and psychiatric hospitalization compared to the matched controls. The mortality was primarily due to completed suicides (19.1-fold greater than in control Swedes).”

These results are tragic. And they directly contradict the most popular media narratives, as well as many of the snapshot studies that do not track people over time.

Indeed, the Obama administration noted that “mortality from this patient population did not become apparent until after 10 years.” So when the media tout studies that only track outcomes for a few years, and claim that reassignment is a stunning success, there are good grounds for skepticism.

The purpose of medicine is healing

This brings us back to Chu’s argument that “surgery’s only prerequisite should be a simple demonstration of want.” What should we make of it?

Why should a doctor perform surgery when it won’t make the patient happy, it won’t accomplish its intended goal, it won’t improve the underlying condition, it might make the underlying condition worse, and it might increase the likelihood of suicide?

Chu wants to turn the profession of medicine on its head, transforming a medical doctor into nothing more than “a highly competent hired syringe,” in the words of Leon Kass.

Unfortunately, Chu isn’t alone. Many professionals now view health care—including mental health care—primarily as a means of fulfilling patients’ desires, whatever those are. Kass explains:

The implicit (and sometimes explicit) model of the doctor-patient relationship is one of contract: the physician—a highly competent hired syringe, as it were—sells his services on demand, restrained only by the law (though he is free to refuse his services if the patient is unwilling or unable to meet his fee).

Here’s the deal: for the patient, autonomy and service; for the doctor, money, graced by the pleasure of giving the patient what he wants. If a patient wants to fix her nose or change his gender, determine the sex of unborn children, or take euphoriant drugs just for kicks, the physician can and will go to work—provided that the price is right and that the contract is explicit about what happens if the customer isn’t satisfied.

This vision of medicine and medical professionals gets it wrong. Professionals ought to profess their devotion to the purposes and ideals they serve. That’s what makes them professionals, and not just service providers.

Teachers should be devoted to learning, lawyers to justice under law, and physicians to “healing the sick, looking up to health and wholeness.” Healing is “the central core of medicine,” Kass writes—“to heal, to make whole, is the doctor’s primary business.”

But Chu’s vision of medicine turns the doctor into someone who merely satisfies desires, even if what is done isn’t good for a patient. Chu writes:

I still want this, all of it. I want the tears; I want the pain. Transition doesn’t have to make me happy for me to want it. Left to their own devices, people will rarely pursue what makes them feel good in the long term. Desire and happiness are independent agents.

Sound medicine isn’t about desire, it’s about healing. To provide the best possible care, serving the patient’s medical interests requires an understanding of human wholeness and well-being. Mental health care must be guided by a sound concept of human flourishing.

Our brains and senses are designed to bring us into contact with reality, connecting us with the outside world and with the reality of ourselves. Thoughts and feelings that disguise or distort reality are misguided, and they can cause harm. In When Harry Became Sally, I argue that we need to do a better job of helping people who face these struggles.

Misrepresentations of my work

And Chu takes issue with me:

Many conservatives call this [gender dysphoria] crazy. A popular right-wing narrative holds that gender dysphoria is a clinical delusion; hence, feeding that delusion with hormones and surgeries constitutes a violation of medical ethics.

Just ask the Heritage Foundation fellow Ryan T. Anderson, whose book “When Harry Became Sally” draws heavily on the work of Dr. Paul McHugh, the psychiatrist who shut down the gender identity clinic at Johns Hopkins in 1979 on the grounds that trans-affirmative care meant “cooperating with a mental illness.”

Mr. Anderson writes, “We must avoid adding to the pain experienced by people with gender dysphoria, while we present them with alternatives to transitioning.”

Of course I never call people with gender dysphoria crazy. And I explicitly state in the book that I take no position on the technical question of whether someone’s thinking that he or she is the opposite sex is a clinical delusion. That’s why Chu couldn’t quote any portion of my book saying as much.

Throughout the book, I point out that the feelings that people who identify as transgender report are real—they really feel a disconnect with their bodily sex—but I also acknowledge the fact that those feelings don’t change bodily reality. I recognize the real distress that gender dysphoria can cause, but never do I call people experiencing it crazy.

I repeatedly acknowledge that gender dysphoria is a serious condition, that people who experience a gender identity conflict should be treated with respect and compassion, that we need to find better, more humane and effective, responses to people who experience dysphoria.

Nevertheless, Chu claims that I am engaged in “‘compassion-mongering,’ peddling bigotry in the guise of sympathetic concern.”

For the record, Chu never contacted me regarding my research or my book. Nor did the Times contact me to verify any of the claims made about me in the op-ed. Indeed, this is the second time the New York Times has published an op-ed with inaccurate criticisms of me and my book.

Americans disagree about gender identity and the best approaches to treating gender dysphoria. We need to respect the dignity of people who identify as transgender while also doing everything possible to help people find wholeness and happiness.

That will require a better conversation about these issues, which is why I wrote my book. And it’s presumably why Chu wrote this op-ed. Now is not the time for personal attacks and name-calling, but for sober and respectful truth-telling.

Chu may regard me as a “bigot,” but I regard Chu as a fellow human being made in the image and likeness of God who is struggling with a painful and dangerous condition. As such, Chu deserves care and support that will bring health and wholeness—not the on-demand delivery of “services” that even Chu acknowledges are unlikely to make life better and may make it very much worse.

Berit Kjos #fundie crossroad.to

[This entire article, and broader site are a goldmine]

If my goal was to undermine Christianity, incite rebellion against parents, eradicate Biblical values, and spread moral chaos, I would urge teens to read the Twilight series. I would prompt them to immerse their minds and emotions in the dark, emotional whirlpool of sensual occultism. And I wouldn't warn them of the consequences.

Of course, my real goal is the opposite: to expose this assault on Biblical faith and to equip potential readers with information that enables them to resist the temptation to join the collective journey into the mind-changing realm of the occult. The following points show the raging spiritual war that's sure to intensify in the years ahead.

Jon Anthony #fundie returnofkings.com

1. Dismantle The Mainstream Media

As more and more of us start to wake up, the media will begin to sense this—in fact, they already have. Have you wondered why they’ve started to cover anti-Hillary stories? It’s because they realize that they’re losing credibility.

The mainstream media is very well aware that they’re losing their chokehold on the American public’s mind, so in a last ditch effort, they’re trying to seem unbiased. Do not buy into their lies—it’s all a giant farce; an attempt to regain their former credibility.

Over the next four years, it will be extremely important to start dismantling these outlets. It’s time to call them out for what they are. Start sharing alt-right stories on Facebook and Twitter, get our message out there. Don’t watch any mainstream media. Don’t buy mainstream magazines, don’t watch their news shows, hell, don’t even pay for cable. Do everything you can to bleed their pockets dry.

As more and more money moves away from the mainstream media, it will naturally move towards alternative news sources—sites like Return Of Kings, Info Wars, Matt Forney, and Danger and Play will become the new media.

Don’t expect this to happen at first, however. In one final cry, before its gory death, the media will proclaim that there is a new “racist, xenophobic” enemy that helped Donald get into office: the alt-right. Expect them to demonize us. Expect them to lie about us, to scream and shout, and to protest. This is fine, however—for we are anti-fragile. The alt-right is in a very unique position.

Any and all hatred towards the alt-right will be a net win for us. Why? It’s simple: any publicity is good publicity. A single mention of an alternative news site by the MSM can, and often does, net us tens of thousands of new viewers. In other words: if they ignore us, we continue to grow in power. If they attack us, we grow even faster. They can’t win.

2. Drain The Swamp

Everything that we’ve done up to this point to get Donald in office will be completely pointless if we don’t drain the swamp. This is our one chance—we have four years to do this.

In order for us to bring about permanent change in this country, we need to hold the cucks and libtards accountable for their actions. Anyone who pushed the pro-Islam agenda, rape culture, or feminazi philosophy must be called out for the traitors that they are.

The elites, the corrupt bankers, and the globalists must all be brought to light. In order for us to bring about true change, and to prevent a globalist dictatorship from happening in the near future, we must ensure that at least 25% of Americans are aware of the elites’ “conspiracy” by the next election.

This is a grass roots movement, and it is growing in power—but we must take away power from those who tried so hard to fight us. Now is the time to cause a ruckus and email your representatives. Now is the time to demand Hillary be thrown in prison. Every single person involved in Hillary Clinton’s private email server must be thrown in jail. Pedophiles and Satanists such as Anthony Weiner and Marina Abramovic, and traitors such as Huma Abedin and Comey must be thrown in jail for their crimes.

Now is the time to clear out the murky waters—to sift through the dirt and rotten garbage lurking below. I believe, that once all is said and done, America will enter into a new age of prosperity. The patriarchy will return.

3. Normalize Straight Males

For too long have men been oppressed, by the very civilization which we created. We have let the SJW’s and culture warriors back us into a corner, but we’ve finally started to fight back. More and more men, upon being exposed to the manosphere, are starting to wake up and take the red pill. We’re starting to realize, as a nation, that there is no reason to be ashamed of being white or being a man.

Once we start to dismantle the mainstream media and drain the swamp, most of this should happen naturally—it was only through the artificial social engineering that being a white male became a crime.

But, we can’t stop here—it’s time to start slowly red-pilling our blue-pilled friends. The best way to do this, is simply through osmosis. Don’t try to convince them with logic, because they did not arrive at a blue-pilled position through logic. They did so through emotion.

Simply be a beacon of masculinity. Be confident in yourself, be assertive, and don’t cave into ridiculous HR requests or political correctness social pressures. Again, once the mainstream media is dismantled and the manosphere grows in popularity, our movement will gain strength exponentially.

The normalization of males, especially white males, is essential for our culture to continue—the second that we started to become ashamed of our heritage and of our nationality was the second that the cucks started closing in. We cannot give them an inch, or they will take a mile.

This is not to say that our country shouldn’t accept immigrants—IF they go through the legal process. How did it get so far that it became socially unacceptable to shame ILLEGAL immigrants? Again, ILLEGAL immigrants? Like I said, it got this way due to an overwhelming amount of white guilt. Do not be ashamed of your heritage, men.

We have made a gigantic step towards national sovereignty with Donald Trump being elected as president, and we cannot let this victory go in vain. We must push onward and continue to normalize what is NORMAL. Being a straight male, white or note, should be the norm, not being a transgender, green-haired, SJW.

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?

Isaac Morehouse #fundie libertarianchristians.com

You do not owe anyone anything. No one owes you anything. Christians have a lot to gain from these powerful Randian insights.

Genuine acts of kindness are not motivated by guilt, fear, or shame. Yet modern religion is saturated with guilty consciences. Fear of sinning, guilt over your station in life, shame about your dreams and desires are commonplace in churches. These feelings are played like instruments by power-seeking ministers, activists, and politicians. The Kingdom of God brings freedom from this condemnation. Anytime you hear a pundit trying to motivate religious people by making them feel guilty, remember that you cannot truly give if you do not freely give. You do not owe anyone anything, but you are free to give everything.

Of course those who decry Randian ideas and favor bigger government are free to give away all they have too. They rarely do. More often they serve the poor by putting on fancy suits and going to fancy restaurants to lobby politicians to spend more of other people’s money. Then they call those other people selfish when they complain. Don’t buy it. Help those in need out of love, not guilt.

On the flipside, no one owes you anything. Nearly all political activism starts from the idea that someone owes you something. A job, a house, medical services, an aesthetically pleasing landscape, a low-fat diet, and on and on ad nauseam. The Christian idea of grace is the antithesis of this sentiment. You don’t deserve it.

The goal of material equality, or the idea that those with more owe those with less, is naked envy. Most people confuse the issue by believing the state, not another person, owes them something. The state has nothing to give but that which is first takes, and it takes from citizens. Your fellow citizens do not owe you anything. You are free to ask and you are free to receive, but you are not owed. What’s amazing is just how generous people can be in an environment of freedom.

Be Free

If you are a Christian who likes Rand you can ignore the cries of “hypocrite” from those with a political agenda. You needn’t defend or support every tenet of Objectivism to appreciate its political philosophy. There’s no contradiction between Christianity and Rand’s main thrust that individuals should be free.

Take to heart the Randian idea that you are not owed nor do you owe. There is a tremendous freedom in this that makes way for genuine giving and receiving, done with joy and motivated by love.

Hadiya #sexist hijabchicblog.blogspot.com

[In a discussion about Saudi Arabian and Muslim women in general driving. Hijab = head scarf and/or facial veil, fitnah = temptation, disorder, struggle to remain pious, etc.]

Salam alaikum, here is opinion in the light of Qur'an and Sunnah.

Praise be to Allaah.

The ruling on women driving should be clear, because women driving includes a number of evils, including the following:

1 – Removal of hijab, because driving a car involves uncovering the face which is the site of fitnah and attracts the glance of men....This is how things usually develop; they start out in an acceptable fashion then they get worse.

2 – Another evil consequence of women driving cars is that they lose their modesty, and modesty is part of faith as is narrated in a saheeh report from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Modesty is the noble characteristic that befits the nature of women and protects them from being exposed to fitnah. Hence it is mentioned in a metaphorical sense (in Arabic), in the phrase “more modest than a virgin in her seclusion.” Once a woman’s modesty is lost, do not ask about her.

3 – It also leads to women going out of the house a great deal, but their homes are better for them – as the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said – because those who love to drive enjoy it very much, hence you see them driving around in their cars here and there for no purpose, except to enjoy driving.

4 – You may find a divorced woman going where she wants, whenever she wants and however she wants, for whatever purpose she wants, because she is alone in her car, at any time she wants of the day or night. She may stay out until late at night. If people are complaining about this with regard to young men, then what about young women, going all over the place the length and breadth of the country, and maybe even beyond its borders.

5 – It is a means of women rebelling against their families and husbands; at the least provocation they may go out of the house and drive in the car to wherever they think they can get some peace, as happens in the case of some young men, who are able to put up with more than women.

6 – It is a cause of fitnah in many places: when stopping at the traffic lights, or at gas stations, or at inspection points, or when stopped by policemen at the scenes of traffic infractions or accidents, or if the car stalls and the woman needs help. What will her situation be in this case? Perhaps she may come across an immoral man who takes advantage of her in return for helping her, especially if her need is great to the point of urgency.

7 – It causes fitnah to flourish because women – by their nature – like to make themselves look good with clothing etc. Do you not see how attached they are to fashion? Every time a new fashion appears they throw away what they have and rush to buy the new things, even if it is worse than what they have. Do you not see the adornments that they hang on their walls? In the same way – or perhaps more so – with the cars that they drive, whenever a new model appears they will give up the first for the new one.

With regard to the questioner asking, “And what is your opinion on the idea that women driving cars is less dangerous than their riding with non-mahram drivers?” – what I think is that both of them involve danger, and one is more serious than the other in some ways, but there is no necessity that would require one to do either of them.

Angel #fundie amazon.com

[Can't you see how convoluted this explanation is? You're beginning with your conclusion and working backwards, which is the method used by a believer and not a scientist.]

I am stating my conclusion to you, and working backwards. When I thought of this process, I worked forward in a step-wise manner.

All pieces of the puzzle must be carefully examined if you are initially given a completed puzzle.

As an example, Einstein may have been working on Energy and he may have calculated the product of mc^2 first.

Knowing the product and knowing the weight of the matter he was working with, Einstein may have calculated backwards to find "what value" times that amount of matter would give him that amount of Energy.

Therefore, working backwards, Einstein may have played around with the equation until he found speed of light squared was the missing link.

Or Einstein may have known the speed of light, but that value did not work in his equation. Einstein, therefore, may have doubled the speed of light and that didn't work either, and as a result of a few failures, he may have ultimately squared the speed of light. Once Einstein squared the speed of light that solved his problem. Einstein easily could have worked backwards.

Having the value for the speed of light squared, Einstein then would have been able to show E = mc^2.

Yet, Einstein may have found his formula by working either forward or backward.

PROUD BIRACIAL! #racist answers.yahoo.com

its "racism" don't go down to the hick white peoples level lol.. we know better then that.. and racism will die once the white race gets extinct, that is suppose to happen around the year 2045, they will be the minority in the year 2042 apparently. Once the white race dies down a bit, all of the sins, shame and guilt will be undone, all of the lies greed and deceit will be rid and they will be pure once again as brown people. If there are more interracial relationships which they are predicting, more of my kind will be born. Us biracials and the blacks will become the new face of america. We are off to a good start with Obama being president =)

the shame and guilt is starting to undo itself slowly but surly!! the whites are finally coming around.. showing some respect.. SOME of them i said. THe Arabs are another story, this one arab guy had the audacity to tell me all this crap as if he is white, my white daddy would whip his arab a!zz back to Iraq!!


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7559996.stm

Source(s):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7559996.stm

R. Scott Clark #fundie monergism.com

Is God Capricious?


HC Q. 12. Since then by the righteous judgment of God we deserve temporal and eternal punishment, how may we escape this punishment and be again received into favor?

God wills that His justice be satisfied;1 therefore we must make full satisfaction to the same, either by ourselves or by another.2 1 Exodus 20:5. Exodus 23:7. 1 Romans 8:3,4.With this question we begin considering the second part of the catechism or the "grace" section of "guilt, grace, and gratitude."

***

One of the great misconceptions about the Augustinian doctrine of divine sovereignty, which was restated by the Protestant Reformers and which came to expression in the Reformed confessions, is that it makes God arbitrary or capricious.

Without reflection or if we start from the wrong place, the acts of God might seem arbitrary. After all, during the fires, one house was taken and one was left behind. It's not evident that there is any way to say that this house was taken but that one was left because of anything intrinsic to each house. It's a mystery of providence. Of course folk frequently and falsely set up cause and effect relations to explain providence but Jesus isn't having any of it (see John 9). This fact, however, does not mean that we cannot say anything about God's justice nor does it mean that God is really capricious. The charge that the God of Scripture is capricious rests ultimately on the assumption that unless we can explain his actions then we may sit in judgment upon them and him. In other words, the charge rests upon rationalism. Of course we cannot explain all of God's acts and we cannot explain fully any of them! His ways are are higher than our ways. His thoughts are not our thoughts. If he did explain himself fully it would consume us. We are not capable of understanding.

If we consider that God always acts according to his nature, then he cannot be said to be arbitrary, especially if we concede that God's understanding of his justice transcends our ability to comprehend it. That is a great difference between the triune God of Holy Scripture revealed in Christ Jesus and Allah or fate. The god of Islam really is capricious. He may forgive or he may not. No one can know. Allah cannot be known. He is utterly hidden. Indeed, he isn't even really personal. The alleged identity of Yahweh and Allah is a great myth of liberalism and universalism. Such a claim is an insult both to Christianity and to Islam.

The God of Scripture is, in himself, hidden from us but he also reveals himself to us and what he reveals to us is true. There is a great divide between the Creator and the creature. We cannot know things as God knows them and we cannot know God as he knows himself, but we can know God because he has come to us and made himself known. He has revealed himself in creation and in redemption and chiefly in his Son, the Word: Jesus the Messiah.

We can correlate God's promises to his saving acts in redemptive history. We can and must count him faithful to fulfill his law and his promises. He threatens judgment for sin. He threatens death for sin and he fulfills that curse (Gen 2:17; Exod 20:5). The whole history of the Israelite holy war against Canaan is the history of God's righteous judgment upon unbelief and sin. He says: "…I will not acquit the guilty" (Exod 23:7). Every human being is personally obligated to produce perfect righteousness before God (Ex 34:7; Ez 18.4,20; 2 Thess 1:8-10; Gal 3:10). Unlike Allah, the God who is, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is not arbitrary. He cannot contradict himself. He cannot be what he is not. He cannot do what is contrary to his nature and his nature is just.

The universal testimony of Scripture is that God's righteousness must be satisfied. Scripture also testifies, however, that God is gracious and merciful. He is merciful in that he does not give to all sinners what they deserve: hell (thanks to Danny Hyde for repeatedly pointing this out on Sunday mornings!) and he is gracious in that he gives to sinners what they cannot earn: his favor. Out of his demerited favor he himself supplies the righteousness required by his justice. I'm grateful to the person at the recent Gospel-Driven Conference at Ponte Vedra PCA who pointed out after one of the sessions that, in Ezek 16:63, Yahweh Elohim promises that he himself will atone for the sins of his people. Of course we remember the scene in Genesis 15 when Yahweh himself passes between the pieces, taking upon himself the obligation to fulfill the promise and to suffer the penalty of violation of the covenant.

This is the difference between biblical religion and all other religions. Only the God of Scripture promises to save his people by fulfilling the obligations of his law for them. All other faiths set up systems whereby we must do for ourselves or, as in the case of Rabbinic and Christian moralism, God gives grace so that we can do so ourselves.

In the biblical faith, however, God meets the terms of his righteousness for us. This is where grace and righteousness meet: in Christ. For us he became both righteous law-keeper (Second/Last Adam) and the Mediator of gracious, free salvation sola fide to and for all those for whom he came, whom the Father gave to him from all eternity.

Kota Baru Municipal Council #fundie news.asiaone.com

[Note: Kota Baru is the capital of Kelantan state which is governed by the Islamist party PAS]

Shop in Malaysia fined for 'sexy' watch ads

PETALING JAYA - A non-Muslim watch retailer has been summoned by the Kota Baru Municipal Council (MPKB) over two "sexy" posters, including one of actress Aishwarya Rai - an "offence" he has supposedly committed more than 10 times since the 1990s.

image

Swee Cheong Watch & Pen Co owner Lee Kum Chuan said he was ordered to pay fines even before he started operating the shop in Aeon Mall - which opened in April. He runs two other similar outlets at KB Mall and Tesco in Kota Baru.

"When I went to MPKB to apply for a business permit for the new shop (at Aeon Mall), I was told to settle the old fines for the same offence committed in KB Mall.

"I was hit with a total RM2,000 (S$668.74) in fines but the amount was reduced to RM400. I had to pay the sum before I could get the new permit," said Lee, adding that each time he had to pay several hundred ringgit in fines for about 10 times since the 1990s.

MPKB enforcement officers raided his shop in Aeon Mall at 3.40pm on Monday.

Lee was ordered to take down the posters, one showing the photograph of the famous Bollywood star and the other of a couple of models, by Aug 1. The outfits in the posters were deemed too sexy by the council.

"The posters were supplied by our manufacturers," said Lee.

According to MPKB's terms of business permits, owners are not allowed to display sexy photographs at their shops.

Kelantan MCA [Malaysian Chinese Association] secretary Datuk Lua Choon Hann said what was happening on the ground proved that PAS was merely paying "lip service" when it said that hudud laws would not affect non-Muslims.

Lau also pointed out that four years ago, the council had taken action against hairdressers in Kota Baru for attending to clients of a different gender.

"PAS has proved yet again that its repeated claims that the hudud enactment will have no bearing on non-Muslims are nothing but mere fallacy," he said in a statement yesterday.

He said MCA would prevent at all cost the Private Member's Bill to amend the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 355, to enhance punitive powers of the syariah courts, from being passed in Parliament.

"Based on the summonses issued by local councils (in Kelantan), MCA wants to raise awareness of the motives to remove clauses in the Federal Constitution that protect the rights of non-Muslims and Muslims against punitive criminal actions based on religious precepts," he said.

Lua noted that the syariah criminal code passed in Aceh last year was applicable even to non-Muslims.

"This includes public whipping of even non-Muslims caught selling and consuming alcohol, gambling or committing adultery."

Josh Hammer #fundie #homophobia dailywire.com

HAMMER: Remember Those Who Told Us Gay Marriage Would Not Lead To Polyamory? They Were Wrong.

“Slippery slope theory is a form of logical fallacy.” – Knaves and fools
The concerted social push is now unequivocally on to normalize non-monogamous, polyamorous relationships.

Just yesterday, CBS News ran a rather disturbing story entitled, “Not Just ‘One Big Orgy’: Fighting The Stigma Of Consensual Non-Monogamy.”

The article, we are informed, is timed to coincide with CBS News’ premiering this weekend an original glowing documentary entitled, “Speaking Frankly: Non-Monogamy.” The article not-so-subtly attempts to guilt-trip the reader to care more about the purported woes of polyamorous couples people: “It is illegal in all 50 states to be married to more than one person — which is known as polygamy, not polyamory,” the reader is told. “Polyamorous people who try different kinds of arrangements — such as a married couple with steady outside partners — run into their own legal problems.”

The timing of the CBS News and concomitant documentary overlaps rather naturally with the lascivious new sex scandal involving Congresswoman Katie Hill, Democrat of California. As The Daily Wire has reported, Hill is now under congressional investigation over allegations she engaged in a “throuple” sexual relationship with her estranged husband and an erstwhile female campaign staffer, in addition to a separate affair with a congressional staffer. But it is also worth nothing that as far back as 2012, “Polyamory: Married & Dating” became a relatively popular reality TV series. Vice, furthermore, wrote a laudatory piece in 2017 on polyamory entitled, “Polyamorists Are Secretive, Stigmatized, And Highly Satisfied.”

Well.

I am only 30 years old, and even I am old enough to remember how leftists and social libertarians alike repeatedly assured us social conservatives that the popular legalization — and, subsequently, imposed constitutionalization via risible black-robed fiat — of same-sex nuptials would lead to neither a normalization of non-monogamous relationships nor a push for polygamous “marriage” itself. Never mind that social conservatives, led by the veritable “What Is Marriage?”-authoring triumvirate of Sherif Girgis, Ryan T. Anderson, and Robert P. George, quite persuasively pointed out that the only reason human civilization ever came around to the number “two” as rightfully constituting a marriage is because it takes precisely two individuals — one biological male and one biological female — to create human offspring. Never mind that social conservatives quite persuasively pointed out that once you remove biologically based sexual complementarity from the definition of marriage, the removal of that underlying number “two” would also logically follow. Never mind that social conservatives, led by New York Times columnist Ross Douthat, persuasively argued that slippery slope social theory is not a “logical fallacy” — it is demonstrably borne out by real, tangible civilizational results over the span of at least the past half-century.

We are now here. The push for de-stigmatized polyamory — and, to be sure, the push quite soon for legalized polygamous “marriage” — is already unfolding right before our eyes. Purportedly “objective” CBS News, after all, is now publishing non-opinion section journalistic content that tries to shame monogamous readers into sympathizing with the legal “plight” of the polyamorous.

Those who reliably informed social conservatives that the de-coupling of sexual complementarity from the definition of marriage would not lead to such an obvious eventual social trend ought to now be held accountable for their merely shoddy prognoses, if they are to be given the benefit of the doubt — or their intellectual disingenuousness, if they are not to be given the benefit of the doubt. That would include Andrew Sullivan as far back as 1996 and any number of prominent pundits in the Obergefell v. Hodges decision year of 2015 — including Jonathan Rauch, William Saletan, and Cathy Young. Each and every one of these pundits and social theorists ought to be challenged and asked why he or she did not possess the logic- and common sense-based prescience to foresee what was so obvious to some of us.

In the interim, those of us who still proudly self-identify as social conservatives ought to dig in our heels. We have a new pernicious civilizational trend to fight, and it is happening right now.

Anna Diehl #fundie 924jeremiah.wordpress.com

Addictions are a perfect modern day example of how God forces us into sin. If temptation was always possible to resist, there would be no such thing as an addiction. Addicts are people who find themselves tormented by temptations which completely overwhelm them. Why is it one man can take or leave a glass of wine, while another man becomes chained to the bottle? Why is one man able to push a pornographic image out of his mind while another man can’t rest until he sees more? The answer is God. Self-control is a fruit of the Spirit and each one of us experiences a different level of it in each situation that we’re in. I might successfully resist 1,000 temptations only to find myself totally conquered by the next one that comes along. It’s so easy to judge those who get hooked on things we’re not personally tempted by, but the reality is that God is the only reason any of us can avoid sinning.

If you honestly examine your own life, you’ll find copious examples of God shoving you into sin by refusing to give you what you needed to resist it. And let’s remember it was God who cursed the world in the first place and He was the One who decided how sin would affect us. It was God who saddled each of us with this carnal shell which constantly lusts after evil. We can’t deny His responsibility in this for we didn’t create ourselves, He did. Babies don’t choose evil—they are born into it. Evil is what comes naturally to us, not righteousness. No one has to teach us how to lie or steal or be selfish and demanding. But we must be disciplined in order to learn how to be kind, patient, and polite. Righteousness is a struggle while evil is automatic—this is God’s doing, not ours. This is how He wants it to be.

Sue Bohlin #fundie probe.org

Sue Bohlin looks a common myths concerning homosexual behavior that are prevalent in our society. These myths prevent us from looking at homosexuality with a biblical worldview and from dealing with this sin in a loving and consistent manner.

In this essay we’ll be looking at some of the homosexual myths that have pervaded our culture, and hopefully answering their arguments. Much of this material is taken from Joe Dallas’ excellent book, A Strong Delusion: Confronting the “Gay Christian” Movement.{1} While the information in this essay may prove helpful, it is our prayer that you will be able to share it calmly and compassionately, remembering that homosexuality isn’t just a political and moral issue; it is also about people who are badly hurting.

10% of the Population Is Homosexual.

