Similar posts

Tim Dukeman #fundie afellowtruthseeker.blogspot.com

[All emphases are in the original except for the underlining, which is used to clarify a quote]

If you haven't heard yet, World Vision has changed its hiring policy to allow individuals in legally-recognized same-sex marriages.

...

...World Vision has declared that a person can live openly, proudly, and unrepentantly in a lifestyle that the Bible calls "unnatural," "detestable," and "an abomination" and still be a Christian. Which is the exact opposite of what the Bible says:

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (1 Corinthians 6)

Don't miss the beautiful picture of the Gospel in these verses. Before Christ, we were caught in all kinds of sins that would keep us out of the Kingdom of God. But we have been washed, sanctified, and justified! We are not the same! We have been forever changed by the precious blood of the Lamb of God. In contrast, World Vision teaches that we can enter the Kingdom of God without being washed, sanctified, and justified, settling on a gospel that literally sends people to Hell.

Consequently, World Vision is no longer a Christian organization. It seems clear that Christian people should support Christian organizations over non-Christian organizations that do the same work. For contrast, let's examine this statement by Samaritan's Purse President Franklin Graham:

I was shocked today to hear of World Vision’s decision to hire employees in same-sex marriages. The Bible is clear that marriage is between a man and a woman. My dear friend, Bob Pierce, the founder of World Vision and Samaritan’s Purse, would be heartbroken. He was an evangelist who believed in the inspired Word of God. World Vision maintains that their decision is based on unifying the church – which I find offensive – as if supporting sin and sinful behavior can unite the church. From the Old Testament to the New Testament, the Scriptures consistently teach that marriage is between a man and woman and any other marriage relationship is sin.

The call to help the poor is an important one, and we must take seriously the biblical commands to do so. However, there is no reason to partner with the workers of darkness. The Bible is very clear on this point. In II Chronicles 20, The LORD sent a prophet to rebuke Jehoshaphat (king of Judah) for joining with Ahaziah (wicked king of Israel) to build ships. That's it. And if God cares about our associations when we partner with someone to build ships, how much more does God care about our associations when we do His work in His Name? This is what the Holy Spirit says:

Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God. (II Corinthians 6)

For Conscientious Christians, the Boycott of World Vision starts today. We must not allow World Vision to proclaim a false gospel with our money. We must not support World Vision over Christian charities. We must not fellowship with darkness. We must not allow Christian Love to be mutilated, and Christian Compassion to be shipwrecked.

If World Vision wants to send people to Hell in the name of humanitarianism, they can do it on someone else's dime.

Old Man Montgomery #fundie oldmanmontgomery.wordpress.com

[=Authors Note: For the sake of trimming, some of the Bible verses in the original page have been removed=]

From the website of ‘johnshore.com’

These were published and dated December 16, 2010. I have only recently become aware of this ‘movement’ via Facebook. (One never knows what one will find there.) These are referred to as the “Sixteen Tenets of ‘unfundamentalist Christians’ , known also or previously known as ‘ThruWay Christians’. Being the old-fashioned, hard-nosed Bible thumper that I am, I disagree with some facets of this and the conclusions of the entirety.

Of course I have reasons and those reasons are published below. Just for convenience, I numbered the statements, replacing what appeared in my copy as a paragraph ‘dot’.

Just for the record, as the article was dated December 16, 2010, it is entirely possible Mr. Shore has completely changed his mind and recanted this whole document. On the other hand, I just checked Mr. Shore’s last blog entry and he’s still pitching the “UnFund” theme.

Caution: If the reader is not a Christian believer, much of this discussion will seem pointless. Feel free to read on, but if you’re confused, don’t worry, it happens to lots of folks.

Here beings the tenets:

1. Jesus Christ was God incarnate. He performed miracles; as a means of providing for the irrevocable reconciliation of humankind to God he sacrificed himself on the cross; he rose from the dead; he left behind for the benefit of all people the totality of himself in the form of the indwelling Holy Spirit.

So far, I’m in agreement. Jesus is God incarnate; the ‘Son’ who is God Himself. Jesus was executed and killed (no alternatives) on a Roman cross under Roman law. Jesus’ death was the final sacrifice needed to atone for the sin of all people who appeal to Him for forgiveness. Jesus rose from the dead on the third day showing Himself to be God and giving a promise to all of an Eternal life in Heaven with Him. He sent the Third Person of the Godhead, the ‘Holy Spirit’ to believers after His ascension.

2. Christ and Christianity are meant to be understood, appreciated, and experienced as galvanizing inspirations for living a life of love, compassion, fairness, peace, and humility. Period.

Now we’re disagreeing. The primary purpose and function of Christianity is to repair the breach between God and mankind due to mankind’s rebellion and disobedience. Being forgiven by Jesus and redeemed by His sacrifice, mankind can have a direct and proper relationship with God. The qualities of love, compassion, fairness, peace and humility are by-products of that proper relationship, not the primary aim.

Am I splitting hairs here? Not as much as one might think; the matter becomes clearer as we proceed.

3. The Bible is a collection of a great many separate documents written by different people in different languages over thousands of years. Properly understanding both the letter and spirit of the Bible necessarily entails taking into account the historical and cultural contexts that so greatly inform so much of its text. The size, density, history and complexity of the Bible render unfeasible the idea that not one of its words reflects more man’s will than God’s. The spirit of God is inerrant; people—even those impassioned by the conviction that God is speaking directly to or through them—are not.

The one starts out well and descends into heresy. The Bible was written over a period of approximately 1500 years. The Books of Moses, the Torah – sometimes Pentateuch, was written in the period between the Exodus from Egypt, around 1400 B. C. to the time of the Babylonian Captivity, around 600 to 530 B. C. (give or take a decade or so.) The book of Revelation, written by John the Apostle was written around 90 A. D. The rest was written somewhere in between, with the possible exception of Job. Job was one of the earliest sections written and may predate Moses. The Bible was assuredly written by at least forty different authors. (For instance, the books of Judges, Kings and Chronicles were written over periods of time and one author could not have written them all; they require accounts from events several hundred years apart. The Torah was more than likely written by a number of scribes with Moses or a later, Babylonian scholar as ‘editor’ and having final input. Genesis is obviously based on oral traditions of the Israelite nation.) The books reflect social conventions and cultural coloring of the times involved.

However, it is the message of Almighty God to humanity. No matter how much a human can foul up, the integrity of the message is based on God’s ability to ensure His message is properly passed on. No human can foul up or outright lie good enough to defeat God’s purpose. So as much as mankind wrote the words on paper (papyrus or whatever), the ‘Word’ (Greek ‘logos’, meaning idea, identity or concept) is that of God. As such, it is inerrant in message.

The idea of the Bible being ‘written by man and therefore possibly distorted’ is an old heresy. It was argued about in the earliest councils trying to settle on the ‘Bible’ and is the basis for several cults who claim to be Christian, but rely on teachings of extra Biblical origin. The heresy also finds much favor among those who wish to discredit any one particular facet of Christian doctrine. Under any version, the idea the Bible isn’t correct means either God really doesn’t care about the message or God is incapable of protecting His own plan. Christians cannot in good faith (no pun intended) accept either alternative.

4. Anyone seeking to mix church and state has failed to understand the nature and proper role of either. Belief that all people are created equal and are deserving of equal protection under the law is foundational to all modern democratic nations. To incorporate the inherently exclusionary imperatives of a particular religion into the determinedly inclusive system of democracy would be to undermine the very spirit of democracy by pushing it toward a theocracy.

This is a pretty silly statement and is highly ignorant of history. The ‘foundational’ belief of people being created equal and deserving equal protection under law is uniquely derived from the Judeo-Christian tradition. It is not found in Islam, Confucianism, Buddhism, Hinduism or any of the other ‘religions’ of the world. It is Christianity that fostered Democracy, not Democracy that fostered Christianity.

Additionally, it was Christian believers and supporters who founded the United States as a nation with no state religion. The United States was not founded as a ‘Christian nation’, but was indeed begun as a ‘nation of Christians’. To pretend otherwise is to ignore history and to invite serious question as to the point of the discussion. One must also note that all movements to ‘remove’ the influence of Christianity from the United States and civil laws result in the promotion of either Secular Humanism or Islam.

There are no moral vacuums.

5. It’s not possible to read Paul’s New Testament writings and remain unmoved by his open heart, intellectual prowess, and staggering bravery. And yet Paul (who, after all, spent years zealously persecuting and having executed untold numbers of Christians) must remain to us a mortal man. More than reasonable, it is incumbent upon those who claim to seek the deepest knowledge of Christ to subject the words of Paul to the same kinds of objective analysis we would the words of any man daring to describe the qualities, purposes, and desires of God.

This is a gentle, lofty and seemingly reasonable attempt to undermine the message presented by God through Paul the Apostle. What this statement does is deny the Divine inspiration and authorship of the Bible as a whole. It returns to the fore in a moment with more of the ‘villify Paul’ agenda.

6. With regards to the written identity of God, the pronoun “he” is a necessity of the English language, not an actual anatomical designation. God is neither male nor female; God contains all of both.

Again, agreement. In Hebrew, just as in English, the male pronoun unless specifically intended refers to both male and female. Jesus says (John 4:23 and 24)“But a time is coming – and now is here – when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such people to be his worshipers. God is spirit, and the people who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” Also one notes in Genesis (chapter one, verses 26 and 27)
“Then God said, “Let us make humankind in our image, after our likeness, so they may rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move on the earth.”
God created humankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them,
male and female he created them.

So, both male and female were (still are, more or less, being distorted from the original model by mankind’s disobedience) created in God’s image; which manifestly means not a physical image, but a mental and spiritual image.

7. The Biblical scholarship supporting the idea that Paul never wrote a word proscribing natural homosexuality is at least as credible and persuasive as the scholarship (if not typical Bible translations) claiming that he did. Any person who uses the words of Paul in the New Testament to “prove” that homosexuality is a sin against God has either never themselves researched the matter, or has simply chosen to believe one set of equal proofs over another. Though laziness is easily enough understood, we remain mystified as to why anyone who purports to follow Jesus would choose to condemn an entire population over choosing to obey Jesus’ self-proclaimed Greatest Commandment to love one’s neighbor as one loves oneself.

Here’s the follow up to point 5. Once Paul is ‘questionable’, the condemnation of homosexuality can be dismissed as a personal quirk, or possibly an outright error on the part of Christianity (on the whole).

Here’s the premise of the tenet: Paul either really didn’t mean what he wrote about the practice of homosexuality despite what is clearly written in the original Greek manuscripts and all subsequent translations of the Bible, or Paul was mistaken and therefore not inspired by God. What an amazing statement.

Either God inspired and authored the Bible or not. If one chooses to deny God’s inspiration in part, then the whole becomes suspect. If God was lax in allowing Paul to write and publish errors, then what of the rest of the Bible is trustworthy? Conversely, if God did in fact inspire and author the Bible, then Paul’s writing is equally trustworthy.

Leviticus 18
This entire section (several chapters) deals with sexual sins and prohibitions. In part (I have inserted whole paragraphs to present an in context view):
19 You must not approach a woman in her menstrual impurity to have sexual intercourse with her. 20 You must not have sexual intercourse with the wife of your fellow citizen to become unclean with her. 21 You must not give any of your children as an offering to Molech, so that you do not profane the name of your God. I am the Lord! 22 You must not have sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman; it is a detestable act. 23 You must not have sexual intercourse with any animal to become defiled with it, and a woman must not stand before an animal to have sexual intercourse with it; it is a perversion.
Leviticus 20
9 “‘If anyone curses his father and mother he must be put to death. He has cursed his
father and mother; his blood guilt is on himself. 10 If a man commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death. 11 If a man has sexual intercourse with his father’s wife, he has exposed his father’s nakedness. Both of them must be put to death; their blood guilt is on themselves. 12 If a man has sexual intercourse with his daughter-in-law, both of them must be put to death. They have committed perversion; their blood guilt is on themselves. 13 If a man has sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman, the two of them have committed an abomination. They must be put to death; their blood guilt is on themselves. 14 If a man has sexual intercourse with both a woman and her mother, it is lewdness. Both he and they must be burned to death, so there is no lewdness in your midst. 15 If a man has sexual intercourse with any animal, he must be put to death, and you must kill the animal. 16 If a woman approaches any animal to have sexual intercourse with it, you must kill the woman, and the animal must be put to death; their blood guilt is on themselves.

These two passages are from the Torah, the first five books of the Old Testament. One can argue these are part of the Jewish or Mosaic Law and are therefore obsolete; in that case, general adultery, incest and bestiality are also permitted along with homosexual conduct. Or is that the point?

First Timothy 1 (written by that suspect Paul fellow)

8 But we know that the law is good if someone uses it legitimately, 9 realizing that law is not intended for a righteous person, but for lawless and rebellious people, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 sexually immoral people, practicing homosexuals, kidnappers, liars, perjurers – in fact, for any who live contrary to sound teaching. 11 This accords with the glorious gospel of the blessed God that was entrusted to me.

There is a note on the phrase ‘practicing homosexuals’ in verse 10 from the NET Bible: “…this term… ??se?????t?? states, “a male who engages in sexual activity w. a pers. of his own sex, pederast 1 Cor 6:9…of one who assumes the dominant role in same-sex activity, opp. µa?a???…1 Ti 1:10; Pol 5:3. Cp. Ro 1:27.” L&N 88.280 states, “a male partner in homosexual intercourse – ‘homosexual.’…It is possible that ??se?????t?? in certain contexts refers to the active male partner in homosexual intercourse in contrast with µa?a???, the passive male partner” (cf. 1 Cor 6:9). Since there is a distinction in contemporary usage between sexual orientation and actual behavior, the qualification “practicing” was supplied in the translation…”

First Corinthians 6 (also written by that questionable Paul)
9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers will not inherit the kingdom of God. 11 Some of you once lived this way. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

This last passage strikes me an illuminating. Homosexuals are included in a list of sin categories which include heterosexual sexual sinners, idolaters, adulterers (distinct from ‘sexually immoral heterosexuals), thieves, greedy, drunkards, verbally abusive and swindlers. The phrase ‘verbally abusive’ is rather interesting. The NIV translates it as ‘slanderers’; I think ‘gossips’ might easily fit into the meaning. At any rate, people who say nasty things about others are lumped in with murderers, thieves and the sexually immoral (of any type).

The last verse in the paragraph implies a change of life in those reading the letter. “Some of you … lived… But you were washed… sanctified… justified…” So they were not just forgiven and allowed to continue; they changed their values and life-styles. The same implication applies to the sexually impure; they don’t do that sort of thing anymore; they avoid that sort of thing; they are ashamed of and denounce their own past behavior.

Therefore, the Old Testament writings prohibited homosexual conduct as does the writings of Paul, therefore the New Testament. The words used really do mean homosexual conduct and not just the generic ‘sexual misconduct’.

I’m really curious about the ‘equal scholarship’ which demonstrates what the Bible says isn’t what it means. I’d like to examine the line of thought and arguments.

The statement “…Jesus’ self-proclaimed Greatest Commandment to love one’s neighbor as one loves oneself” is incorrect and sloppy scholarship.

Matthew 22:
35 And one of them, an expert in religious law, asked him a question to test him: 36 “Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?” 37 Jesus 44 said to him, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment.

This tenet goes past ‘unfundamentalism’ and is squarely non-Christian.

8. It is much more reasonable—and certainly more compassionate—to hold that throughout history God chose to introduce himself in different ways into different cultural streams than it is to believe that there is only one correct way to understand and worship God, and that the punishment for anyone who chooses any but that way is to spend all of eternity having the living flesh seared off of his or her bones.

More reasonable? By who’s standard? As a Christian, the only viewpoint that counts is God’s viewpoint. That ‘viewpoint’ is expressed in the Bible, which is – as noted prior – God’s message to humanity.

More compassionate? To whom? Not to mention under what definition of ‘compassion’? I find no compassion in patting someone in error on the head and say comforting words while allowing them to remain in error at the risk of Eternal Death.

So let’s go along with the idea of God introducing Himself into different cultural streams in different ways. Why would introduce Himself in a totally different manner if He’s the same, Eternal God? For instance, in the sub-continent which is now India, why would God decide not to be the Eternal God of Creation of the Jewish people, but instead be represented by a pantheon of conflicting gods which change over time? Why would Almighty God manifest Himself as the volcano god, demanding virgin sacrifices? Would God happily change Himself into the Great Green Arkleseizure of Viltvodle VI?

Is He still God? Is He bored and just experimenting? Can He not remember who He is, from epoch to epoch?

The idea appeals to the ‘open-minded’ who have no ideas about who God is, or what He should be or do. The concept flies in the face of the ultimate creator of the Universe and all things that exist, who is Eternal and changeless, who is omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent. In other words, God.

Again, not just ‘unfundamentalist’, but not very good thinking and doctrinally non Christian.

9. “No one comes to the Father except through me” does not mean that in the afterlife only Christians can get into heaven. It means that Jesus/God decides who does and doesn’t make it in.

From this one is forced to believe Jesus will not judge between those who accept Him and those who don’t, but instead will judge by ad hoc rules of ‘good behavior’. I say ‘ad hoc’ because no such rules are outlined in the Bible.

All that stuff about believing in the Son and relying on Him in tenet 1 are out the window, then? It is good deeds that really make the difference?

This heresy is remarkably old as well. It predates Christianity, in fact.

Jesus mentioned this concept in Matthew Seven, starting with verse 15:
15 “Watch out for false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are voracious wolves. 16 You will recognize them by their fruit. Grapes are not gathered from thorns or figs from thistles, are they? 17 In the same way, every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree is not able to bear bad fruit, nor a bad tree to bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 So then, you will recognize them by their fruit.
21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the kingdom of heaven – only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. 22 On that day, many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, didn’t we prophesy in your name, and in your name cast out demons and do many powerful deeds?’ 23 Then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you. Go away from me, you lawbreakers!’
24 “Everyone who hears these words of mine and does them is like a wise man who built his house on rock. 25 The rain fell, the flood came, and the winds beat against that house, but it did not collapse because it had been founded on rock. 26 Everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27 The rain fell, the flood came, and the winds beat against that house, and it collapsed; it was utterly destroyed!”
So then, what about “… the one who does the will of my Father in heaven…”? John 15, starting with verse nine makes it clear:
9 “Just as the Father has loved me, I have also loved you; remain in my love. 10 If you obey my commandments, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father’s commandments and remain in his love. 11 I have told you these things so that my joy may be in you, and your joy may be complete.”

Nowhere in the Bible, nowhere in the quotations of Jesus, nowhere in the letters of the various apostles and elders in Jerusalem is any such doctrine mentioned or taught. In one setting (John 10:14-18), Jesus says,
14 “I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me – 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father – and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16 I have other sheep that do not come from this sheepfold. I must bring them too, and they will listen to my voice, so that there will be one flock and one shepherd. 17 This is why the Father loves me – because I lay down my life, so that I may take it back again. 18 No one takes it away from me, but I lay it down of my own free will. I have the authority to lay it down, and I have the authority to take it back again. This commandment I received from my Father.”

Verse 16 is often used to ‘prove’ the heresy of various versions of God and or Jesus running about in human history, showing up in various forms and guises. One fellow seriously suggested it could indicate the existence of extra-terrestrial life. Actually, the statement simply indicates non-Jewish people were included. That’s all.

I personally don’t have any problem with extra-terrestrial life, or any of them being in Heaven. But it will be on the basis of an individual relationship with Jesus Christ.

I am also firmly convinced all the inhabitants of planet Earth will have adequate notice of the person and Deity of Jesus Christ. God is not the sort of being who looks for tiny excuses and ‘foot-faults’ to disqualify anyone from Heaven.

10. The question of whether or not hell is real is properly subsumed by the truth that a moment spent worrying if you’ll be with God in the afterlife is an opportunity missed to be with God in this life.

I agree. There is no point of wondering, let alone worrying, if Hell is real. Jesus talks about it too much to be in doubt. It isn’t pleasant, but it’s there. One is obliged to take note and do something to avoid residence.

11. God’s will and intention is to forgive and teach us, not to judge and punish us.

That is true, but only to a qualified extent. Jesus came to Earth as a mortal man to tell us what to do to avoid Eternal punishment and die in our place to pay the price for our sin. Obviously, God the Father was in on this plan as was the Holy Spirit.

God really does not want anyone to spend Eternity in Hell. However, since all mankind is in the default position of being in rebellion against God, mankind is by default condemned to Eternal Hell.

The words of Jesus in John, chapter three:
16 For this is the way God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world should be saved through him. 18 The one who believes in him is not condemned. The one who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God. 19 Now this is the basis for judging: that the light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone who does evil deeds hates the light and does not come to the light, so that their deeds will not be exposed. 21 But the one who practices the truth comes to the light, so that it may be plainly evident that his deeds have been done in God.
God is loving and concerned. God is simultaneously honest and just. God is God and that means – in a long list of other things – He will always conduct Himself as God and be true to His own nature.

There are also a number of references warning that when Jesus returns – ‘The Second Coming’ – He will in fact judge all people according to their alliances.

12. The only person who should be actively endeavoring to convert non-Christians into Christians is God. Jesus does not need our help drawing people towards him. He does need, or could certainly use, our help in making sure that people know that they are, just as they are, loved.

This statement directly contradicts the command of Jesus.

Matthew 28:16-20
16 So the eleven disciples went to Galilee to the mountain Jesus had designated. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him, but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came up and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age

Acts 1
6 So when they had gathered together, they began to ask him, “Lord, is this the time when you are restoring the kingdom to Israel?” 7 He told them, “You are not permitted to know the times or periods that the Father has set by his own authority. 8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the farthest parts of the earth.” 9 After he had said this, while they were watching, he was lifted up and a cloud hid him from their sight.

First Peter 3
15 But set Christ apart as Lord in your hearts and always be ready to give an answer to anyone who asks about the hope you possess. (“Hope” here meaning the expectation of Eternal life with God.)

So in this statement again, the concept is not ‘un-fundamentalist’ but ‘un-Christian’.

13. Getting a divorce is painful, and if at all possible should certainly be avoided. But ultimately the act in and of itself is not immoral.

This statement flatly contradicts Jesus’ teaching on the subject.

Matthew 5
31 “It was said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife must give her a legal document.’ 32 But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

Matthew 19
3 Then some Pharisees came to him in order to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful to divorce a wife for any cause?” 4 He answered, “Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and will be united with his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” 7 They said to him, “Why then did Moses command us to give a certificate of dismissal and to divorce her?” 8 Jesus said to them, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because of your hard hearts, but from the beginning it was not this way. 9 Now I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another commits adultery.” 10 The disciples said to him, “If this is the case of a husband with a wife, it is better not to marry!”11 He said to them, “Not everyone can accept this statement, except those to whom it has been given. 12 For there are some eunuchs who were that way from birth, and some who were made eunuchs by others, and some who became eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who is able to accept this should accept it.”

So yes, Jesus said divorce is an immoral act, save for the cause of adultery. Even then, the divorced man or woman is limited in options.

14. God does not want any woman “submitting” to anyone.

Another direct contradiction of Biblical teaching.

Ephesians 5
22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord, 23 because the husband is the head of the wife as also Christ is the head of the church – he himself being the savior of the body. 24 But as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. 25 Husbands, love your wives just as Christ loved the church and gave himself for her 26 to sanctify her by cleansing her with the washing of the water by the word, 27 so that he may present the church to himself as glorious – not having a stain or wrinkle, or any such blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In the same way husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.

Colossians 3
18 Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. 19 Husbands, love your wives and do not be embittered against them.

Oh, wait! That’s that questionable Paul again! Since Paul is so very questionable, we can ignore much of his writings – especially the parts about moral conduct, sexual misconduct and general carryings-on.

First Peter 3
1 In the same way, wives, be subject to your own husbands. Then, even if some are disobedient to the word, they will be won over without a word by the way you live, 2 when they see your pure and reverent conduct… like Sarah who obeyed Abraham, calling him lord. You become her children when you do what is good and have no fear in doing so. 7 Husbands, in the same way, treat your wives with consideration as the weaker partners and show them honor as fellow heirs of the grace of life. In this way nothing will hinder your prayers.

That’s the summation of Peter the Apostle. He agrees with Paul the suspect.

15. There were no dinosaurs on Noah’s ark; Jesus didn’t have a pet stegosaurus. An all-powerful God and the theory of evolution are not incompatible.

Whooop! Whooop! Whooop! Strawman Alert!
So, just where do we find claims of dinosaurs on Noah’s Ark? Which gospel contains the story of Jesus and His pet stegosaurus? What kind of hairball ploy is this?

Okay, “An all-powerful God and the theory of evolution are not incompatible.” That part is reasonable enough. However, this isn’t a matter of doctrinal distinction; it’s a matter of textual examination.

Dinosaurs on the Ark? Sheesh.

16. The single most telling indicator of a person’s moral character has nothing to do with how they define or worship God, and everything to do with how they treat others.

So, a relationship with God isn’t important; what is important is ‘good deeds’.

Actually, this is a deceptive argument; somewhat strawman in nature. I’ll agree one’s ‘moral character’ is not always dependent on how one defines or worships God. However, one’s moral character has nothing to do with one’s Eternal estate, being in a proper relationship with God and spending Eternity with God in Heaven.

One can be a rotten skunk and be bound for Heaven, or a very decent, clean, honest and honorable person going to Hell.

I know for a fact that my moral character was – for that matter ‘is’ – not always as good and shining as it ought to be. After becoming a Christian, I have sinned grievously, often and cheerfully. But my eternal destination is already secure and in Jesus’ care. As far as God is concerned in Judgment, I am as pure as Jesus.

Which is not to say I’m content in my life that way, or at peace with God. I found I was a jittery, angry, depressed, unsettled maniac; at least some combination of two or three of those. I can hide it well, but it’s there and I am very aware of it.

What happens is this: God works on me to make me into who – the type of person – He wants me to be, fit for Heaven in Eternity.

To conclude:

“Un-fundamentalists” accept the Deity, Sacrifice, Resurrection and Redemptive nature and power of Jesus Christ. However, they also believe God has appeared in other forms and guises, seemingly revealing other versions of Himself. So Jesus really isn’t uniquely God at all.

“Un-fundamentalists” deny the Divinely Inspired nature of the Bible, strip Paul’s writing of authority and accept homosexual misconduct – and by inference, heterosexual misconduct – as both normal and moral.

“Un-fundamentalists” claim the goal of Christianity is to live a good life; ‘good’ being defined by not offending anyone, getting along with all and ignoring Biblical principles if adherence would cause a row.

“Un-fundamentalists” believe Christians should not vote in accordance with Biblical principles. Nor should laws follow the long held traditions of either Judaism or Christianity.

“Un-fundamentalists” do not assume responsibility for evangelism; in fact, evangelism is discouraged.

“Un-fundamentalists” believe God never criticizes or judges human conduct. They believe there is no Hell. After all, God isn’t going to punish anyone for anything anyway.

All things considered, “Un-fundamentalist Christian” is not a properly descriptive phrase. Citing the serious theological and doctrinal differences between this cult and mainstream Christianity, I would suggest perhaps “Nearly Christian” would be a better description. Since the first tenet does recognize Jesus as God, perhaps “Barely Christian” would do.

Now, I know some bright soul is going to jump on me with the Biblical injunction of “Judge not, lest ye be judged”. The statement comes in Matthew 7, starting with the beginning of the chapter. The whole paragraph reads as follows:

1 “Do not judge so that you will not be judged. 2 For by the standard you judge you will be judged, and the measure you use will be the measure you receive. 3 Why do you see the speck in your brother’s eye, but fail to see the beam of wood in your own? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye,’ while there is a beam in your own? 5 You hypocrite! First remove the beam from your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. 6 Do not give what is holy to dogs or throw your pearls before pigs; otherwise they will trample them under their feet and turn around and tear you to pieces.

This whole speech is addressed at being judgmental of other people in regard to their fitness or standing before God. I am not ‘judging’ any person, but a set of beliefs and how they measure up to Christianity, I am not violating any injunction. Indeed, I am following a warning given by John the Revelator in First John 4:

1 Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to determine if they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses Jesus as the Christ who has come in the flesh is from God, 3 but every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God, and this is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming, and now is already in the world.

So I am testing this ‘spirit’, this claim of revelation of God. I find interesting that tenet 1 claims to recognize Jesus as the Son of God in the Flesh, and then denies Jesus’ Deity in most of the subsequent tenets.

James Wilson #fundie conservapedia.com

Fornication is "sexual intercourse between two persons not married to each other" (also for purposes other than procreation even within marriage)[1] or, more broadly, sex other than with someone you can marry, as with incest or adultery.[2]
The Apostle Paul wrote to the Corinthian church:
“ Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.
Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.[3]

David James #fundie eurofolkradio.com

Cincinnati(SINSINati) Outlaws Quoting The Bible.

Starting Wednesday, quoting the the Bible will officially be illegal in Cincinnati. A new ordinance places a $200 per day fee on any therapist or counselor who uses Christian doctrine to guide their clients.

The law is aimed at abolishing therapies which seek to guide homosexuals, bisexuals and transgenders away from their sinful tendencies, and instead steer them towards a heterosexual, biblically correct lifestyle.

According to the Conservative Post, any counselor using 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 to help those caught in sin could face fines of $73,000 per year.

“Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.” (1 Corinthians 6:9-11)

Many families seek out guidance from Christian-based counselors because they prefer to receive help from someone who is likeminded and shares their deeply-held religious views. The Bible helps those troubled by all sorts of sexual sin, not just homosexuality, but now it will be illegal for anyone in Cincinnati to obtain spiritual guidance for anything from extramarital affairs to premarital sex.

Imagine, just for a moment, that Cincinnati had the audacity to tell Muslims they could not reference the Koran. The media firestorm which would ensue would be unprecedented. The lawsuits which would be brewing might permanently bankrupt the city. But, instead, we have another attack on Christians, with very little backlash.

Share this report if you believe this new law is unconstitutional and must be repealed!

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is the beginning attempt to enforce the Noahide Laws passed by Daddy Bush the Jew traitor. These are not the laws of Moses by any means. We will soon see what these Jews are trying to pull.

After viewing some of this movie, I have a few comments to make. The Rabbis make a pretense to care for the other families of this world which they hate and abuse. I suggest that they focus on their own people first. The Rabbis claim that we should not blaspheme God, worship idols, kill, lie, steal…etc, but that’s all their people ever do, so, pull the log out of you own eyes first and then you can pretend to want to remove a splinter from the eye’s of the other families of the earth. These Jews pretend that they go by the Pentateuch(The first 5 books of the Bible), but they don’t. This is just for deceptive purposes, giving you the idea that they are God’s chosen people. Many Jews have claimed that Lucifer(Heylel) is their God and it is so… they are the chosen people of the wanna be god of this world. That is the real truth people. Also, here again we see the double standard of the Jews…one set of laws for them and one for the rest of us. When are you people going to wake up and see things as they really are?

So when they speak of us not worshiping idols, they mean Jesus Christ. I will definitely do a show on this soon. Until then, seek ye the truth!

Martin #fundie archbishopcranmer.com

So God doesn't know about sexuality? I think you're referring to your god again. Sexuality simply doesn't exist. Seems to me that if Jesus were talking about divorce then, if 'same sex marriage' existed, it would apply to all marriage. I think He didn't refer to it because it doesn't exist. If you can't consummate the marriage it isn't a true marriage.

Homosexuality is comparable to adultery and paedophilia, it is just a form of sexual sin.

I don't turn away those Jesus welcomes, it is quite clear that homosexual, like thieves and drunkards, are not welcomed.

Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
(I Corinthians 6:9-11 [ESV])

Martin #fundie premier.org.uk

No, Campolo is not an Evangelical, he doesn't consider the Bible is the infallible word of God, nor is Steve Chalke.

Big deal, he's a sociologist. Sociology is sub Christian.

How can the fact that there are babies born now to single parent families be relevant to the number of homosexuals now?

Bad upbringing can be a cause of adult behaviour. Parents know this and good parents make the effort to bring children up properly.

To say that homosexual men don't change is a lie. Indeed Scripture tells us that the change:

Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
(I Corinthians 6:9-11 [ESV]) My emphasis

And no, the Bible doesn't say immediately before the statement that being a homosexual is an abomination to God that touching the skin of a dead pig is an abomination. It comes toward the end of a list of sexual acts that are forbidden. Campolo is lying.

Clearly Campolo is ignoring the fact the the Old Testament has different categories of laws, the moral code which always applies and the ceremonial code that ceased with creation of the Church.

