I'd guess that there are a couple of Brits you'd like to be free of right now aCW.
There are a couple of Brits whom I would love to see set free of their sinful behaviors (homosexuality and alcoholism).
I'll keep praying for them.
Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 3
- Thread starter aCultureWarrior
- Start date
- Status
There are a couple of Brits whom I would love to see set free of their sinful behaviors (homosexuality and alcoholism).
I'll keep praying for them.
alwight
New member
What a great guy you are aCW!
You deserve a big hug and wet kisses from the man of your dreams.
lain:
What a great guy you are aCW!
You deserve a big hug and wet kisses from the man of your dreams.
Now Al, try to keep your fantasies in the 'gay' bathhouses that you frequent, I'm trying to run a respectful joint here.
On that note:
The more I think about Part 4 the more excited I am about it, not only because of the new topics I'll be covering extensively, but also because of the table of contents format that I'll be using. I'll be alphabetically categorizing it, mostly with internet links, so that people can find out about perverts like Dan Savage by going to "P" (People) and locate his name and find out all of the great things he's done for the LGBTQueer movement by reading the various articles on him (licking a doorknob while having influenza, 3 ways with his 'husband', talking about "good pedophiles", etc. etc. etc.).
I hope you're excited as well Al, as you've taken good care of yourself by not expiring at the 46.6 year mark and thus have been a valuable asset as to "Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized!"
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Who are these then?
My prayers are between God and me.
Since you're here Art, I need some advice on the upcoming new table of contents format.
When I talk about homosexual pedophilia/pederasty should I put it under the letter "P", or "C" for child molesters or be politically correct and put it under "M" for "man-boy love"? Heck, since children are such a huge part of LGBTQueer culture, I should put it under "H" for homosexuality.
I suppose that I could cross reference it (not to be confused with cross dressing, which will be put under the letter "T" for transvestites/transsexuals...or should I put it under the letter "G" for genital mutilators?).
Decisions decisions.
Last edited:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
As you lack the brains to differentiate between homosexuality and paedophilia it doesn't really matter what letter you file it under, although B for bollocks would be my suggestion...
I'll have you know that I go out of my way to be fair to homosexuals in this thread:
Some of them like children as young as 8 (Hay, Kameny, etc. etc. etc.), others a tad bit older at 15 (Bean, Milk, etc. etc. etc.) and I do hear tell that there was one homosexual who actually liked em above the age of consent! (strictly rumor, so I won't defame his name until it's confirmed).
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
What an idiot...
This really should come of no surprise to anyone, after all, if you're working for the first 'gay' President of the United States, why bother to respect the laws of the land?
Obama speechwriter reveals secret same-sex marriage at White House
July 4, 2015
During a special presentation of the popular live storytelling podcast “The Moth Radio Hour” at this year’s Aspen Ideas festival, former Obama speechwriter Jon Lovett shared a story about how, years before gay marriage would become legal nationwide, he secretly performed a same-sex marriage at the White House...
“I remembered that I worked at the White House, and I could give tours any time I want,” Lovett recalled in Aspen. So he decided to use that privilege to carry out a supersecret operation: performing a first same-sex marriage at the White House.
“Steve and Justin and I walked through the double doors into the ground floor of the West Wing, past the Situation Room, down the hall past the offices of the [National Security Council], up the stairs by the Cabinet room and the Oval Office, through the doors of the Colonnade that connect the offices of the West Wing to the stately rooms of the residence, and we turned right down the stone path that jutted into the Rose Garden, and then I said, ‘Steve, do you take Justin to be your lawfully wedded husband? And Justin, do you take Steve?’”...
Read more:
http://news.yahoo.com/former-obama-...ex-marriage-at-the-white-house-175113407.html
I had to do some searching, but I did find a picture of the "Honeymoon Suite":
http://blackhawk.bhs.schoolfusion.u...Facility Maintenance /Summer2012/IMG_6076.JPG
Obama speechwriter reveals secret same-sex marriage at White House
July 4, 2015
During a special presentation of the popular live storytelling podcast “The Moth Radio Hour” at this year’s Aspen Ideas festival, former Obama speechwriter Jon Lovett shared a story about how, years before gay marriage would become legal nationwide, he secretly performed a same-sex marriage at the White House...