In 1948, Dr. Alfred Kinsey released a study called Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, claiming that between 10 and 47% of the male population was homosexual.{2} He got his figures from a pool of 5,300 male subject that he represented as your average “Joe College” student. Many of the men who gave him the data, though, actually consisted of sex offenders, prisoners, pimps, hold-up men, thieves, male prostitutes and other criminals, and hundreds of gay activists.{3} The 10% figure was widely circulated by Harry Hay, the father of the homosexual “civil rights” movement, urging that homosexuality be seen no longer as an act of sodomy but as a 10% minority class.{4}

Kinsey’s figures were exposed as completely false immediately afterwards, and by many other scientists since. The actual figure is closer to 2-3%.{5} But the 10% number has been so often reported in the press that most people think it’s valid. It’s not.

People Are Born Gay.

Ann Landers said it, and millions of people believe it. The problem is, the data’s not there to support it. There are three ways to test for inborn traits: twin studies, brain dissections, and gene “linkage” studies.{6} Twin studies show that something other than genetics must account for homosexuality, because nearly half of the identical twin studied didn’t have the same sexual preference. If homosexuality were inherited, identical twins should either be both straight or both gay. Besides, none of the twin studies have been replicated, and other twin studies have produced completely different results.{7} Dr. Simon LeVay’s famous study on the brains of dead subjects yielded questionable results regarding its accuracy. He wasn’t sure of the sexual orientation of the people in the study, and Dr. LeVay even admits he doesn’t know if the changes in the brain structures were the cause *of* homosexuality, or caused *by* homosexuality.{8} Finally, an early study attempting to show a link between homosexuality and the X-chromosome has yet to be replicated, and a second study actually contradicted the findings of the first.{9} Even if homosexuality were someday proven to be genetically related, *inborn* does not necessarily mean *normal*. Some children are born with cystic fibrosis, but that doesn’t make it a normal condition.

Inborn tendencies toward certain behaviors (such as homosexuality) do not make those behaviors moral. Tendencies toward alcoholism, obesity, and violence are now thought to be genetically influenced, but they are not good behaviors. People born with tendencies toward these behaviors have to fight hard against their natural temptations to drunkenness, gluttony, and physical rage.

And since we are born as sinners into a fallen world, we have to deal with the consequences of the Fall. Just because we’re born with something doesn’t mean it’s normal. It’s not true that “God makes some people gay.” All of us have effects of the Fall we need to deal with.

What’s Wrong with Two Loving, Committed Men or Women Being Legally Married?

There are two aspects to marriage: the legal and the spiritual. Marriage is more than a social convention, like being “best friends” with somebody, because heterosexual marriage usually results in the production of children. Marriage is a legal institution in order to offer protection for women and children. Women need to have the freedom to devote their time and energies to be the primary nurturers and caretakers of children without being forced to be breadwinners as well. God’s plan is that children grow up in families who provide for them, protect them, and wrap them in security.

Because gay or lesbian couples are by nature unable to reproduce, they do not need the legal protection of marriage to provide a safe place for the production and raising of children. Apart from the sexual aspect of a gay relationship, what they have is really “best friend” status, and that does not require legal protection.

Of course, a growing number of gay couples are seeking to have a child together, either by adoption, artificial insemination, or surrogate mothering. Despite the fact that they have to resort to an outside procedure in order to become parents, the presence of adults plus children in an ad hoc household should not automatically secure official recognition of their relationship as a family. There is a movement in our culture which seeks to redefine “family” any way we want, but with a profound lack of discernment about the long-term effects on the people involved. Gay parents are making a dangerous statement to their children: lesbian mothers are saying that fathers are not important, and homosexual fathers are saying that mothers are not important. More and more social observers see the importance of both fathers and mothers in children’s lives; one of their roles is to teach boys what it means to be a boy and teach girls what it means to be a girl.

The other aspect of marriage is of a spiritual nature. Granted, this response to the gay marriage argument won’t make any difference to people who are unconcerned about spiritual things, but there are a lot of gays who care very deeply about God and long for a relationship with Him. The marriage relationship, both its emotional and especially its sexual components, is designed to serve as an earthbound illustration of the relationship between Christ and His bride, the church.{10} Just as there is a mystical oneness between a man and a woman, who are very different from each other, so there is a mystical unity between two very different, very “other” beings–the eternal Son of God and us mortal, creaturely humans. Marriage as God designed it is like the almost improbable union of butterfly and buffalo, or fire and water. But homosexual relationships are the coming together of two like individuals; the dynamic of unity and diversity in heterosexual marriage is completely missing, and therefore so is the spiritual dimension that is so intrinsic to the purpose of marriage. Both on an emotional and a physical level, the sameness of male and male, or female and female, demonstrates that homosexual relationships do not reflect the spiritual parable that marriage is meant to be. God wants marriage partners to complement, not to mirror, each other. The concept of gay marriage doesn’t work, whether we look at it on a social level or a spiritual one.

Jesus Said Nothing about Homosexuality.

Whether from a pulpit or at a gay rights event, gay activists like to point out that Jesus never addressed the issue of homosexuality; instead, He was more interested in love. Their point is that if Jesus didn’t specifically forbid a behavior, then who are we to judge those who engage in it?

This argument assumes that the Gospels are more important than the rest of the books in the New Testament, that only the recorded sayings of Jesus matter. But John’s gospel itself assures us that it is not an exhaustive record of all that Jesus said and did, which means there was a lot left out!{11} The gospels don’t record that Jesus condemned wife-beating or incest; does that make them OK? Furthermore, the remaining books of the New Testament are no less authoritative than the gospels. All scripture is inspired by God, not just the books with red letters in the text. Specific prohibitions against homosexual behavior in Romans 1:26-27 and 1 Corinthians 6:9,10 are every bit as God-ordained as what is recorded in the gospels.

We do know, however, that Jesus spoke in specific terms about God’s created intent for human sexuality: “From the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; and the two shall be one flesh. . . What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder” (Matt. 19:4-6). God’s plan is holy heterosexuality, and Jesus spelled it out.

The Levitical laws against homosexual behavior are not valid today.

Leviticus 18:22 says, “Thou shalt not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; it is an abomination.” Gay theologians argue that the term “abomination” is generally associated with idolatry and the Canaanite religious practice of cult prostitution, and thus God did not prohibit the kind of homosexuality we see today.

Other sexual sins such as adultery and incest are also prohibited in the same chapters where the prohibitions against homosexuality are found. All sexual sin is forbidden by both Old and New Testament, completely apart from the Levitical codes, because it is a moral issue. It is true that we are not bound by the rules and rituals in Leviticus that marked Yahweh’s people by their separation from the world; however, the nature of sexual sin has not changed because immorality is an affront to the holiness and purity of God Himself. Just because most of Leviticus doesn’t apply to Christians today doesn’t mean none of it does.

The argument that the word “abomination” is connected with idolatry is well answered by examining Proverbs 6:16-19, which describes what else the Lord considers abominations: a proud look, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises evil imaginations, feet that are swift in running to mischief, a false witness that speaks lies, and a man who sows discord among brothers. Idolatry plays no part in these abominations. The argument doesn’t hold water.

If the practices in Leviticus 18 and 20 are condemned because of their association with idolatry, then it logically follows that they would be permissible if they were committed apart from idolatry. That would mean incest, adultery, bestiality, and child sacrifice (all of which are listed in these chapters) are only condemned when associated with idolatry; otherwise, they are allowable. No responsible reader of these passages would agree with such a premise.{12}

Calling Homosexuality a Sin Is Judging, and Judging Is a Sin.

Josh McDowell says that the most often-quoted Bible verse used to be John 3:16, but now that tolerance has become the ultimate virtue, the verse we hear quoted the most is “Judge not, lest ye be judged” (Matt. 7:1). The person who calls homosexual activity wrong is called a bigot and a homophobe, and even those who don’t believe in the Bible can be heard to quote the “Judge not” verse.

When Jesus said “Do not judge, or you too will be judged,” the context makes it plain that He was talking about setting ourselves up as judge of another person, while blind to our own sinfulness as we point out another’s sin. There’s no doubt about it, there is a grievous amount of self-righteousness in the way the church treats those struggling with the temptations of homosexual longings. But there is a difference between agreeing with the standard of Scripture when it declares homosexuality wrong, and personally condemning an individual because of his sin. Agreeing with God about something isn’t necessarily judging.

Imagine I’m speeding down the highway, and I get pulled over by a police officer. He approaches my car and, after checking my license and registration, he says, “You broke the speed limit back there, ma’am.” Can you imagine a citizen indignantly leveling a politically correct charge at the officer: “Hey, you’re judging me! Judge not, lest ye be judged!'” The policeman is simply pointing out that I broke the law. He’s not judging my character, he’s comparing my behavior to the standard of the law. It’s not judging when we restate what God has said about His moral law, either. What is sin is to look down our noses at someone who falls into a different sin than we do. That’s judging.

The Romans 1 Passage on Homosexuality Does Not Describe True Homosexuals, but Heterosexuals Who Indulge in Homosexual Behavior That Is Not Natural to Them.

Romans 1:26-27 says, “God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.” Some gay theologians try to get around the clear prohibition against both gay and lesbian homosexuality by explaining that the real sin Paul is talking about here is straight people who indulge in homosexual acts, because it’s not natural to them. Homosexuality, they maintain, is not a sin for true homosexuals.

But there is nothing in this passage that suggests a distinction between “true” homosexuals and “false” ones. Paul describes the homosexual behavior itself as unnatural, regardless of who commits it. In fact, he chooses unusual words for men and women, Greek words that most emphasize the biology of being a male and a female. The behavior described in this passage is unnatural for males and females; sexual orientation isn’t the issue at all. He is saying that homosexuality is biologically unnatural; not just unnatural to heterosexuals, but unnatural to anyone.

Furthermore, Romans 1 describes men “inflamed with lust” for one another. This would hardly seem to indicate men who were straight by nature but experimenting with gay sex.{13} You really have to do some mental gymnastics to make Romans 1 anything other than what a plain reading leads us to understand all homosexual activity is sin.

Preaching Against Homosexuality Causes Gay Teenagers to Commit Suicide.

I received an e-mail from someone who assured me that the blood of gay teenagers was on my hands because saying that homosexuality is wrong makes people kill themselves. The belief that gay teenagers are at high risk for suicide is largely inspired by a 1989 report by a special federal task force on youth and suicide. This report stated three things; first, that gay and lesbian youths account for one third of all teenage suicides; second, that suicide is the leading cause of death among gay teenagers, and third, gay teens who commit suicide do so because of “internalized homophobia” and violence directed at them.{14} This report has been cited over and over in both gay and mainstream publications.

San Francisco gay activist Paul Gibson wrote this report based on research so shoddy that when it was submitted to Dr. Louis Sullivan, the former Secretary of Health and Human Services, Dr. Sullivan officially distanced himself and his department from it.{15} The report’s numbers, both its data and its conclusions, are extremely questionable. Part of the report cites an author claiming that as many as 3,000 gay youths kill themselves each year. But that’s over a thousand more than the total number of teen suicides in the first place! Gibson exaggerated his numbers when he said that one third of all teen suicides are committed by gay youth. He got this figure by looking at gay surveys taken at drop- in centers for troubled teens, many of which were gay-oriented, which revealed that gay teens had two to four times the suicidal tendencies of straight kids. Gibson multiplied this higher figure by the disputed Kinsey figure of a 10% homosexual population to produce his figure that 30% of all youth suicides are gay. David Shaffer, a Columbia University psychiatrist who specializes in teen suicides, pored over this study and said, “I struggled for a long time over Gibson’s mathematics, but in the end, it seemed more hocus-pocus than math.”{16}

The report’s conclusions are contradicted by other, more credible reports. Researchers at the University of California-San Diego interviewed the survivors of 283 suicides for a 1986 study. 133 of those who died were under 30, and only 7 percent were gay and they were all over 21. In another study at Columbia University of 107 teenage boy suicides, only three were known to be gay, and two of those died in a suicide pact. When the Gallup organization interviewed almost 700 teenagers who knew a teen who had committed suicide, not one mentioned sexuality as part of the problem. Those who had come close to killing themselves mainly cited boy-girl problems or low self-esteem.{17}

Gibson didn’t use a heterosexual control group in his study. Conclusions and statistics are bound to be skewed without a control group. When psychiatrist David Shaffer examined the case histories of the gay teens who committed suicides in Gibson’s report, he found the same issues that straight kids wrestle with before suicide: “The stories were the same: a court appearance scheduled for the day of the death; prolonged depression; drug and alcohol problems; etc.”{18}

That any teenager experiences so much pain that he takes his life is a tragedy, regardless of the reason. But it’s not fair to lay the responsibility for gay suicides, the few that there are, on those who agree with God that it’s wrong and harmful behavior.

Timothy Dukeman #fundie afellowtruthseeker.blogspot.com

One of the most prevalent arguments surrounding the issue of homosexuality is over whether or not homosexuals are "born this way." Much ink has been spilled on this topic, and I've seen many Christians absolutely go to the mat trying to prove that same-sex attraction is not an inborn trait. That's a mistake. It's a mistake because the entire discussion is pointless. Really.

--If same-sex attraction isn't genetic, then it's an environmentally-produced temptation to sin. It must be resisted.
--If same-sex attraction is genetic, then it's a genetically-produced temptation to sin. It must be resisted.

Bro. Randy #fundie teens-4-christ.org

That is not what I was saying here. The rapist certainly is responsible for his actions. However, if the girl involved has dressed immodestly, she shares that responsibility.

A few months ago, when I went to bed, I left some cookies out. When we got up the next morning, there were two smiling kids and cookie crumbs in living room. they were wrong for eating the cookies, and touching what was not theirs to touch, but I was also wrong for giving them a strong temptation. I should have removed the temptation from them. Likewise, a girl who dresses immodestly is setting up a temptation for men. Some men may be able to contain themselves and their thoughts. Other men may not be as strong. Their thoughts run away with them, and they lust after the flesh they see, but they are able to contain it at that. But men who are weaker still may not even be able to stop there. These men may go further and act on their desires. If a man commits rape, has he done wrong? Absolutely! If the woman tempted him, is she wrong as well? Sure is! This flies in the face of the sensibilities we have all been taught because we have believed a lie. We have believed that we can do whatever we want and there are no consequences to our sins. This is a lie.

[The scariest thing about this thread is that to every post Randy makes, there are at least 3 "amen!"s.]

imasaved1(bro Randy) #fundie teens-4-christ.org

That is not what I was saying here. The rapist certainly is responsible for his actions. However, if the girl involved has dressed immodestly, she shares that responsibility.

A few months ago, when I went to bed, I left some cookies out. When we got up the next morning, there were two smiling kids and cookie crumbs in living room. they were wrong for eating the cookies, and touching what was not theirs to touch, but I was also wrong for giving them a strong temptation. I should have removed the temptation from them. Likewise, a girl who dresses immodestly is setting up a temptation for men. Some men may be able to contain themselves and their thoughts. Other men may not be as strong. Their thoughts run away with them, and they lust after the flesh they see, but they are able to contain it at that. But men who are weaker still may not even be able to stop there. These men may go further and act on their desires. If a man commits rape, has he done wrong? Absolutely! If the woman tempted him, is she wrong as well? Sure is! This flies in the face of the sensibilities we have all been taught because we have believed a lie. We have believed that we can do whatever we want and there are no consequences to our sins. This is a lie.

Oboehner #fundie christiannews.net

TheKingofRhye:
If you agree with this or not, it would require overturning Roe v. Wade, wouldn't it?

Oboehner:
Given that only Congress can make law, how is one court case even relevant?

Ambulance Chaser:
Is this your first day in America? Are you not aware of how the three branches of government work?

Oboehner:
Article 1,Section 1. "ALL legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives." - you mean this government?

Ambulance Chaser:
What exactly is it you think the Supreme Court does?

Oboehner:
See Article 3, Section 2.

Ambulance Chaser:
Okay, let's try this a different way. You are aware that every single time the Supreme Court issues a ruling, everyone in this country stops doing what they're doing and immediately complies with it.

You are aware of that, right?

Oboehner:
That sounds like a personal problem brought on by ignorance on the part of "everyone in this country". Still not law.

Ambulance Chaser:
I see. So, then, literally every judge, lawyer, law professor, politician, and federal agency simply doesn't know how the Constitution works. Only you do. Correct?

Oboehner:
Simple ignorance or indifference - most often the latter, and I would hardly say "every".

Ambulance Chaser:
Oh, really? Okay, so cite me some legal scholars who think that case law doesn't matter. Go ahead. I'll wait.

Which legal publications do you subscribe to? It couldn't be the ABA journal. Or the Harvard Law Review. Or the Yale Law Review. Or any law review, because those are all full of case citations.

Oboehner:
"Case law" is an oxymoron. Opinions are like sphincters, everyone has one yet the Constitution is clear.

TheKingofRhye:
That old argument again? Really? Haven't we already been through this? (and refuted it, at that) If Supreme Court cases have no relevance, why is it that we have interracial and same-sex marriage legal in all 50 states? If nothing the courts do is relevant, what is even their purpose?

(and, no, before someone says it, because I KNOW they will, I'm not saying race and sexual orientation are the same thing or something like that)

Oboehner:
Article 1, Section 1.
ALL legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the
United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of
Representatives.

So you're refuting the Constitution now? Or does the meaning of the word ALL escape you?

TheKingofRhye:
OK, then tell me, which laws that we have now has the Supreme Court made? Roe v. Wade didn't make a new law, Obergefell didn't make a new law....

And what do you the think the SC is FOR, if their rulings aren't relevant in any way?

Oboehner:
Why on earth would RvW have to be overturned then? It is not law therefore not binding?
*sigh* Article 3, Section 2 Basically settling matters between states and as an appeals court for lower courts settling matters between two parties.

m-slovak79 #fundie imdb.com

sticking to religious standpoint, which is the only one that matters, says... sex outside of marriage is wrong. it's a sin and sin pushes us away from God which is obviously a bad thing as that can lead you to hell.

but us human's, given our fallen nature(which has always been that way since the fall of Adam/Eve), tend to find bad things appealing as they seem harmless to us and the sexual drive is the easiest thing to exploit since it's so appealing. but damages your eternal soul and can possibly lead you to hell.

praying often (preferably The Holy Rosary daily(i am a Catholic)) gives you strength, over a period of time, to resist your natural sexual urge (trying to resist that by yourself is not happening). just trust me on that. many people around here will likely see this and laugh though since they don't believe in God.

Unknown Islamic schools #fundie theguardian.com

At least 10 Islamic schools in England are still segregating boys and girls in co-educational schools, while others are likely to be separating the genders for certain activities, despite a recent court ruling outlawing the practice. Details emerged in an appeal court judgment on Tuesday, which turned down an attempt by the Association of Muslim Schools (AMS) to join a legal action to seek leave to appeal to the supreme court for a review of the segregation ruling.

The request followed a judgment last month when three court of appeal judges found that Al-Hijrah Islamic school in Birmingham had caused unlawful discrimination by formally segregating girls and boys from the age of nine. The court heard that boys and girls were taught in different classrooms and were made to use separate corridors and play areas. The segregation policy also applied to clubs and school trips.

The judgment overturned an earlier high court ruling which found that Ofsted inspectors were wrong to penalise the school on the basis of an “erroneous” view that the segregation amounted to discrimination. In its successful appeal, Ofsted argued that the school had breached the 2010 Equalities Act. The AMS, which represents 133 Muslim faith schools including Al-Hijrah, said 10 of its members and probably other non-members still had formal segregation policies in place, while other schools segregated children for particular activities. Other faith schools were also likely to be implicated, it said.

The written judgment said the AMS chairman, Ashfaque Alichowdhury, told the court the association’s role was to ensure member schools complied with their legal obligations and acted in a way that was consistent with Islamic teachings and practices. “The court of appeal’s judgment may have created a conflict between these two fundamental requirements which compromises the association’s ability to fulfil what it understands are its purposes,” Alichowdhury said.

“The judgment also puts the segregating schools at immediate risk of challenge from statutory bodies and other interested parties. Clearly where there is a conflict, the schools and the association must obey the law. However, the association believes that this is an important issue and would welcome a review of the court of appeal decision by the supreme court.” The AMS also said the ruling had created uncertainty over future Ofsted inspections at affected schools, and complained of a lack of guidance from Ofsted or the Department for Education over segregation.

An Ofsted spokesperson said on Tuesday that any school potentially affected by the judgment could seek legal advice if required.

“In each case, the school’s individual circumstances would need to be assessed. And the DfE, as the registration body for schools, will support it to make any necessary changes. “We are discussing the implications of the judgment, and what they mean for future inspections, with the DfE.”

Refusing the AMS application to join the legal action, the judges said Al-Hijrah school, which was the subject and claimant in the proceedings, accepted the decision and was working with the council to implement it. “The school does not encourage or support the desire of AMS to obtain permission to appeal in order to overturn the decision.”

pallis #fundie freerepublic.com

Seems to me the better solution would be to make homosexuality socially unacceptable, and cause gay, cross dressing children to dress and act straight, at least until they are old enough to have a private life where they can share their perversions with friends who want to share the gay lifestyle with them. All the politically correct attempts to convince straight people that homosexuality is normal won’t prevent the next young thug from killing or beating a gay kid. What liberals will accomplish with the radical, gay agenda is the next step in tearing down sexual morality and cultural standards. Someday, we will read how some young thug shot the neighbor kid for lawfully practicing bestiality on the street. The PC police will admonish us about the need to teach our children bestiality awareness.

Vincent Cheung #fundie vincentcheung.com

Freedom is almost always falsely defined, even undefined. We must at least answer the question, "Free from what?" Since we are referring to divine determinism, the "determiner" is God. So the only relevant thing to be free from is God, and whether we are free from any other thing is irrelevant. Thus the question becomes, "Is man free from God in any sense?" Once you declare that man is free from God in some sense, you have lost the God of the Bible.

The Christian faith teaches something different. Absolute divine determinism is true; therefore, man has no freedom relative to God – he is not free from God in any sense. However, he is still morally responsible and accountable because God holds him responsible and accountable. There is no logical reason to introduce the issue of freedom. The premise, "responsibility presupposes freedom," is arbitrary, unbiblical, and impossible to prove. Rather, Scripture teaches that responsibility presupposes divine judgment, and divine judgment presupposes God's decision to make this judgment. Therefore, human responsibility presupposes divine sovereignty, not human freedom. We are morally responsible because God is sovereign and we are not free.

The question then becomes one of justice, for to many people it seems unjust to hold someone accountable who is not free. However, this is just the same question rephrased. The issue of justice appears relevant only because one has brought freedom into the discussion by force. The answer is that this is just because it is what God has decided, and he is the sole and ultimate standard of justice; therefore, this is just by definition. People might not like this because it contradicts their intuition of freedom, responsibility, and justice; however, theirs is a sinful intuition. They appeal to their intuition, even making it the basis on which all other considerations must turn, but they have ignored the noetic effects of sin.

Scripture teaches that every person has an innate knowledge of God in the sense that he knows about God, even some of his attributes and commands, by instinct, or by intuition, apart from observation and experience. This knowledge resides in man's mind because God has directly imparted it to him as a creature made in the divine image. Biblical apologists sometimes mention this; however, this is different from appealing to intuition as a basis for argument.

Our innate knowledge of God is not established by intuition itself, but by revelation. We do not say, "We have an intuitive knowledge of God; therefore, we indeed have this knowledge, and this knowledge is true." Instead, we say, "God's revelation tells me that I have an intuitive knowledge of God; therefore, I indeed have an intuitive knowledge of God." And we say, "God's revelation tells me that my intuitive knowledge of God is true; therefore, my intuitive knowledge of God is true."

We also add, "God's revelation tells me that our intuitive knowledge of God has been suppressed and distorted by sin; therefore, although it is true that I have an intuitive knowledge of God, and although this intuitive knowledge of God is true, this intuition cannot function as a source of my theology or as justification for my premises in reasoning, because I cannot accurately perceive and represent the information contained in this intuition. Rather, I need God's revelation to tell me what this intuitive knowledge contains and what to do with it."

[...]

When we refer to what we know by intuition, we do not make a direct appeal to intuition, but we appeal to what God tells us that we know by intuition. In the context of theology and apologetics, we mention this as one of the reasons that sinners cannot excuse themselves. They know God by instinct, but they refuse to acknowledge him or worship him, to believe the gospel and to obey his commandments. We do not begin by saying that everyone knows God by intuition, so that there is no excuse for unbelief; rather, we begin by revelation, and then on the basis of revelation say that everyone knows God by intuition, and therefore there is no excuse for unbelief.

Geremia #fundie forums.catholic.com

What is wrong with guilt and shame? Your child should know that masturbation shameful because it is. How else are they going to learn this if you don't explicitly tell them? Why should alienating the child be avoided more so than stopping the act of masturbation?

Are you afraid the child will rebel once he turns 18 and turn into a promiscuous heathen when he meets the "real world"? This is possible, but he certainly would be worse off hitting the "real world" with mortal sin having stained his soul.

However, if you are vigilant and strictly correct him before he becomes addicted to it, he will greatly respect you when he grows older and continues to discover the beauty of chastity and purity. He will think, "Wow, although I didn't realize it at the time, my parents really cared for me!"

jwright82 #fundie puritanboard.com

Well first off a thing is right or wrong simply because God's says it. Do we christians locate the source of that rightness or wrongness in God's unchanging charector? Yes but what we know of that charector is revealational in nature and always anthropomorphic. We cannot use reason to probe the depths of God. We can faithfuly start with his revealation to us and move from there. Also we must say yes God can declare murder to be right, but he has covenantly bounded himself in the covenat of works (or creation). Remember that God can do whatever he wants because he wants to. Does he bound himself in covenants to mankind? Yes, so he will no more "change" his mind on murder being wrong than he will flood the earth again.

I do not object to appealing to his immutible charector, only that appeals alone tend to abritraraly bound God for some logical or metaphysical reason. God is no more bound by logic than he is bound by creation. Now murder is one crime that he gives his reasons for in the Nohaic covenant but he is under no obligation to give any reason whatsoever for his descissions regarding anything. That I think is the best response to the Euthryphro argument, and Ryft gave an excellant response to it as well.

Ali M. #fundie rr-bb.com

Morally speaking, he [an atheist friend] was one of the most naturally perfect people i had ever known. He didn't suffer from temptations, bitterness, hatred for people, lust or any of the struggles that believers struggle with.... You see, Satan will only cause temptations and spiritual attacks on those who are in the battle seeking the truth and attempting to live according to God's will. he (satan) allready has the atheist so he will let him slide through life with the least amount of friction or hardships, untill he snatches him away at the end that is.

denki #homophobia stormfront.org

Many White Nationalists are Pagans or Atheists and believe gays should have rights. You don't have to be a Christian or anti-gay to be against multiculturalism.

The number of gay people is too small to affect the birth rate. Whites are declining because heterosexuals are not having enough children. Don't blame this on the gay minority.

The gay lifestyle is that of sexual indulgence and impulsive, animalistic behavior. A being that acts primarily in accordance with its insatiable lust and desire is akin to an animal; not a human being, which is imbued with the ability to discern and control oneself. Their entire lifestyle and LGBTQWXYZ+ movement is centered around a perverse fetish and nothing more. "Love is love" cannot and must not be applied to these creatures. The defamation of objective Love has been popularized by morally decaying liberal insects; lust has gained the upper hand. Lust and fetishism are the guiding ideologies of the LGBT community, which aims to unite the degenerated masses around its rainbow flag. LGBT apologists pretend not to notice the obvious: they defend a culture that has developed around parties, bars, clubs, and other venues that emanate promiscuity. The movement requires hypersexuality to exist, as that is its defining feature. They parade the streets sporting sex toys, dressed in revealing clothes, fishnet stockings, pink tutus, heavy makeup, wigs, high heels, flashy colors, etc. etc. Men cease to be men. They no longer talk, walk, act, or dress like men. Lesbians tend to remain more-or-less feminine. Unless they're butch, they tend to keep their hair long, they typically continue to dress like women, and they do not alter their voices to sound deep. Gays, on the other hand, adopt an entirely different persona and actually try to resemble male-female hybrid prostitutes. They adopt the worst traits that generally only manifest in women.

We have all seen them and to deny the sexualized nature of this subculture is idiotic and insincere. They appear on stations like NPR for "Pride month" and introduce themselves as former male prostitutes advertising their "trailblazing" new TV show appropriately titled "Hoes." They refer to themselves as hoes; black slang for whores. They are male whores, they actively advertise themselves as such, and yet naive whites try to present gays in a "positive light," explaining how family-oriented they are and how they "just want to marry and love." Whores are the last people for whom marriage remains a sacrament. Whores have sex for money or pleasure and indulge in it incessantly; to consider whores fit for fidelity and loyalty is laughable and ridiculous. There is a reason gays tend to be associated with HIV; in 2010, they were a whopping 200x more likely to have it than anyone else. Furthermore, they account for over 60% of syphilis cases in America while they only make up 1.6% of the US population. And it makes sense, as they have sex with literally hundreds of men, nearly 80% of whom are strangers. I can't think of anything worse for gays than marriage, as it would only limit their extraordinary desire for anal rupture.