What he describes as a 'gay' boy being bullied sounds like the sort of bullying those experience who are weak and bad at sports, and we only have his word that Roger was 'gay'. And why, if he were, should that make any difference? There are plenty of homosexuals around who appear to be good at sports, I suspect this story is made up.

He gives us the lie that Jesus says nothing about homosexuality, the whole Bible is God's word and Jesus is God, so those passages in Leviticus, Romans and 1 Corinthians are all Jesus' words.

And then he tells us that if we aren't selling all we have and giving to the poor we aren't doing what Jesus commanded, that is ignoring the context. Jesus gave that command to one person only for a specific reason, it wasn't a command to all.

His concept of marriage is flawed. He thinks it is about mutual improvement, yet at the heart of it is the sexual union, something that two persons of the same gender can never have.

Compassion seeks to save the sinner from their sin, treating the homosexual as if they are righteous is not compassion, it is hatred.

John Burton #fundie charismanews.com

Considering the spotlight that homosexuality, transgenderism and various sexual deviances have demanded, we must engage in a conversation about the ramifications such activity—in the church.

In fact, the so called "gay Christian" movement is gaining traction all over the world as is the sanctioning of homosexual marriage in some of the largest denominations.

Unfortunately, immorality has always infected the church. In the book of Revelation we see a severe example of this, and an equally severe reaction by God:

"I know your works, love, service, faith, and your patience, and that your last works are more than the first. But I have a few things against you: You permit that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, to teach and seduce My servants to commit sexual immorality and eat food sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent of her sexual immorality, but she did not repent. Look! I will throw her onto a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation, unless they repent of their deeds. I will put her children to death, and all the churches shall know that I am He who searches the hearts and minds. I will give to each one of you according to your deeds" (Rev. 2:19-23).

The church in Thyatira was on God's radar for their works, love and faith, but also for tolerating sexual immorality in the church.

So many have fallen for an unbiblical definition of true love that is devoid of correction or standards. It feels more like warm, fuzzy, emotional highs and affirmation of people regardless of their lifestyle, which is not biblical love. Love can feel quite repulsive and alienating at times. God is love. He can't avoid it! This God of love, in the above passage, refused to play games with the issue of sexual immorality in the church. His response? Repent or be thrown into great tribulation!

Consider this question: "If you were a pastor and someone who identified as a 'gay Christian' started attending your church, or someone didn't feel it was sinful to have sex with their boyfriend or girlfriend outside of marriage, what would you do?"

People most always respond by saying, "Love them."

OK, but what does that look like? Again, most would say that we should encourage, share the truth with them and pray that they would stay connected in church and eventually see the error of their ways.

This counsel is in contradiction with the Word of God. I asked this question on Facebook just a moment ago, and I'm so proud of my son Skylar who, on a lunch break at work at Silver Dollar City here in Branson, Missouri, responded by typing in: 1 Corinthians 5. He's right:

"It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and such immorality as is not even named among the Gentiles, that a man has his father's wife. But you are arrogant. Instead you should have mourned, so that he who has done this deed might be removed from among you. For indeed, though absent in body but present in spirit, I have already, as if I were present, judged him who has done this deed, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. When you are assembled, along with my spirit, in the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, deliver him to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that the spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord Jesus" (1 Cor. 5:1-5).

This passage also uses a form of the word "tolerate." Sexual immorality is not to be tolerated. Jezebel and the sexual perversion she promotes is not to be tolerated. The demand in today's culture is for tolerance in the midst of sexual perversion. This has crept into the culture of the church and it is time to act.

God is not tolerant. His is longsuffering, but certainly not tolerant of perversion—especially within the church. This is His bride!

What is the loving reaction that leaders must have when unrepentant sexual immorality is discovered in the church? That person is to be removed. He is to be delivered to Satan for the destruction of their flesh—so that his spirit may be saved!

This is love!

Of course, there are significant differences between someone who is struggling with, for example, pornography and someone who indulges in it freely without repentance or any plan to change.

There is also a difference between a professing Christian who refuses to repent of sexual sin and a heathen who refuses to repent. The former is to be removed from the church while the latter should be welcomed with open arms in hopes that they are radically, gloriously saved! And, yes, at that time they will be held to an entirely different standard.

The passage in 1 Corinthians 5 continues:

"Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little yeast leavens the whole batch? Therefore purge out the old yeast, that you may be a new batch, since you are unleavened. For even Christ, our Passover, has been sacrificed for us. Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old yeast, nor with the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. I wrote to you in my letter not to keep company with sexually immoral people. Yet I did not mean the sexually immoral people of this world, or the covetous and extortioners, or the idolaters, since you would then need to go out of the world. But I have written to you not to keep company with any man who is called a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner. Do not even eat with such a person. For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? But God judges those who are outside. Therefore 'put away from among yourselves that wicked person'" (1 Cor. 5:6-13).

If one who calls themselves a brother or sister in Christ are sexually immoral, greedy, idolatrous, a reviler, drunkard or swindler—we can't even sit down at Starbucks with them! We can't invite them over for a barbecue on the Forth of July!

This is love!

If we don't take swift action the entire church will become infected. A little leaven leavens the whole lump.

"And do not let sexual immorality, or any impurity, or greed be named among you, as these are not proper among saints" (Eph. 5:3).

James David Manning #fundie rightwingwatch.org

Harlem’s notorious “stone homos” pastor James David Manning will be spending the 4th of July in Gettysburg with Stewart Rhodes, founder of the right-wing Oath Keepers group.

Naturally, Manning drew on the Civil War theme during his radio ministry on Tuesday, boasting that a group of armed neo-Confederate soldiers will launch a new Civil War in response to the Supreme Court’s marriage equality decision.

“Surely the Confederates and the South will win this time,” Manning said. “You are not going to push this sodomy.”

Manning, who said that he will join these fighters, reported that the neo-Confederates will storm the Supreme Court and the White House, proudly flying the Stars and Bars over the Capitol.

“Now the nation must be rescued from the liberal God-haters and Constitution-haters and those that are pushing this sodomy agenda,” he continued. “America will be rescued and the rescuers will be the Confederates, the Southerners, those that have been the blood-washed, Bible-believing, locked-and-loaded. I’m James David Manning and I want to be one of them. I’m the Lord’s servant. ”

Pastor Ralph Ovadal #fundie pccmonroe.org

Already Christians in many countries are being arrested for preaching what the Bible teaches concerning homosexual acts. In some cases, special tribunals have been set up to punish such individuals. In America, the machinery of tyranny is likewise being put into place.

The purpose of Homo-Fascist Watch is to act as a firebell in the night, alerting and reminding all lovers of true liberty bounded by God's immutable laws of the relentless advance of a form of fascism which tolerates every sort of sexual deviation but no deviation from the party line of a totalitarian, sexually perverse elite. It is not the intention of Pilgrims Covenant Church to provoke mindless hatred or violence against the sodomites. Hatred is a fearful master which destroys its subjects; and those who live by the sword will die by the sword. We urge you to pray for the sodomites with a compassionate heart that those who are not yet reprobate will become adopted into the family of God as forgiven, blood-washed followers of Jesus Christ. Pray for the sodomites, but do not underestimate the ferociousness of their commitment to crush all resistance to their cherished goals and do not neglect your duty to resist such an evil force.

Matt Walsh #fundie theblaze.com

Dear Christians, it doesn’t matter how you feel. It matters what the Bible says.

Jen Hatmaker is a prominent Christian author and speaker. My wife tells me she had a show on HGTV for a while. These days, she’s apparently moved away from renovating homes to renovating Scripture.

That’s a problem, because unlike an old ranch-style house with ugly carpets and 1970’s wallpaper, God’s Holy Word doesn’t need any updates. It’s eternal, unchanging, and always right, no matter how we happen to feel about it.

Christians like Jen Hatmaker would do well to remember this. Especially if they’ve been given, or have claimed for themselves, a position of leadership in the faith. It’s a grave responsibility to be a Christian with an audience. As someone with an audience of my own, I know this well. If we contradict Christian teaching, if we misrepresent Christ’s commandments, if we lead people away from the truth and into the darkness, we have not only put their souls in jeopardy but our own. Christ says it would be better for us to drown in the sea with a stone tied around our necks than to cause someone else to stumble into sin. I believe He meant that quite literally.


That leads us to Hatmaker’s interview with Religion News this week.

When asked about gay “marriage,” Hatmaker declared that homosexuals have the “right” to marry members of the same sex. She said our churches should offer support and instruction to those in gay “marriages.” In other words, she believes that churches should not only accept the abomination of gay “marriage,” but actively facilitate it. When asked if she would attend a gay “wedding,” she said she’d be there with “gladness,” ready to pop the champagne and celebrate their sin with them. She said that if her own child turned out to be gay, she would want him to enter a “faithful, committed marriage” with another man. And, in final act of heresy, she announced that gay sexual relationships are “holy.”

This is the Gospel according to Jen Hatmaker. Many supposed Christians in our culture have a similar Gospel. But it may be useful to pause here and reflect on what the Actual Gospel has to say on the subject. Indeed, we either believe that the Bible is the infallible word of God or we don’t. If we don’t, then we shouldn’t be writing books and giving interviews and going on TV and speaking in front of crowds while waving the “Christian” banner. We should renounce the faith, declare ourselves agnostic or atheist or whatever, and then we’ll be free to promote moral relativism and hedonism all we want. We’ll still be wrong, but at least we’ll no longer be heretics. But if we do actually accept the Bible as the unalterable and eternal truth, then we must make sure that we aren’t publicly contradicting it.

So, for the benefit of those Christians who think Scripture was silent on the issues of marriage and sexuality, here are a few relevant passages:

“Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” – 1 Corinthians 6:9

“For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.” – Romans 1:26

“Now we know that the law is good, if any one uses it lawfully, understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, immoral persons, sodomites, kidnappers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine” – 1 Timothy 1:8

“Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise acted immorally and indulged in unnatural lust, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.” – Jude 7

Hatmaker called gay relationships “holy,” which means divine, while the Apostle Paul called them degrading and unnatural, and promised that anyone who practices homosexuality and does not repent will be barred from the Kingdom of God. As Christians, we are left to ponder who is a greater authority here: The Apostle Paul or the lady from HGTV.

Now, you may struggle with the Biblical teaching on homosexuality, just as you may struggle with any other teaching. You may not understand it. You may find it harsh and difficult and emotionally distressing. But before we even get into explaining why the Bible says what it says, all we really need to establish is that it does say it. Period. We are commanded by God to accept this teaching or risk losing our souls. It’s not an option. We are not required to follow Christ only in the areas where we can find mutual agreement with Him. Our consent and agreement does not matter. At all. Not one tiny bit. We are called to follow regardless. That’s what it means to love God.

If Mrs. Hatmaker finds herself grappling with doubt and uncertainty about this teaching or any other, she should pray about it, consult her pastor, read Scripture, read Christian apologetics on the topic, pray some more and then pray again. She should do all of this in private, speaking only with close Christian friends and mentors who may be able to help her sort through it. But what she should not do — what she absolutely cannot do — is stand in front of the world and declare these teachings moot just because she finds them distasteful. How she feels about them personally is of no consequence. She is not God. Her thoughts and feelings don’t become reality just because they entered into her head.

Obedience is not emphasized in churches very often these days, but it should be. Obedience to God means following Him, standing by Him, affirming His teachings at all times, even when we struggle to understand them. We are commanded to submit to God. Submit. That means give in to His Word and His Law, no matter how it makes us feel.

So, why is gay marriage wrong? Well, first of all, because He said so. I know that reason will not be enough to convince unbelievers outside of the church, but for Christians, if we intend to continue being Christian, it is reason enough. “Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding,” Proverbs reminds us. If you don’t understand why God condemns the homosexual act, that’s because you lack wisdom and insight. It’s not because God is wrong. Don’t rely on your own understanding. Trust God. That’s the fundamental problem with Christians who try to “update” the sexual morality of the Bible: They don’t trust God. They don’t believe Him. And if they don’t believe Him, it’s hard to see how they could really believe in Him.

But if we do want to understand why God has declared the homosexual act a sin — even if the why of God doesn’t matter nearly as much as the what — I would recommend that we do three things:

First, read the first chapter of Genesis. God looked at Adam alone on Earth and decided that he needed a partner. It is not good for man to be alone, He said, so he made Eve. This tells us that men and women were, in a very intimate and profound way, made for each other.

Second, read the early passages in the Gospels. Christ was born of a woman and raised by His mother and His earthly father. We call Jesus, Mary, and Joseph the “Holy Family,” but you might also call them the “correct” or “true” family. If we want to know what a family is supposed to look like — and if all of the Biblical words and commands and teachings on the subject are somehow not enough — then we need only observe the physical, literal demonstration God provided for us. He said, “Here is a family, THE family. Make your families like this one.” How much clearer could He be?

Third, read Matthew 19. Jesus, casting away any lingering doubts, describes a lawful marriage in detail: “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

According to the Son of God, a marriage occurs when a man is united to his wife and the two become one flesh. There you go. There it is. There’s the truth. What part of “man united to his wife” is difficult to understand?

These three passages are especially important because they tell us something about the nature of things. Marriage has a certain nature. It serves a certain function. It does certain things and exists for certain reasons, and those things and those reasons and those functions are all made clear by God and His prophets and Apostles. If we read the Bible, we come to understand that gay “marriage” is not simply immoral, but intrinsically impossible. It doesn’t just defy God’s commandments, it defies logic. Speaking of gay “marriage” is like speaking of “dry water” or “rectangular triangles.” It’s simply incoherent.

Now, there are many aspects of the faith that I find challenging and mysterious. Personally, for me, this isn’t one of them. It all seems quite sensible and utterly consistent with the innate moral intuition that all human beings possess. But even if I couldn’t see the logic in Biblical marriage and even if I couldn’t intuit it based on natural law, it would still be just as true, and I would be called to affirm it and profess it all the same. There are many concepts that my puny little brain can’t seem to wrap itself around, but that’s why I must lean on God’s understanding. Not mine. And certainly not Jen Hatmaker’s.

So I would ask Mrs. Hatmaker what she believes has happened in the last few years that all of a sudden changes the fundamental nature of marriage? What exactly have we learned, in our modern and enlightened state, that even Jesus Christ did not know? What is the truth that we’ve discovered that debunks the truth given to us by God Almighty? Yes, a lot of us have icky feelings about Biblical sexual morality, but feelings aren’t truth.

Of course I’m being a bit flippant. Nothing has happened or can ever happen to debunk or disprove God’s truth. All that can happen is that we, in our weakness and stupidity, become blinded to it. And if we are blind then we should pray to have our eyes opened. But until that happens, all we can do is follow God’s voice in the darkness, wherever it leads. That, we should always remember, is the very essence of faith.

Christopher Gregory #fundie thepropheticnews.com

The sadder aspect of this is how many children will now become influenced by particular wrestling figures, such as one Stone Cold Steve Austin and his ranting in support of gay marriage.

In his latest vulgarity spewed comments, Austin seemed to become defensive by the thought of churches who stood against the concept of gay marriage, not only taking a verbal swing at Christians, he enamored himself even more to families with his vulgarity in his defense of homosexuals. “Everybody’s going crazy about this, and some of the churches say, ‘Oh, no can do, you can’t do that.’ I’m for same-sex marriage. I don’t give a sh** if two guys, two gals, guy-gal, whatever it is, I believe that any human being in America, or any human being in the god**** world that wants to be married, and if it’s the same-sex, more power to ’em….

But Austin wasn’t done yet with his profane ignorance; “OK, so two cats can’t get married if they want to get married, but then a guy can go murder 14 people, molest five kids, then go to f****** prison, and accept God and He’s going to let him into heaven? After the fact that he did all that sh**? See, that’s all horse**** to me, that don’t jive with me.”

This is the same beer drinking, middle-finger pointing, cursing like a sailor wrestler that the WWE (World Wrestling Entertainment) seems to love to promote and one in which the audience seems to embrace. One might think it would be bad parenting to even consider taking a young child to something like a WWE event, but by a simple viewing of late night T.V., it appears many parents have no problem allowing someone like Stone Cold Steve Austin to indoctrinate and educate their children. And yet we wonder why our youth today are drawing further from the faith?

So while Mr. Austin might have no problem with his rabble rousing to satisfy the depths of his sinful heart and mind, allow me to quote the word of God to Mr. Austin (in the rare case he might read this article), it is found in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.“

It would serve Mr. Austin that while he might rule the roost at the moment in his world, God is the ultimate judge and unless he repents, no amount of body slamming or fist gesturing will save his soul in the flames of hell.

Peter Ward #fundie patheos.com

Who do you SAY JESUS IS?

Upon that answer you are saved or damned

You can be a degreed scholar known for quoting the bible and go straight to hell when you die. The devil isn't stupid and loves quoting the bible against believers but he doesn't really believe it either (and by the way the devil is called the "accuser" in the bible, he goes accusing others of wrongdoing no matter how legit or not because he is a liar).

Liberals LOVE critique and NOT facts these days and fool only their own.

Do YOU have a lifestyle of calling someone names no matter how the evidence speaks? Do you assume and call names because a celebrity or leader told you what to think today?

"Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9,10, NASB).

The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God (Gal. 5:19-21).

For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person—such a man is an idolater—has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God’s wrath comes on those who are disobedient. Therefore do not be partners with them (Eph. 5:5-7)."
All of that not SOME but ALL of that message is true. Hear that often in Huffington, Vox, Slate, Salon or Yahoo?

Mr Mann #fundie fstdt.com

Rowenn: Obviously you haven't read the Bible or you wouldn't make such an ignorant statement. God has made His views on homosexuality very clear throughout the Bible. Here is just one verse:

1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

The Word is clear. Unrepentant (practicing) homosexuals who die in their sin, GO TO HELL. They can go to church, they can call themselves a Christian...but if they are practicing homosexuals when they die--they will spend eternity in Hell.

This passage lists a number of sins that offer the same consequences for unrepentance. An unrepentant thief goes straight to hell as well.

BUT, no other sin listed in that passage has a number of followers out to forcibly legalize their sin-calling sin a civil right.

When Jesus stopped the stoning of the adulteress, He told her to, "Go and sin no more." Repentance doesn't mean perfection, or a lack of struggle...The sin must stop! If a gay or lesbian isn't even attempting to stop the sin-They will burn: end of story.

Bottom line, Rowenn: Unrepentant gays and lesbians are gonna burn. This is not a translation issue--its the Word of God.
--If you don't like it, then maybe Christianity is not for you.

Mark Jones #fundie theologyreview.co.uk

In the world of blogging and writing, sometimes you write an article that someone else uses as a springboard to push their opinion. Even going as far as to misquote you to allow for them to use something you’ve said to prop up their position on a particular issue.

This happened recently with an article that I wrote for Theology Review when a local North East political satire blog (read of that what you will) took upon itself to quote mine less than half a quote from our recent article on the situation revolving around Eugene Peterson in July. The situation being around a reported affirmation of gay marriage, and a retraction of Peterson’s statement on the subject.

For more on that please read our article “Getting to Grips With Eugene Peterson’s Statement on Gay Marriage”.

Due to the busyness of the summer, I haven’t been able to spend as much time working on content for Theology Review as I would like. However, last night I logged in to the website to check on a couple of things (not intending to write an article) and came across that the website had been tagged by another website in a blog post. So I went and checked it out, lo and behold, it was an article about homosexuality, where our website was subtly targeted for not being “inclusive” of people of a homosexual persuasion.

So I’ve read the article, and have responded to the article. In this article, I’m going to include my response to the blog and then post some observations about the blog.

Please note that I have removed the name of the author of the blog post at The Northern Jester.

Our Response to The Northern Jester
Hello,

First off, thanks for tagging my post in your article on this subject. It’s always nice to be tagged in a post, as it helps get a little more attention to the site.

However, let me take exception to the comment you made where you said the following:

“Or this article by the Theology Review that’s states how homosexual marriage was “not being pushed down the throats of society in 1997, whereas it is now” in which I don’t want to sound crass but the imagery just writes itself there.”

The first thing to point out here is that you take the quote out of context immediately, as the comment was addressing my observation/assumption to what Eugene Peterson meant by saying the question of whether he affirmed homosexuality or not wouldn’t have even been discussed 20 years ago. Stating that you think that “the imagery just writes itself”, is an indication of your view that this either shouldn’t be discussed or blindly accepted.

The other thing to note in the paragraph I quote you from is that you target an article found on Babylon Bee’s website. I feel as if I should let you know that Babylon Bee is a Christian satire site. So including an article that was written as a joke is not really something that would support your argument here.

It is also worth pointing out that Jesus definitely addressed the homosexual issue, he did this by expressly stating that marriage is to be between one man and one woman only as was established at creation in the garden of Eden (Matthew 19:3-5), also it is quite possible that Jesus references a tradition that was later recorded in the Genesis Rabbah, and is also noted in the Babylonian Talmud, that is that gay marriage was happening at the time of the flood (Genesis Rabbah) and had been outlawed from the time of Noah (Babylonian Talmud). This is found in Matthew 24:36-51 and Luke 17:20-37. Below are the quotes from the Babylonian Talmud and the Genesis Rabbah.

“The generation of the Flood was not blotted out of the world until they had begun writing nuptial hymns for marriages between males or between man and beast.”
Genesis Rabbah 26:5:4

“These are the thirty commandments which the sons of Noah took upon themselves but they observe three of them, namely, (i) they do not draw up a kethubah [marriage contract] document for males, (ii) they do not weigh flesh of the [human] dead in the market, and (iii) they respect the Torah.
Babylonian Talmud, Chullin 92a-b”

So as we can see there is very good reason to believe that Jesus did, in fact, address gay marriage, it just takes a lot of studying of Jewish history, tradition, and Midrash to see that. Personally, it took me a long time of studying the Bible before I came across this, so I encourage you to dig deep into this issue if you really want to have a voice on it.

However, I am not the authority here, God is, so let’s see what God says on the subject. Now because we are under the New Covenant, I’m going to focus on what the New Testament says, as the standard rule of thumb with law is that if it is noted in the New Testament in a context of whatever unlawful deed you’re referring to, still being unlawful, then we can say that in God’s eyes it is still wrong and shouldn’t be done. So here goes:

“Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” – 1 Corinthians 6:9-10

“Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, 10 the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine, in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted.”- 1 Timothy 1:8-11

“For this reason, God gave them up to dishonourable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.” – Romans 1:26-27

Read these passages (this just a sampling from the New Testament by the way), and tell me if any of these suggest that homosexuality and gay marriage is acceptable in God’s eyes. If we’re honest with ourselves, we can’t do that, not without manipulating and twisting scripture. At least with the Jesus argument, all you’re doing is ignoring what Paul said (John also speaks on the issue in Revelation).

As Christian’s our responsibility is to side with God and follow His will and His ways, not the ways that culture wants us to follow in. Now I understand that this will at times be difficult, I mean let’s be honest wouldn’t it just be easier if everyone gets saved if everyone went to heaven. Absolutely it would. But what real glorification of God would there be in that? Very little if we’re honest. God has set the world in His order, and that is the order we are to follow. We are not to try and worm our way around God because we don’t like His rules. That’s frankly an immature way to live. What we need to do is to adjust our position and stand in line with God, easy or not.

In terms of the love aspect, I actually agree with the basic sentiment. As Christian’s we should love everyone, and welcome them in. But truly loving someone does not mean that we affirm their sin, and God clearly defines homosexuality as a sin. It’s no different to adultery, murder, lust, gluttony, or any other sin in God’s eyes. The only difference is how much pop culture is pushing this agenda, when was the last time you saw a rally for polygamy, or Ofsted checking schools performances based on their acceptance of those who desire to commit bestiality. You don’t see either of those things (yet), but the LGBTQA+ agenda is massive, so much so that organisations such as the National Trust have tried to make the endorsement of this compulsory. I’m sure that’s tolerance though, right ??

Anyways, I’ve been on a while now and this comment is getting long. But let me say that I think it’s great that you have a heart and passion for everyone being welcome in God’s house. But with the gay marriage issue, that isn’t really the point. In fact, if you think that is the point, you’re actually missing the point. The real point is that if we’re really going to be godly people, then we can’t just blindly accept what the world tells us to. God is the authority here, not you or I, or pop culture. I know who’s side I’d rather be on.

All the best,
Mark

Paul #fundie premier.org.uk

I'm not a Jew; so I'm ok to eat pork!
It certainly does come down to Biblical interpretation. Through a proper understanding of the Bible we get a picture of who God is; above all He is Holy, Holy, Holy.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11 is one of the clearest verses in the Bible in regards to this issue...
'9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.'
The Christian has been washed clean. They are a new creation. So it is not possible for a true believer to continue in a homosexual relationship if they have been washed clean. Im not saying that desire or attraction goes away, but to blatantly continue in sinful behaviour is not sanctified behaviour. Same sex relationships have no place in the Kingdom of God. (Not my words, but God's)

Stephen #racist aljazeera.com

The Afghan people lack the intelligence and competence to ever become a modern, secular nation state. It is time for the west to stop squandering blood and money in this Islamic hell hole. Quarantine the place and let them eat one another.

hilLIARy #racist fstdt.com

Let’s face it: integration is a complete failure for both Whites and Negroes. Everyone is unhappy with the results. Whites do not want to be anywhere around the Negro. Wealthy whites (liberals) voluntarily segregate from them because they are financially able. Other whites are forced to live among the negro because the government mandated it. Many people at the time of this policy change, knew this was a major mistake. It would not work. Yet they were forced to go along with this plan. Like communism, on paper to some, it seemed like a good idea. In practicality a disaster! Everyone says it in private, but is afraid to say it in public because of the Red Guard of political correctness.

Even the great ‘white liberals’ feel this way. While they give lectures at universities, chit chat at bow tied cocktail parties, write books no one reads about the merits of multiculturalism, diversity and integration, behind the scenes they move into lily white areas, and send their kids to private schools, away from the Negro menace. The poor whites, Asians and others, are stuck and left behind have to pay the consequences of the hypocrisy of the liberal mindset. Their kids do not have a chance in hell to get a good education because of the lowing of scores and being immersed in the garbage culture of rap and hip hop that surrounds them. The Anti-education culture of the negro. They are too young to know the poison this culture is. To some it becomes their reality. They are lost to the world. They become wiggers. On the level of skid row bums.

Without segregation the Negro has sunk even lower. Living without strict rules and regulations set up by the white man, they are unable to cope with modern society. Hence look at their neighborhoods, their crime rates, and their malfunction as functioning members of a civilized society. They have no capacity to govern themselves. This was stated hundreds of years ago by the founding fathers. Nothing has changed!

We must re-segregate. Whites and Asians on one side, and Negroes on the other. I know many liberal whites are thinking: what kind of crazy racist post is this. But deep down you know that a world without the Negro, is a much better place to be. Think of New York with the Negro menace. One variable: the train stations. Think how different they would be without the negro criminal waiting to strike. The crime, the degradation and disintegration of all communities they inhabit would be confined to their areas. There schools are a disaster whenever they are in the majority. Do you want your kids to become wiggers by osmosis learning about African bushboogies? Or do you want your children to become first rate scholars learned in the ideals of Western thought of science and logic. Why do liberals force the poor whites Asians in a world, they have no intention of living themselves! For example: The Clintons had no intention of sending their child to a Washington DC majority black school system. Yes they professed the merits of integration (just not for their child).

Start thinking what is best for you, and your family, not what is best for social engineering plans concocted by people who have no intentions of living themselves!

Plus, for the Negro this would be an ideal situation. You can have a world away from the White man and Asain corner stores, and live any way they want. You can have as much crime, as you like. Illegitimacy can be 100%. Rap can be your national culture. No white man looking over your shoulder shaking their head in disgust. A 75 IQ would be considered a genious. 40% would be a passing grade, Oprah would be the standard of beauty, no white woman to make negresses feel ugly. Free of White supremacy, Asian brain power, and Western thought. Become completely Afrocentric. Act anway you want. Elect 50 cent as your president. Your schools can teach the legends of great Negro dynasties where Christ, Moses, Mozart, Bach, Einstein, Freud, George Washington were Negroes. The Negroes built the pyramids, Europe, China, landed on the moon all the while the white man was living in caves. Teach your kids the negro invented the White man in laboratories. While the white man splits the atom you can split the watermellon. Everthing is equal of merit. Going to jail would give you more pride than going to medical school. You can have the world you desire. It is a win win situation for all.

Have a nice day!

DefiantYoungWhiteMale #racist stormfront.org

Re: We jews are white why cant you accept this?

I hate jews because they've more blood on their hands than any other race. I hate jews because they've turned mainstream media into a carnival of filth, depravity, lies, and brainwashing. I hate jews because they use their Federal Reserve scam to keep my country in perpetual debt while lining their pockets. I hate jews because they push for more third world immigration, more homosexuality, and have used their influence in society to turn it into a decadent hell hole. I hate jews because they lie and tell Whites that negros are our equals. I hate jews because they push to take away guns from law abiding citizens, hoping to render them defenseless against the savage negros and mestizos they've let loose.

I hate jews because they are greedy, subversive, scheming control freaks with no conscience. I hate jews because your feminist hags pollute the minds of our women with anti-male, anti-traditional family propaganda. I hate jews because your Marxist professors teach young White men and women to hate themselves and coddle the darker races. I hate jews because everything you touch turns to filth.

I hate jews because your rabbis are currently pushing for the acceptance of pedophilia, just as they did with homosexuality. I hate jews because they've turned the government of my country into anti-White thieves who encourage businesses to discriminate against Whites and hire non-Whites with financial incentives.

I hate jews because they are pornographers, sex slave traders, and they push multicult agendas in White nations, while demanding a jew-only nation in Israel where all non-jews are given second class treatment. I hate jews because they are usurious scam artists and swindlers. I hate jews because they are very arrogant, as evidenced by your post. I hate jews because they are ignorant, as evidenced in your post. I could go on, but that's enough for now.

It has NOTHING to do with Hitler, who was neither fat, nor old, nor bitter. In fact, jews are known to finance both sides of war, ergo, it was jews who funded Hitler's efforts. It has everything to do with jEWISH BEHAVIOR..you know, the sort of behavior that got you parasites banished over 100 times from various nations. It has nothing to do with Hitler or any other BS you make up in your mind.

You identify as a jew. Therefore you are not White. You are a mongrel. You are a mixture of Asiatic, negroid, and European. You are not racially pure like a White man. White = 100% European origin. You parasites slithered out of the flea markets of the middle east. You can check off whatever box you like, doesn't make you one of us. Your racial makeup and behaviors are far different from that of the altruistic White man. Jews exploit, Whites produce. Big difference.

Also, Einstein, capital E, was a proven plagiarist. Adam Sandler is a foul-mouthed, spoiled little jew boy who lacks creativity and wit, so he has to resort to toilet humor. Jesus was not a jew, how could he be? His teachings are the polar opposite of jewish behavior as he disdained usury, liars, and swindlers.

You come off as smug, ignorant, presumptuous, and arrogant. A typical schoozenite. You are not White..you are a mongrelization of White, Asian, and yes, you have anywhere from 3% to 12% negro blood as well. Deal with it.

What is it exactly that jews do better than Whites? Produce porn? Run usurious debt slavery rings? Sex slave rings? Heroin and ecstasy trafficking? Other organized crime? Fund wars? Destroy nations?

jews produce NOTHING, except for pornography. Otherwise, they just buy and sell, while Whites value labor.

The Big Mick #fundie theblaze.com

What I want is a “How they did it” manual on how The Founders organized a revolution.
And I don’t think we are going to get a TRUE version of the early Son’s of Liberty movement because they broke stuff, burned things down and beat the….stuffing…out of Tyrant Enablers.
We are too deep in our Denial to admit how flat down VIOLENT MEAN and RIGHTLY SO, our Forefathers were.
We don’t want to be righteously enraged and take it OUT on the people who deserve it.
We have self-neutered.
Bottom line, folks, when you are WILLING to beat your Tyrant Enabling Neighbor with a club, about the head and shoulders severely, until he LEAVES the country to AVOID dying, your Sacred Liberties will have a chance to survive.
As long as you remain UNWILLING to physically HURT him you have no chance.
THAT is the lesson of the Founders

Washington, upon hearing the news of Lexington and Concord at Mt. Vernon, wrote to a friend:
“The once happy and peaceful plains of America are now to be either drenched in blood, or inhabited by slaves, sad alternative, but can a Virtuous Man Hesitate in his choice?”
Our Founders KILLED their fellow Citizens for their Sacred Liberty, if you are not willing to do the same you will have none and will have squandered their legacy.