“I remembered that I worked at the White House, and I could give tours any time I want,” Lovett recalled in Aspen. So he decided to use that privilege to carry out a supersecret operation: performing a first same-sex marriage at the White House.
“Steve and Justin and I walked through the double doors into the ground floor of the West Wing, past the Situation Room, down the hall past the offices of the [National Security Council], up the stairs by the Cabinet room and the Oval Office, through the doors of the Colonnade that connect the offices of the West Wing to the stately rooms of the residence, and we turned right down the stone path that jutted into the Rose Garden, and then I said, ‘Steve, do you take Justin to be your lawfully wedded husband? And Justin, do you take Steve?’”...
Read more:
http://news.yahoo.com/former-obama-...ex-marriage-at-the-white-house-175113407.html
I had to do some searching, but I did find a picture of the "Honeymoon Suite":
http://blackhawk.bhs.schoolfusion.u...Facility Maintenance /Summer2012/IMG_6076.JPG
alwight
New member
Not particularly respectful of the homosexuals that you want to criminalise imo, however...
You'd probably need to be a deeply repressed gay male to get that hot under the collar about it I'd say.
lain: Clearly you take the whole "gay scene" very seriously indeed, if you want a job done properly you have to do it yourself, right aCW?
The discomfort that Dan Savage has obviously planted in what passes as your mind aCW, and apparently those of other homophobic bigots too (whether or not Dan actually has ever licked any doorknobs), seems to have been remarkably successful from his point of view and it gave me a chuckle anyway. :chuckle:
Oh Yes aCW, I positively relish the idea of continuing this whole train wreck of a thread well into the foreseeable future. :jump:
You could do some in-depth research or perhaps from first hand experience, into gay men who have trapped themselves inside a straight marriage hoping to avoid most of the homophobic persecution by living a lie. Who are sadly reduced to long lonely hours trawling the internet for beguiling salacious homoerotic entertainment. :think:
In case the Chickenhawks
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chickenhawk_(gay_slang)
who were behind the Stonewall Inn riots back in 1969 think that they're responsible for redefining marriage, they're not, their communist predecessor beat them to it over a hundred years earlier:
Karl Marx and the Revolutionary Roots of Redefining Marriage
While most commentators credit the sexual revolution and the Stonewall uprising of 1969 as the “beginning” of the gay rights movement that led to last week’s Supreme Court same-sex marriage decision, the reality is that the roots of the movement to drastically change the definition of marriage can be traced back to 1848 and the publication of Karl Marx's The Communist Manifesto. Proclaiming that the “abolition” of marriage and the family was central to the fundamental transformation necessary to implement a “just society,” Marx wanted to transcend what he called “bourgeois” marriage, replacing it with a redefined marriage—a form of marriage that “moves beyond marriage.” For Marx, who predicted that “the bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course,” the goal was always to move “beyond marriage.”
Takedown: From Communists to Progressives, How the Left Has Sabotaged Family and Marriage (WND Books, 2015), a new book by best-selling author Paul Kengor, points out that “Marx showed blatant contempt for marriage not only in his public writings but in his private actions.” Tracing the roots of the “anti-family” movement through the history of socialists and communists—including Marx, Friedrich Engels, Margaret Sanger, Wilhelm Reich, and Herbert Marcuse—Kengor calls same-sex marriage a “Trojan horse for the far Left to do what it has always wanted to do: take down the natural, traditional biblical family and attack religion in the process.”
Read more: http://www.catholicworldreport.com/...volutionary_Roots_of_Redefining_Marriage.aspx
http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Content/Site140/Blog/4005kengortaked_00000003448.jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chickenhawk_(gay_slang)
who were behind the Stonewall Inn riots back in 1969 think that they're responsible for redefining marriage, they're not, their communist predecessor beat them to it over a hundred years earlier:
Karl Marx and the Revolutionary Roots of Redefining Marriage
While most commentators credit the sexual revolution and the Stonewall uprising of 1969 as the “beginning” of the gay rights movement that led to last week’s Supreme Court same-sex marriage decision, the reality is that the roots of the movement to drastically change the definition of marriage can be traced back to 1848 and the publication of Karl Marx's The Communist Manifesto. Proclaiming that the “abolition” of marriage and the family was central to the fundamental transformation necessary to implement a “just society,” Marx wanted to transcend what he called “bourgeois” marriage, replacing it with a redefined marriage—a form of marriage that “moves beyond marriage.” For Marx, who predicted that “the bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course,” the goal was always to move “beyond marriage.”