Male sexuality, whether oriented toward females or other males, craves variety. But whereas almost all heterosexual men, perhaps after “sowing wild oats,” settle down with one woman, homosexual men do not settle down. Ever. A classic, large-scale study by Bell and Weinberg conducted during the 1970s and published by the Kinsey Institute found that forty-three percent (43%) of white male homosexuals had had sex with 500 or more partners, and twenty-eight percent (28%) had had sex with 1,000 or more partners. Seventy-nine percent (79%) said that more than half of their sexual partners had been strangers. In 1985, Pollack found that gay men averaged “several dozen partners a year” and “some hundreds in a lifetime” with “tremendous promiscuity.”[ii] In their 1997 study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in the Journal of Sex Research, Paul Van de Ven, et al., found that “the modal range for number of sexual partners was 101-500.” In addition, 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent had between 501 and 1,000 partners. A further 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent reported having had more than one thousand lifetime sexual partners.[iii]

Taken from:
The myth of male homosexual monogamy — ADvindicate

If you are unhappy with the religious overtones of the site, the materials that the author draws information from are books, articles, and academic sources you can find in the citations.

Gays are not associated with classical music, they are not associated with religion, nor a structured, traditional lifestyle. They are associated with disorder, drugs, and loud, flashy, repetitive electronic beeps and boops with abrupt, meaningless lyrics and convulsive movements that obstruct one's mental state, dull one's aching conscience, and force one's mind into a trance-like state in a futile attempt to escape the thought of future consequences. They are mentally ill escapists seeking to alleviate their troubled consciences through parties, sex, and mind-altering substances. Their hedonism ends prematurely with HIV, suicide, or overdose. It's not surprising that they're more likely to abuse drugs and alcohol (meth 12x, heroin 10x, alcohol 2-3x more likely than straight men).

They have a high suicide rate because they are mentally ill and experience childhood trauma. I do not think that a sexual orientation that typically results from rape or molestation is worthy of being mainstreamed and normalized. If it is a "fad," then it is a very dangerous one that begins with a broken childhood, continues into adolescence accompanied by sex and drugs, and finally ends at young adulthood with a stupid, tragic death. Denmark legalized same-sex marriage in the 1930's. It has been the norm for almost 90 years, and these weak, drug-addled individuals still uphold a suicide rate three times higher than that of the general populace.

Their subculture is nothing but a tragedy.

CJ Hopkins #conspiracy counterpunch.org

The Dawning of the Age of Non-Terrorist Terrorism

by CJ Hopkins

shutterstock_339441194

Frederic Legrand – COMEO | Shutterstock.com

Berlin.

Of all the types of terrorist threats we are being conditioned to live in a more or less constant state of low-level fear of, the most terrifying of all has got to be the type we’ve witnessed throughout the Summer — a Summer so terrifying The Guardian is now officially calling it “The Summer of Fear.” Orlando, Nice, Würzberg, Munich, Reutlingen, Ansbach, Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray … the Terror just keeps coming, and coming, like the monster in some blockbuster Hollywood movie. The most terrifying part of it is that these are no ordinary terrorist attacks carried out by ordinary terrorists at the behest of ordinary terrorist groups, but, rather, the work of a new breed of terrorist … a terrorist who has no connection to any type of terrorist groups, is not primarily motivated by Terrorism, and, basically, has nothing to do with Terrorism. Let’s go ahead and call him the “non-terrorist terrorist.”

According to the official narrative being propagated by the Western media, non-terrorist Terrorism officially began in late September 2014 with a statement by Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, a terrorist spokesman for ISIS, ISIL, Daesh, or whatever we’re calling it this week. This statement, which has since been quoted as often as humanly possible by the press, exhorted decentralized terrorist cells, aspiring terrorists, and other random individuals, to launch attacks against innocent Westerners, to wit, to “mash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with a car, or throw him down from a high place …” and so on.

According to the same official narrative, the first attack by a non-terrorist terrorist was carried out in Dijon, France — yes, the place the mustard comes from — in late December 2014, three months after the al-Adnani statement. (The 2013 Boston Marathon bomb attack apparently doesn’t count anymore, as it occurred before the al-Adnani statement and thus doesn’t fit the official narrative.) The prosecutor in the case — the French case, of course — described the perpetrator as a “barely coherent,” mentally unbalanced, middle-aged man who used his car to mow down over a dozen innocent French pedestrians while shouting Islamic stuff out the window.

This, we are learning, is part of the cunning modus operandi of the non-terrorist terrorists, the way they are able to extensively plan and carry out terrifying terrorist attacks while posing as mentally disturbed individuals, or as sexually confused or alienated loners, who have absolutely nothing to do with Terrorism. This ruse was deployed again in Orlando, where the non-terrorist terrorist went as far as to pose as a closeted homosexual; and in Nice, where the attacker maintained his cover for years as a wife-beating petty criminal; and in Würzberg, where apparently the teenage terrorist had been masquerading as an orphaned refugee, but in fact was an insidious sleeper agent sent by ISIS to attack some random train in the middle of the German countryside.

According to knowledgeable Terrorism experts, Western governments, and the mainstream media, we’re going to be seeing more and more of this — these seemingly uncoordinated attacks, both on targets like Nice, which fit the narrative, but also on targets that make no sense, and that terrorists like ISIS have never even heard of, but to which they have nonetheless dispatched their agents to attack Asian tourists with kitchen knives and hatchets while shouting “Allahu Akbar” at the top of their lungs. Who knows where the next attack will take place? Vossevangen, Norway? Demming, New Mexico? Menomonie, Wisconsin? The Outer Hebrides? Your guess is as good as mine.

The point is, as the War on Terror — which, as you probably remember, President Obama officially ended in 2013 — enters this new and more terrifying phase, we will need to prepare ourselves, both logistically and emotionally, for the dramatically heightened level of Terror engendered by the non-terrorist terrorist threat, as well as the invasive “security measures” that will be required to pretend to combat it. Fear, as ever, will be the watchword. Everyone will need to do their part to assist the authorities in identifying, indefinitely detaining, and enhanced-interrogating potential non-terrorist terrorist suspects, and anyone else who looks kind of fishy. Let’s take a look at how that will work.

How to Spot a Non-Terrorist Terrorist

The non-terrorist terrorist is difficult to identify and place on a secret government watch-list as he exhibits few — and sometimes none — of the characteristics of the conventional terrorist. Whereas the conventional terrorist is typically a devout Muslim, and a member of some notorious terrorist group, like ISIS, Al-Qaeda, or Al-Nusra Front (although the latter may not be terrorists, currently, depending on what’s going on in Syria), the non-terrorist terrorist is usually not at all religious, is not a member of any terrorist group, and has absolutely no connection to Terrorism. This lack of any type of terrorist background, or any other ties to actual Terrorism, given the current restrictive limits imposed on anti-Terror professionals by laws, national constitutions, and the like, effectively renders the non-terrorist terrorist undetainable in advance by government agents, anti-Terror police units, and corporate mercenaries, at least in developed Western countries, so they’re going to need all the help they can get in terms of surveilling and profiling everyone. With that in mind, here are some tips for identifying potential non-terrorist terrorists.

The most important thing to remember is that the non-terrorist terrorist is definitely a Muslim, or at least is vaguely Muslim-looking, or has a Muslim-sounding name. White supremacists, neo-Nazis, heavily-armed fundamentalist Christians, and garden-variety white-skinned criminals, unattractive and dangerous though they may be, do not fall into the Terror category, unless, that is, they blow up something like the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, but even that might not count anymore, as it happened before the War on Terror, and … well, once you start calling white people “terrorists,” the distinctions between things get really confusing.

In spite of the fact that he is definitely a Muslim, the non-terrorist terrorist exhibits any or all of an assortment of “non-Muslim behaviors.” He drinks, smokes, abuses drugs, is sexually promiscuous (or aspires to promiscuity), does not attend mosque, rarely prays, and otherwise appears to be just another stressed-out, debt-burdened Western consumer struggling to make sense of late-capitalist society, and to support himself — and, in some cases, his family — with some soul-crushing job at the foreign subsidiary of some global corporation he isn’t even aware of, or as an Uber-driver, or temporary security guard, or with some other type of micro-entrepreneurial activity that’s making his life a living hell, which feeds right into his other cover.

The non-terrorist terrorist often goes to great lengths to create the appearance of having had a long history of psychological and emotional problems. This cover (which the non-terrorist terrorist may begin constructing as early as his late-adolescence) may involve the feigning of a series of nervous breakdowns, or episodes of clinical depression, or suicide attempts, or other such symptoms. Don’t let this “emotionally unstable” act fool you by playing on your empathy for other human beings. If ever in doubt about a disturbed individual, or anyone expressing extremist views, or acting in any way unusual, best to just go ahead and report him, and let the authorities sort it out. You could be dealing with a non-terrorist terrorist in the process of “sudden self-radicalization.”

The “Suddenly Self-Radicalized” Non-Terrorist Terrorist

Unlike the conventional, or “actual” terrorist, the non-terrorist terrorist is often radicalized shortly before the time of his attack, or during his attack, or shortly thereafter. “Radicalization” is a tricky process, which can occur in any number of ways, e.g., over time, in structured settings, but also in purely imaginary ways that only exist in the minds of the terrorists, or the media, or anti-Terrorism experts. In any event, it’s not like the old days, when aspiring terrorists were forced to attend those terrorist training camps out in the desert, and actually get involved with Terrorism. Nowadays all it takes is the Internet, and sincere desire to radicalize yourself.

“Self-radicalization” is a growing problem, and not just among Islamic terrorists. “Radicalism” in any form that opposes or questions global Capitalism, Neoliberalism, and other Western values, is spreading like a mass psychological disorder (see Jonathan Rauch’s recent article in The Atlantic, where he diagnoses the American public’s pathological resentment of the political class). Like the child with Oppositional Defiant Disorder, sometimes even the non-terrorist terrorist — or whatever type of “self-radicalized” person — doesn’t even realize he’s becoming a terrorist, or a non-terrorist terrorist, until it’s too late.

“Self-radicalization” often begins with irrational and inappropriate resentment, which is typically projected onto affluent individuals, major corporations, investment banks, politicians, billionaires, members of the media, or the populations of other countries that happen to be invading or bombing the country of the “self-radicalizing” person in question. This misdirected pathological resentment, if allowed to fester, inevitably leads to the thinking of extremist or terrorist thoughts, which leads to the tweeting of terrorist tweets, and to terrorist Facebook posts, and so on. In no time at all, the self-radicalizing person has transformed into a full-blown non-terrorist terrorist, and is snorting up lines of pulverized Captagon, drawing half-assed ISIS flags on the walls of his apartment with indelible markers, and loading up on weapons at Walmart, or whatever passes for Walmart in his country.

This is just a preliminary check-list of the hallmark features of the non-terrorist terrorist, which the mainstream media will be adding to as The Summer of Fear approaches its climax, and presumably throughout the indefinite future, as the Age of Non-Terrorist Terrorism continues, possibly until the end of Time.

A Word of Warning Regarding Terminology

All right, I know what you’re probably thinking … you’re thinking we’ve finally reached some level of absurdity with this calling people “terrorists” thing where the term completely loses its meaning, and its ability to scare the bejesus out of people. Fortunately, this is not the case. In fact, it’s almost exactly the obverse — the more nonsensical, oxymoronic and utterly meaningless the terms we use to describe the heinous, subhuman enemies (who want to slaughter us because of our freedom) are, the more meaningful, effective and terrifying they are. This is crucial when distinguishing between, for example, our friends in Saudi Arabia and barbarous mad-dog terrorists like ISIS, both of whom chop off people’s heads for crimes like apostasy, idolatry, and adultery … but, of course, the Saudis are not savage terrorists, despite their involvement with the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and … well, you can see the danger here, when you start to actually think about things.

The point is, our new “non-terrorist terrorist” designation should not in any way call into question the widely-acknowledged definition, and constant repetition, of the terms “terrorist,” “Terror,” and “Terrorism,” when applied to terrorists, whether of the “non-terrorist” or “terrorist” type. Terrorism is not a word game, or some specious semiotic construct, or an essentially arbitrary made-up label that can be slapped onto any type of violent activity or ideology we want to demonize. Terrorism is Terrorism. The word means exactly what it means … whatever that might be at this point. You can look it up on the Internet, on Google, or Wikipedia, or whatever.

And as for the “non-terrorist terrorist” designation, let’s not get all freaked out about it and make it any more confusing than it is. We can sit around and argue forever over whether the “non-terrorist terrorist” is a terrorist, but, honestly, where is that going to get us? The simple fact of the matter is, as the adjectival in the term denotes, the non-terrorist terrorist is not a terrorist … nevertheless he is a terrorist, and the fact that he is and is not a terrorist simultaneously defines what he is and makes absolutely no difference at all, at least not within the official narrative.

No, despite what terrorist apologists will tell you, calling some terrorists “non-terrorist terrorists” doesn’t mean they aren’t terrorists, or that there isn’t any such thing as “Terrorism,” except within the simulation of “reality” the global capitalist ruling classes need to maintain to keep the masses entertained and borderline paranoid, as they — i.e., the capitalists, not the masses — transform the rest of the entire planet into a combination shopping mall/labor camp.

If that were true, the “War on Terror” would be nothing but an elaborate farce, a simulacrum that was there to distract us from the sociopolitical and economic dynamics of the historical period we were actually living through … which dynamics might have something to do with something a bit more complex than “Terror,” “Evil,” “Hate,” and other empty but terror-inspiring words like that.

As stressful as things are at the moment, imagine how exhausting that would be … having to think about all that stuff, transnational Capitalism’s ideology, the manufacturing of consensus reality, all the childish narratives we would be being fed moment by moment by the corporate-owned media, and the amount of mental energy it would take to try to resist it on a daily basis … but then, seeing as you’ve made it to the end of this piece, I’m pretty sure you already have.

James R. Aist #fundie rethinkingtheology.com

The Homosexual Propaganda Campaign

The primary source material for this article is found in two publications, both authored by two gay activists, Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen: 1) A 1987 article entitled “The Overhauling of Straight America” and published in Guide, a homosexual publication, in 1987 (for a synopsis with numerous direct quotes and a link to the article, click HERE); and, 2) a book, entitled “After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s”, published in 1989. This book was so popular among gay activists that it made the New York Times Best Seller List (for an extensive, relevant excerpt from this book, click HERE). Keep in mind that the success of this homosexual propaganda campaign requires the eager cooperation of our overwhelmingly liberal media, in order to win over the heterosexual majority in America to their cause. The bulk of this information is presented here “in the authors’ own words”, via direct quotes.

This “planned, psychological attack” involves six distinct strategies, which can be summarized as follows:

Desensitization: Talking about Gays and Gayness as Loudly and as Often as Possible

And I quote: “To desensitize the public is to help it view homosexuality with indifference instead of keen emotion. Desensitization aims at lowering the intensity of antigay emotional reactions to a level approximating sheer indifference. The principle behind this advice is simple. Almost any behavior begins to look normal if you are exposed to enough of it at close quarters and among your acquaintances. The acceptability of the new behavior will ultimately hinge on the number of one’s fellows doing it or accepting it. The way to benumb raw sensibilities about homosexuality is to have a lot of people talk a great deal about the subject in a neutral or supportive way. The masses should not be shocked and repelled by premature exposure to homosexual behavior itself. Instead, the imagery of sex should be downplayed and gay rights should be reduced to an abstract social question as much as possible. Novelties cease to be novel if they just stick around long enough; they also cease to activate alerting mechanisms. You’ll have noted this in your own life: if you hear a protracted, earsplitting mechanical screech, you’ll either be so alarmed, or so annoyed, that you’ll be forced to take action; if you hear a softer–though, perhaps, nonetheless annoying–sound, like the ticking of a clock, and can’t shut it off, you will, eventually, shut it out, and may cease to hear it altogether. Apply this to the problem of homohatred. If gays present themselves– or allow themselves to be presented–as overwhelmingly different and threatening, they will put straights on a triple-red alert, driving them to overt acts of political oppression or physical violence. If, however, gays can live alongside straights, visibly but as inoffensively as possible, they will arouse a low-grade alert only, which, though annoying to straights, will eventually diminish. Straights will be desensitized.”

And I quote: “While public opinion is one primary source of mainstream values, religious authority is the other. When conservative churches condemn gays, there are only two things we can do to confound the homophobia of true believers. First we can use talk to muddy the moral waters. This means publicizing support for gays by more moderate churches, raising theological objections of our own about conservative interpretation of Biblical teaching and exposing hatred and inconsistency. We can undermine the moral authority of homophobic churches by portraying them as antiquated and backwards, badly out of step with the times and with the latest findings of psychology.”

Another popular strategy used to undermine the moral authority of Christian churches is to repeatedly point out the moral failings of churches and their leaders. Unfortunately, there are more than enough of such moral failings to keep the gay activists supplied with fresh ammunition.

Jamming: Creating an “Incompatible Emotional Response”

And I quote: “In Jamming, the target is shown a bigot being rejected by his crowd for his prejudice against gays. The ‘incompatible emotional response’ is directed primarily against the emotional rewards of prejudicial solidarity. All normal people feel shame when they perceive that they are not thinking, feeling, or acting like one of the pack. The trick is to get the bigot into the position of feeling a conflicting twinge of shame, along with his reward, whenever his homohatred surfaces, so that his reward will be diluted or spoiled. This can be accomplished in a variety of ways, all making use of repeated exposure to pictorial images or verbal statements that are incompatible with his self-image as a well-liked person, one who fits in with the rest of the crowd. Thus, propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots being criticized, hated, shunned. It can depict gays experiencing horrific suffering as the direct result of homohatred–suffering of which even most bigots would be ashamed to be the cause. It can, in short, link homohating bigotry with all sorts of attributes the bigot would be ashamed to possess, and with social consequences he would find unpleasant and scary. The attack, therefore, is on self-image and on the pleasure in hating. Remember, a bigot seeks approval and liking from ‘his crowd.’ When he sees someone like himself being disapproved of and disliked by ordinary Joes, he will feel just what they feel –and transfer it to himself. This wrinkle effectively elicits shame and doubt, Jamming any pleasure he might normally feel. Our effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof.”

Examples of “Jamming” would include: 1) the repeated use of name-calling, e.g., “bigot”, “liar”, “fundie”, “bible-thumper” and “homophobe” to create a feeling of shame; and 2) the repeated use of potentially disturbing accusations, e.g., “you are part of an ever-dwindling minority”, “more and more churches are supporting gay rights”, “you’re losing” and “all of the mental health and medical associations say that there is nothing wrong or bad about being gay”, all of which are designed to make the opposition – such as born-again Christians — feel isolated, marginalized and out of the mainstream of society; 3) derogatory references to God as “your mythical sky fairy” and to His Word as the “buy-bull”; and 4) witness this trail of vitriolic comments from a single commenter concerning just one article re. homosexuality published on a Christian website…

•“You have no right to interfere with the secular political culture of this country.”
•“You can believe this nonsense all you like but do it behind closed doors and in the privacy of your own homes and churches.”
•“I don’t want to hear another word about your weird cultish beliefs in the streets and public squares.”
•“All religious evangelism is assault.”
•“Americans do not share your views anymore.”
•“You are a reactionary post-modern convulsion.”

Portray Gays as Victims, Not as Aggressive Challengers

And I quote: “Gays must be cast as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to assume the role of protector. If gays are presented, instead, as a strong and prideful tribe promoting a rigidly nonconformist and deviant lifestyle, they are more likely to be seen as a public menace that justifies resistance and oppression. For that reason, we must forego the temptation to strut our ‘gay pride’ publicly when it conflicts with the Gay Victim image. A media campaign to promote the Gay Victim image should make use of symbols which reduce the mainstream’s sense of threat, which lower its guard, and which enhance the plausibility of victimization. In practical terms, this means that sympathetic figures of nice young people, old people, and attractive women would be featured.”

And I quote:“The mainstream should be told that gays are victims of fate, in the sense that most never had a choice to accept or reject their sexual preference. The message must read: ‘As far as gays can tell, they were born gay, just as you were born heterosexual or white or black or bright or athletic. They never made a choice, and are not morally blameworthy. What they do isn’t willfully contrary – it’s only natural for them. This twist of fate could as easily have happened to you! Straight viewers must be able to identify with gays as victims. To this end, the persons featured in the public campaign should be decent and upright, appealing and admirable by straight standards, completely unexceptionable in appearance.”

Witness here the bombardment of our visual media – TV, movies, comics, theater — with homosexual characters looking entirely normal and being fully approved and admired by heterosexual characters, and the continuing (bogus) claims that homosexuals are “born Gay.”

Give Heterosexual Protectors a Just Cause

And I quote: “Our campaign should not demand direct support for homosexual practices, but should instead take anti-discrimination as its theme. The right to free speech, freedom of beliefs, freedom of association, due process and equal protection of laws–these should be the concerns brought to mind by our campaign. It is especially important for the gay movement to hitch its cause to accepted standards of law and justice because its straight supporters must have at hand a cogent reply to the moral arguments of its enemies. The homophobes clothe their emotional revulsion in the daunting robes of religious dogma, so defenders of gay rights must be ready to counter dogma with principle.”

Familiar examples would include couching “gay marriage” in terms of “civil rights”, insisting on adoption “rights” for homosexual couples and demanding that openly gay boys and teens be welcomed into the Boy Scouts of America because “it’s not their fault” that they like boys. All of these issues are being promoted in the name of “equality”, and mainstream America is buying into it.

Conversion: Make Gays Look Good to the Public

And I quote: “In order to offset the increasingly bad press that these times have brought to homosexual men and women, the campaign should paint gays as superior pillars of society: ‘Did you know that this Great Man (or Woman) was ____?’ We are safest, in the long run, if we can actually make them like us. Conversion aims at just this. We mean conversion of the average American’s emotions, mind, and will, through a planned psychological attack, in the form of propaganda fed to the nation via the media. In Conversion, the bigot, who holds a very negative stereotypic picture, is repeatedly exposed to literal picture/label pairs, in magazines, and on billboards and TV, of gay- explicitly labeled as such!–who not only don’t look like his picture of a homosexual, but are carefully selected to look either like the bigot and his friends, or like any one of his other stereotypes of all-right guys– the kind of people he already likes and admires. The image must be that of an icon of normality.”

Witness here the eagerness of the liberal press to publicize the gayness of popular celebrities, whether they are music stars, movie stars, TV stars, sports stars, politicians, etc. This tactic is designed to create an internal conflict within the fan: “Do I dislike the celebrity because of his/her homosexuality, or do I accept his/her homosexuality and continue to like the celebrity?” The average, uninformed or misinformed American is likely to choose the latter.

And I quote: “The objection will be raised that we are exchanging one false stereotype for another equally false; that our ads are lies; that that is not how all gays actually look; that gays know it, and bigots know it. Yes, of course–we know it, too. But it makes no difference that the ads are lies; not to us, because we’re using them to ethically good effect. In Conversion, the target is shown his crowd actually associating with gays in good fellowship. Once again, it’s very difficult for the average person, who, by nature and training, almost invariably feels what he sees his fellows feeling, not to respond in this knee-jerk fashion to a sufficiently calculated advertisement.”

Witness here the bombardment of our mainstream, liberal media – TV, movies, magazines, newspapers, comics, theater, billboards and the internet — with homosexual characters looking entirely normal and being fully approved and admired by heterosexual characters and/oror praised through rhetoric.

Make the Anti-gay Victimizers Look Bad

And I quote: “At a later stage of the media campaign for gay rights it will be time to get tough with remaining opponents. To be blunt, they must be vilified. Our goal here is twofold. First, we seek to replace the mainstream’s self-righteous pride about its homophobia with shame and guilt. Second, we intend to make the antigays look so nasty that average Americans will want to dissociate themselves from such types. The public should be shown images of ranting homophobes whose secondary traits and beliefs disgust middle America. These images might include: the Ku Klux Klan demanding that gays be burned alive or castrated; bigoted southern ministers drooling with hysterical hatred to a degree that looks both comical and deranged; a tour of Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured and gassed.

A common tactic used nowadays to vilify born-again Christians is to claim that the Bible approves of slavery, polygamy, incest, etc., in order to portray Christians as rank “cherry picking” hypocrites for selectively condemning the practice of homosexuality. Another common tactic is “jamming”, as described above, where born-again Christians, in particular, are constantly subjected to name-calling, e.g., “bigot”, “liar”, “fundie”, “bible-thumper” and “homophobe.” And, of course, this strategy depends entirely upon the eager cooperation of our mainstream, liberal media – TV, movies, magazines, newspapers, comics, theater, billboards and the internet. And, as you will see below, even Christian online magazines are joining in.

The Legacy Lives On

Present day gay activists vehemently deny both any knowledge of Kirk and Madsen and the influence of Kirk and Madsen on the strategies of today’s homosexual movement. They do this because they don’t want the dark and sinister underbelly of the homosexual movement to be exposed to the heterosexual majority. That would hinder their goal of winning the hearts and minds of the heterosexual majority to their agenda. But much of what they are actually doing to further their “gay agenda” is proof positive that they are both the progeny and the legacy of these two pioneers of the homosexual movement. I cited many present day, and all too familiar, examples of this in the sections above, and you can read many, many more examples by clicking HERE and reading the comments at the end of the article. The actions and the words of gay activists themselves demonstrate that the legacy of Kirk and Madsen does, in fact, live on.

The Use of Christian Websites to Attack Born-again Christians

I have personally investigated more than a dozen Christian online magazines that allow readers to comment on their feature articles, and almost every one of them permits gay activists to freely use these very same psychological attacks, via their Comments, against the born-again Christians who are among their readers and commenters. These publications are free to filter comments any way they want to; the First Amendment does not prohibit them from doing so. Now, I don’t know if the editors of these magazines are simply not aware that the homosexual movement is using them in this way – as a Trojan Horse, in effect — to attack born-again Christians; or if, perhaps, they already know this, but have their reasons to permit it anyway. But I do know this: everything is done for a reason, but not everything that is done has an excuse. And I do know that born-again Christians should be able to read Comments on Christian magazine websites without being subjected to psychological attacks by gay activists.

The Antidotes

The Bible provides effective antidotes to help born-again Christians combat these psychological attacks. Jesus experienced similar psychological attacks and said: “Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.” (Matthew 5:11-12); “If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.” (John 15:19); and “I have given them your word and the world has hated them, for they are not of the world any more than I am of the world. My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one.” (John 17:14-15). And Hebrews 12:2-3 reminds us that Jesus, for the joy set before him, endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God, and then instructs us to consider Him (Jesus) who endured such opposition from sinners, so that we will not grow weary and lose heart.

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

When police yell at people, it is considered necessary; but when a husband yells at his wife or children, he is considered abusive. The reason is that America is a Godless nation, which does not recognize a man's authority over his wife in the marriage, and increasingly neither over his children in the home. Genesis 3:16 says...

"Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."

Husbands are not allowed anymore in today's heathen American society to Biblically “rule over” their own wives. Women in America have to a large extent become sassy, arrogant and rebellious against masculine authority, particularly in the home. This is the Devil's work of feminism. This is why divorce is so commonplace. This is why women have entered church pulpits all across America teaching false doctrines. This is why American society is saturated today with whorishly dressed women with imprudent character and lewd conduct.

The way most American women dress is a disgrace. Even professed Christian women dress and act shamefully. I recently visited a Baptist church in my area. Most of the women in the church were wearing pants, swinging their hips to the contemporary music while clapping their hands. It was a sad sight. And they call this “worship.” The woman in front of me was moving her hips forward and backward, and every time she went forward the slacks she was wearing revealed the outline of her buttocks. The woman next to her was wearing pants and kept swinging her hip from one side to the other while clapping. This is sinful worldliness in the church. I won't go back. Do you know what the problem is? Apostate pastors who don't teach their congregation holy living and are afraid to preach against the sin of immodestly dressed women. As with everything else in this sin-cursed world, the love of money is the root of all evil. You can't even go to church anymore to escape the pollutions of the sinful world. The love of money is the reason why pulpits are silent today.

Galactic Federation via Galaxygirl #ufo #crackpot #moonbat #magick voyagesoflight.blogspot.com

Greetings, beloveds. We are the Galactic Federation of Light. We speak as one voice tonight, sending you waves and waves of love, of encouragement and good cheer. The eclipse triad monad has activated swiftly that which was needed to activate, and indeed much that was hidden is to be shortly revealed. Your DNA upgrades that are occurring in your now will enable you to further enjoy the experience of being within your form. We see and we feel your exhaustion and we ask that you hold on a little while longer. Even though Nova Gaia is very real and waiting for you, you must create the bridge and pull that reality time stream to you with your thoughts, your intentions to love in every moment and you willingness to shine your glorious light.

We are the Galactic Federation of Light. You are an essential part of the plan, you are key players in this gaming experience. Your importance cannot be diminished. Allow no one to diminish your light. Restless souls and wandering ones are seeking escape from the light. It is likely you will continue to need to usher them to Alcyone or to your favorite Archangel or Ascended Dragon teammate. Do not be alarmed as the dark ones seek you out for vengeance or relief. They are suffering. The light heals all wounds. Such atrocities are no longer to be tolerated and violation of the free will of the humans shall no longer be allowed. The light has won. We are assuring you this is so. The dark ones know this and it should not come as a surprise to you, seasoned warriors, that they will continue to try to bring you down. They are not able to meet together as they once did frequently to plan and scheme the further demise of humanity. They are cut off, separated, drowning in their own fear, we do not say guilt for we are unclear if they have guilt at this point, for one must have a certain amount of personal awareness to process guilt and that is part of the healing work. Nonetheless, the light has them surrounded on all sides. Do not fear the virus. The virus feeds on fear, on the lower vibrational. Send the virus love. Send it light and transform it. Those that choose to leave the earth sphere simulation shall do so and the virus opportunity affords them this. Do not be afraid. Self care is in order, is the order of the day. We wish for our light workers to feel our support, our healing. Please remember to invite our healing teams into your homes to surround your bodies while they sleep with healing modalities of light and love. Extend this wish into your communities. You may not realize and so we do tell you that the vibratory codex of a healed light worker is felt around the globe. And so when you are healed you heal many by smoothing the vibratory codex of the human collective.