William Rome #racist occidentaldissent.com

Selena Gomez and the Hispanization of America

Pop culture is one of the most powerful forces shaping people today. From teenagers to adults (think of 40-something women trying to be Sex in the City and Desperate Housewives MILFs and cougars), pop culture shapes the way people want themselves and their lives to be. Even more importantly pop culture is both an indicator and shaper of the way the broader culture is going. That is why those across the Right make a grave mistake simply writing it off without engaging it whatsoever.

Working for a local suburban before and after school program at the elementary school in the morning and the middle school in the afternoon was where I noticed this. At the elementary school I was introduced to Dora the Explorer. This Nickelodeon cartoon is easily recognizable as pro-Hispanic legal and illegal immigration propaganda. The creator of the show has admitted as much. More intriguing was what I was introduced to at the middle school: Wizards of Waverly Place. This Disney Channel sitcom is about a family of wizards living on Waverly Place in NYC. Here’s the kicker: they are a mixed family with a white father played by David Deluise and a Hispanic mother played by Marie Canals Barrera. Their children are older brother Justin, middle sister Alex, and youngest son Max. Justin is played by white actor David Henrie. Alex and Max are played by half Hispanic/white Selena Gomez and Jake T. Austin respectively. Both are very Hispanic looking. The thing about this set-up is that there is no mention of the fact that they are a mixed family. There is no Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner moral crusade to legitimize the fact they are a mixed family, it’s simply taken for granted.

Instead the show focuses the adventures and misadventures of the kids as they learn magic from their wizard father and later in wizard school. The obvious Harry Potter inspired scenario works extremely well. The episodes I watched with the kids had (pardon the pun) their own magic. The kids laughed at the jokes and were delighted by the spells. All the creative aspects: jokes, characters, and special effects were what they cared about. Like the creators intended the racially mixed family was taken for granted by them. Moving on to other jobs and activism I forgot about the show.

During this past summer I started watching the show on my own. Selena Gomez is a much bigger pop culture figure than she was when I was introduced to her at the end of 2008. After hearing her single “Who Says” I decided to start watching with an eye more critical from activism. Wizards of Waverly Place’s lack of overt racial politics makes its subtle ones more effective. First off all the white characters are dweebs. The white father keeps up the idiotic father motif so prevalent today. While not as bad as Peter Griffin of Family Guy or Homer Simpson of The Simpsons he is still seemingly dim-witted, clumsy, childish, and goofy. The older white brother Justin is the worst: socially inept, fashionably challenged, a tattle tail, a brown noser, and the butt of all Alex’s jokes. What about the other two kids? Little brother Max has all the typical foibles of a little brother and is for the most part harmless, a comic character but nowhere near the walking laughing stock Justin is. Now we get to the star Selena Gomez. Alex is fashionable, rebellious, often quick-witted, and spoiled (she’s daddy’s little girl). The contrast with Justin couldn’t be more clear: he’s a total loser and she’s so cool. This contrast is also clear with Alex’s best friend Harper played by white actress Jenifer Stone. Harper is the male Justin: she’s unfashionable (despite trying so hard to be), unrebellious (she’s constantly nervous of Alex’s schemes), and studious (unlike the lazy slacker Alex), in other words she’s a dork. Harper also isn’t presented as pretty as Alex with her slightly chubby baby fat. The characters present a picture of whites foolish and Hispanics stylish. But this is tempered by the fact all the characters love and support each other, making all I’ve described subtle and unconscious. Combined with the already mentioned lack of drama about being a mixed family the show effectively normalizes the Hispanization of America for kids today.

One of the most interesting things to come out of the show was in its direct to cable movie that premiered on the Disney Channel a couple months ago. The basic plot is that while on vacation in Hawaii, Alex has a fight with her mom and accidentally cast a spell so her parents never met. Now Justin and Alex must locate a secret cave on the island which contains a stone that cave reverse the spell while Max must keep their parents from meeting other people before the kids disappear (since their parents never met). The subplot of the movie is that a wizard must give up his magic powers in order to fall in love with a mortal. And this is exactly what the white wizard father does to fall in love with the non-wizard Hispanic mother. It is a perfect allegory for what is happening today: white America is giving up what makes it it in for the Hispanization of America.

Beyond Wizards of Waverly Place Selena Gomez symbolizes the Hispanization of America in pop culture in other ways. First off she is being made to represent the new girl next door. With the exception of Taylor Swift, white female pop stars are total whores. Starting with Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera when I was in middle school to Katie Perry and Kesha today, the increasing whoredom of female pop stars is undeniable. Selena Gomez is different. While she is an undeniably pretty and attractive girl, her songs and image is not that of whoredom. They come off as young, lively, and girlie without descending into the snorting coke before getting banged in the bathroom stall image of Kesha. Any parents with standards of decency would rather have their daughter listen to Selena Gomez than the others. White female pop stars symbolize a decadent and dying white America whereas Selena Gomez symbolizes a young and vibrant Hispanic America.

And of course there is her relationship with Justin Bieber. They are the golden couple of teen pop today. In the minds of millions of white girls she managed to get Justin! A Hispanic girl! There must be something cool and beautiful about them! The biggest teen pop couple is a Hispanic/ white one and no one notices. Whereas still to this day black/ white couples can raise eyebrows, people don’t even bat an eyelash at a Hispanic/ white one. Is there any greater pop symbol of the Hispanization of America?

Pop culture is important and must be talked about, especially when it comes to the Hispanization of America. While I don’t think Selena Gomez is a raving La Raza type but a typical teenage girl living dreams of stardom, she is a pop symbol of the Hispanization of America.

CelibatePower #sexist #fundie reddit.com

The destructive power of the feminine force.

Some might think, I am sounding a bit anti-woman. But for the sake of ones own progress in life, hear me out. This is written about extensively by SWAMI SIVANANDA.

I must unserstand that the clarity of all that is Good in consciousness comes from abstaining from the woman. See, I find indulgence in passion, real or imagined leads to degredation.

Then comed the question.."Do I want to be a vessel of Divinity..?".. "Or partake in the indulgence of ego." - For when we partake OF the woman, the seal of spiritual power is sliced, depending on the depth of indulgence.

Good, Bad, I'm the Guy with the Gun.
The "Gun" being - "The Power." - the power is like a cup filled with everlasting life. It is pureed to the tilt. One mis-step can lead a spill in the drop of life. The "Pretty" faces we see in our day to day life can easily cause us to "mis-step" with our cup of everlasting life.

Being overly emotional, or even slightly passionate in the beginning stages of the 'path' can cause a drop in the everlasting life. Mindfulness of our thoughts is paramount. Holding our 'cup' as we traverse forward, getting stronger each day.

Some fools re-joice in the presence of the lady. Their hearts jump when she bats her eyelashes and throws her hair. These same fools who hold their cup of life would give their power away in the blink of an eye.

The womans presence can often have a man question his lifes direction. WHAT is more important to you? Steadfastly focusing with white-lighted intent forever burning into the timeline of life with your purpose?

Or using your power to be given away to a lovers fling? This is the decision we all must make.

Blessed and righteous..
Is he who holds his power and integrity for himself. You cannot fake 'the power' - it is only given and accumulated with time and purpose, mindfulness in the midst of the feminine presence and what not.

Today, a righteousman is few and far between. Bombarded with imagery of concubines the the 'other' life that leads to dependency and misery.

Be the man with the gun. Righteous walk, righteous talk, and righteous intention.

Rise above the woman.
The true nature of man is to lead. Rise above the devils that have taken hold of our minds. Kick down the exhaulted image of woman. The false idol that has been put above us. Destroy that Golden-godess image and walk forward.

Never give the temptress what they want. They are the tools of the devil. Get them out of your way. Let the temptresses that feed off trickery and attention be trampled and bombarded by our boots of righteousness.

Even with the power, we develop the senses of discernment. We discern righteous women who loom youthful and fully of life. Be cautious. Assert domimance and put them to work. They have much to prove in this life.

Walk the path of light. Do not fantasize about romantic notions and bullshit that will tie you down. If a woman cannot be chaste, cannot back your play, or get behind and support you, kick her out of your way. Cast her down to the weak and unrighteous.

Walk your rignteous path of power and achievement. Be free. In the days of old, the women tended the gardens, prepared the food, maintained the household, weaved baskets, and other womanly duties. Such is her place.

The men fought. Killed. Hunted. Built structures and negotiated the deals. And lead the family. Nothing has changed from our primitive instincts other then technology softening the man.

Kick the notion of woman down and become the strength. The blood. The power. The force. Through clear mind, clear will, a chaste heart. Assert domimance once again like the days of old.

Edit:

Some may think i sound incel or anti-woman. I ask you this. Do men share bunks with women in boot-camp? Tyson fury, world champion boxer, did not see his wife for 3 months in preparation for training for his comeback fight.

Some of us have squandered away many years in lust, clouding our judgement from the path. I am not anti-woman. But i feel sometimes sacrafices must be made for the greater good of your progress.

When Rocky was training to fight, he and Adrian started to get hot and heavy. Then he stops her and says "I cant" - "I need everything I got." (Or something along those lines) - So sometimes laser focus is needed to accomplish good things. She backed his play and supported him every step.

This does not mean you have to be an 'incel' (a derogatory remark coined for men trying to improve themself) - what about 'volcel' / voluntarily celibate for a time being to transcend the lower states, and rise above the bullshit?

The sexual / porn haze can leave a man stunted for a while, and even in recovery the day to day interactions can lead him following ego and lust while perusing interactions with the woman. Why not give it a break..?

drkresearch #conspiracy nodisinfo.com

The Islamophobes are at it, once again, perpetrating yet another inane, arch-corrupt hoax, in this case the terminally wretched, fake car and knife attack of Columbus, Ohio. Make no mistake about it this is fake. There can be no other possibility. Moreover, no one can demonstrate otherwise.

Nevertheless, all the imagery proves one issue. This is the fact that this is a drill and nothing else and the fact that this was staged: a mere arch-Zionist-orchestrated psyops. The only guns about, the only actual deadly weapons, are those in the hands of government agents, mere moles and paid elements of the Zionist-controlled world government.

Even so, it is stated as if real, as if actual people were run down and stabbed. The claim is that a blood-thirsty Muslim did it, right, a refugee: an Ohio State University student in addition. Sure, he did it, right. He crashed the car into people and bodies were flying all about, over and under. No one finds such ‘eyewitness’ testimony plausible. Rather, it is obvious from the imagery that there was no actual crash at the site and that, instead, that car, a junk-yard element, was merely off-loaded there.

Notice the props, including the anti-freeze or windshield wiper fluid. Notice, too, the lack of skid marks. How did the car stop? Where is all the damage and/or bloooooddd?

Matt Forney #fundie mattforney.com

If you’re a girl pursuing anything more than a high school degree, you’re in all likelihood wasting your time.

Encouraging girls to go to college and grad school en masse is one of the biggest mistakes America has ever made. The flood of girls into universities is not only in part responsible for the current economic crisis, it’s made it increasingly difficult—if not impossible—for both girls and men to fulfill their natural roles. At the same time higher education has been degraded by so many unqualified girls getting accepted into college, those girls have seen their egos unjustifiably boosted by their degrees, making them unsuitable to be wives and mothers.

In order for society to be cured, this has to be fixed.

Here are my reasons why girls should be discouraged from going to college.
1. Going to college makes girls less attractive.

Girls, in their socially sanctioned solipsism, assume that men are turned on by the same things that they are. Because girls crave high status men, they assume that men similarly find their high status attractive, which couldn’t be further from the truth. No man alive has ever said, “God DAMN, I love the master’s degree on that girl!” It’s usually “God DAMN, she’s got a rack that could stop a runaway train!” or “God DAMN, this girl’s cooking is to die for!”

As a result, four plus years of college more often than not ruins a girl.

For starters, the extended adolescence that is college encourages sluttiness, which wrecks a girl all on its own. All those hunks splooging in her vagina make it more likely that she’ll end up divorcing the man she does end up marrying. Sluts are emotionally broken, incapable of loving and serving men, squandering their gifts of femininity and beauty, constantly trying to trade up for a bigger, better deal that never comes.

Marrying a slut is like paying full price for a beat-up old clunker.

Additionally, college is problematic because it gives girls the illusion of knowledge. Outside of STEM degrees (which are deficient in their own way), few majors actually impart useful information to girls, yet they still think they’re entitled to respect for having the degree; credentialism at its finest. Girls come out of college without being able to cook, sew, balance a checkbook or perform any of the necessary tasks of modern living, yet they still think they’re smart and independent and don’t you dare suggest otherwise. Don’t forget the massive amounts of student loan debt that these girls rack up, which you become in part responsible for if you’re dumb enough to put a ring on it.

Woman is not a learning animal.

The two most fulfilling relationships I’ve ever had were with girls who hadn’t yet graduated from college—one was midway through her degree and the other had not started yet—because they hadn’t had their minds poisoned by the lies of academia. They were fun to be around, girly, and eager to please. They hadn’t had their hearts broken through countless drunken hookups. When I explained something to them that they didn’t understand, they actually listened to me and did what I told them instead of accusing me of “mansplaining.”

If girls are like gold coins, sending them to college is like dunking them in nitric acid.
1a. Girls who go to college are extremely likely to get sexually assaulted.

Given the massive rape epidemic on college campuses, universities are massively unsafe places for girls. As feminists love reminding us, universities are ground zero for rape culture; one in four girls will be raped before the end of her college tenure. Given this information, why would anyone who cares about their daughter’s well-being let her do something as reckless as going to college?

You might as well parachute her into the worst part of Detroit with a “FREE FUCKTOY” sign taped to her back.
2. Most girls major in useless subjects that contribute nothing to the world.

Feminists love bragging about how girls are now earning the majority of college degrees, but they never bring up the fact that the majority of girls’ degrees are worthless in every way. Girls predominantly major in subjects like ethnic studies, women’s studies, English, communications and the like that require no work of any kind and give them no job prospects. As Aaron Clarey shows in this video, the majority of useful (STEM) degrees are still going to men.

What career prospects does a 22-year old girl with a bachelor’s in Arachnid Sexuality have? Dim ones.

If they’re lucky, they’ll end up becoming lawyers, civil servants or HR commissars, careers whose economic and social value is less than zero; those fields exist solely to employ the unemployable and leech off the productive. A select few might hit the jackpot and enter politics, where they can do an even better job of sucking our blood; Clarey showed in his book Worthless that the majority of American politicians have degrees in useless, parasitical subjects like law (Democrats more so than Republicans). But the vast majority of girls will end up living at home when they graduate, struggling to make their monthly student loan payments on a Starbucks salary.

Clearly, slaving away for minimum wage is way more fulfilling than being a wife and mother.

Furthermore, having all these girls “earning” these pointless degrees has lessened the value of a degree period. It’s common knowledge that the rarer something is, the more valuable it is. When our parents were our age, college degrees were uncommon enough that merely having one guaranteed you a good job, and you could secure most jobs with a one-hour interview. Now that everyone and their mother has a degree, employers cross-examine you like you’re on the witness stand, scrutinizing your GPA, your extracurriculars and making you complete stupid questionnaires that analyze how good of a “team player” you are, none of which has any bearing on how well you can do the job.

In their childish quest for “independence,” girls have made it more difficult for everyone—including themselves—to get a good-paying job.
3. Having girls working makes it more difficult for anyone to earn high wages.

It astounds me how so many feminists have absolutely no knowledge of economics. Here’s a hard lesson for you girls: labor is a commodity. And like all other commodities, labor is subject to the laws of supply and demand. When the supply of a commodity outpaces demand, its price (in this case, wages) goes down; when demand outpaces supply, the price goes up. This basic law is why a Walmart in Canton, Ohio is holding canned food drives for its own employees while the Walmart in Williston, North Dakota has to pay its workers $21 an hour and give them free hotel rooms; labor is plentiful in Ohio and scarce in North Dakota.

Leftists lament how wages have stagnated since the seventies and how the gap between the rich and poor has never been wider, but they can’t admit that feminism is a big reason why Americans are getting poorer by the day. The mass entry of girls into the workforce that began in the seventies conveniently coincides with the stagnation and decline of American wages, as well as the decline of unions. Whereas a man could comfortably support his family on his own back in the fifties and sixties, it takes both parents working to raise a family today, assuming the couple can even afford to buy a house and have children to begin with.

Additionally, the presence of girls in the labor force has feminized the economy and made it less productive as a whole. Because girls are unable and/or unwilling to actually take useful positions in the trades, manufacturing or other blue-collar fields (“Eww, I can’t mine coal! I might break a nail!”), the American economy had to be reconfigured to employ them somehow. The solution was to demonize the trades and create new useless white-collar positions such as “human resources.” Corporations used feminists as pawns to help promote outsourcing and free trade in the eighties/early nineties and push pointless office jobs as the new middle-class ideal. And all of those coveted white-collar jobs conveniently required a four-year degree, enriching the (leftist) universities as well.

As a result, we live in a country where a girl who makes $30,000 a year at a nonprofit is more highly regarded than an electrician who makes three times that.

Not only that, girls have altered the workplace itself for the worst. Government bureaucracies and other female-run institutions are governed by rules both written (e.g. sexual harassment laws) and unwritten that make it impossible to be frank, encouraging cattiness and backstabbing. And with few exceptions, female employees all act as volunteer commissars, ready to blow you in to the bossman the minute you upset their feeeeelings. You can’t be direct or honest because you never know what your co-workers will find offensive, making it difficult to get any work done.

But it gets worse than that: feminism is in part responsible for the current economic crisis.

It was girls’ desire for a never-ending supply of cheap crap (more than 80 percent of consumer spending is controlled by women) that resulted in the outsourcing of American manufacturing to China and the rise of big box stores like Walmart that squash local businesses and pay their workers the bare minimum allowed by law. It’s girls fornicating with wild abandon and divorcing their husbands on a whim that has lead to the epidemic of single moms and the subsequent strain on social services. It’s girls going to the doctor every time they get a boo-boo that has resulted in hard-working, healthy men like me having our insurance premiums skyrocket under Obamacare.

And it’s girls being unable to pay off their student loans that will lead to the next economic collapse.
4. Education (and work) are bad for girls’ physical and mental health.

It makes me laugh to see how effectively corporate America has made feminists into their most favored pets. Whenever feminists crow about the “end of men,” what they’re really saying is “Ha ha, we girls make WAY better slaves than you loser guys!” Jezebel and Gawker Media exemplify this contradiction best; all the girls writing there eagerly sound the gospel of female empowerment to make money for a man—Nick Denton—who pays them barely above minimum wage. “Yes Massa, Pax Dickinson is a misogynist racist asshat! Can I pretty please have a cookie, Massa?”

But beneath this you-go-grrl facade is a well of pain and suffering.

Despite all the feminists telling them that they should be happy to be “liberated,” female unhappiness is higher now than it’s ever been. Far more girls than men are suffering from mental illness, and antidepressant use among girls has gotten so bad that the drinking water of major cities like London is turning into a toxic soup. Every Strong, Independent Woman™ knows in her heart that her life is hell on Earth; it’s only her pride that keeps her from admitting the truth.

Recently, a friend of mine who quit her job to become a homemaker and returned to the workforce when her children grew older admitted to me that she preferred being a housewife. Why? It was less stressful. When she didn’t work, all she had to worry about was taking care of her kids, cooking and keeping the house clean. While she and her husband are wealthier now that they have two incomes, her life is never-ending misery. Her (female) boss constantly belittles and abuses her; her co-workers are gossipy do-nothings who refuse to pull their weight, making her pick up the slack; her health has deteriorated to the point where she’s developed stress-related carpal tunnel.

From the kitchen to the cubicle; isn’t freedom grand?

The reality is that girls always submit to men. It’s unavoidable. The only question is what kind of man she submits to. Will it be to a husband who protects her, provides for her and will love her until death do them part? Or will it be to a CEO like Nick Denton or some other corporate manager who views her as a tool to enrich himself, who will kick her to the curb as soon as she’s no longer useful? Even feminism itself is an invention of men, specifically Rousseau and the philosophers of the Enlightenment; Mary Wollstonecraft and other female “thinkers” were never more than sideshow freaks.

Deep inside, girls know what they want; they just need authoritative men to give it to them.

If you’re a girl, you should only go to college if you can meet one or more of these criteria:

Major in something useful. Here’s a pointer to figuring out if a degree is useful; does it involve math? If not, you’re wasting your time. I recommend Aaron Clarey’s Worthless if you want more info.
Go to a quality school. If you can’t make it into the Ivy League or another high-quality institution such as UVM or Binghamton, you have no business going to college.
Have your parents pay for it. I don’t mean co-signing your student loans, I mean having daddy take his wallet out and cover your costs in full. If you’re rich enough that your parents can afford college without any loans, it doesn’t much matter what you do.

The rest of you girls? We’re here to take you back to the place you secretly long to be, the place where you belong: the kitchen.

Now, on your knees!

Agent Kilroy #conspiracy godlikeproductions.com

Microwave, ELF, EHF, and EMF... If you've clicked on this thread, you likely know what I'm talking about.

I have known of the HAARP for over half of my life. The knowledge I have of the HAARP in particular, I obtained from a former government agent, whom I will call GB for now (who has since passed away). I had, and still do, have great respect for GB because of their hand in protecting the American people. I ask that you send a 'thank you' to the sky for them.

But, that isn't the story we're gathered for today.

To simplify- No, liberals and educationally-failed, mentally-fried and unstable youth, the HAARP is NOT a conspiracy. Unless you eat tide pods and also believe that you're living on a flat earth, then go ahead and deny it; you're already FUBAR'd.

With that said, I now make my point-

I am confident in my accuracy to assume that many people (on this forum and beyond) have personally felt, heard and or seen, effects of the HAARP, known formally as the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program.

On the contrary, the HAARP is not limited to EHF (extremely high frequency).
Researchers have concluded that the HAARP's frequencies can vary quite drastically.

-The friendly topic of discussion-

Does anybody here want to share their stories of the HAARP, Woodpecker, or 5G/GWEN tower experiences?

Personally, I have had many experiences with the HAARP and recently, 5G.

Back before 5G was a "thing" that the brainwashed and individuality-squandered youth worshiped, there was just the HAARP.

Alas, now we have multiple HAARPs planted around the world, even the miniature 5G (basically being used as miniature Tesla/HAARPs)
Yes, did you know that the HAARP was based on an invention by Nikola Tesla before he was murdered? I may start a second thread someday discussing Tesla's original creation.

I often noticed the usage and effects of the HAARP mostly during elections (as they have to keep the masses delirious during times of vital decision making), just BEFORE large events (such as the 'BIG NEWS' hurricanes, mass tornado outbreaks, terroristic events, etc).
Again, these experiences are often felt before something 'big'/growth of agendas are taking place.

- Symptoms (multiple or individual)-

- Headaches/Migraines
They begin on a dime and dissipate just as quickly as they begin and they can start at a certain time every day for days/weeks on end- unlike any other headaches.

- Dialup/Digital Tones
They feel embedded in your head, sometimes you will hear one frequency and someone else hears another (or nothing) due to multiple-frequency blasting.

- Body Pulsating
Can be felt in your head, chest, or even whole body, especially while attempting to sleep or relax.

-Frequent Déjà Vu
Which can last for seconds, minutes, and I've even had déjà vu to attack multiple times throughout an entire day.

- Confusion
Such as walking into rooms or going to locations and realizing that there was no reason to be there- these are often called subliminal suggestions, which cause you to do things subconsciously until you begin questioning yourself.

- Anxiety
Sudden onset of anxiety while doing daily tasks that are not of concern to you.

- Anger
Unexplained anger, disgust, rage, or irritability over nothing, often towards other people, or pets.

- Depression
Unexplainable depression can be caused, and can come from nowhere; lasting for only minutes, hours or even days.

- Muscle Reactions
Mild to violent involuntary muscle spasms (not caused by exercise, excessive sodium intake, or dehydration) ranging from back, thigh, calf, groin, upper arm, forearm, neck and even facial. The sudden involuntary jerking of muscles has also been reported.

- Lethargic Behavior
Feeling unrested, achy and lazy for no reason; feeling mentally aware but physically unable to gather any strength.

- Communication and Thought Blocking
Temporarily forgetting what you were going to say/do, difficulty retrieving basic words and struggling with general communication skills; often occurring throughout the day, lasting days and even weeks.

- Balance Issues
Loss of balance sitting, standing or even walking. Or as I call them, random gravity checks.

- Mild Electrical Shocks and Static
Being awoken in the middle of the night by sharp shock and jolt throughout your body, or your head. The sensation of static/hair anywhere or everywhere on your body, it can be extremely annoying.

I do not wish the HAARP's effects on anybody... (Besides maybe the NWO elitists).
However, over my lifetime, I have compiled a collection of HAARP/5G combating strategies that I always go-to when I feel like something is going digitally-rogue in my environment, or I feel like governmental brainwashing is dancing in the air.

-Combat the Wash with LARD-

- Look yourself in the mirror and focus on the consciousness in your eyes.

- Assign a computer-language "command" to lock the HAARP out of your energy field, such as "entry denied", "access denied", " you are not authorized to enter". Again, sounds silly, but can be quite effective, especially for ringing/digital-tones being sent into your head.

- Remind yourself of your full name, (even though it feels a bit strange).
"My name is: John Jay Doe, I am 45 years old and I live on 12345 Appleseed Drive". Reminding your conscious and subconscious who you are and your confidence in your identity is key. Of you're under any sort of mental attack, you can feel a shift in your consciousness when you focus on who YOU are. Either recite mentally or recite out loud. Sure, it feels silly, sounds silly, but it works.

- Do something completely off-the-wall.
Effective for breaking long-lasting déjà vu. If you're walking through the room and déjà vu follows you for minutes on end, stop walking, turn around, do a side-step, and maybe even try a dance move. Do something out of character to disturb the "algorithm" of your déjà vu. Repeat as many times as needed until you feel separated from the waves.

That is all I have for now.

Maybe others will share their stories and bring some more minds to this topic.

If I have missed any effects of the HAARP or 5G, please comment and I will try to add the detail to the lost above.

Anonymous Coward #conspiracy godlikeproductions.com

So I have a regular account on GLP, but I would rather not divulge it for 1) losing credibility and 2) it's not the kind of thing I'm known for posting... So here is my story.

Late 2013 I was in my living room about 8 oclock at night. Something was rustling through the fake ficus on my porch and by the way my pooch jumped up and tore to the door I figured it was a coyote scavenging around my wooden deck again (probably smelled where a trashbag was sitting earlier.

Before I tell the rest of the story I will make it known since I'm not using my account that I'm a private security professional and martial artist, and many reactions as they would seem inappropriate are just habit.

Back to the story. So I keep a .22 by the door mostly to scare night time creatures off the deck. I grab it and not expecting anything more serious than maybe a raccoon, open the door where my jack Russell is already furiously clawing. As he scoots out the crack in the door and bounds out, I turn on the porchlight fully open the door with my little browning leading out. When the automatic light came on I was not prepared for what I saw

About 7 yards away, a giant bipedal figure about 8 feet tall gets up from a crouch and looks down at my little terrier which wasted no time running to the behemoths feet. He had a look of annoyance and almost anger on his face. I'm not sure if it was anger at my dog's aggression or at being unexpectedly surprised, but that second I sensed imminent danger and opened fire for center mass.

I'm positive I should have struck him 3 times, but I saw no wound, no blood, the thick hair did not even look disturbed. Its like every round either missed or dissapeared into thin air! Now he looked pissed! Instead of closing in on me though, he began to crouch down. I could only believe this was to grab for my terrier and in a split second I thought if I could push him back for a split second I could grab my dog and haul ass back through the door. Instinctively I tried to land a push kick right for his diaphragm. I had to close a little distance so I kept forward into the push kick that was not surprisingly about my face level since he was so tall. It landed squarely and forcefully right under his ribcage, and although it didn't knock him back as much as I thought it would, I heard a short gasping cough as he slouched an inch or two. I could tell the blow caused at least mild discomfort.

A shock of fear raced down my body as I realised what I had just done. I had intiated a physical fight with something I could not possibly escape from or win against. His massive right hand swung and made contact with what seemed like the entire side of my body, flinging me out into the yard. Landing and skidding in the dirt. As he approached me he raised his arms above his head in two fists and as I got up to my feet he "screamed" and swung down with both of them. His left arm missed completely as I stepped to the side and thrust my palm into his chin in an attempt to push his head and drive him backwards off his feet. His right arm however came down and made a massive blow to my left shoulder.

I was sure that it had broken or dislocated ever bone in my left torso at the time (although xrays later showed it wasnt severe as it felt) and out of panic and last resorts I began to run as hard as I could, driving his head back as I went. He began to stumble and with the same arm I hammer fisted him it the face several times, making contact at least once (not even budging his massive head) and he tripped to his back, which I'm sure was more of a clumsy accident than from my blows.

As he fell to his back, my instinct was to drop on him cross-side and just try to land some hits, any hits. As I dropped my weight to his chest and lifted my hand to strike, he effortlessly threw me straight up with both hands, and I landed face first in the dirt, the rest of my body crumpling behind it.

I heard him get up, "yell" and walk off. I was terrified and had no desire to lift my head out of the dirt to see, and I was in terrible pain. He stomped around a few yards away for about a minute and I finally looked up and saw him stomp into the brush. My dog sat there paralyzed, belly up in a submissive posture, shaking. About 30 later I finally worked up the motivation to get up and approached the spot where he left through the brush.

To my surprise the brush was completely undisturbed, like he had just dematerialized into nothingness. My gun was gone, I can only assume he threw it.

There's my story. Has anyone ever heard of a bigfoot just "appearing" or "dissapearing"? The footprints just stop at the brush. What was going on?

Anthony Gregory #conspiracy lewrockwell.com

In the nineteen years since Waco, we have seen the police state explode in every direction and now we are all ensnared. Some groups are always more threatened than others, but no one is truly safe. The prisons have swollen to the largest detention system since Stalin's gulags. The police conduct three thousand SWAT raids a month. The war on terror has made a total mockery of what remained of the Fourth Amendment. Torture has lost its taboo. So has indefinite detention. The feds irradiate and molest airline passengers by the millions. People are jailed for taking medicine, buying Sudafed, sharing songs, and selling milk. The Kafkaesque regulatory state threatens people of all economic classes with crushing fines and a fate in a cage. The public schools, always authoritarian institutions, have become explicit adjuncts of the criminal justice system and military recruitment offices. Every major police department has tanks and battle rifles and drones are being used for surveillance and God knows what else. Each federal department has enough firepower to conquer a small third-world country. DHS alone has ordered enough ammo to shoot every American man, woman, and child. The president claims the right to kill American citizens anywhere on the planet on his say-so alone. And he exercises that power.

Why do some of us continue to fixate on Waco? If for no other reason, because April 19, 1993 was a squandered opportunity if ever there was one. The people could have risen up and said, "Enough!" They could have demanded the military occupation retreat from their own neighborhoods — both the federal presence and its satellite jackboots in the city police. They could have demanded an end to the gun laws, drug war, and federal war on crime, each of which was instrumental in ending the lives of more than twenty children at Waco. They could have turned against the media whose elites stood and applauded the White House as it announced and defended its latest killing spree. They could have seen the federal government for the clear and present danger it obviously poses — the only government that had militarily mass murdered American civilians on American soil since the collateral damage at Pearl Harbor. They could have turned their backs on the killers in DC, refusing ever to believe in their lies again, saving the lives of uncountable Americans, Serbians, Afghans, Iraqis, Libyans, Yemenis, Palestinians, and so many others who would bear the wrath of an unhampered imperial executive in the nineteen years to come, sparing the priceless liberties we have seen shredded on the altar of state power.

Instead, they looked the other way, they yawned, even cheered. There might still be time to turn things around. But the tanks are closing in.

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.

Guest #fundie waroftheangels.org

COMFORTER,
TODAY, AFTER READING A BOOK CALLED "PORTALS TO CLEANSING" BY DR. HENRY MALONE, I DECIDED I NEEDED TO HAVE MY ANIMALS DELIVERED AS WELL. I STARTED WITH MY CAT. I HAVE ALREADY ANOINTED THEM AND PLED THE BLOOD OVER THEM, BUT I DECIDED THEY NEEDED A DELIVERANCE AS WELL.
I ANOINTED HER WITH OIL IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER, THE SON, AND THE HOLY SPIRIT. THEN I DEDICATED HER TO THE LORD. THEN I BEGAN THE DELIVERANCE. AS SOON AS I TOLD THE EVIL FORCES TO LEAVE IMMEDIATELY, THE CAT DID TOO ! SHE RAN FROM ME AND HID. THEN, SHE RAN TO THE DOOR. SHE LOOKED FRIGHTENED. SO, LOOKING HER IN THE EYE, AND BEING ABLE TO TELL THERE WAS SOMETHING THERE BESIDES HER, I COMMANDED THEM TO LEAVE HER BODY IMMEDIATELY AS SHE IS DEDICATED TO JESUS CHRIST AND HIS PROPERTY. I LET HER OUTSIDE AND SHE YAWNED...WHICH IS AN INDICATION THEY ARE LEAVING. SHE STAYED OUTSIDE, DESPITE THE WIND BLOWING HARD. THEN, AFTER ABOUT 10-15 MINUTES SHE CAME BACK IN. SHE SEEMS DIFFERENT. IN A GOOD WAY. I GUESS THE DOG IS NEXT.
COMFORTER, ANY THOUGHTS OR ADVICE?

Andre Vltchek #fundie journal-neo.org

How Come the World is Suffering from Stockholm Syndrome

It may sound incredible, but it is true: in countries that have been damaged, even totally robbed and destroyed by the West, many people are still enamored with Europe and North America.

For years, I have been observing this ‘phenomena’, even in the most plundered, devastated war zones and slums. Often I was shocked, other times thoroughly desperate. I did not know how to respond, how to react, how to describe what I have been observing.

Then, a few days ago, in Syria, right next to the Idlib battlefield, close to the deadly positions of Al-Nusra Front, in a country where the West and its allies have murdered hundreds of thousands of people, one of my interpreters exclaimed in a ‘patriotic’ outburst: “Look how beautiful this land is! It is almost as beautiful as Europe!”

And at night, another guide of mine began nostalgically recalling his glorious days in Europe, when he could still go there; before the Syrian war began.

An interpreter did not know who Fidel Castro was (I had his portrait, lighting up cigar, as my phone screensaver), but both of them – my local companions at the battle ground – were fluent in Western slang and the worldview. They knew, however, near zero about China.They were patriotic and they fully supported their country, but at the same time they admired the West and Western journalists from the mainstream media – those very same propagandists who helped to bring their beautiful and unique Syria to the state in which it is now.

It all felt schizophrenic, but definitely not new.

I could not take it, anymore. I decided to write this story, despite the fact that it is an intellectual ‘minefield’. I decided to write it, because it is how it is. Because I have to tell it; someone has to. And above all, because it is absolutely essential to combat the crooked selfie image with which the West has been infecting almost all nations of the world, including all those that it has been plundering and raping.

*

Are we dealing with the so-called “Stockholm Syndrome” here? Most likely, yes. The victim falls in love with her or his tormentor.

For long centuries, the West has been colonizing, usurping, literally terrorizing the entire planet. Hundreds of millions have died as a result of colonialism, neo-colonialism, and imperialism. Wealth, cultural and educational institutions, hospitals, transportation, parks – all that Europe and North America possess to date and boast about, was constructed on mountains of bones, on genocide and unbridled plunder.

That cannot be disputed, can it?

Slavery, mass murder, genocidal expansions; the West robbed the world, and then consolidated its power, promoting its exceptionalism through relentless brainwashing (called ‘education’), propaganda (called ‘information’), and twisted entertainment for the masses that inhabit poor countries (called ‘culture’ and ‘the arts’).

Shockingly and absurdly, Europe and North America are still loved and admired by many, even (or especially) in such places where Western governments and companies plagued everything like locusts, leaving to the locals only burned land, poison and miserable slums.

*

How is it possible?

For years, I have been working in Africa, a continent which was entirely subjugated by the U.K., France, Germany, Belgium and other European expansionist nations. Africa from where millions of men, women and children were brought in chains to the “New World”, as slaves. Where millions died during the ‘hunt’, where millions died in ‘transit centers’, and then, on the open seas. That’s tens of millions of ruined lives. The complete plunder of the resources, the unimaginable humiliation of the people, broken cultures, genocides and holocaust against local individuals from what is now Namibia, to the Democratic Republic of Congo. Great African heroes like Lumumba assassinated by the Western rulers.

And yet, many Africans see the West as some great ‘example’, as a ‘guiding light’, as a severe but respectable ‘daddy’, who uses the belt when it is necessary, but who also rewards justly those of his ‘children’ who ‘behave properly’.

It is repulsive, but undeniable.

The greatest African writers are now teaching at U.S. and U.K. universities. They have been ‘neutralized’ and ‘pacified’, many of them out rightly bought. In many countries, African judges wear comical white wigs, doing their best to look like their British counterparts. The children of corrupt elites are collecting diplomas from the U.K. and French universities, imitating upper-class European accents.

To behave, to look and sound like the colonizers, is something that brings respect.

The same on the Sub-Continent, of course.

The mannerism among the upper classes in India and Pakistan are those of the U.K. (and lately, of the U.S.). Elites there go out of their way to be more British than the Brits; more Californian than the inhabitants of the U.S. West Coast. Countless private Indian universities call themselves ‘American’ or ‘British’, with ‘Oxford’ or ‘Cambridge’ frequently ‘decorating’ their names.

‘To be accepted’ in Europe or North America is the highest honor, in almost all former colonies, therefore, in almost the entire world.

‘Well groomed’, well-educated and modern Asians, Latin Americans, Africans and the Middle Easterners are expected to ape Westerners; to dress like Westerners, eat (and drink) like the Westerners and to ‘defend the same values’ as them.

In fact, they are expected to be much more Western than the Westerners.

But ‘expected’ by whom? Yes, you guess correctly: very often by their own people!

*

Ask and many in the ‘South’ will tell you: everything that comes from the West is beautiful, progressive and dandy.

“Every bule is beautiful,” I was informed, recently, by a young indigenous professional lady in the totally environmentally plundered island of Borneo/Kalimantan. Bule is a vulgar, derogatory Indonesian word for the ‘whites’, and literally means ‘albino’. However, the lady was not joking, it was a compliment: she was brought up believing that every bule is actually superior and fine-looking.

In the indigenous Mexican state of Yucatan, right after the elections that brought to power the left-wing President Obrador, I overheard the conversation of a dozen or so upper-class housewives in a Western chain café. Their references were fully European and North American: From vacations in Italy and Spain, to the films they were watching, books they were reading. Europe was their ‘mother-continent’, while Miami, their only true comparison. Before Obrador came to power, indigenous people were increasingly living in misery, their roofs broken, jobs disappearing. But the elites were, as always, in a European state of mind. The real Mexico was not on their radar. It did not matter, or didn’t even exist.

Even some of the poor in the ‘conquered world’ who are actually ‘concerned’ about Western imperialism, see it as an abstract problem.They see it as a strictly political, military or economic issue. The fact that Western imperialism has ‘culturally’ immobilized entire nations and continents is hardly addressed.

Even in those proud countries that are determinedly struggling against Western imperialism – China, Russia, Iran, or Venezuela – the Western narrative of exceptionalism has already managed to cause tremendous damage.

In China, for instance, almost everything ‘Western’ had been, until recently, associated with modernity. Being ‘against the West’ was considered boring, gray and outdated, somehow connected to the ‘Communist propaganda’ of the past (the fact that the ‘Communist propaganda’ was often correct, mattered nothing). This attitude allowed the great infiltration of Chinese universities by Western academia, as well as the injection of Western nihilism into Chinese arts, culture, even way of life. Only recently, has this dangerous trend been reversed, but not after it had already caused great damage.

The admiration of everything Western destroyed the greatest progressive experiment of modern history – The Soviet Union and the so-called “Eastern Bloc”.

The power of negative Western propaganda packaged together with the promotion of extreme individualism, selfishness and consumerism, literally wiped out all internationalist zeal, humanism and higher principles, from the minds of tens of millions of young Czechs, Poles, East Germans, Bulgarians, and even Soviets.

The once proud Communist Eastern Bloc, after liberating dozens of countries from colonialism, after fighting for an egalitarian world, showing solidarity with all oppressed nations, was then gradually defeated by such shallow bullshit as blue jeans labels, the nonsensical lyrics of rock and pop songs (a favorite weapon of the West), greed, religions (another Western weapon), and slogans like ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ (the Western world which has been denying freedom and democracy to almost all countries on our planet, cynically turned the truth upside down, and fooled East Europeans, by skillfully applying centuries long propaganda methods).

In the end, confused and increasingly cynical, what many East Europeans demanded was not ‘freedom’, but more money, more labels, and the ability to join the bloc of the countries that have been plundering the world.

*

So, what makes the West so successful, when it comes to brainwashing people all around the world? How is it possible after all that banditry, terror and ruthlessness, that most of the oppressed and conquered countries are still showing plenty of respect to the masters that reside in New York, London or Paris?

I believe that if we find the answers to this question, we will be able to save the world, and reverse this deadly trend.

First of all, after interacting with thousands of people in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, Oceania and Latin America, I am coming to the conclusion that the West (and Japan) is often admired for the ‘high standards of living’.

In such miserable and collapsed countries like Indonesia, I often hear nonsense like: “European countries are more ‘Muslim’ than we are. They treat people much better than we do.”

Middle and upper class Southeast Asian families are travelling to Netherlands or Germany, and then exclaim after returning home: “Look at their parks, hospitals, bicycle lanes, trams, museums… We have to learn from them! They do so much for improving our world.”

That’s precisely what Africans admire about Europe. That’s how many ‘educated’ Indians or Southeast Asians feel. That’s what Peruvians, Hondurans or Paraguayans love about their Miami.

Are they wrong? Isn’t there, after all, plenty that poor countries could learn from the West?

Yes; definitely they are wrong. Totally wrong!

Let’s see ‘why’?

The West ‘arranged’ the entire world in accordance with its own feudal system of the past centuries. It brought the system of shameless oppressive regime to the global level.

To admire this monstrous and regressive global system would be like admiring the arrangement of European societies some three hundred years ago. It would be essentially like saying: “Look, the aristocracy of France or England was actually quite fine, egalitarian, educated and healthy, and we should learn from how they lived, and copy their examples!”

Of course, the aristocracy, the royalty and the church of Europe has always lived well, even 300 years ago. They had good schools for their children, they had decent medical care, palaces, summer villas, sanatoriums with mineral waters, theatres, lavish parks, and tons of servants.

The only ‘tiny’ problem was that some 95% of the population had to work for the luxury they enjoyed, subsisting in total misery. Plus, of course, those tens of millions of un-people in the colonies were being exterminated like animals.

The same is happening now. The entire Europe (with the exception of the poor people there) has moved to the bracket of new aristocracy, at least comparatively. And the rest of the world is laboring, dying, being raped and plundered, in order to maintain this ‘wonderful-looking’ social-state project of the West. Even the U.S. and its relatively brutal turbo-capitalist model is still ‘socialist’ (for the U.S. citizens), compared to such countries as Indonesia, India, Peru or Nigeria.

Western standards of living cannot be replicated elsewhere. To believe that the West would allow Africans or Southeast Asians to build a social state is naïve, almost intellectually insulting. Singapore, South Korea and Japan are rare exceptions, where the West closed both eyes, for strictly strategic reasons.

In order for the West to prosper, maintaining a super high standard of living, with all the benefits for its citizens, billions of the ‘serfs’ all over the world have to suffer, sacrifice themselves, and work for close to nothing; the more of them that live in hell, the better.

Nature has to be plundered in places like Borneo and Papua, DR Congo and soon in Brazil.

People have to be ruled by pro-Western corrupt oligarchs, and by the military and religious leaders. Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and now Brazil, are perfect countries for the West: they happily and willingly sacrifice their own people, guaranteeing Western prosperity.

You did not know? Nonsense! You did not want to know. All those people who matter are very happy with this arrangement: The Western rulers, citizens of Europe, North America, Australia, New Zealand and Japan, as well as the rulers/elites in the poor countries. The only ones who are truly suffering are those billions of the poor, worldwide, but they matter nothing, and they are not told anything anyway, because the media is in the hands of the West and their lackeys, and so is ‘education’.

And as they are not told anything, they – the wretched of the Earth – are admiring the West, too. They eat Western junk food if they can save few dollars a month, they drink Nescafe instead of their traditional coffee, listen to the shittiest music, watch pirated Hollywood blockbuster movies, wear fake sneakers and jeans, and masturbate to Western porn (if they have internet). They also dutifully follow religions, which were injected and upheld by the West, into their countries.

The poorer the country, the greater appear to be the green hills and pastures of the Western paradise.

And so, it goes on and on.

In India, Indonesia, Uganda, Jordan, Fiji, Honduras, I hear the same crap, from semi-educated, or West-educated local citizens: “People in the West are actually very good people, but their governments are bad.” Are they sure about that? I wonder.

*

Frankly and honestly, I am tired of this status quo. And I don’t find this amusing at all: hearing admiring statements about European and other Western countries in the middle of the monstrous war zones, famine-stricken areas, brutal mines, on the banks of poisoned rivers and inside the slums.

I am an ‘old-fashioned’ revolutionary. Slaves have to rise and fight, if necessary die for freedom; not to admire their masters and tormentors.

The crimes of the colonialists have to be exposed. The insane arrangement of the world has to be defined and then smashed into pieces.

The cute trams, bicycle lanes, parks, museums, operas, cafes, universities and hospitals in Europe are built on rivers of blood and the bones of ‘The Others’. I said it three years ago on the floor of the Italian Parliament, and I will repeat it again and again, wherever I go.

There is no other topic that matters, right now, on our planet.

Everything is connected to this, including the fear and hate that the West feels and spreads about countries like Venezuela, Russia, China, Iran, South Africa, Syria or Cuba.

They hate us; they hate those who resist, who are standing tall. And they should and will get back the same in return, hopefully, if the truth is pronounced often enough!

BannedBen #wingnut #racist reddit.com

Socialism doesn't work because of human nature.

All people are not created equal, and anyone who believes that is indulging in a canard.

Humans are a hierarchical, greedy, insecure, war-loving, sex-crazed, money-envying, blood-thirsty, competitive, class-conscious higher primate species.

Marxism is wishful thinking, and Socialism doesn't have a prayer.

And the Socialist countries in the south were screwed up before whites became supreme.

Show me any country that was invaded by Spain/Portugal and ruled by the Catholic Church that isn't a mess.

That mess has nothing to do with white people - these countries screwed themselves, by themselves.

You want to see white supremacy?

Go to Norway.

The best-run country in the world.

Why?

They've controlled their population and kept it at a reasonable five million.

Their character has been shaped by their climate so they are practical, frugal, thrifty, clean and just.

Norway stumbled over oil in 1969.

They could have gone nuts and had a zillion children and squandered that wealth, but they haven't.

They have handled their oil and gas wealth beautifully.

Their grid is 98% renewable - mostly hydro - and they have banked that oil and gas wealth so their sovereign wealth fund is now over one trillion dollars.

A trillion dollars for a country of 5 million people.

That is white supremacy, but a kinder, gentler white supremacy.

Marxism and Socialism are wishful thinking, and doomed by human nature.

Sorry.

Brandon Walker & Jim Garrow #conspiracy freepatriot.org

Doctor Jim Garrow, philanthropist and worker for one of the largest non-profit organizations on the planet to save female children from slaughter in China. He has been featured on several media outlets throughout the world. Last Sunday, as a guest of Now the End Begins internet radio program however, he dropped a bombshell on the world. Dr. Garrow claims that up to a week ago he was covert CIA. To top it off on the program, he states he knows that President Obama ordered the hits that killed Tom Clancy and Andrew Breitbart!

Jim Garrow

Doctor Jim Garrow is a man that works for ending genocide in China. He has a PhD, taught college classes in the United States, and throughout the world. He is also the founder of the Bethune Institute, which operates hundreds of schools throughout China. He was even given a secondary honorary doctorate from the North Carolina Collage of Theology and is one of the few Christian teachers in China. In fact many of the Chinese elite business members and military personnel send their kids to Doctor Garrow’s school.

Then Doctor Garrow started noticing the atrocities surrounding him in China. He started noticing that there was a diminishing value in the lives of females. With China issuing the order of one child per family due to over crowding, families were literally choosing to abort, sell, and even kill the female child to try for a boy to pass on their lineage and name sake.

Thus he founded Pink Pagoda Girls, a world non-profit organization dedicated to the rescue of unwanted girls in China. Pink Pagoda Girls even goes as far as finding homes for the female children. The work has become so recognized not just in the United States but around the world. Dr. Jim Garrow was even nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for his work in saving the lives of over 50,000 young Chinese women.

So it came as an absolute shock when listening to the internet radio program on Now the End Begins radio that he made several startling revelations.

Dr. Garrow relieved was that he was actually asked to take the military litmus test that he outed in February 2013. Among the rumors that the United States Military was purging top brass using a “litmus test” of sorts. The high-ranking officials were being asked “would you fire on an American citizen”. If you said no, you found yourself unemployed. Several high-ranking officials have claimed this. Dr. Garrow spoke out about this on Alex Jones’s radio program, Now the End Begins radio, Glenn Beck, and several conservative internet mediums. If you wonder why several top officials were asked to step down or retire, this very well may be why. It left open the question as to why Dr. Garrow of all people would be asked this “litmus test”.

Well it seems that was when Dr. Garrow decided once again to shock the world by stating that up until October 3, 2013, that he was a CIA operative in the Obama Administration, and actually fired from the CIA by President Obama, or “outed” he called it, for his blowing the cover on the Military Litmus Test. The President’s branch director forced Dr. Garrow into early retirement for leaking “classified” information.

Andrew BreitbartBut the surprises kept right on coming.

Andrew Breitbart died under mysterious circumstances. The autopsy said that he died with no prescription drugs in his system and only a .04 blood alcohol content not days after taping an interview with the now also deceased “alleged” gay lover of President Barack H. Obama. So why if he died of natural causes did the FBI go after his widow for potential homicide?

Well according to Dr. Jim Garrow, Andrew Breitbart was not dead of natural causes. According to the interview, he was killed directly by the Obama Administration. Andrew Breitbart was known for his controversy against the administration and the news media. Several people believed he was killed including some of the main founders of www.breitbart.com in his memory.

ClancyThen there was Tom Clancy. Tom Clancy died last week at the age of 66. Although they say “natural causes”, the actual list of cause of death on his autopsy, cause of death unknown.

Tom Clancy once said:

I hang my hat on getting as many things right as I can. I’ve made up stuff that’s turned out to be real — that’s the spooky part.”-Tom Clancy to the New York Times

It is no secret when he wrote The Hunt for the Red October that he was met at the door by Pentagon officials and FBI agents demanding to know where he got top-secret documents. Dr. Garrow states that after the incident, the CIA “spoon fed” him classified information and scenarios to write his novels in a manner that was entertaining but contained that ever needed element of truth. Dr. Garrow says that is why he was killed because he was getting to close to a secret they don’t want the world to know. In fact Dr. Garrow attributes the statement quoted above as “a little too late”.

Dr. Garrow states President Obama had Tom Clancy killed as well and noted that it takes 5 days for plant toxins and most poisons to break down and leave no traces in the human body. Amazingly enough, or coincidentally, the doctors did not perform an autopsy on Tom Clancy’s body for 5 days.

Graeystone #conspiracy graeystone.deviantart.com

So Bill 'Not A Real Scientist But An Engineer' Nye went on Tucker 'Hell Of A Lot Smarter Than People Think' Carlson's last night. For those who don't know Bill Nye is one of the Apostles/Priests Of Climate Change/Global Warming. Now a Skeptic and Supporter of Climate Change arguing isn't new. However watching it last night showed me how annoying Climate Supporters can be. Tucker simply asked(paraphrasing a bit) - "What percentage is humans contributing to the problem of Climate Change. Is it 100%, 75%, 25%?" Such a simple question with a simple answer. . .and of course Bill couldn't even be bothered to answer the question and went off on a tangent.

And its not the first time Bill hasn't given people a straight answer or acted like a religious fanatic. Its also possible he wants to start up some kind of Environmentalist Gestapo and have people arrested for speaking out against his religion. And people think my side of the political fence or my faith in God will lead to some kind of 'Thought Police'? Its also interesting that Nye thinks Climate Deniers are no better than the Enron Swindlers. . .um, if we're talking about Scientific Fraud then what about infamous Hockey Stick? Didn't people profit from that and should people be put in jail for such fraud?

What's really annoying about Bill Nye is that he isn't above using insults against the opposing side during debate. Remember this is the same guy who did a KID'S SHOW back in the day. Is it really alright for kids to have a role model who is that insulting toward others? The way he acts makes me think he hangs with Tara Strong(another celebrity loud mouth who insults people and works on a kid show).

Ultimately Bill showed what type of mental (I don't work on a kids show!) midget he is on Tucker's show. If anything Bill is like Pinocchio the Wooden Puppet who wants to be a Real Boy. In Bill's case he is a Washed Up Engineer Pretend TV Scientist to trying to be a Real Scientist.

Allen West #conspiracy thinkprogress.org

Fox News contributor and former GOP congressman Allen West believes he has uncovered a nefarious plot by recently rescued American POW Bowe Bergdahl’s father to claim the White House for Islam.

After President Obama announced on Saturday that Bergdahl had been freed, Bergdahl’s father, standing by Obama’s side in the White House Rose Garden, said his son might be having difficulty understanding English, and, according to the New York Times, “said ‘bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim,’ a common Arabic phrase meaning ‘in the name of God, most gracious, most compassionate,’ and then spoke a few words in Pashto, a language of Afghanistan.

Referring to this event, West — last seen claiming the Obama administration focused its attention on finding missing Nigerian girls to distract from Benghazi — on Monday claimed he had a “bombshell” to report:

Clare Lopez is a former CIA operations officer, a strategic policy and intelligence expert with a focus on Middle East, national defense, WMD, and counterterrorism issues, and a friend of mine.

She emailed me this morning a very poignant analysis that only someone knowing language and Islam could ascertain. She wrote:

“What none of these media is reporting is that the father’s (SGT Bowe Bergdahl’s father Bob) first words at the WH were in Arabic – those words were “bism allah alrahman alraheem” – which means “in the name of Allah the most gracious and most merciful” – these are the opening words of every chapter of the Qur’an except one (the chapter of the sword – the 9th) – by uttering these words on the grounds of the WH, Bergdahl (the father) sanctified the WH and claimed it for Islam. There is no question but POTUS knows this.”

Lopez is a senior fellow at Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy, a DC-based right-wing think tank that’s responsible for promoting all kinds of crazy anti-Muslim claims and conspiracy theories. This is a great example of the pipeline described in the 2011 the Center for American Progress report Fear, Inc: The Islamophobia Network in America: “Experts” like Clare Lopez provide highly questionable analysis to uninformed pundits like Allen West, who then pass this information on to their credulous audiences.

We should note that, if Lopez’s analysis were right, the White House was likely already “claimed” for Islam long ago — in December 1805, at an Iftar dinner hosted by President Thomas Jefferson.

As for West, he thinks he’s stumbled on to something big. “Folks, there is a lot to this whole episode — like Benghazi — that we may never know,” he said. “And this is not conspiracy theory, it is truth based upon Arabic and Islamic dogma and tradition.”

Hugo #racist realjewnews.com


I am not trying to justify killing/murder but all this must be put in its proper context. In other words:

1) All nations commit atrocities during war (not just Germany). Why do we never hear about the Allied crimes?

2) Wartime propaganda should not be allowed to become part of the historical narrative (the gas chambers story fits this category).

3) Reprisals are often a reaction against crimes committed against an occupying force and not spontaneous blood thirsty outbreaks (as M.S.M. presents it).

4) If the Jews of USA and UK were stirring up those nations to destroy Germany, and if the Jews of Russia were responsible for the Bolshevik mass murder machine, and if most European Bolsheviks during the 1930s were Jews, then why should they expect not to be collectively treated as subversives and enemies of the German state and interned given that they operate like an international masonic lodge?

5) Why do we never hear about the collective crimes of the Jews which enrage host nations and which are the cause of endless problems to everyone on earth e.g. Bolshevism, the Neocon, Hollywood, the various schools of Cultural Marxism, the swindler banking system, the FALSE NARRATIVE of M.S.M. currently driving us to WW3 etc.?

Sherry Shriner #crackpot #conspiracy #fundie #homophobia thewatcherfiles.com

The Real Intention of Mono Atomic Gold

Israel will be mesmerized by the coming panoramic satellite in the sky review of the history of mankind. They will embrace this terrestrial Jesus as the Yahushua/Jesus of the Bible. The Son of God. Those with their eyes opened should flee the state at that time, for their destruction is right around the corner.

This Jesus will align with other false prophets offering gold, frankincense and myrrh...money, perfume, and voodoo Kool-Aid to bribe mankind into changing their carbon based DNA into a crystalline DNA causing a cellular permutation, a mimicry and mockery of a resurrected and glorified body.

The typical human DNA has 2 strands. According to New Age teachings it is believed that before the fall of man in the Garden of Eden that we were created with 12 strands of DNA and after the fall that 10 of them were closed or shut off. It is the intention of Satan and his terrestrial beings to turn back the clock and undo what God did at the Garden of Eden and turn back on all 12 strands of DNA. This is an abomination and mockery of God's judgment on mankind.

They have found that by tweaking human DNA they can cause humans to appear divine like, even 'godlike.' The New Agers call it 'ascension' or obtaining a 'light body' and refer to their earth based soldiers as lightworkers.

I analyzed several Bible Codes on Mono Atomic Gold with a skip distance of 1 and even 5 spaces or less. That's about a tight of a code you can do on anyone or anything. That is the way I do all of my codes. Each code, if done correctly, tells a story. It's not just a term here or there or a sentence or a phrase as depicted by most amateur decoders online. To properly analyze a code I'll study all 50,000 words or however many is associated with it and analyze the entire code in it's entirety to get a proper understanding of what the code is revealing. I don't know of anyone else who properly analyzes a code in this way.

What I found in regards to this white gold wasn't just particular to one code. I repeatedly found and find the same terms and descriptions and story about this white powder gold in many, many different types of codes. It comes up in various and almost all codes because it is a dominant current event and a future one as well.

Some of the terms and their groupings together that I have found in Genesis 7:16 and other passages are:

Ashtar-underworld-master-guru-ghoulish

market-energy-drink-supplement-poison

sublimity-sycophant

abuse-ambusher-arrival-cleansing-poison

dilute-encoded-pattern-gender-process-death (the continual consumption of this voodoo juice will eventually lead to your death, not longevity).

president-permutation (a complete change or transformation)

bribe-immortality

snort-myrrh

cleansing-myrrh-necrosis

Babylon-pact-cleansing-myrrh (Babylon is a term referred to as the United States, the USA will make a treaty enforcing the consumption of this myrrh either known or unknown to the general public.)

myrrh-disaster-devastation-holocaust-annihilation-treaty-pact

myrrh-fraudulent-swindler-cheat-deception-phony-fake

destroyer-leader-king-mobster-myrrh-emerging

snorter-Obama

Bush-devil-incarnated

Obama-Lizard

If you've noticed the energy drinks being promoted on television they contain many of the myrrh, white mono atomic gold buzzwords such as rejuvenation, longevity, life water, even vitamin water, and feature lizards.

They want to change your DNA! They want to dilute it so that mankind becomes androgynous. In other words, effeminate. Neither solely male or female. Like they are. These fallen angels, masquerading as angelic beings are effeminate, homosexuals, and bi-sexuals. This terrestrial coming masquerading as "Jesus" is an effeminate, womanly being. Talk about nauseating...and he and they aren't going to change, so they plan to change the DNA of humans on earth to pollute and dilute God's creation of mankind.

Conservapedia #fundie conservapedia.com

By the 1970s, however, liberals had changed the meaning to represent people who favored abortion and identical roles or quotas for women in the military and in society as a whole.

Specifically, a modern feminist tends to:

* believe that there are no meaningful differences between men and women (The most significant belief underlying contemporary feminism is that there are no sex differences; therefore advocacy for equal rights must be extended to advocacy for equal results or outcomes.)
* oppose chivalry and even feign insult at harmless displays of it (see battle between the sexes)
* view traditional marriage as unacceptably patriarchal
* detest women who are happy in traditional roles, such as housewives,[4] and especially dislike those who defend such roles
* shirk traditional gender activities, like baking[5]
* support affirmative action for women
* prefer that women wear pants rather than dresses, presumably because men do[6][7]
* seek women in combat in the military just like men, and coed submarines
* refuse to take her husband's last name when marrying[8]
* distort historical focus onto female figures, often overshadowing important events (Eg: Henry VIII's wives take precedence in common knowledge to his actual reign.)
* object to being addressed as "ma'am," or feminine nicknames such as "sweetheart" or "honey";[9] object to other female-only names, such as "temptress"

Hesse Kassel #fundie archive.is

5 Lines That Potential Wives Cannot Cross

In the modern west the proportion of marriages that end in divorce is very high, up to 50%. The good news is that it does not follow from this that YOU have a 1 in 2 chance of divorce, no sir. Your chance will at least be reduced, because you are smart and will make the decisions that mitigate some of the risk.
So, you meet a girl who might actually fit the bill. If you’re looking to increase your chances at maintaining a stable family unit, here are five red lines to establish from the moment the relationship starts.

1. You don’t reject me, ever
This first one speaks for itself. Under no circumstance can you accept the idea that she gets to choose if or when to satisfy you or choose to sabotage your joint fertility. Like the other red lines, you need to establish this one well before you sign on the dotted line. Practice this from day one and make it clear before you actually marry and the chance it will be accepted long-term is very high.
If you meet resistance on this matter other than for a very good reason, just quote the line to her. If she continues to protest, then simply next her. Only give sex when it suits you. Making her miss out just a little will only make her keener, so don’t sweat, it establishes the basic theme. You control the time and frequency of sex, not her.
This rule is not just important to the fulfillment of your biological needs. More importantly, a woman who will deny you sex early on will only use it to gain greater power over you in the long run. Simply realize this is not a woman you want tethered to your life, and move on.
The obvious exception to this is the first time you have sex. Typically she will control the timing of that for obvious reasons. From the second time onward, any poorly-reasoned denial is a red flag.

2. I make the decisions, not you
You can’t operate as an effective unit unless there is a clear decision maker. You are that decision maker. As a rule of thumb that means that all decisions about things outside the house are in your sphere. If she wants some responsibility, it’s ok if she chooses how to cook the eggs.
You shall manage money competently and save to create future wealth. After demonstrating that you are a safe pair of hands it will be a lot easier to maintain discipline in this area. If you leave her with power over spending decisions she will squander the lot, so don’t give her the option.
I feel bound to point this out, but it should go without saying. You are not going to make this one stick unless you make decisions which are genuinely aimed at mutual benefit. Once you establish a trust that you will make responsible decisions, most girls will happily follow your leadership. Any girl who doesn’t is just asking for the door. As a gentleman you are ever-ready to open it for her.

3. Contraceptives and abortion are murder
Yes, that’s right. When you are selecting a wife or are married you don’t accept such practices. Why? Immediate children, more children, short gaps between children. These all increase her dependence on you and the loyalty that comes with it.
Sluts and pleasure-seeking women will next you right away if you insist on applying this rule. We are looking for a wife, right? So that’s a good thing. This rule may require some short delay before having sex. That’s fine, we are chasing a good partner for the next 50 years.
If she is marriageable don’t be afraid to make her pregnant before marriage. There is nothing like a baby on the way to increase your bargaining power. Since you are sincere in your search you are not harming her. You are helping her by overcoming her female propensity to waste her fertile years on a career, bad boys, and antidepressants.

4. I don’t touch children till they can walk
Yes, that’s right. Mothering is for mothers. If she tries to insist, just feign incompetence. It’s not hard and no girl can resist taking over.
If she claims she has other responsibilities that just means she doesn’t have enough time for those other responsibilities. Being a mother is a full-time job and her first priority. Any work, sport, church, or whatever that she can’t handle just has to go. Yes, that means everything up until the youngest child enters school.
It’s important for your children that they have her full attention. There is no one on Earth who will do as good a job. Child care services are not acceptable substitutes for a mother’s time, so don’t let her use them. If you are worried about your family living on a single income then either don’t get married, knuckle down, or harden up.
Breast feeding is good for children and increases her bond with your children, so make her do it for one year. Then make her stop. Otherwise it might delay the next child and make her search for alternatives to being a wife and mother.

5. You have left your old family and joined mine
Don’t actually say this one. Just make it clear that her family and friends from before are not important to you. Their opinions do not matter. Don’t spend a lot of time with them. Show them exemplary politeness, but only the required respect and minimum interest.
If she is worth having as a wife then she will get the message and simply attach herself to your family. Under no circumstance should you think that you can establish relations on a win-win basis with such people. They will turn on you the moment there are problems between you and your wife. When that happens, the less influence they have the better.
Now ask yourself how she will find the chance to stray?