Jesse Benn #fundie huffingtonpost.com

In the face of media, politicians, and GOP primary voters normalizing Trump as a presidential candidate—whatever your personal beliefs regarding violent resistance—there’s an inherent value in forestalling Trump’s normalization. Violent resistance accomplishes this. In spite of this, such resistance is apparently more offensive and unacceptable to societal norms and liberal sensibilities than the nastiness being resisted in the first place.

As a result, a litany of think-pieces and condemnations from liberal media and politicians are making their rounds to make it clear how unacceptable and counterproductive any violence or rioting is, urging people to “listen to the other side,” and to use “legitimate means“ to fight Trump’s rise—ignoring the possibility of fascism in the US rising with it. Those who stray from this nonviolent narrative, like Emmet Rensin, an editor at Vox who tweeted that people should riot when Trump comes to town, face swift and punitive redress, urging them to fall back in line. Amidst the hot takes and denunciations from liberals, they all seem to miss a few key points. First, they misplace the blame. Second, they misunderstand the desired outcome from violent resistance and those protesting Trump in general. And third, they ignore the history of successful violent insurrection in the US, instead favoring the elementary school version of history in which nonviolence is the only means of struggle that’s ever achieved a thing.

Anna Diehl #fundie 924jeremiah.wordpress.com

Rebellion driven suicide is when we know that God does not want us to kill ourselves, we know that we have the resources we need to resist the temptation, yet we say to God, “I’m going to abuse and destroy this amazing machine You built for me because I’m tired of being here and I have lost all respect for Your Authority.” Is this an honoring attitude? No, it’s rebellious and snarky. Where do we get off destroying God’s property and trying to force our way into eternity? Where do we get off telling the Creator of all things that we’re taking over the control of our existence?

Rebellion driven suicide is an attempt to dominate God by forcing Him to separate our souls from our bodies. In many cases, God just isn’t willing to play along with our games. This is when we find Him botching our suicide attempts. Often God even worsens our physical condition in an effort to drive us back into submission to Him. For example, there are many stories of people jumping off of bridges in an attempt to kill themselves, only to end up smacking the surface of the water so hard that they end up permanently crippled and unable to walk. When we view suicide as a guaranteed way to escape our current misery, we are being very foolish. God will not take orders from us. We will not leave this dimension until He decides it is time.

TFP Student Action #homophobia #fundie tfpstudentaction.org

1. It Is Not Marriage
Calling something marriage does not make it marriage. Marriage has always been a covenant between a man and a woman which is by its nature ordered toward the procreation and education of children and the unity and wellbeing of the spouses.

The promoters of same-sex “marriage” propose something entirely different. They propose the union between two men or two women. This denies the self-evident biological, physiological, and psychological differences between men and women which find their complementarity in marriage. It also denies the specific primary purpose of marriage: the perpetuation of the human race and the raising of children.

Two entirely different things cannot be considered the same thing.


2. It Violates Natural Law
Marriage is not just any relationship between human beings. It is a relationship rooted in human nature and thus governed by natural law.

Natural law’s most elementary precept is that “good is to be done and pursued, and evil is to be avoided.” By his natural reason, man can perceive what is morally good or bad for him. Thus, he can know the end or purpose of each of his acts and how it is morally wrong to transform the means that help him accomplish an act into the act’s purpose.

Any situation which institutionalizes the circumvention of the purpose of the sexual act violates natural law and the objective norm of morality.

Being rooted in human nature, natural law is universal and immutable. It applies to the entire human race, equally. It commands and forbids consistently, everywhere and always. Saint Paul taught in the Epistle to the Romans that the natural law is inscribed on the heart of every man. (Rom. 2:14-15)

3. It Always Denies a Child Either a Father or a Mother
It is in the child’s best interests that he be raised under the influence of his natural father and mother. This rule is confirmed by the evident difficulties faced by the many children who are orphans or are raised by a single parent, a relative, or a foster parent.

The unfortunate situation of these children will be the norm for all children of a same-sex “marriage.” A child of a same-sex “marriage” will always be deprived of either his natural mother or father. He will necessarily be raised by one party who has no blood relationship with him. He will always be deprived of either a mother or a father role model.

Same-sex “marriage” ignores a child’s best interests.

4. It Validates and Promotes the Homosexual Lifestyle
In the name of the “family,” same-sex “marriage” serves to validate not only such unions but the whole homosexual lifestyle in all its bisexual and transgender variants.

Civil laws are structuring principles of man's life in society. As such, they play a very important and sometimes decisive role in influencing patterns of thought and behavior. They externally shape the life of society, but also profoundly modify everyone’s perception and evaluation of forms of behavior.

Legal recognition of same-sex “marriage” would necessarily obscure certain basic moral values, devalue traditional marriage, and weaken public morality.

5. It Turns a Moral Wrong into a Civil Right
Homosexual activists argue that same-sex “marriage” is a civil rights issue similar to the struggle for racial equality in the 1960s.

This is false.

First of all, sexual behavior and race are essentially different realities. A man and a woman wanting to marry may be different in their characteristics: one may be black, the other white; one rich, the other poor; or one tall, the other short. None of these differences are insurmountable obstacles to marriage. The two individuals are still man and woman, and thus the requirements of nature are respected.

Same-sex “marriage” opposes nature. Two individuals of the same sex, regardless of their race, wealth, stature, erudition or fame, will never be able to marry because of an insurmountable biological impossibility.

Secondly, inherited and unchangeable racial traits cannot be compared with non-genetic and changeable behavior. There is simply no analogy between the interracial marriage of a man and a woman and the “marriage” between two individuals of the same sex.

6. It Does Not Create a Family but a Naturally Sterile Union
Traditional marriage is usually so fecund that those who would frustrate its end must do violence to nature to prevent the birth of children by using contraception. It naturally tends to create families.

On the contrary, same-sex “marriage” is intrinsically sterile. If the “spouses” want a child, they must circumvent nature by costly and artificial means or employ surrogates. The natural tendency of such a union is not to create families.Therefore, we cannot call a same-sex union marriage and give it the benefits of true marriage.

7. It Defeats the State’s Purpose of Benefiting Marriage
One of the main reasons why the State bestows numerous benefits on marriage is that by its very nature and design, marriage provides the normal conditions for a stable, affectionate, and moral atmosphere that is beneficial to the upbringing of children—all fruit of the mutual affection of the parents. This aids in perpetuating the nation and strengthening society, an evident interest of the State.

Homosexual “marriage” does not provide such conditions. Its primary purpose, objectively speaking, is the personal gratification of two individuals whose union is sterile by nature. It is not entitled, therefore, to the protection the State extends to true marriage.

8. It Imposes Its Acceptance on All Society
By legalizing same-sex “marriage,” the State becomes its official and active promoter. The State calls on public officials to officiate at the new civil ceremony, orders public schools to teach its acceptability to children, and punishes any state employee who expresses disapproval.

In the private sphere, objecting parents will see their children exposed more than ever to this new “morality,” businesses offering wedding services will be forced to provide them for same-sex unions, and rental property owners will have to agree to accept same-sex couples as tenants.

In every situation where marriage affects society, the State will expect Christians and all people of good will to betray their consciences by condoning, through silence or act, an attack on the natural order and Christian morality.

9. It Is the Cutting Edge of the Sexual Revolution
In the 1960s, society was pressured to accept all kinds of immoral sexual relationships between men and women. Today we are seeing a new sexual revolution where society is being asked to accept sodomy and same-sex “marriage.”

If homosexual “marriage” is universally accepted as the present step in sexual “freedom,” what logical arguments can be used to stop the next steps of incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and other forms of unnatural behavior? Indeed, radical elements of certain “avant garde” subcultures are already advocating such aberrations.

The railroading of same-sex “marriage” on the American people makes increasingly clear what homosexual activist Paul Varnell wrote in the Chicago Free Press:

"The gay movement, whether we acknowledge it or not, is not a civil rights movement, not even a sexual liberation movement, but a moral revolution aimed at changing people's view of homosexuality."

10. It Offends God
This is the most important reason. Whenever one violates the natural moral order established by God, one sins and offends God. Same-sex “marriage” does just this. Accordingly, anyone who professes to love God must be opposed to it.

Marriage is not the creature of any State. Rather, it was established by God in Paradise for our first parents, Adam and Eve. As we read in the Book of Genesis: “God created man in His image; in the Divine image he created him; male and female He created them. God blessed them, saying: ‘Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it.’” (Gen. 1:28-29)

The same was taught by Our Savior Jesus Christ: “From the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female. For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother; and shall cleave to his wife.” (Mark 10:6-7).

Genesis also teaches how God punished Sodom and Gomorrah for the sin of homosexuality: “The Lord rained down sulphurous fire upon Sodom and Gomorrah. He overthrew those cities and the whole Plain, together with the inhabitants of the cities and the produce of the soil.” (Gen. 19:24-25)

Taking a Principled not a Personal Stand
In writing this statement, we have no intention to defame or disparage anyone. We are not moved by personal hatred against any individual. In intellectually opposing individuals or organizations promoting the homosexual agenda, our only intent is the defense of traditional marriage, the family, and the precious remnants of Christian civilization.

As practicing Catholics, we are filled with compassion and pray for those who struggle against unrelenting and violent temptation to homosexual sin. We pray for those who fall into homosexual sin out of human weakness, that God may assist them with His grace.

We are conscious of the enormous difference between these individuals who struggle with their weakness and strive to overcome it and others who transform their sin into a reason for pride and try to impose their lifestyle on society as a whole, in flagrant opposition to traditional Christian morality and natural law. However, we pray for these too.

We pray also for the judges, legislators and government officials who in one way or another take steps that favor homosexuality and same-sex “marriage.” We do not judge their intentions, interior dispositions, or personal motivations.

We reject and condemn any violence. We simply exercise our liberty as children of God (Rom. 8:21) and our constitutional rights to free speech and the candid, unapologetic and unashamed public display of our Catholic faith. We oppose arguments with arguments. To the arguments in favor of homosexuality and same-sex “marriage” we respond with arguments based on right reason, natural law and Divine Revelation.

In a polemical statement like this, it is possible that one or another formulation may be perceived as excessive or ironic. Such is not our intention.

SadieSarah1960s #fundie forums.catholic.com

My husband and I are very protective of our daughter, I admit that. Last night, she came to me and insisted she wanted to talk to me about our rules. A few she brought up:

1) She isn't allowed to lock the bathroom door. She can close it, and we knock before coming in, but it isn't safe to lock doors.
2) She isn't allowed to go over to her friends' houses. I am just not comfortable letting her go. Who knows who we live around? However, her friends are allowed coming over, and she can have one stay the night.
3) No boys are allowed. She is allowed to have male friends, but they aren't to be at the house, even when my husband and I are home. I know how teenage boys are.
4) She doesn't know her own password to her internet account. She's only to be online when my husband and I are at home, so we can keep watch over what she's doing.
5) She isn't allowed to watch/listen to movies or music unless we check it out beforehand. Even anything rated G. I no longer trust the MPAA.
6) We drive her to school, and we pick her up. She wishes to drive.
7) There is no door to her bedroom. She has a walk in closet, so she dresses in there.
8) No piercings, jewelry, or tattoos, of course! Also, no painted nails.

Wotans Krieger #racist aryan-myth-and-metahistory.blogspot.co.uk

Time after time I have warned the readers of my blogs of the necessity of maintaining the purity of their racial blood lines, a sacred trust and an inheritance from our distant ancestors but also a duty to our yet unborn linear descendants. Blutschande is the most serious crime that an Aryan can commit against his race and folk and I hope that one day this crime will be recognised as such and punished accordingly once our peoples recover their freedom from the zionist yoke. The servants of the Demiurge lord of darkness understand that in this cosmic war in which we fight that our strongest possession is our blood or DNA as it is less prosaically termed, and they will do everything in their power to encourage Rassenmischung for by this process we destroy ourselves without a single gun being shot. It is the greatest form of treason that an Aryan could commit. By engaging in Blutschande they are spitting in the faces of their Folk, their ancestors and descendants, condemning the latter to eternal shame and disgrace. Therefore in the words of Der Meister Guido von List I appeal to my readers:"Your blood, your highest possession." Racial purity is the greatest gift that our ancestors have bestowed upon us and it is the most precious bequest that we can endow upon our descendants. For within the blood of the Aryan there lies the sacred quality of divinity. The Aryan is no mere human animal: we are nothing less than children of the Gods.

Derek Baroni #fundie returnofkings.com

“Mommy, I want to play ball with the boys”, said six-year-old Annie, in a tone of voice that was rapidly approaching the dreaded high-pitched whine. “You will, my dear, I will make them”, said her weight-challenged mom as she turned towards the pair of laughing teenage boys that were throwing a ball back and forth in the nearby cul-de-sac.

“NICKY! DANIEL! Annie wants to play ball with you! You better play with her and behave, otherwise I swear to God, I will tell your mothers!” bellowed the mother hen at the boys.

As soon as Annie joined the game, the boys’ behavior changed dramatically. They were expected to accept Annie as their equal, which she obviously wasn’t. The ball was no longer thrown or punted with any considerable force, lest little Annie trip herself up and kiss the ground.

Instead, the ball was passed along or gently rolled on the ground. Meanwhile, the mother hen perched herself high on the balcony overlooking the neighborhood, seated on what must have been a titanium-reinforced chair, and occasionally shouted orders.

The first thing Annie did was make sure nobody possessed the ball—everyone had to have exactly equal time with it, and in a specific order. The purpose of this forced sharing was so that nobody had their feelings hurt in any way by being left out. The game was no longer about competition, it was about participation.

Of course, boys grew tired of her rules immediately but still went along with the charade because it seemed like the path of least resistance.

What is going on here?

If you’ve spent any amount of time in a Western country, you must have seen something like this unfold right in front of your eyes. You might have been involved in such occurrences and yielded to women without thinking twice. Besides, it can seem so natural when you’re immersed in a gynocentric culture on a daily basis. Women are people too, right? Why not treat them with the same respect men get?

The problem is that women lack accountability and will always superimpose their inner realities upon the outside world, rather than the other way around. Ignoring objective reality usually comes at a great price, but women offload the cost onto unsuspecting men, dragging them down into the darkness.

If a woman was given free reign over the Garden of Eden, she would ruin it for everyone. Want proof? Allow me to go biblical for just a second and quote Genesis 3:13 :

13Then the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this you have done?" The Woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate."

Note the deflection of responsibility – the woman hasn’t done anything wrong, it’s the snake’s fault for presenting her with a temptation she couldn’t resist. Now, the Bible shouldn’t be taken literally, but the fact that a 3,400 year old book talks so frankly about the true nature of women is astounding.

In fact, everything else in the Bible pales in comparison to that one verse and is pretty much tainted by a needless religious subtext. That one sentence is a warning from ages past—anything can be destroyed by putting a woman in charge and letting her have an “oopsie” moment.

So, how does this translate to our times? The root of all problems with women is that they are entitled, which means they want respect and attention they don’t deserve. Girls are carefully groomed from the early childhood to believe themselves to be perfect. When left unchallenged, this attitude eventually turns them into a black hole wherein all resources and attention disappear.

A boy who tries to do the same thing as Annie would be rightfully called “spoiled” and quickly humbled by his friends or his brother, if he has them.

It is your duty to call out female entitlement when you see it and spread awareness of this phenomenon, sharing your insights alongside it. Humbling a woman will generally cause a wave of triggering to occur among perennially butthurt SJWs, but it is the only way to stop females from being a liability, not just on you, but on the entire society.

If a woman still refuses to change her ways, don’t give her your respect or attention and simply move on.

JRG39402 #fundie baptistboard.com

I knew that topic would get some people's attention. But listen to where I am coming from. Since all people are born of a sinful nature, we are all inclined to sin. That sin could be lying, stealing, lust, homosexuallity, ect. If a homosexual tells you "I was born this way", why argue with them? It doesn't go against the Bible to agree with them on that point. Just because you are inclined or tempted to sin doesn't make it right. Jesus was tempted, but didn't sin. God won't give us more than we can handle. He wouldn't allow people to deal with homosexuallity if they couldn't handle it. They can still say, even if they are tempted to live such a lifestyle, no. At least with God's help. So don't argue with someone on homosexuallity where you can't even get to the gospel. Just show them that we all are sinners in need of a savior and that when God saves us, he will give us a new heart with new desires. We can trust God because he cannot lie. That may mean God either
1.) takes away the homosexual temptation completely or
2.) gives you the desire to do what God wants and resist homosexual temptations.
My point is that we are to love our neighbors, even if their particular sin problem is different from ours and rather than debate that intellectually, speak to their conscience. They know what is right even if they don't practice it.

David J. Stewart #conspiracy jesusisprecious.org

We are living in some evil, twisted and confused times. There are a bunch of nuts on the internet. I watched a YouTube video today (with over 330,000 views) by some religious nut who actually said he doesn't think sexual lust is a sin. He claimed that Christians who preach against lust misinterpret Matthew 5:28 in the Bible, where the Lord said lusting upon a woman is the same as adultery. The video's author claims that Christians misunderstand the Lord's warning. What a reprobate! The Scriptures plainly teach that lust entices a person, which conceives sin. James 1:14-15, “But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.” Lust is a sin. Sexual lust is a sin. Engaging in lust doesn't prevent sexual sins. Every man contends with lust. There is no escaping it, except to resist the temptation as the Bible teaches in 1st Corinthians 10:13, “There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.” No man can avoid temptation, but we can escape as per the Lord's promise to make a way of escape.

CH #racist heartiste.wordpress.com

I believe that NW European White Gentiles are nearly alone in the world for having inherited a genetic racial predisposition to a guilt-based, rather than shame-based, moral sense. And all the shame-based races take advantage of that White Gentile character trait when they are within subverting distance.

***

COTW runner-up is PA with a briskly arresting truth about blacks and their relationship to Whites and Fellow Whites.

Whites have the tendency to idealize blacks as beloved pets such as faithful dogs. Jews have a proclivity for idealizing blacks as their reciprocal. “Everything that they are not” vigor-wise. They also feel a kinship with them as fellow Resources Extraction Algorithm.

The biggest slavering sportscucks I know are Fellow Whites. It almost carries an undertone of vicarious sexuality. I think a part of it too is that FWs can say, “Look at all this previously untapped greatness you racist Gentile goyium stupidly discriminated against”, while conveniently ignoring the unleashed dystopian nightmares that past discriminations had helped to put a lid on.

Gary Cass #fundie defendchristians.org

Christian liberties and values are under attack. The United States is at a crossroad. If the United States Supreme Court sanctions homosexual as a federally protected right then Christians will surely face major repercussions.

Here is our list of four effects a Supreme Court ruling in favor of homosexual marriage would have:

1. The Closure of Christian Adoption Agencies

Already faithful Christian adoption agencies have stated that they would close their doors if the government required the agencies to allow homosexual couples to adopt from these institutions. Adoption agencies in England have already been forced to shut down.

Fascist homosexual activists have put these important charities in the untenable situation of either providing adoption services or violating their religion. Rather than appreciating the good work these charities do for children, vicious homosexual activists want the charities shut down to make a political point. The homosexual lobby is not about tolerance. They are intent on imposing their twisted ideology on everybody, no matter what harm it does, even if it hurts orphaned children.

2. The Likely Prohibition on Preaching Against Homosexuality and Counseling of Homosexuals

In California it is a crime to counsel minors that they can change their homosexual desires. New Jersey also has a similar statute that was upheld by the Third Circuit US Court of Appeals.

These prohibitions would prevent parents from getting help for their children who are struggling with homosexuality from counselors who might have a Biblical worldview regarding sexual morality. Christian counselors will not be able to provide emotional help for children struggling with same-sex attraction.

There are tens of thousands of ex-homosexuals who have left of the lifestyle and can testify of God's grace in overcoming same sex attraction. Banning reparative therapy is another attempt by radical activists to force the acceptance of homosexuality on our children.

3. Churches and Others Would Lose Federal Tax Exemptions

Could lead to loss of contribution income and forfeiting of church properties to pro-homosexual groups. Already the Boy Scouts have been required to allow for homosexual membership in California or be stripped of their tax exemption. Churches are not far behind.

A bill meant to protect churches from this radical agenda has been placed on hold for two years in the US House of Representatives. The Marriage and Religious Freedom Act was introduced by Representative Raul Labrador from Idaho in 2013 but has made little movement since being referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

4. Businesses Mandated to Cater to Homosexual Couples

Lastly, it should be no surprise that Christian business owners will face an increasing amount of hostility, including fines, fees, and regulations by the government for not serving or catering to homosexual couples. The wedding industry is chalk full of stories of Christian business owners who faced severe backlash for not serving homosexual couples. If the Supreme Court rules that homosexual marriage is a fundamental right then Christian business owners would be required to participate if requested to by a homosexual couple.

TAKE ACTION
So what can we do now? The Supreme Court will release their ruling on this important issue on Thursday. There is still hope. Christian, we must pray that these judges use their God-give role to uphold the important institution of marriage as between one man and one woman.
No matter what, we must be courageous enough to stand by our Biblical values... even in the face of punishment!

Anonymous #fundie rhrealitycheck.org

[RE:Poster who has had an abortion states that she does not feel truamatized or regret her deciosin.]

Denying a Guilt is a Greater Guilt.
No one can make you feel shame, remorse, or "I am sorry" for killing your own kid, all right? Either you do or you don't. You are your soul, your aura, your Karma. Most defend that which corrupts or corrupted them. (Kinda like the lesbian that slants "male" behavior after being sexually abused by a male).
So, YOU don't have an ounce of conscience about snuffing your child's life, BUT I am hear to tell you: YOUR CHILD IS LOVED BY ME AND MILLIONS OF OTHERS MORE THAN YOU COULD EVER UNDERSTAND, ACCEPT, OR EXPERIENCE IN A LIFETIME. In spite of your cold stone non-humanitarianism, your baby is loved.
Take that to your fluffy pillow tonight. I will even name your baby for you right now, all right? It's name is Dana. All those that love Dana in spite of it's mother's estrangement, give a xxo.

Lady Checkmate #fundie disqus.com

Sexually abused as a child, a satan worshiper finds Jesus, through the prayers of a stranger!!

https://youtu.be/20xpyQvrTug

A desperate man who had been beaten and sexually abused by his closeted homosexual father and raped by a homosexual male friend of his family as a child, struggled with depression and suicidal thoughts. He tried to escape the pain through drug addiction and pimping. Feeling lost and abandoned, he began rebelling, big time, against God, by getting deeply involved in satan worship, as a means to get back at God, but he finds Jesus, and becomes Born Again! Keep praying. There is deliverance in Jesus Christ!!

Some TERFs #transphobia reddit.com

Re: Transbiancel complains that there's NO reason why he should be a "social pariah" in the lesbian meetups he's been attending for a year and a half

image

(S_FirestoneTires)

GCS Dr. Kathy Rumer

he he was talking about how the idea of being female has always been VERY arousing to him

You know what I'm pleasantly surprised about? This is one of the few cases where someone with that profile doesn't tell people "if you don't want to suck my girldick, you're transphobic" (also, you privileged cis scum, if you want to suck Feminine Benis, that's bad and horrible because it's "dehumanizing").

Ray Blanchard found that there are GAMP straight men who like breasts and a penis, but those men want a female-looking partner, not a brutish manly AGP 40-year-old. More to the point, the AGPs had way too much prenatal T to have sexual interest in said men. For example:

Riley Dennis: "if you don't want to date someone because they have a penis, you're transphobic!"

Men in the YouTube comments: "we'll date you, Riley!"

Riley Dennis: "ewww, I don't like men!"

I have a masculine face

Everyone knows that having a craggy male skull is sure to bring all the lesbians to the yard!

I'm smart, funny, and easy to talk to

My dear delusional Red, if those qualities controlled attraction, oppressed sexual minorities wouldn't even exist. Closeted gays and lesbians could just force themselves to be straight by finding an opposite-sex spouse who is "smart, funny and easy to talk to." Freddy Mercury tried that with Mary Austin.

People are mostly friendly, kind and engage socially

It's almost like people can't control what they are and aren't sexually attracted to, and it doesn't mean they're "bigots" or hate you.

>People are mostly friendly, kind and engage socially when I approach them

>I'm a social pariah, bawwwwww!

>I have a masculine face, why don't lesbians want to get any of that?

Full galaxy-brain definition of social pariah.

(Ergative_Absolutive)

Lesbian meetups serve a few major functions:

For lesbians to hang out with women who get it, in a space where they can be honest about who they are. Straight women, even liberal ones, can be weird about friendships with lesbians. And social circles that are dominated by straight women tend to expand to include husbands or boyfriends (which isn't necessarily bad, but it's not the same as having an all-women space) and tend to involve a fair amount of talking about relationships with men.

For lesbians to meet potential sexual/romantic partners.

Did I mention meeting potential partners? Because that one's important.

Female homosexuals aren't going to see a heterosexual male, gender identity notwithstanding, as someone who shares their life experiences in the same way as a fellow lesbian. Nor are they going to see a heterosexual male as a potential girlfriend. OP is showing up to the Taco Lovers' Tacomania All-Taco Taco Fest with a platter of beef sausage.

The reality is that the woman-seeking-woman sections of all dating apps are full of MtF people and straight couples looking for a unicorn. The ideal solution would be better filters on these apps, but I doubt that's going to happen anytime soon and it's totally beyond your control.

If I were you, I'd be upfront and lowkey. For example:

I'm a trans woman looking for a summer fling, but very open to something more serious with the right woman. On weekdays, I'm a defense lawyer; on weekends, I'm a hiker, biker, kayaker, and amateur pastry chef (emphasis on the amateur).

Basically, avoid anti-TERF screeds and other gender politicking, don't try to bury the fact that you're trans in the small print, and don't go on about how you're a super lesby lesbian seeking a super lesby lesbian relationship with a fellow lesbian. Yes, a lot of the women using whatever app you're on will still roll their eyes and swipe left, but them's the breaks, for you and for them.

ETA: I also agree with u/FruitTreesRule's advice to you.

(FruitTreesRule)

Lesbian spaces are meant for lesbians, so don't go there.

You can try catch-all dating apps/sites and indicate you are trans. Don't initiate to women who specify they are lesbian on their profiles since many lesbians are being coerced into "giving a chance" if they don't want to be labeled transphobic. Don't put a woman in that position.

Or you can just be social and engage in friend groups and see if you meet someone the old fashioned way, but again, don't try to initiate with lesbians. Seriously, it's equivalent to a "cis" man assuming he can hit on a lesbian. It's invasive and insulting and entitled.

Perhaps there is female out there who is open to gender non conforming men, who are hormones, who have breasts and a penis. But, honestly, not many women are into that.

That is your problem, not women's.

I suggest seeking out another trans male if you are open to that.

(ilovemylesbiangf)

Probably shouldn't go to lesbian meetups if this "woman wannabe" is only interested in sleeping with them. Lesbians tend to sleep with other women.

(HorsesCantPlayHockey)

"Transdar"= knows what a man in a dress looks like.

(CallaAETHIOPICA)

Let’s see, I know why lesbians aren’t interested. It’s because you’re male!!

Don #fundie yahoo.com

https://youtu.be/LD8kgAx8dl8
DEMOCRAT Has BECOME A SYNONYM FOR HOMOsexual
After being a life- long Democrat, since Carter ,I’ll be voting Republican for several reasons such as the disproportionate proliferation of HOMOSEXUAL TV programs and movies and the GUN GRAB ATTEMPTS by the Democratic Party. But , these next reasons really burn me up ! Recently, an openly HOMOSEXUAL teacher in EFLAND , N.C. recently read the book,” KING AND KING “, TO HIS 3RD GRADE CLASS. It’s the story of TWO HOMOSEXUAL PRINCES getting married and it shows them kissing. Also The Girl Scouts of America has been FORCED, by HOMOSEXUAL Groups, TO ACCEPT BOYS WHO IDENTIFY AS GIRLS.
There even pushing to have sex education taught in Kindergarten "Chicago Passes Sex-Ed for Kindergartners -
ABC News"
"Obama: Sex Ed for Kindergartners 'Is the Right Thing to Do'

Obama directive forces schools to allow transgender students to use bathrooms consistent with their gender identity !

In the state of California, heterosexual married couples can no longer be referred to as Husbands and Wives , Democrat Governor Jerry Brown has signed a bill into law that not only redefines marriage, but eliminates any reference to husband and wife, replacing each with the Generic Term Spouse !

People this is beyond the pale. The rampant proliferation of this kind of behavior is what we can expect if we continue to let the 2% TAIL OF THE HOMOSEXUAL POPULATION continue to WAG THE ENTIRE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. The REPUBLICAN PARTY is our last hope in maintaining some kind of MORAL COMPASS AND TRADITIONAL FAMILY VALUES that are the foundation of this Country . Voting in a another Democratic president will give them the opportunity to appoint 3-4 new Liberal Supreme Court Justices giving the Court a LIBERAL MAJORITY FOR GENERATIONS. Meaning we can expect more of this. The following is the Genesis of a Lawsuit filed in 2006 against the reading of the HOMOSEXUAL BOOK.”KING AND KING” TO 7 YEAR OLDS IN A CLASSROOM.

Funny how you can’t read a lesson from the bible in a classroom .but you can PROMOTE HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE TO 2ND AND 3RD GRADERS !!!!

In 2006 Robb and Robin Wirthlin and David and Tonia Parker filed a federal lawsuit against the school district of Eastbrook Elementary School, which their second graders attended in Lexington, Massachusetts. The Wirthlins' son's teacher had read King & King aloud to the class as part of an educational unit on weddings. Parents countered that the school's job was to teach about the world and that Massachusetts sanctioned same-sex marriage The plaintiffs claimed that using the book in school constituted sex education without parental notification, which would be a violation of their civil rights and state law. Robin Wirthlin appeared on CNN, saying
“ We felt like seven years old is not appropriate to introduce homosexual themes. My problem is that this issue of romantic attraction between two men is being presented to my seven-year-old as wonderful, and good and the way things should be. Let us know and let us excuse our child from the discussion. ”

HERE’S WHAT THE LIBERAL JUDGES RULED: IF THIS IS THE KIND OF RULINGS YOU WANT , ELECT ANOTHER DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT


The judge dismissed the lawsuit, saying "Diversity is a hallmark of our nation. The Wirthlins and the Parkers appealed the decision; a three-judge panel of the First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously in favor of the school. Judge Sandra Lynch, writing for the court, rejected the plaintiff's argument that their religious beliefs were being singled out as well as their argument that their First Amendment right to free exercise of religion was violated, writing, "There is no evidence of systemic indoctrination. There is no allegation that [the second-grader] was asked to affirm gay marriage. Requiring a student to read a particular book is generally not coercive of free exercise rights." The court also ruled that the parents' substantive due process rights were not violated, as these rights did not legally give them the degree of control they sought over the curriculum.

This same ruling could apply to reading a life lesson from the Bible !!!!!

TELL EVERYONE YOU KNOW ABOUT THIS !

Here's a small % of shows with Homosexual Characters or Content without doing an in depth search ,let's see we have the one that started it all Will and Grace, then STAR TREK BEYOND, Guilt , The Interestings , Sequestered , Ballers,Transparent, Mr. Robot, One Mississippi, Aquarius , True Detective ,Bosch, Grace & Frankie ,Red Oaks, Zoo ,CSI- New Orleans ,Six Feet Under , Complications ,Entourage , Angels in America ,Community , Girls, The L Word, The Walking Dead , The Following, Empire , Backstrom , Chicago Fire , The Royals ,The Big Bang Theory, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Bored to Death , The Cleveland Show, King of the Hill, South park, The Simpsons, Glee, The 100,Black Sails, Madame Secretary , Gotham , Kingdom, How to get Away With Murder, The Modern Family, Dominion, Tyrant, The Night Shift, It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia, Penny Dreadful, Nurse Jackie ,Star Crossed, The Fall , Peaky Blinders , Wentworth , Defiance, Hemlock Grove, Hannibal , The Bridge , Under The Dome ,Ray Donavan , Orphan Black, Banshee, Betrayal , House of Cards , Alpha House , Masters of Sex , Nashville, Da Vinci's Demons , Arrow, Sons of Anarchy ,Orange is the New Black, Sherlock ,Skins , Lip Service, How I met your Mother, Xena ,Prison Break , Homicide Life On The Streets , East Enders , Teen Wolf , Torchwood, Sex and the City , Bad Girls ,True Blood , Spartacus ,Game of Thrones , The Vampire Dairies , Shameless , Queer As Folk , The Wire ,The Office , Weeds ,Ripper Street , Schitt’s Creek , Eye Candy ,Transparent, The Flash ,Chasing Life ,Hit The Floor ,Dracula , Dates , The Originals ,A Place To Call Home , The Fosters , The Carrie Diaries , Undateable , and American Horror Story just to mention a few there are dozens more.

The HOMOsexualS are 2-5% of the population ,but 90% of the TV Shows have HOMOsexual content . Don't you think that's a bit disproportionate.

Rurudyne #fundie freerepublic.com

(This fundie has come up with a horrid poem)

Poofters in sin arise
And put your armor on
Strong in the strength that Hell provides
To those unknown above
Strong in the Prince of the Air
And in his deceptions
Who in the strength of themselves do trust
Will failing strength must fall

Stand then in thos great sin
With pride your watchword
And take to arm you for the fight
Political correctness
That having all grace resisted
And all your opportunities passed
Ye will face horrors you now deny
And stand under judgment at last

Leave no unguarded place
No place for grace to find
Celebrate every perversion, every vice
And deny your only hope
From pride to pride go on
Resist those who pray for you
Tread down all that seeks to call you back
And have your way at last

Mack Major #fundie facebook.com

You can't stop having sex because you've opened a doorway in your life for an evil spirit to vex you. All throughout the New Testament you'll read about those who were 'vexed' by evil spirits.

This is because demons are real. And whenever there is ungodly sexual activity taking place, demons will surely be found.

Now where does that leave you? You stopped being promiscuous when you gave your life over to Jesus. But every now and then in spite of the guilt and shame that it brings, you find yourself slipping back into the same sin that Jesus once rescued you from.

Why can't you get control over your flesh and keep it?

Why can't you master the urge to masturbate or to watch skin flicks?

Why do you keep falling back into sexual sin even though you confess salvation: and is there a way to stay totally delivered from the power of the flesh nice you e been set free?

Introducing my latest class: Ultimate Sex Mastery. This class improves upon the 21 Day Challenge and brings it home to the core issue of walking in freedom from controlling spiritual forces that feed off of our sexual energy.

You're not crazy or weird because you can't control your sex drive. You're just under the influence of an evil spirit. And if you don't master your sex drive you'll end up being mastered by an evil spiritual force that controls you through your sex drive.

But with the knowledge you'll gain from doing this course you'll be fully empowered to resist and walk totally victorious from those unclean spirits.

Sign up begins right away, as this course begins promptly on Friday evening. Since the devil seems to get busiest in our lives during the weekend, I thought it would be a great idea to start this Ultimate Sex Mastery on a Friday evening.

The cost is just $21 total - just a dollar a day. And it comes with a free copy of my ebook PORN: WHEN PLEASURE BECOMES POSSESSION.

Don't delay, reserve your spot NOW! (See comment section for link info.)

Some incels #transphobia reddit.com

Re: 90% of /r/detrans are female-to-male, because women realize quickly that being a short weak framed man is HELL. BLACKPILLED

image

(HighIQPakiCel)

Imagine a 5'4 feminist type deciding to become a man, thinking she'll get "male privilege". She takes testosterone and gets her tits cut off and becomes a weak framed 5'4 incel that no woman wants to date. LMAO LIFE FEUL.

They want their female privilege back immediately. They thought they wanted male privilege, what they really wanted was CHAD PRIVILEGE.

And the ugly fat balding man who has never gotten a date in his life puts on a skirt and bra & has guys lining up to fuck him. Transgenderism is a huge blackpill.

Men who become women can be put in 2 categories.

Transwomen who like men/trannies: In this case they have immediate access to infinite sex with men and other trannies.

Transwomen who like women: In this case it's fucking over lmao. Lesbian women don't want to date a fucking manly tranny. This is where the "high suicide" is. These trannys realize that real women want nothing to do with them, they either suicide or settle for other trannys. Almost no trannies pass, 99.9% look like freaks without fakeup

Interesting. Now that you mention de-transitioning, I'm really curious about the percentages now. I know more transitions are MtF, but it sounds right that FtM would have more quitters.

It seems 90%~ of detrans people are FTM, even though the vast majority of trans people are MTF. These numbers are staggering, even moreso when you adjust for population of ftm vs mtf

(gloomcel)

And unless they are Asians usually they will never pass. Asian have narrowed shoulders and small bones which help with finding clothes

There’s a chance for a male to female transgender to improve their life. It’s small, and most trannies don’t pass for real women but when they do it’s a good improvement.

Female to male is like someone giving you a large pizza and chicken wings for free and you throwing that perfectly good food into the garbage. The same person buys you the pizza and wings every day.... only for you to throw it away.

Seriously. Being a man is brutal and based on how much money you have and how big and strong you are.

Women say men have the winning ticket. Only Chad does.

Exactly, they never wanted to be male, they wanted to be Chad

Being Chad means people take you seriously. Incel like me can speak the truth but I am not attractive so people won’t accept it

(whimDEE)

there should be more debate about this topic. i wonder WHY women change back to women after they had a taste of what it was like being a man.

i wonder what the suicide/depression rates are for FtM as well. i bet it’s a lot higher than MtF. KEK

And this is despite the fact that women can look more convincingly like a man than vice versa, minus the height.

universallyabhorred #crackpot incels.co

[Serious] Homer Simpson Would Be Incel, But Being A Sociopathic NT Saves Him

He's not book smart but street smart. He gets people to like him easily, has a huge amount of friends or acquaintances, people overlook his callous, cruel, thoughtless, impulsive and dangerous behavior. He is highly manipulative and guilt trips, shames, begs, and lies a lot to get what he wants, make himself look good and avoid embarrassment.

He regards other people negatively but they treat him positively, think Ned Flanders. He often says the right thing at the right times to gain forgiveness and buy love, think emotional and loving moments with his wife Marge, which allows him to keep her tied to him. He acts emotionally unavailable or abusive to family even occasionally strangling his son, but it's all passed off as humor. He makes intelligent statements even in dumb moments which proves he's just acting stupid for fun, think of the episode where he chooses to have a crayon placed back in his brain to make himself dumber, so he can fit in again.

At the same time think of his appearance, balding, obese and middle aged. He'd definitely be incel material. Of course this is just fiction but even the cartoon writers are blackpilled in realizing the importance of having a dark triad personality. Someone who is sociopathic, charming and extroverted is more socially and sexually successful on the show than someone who's autistic, socially clueless or nerdy. Think of the characters Ralph Wiggum, Martin Pince or Professor Frink as examples of the latter.

Lady Checkmate #fundie disqus.com

Lady Checkmate's headline: "Why Are Practicing Homosexuals Judgmental and Cruel Toward Former Homosexuals Who Give Their Hearts to Jesus Christ and Leave Their Old Lifestyle?"

I've noticed a trend that concerns me. Recently I posted an OP on Jackie Hill-Perry, a self-procliamed former stud-lesbian who is now a Christian lady that came out of homosexuality (no longer practicing homosexuality), accepted Jesus Christ as her Lord and Savior, is married and has a daughter (Eden) with her husband.

Jackie is now serving the Lord with her whole heart and ministering to the lost, even though she still faces temptations ("less" now than before-her statement), she is staying close to God...by the grace of God. Thank God.

Sadly, I've noticed practicing homosexuals judging and attacking Jackie, questioning her sexuality, doubting her truth and attempting to negate and trivialize the change God has made in Jackie's life. It's as if it offends them that someone who shares their struggle can triumph over that struggle, in Jesus' name.

Why is that? Why does it offend some homosexuals when other homosexuals seek Jesus Christ, turn away from that alternative lifestyle and seek and serve God with their whole heart (despite the temptation to continue sinning)?

Selah.

Don't forget to RECOMMEND. Lets get the Truth out so that Light may shine bright in this dark place and Jesus Christ may be glorified.Even if the discussion is closed, please still RECOMMEND.

Haley:
I read a church sign that said "If it hurts, then it's working". The holy Spirit convicts the lost right? So I think it might make them feel uncomfortable, maybe it stings? I don't know.

Lady Checkmate:
Yes ma'am. I thought the same thing. It's very sad.

Mick Williams:
It's probably the same reason they're coming for our kids in the classrooms; they must keep the lifestyle going at all cost. They do the bidding of their dark master because they no more believe in a devil than they do in God.

Lady Checkmate:
You're right. Many may NOT even have an answer other than to cuss and insult. I hope I'm wrong about that as I would sincerely like to know what deception the enemy uses to make them tear down another person struggling with the same temptation and coming out of it. Personally when I was back sliding, I was always happy for those who gave their hearts to Jesus Christ. Of course, it was also a reminder that I needed to get right, but still...

Michael Bresciani #fundie blogs.christianpost.com

For upwards of 38 years I have warned that America is heading for a fiscal fall that will make the old crash of ‘29’ look mild by comparison. In the last ten years, I have written numerous articles and reports that give warning about America’s continuation of the abortion genocide and our wholesale entrance into the realms of prurient interests and gross perversion.

The message was appendaged with a warning about a dirge of poverty and scarcity. Today that message has seen its entrance with Obama’s healthcare spectacle looming against America’s wealth and posing the single greatest threat to our fiscal stability since the stock market crash and the days of the great dust bowl.

A reduction in the average income per household, shrinking jobs markets, shorter work weeks and now huge increases in healthcare costs are only the beginning.

The horror stories already coming out of the ObamaCare inauguration are being called ‘mis-information’ by the President, but the dullest minds can see that the facts don’t jibe with the Obama diatribe repeatedly offered to counter what we are all seeing unfurl before our very eyes.

What we know is that America has not been listening to the messages of warnings from her best voices. What we should know is that God is not so hard of hearing.

God hears the cries of the nearly sixty million slaughtered unborn human beings who were discarded like so much useless refuse. He hears the cries of those distraught with the breaking down of foundational principles like marriage between one man and one woman. He hears the outcry against the full acceptance and coddling of perversions and porn.

He has done today, what he did in the ancient times, he has measured out a three pronged appeal over a sufficient amount of time (a generation) and he is now entering into stage three. When the three appeals are finished, all that is left is judgment or a chance for us to repent and set the record straight once again. It is the last gas on this road before our little journey comes to an inglorious ending.

The three appeals call first to the head, secondly to the heart and finally to the wallet.

For years I have proclaimed that Americans are capable of justifying any trend that comes along, but when you touch the pocketbook you will get their attention. While it may be far too late to rectify this problem it may produce a new direction for many – quite long overdue.

S Flower #fundie latimesblogs.latimes.com

The sexy 13 year old child Samantha Geimer had already slept with two men before Roman Polanksi- so the story goes.

So this is really about a dope of a mother leaving her tempting child at Jack Nicholson's house. It is for parents to be aware that some children are highly sexual and Samantha Geimer was one of them.

Angelica Huston, Jack Nicholson's girl friend was in the house at the time- and so the child - Samantha Geimer could have screamed, or ran out of the house to get help from a neighboring home IF SHE WERE THAT FRIGHTENED. I think that this is something she is making up, something her mother told her to say - since she doesn't want to prosecute Polanski now.

If Samantha were that frightened I would think she would still want to prosecute him for what he did to her.

Samantha's mother was asking for trouble in leaving her underage daughter at a stranger's house.

Then Samantha's mother passed on the trouble to Roman Polanski who certainly does not deserve any more victimization or witch hunts in his life - because of the mother's stupidity in leaving the sexy underage child there.

Samantha's mother also passed on this trouble to her daughter Samantha Geimer as the whole world is talking about her daughter's sexual exploitation even today.

I think Samantha was also attracted to Roman Polanski and perhaps also she felt she had to please and let it happen so she could be in a movie.

As Whoopie Goldberg said there was some chemistry between Samantha the sexual child and Polanski. It wasn't exactly rape rape - it was just rape.

The first devil in this scenario was Samantha's mother, for not supervising her child and tempting Polanski with her child, who could not resist that temptation. Then after the mother was a devil again and set into motion punishment for not being able to resist her unattended daughter.

Apefrican #racist niggermania.net

A few years ago, I had a money order to pick up at a Western Union store.

I had used the particular store before, but haven’t dealt with this particular nigger behind the counter. It was a young coon. All dressed up in a spiffy uniform, doing it’s best to hide the shitbeast within by sounding all civilized. “Ahm sorry suh!” “Ah cants do dat suh!” “Dat be against uh rules”.

I couldn’t pick up the money order because I had an out of state drivers license, and according to the coon, I had to have an in state drivers license, which was of course nonsense.

Despite claiming what “da rules be” it was clear that this particular dindu had no clear idea what the rules really were. Kinda like having a monkey read the instruction manual to a car. It might figure out that “shiaat” happens if it turns the ignition key, but no real understanding of what is really happening, and what to do next.

I finally gave up arguing with him, but not before casually saying: “Fine, fine... No reason to be a nigger about it!” (Even though I wasn’t a full on Niggermaniac yet, I couldn’t resist the temptation to get back at him.)

The change in the spear-chucker was as sudden as it was violent. The facade of civilization, the “suh”s and any pretense of being a harmless magic negro was instantly gone, and the halfwit expression in his eyes were replaced by raw, ape-like fury. For a second it felt like I’d been transported hundreds of thousands of years back in time, to an African savannah.

“WHADDAFUG YOUZ BE SAYING IMMA MOFUGGINGFUGYUUP MOFOGGA” He started eeking and ooking, jumping up and down and shaking his fist as if holding an imaginary spear or human bone in his hand. Alas, I didn’t stay to enjoy the rest of the chimpout, and was already halfway out the store before he bellowed out his first “mofugga”.

Okonkwo Akachukwu #racist amren.com

A Nigerian’s View of Race

Whites have become lambs, practically begging for slaughter.

When a certain leader of a certain country refers to other countries, such as Nigeria, as s**tholes, that is not the least bit racist. It is, unfortunately, merely descriptive.

The fences at the school were routinely broken so that students could bring prostitutes onto the premises for a short session. It was not at all uncommon for a young student to be attending to the call of nature at night in the overgrown grass while another would be engaging a local woman only a few yards away.

Boarding students, particularly the more vulnerable junior students, often went without food or drinking water. These basic necessities should have been covered by our school fees but the funds were almost always misappropriated by school staff. Underfeeding was so widespread that my friends and I might go for two weeks without defecating. Drinking water was sometimes so scarce that we might padlock a pail of water in a locker, only to find the lock broken by morning.

Sexual molestation of the younger students was a matter of course. The only way to avoid that was to avoid sleeping in hostels. Some of my fondest childhood memories are of sleeping on the rooftops of classroom buildings to avoid predation, swatting at mosquitoes and watching the stars and discussing the nature of the universe with close friends. I was a natural storyteller, and my friends also enjoyed these evenings.

Electricity was a problem in the hostels, so it was impossible to read at night. I used to climb the fence—not to steal or to chase whores—but to find a functioning street light. I recall finishing Stephen King’s Shawshank Redemption under a street light very close to the huge glass building known as Church Gate.

King’s College is considered an elite institution in Nigeria.

If any major British government official were to ever ask me if my people are glad the British are gone, my response would be simple. “No, we are not. Come back. Please.” There is a kind of adulation of the British that is on display when a Nigerian goes to Britain for the first time—even if only for one week—and comes back with an affected British accent.

On the other hand—and I freely acknowledge this is a stark contradiction—virtually all Nigerians and Africans believe that Africa’s poverty and instability are due to European exploitation. If it weren’t for ndi onyi o cha (Igbo for “those white skins”)! I have never understood this line of reasoning. If Africa was worth plundering, why are Africans unable to plunder Africa’s resources to build their own advanced civilizations?

This African tendency to blame others for our own shortcomings is a perfectly natural, if unhealthy, coping mechanism. One cannot live year in year out in squalor, social stagnation, and rampant crime and simply accept that this is perhaps the best level at which one’s people can operate. It is far easier and all too human to push the blame elsewhere.

Another purpose for the demonization of whites by Africans is to serve as a moral justification for plundering and exploiting whites. I need not outline the very many tactics of plunder. Green-card fraudulent marriages are a common example. For years, my own family has been struggling in vain to get me to “follow tradition” by marrying an akata (Igbo slang for African-Americans) in order to get “papers.” Of course, the anchor-baby phenomenon is exploitation, as is mass migration to Europe.

A few years ago, a Nigerian friend remarked that he had survived for years in the US by never paying for groceries. Whenever he was approached by a store attendant as he wheeled his cart towards the exit, he would simply yell aggressively in our native tongue, never once pausing for breath as he made for the exit.

White guilt makes white people easy to plunder. It is why white professors everywhere give black students preferential treatment that amounts to unjust discrimination against the rest of the class.

There is something unusual about the psychological makeup of white people. It can be metaphorically described as an inner compass. Due to that inner compass, white people need very little external force or punishment. They do not need much policing, so people can apply their potential to useful activities rather than wasting time donning a uniform and swinging a night-stick.

The absence of this inner compass is why, in Nigeria, no number of police officers can enforce traffic laws at an intersection. Indeed, most traffic enforcers and police officers routinely break the laws they are supposed to uphold (and still insist on taking a bribe at every random stop).

While this inner compass has tremendous advantages for white society, one disadvantage is that members of that inwardly guided culture are prone to tremendous torments of conscience that make them vulnerable to manipulation. There seems to be a miasma of guilt inherent to the very fabric of Western culture, a feeling of inadequacy for failing to measure up to one’s internal yardstick.

Although slavery was a universal phenomenon that preceded the US, no black, Arab or Asian man ever seems to experience racial guilt because of it.

I have no idea just how far down the rabbit hole of insanity this suicidal phenomenon of white guilt will go. One thing I do know is that most cultures, especially Eastern ones, suffer little to none of the white man’s inner conundrums and have zero patience for the social shakedowns and inefficiency of black culture.

The blunt truth is, as far as blacks are concerned, whites have become lambs, practically begging for slaughter in a world filled with lean wolves. We blacks have grown accustomed, even dependent, on the easy milk of guilty teats. What will happen to us when a less masochistic civilization replaces whites?

The future I see for Africa is as an economic outpost or colony of China. We Africans possess no human capital, in an age that requires the economic leveraging of human capital. The cars in our streets do not bear African names; they bear the names of Japanese, American, French, and Italian automotive innovators.

We have no major industry other than the natural resources beneath our feet, and our elites squander the revenues on luxury items from other civilizations. We are converting our only assets into rapidly depreciating foreign trinkets and distractions.

In the natural course of things, Africa’s resources will, once again, be exploited by a civilization—in this case Chinese—that is economically and technologically superior to ours. In the next 40 years, China’s influence will be immense, and the Chinese are not sympathetic, as whites are, towards the antics of Black Lives Matter.

I doubt that the reality of our plight will ever be universally accepted by Africans. I don’t think the average Nigerian realizes just how serious the problem is. We know, deep in our hearts, that our country is not working, but what is the solution? There are only so many African migrants other countries can accept. Our problem thus becomes a world problem.

Fay Voshell #fundie barbwire.com

The fact is that the Left's struggle against the clear-cut distinctions between the sexes is not about civil rights. It is not about equality. The struggle amounts to a religious war between the Jewish/Christian view of humanity and the pagan view of mankind.

[...]

[P]agan mythology is characterized by the extreme malleability of material reality, including the malleability of human beings and animals. It is anti-Christian and anti-science. The pagan viewpoint is the current mythology of the Left and is the dead end of the sexual revolution begun in the sixties and now culminating in the abolition of man and woman. The chief difference is that today's gods and goddesses are human beings who arrogate to themselves the ability to metamorphose into whatever form (sex) they choose.

[...]

Like all mythical delusions and fantasies the Left embraces, force is required in order to get the common sense populace who believe in material reality to knuckle under to nonsensical myth. Political fantasies about reality always lead to tyranny.

The uppity person who notes the emperor has no clothes or that a man claiming to be a woman is in the ladies bathroom exposing himself is quashed as a bigot. How dare anyone question the made up reality of the Left’s gods or goddesses? That is not really a man you see. It is a woman. You, dear reader, are crazy, not the gods. You are no longer sane enough to be a member of the Planet called Fitness. Further, your pizzerias will be shut down if you don’t bow down to the gods of the Left. In the long run, you hate-filled people who don’t buy into the multitudinous fantasies of the gods [...] must be destroyed entirely because you don’t agree with the Left’s religion.

Dutch Sheets #fundie charismanews.com

5) God is not finished with America.

I believe America will survive the judgment. I still believe we will experience a great revival—a Third Great Awakening—followed by a great reformation. If this occurs, it will turn America back to God and save us from total apostasy and destruction. A revival of this magnitude is our only hope! This revival will not stop the judgment, but will occur in spite of the judgment. Indeed, it may happen in part because of the judgment. But I, and other trusted leaders I know, have very strong promises from God regarding the coming of this revival. God will turn us back to Himself. While commenting on this decision, Jennifer LeClaire, senior editor of Charisma, shares a strong word of hope she received from the Lord a few years back.[5] It is well worth reading.

God loves this generation, and he loves the millions of unsaved people in America and throughout the earth. He needs an America in right relationship with Him in order to reap this potential harvest. A great revival will restore to us this amazing destiny. Do not be deceived; the war for the soul of America is linked to this greatest harvest of souls in all of history.

I have written a small book outlining why I believe this revival is coming.[6] Perhaps more importantly, it describes how the awakening will be generated. The book is an easy read and is filled with great hope for America. It explains how our nation was actually born through a movement of prayer, under the banner of a flag flown during the American war for independence. This flag, commissioned by George Washington and flown over our naval ships and battlefields, had emblazoned across the top: An Appeal To Heaven.

If America ever needed another Appeal To Heaven movement, it is now! Let's create one! There is still a window of time, but it is closing fast. Let's cry out for mercy and grace, appealing to heaven for a third great awakening.

John Gisogod/Bob #sexist marclepine.blogspot.com

The fantastic message of love of Marc Lepine

Why a red ribbon? Is it not the color of the AIDS campaign already? We would have liked to find an original color, but all colors are already taken. White, red, green, blue, yellow, brown, black, even intermediary colors like lime, cherry or fuschia: they have all been taken by some social cause or left-wing campaign, much to the point that certain colors are shared now by more than one institution or fundraiser. Facing such a difficult choice, Red vs White seemed the best solution.

The Red Ribbon campaign makes plain to all that Marc Lepine is in fact a kind of liberator and that December 6 could finally become something positive. Liberator, how so? He liberates women from the unhealthy thoughts of genocide and gendercide that were prevalent in the feminist discourse since the days of Valerie Solanas and Mary Daly, and helps them STOP their planned monstrosities. The message is here: stop hurting men and be good to them, and they will stop hating you. They could even start to like you again some day. This is the Red Ribbon message of Marc that we can oppose to the White Ribbon of shame, guilt and hatred.

Marc Lepine tells women and feminists YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE MONTERS ANYMORE. He tells these thousands of women and feminists who have stolen their partner's house, their car, their money, he tells those who have stolen their ex-husband's children, their jobs and drove them to suicide: STOP TO BE MONSTERS, stop to secretly dream of killing men and planning gendercide, and we will perhaps begin again to love you some day. This is a powerful message, A MESSAGE OF LOVE, worthy of a new Christ.

The Red Ribbon campaign aims at ''unmonster'' women. It gives back their dignity to former feminazis, and allows those who performed atrocities without clearly realizing it, or misguided by their peers and under orders from the feminist war machine, to choose the path to REDEMPTION. To proudly wear this Red Ribbon is to show the world that YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE MONTERS ANYMORE, there is a way to salvation. Marc has given back women their dignity: he says ''be good and men will immediately stop to hate you, even start to like you again''. This is the powerful MESSAGE OF LOVE, and message of hope of Marc Lepine. Stop planning gendercide and stop acting like monsters, and we will start to love you again!

BUT WHY SHOULD WE LOVE YOU?

Why not? The killer saint tells them: ''let's save the planet from genocide. You don't have to read these books of vengeance anymore, like Mary Daly and Valerie Solanas, you don't have to plan massacres of male children in our hospitals anymore''. The iconic killer tells them: ''I'm ready to forgive you my children''. According to him, he would even be willing to forgive them the destruction of the environment which has been caused qui by feminine franctic consumerism for more than a century. Ladies, join this campaign of love of Marc: throw away this white ribbon of hate and replace it with the red color of love. Together, let us ''unmonster'' our society !

John Gisogod

PS. an extra kind word from Bob Allen to all of you out there

International Marc Lepine Day, December 6, is almost here again. By now all MEN should have their homes decorated. The lights should be up. The cards sent out, The carbines polished. A day of feasting, drinking, and celebrating.

Happy Saint Marc's Day to you all.

Bob

WORLDWIDE TARGETING/GLOWTEKK #conspiracy #crackpot #magick #ufo worldwidetargeting.com

Satanism Masonary And All Forms Of Paganism are all based on the manipulation of energy and consciousness through Mind Control and deception and it is mostly controlled through ritual based ideology. These rituals create energy fields, Vibrational frequencys, which connect the consciousness of the participants to the NAA group (i.e. reptilians) and other Consciousness energies in the lower fourth dimension. The Archons on the Saturn base transmit AI that contain Satanic belief systems to propagate these distortions on planet earth. This dimensional field, also known as the lower astral to many people, resonates a frequency of low vibrational emotions like fear, guilt, shame, hatred and so on. When a ritual focuses on these emotions, as Satanism does, a powerful connection is made with the lower fourth dimension. These connect some of the 'demons' which these rituals have been designed to summon and feed since the invasion occurred 6000 years ago. Once a system is infiltrated with base desires as described in Archontic Deception Behavior or selfish ego, the system is not sustainable as it only collects energies from one group to steal from another group in order to achieve a temporary result, (Like a ponzi or pyramid scheme) or give a small percentage of people who manipulate the energies the energetic advantage over others. This is called Consumptive Modeling.