Just imagine the situation. Wedding. Pregnant. Child born. Full time mother. No career. Breast feeding. Stop breast-feeding. Constant sex. Pregnant again. Repeat. There is little opportunity for her to get away from the children and her commitment to you, let alone consider alternatives to marriage. By the time the youngest child is in school her SMV relative to yours will have dropped, and you are safer. There are no guarantees in life but this is about as close as it comes to a solid gold one. So, follow these rules and enjoy your traditional marriage.

Dan Holman #fundie armyofgod.com

George Tiller was not your run-of-the-death-mill baby-killer. He was symbolic of the baby-killing industry. He grew in stature as he handily overcame personal obstacles and professional accusations. He made the black art of baby-killing acceptable, perhaps even noble to the public at large.

Tiller represented the baby-killing industry as their point man. He was the face that baby-killing Americans came to love, and pro-lifers love to hate. With legal impunity, wearing a shark-skin suit, Tiller killed the “big babies” with a smile.

Tiller was well connected, especially after the November Republican defeat. He did not squander his fortune, as most baby-killers do, on wine, women, and drugs; he invested wisely in politicians. Pro-choice to kill Governor Sebelius kept her protégé’ from being charged and convicted of a litany of violations of Kansas law. A rising star in Obama’s administration Sebelius would have taken Tiller along with her. Maybe even a Surgeon General.

Wichita’s perpetual beacon of hope, Troy Newman, promised Tiller’s head on a platter. But every attack on Tiller was thwarted. Hoping against hope Troy petitioned Kansas’s Medical Board to pull Tiller’s license. Poppycock! That simply would not happen. Tiller, acquitted of violating Kansas’s laws, was in no serious trouble with the medical board.

The David and Goliath routine was looking bad for David until an unknown champion appeared on the scene. God’s chosen instrument, with a single bullet to the braincase slew Goliath. Rather than take courage from this change of fortune, Troy and his camp ran the other way thinking “Boy, the Philistines are going to be pissed!”

Sweating bullets, Troy was the first to apologize to both the pro-aborts and pro-lifers. “And gee, we were so close to getting Tiller’s medical license pulled!”

Now that we have set the stage, let us examine the pre-text for why Troy and others renounce this shooters brave, unselfish act: Troy tells us that the shooter is a “coward” and a “vigilante.” We all know what a coward is but the definition of a vigilante is “any person who takes the law into his or her own hands, as by avenging a crime.”

We do not know if the shooter's motive was vengeance or if he was acting in defense of the pre-born. The definition for self-defense and defense of others is “the right for civilians acting on their own behalf to engage in violence for the sake of defending one's own life or the lives of others, including the use of deadly force.”

Self defense and the defense of others is justifiable homicide.

This defense is denied Tiller’s shooter as our laws do not recognize the humanity and worth of the pre-born. Those of us who do recognize the person of the Preborn should understand that the use of force is justifiable in protecting the pre-born children, but such is not the case.

In the posts that I have read from Troy and others they assume the shooter’s motive to be vengeance, rather than defensive action. Troy was quick to condemn Tiller’s shooter without knowing his true motive. You can stab a man’s character as surely as you shoot his person.

I proffer this fine distinction because it is important to hand-wringing soul-searching theologians sorting through the dainty innuendos, presuppositions, and new and old winds of doctrine.

But I do not believe the shooter’s motive to be important, as it amounts to defensive action no matter what his motive was.
Tiller was a serial killer. He killed the week he was killed, and like the punctual rape of every blessed day, he was scheduled to kill again. The shooter’s bullet, like David’s stone, stopped Tiller’s bloody hands cold.

But along with the death of George Tiller, is the toppling of the invincible baby-killing idol of aborticide.

Like the Munchkins in the Wizard of Oz, news of Tiller’s death was at first hard to believe. While many of us broke into a joyful song, others broke into a shameful retreat.

Tea Party Nation #conspiracy rightwingwatch.org

[Obama releases his official birth certificate.]

Democrats are hailing this as a huge defeat for the Republicans. It isn’t, but they are very good at messaging.

However, there is a very serious question to be asked. Since there are no bombshells here, except the possibility that Obama’s mother might have been a few days underage at the time of the conception, the question remains, why did Obama spend millions of dollars to keep this document secret?

Donald Trump, being the savvy guy that he is, is already moving to his next target. Obama’s college records. Obama has never released his college records, including those at Occidental College. Many believe Obama went to college there on a scholarship reserved for foreign students.

Obama should release his college records, as well as his attorney disciplinary records. Whether he will or not is anyone’s guess, though once Obama broke and released this document, he will have a much harder time not releasing other documents.

For the conservative movement, this is a two edged sword. Getting to see some of these documents is great. The question is what will it do to the Obama candidacy? Obama could be mortally wounded if some of the other records reveal embarrassing things, such as attending school on a scholarship reserved for foreign students. The Democrats may actually want this to happen. As gas prices rise and so does inflation, the chances of an Obama second term diminish. If something happened and the Democrats could replace Obama with someone else (Hillary Clinton?), that candidate could run against the Obama record as well as the Republicans, giving them a shot at keeping at least the White House in Democratic hands.

Pamela Geller #fundie wnd.com

We should have seen all this coming. Obama deceitfully hid his Muslim background and schooling and his agenda. I started writing about Obama’s religious Muslim background in January 2007, and throughout 2007 and 2008 I presented evidence of Obama’s identification as a Muslim when he was a child, his extremist Muslim family and his Islamic schooling. In December 2007, I wrote, “Barack Obama went to a madrassa in Jakarta. A madrassa in a Muslim country. Whether he was devout or secular, he knows what was taught. He knows what is in the Quran. Even if he is ambiguous, he knows the stakes involved. His father was a Muslim who took three wives (without divorcing). His stepfather and close members of his family are devout Muslims. Not an unimportant influence.” And who can forget Obama’s bald-faced lies to the Jews? In February 2008, Obama told Jewish leaders: “If anyone is still puzzled about the facts, in fact I have never been a Muslim.” Yet he was registered as a Muslim in an Indonesian school.

Nor was that all. Terrorists supported him. There were the phone banks in Gaza supporting his campaign. Tens of thousands of jihad dollars from a Hamas controlled refugee camp in Gaza filled his coffers. Mosques in the U.S. were preaching for Obama. Khalid Al Mansour, a racist Islamist very much in the mold of Louis Farrakhan and Obama's anti-Semitic, anti-American pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, sponsored Obama for Harvard. When Wright was exposed as a member of the hate group the Nation of Islam prior to his leadership of his Black Liberation church, the mainstream media yawned.

Americans rely on our media to vet our candidates. But the media morphed in 2008. Instead of investigative journalism, the American people were victims of activist propagandizing. Obama was never vetted. His lies were never exposed.

And so now we have our first Muslim presidency, just eight years after 9/11. The media can spin their subjugation and adulation a million different ways, but America did not vote for a "Muslim presidency," which is what this is. Everything this president has done so far has helped foster America's submission to Islam.

Aaron Sleazy #sexist blog.aaronsleazy.com

Imagine for a second that you’re an entitled fat bitch who has been told so often that she’s a little princess that she ended up believing it. Even if you’re not fat, your personality is very likely to be toxic. Now look around and you’ll find that there are a lot of Western women like that: entitled, unpleasant personality, and barely able to take care of their own life.

Alek Novy speaks of the “pussy cartel” if I recall correctly. Similarly to how OPEC controls a large part of the world’s oil supply, the pussy cartel controls how often men get laid. It’s an amusing metaphor, and there is some justification behind it. Women in the pussy cartel seem to think that because they are providing (selling?) access to a very desirable resource (sex), they can do whatever they want. (Just look at Saudi Arabia for a real-life comparison.) Since too many men only think with their little head, women believe they will get what they want anyway.

Your typical Western whore may very well think that she is a special snowflake and go on to bang a dozen dudes in her 20s. She thinks she can easily get a quality guy to marry her, should she ever decide to do so. More and more women realize that things seem to have changed, however. Some even speak of a “marriage strike”. It seems that word got out that Western whores aren’t really worth it. Many men don’t even want to date them anymore.

Here’s something to think about: go to a larger Western city, and count how many White male/Asian female (WMAF) pairings you see. Chances are that it’s not an insignificant number. Now, only the more desirable men are candidates for relationships to begin with, so for every white guy who entered a relationship with an Asian woman, some Western woman lost out on getting a stable and desirable partner. More and more white women will learn that they can no longer compete for white guys, so their prospects will be rather dismal.

It may just be my perception, but I certainly have the impression that WMAF pairings are getting more and more common. This now leads me to wonder how white women perceive this. Calling it an “Asia Shock” seems appropriate, in my opinion. Imagine this: Western women get raised to be spoilt brats and everything is fine and dandy because guys are seemingly willing to take their crap — until suddenly competition shows up that completely blows them out of the water. It’s not a pretty sight, and it’s not surprising that they are losing out as the women who “steal” their men are more attractive, smarter, and have infinitely more pleasant personalities. Seriously, why wouldn’t you trade a Western harpy for an Asian bombshell with brains who is a joy to have around?

It’s hilarious how Western women try to deal with their competition. Shaming guys is an old favorite. Then there is the old “patriarchy” canard, according to which Asian women are only nice because they are “oppressed” and if you date one, it not only means that you’re an oppressor, it also means that you are not “man enough” to date a Western whore. Dear Western women, if the choice is between a berating bitch and a woman who shows genuine appreciation for her partner, what do you think any guy with half a brain will do? Heck, plenty of guys who are immune to yellow fever rather abstain from sex and relationships altogether instead of getting involved with Western women. Whatever you think you are doing, Western women, I don’t think it’s working anymore.

Dean T. Olson #fundie raptureforums.com

The ruling today [on same-sex marriage] will open the floodgates of persecution of Christians in America. There is an axiom that whatever the government taxes it controls. Today's ruling clears the way for the government to remove tax exempt status from churches refusing to knuckle under to the gay agenda. Not only may churches lose tax exempt status, but the coercive power of a godless government can fine and imprison pastors declining to perform gay weddings. Adhering to Biblical truths can now be labeled hate crimes leading to job loss, fines and imprisonment.

Satan is winning battle after battle in our increasingly wretched culture. A sure sign that we are now circling the drain and our redemption via the rapture is very near. [...] Today's decision greases the skids for wholesale persecution of Christians at the hands of godless secular progressives now running our nation. Believers will witness a dizzying onslaught of perverse cultural events that will so transform our beloved America that we will no longer recognize it. It is like a slow motion train wreck watching the implosion of our society. I hit my knees nightly to beg Jesus to come quickly and take us out of here.

Brian Niemeier #wingnut brianniemeier.com

Conservatives are fond of invoking the Ring of Power from J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings as a symbol of government power. It's easy to see the attraction that metaphor holds for them. Having raised individual liberty and limited government to cardinal virtues, a talisman of ultimate control fits their image of the shadowy, vaguely superhuman bureaucracy in Washington.

In Tolkien's masterpiece, the plot was a type of anti-quest wherein the heroes had to overcome long odds--not to recover some powerful artifact, but to destroy it. Meanwhile, a Dark Lord seeking world domination was after the same prize. The spoils were winner take all with no silver medal for second place. Those conditions set a nuclear doomsday clock-sized timer that kept the tension high.

Conservatives' penchant for equating the One Ring with government explains itself when you consider that it lets them cast themselves as the underdog Fellowship striving to destroy the source of tyranny--or in their case, return America to Constitutional government. It's a highly flattering image.

There are a couple of problems with that allegory, though. First of all, the Fellowship's goal wasn't placing checks on the Ring. They were out to destroy it, specifically because its power was illimitable. Following the analogy to its logical conclusion, Conservatives actually propose something more along the lines of Frodo's original idea: managing the Ring by keeping it out of the wrong hands. Due to its corrupting influence, that also meant refusing to use it himself.

Tolkien staunchly resisted attempts to frame Lord of the Rings as an allegory, and here we have a good reason why. Plugging "government" into the story for all values of the Ring results in something more like anarchism. The story itself contradicts this reading, since one of the good guys' victory conditions is crowning a new king. Tolkien's opus can more readily be seen as two groups of monarchists slugging it out with a small faction of distributists deciding which monarchy wins.

The other issue is that it's far too late to destroy the Ring. Proposing a return to the Constitution is closing the barn door after the horses have not only left, but have been shipped to China for stew meat.

[...]

The Conservative project might've had merit while there was still a chance of bringing the state to heel through grassroots organizing and voting in the right people. Now, by their own measure, Conservatives are about as relevant as the Whigs. The folks running establishment Conservatism know this. That's why their operation has shifted toward milking Boomers for cruise money while pushing butt stuff on college kids.

Point this out to Conservatives, and they'll often quote from Lewis' Abolition of Man or Tolkien's line about fighting the long defeat. That attitude makes sense coming from British men of letters who held a vestigial fondness for pagan stoicism and who'd seen the two apocalyptic 20th century wars. One wonders what they'd say if they saw that England will be minority English by next century and heard that the state can rip children from their fathers' arms for summary castration.

Tolkien never showed us what would happen if Sauron won. Now we're seeing it firsthand. Clown World thwarts the Ring metaphor.

Perhaps an alternate timeline sequel to LotR would have seen a daring burglar stealing the Ring back from under the Dark Lord's nose. 2016 actually gave Conservatives the chance to play out that scenario--to try Boromir's way and use the Ring now that all bets are off--or else destroy it. They squandered their last chance to do both. The urge to languish on the sofa and sigh about the long defeat proved irresistible.

Conservatives' utter and repeated failure has taught us at least one thing: The Ring can be wrested from its wielder's hand. Unlike Tolkien's preternatural talisman, government is a human institution meant for human use.

The rising tide of dissenters won't make the same mistakes. Our task is to slowly scale the mountain until we stand where Boromir did. And this time, we'll use the Ring.

For a story where the heroes put this strategy into practice, check out Combat Frame XSeed: CY 40 Second Coming.

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

Demonic spirits appear in many forms, sometimes working through false prophets, sometimes through corrupt bibles, and oftentimes through adulterous and violent scenes on TV. Every TV program has a spirit to it. Fox News is saturated with a demonic spirit of lying and misinformation. Oprah Winfrey's show is saturated with a demonic spirit of New Age and occultism. Desperate Housewives is saturated with a demonic spirit of adultery and lasciviousness. And on and on.

Tom DeLay #fundie newsmax.com

Former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay claims the Justice Department has drafted a memo that spells out a dozen "perversions," including bestiality and pedophilia, that it wants legalized.

"We've … found a secret memo coming out of the Justice Department. They're now going to go after 12 new perversions. Things like bestiality, polygamy, having sex with little boys and making that legal," DeLay said Tuesday on "The Steve Malzberg Show" on Newsmax TV.

"Not only that, but they have a whole list of strategies to go after the churches, the pastors and any businesses that try to assert their religious liberty. This is coming and it's coming like a tidal wave."

The Texas Republican's bombshell claim comes four days after the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex marriage is now legal in all 50 states — a landmark decision DeLay strongly opposes.

When Steve Malzberg repeated to DeLay his assertions that the Justice Department seeks "to legitimatize or legalize" practices such as bestiality — defined as sex acts between humans and animals — DeLay responded:

"That's correct, that's correct. They're coming down with 12 new perversions … LGBT [short for lesbian gay, bisexual and transgender] is only the beginning. They're going to start expanding it to the other perversions."


CH #fundie heartiste.wordpress.com

But does he have tight game? The evidence gathered to date says… the tightest! For instance, examine closely how well Trump handled his own Realtalk™ charge that could’ve blown up in his face given leftoid Hivemind and GOP (one and the same) hatred of him.

Trump said Juan McCain is no war hero, because, paraphrasing, there’s nothing heroic about getting captured.

I happen to agree, in part, with Trump here. A sure sign of national decline is bastardization of the native language (to suit the needs of ruling class propagandists and, less ominously, to strengthen group identification among the lower classes). As Greg Cochran has noted, we live in a culture where the hero has MOVED ON to the right side of history, becoming a “hero through suffering” rather than a “hero through deed”. This is supposed to be an improvement. It’s not. It’s a dumbing-down of heroism, so the mass of mediocrities can feel like they have a spiritual connection to the hallowed Hero’s Hall every time they fall into a depressed resignation about their miserable lives.

I specify that I agreed with Trump “in part”, because the Merriam-Webster definition of “hero” does include, under line item #2, the description of the hero as someone with “noble qualities”. You can argue that, once captured, possessing the grit and fortitude to stick it out for years until release is a type of heroism.

So there was wiggle room there for Trump to take a legit hit from his enemies to the…. “””right”””. (hahaha i keel myself!)

But did Trump back down when the Hivemind assembled its buzzing battalions to perforate him on a, ahem, trumped-up charge of insufficient patriotism and groveling toward a veteran with a stellar record of lapping up the precum off Vicente Fox’s Spanish-European glans? (A charge, it should be mentioned, not a single member of the Hivemind conglomerate takes seriously in his own life.)

No. Not only did Trump refuse the offer he couldn’t refuse, he struck back with guns twice as big, twice as fast, and ten times as lethal.

This fuckin guy. ????

As wags have dubbed him, Trump is a kind of morph of Realtalking internet commenters and Duke Nukem. Here he is on peabrained cuckservative Rick Perry, after Perry swallowed a load of Hivemind jizz and tried, feebly, to oust Trump from respectable GOP circlejerks:

And look what Trump did to that most effete of GOP supracucks, Lindsey “gaypedoface” Graham, (who called Trump a “jackass”). Skip to minute 26:00 to see Trump brandish Graham’s real cell number, asking the studio audience to call Graham for clarification on his past request for Trump’s campaign assistance. It is quite the slashing shiv.

Trump has tight game.

– He reframes his opponents’ attacks.
– He goes on the offense, never allowing himself the womanly comfort of the defensive crouch.
– He never apologizes. Especially not when his accusers are such gratuitous phonyfucks.
– He is socially savvy, and knows how to speak to the common man.
– His upgraded third wife is a hottie. And not just “for her age”.

If Trump is President, no one will have to humiliate himself pretending that a First Gorilla is a highly fuckable beauty.

Trump is such a BAD BAD RACIST EGOTISTIC MAN that he currently sits atop the Republican polls. Game can get you laid, and it can help you become leader of the free world.

President Donald Trump.

Isn’t it about time the Presidency was occupied by an alpha male worthy of the office? You know, alpha males like we used to have with the Founders?

If nothing else, Trump makes what would have been a tedious, insipid non-race with no import besides greasing the skids to national dissolution into something interesting to watch. Trump has pushed the Overton Window so wide, its gaping hole resembles Andrew “RawMuscleGlutes” Sullivan’s prolapsing rectum.

Trump fucks with the status quo, and the fucking is good.

dianadepoitiers #wingnut #sexist amren.com

RE: Kiss Me Now, You Nazi! Refusing to Date Woke Women Makes You ‘Dangerous’ and ‘Far-Right’, Apparently

What about househusbands? That's a badge I happily wear.

What about them? They score between 0-1 on a 1-10 attractiveness scale .

It would drive me insane to have a househusband.

”Because that is what she WANTS to do. Feminists are not against women being housewives if they want.”

Yes they are. I cannot tell you how many nasty, hateful screeds I’ve read online about housewives. They say we’re lazy, stupid, worthless, slaves to men, etc. They only want women to do what they want, if it fits in with the liberal ideology.

Feminists resent domestic women despite lip-service to "women's choice."

Domestic women, unless rich-by-daddy, automatically depend on a man for their livelihood. This irks feminists to no end, but not because they think those women will be enslaved to a man, as folklore would have you believe; but because they know men willingly enslave themselves to those domestic wives by bringing them livelihood and protection on a platter - something an authentic Feminist could have never inspired in a man to begin with.

Because that is what she WANTS to do. Feminists are not against women being housewives if they want.

This is because:

1. Feminists are individualists, not holistic, civilization-oriented thinkers. Civilizations are not built strictly with what individuals WANT (their whims).

2. Feminists know their aggressive ideology and propaganda denigrates individual choices they personally despise anyway (Fems DO despise the housewife role and they resent women who can afford to choose this role).
Note how it is increasingly difficult for family with traditional values to choose to keep the wife in a strictly domestic role. They tell you you have a choice; but with enough women coaxed in the workplace, the provider/homemaker option becomes an unrealistic economic options for many. Only theoretical.

Generally speaking, when everyone is told that they can do whatever suits them, personally, and that their society should accommodate every individual with the widest possible array of choices - you end up with no civilization.

The bottom line is that, with very rare exceptions, most women contribute best to civilization by fulfilling reproductive and domestic roles, not "professional/technical."

Just like most men contribute best in the public sphere, not when they change diapies.

In fact, if you examine closer the so-called "workplace" (as if the domestic area is not a "workplace") most women mess around in frivolous, bureaucratic, paper-shuffling, make-work, resource-wasting, water-cooler gossiping jobs, not in value-adding jobs.

Women's value remains in the private sphere. It always has, it always will. The rare, highly competent female surgeon (or what not) can easily be replaced with an equivalent male. Keep the rare Anna Coulter in the public world - that one would probably explode if confined to domesticity.

Otherwise, it's not worth messing up your civilization for very rare individual exceptions to the rule.

Bring women back home. Make the Private Sphere Great Again!

Unfortunately, guys do not have a choice in what we want to do; same goes I suppose for most women. The 'elites' who have destroyed this once great country have made sure of that by importing tens of millions of illiterate turd worlders, ordering LE to let them run wild as they destroy the civilization that white people built over the last 500 years, and then their corporate world refuses to employ white people as anything other than fry cooks, toilet cleaners and floor sweepers. Jeff Sessions observed that 60% of all white STEM graduates never work in their field 5 years after graduation, or effectively, NEVER. This is because the corp world like Google, Microsoft, Amazon, et al employ h2b types, illegals and worse. But of course the MSM blames YT for anything that is wrong in this country. That record is getting very old and after 3 or 4 generations we have gotten wise to who is that bunch of clowns behind the curtin in the OZ throne room.

Yes. And what feminists do not want the public to understand is that when you hurt most men, you automatically hurt most women too.

Women are not attracted to weak, vulnerable, dispossessed men - whether they have enough money/power of their own or not. Just like men are not attracted to ugly, fat, fighter-type, non-feminine women.

It's nobody's fault. It's not that the sexes are mean to each other. It's what we have evolve to look for. A better world is a world where both sexes are encouraged and helped along to become the most of what the opposite sex looks for in a partner. That's kind, humane and beautiful.

It is why every young woman secretly dreams of being an inspirational princess who leaves glitter behind as she walks. It's why every guy dreams of being James Bond - who leaves bodies behind (as needed) as he walks.

Most leftist women are feminine conforming.

Originally, maybe. Increasingly less so, as feminism continues to weave its works. Most people with minimal observational acumen, who have had the chance to compare and contrast female populations in various feminist and non-feminist cultures (aka "perspective"), can recognize the subtly masculine traits of most contemporary western women when compared to women elsewhere.

Outspoken (translate loud), assertive (translate aggressive), confident (translate full-of-themselves or just nonchalant), trying hard to be funny (translate 'not funny'), cool (translate cold), comfortable and buddy-like around men (translate slutty), etc. They may wear lipstick and sport mermaid hair but their subtly masculine traits are less subtle with every decade. Western men and women are now pushed to converge in a gray area of androgyny.

Though the pretty feminine women see nothing wrong with what their non-feminie conforming sisters are doing.

Ever heard of virtue signaling? They don't want to act "judgy" because the culture says it' not cool; but I can promise you they they DO recognize plenty wrong with what their overtly non-feminine "sisters" are doing (non-feminine as in more or less butchy). On this point, this only means less sexual competition for them. Btw, there's no "sisterhood."

You appear to have little understanding of the depths of female hypocrisy and manipulation abilities.

Really? I’ve never met a feminist that didn’t double down on the lunacy and tried to emotionally castrate their sons and turn them into “feminist men”.

It can be confusing to distinguish all the conscious and subconscious motivations behind a woman's feminist identity. Not all declared feminists are created equal. There are authentic feminists (true genetic failures as women); there are popularity-driven feminists (women as herd creatures opt for what seems most popular); there are vanity-driven feminists (attention whores/ celebrities of the Me Too persuasion); there are defensive feminists (afraid of the rigors and upward pressures patriarchal societies often impose on women), etc. I'd say most female feminists fall in the latter two categories.

The popularity-driven ones usually don't know their left from right and just parrot back whatever sounds "cool" and "with it."

Romans 6:23 #fundie teens-4-christ.org

I was driving home from school on a normal winter day. There was some snow on the ground, but overall the roads were pretty much clear. The road I was on was 45 MPH, so I was moving pretty fast for the weather conditions! So anyway, I was going up a slight hill and as soon as a reach the top I see a school bus stopped letting some kids off and there were two or three cars behind it. I lightly pushed onto the brakes to slow down but realized I wasn't slowing down at all! I immediately SLAMMED on the brakes as hard as I could and went into a skid, heading straight for the row of cars ahead of me! I screamed at the top of my lungs "PLEASE HELP ME GOD!" and slid all the way up until I was about 4 inches away from the row of cars, and I came to a sudden stop, which was extremely scary because I was still moving at about 10 MPH just before that! I thought I had hit a car from sure and that's what stopped me, but the person in that car didn't seem to notice. I stopped to catch my breath and just sat in my car for a bit to see what the other person would do. The line started moving and the car ahead of me just kept on going. Amazingly there were no scratches on his car at all! I pulled aside, got out of my car, and looked for any damage, and there was absolutely none! I came to the conclusion that it wasn't the car ahead of me that stopped me, but the hand of GOD Himself!

Todd Strandberg #fundie raptureready.com

The most disturbing news event related to the media bias is the reaction to the undercover investigative video of Planned Parenthood. A pro-life group filmed a Planned Parenthood executive talking casually about the body parts of aborted babies, using the partial-birth abortion procedure to ensure the baby parts stay intact. The press took a couple days to figure out how to create the right spin to convolute the truth about the sickening video. The AP was the first to say it was only about the “disposition of fetal remains.”

The Washington Post followed with columnist Petula Dvorak proudly declaring, “Planned Parenthood deserves to be supported, not attacked.” In it, she called the video “nothing more than another one of those graphic abortion protest posters,” or “totally out of context and totally horrible.”

Cosmopolitan magazine used the use the same boldfaced denial tactic with the headline, “That Planned Parenthood Video Isn’t the Scandal Abortion Opponents Are Making it Out to Be.” Now, frankly, I’m just going to yawn,” wrote writer Robin Marty. While she “shuddered” at watching the video, she reasoned that “medicine overall is often gory and gruesome.”

Samantha Allen from The Daily Beast attacked the financial claim in an article titled: “Planned Parenthood Doesn’t Sell Fetuses: The Real Story Behind That Shady Video.” She unconscionably comes to this conclusion because “payments are for processing and transportation costs.”

The minds of these reporters are so sick and twisted, if they had worked for the Nazi state media they would easily have explained away Hitler’s death camps by saying, “Oh, these people died from a mass suicide” or “maybe the Red Army committed these atrocities.”

Polish_Crusader #fundie gamefaqs.com

[Re: Say good things about other beliefs]

Buddhism- I think they are nice people. I used to day a buddhist who I almost converted but she ended up not because of my horrible actions. This was before i turned into the awesomness I am now. I think they will get the least punishment in hell cuz of their nice deeds.

Sikhs, asian religions- ditto, just like buddhims

Islam- There are a lot of nice muslims. But I think they will burn in hell pretty bad. Sorry thats negative. Im just saying. There own book attacks jews and christians! What do u expect!

Atheists- Atheist try to act smarter than thou and so evolved and intelligent, but end up sounding stupid and wicked. They are fools just like the bible says- only a fool says there is no god. Atheists will be burned more than crispy critters in the pit of hell. This is negative i know. But its the truth!

Catholics- Truly the craziest sect of christianity. Apart from the smaller cult like versions- like jehovahs witnesses and mormons. Im not entirely sure of their salvation. But I think there are alot of nice catholics.

Jehovahs witnesses, mormons, various wannabe christian cults- BURN, BURN, BURN, i hope these guys bring plenty of sunblock and water in the pit of hell cuz their false beliefs will get the screaming in torture. That sounds horrible. But im being blunt honest, im tired give me a break.

Oh well,... yawn... goodnight eveyrone! AND DONT BURN IN HELL!

Jennifer Leclaire #fundie charismanews.com

The Obama administration may be resistant to defunding Planned Parenthood at the federal level—and the Senate may have failed to get the job done—but individual states are rising up against these conscienceless baby killers.

Undercover journalists have released five bombshell gruesome videos that have outraged even liberal politicians, though Planned Parenthood's clergy board insists the group is "doing God's work."

Louisiana was quick to defund the abortion mill. New Hampshire jumped on board and Alabama becomes the third state to end all funding for the abortion giant.

The "Am I Being Detained" Award

Sir, Am I being Detained? SIR!

Anonymous Coward #conspiracy godlikeproductions.com

Christ detained by Satan 6 centuries prior being Jesus?!

I wonder why nobody wants to address the detention of Christ with the 'king of Persia'?

Read this first (short masterpiece reading):

Thread: BOMBSHELL: Christ was on earth before being Jesus!


Dan 10:13

But the prince of the Persian kingdom resisted me twenty-one days. Then Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, because I was detained there with the king of Persia.


Christ was detained WITH the 'king of Persia', together, as stated in Dan 10:13.

Except that history never reported such detention of the king of Persia which was Cyrus the Great at the moment Christ met Daniel.


[link to en.m.wikipedia.org (secure)]


Why did the prince of the Persian kingdom resist Christ 21 days?

What could the word 'resist' means?

Who was the prince of the Persian kingdom at the time of Cyrus?


The son of Cyrus the Great was Cambyses II.

[link to en.m.wikipedia.org (secure)]

Bardiya is said to be an imposter who ruled few months.

[link to en.m.wikipedia.org (secure)]


20 So he said, “Do you know why I have come to you? Soon I will return to fight against the prince of Persia, and when I go, the prince of Greece will come;

This is not the king but the prince of Persia that Christ would fight against.

Why would Christ fight Cambyses II in the End Times supposedly being the moment Christ returns to defeat Satan.

Who else could Christ fight against?

Is the Son of God involved in minor fights against minor princes?


There is another version that could well be the real one.

Nebbuchadnezzar was the king of Babylon who invaded Israel and subdued its king who was deported to Babylon. Daniel was a noble from the royal Israelite family. He wrote his book from Babylon in captivity. He cites Nebbuchadnezzar and Belshazzar, son of Nabonidus.

In Daniel's book, some kings are missing between Nebbuchadnezzar/Belshazzar of Babylon and Cyrus the Great, then Darius I, of Persia. These missing kings are:

[link to en.m.wikipedia.org (secure)]

Amel-Marduk
Nergal-shar-usur
Labashi-Marduk

and Nabonidus, particularly known with the Nabonidus Chronicle.

[link to en.m.wikipedia.org (secure)]

Nabonidus was king and father of Belshazzar cited by Daniel in Dan 8 as king of Babylon, instead of his father Nabonidus!

Why is Nabonidus forgotten?


While the three first kings after Nebbuchadnezzar (42 years of reign) ruled only for 4 years (3 kings in four years), Nabonidus, having left the capital for a long period, ruled
17 years through his son Belshazzar, staying in Babylon, for a while.

Wikipedia says about Nabonidus: Last Mesopotamian king of Babylon, originated in Harran in Assyria. Was not a Chaldean, often left rule to his son Belshazzar.

So, remember that Nabonidus was the last king of Babylon before the invasion of the Persian king Cyrus the Great while Daniel was in captivity in Babylon.

In the page of Wikipedia about Cyrus we can read this:

[link to en.m.wikipedia.org (secure)]

It is probable that Cyrus engaged in negotiations with the Babylonian generals to obtain a compromise on their part and therefore avoid an armed confrontation. Nabonidus was staying in the city at the time and soon fled to the capital, Babylon, which he had not visited in years.[62]

Two days later, on October 7 (proleptic Gregorian calendar), Gubaru's troops entered Babylon, again without any resistance from the Babylonian armies, and detained Nabonidus.


Here is more about Nabonidus:

[link to en.m.wikipedia.org (secure)]


HERE WE ARE!

WE HAVE A KING DETAINED IN CYRUS' PERIOD. IT HAPPENS THAT CYRUS WAS MADE KING OF BABYLON AFTER NABONIDUS' REIGN!


On October 29, Cyrus himself entered the city of Babylon and detained Nabonidus.
.../...

After taking Babylon, Cyrus the Great proclaimed himself "king of Babylon, king of Sumer and Akkad, king of the four corners of the world" in the famous Cyrus cylinder, an inscription deposited in the foundations of the Esagila temple dedicated to the chief Babylonian god, Marduk.

What the links provided say is that Nabonidus has been downplayed by the Babylonians priests of Marduk and Cyrus himself, considered as a Messiah in Isaiah's texts by the Jews.

NABONIDUS HAS UNDERGONE A SMEAR PROPAGANDA BY THE ONE SEEN AS A MESSIAH BY THE JEWS.

IS IT THE REASON FOR THE CONFUSION BETWEEN THE PRINCE OF PERSIA - IN FACT CYRUS THE GREAT NOT KING OF BABYLON YET - AND THE KING OF 'PERSIA' WHO WOULD BE IN FACT THE KING OF BABYLON - INSTEAD OF PERSIA - DETAINED BY CYRUS...WITH CHRIST?

THIS GIVES US A VERY NEW VISION OF CHRIST DETAINED WITH NABONIDUS, KING OF BABYLON (NOT PERSIA) BY CYRUS - THE PRINCE OF PERSIA - WHO THEN IS IN FACT SATAN INCARNATED...REVERED BY THE JEWS FOR HIS DECISION TO SET THE JEWS FREE!

The point now to understand is why the Jews mistranslated Babylon for Persia. Is it to follow orders from Cyrus the Great to better hide the presence of Christ with Nabonidus in prison because of Cyrus WHO WOULD BE THE PRINCE OF PERSIA WHOM CHRIST WILL FIGHT AT THE END TIMES AND RESISTED CHRIST 21 DAYS?

ONLY A SUPERNATURAL BEING COULD RESIST CHRIST'S POWER. THIS COULD ONLY BE CHRIST, UNFORTUNATELY DETAINED WITH NABONIDUS!


In case I wasn't clear enough, the point is that:

1) the Prince of Persia was Cyrus the Great, KING OF PERSIA. He resisted Christ for 21 days. Cyrus the Great was actually Satan that Christ must fight in the End Times.


2) the King of Persia was Nabonidus, actually KING OF BABYLON. He was actually detained by Cyrus the Great just before the latter become King of Babylon. The detention with a king that Christ speaks about is therefore REAL.


3) The mistranslations - king of Persia instead of King of Babylon (Nabonidus) as well as Prince of Persia instead of King of Persia (Cyrus the Great) - reflects a purposedly smear campaign against Nabonidus by Cyrus the Great seen as Messiah by the Jews through Isaiah's words, to better confuse the readers and make Nabonidus forgotten.


4) Since Christ was detained by Cyrus the Great WITH Nabonidus, King of Babylon, it means that Christ was incarnated BEFORE being Jesus for the detention necessarily occured on the physical plane!


5) the point 4 above explains why the angel Michael had to set Christ free. Christ should have been abducted by an angel - only supporter of Christ at that time according to his own words - and freed from his incarnated body (Daniel saw him in his glorious body in Dan 10) like Christ was freed from Jesus' body when John saw Christ in Rev 1.


6) the abduction of Christ should have occured like the ones reported in numerous cases of angels' interventions as stated in this thread:

Thread: The RAPTURE is UFO related.


7) Christ's incarnation in Daniel's time remains a mystery...but should be related to Nabonidus' detention. Who was Christ (incarnated) to the King of Babylon? One clue lies in the mysterious and supernatural handwriting on the wall in Dan 5 intended to Belshazzar, Nabonidus' son:


25 “This is the inscription that was written:

mene, mene, tekel, parsin

26 “Here is what these words mean:

Mene: God has numbered the days of your reign and brought it to an end.

27 Tekel: You have been weighed on the scales and found wanting.

28 Peres: Your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians.”

30 That very night Belshazzar, king of the Babylonians, was slain,

31 and Darius the Mede took over the kingdom, at the age of sixty-two.

Here we see how historically wrong is this last verse for the new king of Babylon was Cyrus, NOT Darius who came well after Cyrus the Great almost ten years later after two other kings.

The same way, Belshazzar is presented as the son of Nebbuchadnezzar instead of Nabonidus in Dan 5.


Again an attempt to dismiss Nabonidus and confuse the readers.

I believe Christ being close to Nabonidus who was far from his son. One must ask why...

Mike Adams #conspiracy naturalnews.com

BOMBSHELL: China and America already at war: Tianjin explosion carried out by Pentagon space weapon in retaliation for Yuan currency devaluation... Military helicopters now patrolling Beijing

(NaturalNews) EXCLUSIVE: Mainland Chinese dissidents have handed Natural News the following bombshell story. (Two minor updates / corrections are now included in this story, see below.)

The Tianjin explosion was waged as an act of "kinetic retaliation" by the Pentagon in response to China's currency war Yuan devaluation, according to dissident sources from mainland China. The Chinese government has put in place unprecedented secrecy surrounding the mysterious explosion, and aggressive police state tactics are now being invoked to control the flow of information surrounding this event.

"Last week's explosions sent massive fireballs into the sky and hurled burning debris across the industrial area at the world's 10th-largest port, burning out buildings and shattering windows kilometres away," reports the Daily Mail UK.

The Chinese government's official explanation for the explosion, which has now killed 114 people, is a complete whitewash. China is going to declare regional martial law in the next 18 days, Natural News has learned, in order to exercise total control over the movement of people and information. The government has banned reporters from entering the area and has begun arresting bloggers who promote what the government calls "conspiracy theories" regarding the cause of the massive explosion.

China has blacked out reporting on Tianjin in exactly the same way the U.S. media blacked out reporting on Dr. William Thompson, the CDC whistleblower who admitted the CDC buried evidence linking vaccines to autism. In both China and the United States, when the government doesn't want the citizens to know something, it censors the story across the entire state-run media, invoking "information totalitarianism."

Both before and after the massive explosion, the Chinese government has been flying "black helicopters" in formation across Beijing. (Update: Previously, this article stated the helicopters began flying after the explosion, but we have been corrected on this point, as helicopters were witnessed in the sky in the days before the explosion as well.) Chinese dissidents took numerous photos of these helicopters and were able to deliver these exclusive pictures to Natural News:

image

A warning shot from the United States: Don't crash the dollar or sell our debt

Chinese dissidents have told Natural News they have reason to believe the attack on Tianjin is a warning shot from the United States, which is terrified that China is on the verge of announcing its own gold-backed currency while declaring a fire sale on U.S. debt holdings.

The actions would collapse the U.S. dollar and destroy the U.S. economy, sending the United States into economic freefall. The "Rod of God" weapon deployment by the U.S. Pentagon, we're told, was America's "shot across the bow" to send a powerful warning message to China while disguising the attack as a domestic chemical explosion.

Timeline of events: China devalues currency, then Pentagon strikes in mere hours

Consider the calendar of events in all this:

August 11, 2015: China devalues the Yuan by 1.9%, sending "shockwaves" around the world and setting off a "devastating" impact to the U.S. economy.

August 12, 2015: Tianjin struck by Pentagon's secret "Rod of God" weapon, a space-based top-secret kinetic weapon that can be dropped from high orbit to strike almost any land-based target. The weapon instantly destroys six city blocks on the edge of the city of Tianjin, sending a message to China that's eerily similar to the message sent by the United States in the dropping of the world's first atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in World War II. (Yes, the USA is willing to drop weapons of mass destruction on civilian populations. It has already done it twice!)

(For those following the Shemitah, the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan also occurred during a Shemitah year, in the month of august, 1945, exactly 70 years ago. This is precisely TEN Shemitah cycles ago, or what might be called a "deca-Shemitah.")

August 16, 2015: Obama issues stern warning "...about the presence of Chinese government agents operating secretly in the United States," reports The New York Times. "And it comes at a time of growing tension between Washington and Beijing on a number of issues: from the computer theft of millions of government personnel files that American officials suspect was directed by China, to China's crackdown on civil liberties, to the devaluation of its currency."

The Pentagon's secret space-based weapons

The "Rod of God" weapon consists primarily of a kinetic weapon arriving with unimaginable kinetic energy... more than a small tactical nuclear weapon, in fact, giving it the appearance of a tactical nuke.

U.S. websites are now speculating that the Tianjin explosion was a U.S. space-based weapons test involving a "Rod of God" weapon dropped from orbit. "The [resulting] lake [crater] in China proves a 5 kiloton blast, possibly nuclear or possibly from a space based 'rod from God' (pictured to the left) weapon [was] deployed by the space plane," says The Unhived Mind.

"After looking through the images of the soviet nuclear tests, the new lake in China appears to have been made by a slightly sub surface burst of at least a 5 kiloton nuclear bomb... This was NOT an accident and the fracture pattern around the crater proves a sub ground burst. If it was a sub ground burst, then a small nuclear weapon is the biggest possibility because once a nuke has to push dirt, the blinding flash will not happen. A slightly subsurface detonation would explain why camera sensors did not get strange artifacts. And if it was not a nuke, it was something else incredibly huge, but not a fuel air bomb because fuel air bombs will not leave craters."

Space-based kinetic weapons "dropped" onto targets are explained by Popular Science in this article from 2004:

When instructed from the ground, the targeting satellite commands its partner to drop one of its darts. The guided rods enter the atmosphere, protected by a thermal coating, traveling at 36,000 feet per second--comparable to the speed of a meteor. The result: complete devastation of the target, even if it's buried deep underground.

"When required these projectiles can be commanded to dive, singly or en masse, at targets on the Earth's surface, smashing into the victim at orbital speed. As the projectile's kinetic energy is released, the blast would be equivalent to a large conventional bomb," explains Armaghplanet.com.

The Last Trump #fundie christiannews.net

(in response to "news" story "Atheists File Complaint Over Judge Who Offered Marrying Girl, Copying Scripture as Jail Alternative"):

Ah, look at all the Christian website stalking trolls up in arms over a simple verse of scripture! A simple quote from a piece of literature!
And comparing it to Islam and the Koran! Adorable! :)

Relax atheistic religitards. It's called wisdom. And it came from a book. (Oh no! Oh no!)
Had he not actually referenced the book of Proverbs or simply reworked the wording to some degree you wouldn't be convulsively frothing at the mouth right now and pulling erratically on your own hair.

Wisdom. If you dig a pit, you might very well fall into it. AKA, you will suffer the consequences of your own actions. Make good choices and you will STAY OUT OF TROUBLE. Period. Nothing more to see here folks. Yawn.

Liberal atheist extremists for you. Desperately at war with a God they don't even believe exists. Heck, they'll even stalk Christian websites FULLTIME, day in and day out, 24 freakin' 7. Yeah, that's not crazy. ;)

BummerDrummer #sexist #dunning-kruger incels.co

[RageFuel] How easy it would have been to stop female rights.

Female suffragists: "Give us rights! Voting rights! Equality!"

"No".

Done. That would have literally been it. Let me explain;

The difference between female equality movements and, say, negro civil rights movements is that Negroes posed an actual physical threat. Negro (males) could riot, get weapons, etc. If not a physical threat, many Negroes back in that time period had jobs (although usually bottom barrel tier) that if they mass protested in strikes could pose an economic problem. Women had neither physical power nor economic power. The only time women were ever really "militarized" and fought was around 10-15 years later in the Spanish Civil war, in which case they got utterly destroyed, and the reason these spanish civil war foids fought was because they were in a situation 1000x worse than 1920's woman's suffrage America.

Economically Women had no power either, a vast majority were either housewives or some easily replaceable job like a secretary. They did not have the economic sway to do anything if our fucking ancestors just said "No" to their plea for rights. "But m-muh they deserved it by working in the factories!" "In ww2 we would've lost cuz wymn made all the ammo!" No they didn't, this is a parroted talking point but if females didn't make any factory contributions at all in both world wars it would've ended the same way. They aren't "Muh independent wymn" for doing something even a child could do, which would be the people who would make ammo in factories if females didn't do it (Or other men not at the front).

There was no reason for our ancestors to have let these fucking stupid hags get anywhere in equality. They couldn't have done anything if we just said "No". But because of how cucked we were EVEN BACK THEN 100 YEARS AGO we said "Yes". Also cuz the jews.

waffleflavoredfloss & other TERFs #transphobia #sexist reddit.com

[OP of thread]
waffleflavoredfloss: Just wondering at the hypocrisy of trans women who use medicare and employer insurance to get things like fake breasts and facial surgery etc. When will these services be free for women who have qualms about how they look? If Im flat chested can I claim breast implants are for my mental health or if I have large jaw can I use facial feminization surgery on the tax payer dollar too? I just found out these things were covered by medicare and Im honestly floored its so insulting and unbelievable.

[assorted comments]
natalwoman: If TIMs can get breast augmentation for having small breasts after hormones - why can't flat chested women get breast augmentation as well? Same with facial plastic surgery too!

You can be a woman and not have big comic book tits - but that doesn't fulfill their fucking fetish.

berryflakes: And you can be a woman and have a big and / or broken nose. We are taught that surgery shouldn’t be the first thing to do, even if you engage in self destructive actions because of your looks, and it’s never covered, but somehow they can get it free and without anyone questioning it?!

waffleflavoredfloss: I find it insulting to women who have features these people describe as male as well like do they not see how sexist they are?

McKarty: I’m sorry, but they aren’t real women. There are only two types of woman: porn and anime.

Edit: and hentai women, of course, who are iNtErSeX— it’s a spectrum! Sorry to be so exclusionary; I’m still (always) learning.

vrishkin: It ok girl, I sexualize all women :* :*

I’ve asked people before if insurance should cover my meal prep, gym fees and supplements so I could match my dysmorphic body view and been told “yes” before.

TiM apologists are delusional

skallys: It's weird because they spend so much effort claiming everything about them "IS" female, but then do a 180 when insurance offers covered surgery on like 8 different parts of them.

tryingformighty: You have made an excellent point. How can they argue for "gender confirmation" surgery while arguing they shouldn't have to have SRS?

Of course I think we know the answer...both are ways they seek satisfaction from their fetish.

justhysterical2018: Reminds me of when the New Yorker wrote this pretty glowing piece about a stunning and brave TIMs facial feminization surgery. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/03/19/the-story-of-a-trans-womans-face

I read it and just laughed. Women like the Kardashians and the Real Housewives get made fun of all the time for their facial reconstruction projects. Sure these women look ridiculous, but where are our profiles in the New Yorker for getting "affirming" nose jobs and forehead reconstruction? When women get plastic surgery we're called vain and shallow if you can tell we've had work done. Can you imagine a New Yorker author discussing with sympathy how difficult it is for women to get fillers and nose jobs covered by insurance?

tryingformighty: Does this mean that if "transwomen are women" we can make fun of them for being vain and shallow when *they* have facial plastic surgery?

TheGreatAndPowerfulOz #fundie imdb.com

I find it hilarious the number of people on this INTERNET MESSAGE BOARD that consider themselves highly intellectual. For instance, they quote other people's theories like it's their own personal religion, and they throw Latin phrases around like they're going out of style (They are, by the way. Take note.)
I actually had someone on here tell me that evolution was the correct theory and that "a theory is something that is generally regarded as fact". Oh really? Because creationism and evolutionism are both THEORIES. Both Christian and evolutionist tools are warring on a stupid web site about something that only affects them after they die. (It actually affects Christians in the present, but we'll let the atheists think it's all "equal", because they all want equal rights for everyone anyway.) Live your life, believe what you want to, but I'm going to cover all bases by believing in Christianity. If I get up to heaven and Allah is up there waving a stick, well I better hope he's merciful or else I'm SOL. But I might as well believe in something just so I can cover all bases.
If there isn't a God (there is), then it doesn't really matter what I believe. The fact that atheists have no comprehension of an afterlife (and the fact that the absence of such doesn't disturb them) is proof that they waste the time they have on Earth by squandering it looking to prove evolution is real.
Get off your self righteous f ucking high horse and let people believe what they want to. People on this board point to the Crusades as horrible because "religion killed so many people", but so did Hitler. So did Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. So did Nero.
The point to all of this is, I see a lot of the same people proving/disproving (whatever you want to believe) their various theories, but really it doesn't do anyone any good to argue about such things. Christianity is more progressive than atheism because we don't want to/have to prove jack. We BELIEVE. That's all that is necessary. Meanwhile, everyone else comes up with pointless information. Well, have fun, because I'd rather sit in church than in front of a microscope with some 80 pound atheist that needs 300 SPF.

Kim, Lou and Lisa #fundie christianitytoday.com

Kim: That's a great question. My realtor—who's gay—recently invited me to a dinner party at his house. Part of me wanted to attend because I've known him for years and I care about him. But another part was anxious about going. I wondered if I'd feel weird, or if I'd be able to carry on a conversation. I don't typically socialize with many gay people. I also wondered if it would look bad for me to go.

Lou: In 1 Corinthians 5:9, the apostle Paul says not to "associate with sexually immoral people"—but then he goes on to say, "not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world."

Lisa: The Bible cautions us to be in the world but not of it, but also calls us to be salt and light. When I look at who Jesus was in the gospels, I suspect he would have gone to a gay realtor's party because he didn't shy away from irreligious people. The reality is, people who aren't Christians are desperate for something that's honest, true, and real—and that's Jesus.

Todd Strandberg #fundie raptureready.com

I'm very keen to read ever-negative email sent to Rapture Ready. Reading all the letters that disagree with the site helps me better understand why people have trouble with the end-time message. I use this information to help me refine the advice we offer to the public.

At the heart of many emails is content I identify as the "Sucker's Bet." These people view us "Doomsday Christians" as wasting our lives by endlessly waiting for a Lord who is never coming. They base their view on the idea that Jesus hasn't come in 2000 years, so this complete lack of activity should prove that He is not coming at all.

Some of these people bet they will have the satisfaction of watching me squander my life on a meaningless quest. But I'm not sure where they see the payoff. If I outlive them, there is no payoff. The only wager I see is their hope that Jesus doesn't come back and bring their carefree existence to a premature end.

[...]

When I respond to people, I reply to the real issue they are secretly addressing. People normally write me because they are bothered by events that confirm Bible prophecy. I point out to them that prophetic fulfillment is the real reason they're mad at me, and I warn them by saying, "If my luck with the end-time signs doesn’t run out soon, yours will.

Bob Lonsberry #fundie boblonsberry.com

WE NEEDED FAITH, NOT POLITICS

If you're the donut man, sell donuts.

And if you're the pope, preach Christ.

In life, you have to know your role and remember your purpose. You have to keep your eye on the prize. Yesterday, in front of a Congress and a nation, Pope Francis forgot who he was.

He came to the plate, and he didn't swing.

He failed to deliver the one message his life is supposedly dedicated to delivering. With the eyes of a government and a people upon him, he squandered the opportunity of a lifetime.

America needed to hear something, and he didn't say it.

If you're the pope, you preach Christ. You spread the good news of a Savior sent to redeem mankind. You call the world to Christ, you call the world to repentance, you call the world to its knees.

You tell all who will hear, the most important thing they or anyone else will ever hear – that God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes on him should not perish, but have eternal life.

You follow the example of the Apostle Paul who went among the Corinthians with one topic on his lips – “Jesus Christ, and him crucified.”

You stand before the Americans, like that same Paul stood before the Athenians, and say, “Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.”

But that's not what Francis did.

I'm not sure he even mentioned God or Jesus.

Instead, he talked about immigration and global warming and social justice. He gave a halting, barely comprehensible lecture ripped right out of the progressives' talking points. He said nothing new, noble or memorable.

And he certainly didn't preach Christ. He said not a word that called anyone to God, or gave them an insight into salvation or the eternities.

He did nothing to save a soul.

Mike King #sexist tomatobubble.com

In this mad, mad, mad Marxist world of ours, leave it to Sulzberger's Slimes, in the immediate aftermath of the murder of a New York City female police officer, to praise the "progress" that has been made with regards to the hiring and promoting of female police officers.

From the article:

"And across the nation, women have pushed their way into policing’s most demanding jobs. To them, Officer Familia’s death was seen as a grim signifier of their growing front-line roles."

There are now 6,394 female officers on a force of just over 36,000 in dangerous New York City. That's almost 18%. The percentages in other cities that are even more dangerous are about the same and growing -- with more and more of them being killed "in the line of duty" every year. This is all part of the "progress" that "women's liberation" has brought to today's miserable, manified, modern woman. Thusly "liberated" from the "yoke" of marriage and traditional family life, the loony ladies now get to dress up in blue, carry a gun, chase bad guys through dark alleys, and then get killed -- often with their own gun.

A blast from the past, from the article, about a hyped-up event which your New York metro-area high-school aged reporter here remembers very well:

"In the early 1980s, the New York City subways were forbidding, with robbers lurking in graffiti-covered cars. Very few women were on patrol, but Officer Irma Lozada took one of the most dangerous jobs: She hid her badge and draped fake gold chains around her neck, courting robbers to come after her in some of the most desperate parts of Brooklyn.

It was on one of these plainclothes assignments in 1984 when something went terribly wrong: Officer Lozada chased a suspect, got separated from her partner and was killed after the suspect wrested her service revolver from her and shot her twice."

She became the first female officer killed in New York City history. So jolted was the police force by her death that, in the aftermath, some officers spoke of women being better off reassigned to office jobs, several people recalled."

Yes indeed, you've come a long way, baby!" How's it workin' out for ya?

In a healthy pre-Marxist society, dead officerettes Irma Lozada and Miosotis Familia would have been home cooking dinner for their husbands and checking the kids' homework.

As it was with the mentally sick reaction to the death of Officerette Lozada then, so it is again today with Officerette Familia, who was shot and killed execution-style by an admitted cop-hater, just last week. Rather than reassess this abominable practice of sending women off to fight criminals and enemy soldiers, the unisex Marxists act as if it's part of the normal course of business and continue to praise the "progress" that these misguided police-gals and Marine-ettes are making.

The societal perverison of cultural Marxism / libtardism offers oppression to women, not "liberation." How much happier, safer, and alive would Ms. Lozada and Ms. Familia had been if they were stay-at-home wives and mothers. Of course, given how the corresponding economic hands of Marxist taxation & the Fed's debt-currency racket make it increasingly impossible for a woman to stay home -- because a huge chunk of her husband's earnings (if she even has a husband), are taxed and inflated away -- these ladies are often forced to work. How hypocritically ironic it is that the Left condemns the Taliban for banning women from the workforce, as we here in the oh-so-enlightened West essentially, through economic policies, ban women from becoming traditional housewives!

Even when faced with the horrible murders and ghastly battlefield casualties of the fairer sex, very few of today's "men," especially those in the public realm, will dare to question the perverse policy of depriving strong men from 18% of police jobs just so that mostly infertile women can take them, and get killed. Chivalry truly is dead -- as is sanity!

The Great One (that's Hitler for you all newbies and normies) had a few observations on this matter. And his truth, no matter how out-of-fashion it may seem to the modern libtard, will always be the truth. Tell it Great One, tell it:

"If I think to myself that a woman should make an appearance at a trial, then I have to say: if that were a woman close to me, and if I wanted to imagine my mother were still alive and has to sit in front of a murderer in a court and decide the verdict,... never, never! We don't want that.

I do not want a uniformed female police officer to walk around and run after scamps or criminals. These are things we naturally don't want. Then they say, 'Excuse me, you don't allow women in the parliament as well.' Certainly, but only because I am satisfied that the parliament does not raise the value of women, but it would only degrade her. I also removed the men from parliament because they were all rotten. (Reichstag laughter)

Then they say, "Why not put some good women into parliament." Because they would turn rotten too. (more laughter)

...

A women's regiment of snipers is being trained in the Soviet Union... grenadiers in Spain (pre-Franco). All I can say about this type of female equality -- I have experienced war. I know how hard it is. I know how many men’s nerves have been shattered by war. I have often seen them return by the dozens, doddering, completely ruined and broken. The idea that a girl or woman should take this upon herself --- I could have no respect for German men then. As long as we have a healthy male gender in Germany, no female sharpshooters or grenadiers will be trained in Germany. That is no equality, but rather, inferior rights for women because it is much harder for her than men. We won’t do it – because for us, the woman has been the most faithful work and life companion of the man at all times."

Hitler: "The catchword “Women’s Liberation” is merely a phrase invented by the Jewish intellect, and its contents are marked by the same spirit. The German woman will never need to emancipate herself in an age supportive of German life. She possessed what Nature gave her automatically as an asset to maintain and preserve; just as the man, in such an age, never had to fear that he would be ousted from his position in respect to woman."

No wonder why women loved Him so. The Great One cherished and protected them from the "progress" that Jewish-Marxist "liberation" offered them.

Boobus Americanus 1: It' a shame what happened to that female police officer.

Boobus Americanus 2: Indeed. Unfortunately, such tragedies are the price for the tremendous progress that women in law enforcement are making.

Sugar: "Progress, my asss, Bobusss!! Thesse deluded dames sshould have sstayed home and raissed a litter -- like I did!

Editor: How come your kitty children never call you? The bastards.

Hugo #racist realjewnews.com

Christian Zionism is the mother of all spiritual deceptions and is a good indicator of how far Christian theology has been infiltrated.

Result = the message of Christ is neutralized and the perpetrators of evil are shielded by churches whilst the victims lay abandoned.

Are CZ aware of the vile comments made in the Talmud about Jesus and his mother? Are they aware that Muslims and the Koran by contrast talk about Jesus and his mother in reverent and respectful terms?

Are CZ aware of the overwhelming role of international Jewry in most movements/structures that have wrought destruction on mankind and the Christian social order e.g. Bolshevism, the Neocon, Hollywood, the swindler monetary system, Frankfurt School cultural Marxism and its offshoots, the matrix of lies known as mainstream media etc.?

The Scriptures say clearly that the whole world is deceived. Have CZ ever considered the possibility that they are laboring under a colossal deception?

All CZ can do is adopt these super-spiritual airs in which they quote Scripture — often out of context and without realizing that there are an equal number of Scriptures contradicting their biblical interpretation (not to mention common sense).

CoolCluxClan & thrownawaylyktrash #transphobia #psycho reddit.com

Re: Worse than army recruiters

image

Transcript: iol I've been pressing Xanax with estrogen and selling it to high schoolers

*image of some pills*

(CoolCluxClan)

Remember, one day you'll open up LE Reddit Xd Xd and as usually for their agenda pushing they do, they'll show you news about how a fag got hacked to death, burnt alive, beaten with a baseball bat til his head turned into a concussion having lump of meat, fed to dogs alive whatever the fuck has happened, alright?

You're going to have a human response to that since you are a human being. Involuntary empathy, just like how you yawn when someone else yawns in front of you. You are going to say "shit, that's harsh man. I mean I'm all for criminalizing/prohibiting/Russianstyle Freedom'ing this thing but this is too much"...

REMEMBER THIS. REMEMBER THIS SCREENSHOT.

(thrownawaylyktrash)

I just don't get the mentality; this ideology that you natural hormones are something that NEED to change. That changing them and becoming, physically, the opposite sex is something inherently virtuous that everyone needs to aspire to. Why? Do they hate the very idea of cultural norms that much? Are they really that all-in on liberalism?

Step 1 force identity politics

Step 2 change your own identity to match that of the side you perceive to be “better” or “more righteous”

Step 3 hate on anyone who doesn’t match that identity (even tho you didn’t either before you changed it)

”The future is feminist”. And suddenly liberal guys wanna be women. Hmm.

Hunter Wallace #racist #wingnut occidentaldissent.com

[From "American History Series: The Fourteenth Amendment"]

I’m really enjoying Eric Foner’s new book.

This is probably the best book he has ever written.

The following excerpt comes from Eric Foner’s The Second Founding: How The Civil War And Reconstruction Remade The Constitution:

“Howard’s mention of the Bill of Rights highlighted the dramatic change in the federal system brought about by the Reconstruction amendments. The Bill of Rights had been designed to restrict the actions of Congress, not the states. Chief Justice John Marshall stated this unequivocally in the case of Barron v. Baltimore (1833): “these amendments demanded security against the apprehended encroachments of the general government – not against those of the local governments.” In legal terminology, Howard was described the “incorporation” of the Bill of Rights – that is requiring states to abide by its provisions – a process that has been going on for much of the twentieth century and into the twenty-first.”

As we previously noted, The First Founding and the Bill of Rights restricted the power of the federal government. The Tenth Amendment reserved all powers not explicitly granted to the federal government to the states. During the White Republic, there was no uniform definition of federal citizenship, no such thing as birthright citizenship and above all else there was no liberal state that had the power to enforce equal rights. Liberals appealed to the rhetoric of the Declaration of Independence.

[...]

The First Founding gave the sovereign states vast powers and enormous room to preserve illiberal institutions. It used to be a crime in the South to criticize slavery and to promote miscegenation. The Southern social order was based on patriarchy and paternalism.

“The Fourteenth Amendment for the first time elevates equality to a constitutional right of all Americans. It makes the Constitution a vehicle through which aggrieved groups and individuals who believe that they are being denied equality can take their claims to court.”

“Equality” wasn’t a part of the Constitution until the 14th Amendment except in the sense that each state had an equal number of senators and the possibility of a tie in the electoral college in a presidential election.

[...]

There were vociferous objections to the Fourteenth Amendment at the time:

“With equal persistence, Democrats contended that the amendment would destroy traditions of local self-rule and “invest all power in the national government. …”

[...]

As Eric Foner notes, the Reconstruction Amendments and federal civil rights legislation did all these things and much more by empowering the federal government to enforce the nebulous concept of “equal rights” and by depriving the states of their traditional powers. No one at the time anticipated how the Fourteenth Amendment could be stretched to legitimize sodomy, miscegenation, gay marriage and transgenderism. Every criticism that was lodged against it at the time ultimately came true.

This was also true of the Brown decision in the 1950s. The critics of the Brown decision denied the existence of racial equality. They denied that integrated schools would accomplish the goal of eliminating the racial gap in academic performance by eliminating racial discrimination. 65 years later, the critics of Brown have been utterly vindicated. And yet, Brown has become sacrosanct even though it never worked. How much money has been squandered on rebuilding entire metro areas to escape integration?

Unknow #fundie spiritualresearchfoundation.org

2. What are the physical symptoms of being affected by ghosts?

We have categorized the symptoms for easy referral.

2.1. The five sense organs
Foul taste in the mouth.
Experience of eyes being pulled inside, irritation in the eyes, etc.
Dryness of lips, mouth and throat.
Due to the Raja-Tama in the ghosts a sticky layer is formed on the face and body of the affected person.
Oily skin.
Rashes on the skin.
Eerie feeling of being touched.
2.2. Pain
Pinprick sensation.
Headaches and migraines.
Severe backache, body ache and inability to move.
Experience of strangulation.
2.3. Symptoms related to the nine body openings
When in the proximity of a sattvik influence, the ghosts (demons, devils, negative energies, etc.) leave the body through any of the nine openings, i.e. two eyes, two nostrils, two ears, mouth, penis/vagina and anus. The person may experience as if gas is going out of any of these openings or one may experience cough, yawning, burping, sneezing, etc. as per the opening involved.

2.4. Digestive system
Not allowing the person to have his meals: Loss of appetite, nausea on sight of food, feeling better after getting away from food.
Sharpened appetite, frequent hunger and having heavy meals: The Absolute Fire Principle (Tejtattva) is required to digest food. As man consists predominantly of the absolute Earth Principle (Pruthvitattva), he cannot digest a lot of food. But if he is possessed by ghosts (demons, devils, negative energies, etc.) he can do so. As the ghosts consist of the Absolute Air Principle (Vayutattva) they can digest the food by using the Absolute Fire Principle. Refer to the article on the Absolute Cosmic Principles (Panchatattva).
2.5. Reproductive system
Inability to have children.
Recurring miscarriages.
Stillbirths
2.6. Accidents
Electric shock
Domestic accidents such as heated oil flying from the frying pan
Repeated vehicle accidents in a certain location
2.7. Motor organs
Fidgeting and restlessness due to increase in basic Raja subtle-component
Contorted movements
Tics
2.8. Makings sounds
Making moaning and weird sounds and not remembering anything afterwards.
Making animal sounds.
The ghost speaking through the possessed person in a voice of the opposite sex.
2.9. Effect on vital energy
Vital energy (Pra?a-shakti) is the life sustaining energy of the body and is subtle.

Vital energy in a spiritually evolved person and that in a person not spiritually evolved

Percentage of vital energy
1. Spiritually evolved person 130
2. Person not spiritually evolved 100

Amount of vital energy according to the extent of distress by ghosts (demons, devils, negative energies, etc.)