Since the Luciferian Knights Templar were established to covertly replace the original Christos Essene Templars and Maji Grail lines on the earth, they asserted their genetic elitism and divine right to rule, thus systematically slaughtering any of the population that did not comply with their agendas. A major timeline trigger event began with the Celtic invasions 9,500 years ago, when the NAA and their Luciferian Knights Templars were first attempting to create a super-race of genetic elites for ruling the earth. This placed the hijacked Egyptian Serres and Ruby Sun DNA through their propagated bloodlines, which evolved into Freemasonry, Knights Templar, Rosicrucian’s, Jesuits, and other secret societies that persist with a similar Thothian slant of hermetic esoteric knowledge. Therefore, the secret societies in power were originally formed by the Luciferian Knights Templar and were ultimately designed to hide the ancient sacred knowledge of humanities true origins from the common people, in order to route them into the guardrails of superstitions, ignorance and organized religion, such as the Church of Rome and Islam.
​Let me put this in a way you may understand the true prophets of this world i.e Jesus, Buddha etc figured out the truth and broke through the illusion (the consciousness trap). And the simple message they tried to deliver (which has been heavily distorted with endless garbage and nonsense), is we all carry 13 energy points known as chakras each one represents something different. Lower frequencies keep you trapped within the lower aspects. Master all 13 Chakras and you will be set free. Kill All Human Weakness. A Clear Indication Of This Is The 7th Seal, If You Think About Your Crown Chakra As The 7th Which Is A Few Inches Above Your Head (the halo), And It Being The Direct Link To The Collective Consciousness The Bigger Picture Begins To Reveal Itself. Which is where the simplified version of "Thou Shall Not Sin" Originated.

​But, It Is Only A Distorted Fraction Of The Truth. Of Course the Dark factions of earth understood this and integrated it into there own distorted programming making it seem completely believable to the uninitiated and unaware. Successfully removing all true power from the people and becoming the controllers of it. The true Great Awakening Will Be Full Realisation and Awareness of this. To remember who we truly Are. Paliadorian Activations will begin the clearing of the Yahweh/Jehovian Matrix and its Blood Covenant bindings out from all Human genetic records.

Certain factions of the Knights Templars were influenced by esoteric Islamic practices as well as distorted flavors of assorted Gnostic sects during the Middle Ages, in their interpretation and use of the Baphomet representation in hidden ritual practices. The medieval French word used for Muhammad was a derivation of the word Baphomet, as Mahomet was an alternative spelling used in the Middle Ages for the Muslim prophet Mohammed, the supposed founder of Islam that was groomed for position by the Black Sun NAA groups. Therefore, the claims that the Knights Templars in France were worshipping Baphomet in secret rituals also meant, in fact, that some of them had defected and were secret Muslims (the evidence is clear as freemasons at the 33rd degree, shriners or garters worship allah). Mahomet appears to be derived from its usage in Provence, which was the center of the Cathar Church in France, until the Albigensian Crusade and Inquisition killed or silenced any survivors.

There were beliefs in the Middle East that magical ceremonies could make severed heads act as oracles that would talk to the occultist delivering assorted levels of information and future prophecies. During the thriving era of Thoth cults in Egypt, the black magician would use a mummified head of a firstborn son in magical practice, attempting to make a talking head in which spirits could embody through its vehicle and thus be directed for divination purposes. The mummified head would be mounted onto the wall overlooking the main altar, or presented on a golden plate, from which it would deliver prophetic messages. Thus, during the Middle Ages some of the factions of Luciferian Knights Templar used mummified heads as their center of Black Magical rites assigning it as the symbol of the Baphomet, the head which would be used to communicate with these dark spiritual forces.

The Luciferian Knights Templar effectively formed a priesthood and created an alliance with the Hyksos Kings and Knights of Malta in the Middle Ages to orchestrate several crusades in order to destroy all evidence of any remaining Essene manuscripts and Atlantian artifacts that included teachings from the original Founder Records. Therefore, the Luciferian Knights Templars were also directly involved with devising the bible narratives during the Council of Nicaea, in forming the cover stories that would be given to the masses about Christ on the earth. Falsities were used to hide any Christos Essene Templar knowledge that included awareness of the Christos-Sophia Aeonic pairing, ley lines, stargate locations and how to harvest free energy from the power centers in the earth itself. To continue their search for gaining control over the grail stargates and discovering any buried Essene artifacts, it was imperative that the true nature of Christos-Sophia consciousness be distorted into reversals, that Patriarchal Domination, Misogyny, and sexual submission of all females be strictly enforced to feed the Baphomet sexual energy-based structures. The immense spiritual power inherent in the embodied Solar Christ feminine that is freed of the lunar reversals, and the knowledge of the existence of the female Christ Melchizedeks on the earth, was obliterated from all of the historical records to enforce the dogma of the patriarchal domination narrative as designed by the NAA. (Negative Alien Agenda).

AR-15 #conspiracy rightlyconsidered.org

This is really rich over at the homophonically-racist website, the Daily Noose. Professor of Philosophy and Law, Leslie* Green, tells us that when the right refers to universities as “liberal,” they mean universities filled with people who believe the following:

Species arose through natural selection.
No author of any gospel ever met Jesus.
Homosexuality is a normal variant in human behaviour.
The United States lost a war against Vietnam.
Human activity is a significant cause of climate change.
The United States has worse public health than do countries with nationalized health care.
Yet these beliefs are not the real threats to conservatives or the right. The true threats are the “habits of thought, modes of inquiry, and sensibilities of outlook,” which lead to such beliefs, in other words, conservatives feel threatened because “[universities] are universities.”

Got that? No, you say? Then let me mansplain it to all-y’all backwards readers of this humble blog: Them dumb tobacco chewin’ conservatives are threatened by the fact that there are all them smart fellers in them Iv’ry towers with that book learnin’ and stuff. It has nothing to do with the fact that at the Iv’ry towers they take as Gospel the following claims, with dissent met not with argument but ridicule:

-The only mechanism of common descent is natural selection.
-No authors of the Gospels ever met Jesus.
-Homosexuality is a normal [sic] variant in human behavior
-The war against Vietnam had little to do with stopping communist aggression of the north Vietnamese against the South and was not a political defeat but a military one.
-We should reduce fossil fuel use quickly by giving the government more control or else face disastrous consequences (#ClimateChangeIsReal).
-If you believe in yourself enough, you can be anything you want to be, including a man, woman, or whatever else you choose.
-You should be called an “Islamaphobe” if you denigrate Islam.
-Mexico is giving us their best and Trump is a racist (#RESIST). Because…
-Only whites can be racist.
-If you’re white, you come with a special cape that gives you “privilege power” no matter how dumb or poor your parents were.
-There is a serious problem of police injustice against blacks in the West. #BLM
-The “gender wage gap” is mostly to be explained by systematic injustices against women by (white) men.
-If you have four or five daughters, one of them is bound to get raped in college.
-Everyone should be able to go to college.
-There (REALLY) is a Constitutional right against the states to unlimited butt sechs.
-If you deny the above then you’re a bigoted bigot-faced bigot.

I’m sure I’ve missed a few. Perhaps some professors will help us fill in the gaps.

*Note: Not knowing Leslie, I don’t know if they identifies as a man, woman, or The Other. Thus, I have used the white, colonialist, capitalist, toxically masculine, gender-neutral, pronoun, “he” and various other forms to maximally be”on the wrong side of history.”

revoskeepnus #fundie forums.plentyoffish.com

[replying to - - You are probably Bi....or Bi Curious....just know its ok no matter what. Maybe you are gay? Either way ....just be WHO you are....be happy.]

I am sick and tired of everyone saying it's "okay to be gay." "Just be who you are." They are the same dumbasses that say if a child acts like a total dipshit, he's just "expressing pent up hostilities". WTF. Homosexuality serves no biological purpose except to give the people participating in it pleasure. Greed, self-love, and all of the other bullshit is what has the world in the shape we are in today. Just because all of these damn liberals say it's okay, doesn't make it so. Rome didn't fall for no reason at all. It is a lot harder to resist temptation and desires, but you are a stronger person for it in the end. Instant gratification is not always the best route to take. I have a son, and a lot of people have asked me what I would do if he were gay. Well, I guess I will have to wait and see, but as of right now, I'd throw him out on his butt. If he wants to defy me and The Bible, he can do it on someone else's watch...

EmpathicDesign #homophobia #fundie deviantart.com

And the fact it is considered not: Wrong.

The APA and the American Psychiatric Association are the organizations that "Affirmed" homosexuality as not being a mental illness using poor and contradictory methods to reach this conclusion, but they are wrong in their methodology. Examples:


"It should be noted that the American Psychiatric Association does not consider pedophilia in itself as a mental disorder either. After discussing the ways that a pedophile could disclose “intense sexual interest in children,” they write:

If individuals also complain that their sexual attractions or preferences for children are causing psychosocial difficulties, they may be diagnosed with pedophilic disorder. However, if they report an absence of feelings of guilt, shame, or anxiety about these impulses and are not functionally limited by their paraphilic impulses (according to self-report, objective assessment, or both), and their self-reported and legally recorded histories indicate that they have never acted on their impulses, then these individuals have a pedophilic sexual orientation but not pedophilic disorder. (American Psychiatric Association 2013, 698)"

"Again, sexual fantasies and “intense sexual attractions” occur in the form of thought, so a 54-year-old man who has “an intense sexual interest” in children thinks repetitively about children in order to stimulate himself to orgasm. That person's thoughts, according to the American Psychiatric Association, are not disordered."

"It is alarming that a sadistic or pedophilic fantasy could be considered not to meet the criteria for a mental disorder"


Now, the sexual content:

"The mental orderliness of a sexual behavior could be (at least in part) determined from the physical orderliness of the sexual behavior. So, in regard to men who have sex with men, the physical trauma caused by penile-anal intercourse is a physical disorder; penile-anal intercourse almost always results in a physically disordered state in the anorectal area (and possibly the penile area of the inserter as well):

The optimal state of health of the anus requires the integrity of the skin, which acts as the primary protection against invasive pathogens … Failure of the mucous complex to protect the rectum is seen in various diseases contracted through anal intercourse. The act of intercourse abrades the mucous lining and delivers pathogens directly to the crypt and columnar cells allowing for easy entry … The mechanics of anoreceptive intercourse, as compared to vaginal intercourse, almost demands denuding of the protecting cellular and mucous protection of the anus and rectum. (Whitlow et al. 2011, 295–6, emphasis added)

It seems that the information in the previous paragraph is established as a solid scientific fact; it seems that a researcher, practitioner, psychiatrist, or psychologist would have to be ignorant or negligent to deny that fact.

So, one sign or indicator of whether a sexual behavior is normal or disordered could be whether or not it physically harms one or both people. It seems to be clear that penile-anal intercourse is physically disordered and it causes physical harm as well. Since many men who have sex with men desire to perform those physically disordered actions, it seems to follow that the desire to engage in such actions is disordered. Since desires occur at the “mental” or “thought” level, it follows that such male homosexual desires are mentally disordered."

"Furthermore, the body has within it various types of fluids. Those fluids are “physical,” and they have proper physical functions (again, that is simply a reality of medicine or health—the fluids in the human body have proper functions). Saliva, plasma, interstitial fluids, and tears all have proper functions. For example, one proper function of plasma is to transport blood cells and nutrients to other parts of the body."


"Semen is a male bodily fluid, and hence (unless one arbitrarily applies one's own rules to the field of medicine) semen has a proper physical function (or multiple proper functions) as well. Semen typically has within it many cells, known as spermatozoa, and those cells have a proper location to be transported to—the cervical area of the woman. A physically ordered sexual act of a male, then, would be one in which the semen physically functions properly. Hence, another criteria for a normal or “ordered” sexual behavior is one in which the semen functions properly by delivering spermatozoa to the female's cervical area."

"One cannot conclude (with Alfred Kinsey) that a human behavior is normal simply because it is more common than previously assumed—otherwise all human behaviors, including serial killing, would have to be considered normal."

"One cannot conclude (with C.S. Ford and Frank A. Beach) that there is “nothing unnatural” about a behavior simply because it is observed in both humans and animals—otherwise cannibalism would have to be considered to be natural. Most importantly, One cannot conclude (with Evelyn Hooker, John C. Gonsiorek, the APA, the American Psychiatric Association, and others) that a mental condition is not disordered because it does not result in “maladjustment,” distress, or impairment in social functioning—otherwise, many mental disorders would have to be labeled erroneously as normal. The conclusions arrived at in the cited literature are not supported by the premises proposed to be scientific fact; the faulty works cannot be considered credible sources."

"It is always best to give others “the benefit of the doubt.” Maybe the APA and the American Psychiatric Association accidentally made catastrophic logical mistakes in the literature they cite as evidence supporting the claim that homosexuality (and other sexual deviances) is not a mental disorder; that scenario is quite possible. Still, one should not be naïve and ignore the potential for powerful organizations to perform advocacy science. There are major inconsistencies in logic as well as arbitrary applications of certain principles by those upheld as “authoritative” in identifying and diagnosing mental disorders. The present summary and analysis in this paper of the literature put forth as “rigorous” and “significant” empirical evidence uncovers major deficiencies—irrelevant, outdated, and absurd literature—and calls into question the credibility of the APA and the American Psychiatric Association's discussion and identification of sexual disorders. Indeed, suspect anecdotes and antiquated data have been used in the debates surrounding homosexuality, but the evidence shows that even the authoritative sources on mental disorders are guilty of those charges."

Homosexuality is a mental illness. Case closed.

M.

Frank #sexist archive.is

(Part 4/5 of "How Women Manipulate Men and the Female Ego". Emphasis original.)

How women control man
Let’s look deeper into the various tools women use to control and hide this process. It can be recognized that basically all tools are used to pull down one’s frequency and mislead by leveraging weaknesses, to invoke some kind of negative emotion like pride, jealousy, guilt, shame and so on. She intends to cause a reaction and suffering to her behavior. Because only then one becomes vulnerable and easy to control. When someone is happy, he cannot be controlled. Women know a mans weaknesses right away after looking at him. They are men experts. They get it through presence.
Figure 3 gives an overview.
image
Figure 3 – Female Ego and Manipulation Techniques

Interrogation – She asks questions to gain critical information that she can use to hold against the man. “Do you love me?”, “Are you my friend?”, “How important is sex for you in a relationship?”, “Why do you want to be with me?” Or to better determine your social status. Trying to find out if you are congruent. “Where do you work?”

Ambiguity – It will not be clear if she wants to be with you or not. Indirectness in communication. Saying one thing and doing another. Communicating one thing and then changing it.

Undermining Reality – She puts the weight on your shoulder. Either directly or indirectly pointing out that a happening was your fault, your responsibility or shortcoming. Blame. Disagreeing. Manipulation through guilt. “You are thinking too much about it. It is not that way.” “I think you are just silly.” “Don’t be silly.” “Soccer seems to be more important to you than I am” (blame and guilt) “You are such an egoist. A relationship cannot work with someone like you.” (pretending to be guilty and insulted). She laughs about her manipulative behavior as if it was a joke (recontextualization, also hiding).

Directing – This entails occupying your consciousness with irrelevancies and giving you commands. She may command you to do some gardening work with a very negative and commanding tone. “Give me a drink”, “Take the bag into the basement”. She dictates and instructs in various ways. She determines common activities and meetings. She implies being in need of help, and asks you to do things she could do on her own. She asks you a few irrelevant questions serveral times in a row. Like “How do you like my dress?” And even if you answer it, she asks again, sometimes right after the answer. She talks a lot and makes you do things.

Hurt – Anything that makes you suffer and what you are sensitive about. E.g. if you are fat or bold, women will repeatedly bring that into your awareness in fierce ways. Sometimes it may not appear fierce, but inwardly you will feel like a bomb just dropped over Hiroshima. A sublte way may be touching your bold spots, or repeatedly looking at them. The intention here is to harm deliberately. Every weakness and sensitivity you have about any issue will be brought up and used to stab. One example: “How much money do we still have?”.

Drama – 1. Poor me drama. Draining energy by complaining and implying that one is responsible for their troubles. The purpose here is to make you feel guilty. Often it works even though you know that it is not your fault on a deeper level. They talk about their illnesses, mistreatments or sufferings.
2. Pure negativity drama. Aggressiveness, being loud, insulting. The intention here is to get some kind of control back, to dominate and to reel you in.
3. Negativity dumping place drama. They just go on talking, transmitting pride, anger, sadness and judgementalism.

Waiting – They let you wait. Or they tell you or ask you for a specific time to meet or have dinner ready and then do not comply to this time.

Disqualification – She implies that she has more value than you directly or indirectly by putting you down.”You never change.”

Being Condescending – Insults. Showing Disrespect. Talking bad about you and putting you down. Complaining. “You never put down the toilet seat.” “I don’t want that. Stop it.” “You are never of any help.”

Dominating – In this category also belongs their attitude of “only what I want shall be done.”

Increasing Value – Increasing their own worth and market value by creating competition with other men. Even if there are no man in their lives right now, they make one up. They tell you various stories. They are also increasing their value by being aloof and pushing you away.

Negative Compliance Tests – They try to let you do things you would normally not do, but would do especially for women to gain their sympathy. Ironically (and that’s the point) the result will be the opposite of what you intended. “Can you hold my bag real quick, while I go to the toilet.” “I need socks to play the game. Do you have any?” (looking at yours, that are on your feet). “Do you want to drink something?” (handing you her cup with just a sip left). She starts holding your hands and takes notice if you let go or not.

Jealousy – She goes out dancing, and talks a lot about how other man are interested in her (implying it indirectly). She hides details of things and she is vague, especially when you are pushing for an answer. She is flirtatious with other men in your presence.

Responsibilities – They own your responsibilities and make them their own. This is a subtle enslavement. My secretary for example has to do some paperwork and some organizing for me. So occasionally she comes and I have to fill in some additional information on those paper sheets. And right in our conversation she manages it to turn it around and give me instructions what to do and when it should be finished. So of course I have to provide some information but she changes the energy and context as if she is the boss.

Role Adaptation – They take on a certain role. Being your parent for example. By expressively playing this role they are able to enforce the effects of the role.
Agreeing – After an argument you will see that they start argreeing on various things to end the argument. They are in control of starting and ending it.

Hoops – They throw a psychological hoop and see if you’re jumping into it. Often it is to deprive you of your power. She gets some feeling of superiority from knowing how you will respond.

Rejection – This is also often just a way to get a hold on you. Ironically women reject even men they are interest in.

The information gap – This word was termed by psychologist George Loewenstein. It states that there is a painful gap within our minds that we desire to close in order to relieve us from this pain. This gap is supposed to steer curiosity. This gap is created by questions and puzzles, unknown decisions, false expectations, access of information from others, remembering things you forgot. Women seem to know this even before it was discovered!

Panic Reactions – Once in a while they go for what can be called a panic reaction, when your brain gets short-circuited and you usually just blow. If the man gets physical, she turns it against the man and emphasizes how she really did nothing. And this works pretty well because her intention to short-circuit is well hidden. One example: It happens that she has bad breath and talks to you. You allude that she has bad breath and that she should please keep a distance while talking to you. You do that twice. She backs off walks around in the room a little bit then comes back close in order to relocate some things and then again to blow her breath into your nose.

Trolling Expectations/Perceptions – This is also a very subtle one and it can be said to happen on the level of thought. Three examples: She walks towards one side of a double door (holding the thought in mind to enter there) and you step aside in expectation she will now cross that path, but instead she now changes to enter through the second door. Secondly, the man expects her to behave mean in a certain situation but she is suddenly nice. Or you might know that she is attracted to you and expect her to touch her hair, but as you notice and pay attention to it she suppresses the movement and waits until you look away (may also be hiding in other situations).

Aloofness and Push – Pull – This was introduced at the beginning and though aloofness is something fundamental and innate to the female psyche it may be contextualized as a manipulation as well. Many techniques are supplemented by push – pull. They are preceded by a pull and finished with a push.

False Cause - Usually a woman blames and criticizes you exactly for what she is the cause. For example she complains that you are never doing anything with her. But when you make some propositions for activities she denies your suggestions without further ado. She is not interested in a constructive resolution of the conflict.

A Special Case – When you are arguing with some fact based reasoning in good will, what will often happen is that she implies in her argumentation that your fact is a generality and she gives an individual case for the purpose of disproving you as wrong (the individual case is also often a lie which is based on missing information that you do not have). Example: In a gender debate a man argues that men are often insecure in talking and approaching women because they are often not sure what is ok to do and what not. And that a man is supposed to do the first step because women never do it. The woman responded laughingly questioning what women he means and that she often makes the first step and speaks to men.

Caught Unprepared – One pattern is also that women strike when the man least expects it or is most vulnerable. Examples are when you come back home from work and are exhausted. are tired and start going to bed or leave a conversation with her.

Hiding and Enforcement
Lying – They lie from trivia to major things. Also to hide manipulation and aloofness. Often they tell you the opposite of what’s actually the case, “Men are pigs”, “You have to try to understand me”, “Men want what they can’t have.” When she bails out on appointments she talks about reasons of higher magnitude like it was raining or her mother did not let her. She does not respond.

Disguising – Disguising the process of aloofness and manipulative behaviour. Recontextualization. Basically all manipulation has to be disguised, otherwise it looses its function and purpose. “I am just trying to help you.”

Frame Control – This is a major one. Women almost have a super power here at their disposal. They are able to express their emotions and themselves unimpeded. They are at ease with it and do not fall into doubtful self-reflection. This is also why they enjoy dancing so much in constrast to many men. By being expressive and having a strong frame, it allows them to steer opinions and behavior. Women can even make an entire room consent to a certain preconceived belief just by holding a thought in mind.

Utilizing Needs and Positionalities – They know when a man likes something and use this knowledge to satisfy their own needs. Basically this is the foundation a woman works on: “her man is her kitchen.”

Alain Soral #racist timesofisrael.com

A French court on Thursday sentenced far-right Holocaust denier Alain Soral to one year in prison for insulting a magistrate and making anti-Semitic comments on his website.

On the site, which is called “Equality and Reconciliation,” Soral wrote that Jews “are manipulative, domineering and hateful.”

Soral, 60, has been convicted multiple times of incitement to hatred over a constant stream of anti-Semitic comments over the years. His last conviction was in December in a defamation case. The Paris Court of Appeal fined him 4,000 euros ($4,500) for producing and selling on his website a poster targeting Jews.

“We will continue to prosecute Mr. Soral as long as he makes anti-Jewish remarks,” said attorney Ilana Soskin, representing the International League Against Racism and Anti-Semitism, which brought the latest complaint against Soral.

Soral was also sentenced for insulting a female magistrate, saying he had “never heard so many lies and dishonesty out of the mouth of a woman, and I have known prostitutes.”

The sentence marks the first serious punishment for the far-right provocateur, according to Richard Malka, an attorney representing the magistrate.

The French Union of Jewish Students tweeted praise for the court’s decision Thursday against “this little propagandist of hatred.”

In 2016, a French court slapped Soral with a $13,000 fine and a suspended prison sentence of six months for saying the Nazis should have finished killing the Jews of Europe.

The sentence was over Soral’s Facebook post a year earlier about Serge and Beate Klarsfeld, two anti-racism activists who helped track down dozens of Nazi war criminals.

“This is what happens when you don’t finish the job,” Soral wrote about an article on a state honor conferred on the Klarsfelds by Germany.

A judge found Soral, who has long been a well-known writer on the French far-right and an ally of the anti-Semitic comedian Dieudonne M’bala M’bala, guilty of “justifying war crimes and crimes against humanity.” It marked only one of Soral’s multiple convictions for minimizing or mocking the Holocaust.

The judge also ordered Soral to pay 5,000 euros, or about $5,600, to each of the Klarsfelds and 2,000 euros, or $2,250, to the International League against Racism and Anti-Semitism, which then too filed the complaint against Soral.

Valerie Solanas #sexist en.wikiquote.org

Eaten up with guilt, shame, fears and insecurities and obtaining, if he's lucky, a barely perceptible physical feeling, the male is, nonetheless, obsessed with screwing; he'll swim a river of snot, wade nostril-deep through a mile of vomit, if he thinks there'll be a friendly pussy awaiting him. He'll screw a woman he despises, any snaggle-toothed hag, and, further, pay for the opportunity. Why? Relieving physical tension isn't the answer, as masturbation suffices for that. It's not ego satisfaction; that doesn't explain screwing corpses and babies.

ikester7579 #fundie evolutionfairytale.com

The reason Christian are h*m*ph*bic is because it is not natural. And is considered a sin. But we are called this if we bring up the subject. And for what reason?

Guilt, shame and peer pressure is the best tool to get someone to either back off, or conform through fear of ridicule. So where does this type of control come from when one person controls another in this fashion?

It's a form of witchcraft. When one person is controlled by another, and is forced to do things against their will through all the things mentioned above. It's a form of witchcraft. It is more so when you use these things to keep someone from doing what is right, and make them do what is wrong.

But what about the Christianphobics? Are they really against all religion, or only one religion? Let us take the Islamic candidate for U.S. President. Do we hear separation of church and state while this guy tries to run? Do we hear that he may try and turn the nation into a religion through his faith? NO!

Mike King #fundie tomatobubble.com

The Ten Commandments of a DemonRat

* This should not be taken as an endorsement of the useless Republican't Party.

1. You shall always support massive government spending, massive deficits, high taxes, endless money printing, and any regulatory scheme or executive mandate that will increase and consolidate the dictatorial power of the Federal government.

2. You shall always blame the ensuing economic dislocation and inevitable hardship caused by the 1st Commandment upon "the rich" and the business class. Rub raw the wounds of public discontent and then present your yourself as the benefactor of downtrodden humanity while rolling out the next program for government expansion.

3. You shall always support the killing of unborn babies -- referring to them as "fetuses" -- right up until the 9th month of pregnancy and even afterwards. Selling the organs for cash is an added bonus.

4. You shall always support, promote and protect insanity, ugliness, godlessness, perversion and depravity of any kind -- including abstract art, degenerate music, literature and film, pornography, adultery, graphic sex-education for children, promiscuity, the glorification of the "single mom," child pornography, homosexuality, lesbianism, cross-dressing and even, albeit it with necessary caution, bestiality and the raping of children.

5. You shall always support any incremental step toward the ultimate abolition of private firearm ownership. Use "the children" as your main front for this project.

6. You shall always support any incremental step toward the ultimate blending out and murdering off of the White Race. This includes discrimination, imposed under the high-sounding name of "diversity," against White college applicants and job candidates; the agitation of Blacks, Browns, Asians and Jews into envying and hating Whites; the tearing down of the memory of famous historical White personages; and the constant guilt-shaming of Whites into self-hatred.

7. You shall always support unlimited legal and illegal immigration from the Turd World, along with the welfare programs and voter registration that follow. Defend all migrants as "dreamers" and opponents as "xenophobes."

8. You shall always support any incremental step toward, or organization working for the establishment of an all powerful one-world government.

9. You shall always work toward the feminization and dis-empowerment of males, and, conversely, the masculinization and empowerment of females, with the ultimate objective being the effective abolition of marriage the traditional family.

10. You shall always promote and never deviate from the fake sciences of St. Hawking's Bing Bangism, St. Darwin's Evolution, St. Einstein's Curved Space Relativity, and St. Gore's manmade CO2 based Global Warming / Climate Change.

I Resist Temptation And Fight It. #fundie fstdt.com

Homosexuality is a sin. Homosexual people suck on a large throbbing penis like a sausage and acting like wild animals hungering for the right to suck and suck and release semen into the tongue and the mouth. Their eyes turn wild and they suck and suck as well as forcing the penis down the anus and listening to it throbbing and shifting and hearing it run out of semen they cheer in their wild lust for the penis and semen for the sin of Homosexuality is a mark of Satan who tempts straight men to go wild and start acting gay. As the penis grows bigger and bigger they release it all in a burst of madness.

svarog123 #fundie reddit.com

-Sexual activity between adults and children is found in all primate species, and all pre-industrial cultures without a taboo on child sexuality. It is just as "normal", biologically speaking, as homosexual behavior.
-Pedophilia is not a mental illness, but a sexual orientation. The conclusion of the final DSM-V is that the term "pedophilia" by itself does not refer to a psychiatric disorder. There is no longer an entry for "Pedophilia" but only one for "Pedophilic Disorder", and it states that if individuals "report an absence of feelings of guilt, shame, or anxiety about these impulses and are not functionally limited by their paraphilic impulses (according to self-report, objective assessment, or both), and their self-reported and legally recorded histories indicate that they have never acted on their impulses, then these individuals have a pedophilic sexual orientation but not pedophilic disorder."
-There is no evidence pedophilia is the result of any kind of abuse. This is an urban myth discredited by scientific research.
Freund, Kurt; Watson, R.; and Dickey, R. (1990). "Does sexual abuse in childhood cause pedophilia: an exploratory study," Archives of Sex

Cannibalism is also found in primate species. I guess we should just make cannibalism legal? The whole point of being human is not giving in to disgusting impulses like pedophilia and cannibalism.


Why is consensual and mutually pleasurable sexual activity between children and adults "disgusting"? Plenty of people find homosexuality "disgusting" as well. Does this mean we should ban homosexual sex? Why is it any different with sex between children and adults?


Lookismisreal #sexist reddit.com

If I see a femoid getting involved in some kind of accident, only for the cunt to ask me to help her, I would deliberately ignore her and not feel bad about it at all. Or, if I encounter some bitch bleeding to death in an alleyway, I would not go my way to seek help and care for her in anyway. I mean, why should I? None of these cunts gave a fuck about me when I was bullied, rejected, mocked and shunned.

So, why should I waste my time helping and caring towards a species who wouldn't help me in anyway if I was in the same situation? Also, fuck the dipshits who guilt shame people telling how a decent human being would help a femoid in need, no matter what. I will not help or have any kind of empathy towards my oppressors who have done nothing but caused me pain through my entire life.

Valerie Solanas #sexist en.wikiquote.org

He ["the male"] is trapped in a twilight zone halfway between humans and apes, and is far worse off than apes, because he is, first of all, capable of a large array of negative feelings that the apes aren't - hate, jealousy, contempt, disgust, guilt, shame, disgrace, doubt - and, secondly, he is aware of what he is and isn't.

Southpaw #fundie whiteboydj.com

[To the tune of "Baby Got Back" by Sir Mixalot]

"Baby Got Book"
Lyrics by Dan Smith; Copyright 2004

Intro
Oh my goodness, Becky, look at her Bible
It is so big
She looks like one of those preacher guys girlfriends
But...you know...Who understands those preacher boys
They only talk to her because she looks like Mother Teresa, ok?
I mean her Bible...it's just so big
I can't believe it's so huge
Uggh! It gross!
Look, she's just so...righteous

Verse 1
I like big Bibles and I can not lie
You Christian brothers can't deny
That when a girl walks in with a KJV
And a book mark in Proverbs
You get stoked
Got her name engraved
So you know that girl is saved
It looks like one of those large ones
With plenty o' space in the margins
Oh baby, I wanna read witcha
Cause your Bible's got pictures
My minister tried to console me
But that Book you got makes ("M-m-me so holy")
Ooh, momma-mia
You say you want koinonia
Well, bless me, bless me
And teach me about John Wesley

I saw her prayingWhile I was DJing
She got grace...pretty face
She ain't goin' down to the bad place

I'm tired of heathen guys
Sayin' they like pocket-size
Ask the average Christian to take a look
She's gotta pack much Book

So...Fellas (Yeah), fellas (Yeah)
Has your girlfriend got the Book (Oh yeah!)
Well, read it (Read it!), read it (Read it!), read that Holy Book
Baby got Book

Chorus
(NIV with a ribbon bookmark)
Baby got Book
(NIV with a ribbon bookmark)

Verse 2
I like 'em leather and bound
It's 50 pounds
I just can't understand
How it is, some weenie
Wants the Bible on CD
She wanna get you saved
Amen! Double up! A-men!

I ain't talkin' about a paraphrase
Cuz Paul wouldn't use those anyways
like 'em real thick and red-letteredYou can't find nothin' better
Southpaw's in love
Bibles that big are unheard of

So I'm sittin' here thinkin' "What if...
I find me a girl that shows midriff?"
You can have those bimbos
I'll keep those chick that do devos
A word to the Christian sistas
I can't resist yaI'll do God's time witcha
But I gotta be straight when I say I wanna pray
Til the break of day
Baby, got it goin' on
Like the wife in Pro-verbs 31

We just might get engaged
When we finish reading this page
Cuz it's worn and it's torn
And I know this girl's reborn

So ladies (yeah), ladies (yeah)
Do you wanna save people from Hades (yeah) Then read it...'til the pages fall out
Even white preachers got to shout
Baby got Book

(Thompson Chain with big red letters)
Baby got Book

Yeah baby
When it comes to a good book
Stephen King's resume just can't compare
39 + 27 = 66 books
And if you're Catholic...there's even more

So your girlfriend quotes Bill Hybels
But does she got a big Bible?
Cuz that little things she's got won't start a revival
My Bible study don't want none,Unless you got Book, Hon

...You can read Clancy or Grisham
But please don't loose this Book

Some brothers wanna play that hard hard role
And tell you that Book's too old
So they toss it and burn it
And I pull up quick to just learn it
So your girl likes paperback? Well I ain't down with that
Cuz my girlfriend's hot her Bible's rockin'
And she's got good doctrine
To the atheist chicks who try to dis
You ain't it Miss Priss
Give me a Christian, I'm insistin'
And I'll greet her with some holy kissin'
Some pervert tried to chase But he didn't make it past first base
She's quick to resist temptation
And she loves a new translation
So ladies who were lost and found
If you want the triple-six thrown down
Dial 1-800-reads-a-lot
And teach me about those Psalms
Baby got Book

(NIV with a ribbon bookmark)
Baby got Book
(Thompson Chain with big red letters)

Bible college knowledge but she still got Book (4 Xs)

Elijah #fundie boardserver.superstats.com

Who are these rebellious souls I see burning incense, ringing bells, chanting unholy words, and bowing down to images made by man? Where are righteous children hiding on Earth in these days of perdition while false gods are stealing Truth out of the hearts of fathers and mothers? Why has the Church of God not heeded the call to unity or taken a stand with this prophet?

Have servants of Christ forsaken redemption in their zeal to compromise with the Evil One? Has power given unto loyal souls to overcome guilt, temptation, and hopelessness been cast aside in favor of pride, wealth, and fame? Has the world heard voices calling religious leaders to bend in submission to the authority of Christ? Has desire for earthly power taken precedence over the desire to humbly serve the poor of spirit in the Church of this day? It is with sorrow in my heart that I look upon the corruptible ways of this adulterous generation. There has been a falling away from the favor of God for those who seek to appease lustful appetites. The meek are being shunned to favor the arrogant; the needy are scorned, speakers of holy words are mocked, and doers of good deeds are hindered by those who slander. Did anyone believe my false accusers in 2003? Will anyone doubt that Hell is real in July of 2007?

Nixwerld #wingnut #racist #sexist #transphobia deviantart.com

SJWs, they're all a bunch of social media addicted queefbags if you ask me. If the film industry wants to survive through the COVID-19 pandemic and economic crisis, and if they want to keep that theatrical window going, they should restructure their own brands, lay off many of those social media influencers, stop relying on China for their profit, stop remaking or rebooting practically everything, enough with the gender-swapping and female empowerment, stop forcing "diversity/representation" on everything, and so forth. It's people like them who appropriate racism and abuse and intolerance towards one another, and bankrupt the police so that they could kill people they don't like and all other sorts of things. That's what you'd get in Donald Trump's America. And Disney, they should stop with the live-action remakes, and sell off all the IPs which they acquired through Bob Iger as a CEO, they can't afford to own a competing major film studio like 20th Century (Fox) Studios at this point.

Absolutely. The studio execs in corporate Hollywood need to learn their lesson. I believe in the theory of "Go Woke, Go Broke", insulting and guilt-shaming your audience into thinking they're all a bunch of racists and hypocrites does NOT earn you money or respect, it makes the situation even worse, and it turns people off from watching your shows.

On the subject of Disney, they have already become far too big and powerful over the past severeal years. If they want to earn more trust and respect from their target demographic, they should sell of most, if not, all of the companies they acquired under Bob Iger, excluding Pixar. They should stop with the live-action remakes of popular animated films, and not only revive the Touchstone Pictures brand for more adult themed movies but also sell of 21st Century Fox and its affiliates to some other company while they're at it.

Mack Major #fundie facebook.com

There's an old saying that states: The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

Some of you just 'intended' to have a good time with those nice hips, legs, backside and thighs. But if you were able to see with the eyes of your spirit, and not just with the eyes of your flesh, you would've seen that beneath the flesh that so easily caught your attention was none other than an evil spirit assigned to steal your soul - for eternity.

Think about it: a few moments of pleasure in exchange for an eternity in Hell. That's a cheap trade off for your eternal soul!

Yet many people take this demonic bargain every single day, without one second thought to what the real cost will ultimately be.

And the genders could easily be reversed on this for the ladies as well. Many of you who are reading this - even as a Christian - find yourselves caught up in sexual sin. And you think it's just innocent harmless fun that God will excuse on judgment day. He will not.

Because unless you repent, the Lord will certainly judge you with the swiftness. *See Hebrews 13:4*

When we continue living in sexual sin, even after professing salvation, we send the wrong message to those still caught up in the world.

We're basically telling them that salvation doesn't work - the blood of Jesus Christ is powerless - and that the devil is ultimately stronger than God.

Many Christians have been poor ambassadors for Jesus Christ, His power and His kingdom. And because of this God is mocked by those who think every Christian is nothing more than a hypocrite who professes and preaches something that they cannot live themselves.

It's time out for bringing shame and embarrassment to the cause of Christ! You CAN live free from sexual sin. You CAN live a lifestyle that's truly pleasing to God!

God is looking for ambassadors - folks who are willing to wear the brand of Jesus Christ with power and great zeal. It's time out for being a weak, passive, gutless, chicken-hearted, feeble believer who lacks the simple power to resist temptation.

Where are the warriors for Christ - the ones who are willing to leap over walls and run through demonic troops? Where are those willing to sacrifice all for our Lord?

You'll sacrifice your soul for a moments worth of pleasure - why not sacrifice it for the cause of Jesus Christ? The rewards are certainly much greater.

But you have to be willing to turn down a few earthly pleasures in order to gain the life that's truly worth living.

If you're tired of this embarrassment of an expression of faith that we try to label as modern Christianity, then I invite you to DO something about it. Join the movement. Become a Brand Ambassador for Jesus.

But this ain't for the fake Christians who love their sinful lifestyle more than they love Christ. This is for those who are truly tired of Christianity as usual; and for those who long for an authentic expression of the supernatural power of the real Christian life that Jesus came to bring.

Are you up for the challenge?

angryxtian #fundie ignorantchristian.wordpress.com

If There Was A Global Warming, The poor cuntries should have to fix it anyway. It doesnt effect us so its not are problem so we have no intrest to fixing it. Its countries like Indonesia and Pakistan and Bolivia all the libral environmentals are threatning so those places should worry about it or ignore the nutjobs and they should leave us alone. Its not are problem.

But global warming is just a hoax. We al know that. Its for politics and libral shame guilt and its for hurting industrys the librals dont like. The scientsts debate it all the time but theres no agrement at all. They used to say the industrys were causing a ice age back in 1970s and now they say its getting to hot. Sure seems like its cold in a lot of places from what I heard. All those valcanoes have more polution every year than the hole 6,000 years weve been around.

wlil #racist stormfront.org

Chinese are one of the most racist and authoritarian bullies people in the world.

Chinese like other Asians want people to fear them and kow tow to them for no good reasons.
In fact those light skin Chinese are no better than other brown bullies.

Chinese like other Asians tend to disregard others who don't enrich them.

Most Chinese only pretend to be civilised while they sneakily accummulate more power and more wealth that originated mostly from the hard work of Whites.

Most Chinese are in reality a nasty bunch of people.

I think Chinese are no better than Jewish.

Chinese like other nonwhites are trying to dominate everything that was originally created by Whites.

Rich Chinese are one of the most arrogant and inhumane group of nonwhite on this planet.

Chinese are by nature cruel people, whenever they have the upper hand.

Even if those speak English, it is very difficult to communicate or get along with them. I find those Chinese very brutal and very backward. Chinese tend to force disadvantaged people to agree with them on everything.

I suspect they want everyone in the world to be Chinese(though they tend not to acknowledge poorer Chinese or darker skin Chinese) so that they can control and abuse everyone with ease.

Those Asians who are so ignorantly proud of being classified as Chinese are either willing victim of Chinese propaganda or unwillling victim of Chinese propaganda. It is weird why so many are so proud of being associated with such an inhumane race such as Chinese.

Scott Walker #fundie news.yahoo.com

THIS IS TO ALL THE IGNORANT HATERS OUT THERE:
When gay activist call you a homophobe, they really don't mean it. They KNOW your opinions have nothing to do with fear.

And when the LGBT types call you hater.... they KNOW you don't hate them. And in the case of Christians, most gays probably KNOW that your stance is based on love and concern... and not hate.

And when they call you ignorant, stupid, crazy, etc.... they KNOW that a lot of the arguments, put forward by people who disagree with their lifestyle, are well thought out and actually make sense. They KNOW that we aren't ignorant. We understand homosexual behavior quite well. THESE ARE INTELLIGENT PEOPLE WHO REALLY DO KNOW OUR SIDE OF THIS CULTURAL DEBATE. So why the need to classify someone who has a differing opinion as a "hater... homophobe... ignorant?" Why do it? After all, they do KNOW better than that.

Simple. We are dealing with liars. These are people who live a lie every waking second of their existence. It requires tremendous amounts of energy to BS yourself constantly. They know their desires to feed their flesh are unnatural. They know they actually hate themselves. This is why the suicide rates in the gay community are 5-6 times higher than in the general population. They have to sell themselves, at every waking moment, that everything is really ok. Guilt avoidance. 

So why do they call names rather than reason? Because ANY LIE is perfectly acceptable in order avoid the horrible pain of looking within at the truth. These are miserable lost souls who want to scratch every itch.... WITH ANYONE... AT ANY TIME. Go to their web sites.... read what they REALLY ARE. They are FORCED to live in this delusion and they feel they have to force others to enable them. ANYTHING to not feel guilt or shame for their behaviors. We are simply dealing with liars who will say anything as to be catered to.

Ron Paul #wingnut #quack lewrockwell.com

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has proposed the next multi-trillion dollar “coronavirus relief” spending bill that will support testing, tracing, treatment, isolation, and mask policies that have been part of a “national strategic plan” she has been advocating. The Trump administration is not opposing Pelosi’s plan on principle. Instead, it is haggling over the price.

But, even if the strategic plan could be implemented at little or no monetary cost, it would still impose an unacceptable cost in lost liberty.

Pelosi’s plan will lead to either a federal mask mandate or federal funding of state and local mask mandate enforcement. Those who resist wearing masks could likely be reported to the authorities by government-funded mask monitors. We can label this the “Stasi” approach to health policy, after the infamous East German secret police force.

Contact tracing could lead to forcing individuals to download a tracing app. The app would record where an individual goes and alert authorities that an individual has been near someone who has tested positive for coronavirus.

The strategic plan could eventually include Bill Gates’ and Anthony Fauci’s suggestion that individuals receive “digital certificates” indicating they are vaccinated for or immune to coronavirus. A certificate would be required before an individual can go to work, to school, or even to the grocery store. The need to demonstrate vaccination for or immunity to coronavirus in order to resume normal life would cause many people to “voluntarily” receive a potentially dangerous coronavirus vaccine.

The Trump administration has already spent billions of dollars to support efforts of companies to develop a coronavirus vaccine. Policymakers have stated that once a vaccine is developed it will be rushed into production and onto the market. Supporters of expediting production and use of a vaccine should remember the 1976 swine flu vaccine debacle. The swine flu vaccine was rushed into production in response to political pressure to “do something.” The result was a vaccine that was more of a danger than the flu.


Unfortunately, those who raise legitimate concerns regarding the safety of vaccines are smeared as “conspiracy theorists.” This is the equivalent of stating that anyone who dares criticize our interventionist foreign policy “hates freedom” and is probably a “terrorist sympathizer.”

The coronavirus panic has given new life to the push for a unique patient identifier. The unique patient identifier was authorized in 1996, but appropriations bills since 1998 have contained a provision forbidding the federal government from developing and implementing the identifier. Unfortunately, two weeks ago, the House of Representatives voted to repeal the ban. The unique patient identifier would aid government efforts to track and vaccinate every American, as well as to infringe in other ways on liberty in the name of “health.”

Politicians and bureaucrats cannot eliminate a virus any more than they can eliminate terrorism. What they can do is use terrorism, a virus, and other real, exaggerated, or manufactured crises to expand their power at the expense of our liberty.

Politicians will never resist the temptation to use crises as excuses to gain more power. Therefore, it is up to those of us who know the truth to spread the message of liberty and grow the liberty movement, A strong liberty movement is the only thing that can force the politicians to stop stealing our liberty while promising phantom security from terrorists and viruses.

Abdul Wahid #fundie hizb.org.uk

Some weeks ago prominent Imams, scholars and activists signed their name to a letter declining to lead Janazah prayers for those responsible for the London Bridge attacks. At the time, supporters of the letter argued that there was a precedent in the Sunnah where the Messenger of Allah declined in similar circumstances, and that there was value in demonstrating to non-Muslims that Muslims abhor such killings. Others opposed the statement – though also abhorred the killings – having other concerns including the implied acceptance of collective blame. Now emotions have cooled a little, I would like to share a serious concern that many of us (including some of those who signed the statement) may share.

As more of us become aware of the external pressure to ‘reform’ Islam – i.e. to change this Deen such that it conforms to secular liberal norms and policies of the political establishment, it is interesting to consider how religious reformations have occurred in the past. Orthodoxies were not re-evaluated in a political vacuum. Rather change was encouraged in the context of political pressure. The most famous example in British history is that of Henry VIII when he put pressure on clerics to find a religious solution to his failure to produce a male heir with his first wife, allowing him to remarry. Some of the clerics, faced with political pressure, searched for a legitimate solution within the Papal Law of that time – an annulment. The Pope rejected this – also for political reasons – to avoid a rift with Spain – leading to the wholesale change of the Church in England. In subsequent years, both under Protestant and Catholic monarchs, the opposing factions were pressured to make doctrinal concessions in order to prove their political loyalty, or else face suspicion, persecution or execution.

Of course, analogies have limitations and I am not offering this one except to make the point that political pressure has often driven theological change. Today, political pressure is usually applied at a time when Muslims feel at their most vulnerable. Following the attacks of 9/11 and 7/7, Woolwich, Manchester and London Bridge, responsibility is placed on the Muslim community, deliberately and collectively, through a variety of political messages carried by the corporate media – varying from explicit statements of the type Blair and Cameron used to make, to the implied blame from politicians and commentators expecting Muslims to ‘do more’ to deal with the issues at hand.

We have become used to calls for Muslims to ‘condemn’ such attacks and ‘endorse’ a variety of policy initiatives in their aftermath. However, condemning acts of murder is not sufficient – one is expected to condemn the ‘ideology’ supposedly associated with it – including the very idea of Jihad, the institution of Khilafah, and a number of other matters. Moreover, condemnation must be reserved for individual acts by Muslims and never state-sponsored acts of politically motivated violence – more bloody and terrifying by many degrees.

Uncritical endorsement is expected, for government policies supposedly related to preventing violence – but which can be extremely oppressive, targeting activities such as browsing the Internet and writing poems. We are expected to endorse the government’s use of ill-defined words like ‘extremism’ and their explanations for the causes. We are expected to endorse the idea that Muslims can and should do more to stop such attacks; and displays of loyalty that call for us to celebrate the armed forces that have been complicit in violence in Muslim countries.

These pressures are aimed to demonise authentic Islamic opinions about Jihad; Khilafah; relations between men and women; same-sex relationships; opposition to the occupation of Palestine; opposition to western foreign policy and military ventures; and opposition to the regimes in the Muslim world. We then start to see theological justifications for a changed position – not because they were considered theologically strong, but because they conform to political and ideological pressures around us. The theological justifications often start, like Henry’s annulment, applying a legitimate principle but then extending it beyond its original context just to meet political pressures; or exceptional circumstances become generalised to being normal practice.

For me, the statement about refusing to lead the Janazah prayers of these attackers rang alarm bells – not because it was baseless, but because it was drafted at an extremely emotive time (and hence a point of maximal political pressure), and arguably took the matter beyond the original Sunnah precedent. Yes, the Messenger of Allah declined to honour certain people with the blessing of his Imamah at their funerals, instead telling one of his noble companions to lead the prayer. But to gather dozens of names, announce the matter publicly with a press release, and to call for others not to lead the prayer – exceeds his noble example by some measure. It also puts any Imam who decided to read the funeral prayer, for example to help a traumatised family, at risk of being labelled an ‘extremist’.

Aside from the social and political implications of such messaging, what is needed at this time is for Imams, scholars and Muslims who are active in their communities to actively engage in understanding and then explaining the relevant issues as they are, not as the government or extreme secularists would like them to be. In that way we would be true to our Deen, explaining it clearly to our community and not falling into the reformation traps laid for us.

Advocates of reform argue that there is no obligation of Khilafah; no Jihad like the ghazawaat of the Messenger ; no problem with joining armies that will attack Muslims; no problem with Riba-based contracts; no problem with man legislating and ruling by other than what Allah has revealed; no problems with joining or supporting secular political movements; no problem with un-Islamic sexual relationships; no problem with nation state constructs taking precedence over Islamic loyalties; and no problem with a national ‘tribal’ identity taking precedence over an Islamic identity. These are all positions that some of the same people would have shunned only a few years ago without today’s political pressures. Yet consistent pressure has forced a change in their views.

Our role is not merely to resist the pressures to reform, but to actively uphold and explain authentic precepts that are demonised – not fearing the blame of the Blamers. It is to resist the temptation to look for exceptions to general rules, without teaching the general rule first and restricting the exceptions to their appropriate context. It is to guard against using examples out of their context. It is to be aware that pressures are applied in order to force Muslims to change.

Muslims who have validated the institution of Khilafah have been denounced as ‘extreme’, not just because ISIS have soiled it but because reformists argue it isn’t an obligation any more, as modern political constructs are acceptable. Yet many remain silent on the reformist argument and allow the misinformation to go unchallenged. Muslims who uphold the idea of Jihad in all its forms are denounced as ‘extreme’, not just because some individuals exceed limits set by Allah in taking innocent life, but because reformists argue the only Jihad is jihad-al-nafs. Those of us who know both positions are flawed, rarely educate the community about what Jihad really means.

So, as to my question – can such joint statements become a vehicle for reformation? Not always. But several by the ‘usual suspects’ leading the reform agenda have – and I am concerned that this most recent statement shared some of those aspects I have highlighted in this open letter – and it is for this reason that I offer this nasiha, which I pray is clear for those who read it, and accepted by our Lord, Allah .

Robin Goodspeed #fundie voiceofthevoiceless.info

In January of this year, Glenn Beck, the conservative radio and television host, stated on his radio show that if anyone within the sound of his voice hated a gay person, they could not be a fan of his or have a friend anywhere on his show. Mr. Beck is a Christian, a Mormon, and professes to believe the Bible and follow its precepts. If that’s true, I’d like to share the following with Mr. Beck and other alleged Christian defenders of homosexuality.

I am an Ex Homosexual, Ex Lesbian, Ex Queer, Ex Gay who is extremely grateful to Glenn Beck for inspiring me to leave homosexuality. I lived my entire adult life as an out, active, atheist lesbian. My personal redemption story began in 2009. In a dark, empty movie theatre on the west coast, I watched Glenn Beck act out his autobiographical “The Christmas Sweater.” In the depths of his alcoholism, drug addiction, depression, and suicide, Beck had a dream in which Jesus Christ appeared to him, forgave him, and freed him from addiction and suicide. This was before he chose to become a Mormon. I knew in that instant that if Jesus Christ could free Glenn Beck from alcoholism, drug addiction, and suicide, Jesus Christ could deliver me from homosexuality. I asked Jesus to come into my heart and forgive me and He did. I was freed immediately from any and all desire or temptation to continue in the homosexual life and filled with a passion to tell the truth about homosexuality.

I was not born a homosexual. I was not “born that way.” There is no scientific proof, or proof of any kind, that there is a homosexual gene or that homosexuals are “born that way.” I was sexually molested at the age of 2 and I began making choices at that age that lead to a life of homosexuality. I chose that life and I clung desperately to the lie that I was “born that way” so I would never be held accountable for my choices. This is what every sinner wants. I was a permanent, perpetual victim who demanded to be placed in a special, blameless category of sin. I was “constitutionally incapable of being honest with myself” and as America became increasingly atheist and hedonist, I received more and more permission to practice my special sin of choice.

The secular counseling world, especially, which I sought out to combat addiction, depression, and suicide, demanded that I believe I was born that way and that I just accept and love myself more and better. But even passionate, powerful defenders of homosexuality cannot remove the consequences of sin. In my heart of hearts, where God resides, I knew what I was doing and how I was living were wrong and I could not escape my shame and guilt and pain. Glenn Beck admitted his sin of addiction and Jesus Christ forgave and healed him. God used Glenn Beck to reach me. When I asked, Jesus Christ forgave and freed me from my sin of homosexuality. I pray that Glenn Beck and other alleged Christian defenders of homosexuality can hear the truth now.

Satan is the Father of Lies and he attacks every child. We are all born children of God; we are all attacked by Satan; and we are all sinners. The only thing special about the sin of homosexuality is the audacity and persistence of the lie defending it. If you love the homosexuals in your life, stop defending their sin. God loves them and God will forgive them, if they turn to Him and ask. Help them believe that He will forgive them. Help them reach out for His forgiveness and love. Love their souls instead of their sin. Pray for their redemption. I am an Ex Homosexual today through the prayers of those who truly loved me, the grace of God, and the power of Jesus Christ, praise God. The homosexuals you love deserve redemption too.

Chris Fellows #fundie goodreads.com

The temptation with this book is to go full Macaulay and write a ten thousand, fifteen thousand, twenty thousand word review that tells you much more about me and how clever I am than about the book. This temptation I will try to avoid. At least a bit. If you are reading this review I expect you are familiar with its thesis: Legutko has lived in Communist Poland and in Post-Communist Poland and has written this book about the worrying similarities he sees between the two. Everyone must think the same, or else; and the false gods of the ‘Liberal Democratic’ West are not so very different from the idols of the Communist East.

“The atmosphere the systems produce is particularly conducive to engendering a certain type of mentality: that of a moralist, a commissar, and an informer rolled into one. In one sense, this person may think that he performs something particularly valuable to humanity; in another, the situation helps him to develop a sense of power otherwise unavailable to him; and in a third, he often cannot resist the temptation to indulge in a low desire to harm others with impuntiy. For this reason tracking opposition and defending orthodoxy turned out to be so attractive that more and more people fail to resist it.”

Like most of my countrymen, I am used to thinking of ‘political correctness’ as an American disease, so it is salutary and sobering to read a book such as this which is primarily concerned with the impact of the same disorder on the European Union.

The odd thing about reading this book was that as I went on I found myself growing more cheerful and optimistic. It started from the question I have learned to ask myself, whenever I write a long screed complaining about something: ‘What positive alternative is there to this bad thing I am complaining about?’ I think it makes a difference if you can propose a solution, as well as describing a problem, even if (like Dostoevsky) nobody ever remembers your solution and only applauds how elegantly you have stated the problem. So, I thought, what is the alternative to this ‘liberal democracy’ which Legutko does not like, and which I do not particularly like either?

For almost all places, at almost all times, have enforced an irksome conformity. We who lived when Communism collapsed have been lucky enough to have lived through one of those stages of rapid flux from one to another, in which for a brief period of time all the walls seem to vanish like the insubstantial fabric of a dream, and endless vistas of possibility stretch out in all directions. ‘What joy it was in that dawn to be alive...’ But the steady-state condition of human society is not like that.

Legutko never spells out clearly what sort of society he would like to see instead. Is there any time we can point back to and think, that was definitely better than this one? I think if we read any history at all we have to say, no. Was the Poland between the wars a society where hierarchical structures guided people towards high ideals while letting them speak and write freely, harmoniously combining the best features of Christendom and the Enlightenment? I don’t think so. Or is Legutko looking back nostalgically to the glory days of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth? I think, though he never says so explicitly, is that something like that is what he would like: an aristocracy, a constitutional monarchy, respect for western culture, and an overarching Church that tolerate minorities magnanimously rather than being a tolerated minority itself. It would be nice to have more detail of this positive vision. He does say: “Christianity is the last great force that offers a viable alternative to the tediousness of liberal-democratic anthropology” (And I wish this were true; but atheist statist authoritarianism that puts bread on the table is still going very strong; and Islam is a force looking stronger every day).

Christianity had nigh 1500 years to work on Europe, and very rarely reached the heights of the Most Serene Republic in its best years. I am sure that the average person plucked from a field or street anywhere in Europe between the time of Constantine and the French Revolution had more to fear from speaking their mind if they disagreed with the prevailing orthodoxy than an average person you were to pluck out nowadays. So if Legutko’s preferred vision is a Distributist neo-mediaeval republic on the Polish-Lithuanian Commonealth model, I would expect, from a philosopher and political scientist, more detail about how will get there, and how we will incorporate checks and balances to avoid all the flaws we know Christendom was prone to.

It is not clear how Christianity differs in essence from Communism and ‘Liberal Democracy’, as described by Legutko: “Once a man joins an ideological group all becomes clear to him and everything falls into place; everything is either right or wrong, correct or incorrect.” Except that everything will fall into place in the way Legutko approves of. Furthermore, offering God to Man only as a means to the end of ordering society seems to me to somewhat sacriligious. It is like offering Victoria Falls as a means to make a cup of tea.