Extent of distress Amount of vital energy (percentage)
5 95
10 90
20 70
30 50
40* 30**
* In the present times generally the maximum distress possible is 40%

Distress will include both getting affected and possession by negative energies

** The reduction in Vital energy is because it is utilized in fighting the ghosts. When it decreases below 30%, the person dies.

wanda_for_decent_values #fundie news.messages.yahoo.com

Christians are taking back America!

And we are THROUGH kowtowing to witches, satanists, muslims, atheists, homosexuals and socialist liberals!

America is a Christian nation, not a nation of witches. Satan symbols over my dead body.

By the end of President George W Bush's 2nd term:

1) Iraq will be well on the way to being a peaceful Christian country. Once Iraq has gone Christian, the Gospel of Jesus will spread throughout the Middle East. The region will be at peace and millions of Arab souls will be saved through the grace of Jesus Christ.

2) Bush will have appointed at least three or four USSC Justices and the baby slaughterhouses will finally be closed down forever.

3) Gays will be put back in the closet for good. The sodomy and decency laws will be reinstated and their disgusting disease spreading activities will be outlawed again. Maybe we can’t get rid of them, but we can get them out our children’s view.

4) School vouchers will allow parents to send their kids to decent Christian schools instead of the NEA-infested cesspools that exist now.

5) Worthless liberal social welfare programs will be dismantled and replaced by Christian faith-based government funded programs. People will finally get REAL help through Jesus Christ.

6) Filthy shows like Howard Stern, Will & Grace and Desperate Housewives will be off the air and replaced with decent Christian family programming. Families will once again be able to turn on the radio or television and not be embarrassed to listen or watch together.

7) The abominable scourge of Internet pornography will end with the introduction and ENFORCEMENT of the Online Decency Act. Pornographers who expose the public to this sickening material will be behind bars where they belong.

You can be with us or against us, but you had BETTER believe one thing:

Christians are DONE sitting at the back of the bus.

762x51 #fundie moonbattery.com

[Re. Lowes deciding not to advertise during the show "All-American Muslim" after being pressured by a Christian right group.]

If the Dummycrats can force Lowes, even by extortion with the threat of legislation, to support such an anti-American POS as this Muslim lie, they can force anyone to say or do anything under threat of legal action. If that doesn’t work they just send the military to scoop you off the streets and imprison you for life.

That will spawn a new generation of libtard reality shows like North American Gulag, The Real Housewives of Muhammad, Suicide Bomber Chef, Hollywood Jihadi, Say Yes to the Bomb Vest, Redistribution Pyramid, Deadliest IED, The Amazing Race Across the Border, Tori and Dean and Sharia, American Infidel, Allah Knows Best, on and on.

The alternative is we stop them, NOW, by ballots or bullets.

SchrodingersDick #sexist incels.co

Most men date women around their age. Hollywood actors date younger because they are Hollywood actors, duh

Survivor bias. Hollywood is full of extremely high SMV men. It’s literally a prerequisite to have looks in order to have access to the money and status that comes with being an actor or otherwise famous person. An actor’s sex life is nothing like the average man’s sex life.

so naturally their dating pools are the largest, and as a man’s dating pool grows, it becomes younger and younger as THAT IS WHAT FEMALE SMV IS. Not that non sentient hole author talking about that 49 year old roastie is a catch because she’s smart and talented or whatever. In the SMP, only genes matter. Only sex appeal. Perceived reproductive success and perceived fighting success. It’s like leftists and feminists reject anything that might be a source of discomfort to some (knowing that SMV is non malleable and there are indeed people superior to you in these metrics). Muh just world view. Muh were all equal. Muh you can be whoever you want to be bro!

but still, most men are with their age match; not because they’re non-misogynistic feminists who see the true value in the female soul or whatever, but because they can’t do better. If they could, they would be fucking much younger girls 100% of the time.

it’s old lady cope. Foids 40+ shouldn’t be complaining about not getting 40 year old millionaire chad. They should be raising grandkids already. They shound have already been out of the sexual market for 20 years. They squandered their JB youth/fertility/attractiveness and are mad that other women arent doing the same.

It’s kinda hilarious that they complain about this because almost every woman goes through a period in her life where she is an extremely valuable, high SMV “catch”.. for the majority of women this is a small window from puberty to like 20. they experience very high SMV and an ability to get virtually any man they want... while the vast majority of men never live a day as high SMV males.. most men live out their lives totally invisible to women from birth to death. Their only sexual success is the Result of low SMV female necessity/desperation. Betabuxxing is not victory. It’s worse than inceldom. Atleast as an incel you have dignity. You are not someone’s slave or ATM, while pretending you are the love of their life.

as always, let’s not expect any reason or logic from females. Always expect olympics level mental gymnastics, and usually 500 different logical fallacies per paragraph.

Fist In the Face Of Misandry #sexist promalecollective.wordpress.com

{Excerpts from the „Pro-Male manifesto“}

Feminism is a hate movement. It has always been such and there is no such thing as a valid feminism. Do not make excuses for that hate movement. All three waves of feminism are based on misandry and disinformation. There has to be zero compromise with that movement. No one expects Jews to compromise with the Nazis and no one expects black people to play nice with the KKK.

You can’t be pro-male and married. It is that simple. MGTOW tackles the controversies surrounding marriage from the narrow point-of-view of the man’s self-interest, but when a man marries, he is maintaining an anti-male institution. This action sells other men out and in turn harms the entire male collective, just for a bit of female validation. Furthermore, singles end up paying for the tax breaks that benefit married couples and fund the social services used by housewives.

Sean Johnson #racist atlantablackstar.com

Christianity was copied from the gods of ancient kemet. Amen-ra the sun god, king of kings, first and last, Lord of hosts. Father of osirus, born of a virgin who walked on water, healed the sick, and was resurrected.

You are completely backward sweetie. There is no record of slaves, a slave based economy, or Hebrews in Egyptian records so anything your white man bible tells you is bullshit. You need to get a passport, travel to egypt and Greece and rome like I have, go to college and take some classes on antiquity before attempting to correct someone who knows his gistory. King james....Shakespeare wrote the king James bible...read a book and stop pretending to be conscious. You watch housewives and scandal...

Skid #fundie bibleforums.org

The secular version of evolution really goes back to what they call the beginning when stars exploded in space and the debris collected together to form the earth. Then apparently a single cell, or several cells survived millions of degrees of heat, then sub zero temperatures of space and evolved into plants, animals and humans. In my opinion that is so lame that I cant believe it is actually taught in schools as the "big bang theory" and evolution. I can see adaptation being called evolution to an extent, but living cells evolving into all the different things on this Earth? Besides why would there ever have been living cells in a star to begin with. Or were the living cells just floating around in space and the debris picked them up? Gee, where did the living cells come from to begin with? Must be chemicals floating around in space just happen to randomly come together in space to form the millions of different living things on Earth.
Also, why do I have my soul/spirit, and you have yours? I wonder how science explains that one?
I am sorry, I guess I just believe wholeheartedly that God created everything including Adam (from dust, just as His Word says).
The good news is that science is supporting biblical scripture more and more all the time.

madworldnews.com #wingnut #conspiracy #pratt madworldnews.com

Bombshell evidence has just been uncovered by Attorney Jay Sekulow, proving that Barack Obama, in his last days in the White House, set up a coup by a secret executive order to overthrow President Donald Trump, and that coup is going on right now. Sekulow, while investigating the General Mike Flynn scandal, discovered what Obama hoped would never be found, and you’ll be shocked to learn about the smoking gun.

After Donald Trump won the presidency, Barack Obama and his minions in the White House hatched a plan to ensure they could keep enough power to eventually overthrow the new president. Obama accomplished this by signing an executive order on January 3rd, 2017, with only 17 days left in office.

According to Jay Sekulow, a well-known attorney who heads the American Center for Law and Justice, Obama set-up a plan for the intelligence community to target President Trump through a secret executive order that Sekulow has uncovered.

Specifically through the use of a lame-duck executive order, President Obama authorized multiple intelligence agencies to have access to Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) including phone call intercepts. [via Conservative Treehouse]

Obama expanded who could investigate and have access to highly classified information. Before Obama’s order, only the National Security Agency (NSA) had clearance to order a phone tap or access the top secret information, but Obama gave 16 different agencies access and power to investigate whatever the hell they want. That includes Obama loyalists, who are still in positions throughout those 16 different agencies. This is how they took out General Mike Flynn, and it was an act of espionage when they did it.

The new rules were issued under section 2.3 of Executive Order 12333 after approval by two Obama Administration officials: Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Director of National Intelligence Director, James Clapper. [via ACLJ]

So, in the beginning of January, when Obama wrote this executive order, in effect, he was setting up a shadow government against Trump. Obviously, these orders would never affect Obama’s presidency since he was leaving office in 17 days.

Karolina Provokatsiya #fundie #sexist #transphobia amgreatness.com

[From "Stop Putting Your Daughters on Birth Control "]

Earlier in the summer, I was vacationing at the beach with a dear family friend. As we lounged in the sunroom listening to waves break in the distance one early afternoon, she brought up her 16-year-old daughter, Sally. A few weeks’ prior, Sally and her boyfriend of three years (we’ll call him Mike) had broken up. Mike had just spent his first year away at college. Sally generally tells her mother (who is a bit of a gossip) very little, but her mother had gathered through Sally’s sisters that Mike had been unfaithful.

Sally’s mom expressed the situation to me as a “shame,” because a few weeks before the breakup, Sally had requested the birth-control pills that her mother had long touted as a possibility for each of her daughters. Now, between sips of pinot grigio, she hoped aloud that her daughter wouldn’t “go crazy” and sleep with too many people to make Mike jealous.

Since the breakup, Sally has begun making darker and more suggestive choices in fashion, makeup, and social media posting. She’s always been sassy, but her attitude has become detached and bitter with an air of rebellion. Even a casual observer would be able to detect a thinly veiled resentment toward her parents.

“It’ll probably just pass,” her mother says. “Same thing happened to me in high school.”

Growing up in the Deep South, most of my good friends (whose parents were Christians, Republicans, and leaders in the community) began taking “the pill” at 14 years old, no questions asked. Chelsea got a pimple? The pill will fix it. Tori has bad cramps? Take the pill. Julia can’t regulate her mood or appetite? Sounds like a job for the pill. Never mind that the pill can make you break out, worsen bodily pain and mood swings, and make you gain weight—and often did all of those things at once.

At some point, the pill became a rite of passage, an irrational tradition to which all upstanding WASPs adhered and one they perpetuated whether because of inertia or fear. The explanation was rarely that the pubescent girl was actually having sex—in fact, most didn’t start with that until years after beginning the pill. But the understanding was that eventually she would. And this little magic trick not only would insulate her from the adult consequences of her adult decisions, but, perhaps primarily, insulate her Baby Boomer parents from the social shaming a teen pregnancy would generate in their circles.

[...]

The issue of birth control cuts to the core of the diabolical disorientation of the family in the Western world. When your daughter, sister, wife, or girlfriend swallows that pill, not only does she ingest all the artificial hormones that increasingly are linked to breast cancer and strokes later in life, she ingests our society’s judgment of her worth. Whether she takes it with explicitly naughty plans like those of Sally, or for the diversionary purposes of my teenage peers a decade ago, she always absorbs all of the presuppositions that the pill represents. As the soul is more sensitive than the body, these presuppositions are what cause the most damage.

They deserve a good dismantling.

That Fertility Is an Illness
With the exception of the new transsexual mutilation procedures, fertility and pregnancy might be the only natural, healthy functions of the human body that are treated as illnesses by the medical community at large. If we were to compare the state of fertility to any other healthy capacity of the human body, and then consider how a doctor might cancel that healthy capacity according to patient preference, we begin to see what is certainly a violation of the Hippocratic Oath.

Imagine treating someone’s ability to run by cutting off their legs or giving them an immobility pill for the years during which they are at their physical peak. Imagine then still calling oneself a “healer” in light of this.

[...]

That Young People Are Incapable of Virtue
Boomers assume that because they were unable or unwilling to control their own urges and achieve for the sake of virtue, it is therefore beyond their children and grandchildren. This is projection from the generation that, in their teens, squandered the stable social systems into which they were born. These greedy self-adulators who robbed future generations of social capital and real capital by their risky behaviors and insatiable desire to be cool, cannot conceptualize that young people could be anything greater than the degenerate pleasure-seekers they once were and still aspire to be.

So rather than instructing Sally that her virginity was something to be cherished and reserved for the bonds of marriage, my friend, whom I love, operated on the assumption that virginity was something to be lost, helplessly, like a feather in the wind. When she handed her daughter the little brown bag of Lo Loestrin Fe, she handed her the keys to a door she never should have opened. But the priority for Sally’s mom wasn’t that Sally not go through that door; it was that Sally avoid the potentially embarrassing consequences of going through that door.

[...]

The best you’ll get for your complacency is spiritual malaise. The worst you’ll get is a dead kid. If you love your daughter, stop giving her birth control.

Mrs. Parunak #fundie ladiesagainstfeminism.com

[The Top Ten Reasons Modesty Gets a Yawn]

My family and I have had the privilege of hanging out with some unbelievably awesome single guys lately. A big reason I say they are so awesome is that they actually care about winning the battle with lust. Most men gave up long ago. Titus talks about Cretans whose “god is their belly.” In our culture, deity seems to have migrated several inches south.
But these guys have a problem, and it’s a problem that we have to own as their sisters in Christ. Everywhere they go, women are unbelievably unhelpful. Flaunting. Revealing. Immodest. Out in the world, we wouldn’t really expect anything else, but when it’s women in the Church, that’s a different story. Over and over, our friends have lamented that Christian women just don’t seem to understand what they’re doing to their brothers. I think that’s because no one is out there trying to teach them. And guess what, ladies, that’s OUR job. The Bible says that it’s up to women to teach other women how to be discreet and chaste (Titus 2:5).But so many women can’t muster much passion about this issue. It conflicts with other values, or it just isn’t on the radar screen. So, in honor of awesome guys everywhere, I would like to present my Top Ten Reasons Why Modesty Gets a Yawn in hopes that all of us ladies can wake up, start being “teachers of good things” and consider how to provoke other women to love their brothers by making the gathering of the saints a safer place for battle-weary soldiers of purity.
10. I’m too old to be a problem.
You’re never too old to be discreet and chaste. Just because you don’t look like a teenager doesn’t mean that you don’t still need to be careful. When you’re bending over in tight jeans, your crow’s feet don’t show anyway. And if your cleavage is spilling out of your neckline, it’s likely to be a challenge whether or not you have a few gray hairs.
Even if, for the sake of argument, you really are too old to ever cause anyone to struggle, you’re still not too old to set an example for the younger women who are naively exhibiting themselves. After all, if their mothers and grandmothers are doing it, why shouldn’t they?
9. I don’t have a body like a Victoria’s Secret model, so who would ever lust after me?
This one is similar to #10 and reveals a way in which most women don’t understand men. Women think that they have to have a perfect total package to provoke anyone to lust. Actually a man will feel a twinge of arousal from seeing anything that is hyper-accentuated and immodest about a female body–even if something else is less than perfect.
8. But my husband wants me to dress immodestly.
Usually, when husbands express this, it’s because one of two things is happening (sometimes both at the same time). Either you are not paying attention to satisfying his deep desire for visual stimuli when you are alone (and wives, when you’re alone, go ALL OUT!); or he’s a lust junkie who’s getting a buzz anywhere and everywhere he can and is annoyed that he isn’t getting the same buzz from you. A man that is fighting hard will not want you to be as inconsiderate and unloving as all the women he has to put up with all day. But a man who’s wallowing in other women’s immodesty will want to pull you down into the pit with him with absolutely no regard for how many men you cause to stumble along the way. If your husband doesn’t care if other men are lusting after you, it is a huge red flag that he is probably lusting after everyone else.
7. Are you saying that if a man is lusting after a woman, that it’s her fault?!
Nope. Not even close. Lust is a sin. And if a man is committing it, God holds him and him alone accountable. I’m not advocating the Islamic stereotype “blame the woman for her own rape” kind of mentality that says that men are not responsible for themselves in the presence of a beautiful woman.
But we can help our brothers. Being immodest is like throwing a party for a bunch of recovering alcoholics and deciding to have an open bar. If your guests got totally smashed it would, of course, be their fault, but no one is going to think for a minute that you really loved them or cared about their struggles.
6. But my husband never has any trouble at all with immodest women.
Apparently, there really are a few men out there who are totally oblivious. I don’t personally know any of them, but I’ve gotten enough comments from wives insisting that their husbands are in this category that I’m willing to acknowledge the possibility. However, just like I am taking your word for it that your husband has no difficulty, you might want to consider taking my word for it that a lot of other men do.
5. If Christians look like freaks no one will want to be a Christian.
People who don’t want to be Christians don’t want to because the Gospel sounds outlandish, or because they firmly believe something else, or even sometimes because they don’t understand their own sinfulness and what they need to be saved from. That “Christians are too weird” is just an excuse, as evidenced by the “Christians are no different from anyone else” excuse that we hear equally often. God frequently asks His people to do things that make us look weird (turning the other cheek, not lying, esteeming others as better than ourselves, for example). We need to be concerned with what’s right, not what’s normal.
4. But I want to dress like my friends.
Sure, but somebody has to be a leader. Imagine how much easier it would be for your friends to be considerate in their dress if you were already doing it.
3. I want to look cute and stylish.
This is a hard one. Probably every woman really wants to have everyone think she’s beautiful, but at what cost? Is following fashion so important that it’s worth placing a stumbling block in your brother’s path? Now someone’s going to jump in right about now and say that we can be cute and stylish and modest, and, of course, that’s lovely when we can achieve it. But modesty needs to be the first priority. So often it’s the other way around, and “cute and stylish” trumps modest. When we decide that our own sense of style matters more than helping men avoid lust, fundamentally, it is just selfishness on our part.
2. Guys won’t pay attention to me if I’m dressed in a sack.
Yeah, a lot of them probably won’t. But you have to ask yourself what kind of attention you really want. Are you looking for a godly husband or a long trail of panting, drooling puppies who will abandon you in a heartbeat just as soon as another piece of meat strolls by? Quality men want virtuous women. The problem is that the world is mostly populated by non-quality men, so virtuous women necessarily get less attention. This isn’t really a problem when you consider that drooling puppies make lousy husbands (assuming they ever quit playing video games long enough get around to marrying you). You’re wasting your time if you’re trying to appeal to them.
1. But I don’t see any men lusting after me!
Ha! Yes, there are a few creepy guys out there who ogle women openly, but 99.9% of the men out there are much more subtle. They know that it’s socially unacceptable to stare, so they don’t. In fact, most men will not look at your body when you are looking at them. If your attention is on them, they’ll look at your face, nod politely, play the gentlemen. But turn around to talk to your friends, and they’re watching you out of the corners of their eyes, and it is not your face they’re looking at this time. You have no idea how many surreptitious second (and third and fourth…) looks are being stolen. You also have no idea how many of your brothers in Christ are fighting hard not to take those second looks and are feeling really beaten up by how aware they are of your body.
Our brothers’ fight deserves much more than a yawn. Be modest yourself. Share the truth with your sisters. Let’s wake up and help each other out.

CertifiedRabbi #racist reddit.com

The manopshere wing of the Alt-Right was always my least favorite wing of the Alt-Right because it just reeks of male insecurity and degenerate black male mating strategies. And this latest controversy where they tried to chase away our female supporters just cemented my disdain for them.

This latest controversy is also yet another reminder that I can never tell the difference between hardcore ideologues, retards, crazy people, and enemy infiltrators/government informants. I mean, who in their right mind would try to chase our female supporters like Tara away? And going after Lauren for being a race-mixer in high school when you yourself are a race-mixer strikes me as being extremely suspect.

It almost seems like our recent forced "engagement" with the Arab and Islamic world after the 9/11/2001 Islamic terrorist attacks has started to rub off on our culture. Roosh himself is Middle Eastern. And a lot of Alt-Right guys that were military veterans probably got sent into Iraq and Afghanistan, and now they're trying to bring that type of old school patriarchy back to the West because they think that it will solve the liberal pussification of our society. But to me that's just crazy because we're not in a position to dictate the social norms of the average White person. Maybe if we actually achieved power that type of desire to turn White women back into 1950's era housewives would make sense. But trying to push that type of shit now when we only have influence over maybe 1% of the White female population? What in the fuck are these manosphere morons thinking?

I always thought that Ramzpaul was talking out of his ass when he accused Anglin and crew of being paid shills, but I'm increasingly starting to think that as well. Anyone with a serious criminal record is very suspect in my view because that makes them vulnerable to being coerced into becoming government informants in order to avoid lengthy jail sentences. And you have to be fucking insane to think that you can actually normalize neo-Nazism in the modern Western world. Regardless of their motivations, the end result of their efforts is the same: yet another failed White Nationalist movement that goes nowhere because the average White person will never embrace neo-Nazism or blatant bigotry. And ensuring that no White women will join our movement will only speed up our demise.

The Alt-Right's openness and unwillingness to purge anyone that's pro-White regardless of how crazy their other beliefs are is biting us in the ass by allowing the autists to define the movement. And it's making us vulnerable to hostile infiltration and manipulation.

David J. Stewart #fundie jesusisprecious.org

It warms my heart with encouragement to know that Jesus monitors every aspect of my life, and takes it personal when people are unkind, dishonest or malicious toward me. And of course, the Lord watches everything that I think, say and do toward others. The Lord also appreciates when people pray for me and are kind and helpful. I say that humbly with a grateful heart. As I've often said, those Christian web visitors who pray for my labours in the Lord are co-labourers with me. You are truly my friends, and friends to the work of Christ.

...

Indeed, my enemies are God's enemies, and God's enemies are my enemies. I am in Him, and He is in me. John 14:20, “At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.” So rejoice oh Christian, because you truly have no enemies. John 7:7, “The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil.” If you are a Christian, your enemies are Christ's enemies. Our heavenly Father watches over us continually, monitoring everything (Psalms 139:1-5). Understanding this Biblical truth ought to compel us to love our enemies and pray for them, knowing that they are in trouble with the Lord.

...

We Are the Lord's Property

Romans 14:8, “For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's.” I hope that you'll grasp this important truth that everything you own is the Lord's. If someone has robbed you, whether by burglary, corporate theft, legalized fraud, crooked lawyers, extortion or in some other way, they have cheated the Lord. Every penny to your name is the Lord's. If you spend money unwisely, then you are squandering God's money.

Sustained While Yawning #fundie bbs.payableondeath.com

I think you are forgetting Electra that blind people don't choose to become blind... if they did then I wouldn't feel sorry for any blind person crossing the street. On the other hand, people are not born gay--it's true no matter what people are telling kids in school.. at some point in a homosexual's life they choose to go the gay-way... 90% of all homosexuals have had happen to them that obviously point a finger at things like--having been sexually molested by someone as a child, etc. But it still is not normal...

André du Pôle #fundie returnofkings.com

5 Qualities That Dying Empires Lack

André is a young European who left his decaying country in 2012 for greener pastures. He enjoys exploring subterranean places, reading about a host of interconnected topics, and yearns for Tradition.

Along with blue pill and global governance comes the Hollow Empire. We live in the golden age of marketing, public relationships, and propaganda. Many people are good at crafting appearances and virtue-signaling by the standards of the degenerate mainstream. The cities are littered with awesome, hip images, but this world is full of it.

Cities are full of useless bureaucrats, con artists, effeminate men, and man-jawed women. People are fake. Interests and excessive desires are either veiled under passive-aggressive forms or openly communicated through sheer assholery. No mystery why stoicism came back into fashion among conscious men: when your day is full of fake smiles, you’re better off working on your inner fortress. (And when you’re stoic and poor, bulking on a budget makes you better off as well.)

In such a world, some human qualities are sorely lacking. They are often perceived as signs of weakness, naivete, or as antics. Or some start counterfeiting and misdirecting them.

1. Loyalty

Sheep dogs are amongst the most loyal breeds out there. Have you seen a lot of them in metropolises? Bourgeois bohemians prefer small, frail dwarf dogs that cost a small fortune. Or cats, whose displays of egoism and moodiness are always overlooked because they’re sooo cute.

Loyalty is a noble trait. It supposes courage, constancy, straightforwardness. A loyal parent cares. A loyal citizen does his duty and tends to become a pillar of his community. A loyal friend is someone you know you can count on. Unfortunately, loyalty has been both abused and derided. Since the 60s, the media started associating it with purportedly “oppressive” and narrow-minded people while encouraging sheepish behavior towards the latest craze.

Being loyal to a girl who would only remain if you treat her badly would be foolish. Beyond this, it is hard to be a loyal patriot once you know how much nation-states sent Europeans kill each other for nothing but neoconnish interests. As French writer Louis-Ferdinand Céline said, “you think you’ll die for your country but what you’ll really lose your life for is bank vaults.”

2. Kindness

According to the dictionaries, being kind means having a benevolent, friendly, helpful disposition. In a normal society, kindness would be the sign of a good nature and it would be rewarded. In The Current Year, kindness towards women or strangers will have you exploited then called a loser or hypocrite. Men with low self-esteem started to serve women in exchange for absolutely nothing: this warped beta niceness has become a patron for kindness in general.

‘I’ve tried speed dating and all the dating Apps, but every time I put my real age, all I get are idiots and losers,’ she told the New York Post. ‘I figured, why not make them useful and have them help me around the house?’

She found a match with a man wearing overalls and wielding a hammer in his profile photo and invited him over to install her air conditioning… After he successfully carried out the installation, Bloom asked him to leave and didn’t answer his messages asking her to go on a proper date. (Daily Mail)

Displaying kindness towards freewheeling female hypergamy is the same than being loyal to a brand that makes millions out of sheeple. A sane mind doesn’t do it.

3. Politeness and courtesy

Both words refer to a kind of high culture: refined interests, a genuine concern for arts and belles lettres, a tactful and gallant temperament. Polite, courteous manners thrived during the eighteenth and nineteenth century. They were derided as bourgeois by Bolshevists and promiscuous bohemians. Today, loud-mouthed girls know nothing of it, and both have been turned into either mild-mannered spinelessness or pure snobbery.

The arts associated with politeness, such as theatre or classical music, were appropriated by old money whereas the masses are fed with pop garbage. Actually, you can be polite and courteous if you hop in the right context, then use it as a folding screen for game, Sandor Szavost-style. Otherwise you will come across as formal or distant or snobbish. Indeed, neither do boyish immaturity nor grrly aggressive narcissism provide good grounds for taking a woman’s hand and leading her through an impeccable tango.

4. Forgiveness

Jesus Christ extolled forgiveness beyond revenge. Clear the slate, turn the other cheek. Just like toleration, forgiveness works best when it is reciprocated: I’ll forgive your misdeeds because you will forgive mine, I’ll tolerate your antics because you will accept my eccentricities. When the reciprocal aspect wanes, these qualities turn into sheer weakness. Forgiving a BLM activist who sent your brother into a coma only means giving him a pass so he’ll do the same to you.

The Golden Rule, just as any of its derivatives, only works within a context of reciprocation and mutual trust. German jurist Carl Schmitt noticed the Latin Bible told about forgiving the inimicus, the disagreeable guy you’re squabbling with, not the hostis or foreign enemy who will take your head as soon as he can. There is no point being forgiving towards an enemy you have nothing in common.

Unfortunately, the chaotic Current Year destroyed most boundaries. It is sometimes hard to say who’s an inimicus or occasional yet brotherly rival you can forgive, and who’s a hostis you should always be vigilant of.

5. Patience

Arno Brecker did nothing wrong

As the saying goes, the early bird catches the worm. Being patient, planning, delaying gratification, is part of achieving great things. (Unless you’re picking up a Western whore whom you should bed early). The occult elite does not want you to be like that. Rather, those on the top want you to look for instant gratification.

The social media crack pipe, junk food, porn, and video games are designed so you get a massive rush of dopamine early on and get back there for more. If you go down this road you’ll become impatient, addicted, unable to work long hours without some unnatural gratification.

Of course this mindset makes you dependent, frail, unable to provide for yourself over the long term. Impatience is often associated with neuroticism, immaturity, and seeking external validation.

Being patient—without being passive—is required to tread the long path towards the top of the mountain.

Conclusion

Patience can be exercised alone on a purely Stoic fashion. Being patient only requires mastery of oneself, not of others. The four other qualities are essentially social but hard to exert in an anomous, low-trust society. Our natural propensities, from loyalty to the desire to provide, were misdirected and exploited. This made us wary of society in general and of other individuals in particular. When people are foreign to each other they are bound to screw and get screwed.

The better angels of our nature, yet, are still there. In spite of constant bickering and backstabbing the dissenters are closer to each other than to degenerate normies. Some girls can become reliable housewives. Hipsters who snark at old-fashioned qualities are the kind of people who build nothing. If we manage to build thick relationships again, we will effectively foster a civilization renewal.

Various Incels #sexist #pedo incels.co

(Personalityinkwell)

https://www.virtualteen.org/forums/showthread.php?t=165102

[Brutal] teens talk about virginity loss age and experience

brutal thread, while we were coping with vidya after a day of bullying, this is what chads and foids were up to.

Chads losing it young of course:
This chad lost it at age 10 or 11. hey, how could he remember? it's not like sex is a big deal for chad since he does it all the time: https://www.virtualteen.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2111079&postcount=3

This chad lost it late for a chad, 13. he banged his loli girlfriend in all her holes: https://www.virtualteen.org/forums/showthread.php?t=165102

This chad lost it at 13, but only has a 3.5 inch dick! (I guess dicks grow though during puberty, but that's micropenis territory) https://www.virtualteen.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2188117&postcount=39

Sluts starting early:

This girl got fucked in all her holes at age 11 https://www.virtualteen.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2111526&postcount=10

This girl was 11 when she lost he bi virginity and lost her "real" virginity at age 12 https://www.virtualteen.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2393335&postcount=60

This one is disturbing, she was age 8 and banged her dad. She claims he had 9 inch dick. (LARP?) https://www.virtualteen.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2626589&postcount=68

@Personalityinkwell really wants to make me suicidal

my threads are too brutal

I wonder if any bluepilled lurkers offed themselves reading my threads

JFL I didn't even read the first chad story

him and his 11 year old friend dp'd a 9-10 year old foid

insane

(Grothendieck)

Imagine waking up to a hebe. Little ass cuddled into your groin, her flat chest softly rising and falling with each breath. Messy hair in your face, but you don't care, you can smell the anticipatory scent of the beginning of her puberty. That intensely arousing hormonal smell. You feel the soft, light blond baby hairs on her legs and arms and she lets out a little yawn. Giggles as she feels your cock against her butt.

(nihility)

This is madness. That's how ERs are made, hearing all of that from your peers it's hard to not go crazy

(Pumkin)

that spoiler is brutal
memories came flooding back of when i'd spend my weekends playing gameboy and thinking everybody else must be nerdy like me then have to go to school on monday to listen to a classmate talk about having threesomes with girls and getting blowjobs on the school bus

it still irks me that i was 15 and riding the school bus then one of my classmates would be in the back giving blowjobs to senior boys then come up to the front and sit next to me to chat when she was done. just after she finished swallowing Chad cummies they would tell her to fuck off so she would sit next to the pussy beta (me) to cheer her up. yet she did this week after week? how does that make any logical fucking sense to give blowjobs to guys that don't give a fuck about you and then neglect the people that are treating you nice?

females are pieces of shit

CH #fundie heartiste.wordpress.com

I was alerted to a potential bombshell in the de Jesus Cruz shooting story by Ricky Vaughn’s Gab feed (@Ricky_Vaughn99). David Hogg, one of the self-proclaimed survivors who made an infamous tape while hiding out in a closet during the shooting, may have been caught lying on tape.

The media is telling us David Hogg interviewed his classmate in a closet DURING the shooting. In this video, he clearly states the time as 9:30 A.M.

[...]

But, as the timeline from the Sheriff’s office shows, the shooting did not start until 2:21 P.M.

https://archive.fo/ZQ80m

What the hell is going on here? These student activists are LYING to us.

***

Folks, I have archived the video, so they cannot get away with this.

We need the truth, the public deserves to hear the truth.

***

I am NOT saying this is a false flag. I am NOT saying that these are crisis actors.

I am saying that these student shitlib activists are LYING to us, and we need answers. The public deserves to know, just what the hell is going on?

***

Here’s what I think happened: They had a drill that morning in order to scare kids into gun control. During the drill, they made these videos.

Then, that afternoon, there was an actual shooter.