Ah, I have worked it out. This is primarily a Euroskeptic polemic, the goal of which is to fire up as many Euroskeptics as possible within a ‘broad tent’ of opposition to the nihilistic vision of European Union. As such, too much of a detailed positive vision would be counter-productive.

Where was I? Ah, why I got more cheerful the more I went along reading this book. Trying to think about where and when, if anywhere and anywhen, humanity was better off reminded me of all the other places besides Central Europe where things were much better than they were thirty years ago. There were a lot of them, and they were places where ‘Liberal Democracy’, broadly understood, was definitely on the side of the Angels. The problems Legutko talks about are problems of Western Europe and its overseas offshoots in the Americas and Australasia. All those places put together have a population less than that of China. While I yield to no man in my loathing for the unelected unrepresentative swill who tyrranise the Renegade Mainland Provinces, things are undoubtedly better than 30 years ago in China by a very great extent, and not only in material terms: people have more access to all the good things about Western culture that Legutko is keen on, there are many more people who, as Christians, are active participants in the Western culture that Legutko is keen on; and the worst excesses of ‘liberal democracy’ seem pretty harmless compared to the things that people have to put up with. In Korea, also, the growth of Christianity and liberal democracy over the past half-century have been positively rather than negatively correlated, as far as I can tell. In India, which again has about as many people as Europe and the Americas put together, people are also not only materially better off, but have much greater exposure to the good bits of Western civilisation, and the switch from ‘Third Way Socialism’ to something more like liberal democracy was a major driver of this. Indonesia has gone from dictatorship to something like liberal democracy; a peaceful and democratic transfer of power is not big news in Nigeria, which also has moved in the direction of liberal democracy with good results; ‘liberal democracy’ is still something people look at as a source of hope in places further to the periphery of Europe, like Turkey and Ukraine. In all these countries of course there are big problems, but political correctness does not rank highly among them. As I read through Legutko’s book, I thought about all these places more and more, and the declining relative importance of Europe and the Americas made me more and more cheerful about the way the world is going.

Legutko valuably points out the pernicious over-emphasis on ‘entertainment’ in the West. We are all doped up on electronic soma 24/7 so we never stop to think about the Ultimate End of Man, or the Nature of Reality, or What Constitutes the Good Life. But I guess, honestly, not too many of us ever thought about those things back when we were tilling our barley fields and occasionally seeing someone who could read in the distance.

It would be gutless of me to review this book without empirically testing its hypothesis. It is obvious from evolutionary biology that homosexuality is intrinsically disordered, as the Catholic Church teaches, and that it is almost certainly a mental rather than a physical disorder.

Roosh Valizadeh #fundie returnofkings.com

It was Joe’s first date with Mary. He asked her what she wanted in life and she replied, “I want to establish my career. That’s the most important thing to me right now.” Undeterred that she had no need for a man in her life, Joe entertained her with enough funny stories and cocky statements that she soon allowed him to lightly pet her forearm.

At the end of the date, he locked arms with her on the walk to the subway station, when two Middle Eastern men on scooter patrol accosted them and said they were forbidden to touch. “This is Sharia zone,” they said in heavily accented English, in front of a Halal butcher shop. Joe and Mary felt bad that they offended the two men, because they were trained in school to respect all religions but that of their ancestors. One of the first things they learned was that their white skin gave them extra privilege in life which must be consciously restrained at all times. Even if they happened to disagree with the two men, they could not verbally object because of anti-hate laws that would put them in jail for religious discrimination. They unlocked arms and maintained a distance of three feet from each other.

Unfortunately for Joe, Mary did not want to go out with him again, but seven years later he did receive a message from her on Facebook saying hello. She became vice president of a company, but could not find a man equal to her station since women now made 25% more than men on average. Joe had long left the country and moved to Thailand, where he married a young Thai girl and had three children. He had no plans on returning to his country, America.

If cultural collapse occurs in the way I will now describe, the above scenario will be the rule within a few decades. The Western world is being colonized in reverse, not by weapons or hard power, but through a combination of progressivism and low reproductive rates. These two factors will lead to a complete cultural collapse of many Western nations within the next 200 years. This theory will show the most likely mechanism that it will proceed in America, Canada, UK, Scandinavia, and Western Europe.

...

The Cultural Collapse Progression

1. Removal of religious narrative from people’s lives, replaced by a treadmill of scientific and technological “progress.”

2. Elimination of traditional sex roles through feminism, gender equality, political correctness, cultural Marxism, and socialism.

3. Delay or abstainment of family formation by women to pursue careerist lifestyles while men wait in confused limbo.

4. Decreasing birth rate among native population.

5. Government enactment of open immigration policies to prevent economic collapse.

6. Immigrant refusal to fully acclimate, forcing host culture to adopt external rituals and beliefs while being out-reproduced.

7. Natives becoming marginalized in their own country.

1. Removal of religious narrative

Religion has been a powerful restraint for millennia in preventing humans from pursuing their base desires and narcissistic tendencies so that they satisfy a god. Family formation is the central unit of most religions, possibly because children increase membership at zero marginal cost to the church (i.e. they don’t need to be recruited).

Religion may promote scientific ignorance, but it facilitates reproduction by giving people a narrative that places family near the center of their existence.[1] [2] [3] After the Enlightenment, the rapid advance of science and its logical but nihilistic explanations into the universe have removed the religious narrative and replaced it with an empty narrative of scientific progress, knowledge, and technology, which act as a restraint and hindrance to family formation, allowing people to pursue individual goals of wealth accumulation or hedonistic pleasure seeking.[4] As of now, there has not been a single non-religious population that has been able to reproduce above the death rate.[5]

...

2. Elimination of traditional sex roles

Once religion no longer plays a role in people’s lives, the stage is set to fracture male-female bonding. It is collectively attacked by several ideologies stemming from the beliefs of Cultural Marxist theory, which serve to accomplish one common end: destruction of the family unit so that citizens are dependent on the state. They achieve this goal through the marginalization of men and their role in society under the banner of “equality.”[6] With feminism pushed to the forefront of this umbrella movement, the drive for equality ends up being a power grab by women.[7] This attack is performed on a range of fronts:

medicating boys from a young age with ADHD drugs to eradicate displays of masculinity[8]
shaming of men for having direct sexual interest in attractive and fertile women
criminalization of normal male behavior by redefining some instances of consensual sex as rape[9]
imprisonment of unemployed fathers for non-payment of child support, rendering them destitute and unable to be a part of their children’s lives[10]
taxation of men at higher rates for redistribution to women[11] [12]
promotion of single mother and homosexual lifestyles over that of the nuclear family[13] [14]

The end result is that men, confused about their identify and averse to state punishment from sexual harassment, “date rape,” and divorce proceedings, make a rational decision to wait on the sidelines.[15] Women, still not happy with the increased power given to them, continue their assault on men by instructing them to “man up” into what has become an unfair deal—marriage. The elevation of women above men is allowed by corporations, which adopt “girl power” marketing to expand their consumer base and increase profits.[16] [17] Governments also allow it because it increases their tax revenue. Because there is money to be made with women working and becoming consumers, there is no effort by the elite to halt this development.
3. Women begin to place career above family

At the same time men are emasculated as mere “sperm donors,” women are encouraged to adopt the career goals, mannerisms, and competitive lifestyles of men, inevitably causing them to delay marriage, often into an age where they can no longer find suitable husbands who have more resources than themselves. [18] [19] [20] [21] The average woman will find it exceedingly difficult to balance career and family, and since she has no concern of getting “fired” from her family, who she may see as a hindrance to her career goals, she will devote an increasing proportion of time into her job.

Female income, in aggregate, will soon match or exceed that of men.[22] [23] [24] A key reason that women historically got married was to be economically provided for, but this reason will no longer persist and women will feel less pressure or motivation to marry. The burgeoning spinster population will simply be a money-making opportunity for corporations to market to an increasing population of lonely women. Cat and small dog sales will rise.

Women succumb to their primal sexual and materialistic urges to live the “Sex and the City” lifestyle full of fine dining, casual sex, technological bliss, and general gluttony without learning traditional household skills or feminine qualities that would make them attractive wives.[25] [26] Men adapt to careerist women in a rational way by doing the following:

to sate their natural sexual desires, men allow their income to lower since economic stability no longer provides a draw to women in their prime[27]
they mimic “alpha male” social behavior to get laid with women who, without having an urgent need for a man’s monetary resources to survive, can choose men based on confidence, aesthetics, and general entertainment value[28]
they withdraw into a world of video games and the internet, satisfying their own base desires for play and simulated hunting[29] [30]

Careerist women who decide to marry will do so in a hurried rush around 30 because they fear growing old alone, but since they are well past their fertility peak[31], they may find it difficult to reproduce. In the event of successful reproduction at such a later age, fewer children can be born before biological infertility, limiting family size compared to the historical past.

...

Cultural decline begins in earnest when the natives feel shame or guilt for who they are, their history, their way of life, and where their ancestors came from. They will let immigrant groups criticize their customs without protest, or they simply embrace immigrant customs instead with religious conversion and interethnic marriages. Nationalistic pride will be condemned as a “far-right” phenomenon and popular nationalistic politicians will be compared to Hitler. Natives learn the art of self-censorship, limiting the range of their speech and expressions, and soon only the elderly can speak the truths of the cultural decline while a younger multiculturalist within earshot attributes such frankness to senility or racist nostalgia.

With the already entrenched environment of political correctness (see stage 2), the local culture becomes a sort of “world” culture that can be declared tolerant and progressive as long as there is a lack of criticism against immigrants, multiculturalism, and their combined influence. All cultural identity will eventually be lost, and to be “American” or “British,” for example, will no longer have modern meaning from a sociological perspective. Native traditions will be eradicated and a cultural mixing will take place where citizens from one world nation will be nearly identical in behavior, thought, and consumer tastes to citizens of another. Once a collapse occurs, it cannot be reversed. The nation’s cultural heritage will be forever lost.

...

How To Stop Cultural Collapse

Maintaining native birth rates while preventing the elite from allowing immigrant labor is the most effective means at preventing cultural collapse. Since multiculturalism is an experiment with no proven efficacy, a culture can only be maintained by a relatively homogenous group who identify with each other. When that homogeneity breaks down and one citizen looks to the next and does not see a person with the same values as himself, the culture falls in dis-repair as native citizens begin to lose a shared means of communication and identity. Once the percentage of the immigrant population crosses a certain threshold (perhaps 15%), the decline will pick up in pace and cultural breakdown will be readily apparent to all observers.

Current policies to solve low birth rates through immigration is a short-term fix with dire long-term consequences. In effect, it’s a Trojan-horse prescription of irreversible cultural destruction. A state must prevent itself from entering the position where mass immigration is considered a solution by blocking progressive ideologies from taking hold. One way this can be done is through the promotion of a state-sponsored religion which encourages the nuclear family instead of single motherhood and homosexuality. However, introducing religion as a mainstay of citizen life in the post-enlightenment era may be impossible.

We must consider that the scientific era is an evolutionary maladaptive feature of humanity that natural selection will accordingly punish (i.e. those who are anti-religious and pro-science will simply breed less). It must also be considered that with religion in permanent decline, cultural collapse may be a certainty that eventually occurs in all developed nations. Religion, it may turn out, was evolutionary beneficial to the human race.

Another possible solution is to foster a patriarchal society where men serve as strong providers. If you encourage the development of successful men who possess indispensable skills and therefore resources that are lacked by females, there will be women below their station who want to marry and procreate with them, but if strong women are produced instead, marriage and procreation is unlikely to take place at levels above the death rate.

A gap between the sexes should always exist in the favor of men if procreation is to occur at high rates, or else you’ll have something similar to the situation in America where urban professional women cannot find “good men” to begin a family with (i.e., men who are significantly more financially successful than them). They instead remain single and barren, only used occasionally by cads for exciting casual sex.

Jack Hyles #fundie jesus-is-savior.com

Keeping The Child Pure

Satan has pointed every weapon in his arsenal at our young people. Promiscuous petting, Hollywood movies, secular magazines, the new morality, lewdness in dress, television, popular songs, and the permissive society have all joined hands to try to corrupt the morals of our youth. If a child reaches the marriage altar retaining his purity in our generation, it certainly will be on purpose and not by accident. It will be the result of prayer, training, and discipline as administered by loving parents. This chapter is dedicated to helping us to rear clean, chaste, and moral young people.

1. The child should attend a fundamental church that takes a stand against the permissive society, indecent dress, improper exposure of the body, and unwise association between the sexes. He should hear a man of God thunder against sin and for righteousness. He should be taught the "thou shalt nots" of the Bible. He should get the idea from early childhood that he is to keep his body pure and clean and save it for the one God has for him.

He should be taught the Scriptures which deal with virtue and chastity. There is absolutely no substitute for a child growing up at the feet of a prophet of God, a man who rains wrath upon evil and warns men of evil deeds.

2. The wise parent will have definite rules about a boy and girl not being in a car alone together. Becky is now married. She was never allowed to be alone in a car with a boy. More sin is committed in automobiles than in motel rooms and red-light districts. The wise parent will never say such thing as "I trust my daughter." The truth is he should not even trust himself in a circumstance that would lead to wrong. The Apostle Paul was always conscious of the possibility of his turning back. He warned the Galatian church if he himself returned and preached any gospel other than the one they had heard, he should be accursed. The child who does not spend hours and hours alone with a member of the opposite sex in a car certainly has not missed anything that he shouldn't miss.

...

5. The child should be taught to be disciplined in his eating habits. This may seem strange in a chapter on purity, but children who have not restraint in the feeding of their bodies will likely have little or no restraint in resisting other temptations that come to the body. If leaving off stimulating food such as sauces, highly seasoned food, and other foods hard to digest does nothing else, it at least teaches the child to say "no" to the appetites of the body. This discipline can be transferred to the temptation of immorality and misbehavior toward the opposite sex. One discipline helps another.

6. Proper clothing should be worn. Tight clothing should be discouraged. Clothing that needlessly irritates the body should not be worn. Clothing that exposes too much of the body should be avoided.

...

8. The parent should see to it that the child is very busy. Somebody has said that the only men free from bad habits were those whose paths kept them so everlastingly busy that they never had any time to go loafing. The parent should help create hobbies that will tend to fill the idle hours as well as keep boys and girls apart much of the time. Seize every opportunity to use a child's interests toward a proper hobby.

Along this line it is wise for a child not to develop hobbies that are quiet and cause him to be alone. Too many hours of listening to stereo music is not good. Too many hours of playing alone is not good. Hours spent behind locked doors are dangerous. Outdoor games are better than indoor games. Active games are better than quiet games. Group games are better than games played alone.

9. The child should not be allowed to attend Hollywood movies or read questionable literature. Plenty of good literature should be provided, especially novels of adventure, heroic action, etc.

...

12. Little boys should play with little boys and little girls with little girls. Becky, Linda, and Cindy have never been allowed to play with little boys, and David has never been allowed to play with little girls. So many of our children have drifted toward homosexuality because of boys developing feminine tendencies and girls developing masculine tendencies.

13. The child should never be allowed to be alone unclothed or scantily clothed. After bathing he should be required to clothe himself completely. This eliminates presenting unnecessary opportunities for a child fondling his own body or becoming overly interested in himself and his body.

14. A girl should do girl's work and a boy should do boy's work. In an effort to make ladies of girls and men of boys the parent should see to it that the girl does not mow the yard, prune the trees, chop the garden, etc. These are boy's tasks. The boys should not wash the dishes, iron, etc. These are the girl's tasks. The boy should mow the yard, clean the garage, clean the basement, do repair work around the house, etc., and by all means he should be taught to sweat. This is vital, not only in making him normal, but also in keeping him pure.

Atavistic Autist, GoffSystemQB & Lame Dude #sexist incels.co

RE: [HIROSHIMA BLACKPILL] Foid enjoys "rape" from chad

(Atavistic Autist)

I was raped while I was blackout drunk. In reality, I actually really enjoyed the sex even though I couldn't consent, and I told my boyfriend I tried to get him off but I really didn't. I am torn apart by guilt over this.

"teehee, I was drunk" implies that alcoholism doesn't just increase the honesty of your actions and lead to what you would do anyway without your neuroticism inhibiting you.

This foid outright admits to having been capable of verbally refusing the act, at least, but not having done it. Indeed, why would she feel any guilt and shame now if she had truly been without decision-making authority then?

She says that she's lying to her hubby cuck, but continues to lie to le Reddit and even to herself to make herself look better. I hope the fat hubby cuck starts becoming "toxic" and "emotionally abusive" to her out of instinct, and then the relationshit ends as the foid ultimately reinforces her whoredom.

Btw, AWALT.

(GoffSystemQB)

As has been said before. It isn't rape if it's Chad.

"teehee, I was drunk" implies that alcoholism doesn't just increase the honesty of your actions and lead to what you would do anyway without your neuroticism inhibiting you.

Not saying there isn't some truth to this, but if that's the case then there are normies and other guys that foids actually secretly want to fuck. Alcohol is the norman's best friend to getting laid.

Really the only time they will ever experience casual sex is a once in a blue moon encounter with a girl that is at least slightly drunk.

(Lame Dude)

"I was drunk, somebody raped me." I dont have sympathy for you.

Why dont women have a sense of self preservation? Even with a dick, I dont get drunk around people I dont know well.

I went to swim with sharks, but then they bit me. Teach sharks not to bite!

Mack Major #fundie edendecoded.com

Ladies, as a Christian woman you have NO business calling yourself a DIVA! Have you any clue what an actual diva is? I suggest you do your research.

Surprisingly, many Christian women have latched on to the diva title because they adopted it from their favorite Beyoncé song: Diva.

Divas (or devas as they are commonly referred to) are demons! They're elemental spirits used mostly in witchcraft and other occult rituals. And you are forbidden by God to engage or even associate with such things.

Why are you Christians even going around calling yourself demons?

I was wondering where all these 'sexy Christians' were coming from. You see them everywhere nowadays: at church, online, conducting women's conferences. They love to call themselves prophetess and "women of God." But something about them is very off.

"Oh yea, I almost forgot: there's something about them... and high heels.

I've been observing a large number of 'saved' women who can't resist the temptation to showcase their 'sexy' feet. Especially in high heels. And they're not doing it for men, as many believe. They do it for other women.

It baffled me for the longest, until I started researching how witchcraft has slowly infiltrated the church.

We now have a large group of Christian women who've fallen under the influence of witchcraft, lesbianism and gnostic occultism. They no longer take pride in presenting themselves as holy vessels of honor before God. Now they take pride in presenting themselves as sexy, sassy "divas for Christ." Whatever that is...

Here's a key indication of witchcraft when you see it: if it places an emphasis on the power of the feminine over the masculine, and accentuates the sensuality and sexuality of women... that's NOT a good recipe for godly virtuous womanhood. That's a witch brew!

I guess all those years of being "loosed" has finally freed some Christian women to be Christian temptresses, seductresses and witches in the pulpit too.

But Christ doesn't accept such spiritual pollution. Which is why many churches full of women like this cannot and will not thrive until order is first established.

"Divas gain power through seduction. This is no different from the Christian diva.

And when divas get bored seducing men, they turn towards seducing other gullible women. Those who operate under the influence of Jezebel will hate to hear this; just like they hate most of the things I write. Because Jezebel fears the presence of a strong God-fearing alpha male.

It's the only thing that can keep her in check. And that spirit of witchcraft fancies herself to be queen who answers to no man. - Revelation 18:7

If this is you, shame on you! You need to repent of your desire to be a seducing Christian, and do it fast. You're supposed to lead the world to salvation. Not lead them to lust!

***Stop letting Satan use your body and beauty as weapons of sabotage in your own life and in the lives of others. Break free from soul ties and sexual demons.

GMT #racist niggermania.net

In the UK, we do not have anywhere near the same freedom of speech as you guys in the US (and elsewhere) have. Over here, if we call a nigger a nigger, we risk susbtsantial fines, compensation orders to the nigger and even imprisonment. Seriously.

As such, we have to be VERY careful and creative when it comes to effectively banning niggers from premises and facilities as if it can result in bankruptcy and imprisonment. At the same time of course, letting a nigger move in can rapidly destroy a thriving business.

Among a couple of other little ventures, I have a 50% share in a small guest house in England - and to keep things nigger free and hassle free, we tend to focus only on contractors working away from home.

Today we had our last vacancy taken and although the persons's name was very English sounding, in the past we have had people "make bookings" for their friends / relatives etc - so you cannot always go by name or accent.

Anyway, I had taken a booking (and advance payment) and this person was due to arrive.

You can imagine how I started to die inside when this nigger walks up with a case in tow asking if he had found us. (No point lying as even a nigger would work out the address in a few seconds if it looked at the numbering on the street).

"Yes" I said, choking on the words and wishing I had just missed the enquiry from it altogether.

"Ah Goods", it ooks and then to my confusion, hollers out the name of my guest who then came around the corner with another case. The nigger was just the taxi driver and its passenger was an extremely civilised human.

What I dreaded suddenly turned into profound relief, I had to resist the temptation not to punch the air and go "Result!!".

I am still on a natural high.

Aetherapologist #fundie reddit.com

It blows my fucking mind that you think sexual activity is harmful to children somehow.

That's not what /u/Sunfl00 or /u/pilarholt said. OP's story is about an adult taking non-consensual sexual photographs of a child, which is not identical to the term "sexual activity", it's more specific. Sunfloo is talking about the same thing with the phrase "pornographic pics of kids".
You do agree that adults who desire sexual activity with children are fucked up, right?

I am perfectly aware of what the conversation was about. I wasn't commenting on the subject being discussed. I was interjecting sense and reason into the conversation by pointing out the deeply flawed beliefs which allowed the discussion to come into existence in the first place. It would be like an atheist interjecting into a theological argument between two people with the statement "your god does not exist". No, I would not agree that adults who desire to engage in sexual activity with children are fucked up. You are fucked up for supporting the cultural conditioning which causes children to be traumatized by something that is not only harmless, but immensely beneficial. Sex is not wrong and it does not psychologically harm children. Punishment causes distress. There is a causally direct correlation between the degree to which an individual experiences distress for breaking a rule and the degree to which that individual's community punishes those who break that rule. Pedophilia is one of the most punished things on earth. There is no magical time during human development when sexual feelings aren't possible or when they crossover from being distressing to being pleasurable. Fear conditioning through punishment and threat of punishment for breaking a deeply vilified sexual taboo is the reason why children experience trauma from harmless sexual activity engaged in willingly.
I have never heard a single good argument that justifies the criminalization of sexual activity with children.


How about the fact that virtually all sexual activity with children is non-consensual?

Even if it were true that the vast majority of instances were not consensual, that wouldn't justify criminalization of consensual sexual activity. If 99% of sex acts among adults were the result of rape, that wouldn't somehow make the consenting examples wrong.
Sexual feelings are pleasurable at every stage of human development. Almost everyone on earth can recall doing sexual things in private in their youth and not being harmed by it. Most parents can report observing their toddlers playing with themselves in their diapers at some point. There are sonogram video images of fetuses masturbating. There's every reason to believe the vast, vast, vast majority of children from the youngest possible ages would want to experience sexual pleasure with others but for the threat of ultra severe punishment for it. If anyone who was involved in sexual activity with a pedophile as a child didn't express fear and guilt and shame for it but expressed positive feelings about it, they would be positively vilified. No one is even allowed to not be traumatized or otherwise express a deep sense of wrongness about their childhood sexual experiences with an adult without being punished for it.

Peter Thiel #fundie cato-unbound.org

I remain committed to the faith of my teenage years: to authentic human freedom as a precondition for the highest good. I stand against confiscatory taxes, totalitarian collectives, and the ideology of the inevitability of the death of every individual. For all these reasons, I still call myself “libertarian.”

But I must confess that over the last two decades, I have changed radically on the question of how to achieve these goals. Most importantly, I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible. By tracing out the development of my thinking, I hope to frame some of the challenges faced by all classical liberals today.

As a Stanford undergraduate studying philosophy in the late 1980s, I naturally was drawn to the give-and-take of debate and the desire to bring about freedom through political means. I started a student newspaper to challenge the prevailing campus orthodoxies; we scored some limited victories, most notably in undoing speech codes instituted by the university. But in a broader sense we did not achieve all that much for all the effort expended. Much of it felt like trench warfare on the Western Front in World War I; there was a lot of carnage, but we did not move the center of the debate. In hindsight, we were preaching mainly to the choir — even if this had the important side benefit of convincing the choir’s members to continue singing for the rest of their lives.

As a young lawyer and trader in Manhattan in the 1990s, I began to understand why so many become disillusioned after college. The world appears too big a place. Rather than fight the relentless indifference of the universe, many of my saner peers retreated to tending their small gardens. The higher one’s IQ, the more pessimistic one became about free-market politics — capitalism simply is not that popular with the crowd. Among the smartest conservatives, this pessimism often manifested in heroic drinking; the smartest libertarians, by contrast, had fewer hang-ups about positive law and escaped not only to alcohol but beyond it.

As one fast-forwards to 2009, the prospects for a libertarian politics appear grim indeed. Exhibit A is a financial crisis caused by too much debt and leverage, facilitated by a government that insured against all sorts of moral hazards — and we know that the response to this crisis involves way more debt and leverage, and way more government. Those who have argued for free markets have been screaming into a hurricane. The events of recent months shatter any remaining hopes of politically minded libertarians. For those of us who are libertarian in 2009, our education culminates with the knowledge that the broader education of the body politic has become a fool’s errand.

Indeed, even more pessimistically, the trend has been going the wrong way for a long time. To return to finance, the last economic depression in the United States that did not result in massive government intervention was the collapse of 1920–21. It was sharp but short, and entailed the sort of Schumpeterian “creative destruction” that could lead to a real boom. The decade that followed — the roaring 1920s — was so strong that historians have forgotten the depression that started it. The 1920s were the last decade in American history during which one could be genuinely optimistic about politics. Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians — have rendered the notion of “capitalist democracy” into an oxymoron.

In the face of these realities, one would despair if one limited one’s horizon to the world of politics. I do not despair because I no longer believe that politics encompasses all possible futures of our world. In our time, the great task for libertarians is to find an escape from politics in all its forms — from the totalitarian and fundamentalist catastrophes to the unthinking demos that guides so-called “social democracy.”

The critical question then becomes one of means, of how to escape not via politics but beyond it. Because there are no truly free places left in our world, I suspect that the mode for escape must involve some sort of new and hitherto untried process that leads us to some undiscovered country; and for this reason I have focused my efforts on new technologies that may create a new space for freedom. Let me briefly speak to three such technological frontiers:

(1) Cyberspace. As an entrepreneur and investor, I have focused my efforts on the Internet. In the late 1990s, the founding vision of PayPal centered on the creation of a new world currency, free from all government control and dilution — the end of monetary sovereignty, as it were. In the 2000s, companies like Facebook create the space for new modes of dissent and new ways to form communities not bounded by historical nation-states. By starting a new Internet business, an entrepreneur may create a new world. The hope of the Internet is that these new worlds will impact and force change on the existing social and political order. The limitation of the Internet is that these new worlds are virtual and that any escape may be more imaginary than real. The open question, which will not be resolved for many years, centers on which of these accounts of the Internet proves true.

(2) Outer space. Because the vast reaches of outer space represent a limitless frontier, they also represent a limitless possibility for escape from world politics. But the final frontier still has a barrier to entry: Rocket technologies have seen only modest advances since the 1960s, so that outer space still remains almost impossibly far away. We must redouble the efforts to commercialize space, but we also must be realistic about the time horizons involved. The libertarian future of classic science fiction, à la Heinlein, will not happen before the second half of the 21st century.

(3) Seasteading. Between cyberspace and outer space lies the possibility of settling the oceans. To my mind, the questions about whether people will live there (answer: enough will) are secondary to the questions about whether seasteading technology is imminent. From my vantage point, the technology involved is more tentative than the Internet, but much more realistic than space travel. We may have reached the stage at which it is economically feasible, or where it soon will be feasible. It is a realistic risk, and for this reason I eagerly support this initiative.

The future of technology is not pre-determined, and we must resist the temptation of technological utopianism — the notion that technology has a momentum or will of its own, that it will guarantee a more free future, and therefore that we can ignore the terrible arc of the political in our world.

A better metaphor is that we are in a deadly race between politics and technology. The future will be much better or much worse, but the question of the future remains very open indeed. We do not know exactly how close this race is, but I suspect that it may be very close, even down to the wire. Unlike the world of politics, in the world of technology the choices of individuals may still be paramount. The fate of our world may depend on the effort of a single person who builds or propagates the machinery of freedom that makes the world safe for capitalism.

For this reason, all of us must wish Patri Friedman the very best in his extraordinary experiment.

(Emphasis added)

Dreamhunter #fundie historum.com

[ on the ethics of drugging someone into "loving" you against their will ]

They say anything goes in love and war, or something like that.

Let's say that 'fake' love gave rise to a child. And that child is a happy child, and made both parents happy, cemented their love further, so to speak. What then?

You can't go back in time and undo it all, can ya? Even if ya thought it was unethical in the first place, breaking up what is now an idyllic family would be equally, if not even more, unethical.
But suppose, just suppose, you were one of the parents in that family, the one who used the potion specifically, would you now still be spending your nights wallowing in guilt? Or would you be focusing on the happy present, and let bygones be bygones?