They lied and said, “we made these videos during the shooting.”

First of all, why did they lie to us?

Second of all, were FBI agents online posing as Siegetards and goading this idiot, Cruz, into doing a school shooting that afternoon?

That way, they would have all the video and students who were anti-gun activists and media-trained all ready to roll for their massive anti-gun psy-op.

David Hogg, who is the face of this group of charlatans posing as “concerned activists,” is the son of a prominent FBI agent. What the hell is going on here, folks?

If true, this whole post-shooting “march against guns” activist movement is a HUGE chaimstream media-driven hoax, probably financed by that agent of Satan himself, George Soros.

More suspicious details about David Hogg that lend credence to the claim he’s a hired crisis actor tasked with pushing a major social movement to repeal the 2nd Amendment:

Hogg works for John Podesta’s Center for American Progress
From that same link, an antifa member claims Hogg didn’t go to Parkland HS; he went to school with him at Redondo Shores HS in California
Hogg really is the son of an FBI agent

Most hilariously, Hogg is seen feeding shitlib boilerplate scripted lines to a “schoolmate” in a video “interview” he supposedly shot “during” the Cruz shooting.

...

The whole hacktivist clown show has the feel of a top-down, rather than bottom-up, managed movement. A BIG LIE. Who’s behind the scenes, funding and directing the show? (((Curiouser and curiouser))).

Crisis actors and false narratives. It’s not like the Degenerate Leftoid Mob doesn’t have experience recruiting kids to tell whoppers. Turning out an army of child soldiers to shill for the cause du jour is the Left’s specialty.

America is drowning in lies. This age of chaos and spiraling decline will end, but not before the globohomos have tried every gaslighting weapon at their disposal. When the truth outs, the rats scurrying for cover will be a marvel to behold.

Anonymous Coward #conspiracy godlikeproductions.com

Official Mandela Effect Think Tank. Code Potentially Cracked?

This thread is not for arguments about spelling, "official" histories, geography, etc.
This thread is for the others.

Disclaimer: Pardon my language in this post. I lack the vocabulary in this reality to perfectly describe a phenomenon that is reality bending. My descriptive words may be off, but bear with me, and each other, as we properly decode these events once and for all.

An older thread that truly got the ball rolling on this phenomenon is here:
Thread: Anyone remember the Berenstein Bears? Proof of PARALLEL UNIVERSE???

One of the best threads ever on glp, in my opinion.

:berensteinmatrix:

This situation has now progressed in a major way.
Here are some more recent threads:
Thread: "Mandela Effect"
Thread: Mandela Effect Has Now Reached The Bible. Seriously.

Update: Since the start of this think tank, this phenomenon has grown to the point where there are now threads about the galaxy itself being changed for us!

Many argue that it's always been BerenstAin, or that current geography/history has ALWAYS been fact. They are right, as they've always been in this reality/timeline/whatever this simulation frequency could be called. That's the way things have always been here.

I'll get the ball rolling with 3 theories:

Theory #1:
Unintenional side effects from cern or time travel. This one isn't ringing a bell with me intuitively, but it is the most practical of the three.

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

Theory #2:
Gaslighting. TPTB using cern or time travel to gaslight us. Remember, gaslighting is a textbook behavior of ALL psychopaths that breaks down the sense of reality in their victims. Tptb basically raising the bar here and gaslighting the world with hidden technology. Clearly then they are far along in their work towards full and total domination of the psyche of every man, woman, child, and all their damn transgenders they won't shut up about.

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

Theory #3:
Some of us have experienced some sort of "quantum jump" or something from similar realities where some things were definitely different. Where we came from, the evil queen in Snow White said: "Mirror Mirror on the Wall", not "Magic Mirror on the Wall". That is why we cannot find an old original version matching what we remember; the "original" version is different here.

And some of us bought "Bragg's" apple cider vinegar for many years, yet find that here.... it has always been simply "Bragg".

Quantum Physicists discovered that every atom, and therefore every cell in your brain/body, flashes in and out of existence here. We are bouncing back and forth between what our five senses (or more) are aware of here, and a quantum field that we all interact with, yet don't have conscious awareness of.

We are now seeing evidence that when we bounce back from the quantum field, we don't always bounce back to the same reality. The timeline/universe/what-have-you where we are discussing this now has some natives, and some from different timelines or parallel universes.

Now, there were a lot of 2012tards here. Remember talk about the shift, where some ascend? Bear with me...(pun intended)..........

Most of us, it seems, get a spooky or somewhat negative feeling about these changes. The natives to this timeline seem mind-controlled to the max, even some folks that we really like. And indeed, there is a literal frequency matrix here with the cell towers, wifi, etc that to some degree effects us as well. However, we remember other places, similar yet different. It is the Awakening-- we are in the shift . We entered a paralell universe and we are ascending. The evidence we're seeing with these mandela effects is a result of our be awakened to the process of said shift.

Imagine that as we bounce back and forth from the quantum field to our lives that we are consciously aware of, there is a gradient of frequencies. There are natives to every frequency, but also a breakaway sect that is bouncing gradually up along the scale of frequencies. The others that do not see what we see are meant to be in this universe to work things out and experience the "end of the world" scenario. You create your own reality as you become aware that your own mind is interacting with this quantum field to change the process itself. Remember that as a totem to continually RE-analyze your timeline and run tests on consciously choosing which frequency you are bouncing back to. We moved from other timelines/parallel universes to this one and it could be that the reason we are here is to witness this reality, learn from it, and move on and move on up to the next. And we've already been doing that, which is why the effects are picking up steam as we see more and more of the "changes" pop up. The others that are not moving to different timelines (such as the natives to your current timeline that you encounter) apparently plan to remain in their native timelines, as they have to learn from their frequency still. Do not fear the changes!!! Focus on positive lessons always moving up, and do not let the natives make you fear your own perceptions. They will only serve as negative being keeping you stuck here to experience the end of the world with them. Some of us are headed elsewhere.

It could explain why folks like Alex Jones are allowed to carry on here. Taking his word for everything could keep you stuck in the nuclear war, fema camp timeline. That doesn't mean you have to avoid him completely if you don't want to; It just means you have to consciously not allow yourself to get stuck in his reality while listening.

This could also explain why ancient cultures passed down history with rock carvings and relaying information orally. Indeed, tptb have squandered and wiped out much of that information, and right now many of us are finding that our memories of the past are more solid than what we're being told. Our old Berenstein bears books have changed, but our memories and conversations haven't.

Let's maintain an open-minded discussion sharing our journeys here. Natives wanting to hold us back will be banned as I do my best to keep this thread moderated. This thread is for all the quantum jumpers looking to explore these shifts for the sake of enlightening ourselves and each other to what may very well be the awakening of humankind to the true nature of this simulation.**

I'm no longer moderating this thread, as I'm leaving glp.

**Footnote: These are just the theories that resonate most with me. I'm open to hearing as many different theories as the others may have.

caamib #sexist reddit.com

Yawn. Just more idiocy.

So you admit you shouldn't have said those things, but they were, even though you yourself admit were wrong and dumb as fuck, supposed to "shake me up"? Hahahah oh wow.

And, no, once again, if your "opinion" is something that has nothing to do with anything I ever stated, then it's not an opinion. It really isn't that hard. I mean, it is to you since you're mentally retarded. but it shouldn't be to anybody with an IQ above 20.

>So why cant others so the same, even if its directed at you?

BECAUSE MY OPINIONS DON'T BREAK THE RULES. YOURS DO, AS THEY'RE ABOUT ATTACKING ME WITH INCORRECT CLAIMS ABOUT SHIT I MOSTLY EXPLAINED BY 2013, YOU TOOL.

>if someone says they dont think your very smart based on what you say, you can disagree but accept its their opinion.

Not why you were banned, you lunatic. Keep playing the victim.

>but I think someone should have sat down with you when you were much much younger and taught you a bit about women and relationships

**HAHAHAHA MY PARENTS, WHO DIDN'T GROW UP IN A FEMINIST SOCIETY, WERE SUPPOSED TO TEACH A 12 YEAR-OLD ME TO SHOOT A GIRL OF THE SAME AGE IN THE HEAD- HAHAHAHAHA**

>but its like you turned your sub into your own safe space.

I have protected it from insane monsters like you and will continue doing so. This is by no means a safe space, as people are disagreeing with us every day. It's just not allowing crazy fucks like you in.

>your mind on women or racism I think it would make you a lot happier.

Of course. Being as delusional and stupid as you would make me somewhat happier. So would heroin. The same deal. You're selling snake oil, pal. Dangerous, cancerous snake oil.

And see how he uses the term "racism", and that's wrong, while supporting blacks killing everybody white in the world oh wow.

And, once again, go fuck yourself.

Feuerwerferin #fundie radicalhub.com

BDSM is not only racist it is also antisemit. Black clothes and lethear are inspired by the Nazis (SS) and Foucault for example wrote that it turned him on to reanact the suffering of the Jews. The Nazis that still exist in Germany also seem to be above-average into BDSM and it’s women who are humiliated and of course not men. They don’t bother to lie about empowerfization unlike the self-proclaimed “progressives”. So, do male Nazis just not realize that they are indeed and consequently against their own very intention empowering women through their fetishes although they promote childbearing and housewives (conservatism)? *cough*

Roy Batty #sexist wehuntedthemammoth.com

[H]ere are some of the benefits that brave, stronk and empowered wimmins have brought to our societies:

college false rape allegations
mass migration from shithole countries
divorce rape
school shooters
fines for not wearing bicycle helmets
consumerism
wages cut in half
herpes
fat acceptance
speech codes

So thanks, ladies?

[...]

No, but seriously, I can’t even talk to Western women anymore. So I’m not going to be wishing them a Happy Women’s Day. Because they’ve squandered any goodwill I could have felt towards them.

Here’s to replacing this squandered holiday with White Sharia day in the West very, very soon.

[...]

If we’re going to have International Woman’s Day though, there should also be an “International Burn a Witch Day” and “International Shame a THOT Day.”

It’s only fair that we reward AND punish.

Sacco Vandal and Vanzetti Vandal #sexist vandalvoid.com

If foreign nations refuse to surrender their women willingly to us, we Westerners will be forced to acquire said females through more ancient means; namely, that of conquest. This method would have the ancillary benefit of speeding up the return to equilibrium of the sex ratios of our societies by culling a small percentage of military-aged men.

Furthermore, amongst the potential war brides, this method would also increase the desirability of our men, because women are evolutionary predisposed to mate with victorious conquerors of their own people.

The United States, for example, could easily utilize the superior military might that it is currently squandering upon policing the world to instead wage a war of conquest upon Mexico and the rest of Central America. Why build a wall across the vast and open American Southwest when you could instead build one across Panama?

In all honesty, manifest destiny was never really intended to stop until the entire continent of North America was placed under U.S. dominion anyways. Also, an invasion and occupation of Mexico and Central America would have the added benefit of giving the United States a chance to finally win the War on Drugs by creating a matrix wherein liquidation of the Mexican drug cartels would become a necessity. Let’s face it: conquest is a win-win.

Europe’s war bride fortunes, on the other hand, would naturally be more conveniently sought after in the Eastern Hemisphere. By subjugating and bringing order to North Africa, Europe could simultaneously end the flow of African migrants into Southern Europe, hitting two birds with one stone.

Furthermore, a deal could perhaps be made between the E.U. and Russia to divide the Middle East, which would have the added benefit of ending the flow of “refugees” from that region as well, replacing the waves of young Muslim men seeking to rape European women with waves of young Muslim women seeking to marry Western men.

MontUHURU Mimia #conspiracy cinematicsymbolism.blogspot.com

And there’s several ways I could explain how this concept works, but for the sake of not making this post any lengthier than it needs to be, I’ll say this ideology deals with elites knowing that if you want to better control any organization…or organism, one of the best ways to do it is by destabilizing the target and throwing it into a state of dysfunction. Then, you offer the target your solution to the problem. And once this solution is administered, it’s diagnosis will make the target operate in accordance with the desires of the fascist elite.

For example, in the early 1970’s a rich business tycoon said he was at a dinner party and happened to strike up a conversation with a member of the Rockefeller family. While conversing the Rockefeller asked the businessman: “Tell me, what do you think of the Woman’s Lib movement?”

The tycoon responded: “Well, overall I think it’s positive, women getting equal pay for equal work and all.”

The Rockefeller replied: “Listen, we funded Women’s Lib, and the main reason was because we couldn’t tax half the population if women were staying at home and being housewives. Not only did we want to get women into the workforce, but we knew that with both parents out of the home, what essentially would be raising their kids would be the TV, so the generations after theirs would be much easier to program.”

Now, I’d like to focus on the Rockefeller’s last statement about kids being raised by TV. This sentiment is telling when it comes to the elite’s main target for destabilization over the course of the last half-century.

And that target is the nuclear family.

See, if you destabilize the nuclear family and have a spate of one-parent households dominating any country, the children of those households will be infinitely more corruptible than a child coming from a stable two-parent home. Now let me expound on this further…

What I’m not saying is that children from single-parent households are destined to be morally obtuse and criminal-minded, what I am saying is these children will more than likely have some sort of emotional instability from not growing up with both parents. And more than likely, this will affect their decision making to the point where they’ll be more willing to do certain things that the child who has the counsel of both parents won’t. And monetarily, the child may not have access to items they want or need because there’s only one household income. And this more than anything may affect their decision making.

So for the last several decades, the elite have thrown every effort into destroying the nuclear family and keeping it dysfunctional. And one of the best ways to do this is by eradicating traditional gender roles.

Enter the Wachowski brothers…siblings….I mean, sisters.

Now, last year I wrote about Larry Wachowski becoming Lana, and a week ago, I found out that his brother Andy has now taken the transgender plunge and become ‘Lilly’. After shaking my head for several minutes, I have to admit to being mildly shocked, but I wasn’t surprised. Here’s why…

Like I said earlier, with more and more americans/global citizens being distrustful of corporations and with the elite seeing our exodus from the traditional workforce, the powers that be need to be reassured that we're kept in the ‘construct’ that the ‘Real-life’ Matrix is built on. Thus, they have to up the ante with their techniques of keeping us ‘corruptible’.

So the Wachowski’s are not only helping to mainstream homosexuality, but they and others like ‘Caitlyn’ Jenner are ushering in an era of total gender confusion. Our children are being told that they don’t have to be boys or girls. Thus, the elites are asking them to be some kind of human hybrid.

And soon the elites will have an official title for the ‘genderless’ human. This will be followed by initiatives to bait them back into the Real-Life Matrix with the promise of more access to resources via government programs that cater specifically to them.

And that’s what the Wachowski sisters and ‘Caitlyn’ Jenner are really spearheading.

So let me break this all the way down and say:

The matrix has you…

Jeff Miller #fundie splendoroftruth.com

For the last month I have been preparing myself for a Sen. Obama win. I am by nature a pessimistic-optimist. I am though much more calm than I expected I would be in the aftermath of President-Elect Obama. It is much easier to remember today that my trust is in Jesus. Though I am also in mourning for the unborn who will die as a result of an Obama Presidency. They will never get to vote in an election, much less get healthcare or participate in the economy. The economy goes up and down. Dead babies stay dead.

Maybe we need to pray for the health of Supreme Court members so that they stay healthy another four years and have no desire to retire. Yeah I am only saying this jokingly, but no doubt some will retire and have a replacement named by a President Obama and another generation of children will be killed with the permission of the court. One thing you can say about Democrats is that they never pick a nominee that "grows" in office - they are reliably strict deconstructionists who will find a foreign law that matches their biases or grab a penumbra in a pinch.

Being thankful for little things the Democratic Senate does not have 60 seats so I hope this will keep the misnamed Freedom of Choice Act from being able to be signed into law. At least I hope that it is not able to be passed. Unfortunately the Mexico City policy will be history in an Obama administration. Plus I can only imagine the type of people that will be sent to represent us in the U.N. Say hello to CEDAW and the United Nations efforts to make abortion a universal "right." Plus President Bush's restrictions on Federal funding of embryonic stem-cells will be gone and surely the taxpayers will be funding destructive embryonic research regardless of the progress of ethical sources of stem-cells. Federal money will be used for cloning research and yet more embryos will die at the hands of scientists killing in order to preserve life.

This is the affirmative action presidency. Affirmative action is notorious for placing skin color above qualification and the electorate decided accordingly. There was hardly a dimes worth of difference between any of the Democratic presidential wannabees other than varying levels of experience. Obama's main qualification was that his father was from Kenya and he was capable with a teleprompter. Though once he became the nominee he had a cascade of forces historically helpful for a Democrat to take the office this time around.

Though at least now we know how many racists there are in the United States. Those 56,280,668+ that voted for Sen. McCain are obvious racists for not voting for "The One." And just because you might have voted for Alan Keyes - well you're racist too for not voting for Obama. The idea that the election of Sen. Obama is going to heal race relations I think is laughable. The media will frame every opposition to a President Obama's policies as racially tinged just as they did during the election.

As far as the media goes I don't know which I liked worse. The media that use to pretend to have some objectivity or the one that simply became campaign operatives. Media bias is nothing new and selective reporting has been with us for quite a time. The editing of the Palin interview to make her look worse and the L.A. Times withholding of a video tape are just some of the egregious examples this time around. The media can determine what the Palin family ate the night before by inspecting their garbage can, but could find nothing worthy to investigate on Sen. Obama. Gee remember the media trying to pin cocaine use on President Bush, yet Obama's biographies detailing drug use get a yawn. I hear that the Main Stream Media is going to be elevated to a cabinet position by President Obama because of the good work they did for him. No longer will dissent be patriotic as the media said during the Bush years.

Now we will also have a culture of death Catholic Vice President who will be putting the vice into Vice President with his support of many forms of abortion. I bet the media can hardly wait to snap a picture of him receiving Communion to gloat. The USCCB meets soon to discuss "practical and pastoral implications of political support for abortion." Will the scandal of Sen. Biden be addressed? Probably not, but I would love to be wrong.

I hear that Sen. Obama will be FedExing 30 pieces of silver to Doug Kmiec. Moloch is quite happy with all of the Catholics that voted for Sen. Obama. According to Catholic Culture "Among Catholic voters who attend Mass weekly, McCain won majority support: 54- 45%. Among those who do not attend weekly Mass, the margin for Obama was an overwhelming 61- 37%. Thus Obama drew his support from inactive Catholics." So 45 percent of Mass going Catholics supported the most extreme supporter of abortion ever in a Presidential race. The unborn chopped up via scalpels will be glad to hear about hope and change.

Imperial Wizard Cole Thornton #fundie unskkkk.com

Let me tell you just how important the woman's role really is. Back in the day before women's lib screwed up things all around, the woman played a very important role in making the family the center of our being. God ordained the man to be the head of the family. This does not mean that He made the woman to be a servant to the man, but a help mate. They were/are to work together. He is to see that the family worships God, is protected, food provided, clothing furnished, a place to live made available, etc..She was/is to help him accomplish this. She also raises the children, cooks the food, even made the clothing, etc..She MADE the HOME. One thing that has always angered me to no end was to hear some moron say, oh, she is/was just a housewife. When we HAD housewives, or homemakers, our families were a lot better off. Mom saw to the kids needs, their schooling, that their homework got done, their illnesses tended to, their meals prepared, their homes cleaned, etc.,etc.,etc..There is no doubt as to why women's libbers wanted this to end as this was/is one of the hardest jobs on this planet if done correctly. It for sure was a 24/7 job.

Funny thing is, when this was done, many of our present day problems were so much less. Drug use was way lower just as were teen pregnancies, school drop outs, assaults, rapes, robberies, murders, you name it. Was Mom really responsible for all of this? I'd easily say you betcha.

These were the days when the evening meal centered around the family sitting together at the table, and not in front of the t.v.. Many problems, hopes, dreams, and questions about life were addressed here. The days occurrences were discussed. Also so were the wrongs that some did, and, why you were not supposed to do them and more importantly, what would happen to you if you did.

Anne Kennedy #fundie patheos.com

(=First of a two part post/rant about Glennon Doyle Melton, a Christian blogger/author who came out as a lesbian and married a woman=)

I mentioned in our podcast yesterday the tragic downfall of Glennon Doyle Melton. I would like to point out a few obvious home truths. Incidentally, of course it would be nice to think nuanced and fascinating thoughts, to grasp at difficult insights that have not been articulated by others, to, in short, be Novel. But this point in Christian history doesn’t seem to be calling for that sort of thinking. We seem to be needing to go back to the most basic point, the expression of the most essential truths. And the most essential of all of them is...

What is love?

This foundation of Christian doctrine has been so muddled and twisted, squandered really, by the modern Westerner, that we have to keep going back to the very beginning point of Christian Faith in order to answer this tragic confusion.

So Glennon, like so many, got married, had some children, and found herself in the usual way of coping with a too difficult life, a broken relationship with herself, and a cheating husband. In the midst of this, she turned out to be a top notch writer and so wrote her way through her difficulties and troubles. Here she has my complete sympathy. I am sitting here at this very minute in desperate pursuit of mental health through writing. Writing is my life line. If I don’t write every day, I become unhinged. And gosh, isn’t it nice if people read your writing? Everyone has been reading Glennon. That I haven’t is my own fault. I need to get out more and read more. I’ve read a few of her blog posts, though, and they are breezy, brilliant. The writing is what you Want when you click on the Internet.

But good writing does not a theologian nor a Christian make. Any one of us can put ourselves out there but the church–the people who know and love God and his Son Jesus Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit of whatever denomination and background–have a duty, an obligation, to articulate the gospel clearly and repudiate those who call themselves Christian but do not adhere to basic Christian doctrine. For the sake of Glennon herself, because she has claimed the name of Christ, I find I must say no to her new way of life.

Let’s just quickly look at what she says about love, both for herself, and more troublingly, for her children. She writes, “I want you to grow so comfortable in your own being, your own skin, your own knowing – that you become more interested in your own joy and freedom and integrity than in what others think about you. That you remember that you only live once, that this is not a dress rehearsal and so you must BE who you are. I want you to refuse to betray yourself. Not just for you. For ALL OF US. Because what the world needs — in order to grow, in order to relax, in order to find peace, in order to become brave — is to watch one woman at a time live her truth without asking for permission or offering explanation.”

And about her children, “They have the love and support of their dad, me, their grandparents, their aunts and uncles, their church, their teachers, their friends’ families –all of whom have fallen as hard for Abby as they have. They’re lucky kids, to be surrounded by so much love. We have family dinners together – all six of us — and Abby cooks. (She is an AMAZING chef because Jesus loves me). We go to the kids’ school parties together. We are a modern, beautiful family. Our children are loved. So loved. And because of all of that love, they are brave.”

You can find the longer post on her Facebook page.

Let me begin by saying that throwing over your broken marriage to join with another woman isn’t actually brave any more. It’s one of the easiest choices on the table. It may not feel easy in the moment, but what you are doing is embracing a copy of yourself, and you are doing it with the culture’s complete approbation. Bravery is when you do something difficult that ought to be done but you don’t want to do it, but you do it against your desires, for the sake of another. The choice of Glennon to be with a woman is the choice to go with self expression and the love of the self over the love of another and of God.

And that’s the confusion, isn’t it? It’s everywhere. In Christianity you are called to die to yourself, to die to the very essential nature of who you are which has been so corrupted and marred by sin that it is irrevocably bound to eternal death. This is the state of the human person. Not a single human person escapes the sentence of death that came when we chose to love ourselves rather than the Other, that is God. And however painful it is to face, no one gets a pass on this sentence. We all go down the grave one by one, dust to dust, because we idolatrously chose to love ourselves rather than our Creator.

No amount of embracing the self will cure the ills of the soul. No Amount. There is nothing you can do to love yourself enough to rescue your soul from death. You can’t. There is no human solution to the death dealing cavern that separates us from God.

That is why God himself had to cross over that cavern by himself. He had to come and absorb our sin and our rejection of him in himself. That is the cross. He took our catastrophic and poisonous self love onto himself and died the death we should have died.

When we cling to him, the death we endure, though it feels very great, is actually very small. Still, it is not easy to say no to the self, to put to death that essential poisoned self. It can’t happen without God himself carrying you through to eternity.

And I really hate to say it, but this is going to have to be part one, because I have somewhere to be. But I will pick up right here tomorrow, and will probably have another part after that. I hope you who know and love Jesus will pray for Glennon and her children and her husband and her new person and plead with God to enlighten the eyes of her heart that she might finally see him for who he is. See you tomorrow!

Aloysius J. Fozdyke/Henry Makow PhD #conspiracy #fundie #wingnut henrymakow.com

<Henry Makow's excerpts from the "letters of Sydney's Satanic Alpha Lodge High Priest">
Australians have really settled into the new order and are getting ready to sell their homes to Chinese investors. This is how it's done! Essentially, totalitarianism has finally been imposed and joyously accepted. As their economies die, the culling from lack of medication will be blamed on a cartoon virus. The brave, bronzed Aussie has long been a tasteless joke.

On any objective assessment, there are too many "useless eaters", many of whom are sick or 'scrapings from the bottom of the gene pool'. Global human population is out of control. Let the games begin! The elderly and chronically sick - in that order.
<...>
Internationally, America is a basket-case - with its mongrelized, uneducated population (possessing attention spans shorter than their pubes); ghost cities burning, and unpayable debt. 'Land of the free and the home of the brave'; don't make me belly-laugh sardonically!

Soon the superannuation of Australians and New Zealanders will be squandered. But even if they wake up, they're disarmed and docile. In the State of Victoria, they're living as battery hens - no worries.

Freedoms were taken away by the Salami Method - a slice at a time. There's so few and inconsequential freedoms left that it doesn't really matter. When we tell you and your family to get on the cattle trains, you will. Your future, together with your pension and superannuation funds await their transformation. Solve et coagula!

F. Roger Devlin #fundie toqonline.com

[A review of "Third Ways" by Allan C. Carlson]

Adam Smith and David Ricardo expressed cautious optimism that an unhindered market in labor would provide the ordinary working man a large enough wage to marry and raise a few children; but neither claimed to have demonstrated the necessity of this. Radicals such as Marx and Engels soon challenged the idea, maintaining that capitalism transformed labor into an ordinary commodity which women and even children could sell to capitalists at a fraction of the cost for adult men. The traditional autonomy and solidarity of the family would thereby fall prey to industrial efficiency and the Faustian quest for profits. Later liberal economists such as J. S. Mill and Alfred Marshall came to agree with the Marxists that the capitalist market economy makes no natural accommodation to the family.

...

It might at first sight seem paradoxical that families could ever be economically worse off having a second income instead of just one. But this is a classic example of what logicians call the fallacy of composition. It works like this. When an exciting play occurs in a baseball game, all the fans jump to their feet to get a better view. Do they actually get a better view? On average, no. If only one fan were to rise, he would get a better view; but when all rise, the overall view is no better than before. Analogously, an individual woman entering the workforce undoubtedly improves her own material situation; but if the great mass of women enters the workforce, the overall effect is merely to glut the market for labor, driving down wages for everyone.

...

No “law of economics” prevents such insulation of women and children from the labor market. All societies treat certain things they especially value as extra commerciam—outside the scope of market exchange. There need be no market for beef, for example, in a country where cows are considered sacred. Or again, as long as a market in slaves existed they were subject to the same law of supply and demand as any other commodity; but this market could be abolished, and was. Similarly, there need be no market for women’s labor in a country which values home life and family solidarity more than maximal industrial efficiency. Except under rare conditions involving extreme destitution—e.g., where women’s or children’s wage work might be necessary to allow everyone in a family to eat adequately—any society can enjoy as much family autonomy as it is willing to pay for in such efficiency. Proponents of family-centered “third ways” believe such a tradeoff worthwhile; some may disagree, but there is no economic absurdity involved in the idea.

If you are even familiar with the term “family wage” today, you are showing your age. Yet this ideal, writes Carlson, “dominated labor goals throughout the North Atlantic region from the mid-nineteenth through mid-twentieth centuries and had measurable effects on wages and the labor market.” While industrialists almost without exception advocated the “right” of poor women to work (and drive down men’s wages), working class husbands felt differently. They fought for and won wages that permitted their women to remain at home with the children. In Britain between 1842 and 1914, for example, “substantial gains in material standards were achieved by the working class, accompanied by the movement of women from wage-earning to domestic pursuits.” Similarly, in Belgium there was “a thorough transformation in the family life of workers between 1853 and 1891, based on a withdrawal of married women from the labor market and a dramatic rise in the real incomes of men” (p. 44). Keep this in mind the next time you hear a feminist complacently assert the “impossibility” of returning to the days when a woman’s place was in the home.

In America the family wage ideal rested on legal barriers, direct discrimination (gasp!) against categories of female workers, marriage bans, and labor laws requiring the special treatment of women, discouraging their employment. The system was strong enough to survive the New Deal, but was dealt a body blow by the entry of the United States into World War II and the consequent mobilization of women for industry. The National War Production Board recommended “a single evaluation line for all jobs in a plant regardless whether performed by men or women.” Only 13 percent of US firms had followed such a policy in 1939, but by 1947, 57 percent did (pp. 45–46).

...

“Equal pay for equal work” is a masterful piece of political rhetoric with a sort of “2+2=4” ring to it. Carlson catalogues for us a few of the realities this deceptive slogan has served to conceal. First of all, family households with only a single male wage earner have experienced a decline in real income: between 1973 and 1993 alone, this decline amounted to 13.6 percent. Next, single-income families have been put at a mounting competitive disadvantage relative to two-income families in the acquisition of consumer goods. There has also been a sizeable increase in the number of men earning less than a “poverty line” wage, and similar growth in the number of children living in female-headed households. Married women are increasingly faced with a stark choice: leave their young children during the day to try to earn income, or stay with them and fall into poverty. Either way, the children lose (pp. 50–51).

For the first time in history, notes our author, the family is becoming completely industrialized. Gardening, food preparation, home repairs, child care, and other residual forms of home production are being abandoned by busy couples in favor of market-provided services; in other words, the home has no economy of its own, but has become at best a kind of consumer’s cooperative (pp. 51–52). With the economic rationale for marriage thus eroded, divorce, transitory cohabitation, bastardy, abortion, and loneliness all increase. We have come a long way, baby.

Sweden is often held up as the best model of a country pursuing a “third way” between capitalism and socialism. Carlson devotes a chapter to the evolution of Swedish family policy in the past century and the ideological debates surrounding it; rumor has it that its original title was “Desperate Swedish Socialist Housewives.” However that may be, this chapter makes especially clear the difficulty of arranging family policy prescriptions neatly on a conventional left-right ideological spectrum. As early as 1866, delegates to the First Socialist International “approved a resolution calling for bans on the employment of women. The measure’s sponsors reasoned that working women pressed down overall wage levels and displaced men; in their view, working women were the equivalent of strikebreakers” (p. 113). Sweden’s Social Democratic Party adopted this view, and for many years it remained normative for Swedish “progressives.”

...

By the 1960s, however, Alva Myrdal and her stridently anti-familial feminism were again on the march. Individual rather than familial taxation became a central issue in Swedish politics. As passage of the measure approached, a “Campaign for the Family” was launched. Fifty thousand letters of protest poured into the Prime Minister’s office; thousands of women marched on the Riksdag in (as one Swedish newspaper put it) “history’s first housewife demonstration.”

It was to no avail. In 1970, individual taxation went into effect; overnight, a housewife became an expensive luxury (pp. 129–31). Carlson writes: “Correctly labeled the era of Red Sweden, the first Olaf Palme government committed a kind of feminist genocide, intentionally eliminating a whole class of women through coerced ‘reeducation’ and forced labor” (p. 179).

The family wage is by nature a compromise with industrial capitalism; it turns one member of the family over to the labor market in exchange for keeping the rest insulated from it. Distributism, the economic platform advocated by Hilaire Belloc and G. K. Chesterton, went farther by seeking to counteract some of the inherent tendencies of capitalism directly.

Unknown author #fundie bylogos.blogspot.ca

Aliens, like angels, are not descendants of Adam. They thus share neither his nature nor guilt. Hence Christ's sacrifice is of no avail to them. Man is the only creature to be thereby saved from the consequences of his sinfulness. Thus, if aliens exist, either they have not fallen from grace or, less happily, like the fallen angels, they cannot be redeemed.

Man has a special relation to God. Man alone was created in the image of God and appointed to rule over creation. Even stars were created primarily to serve as lights and signs for man. Finally, at the end of times, Christ returns to the earth, the abode of man, to judge living and dead. Man is to judge the angels (I Cor.6:3). The New Jerusalem comes down from heaven to earth. All this reinforces the special place of man in God's creation.