Takedown: From Communists to Progressives, How the Left Has Sabotaged Family and Marriage (WND Books, 2015), a new book by best-selling author Paul Kengor, points out that “Marx showed blatant contempt for marriage not only in his public writings but in his private actions.” Tracing the roots of the “anti-family” movement through the history of socialists and communists—including Marx, Friedrich Engels, Margaret Sanger, Wilhelm Reich, and Herbert Marcuse—Kengor calls same-sex marriage a “Trojan horse for the far Left to do what it has always wanted to do: take down the natural, traditional biblical family and attack religion in the process.”
Read more: http://www.catholicworldreport.com/...volutionary_Roots_of_Redefining_Marriage.aspx
http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Content/Site140/Blog/4005kengortaked_00000003448.jpg
On occasion I will use the website "breitbart.com" to gather information for use in this thread (it's rare, but I have).
I know that many conservatives reference that website but fail to ask the following question about their now deceased founder:
Why was Andrew Breitbart on the board of directors of GOProud?
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/andrew-brietbart-skipping-cpac-due-to-goproud-ban/
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...220px-Andrew_Breitbart_by_Gage_Skidmore_2.jpg
Was Breitbart a bisexual? Had he been a Catholic altar boy at one time and he recognized a former Catholic Priest as a high ranking member of GOProud and longed to return to his youthful days?
Are there any Breitbart fans that could answer that question for me?
I know that many conservatives reference that website but fail to ask the following question about their now deceased founder:
Why was Andrew Breitbart on the board of directors of GOProud?
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/andrew-brietbart-skipping-cpac-due-to-goproud-ban/
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...220px-Andrew_Breitbart_by_Gage_Skidmore_2.jpg
Was Breitbart a bisexual? Had he been a Catholic altar boy at one time and he recognized a former Catholic Priest as a high ranking member of GOProud and longed to return to his youthful days?
Are there any Breitbart fans that could answer that question for me?
I was in another thread talking about the recent marriage ruling by SCOTUS and wrote something that I'd like to share here (and as always, open it for debate to those who disagree) :
Marriage has become a joke. Since adultery was decriminalized, no fault divorce laws were put in place and laws allowing cohabitation, sodomite 'marriage' is only putting the final nail in the proverbial coffin.
One issue that I'd like to talk about... is the term we all heard so much about during the sodomite marriage debate: "Slippery Slope", i.e. that allowing sodomites to marry would lead to incestuous and other sexual deviant behavior marriages.
In order for there to be a "slope", homosexuals would first have to stand on a higher ground than those who engage in incest, sex with animals or pedophilia. They don't, like all of the behaviors that I just mentioned, those who engage in homosexuality are just as much perverts as the rest of them.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/ce/1b/a1/ce1ba1a3ca3711fa84cbadd9f6043e35.jpg
Marriage has become a joke. Since adultery was decriminalized, no fault divorce laws were put in place and laws allowing cohabitation, sodomite 'marriage' is only putting the final nail in the proverbial coffin.
One issue that I'd like to talk about... is the term we all heard so much about during the sodomite marriage debate: "Slippery Slope", i.e. that allowing sodomites to marry would lead to incestuous and other sexual deviant behavior marriages.
In order for there to be a "slope", homosexuals would first have to stand on a higher ground than those who engage in incest, sex with animals or pedophilia. They don't, like all of the behaviors that I just mentioned, those who engage in homosexuality are just as much perverts as the rest of them.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/ce/1b/a1/ce1ba1a3ca3711fa84cbadd9f6043e35.jpg
alwight
New member
Tell us again about your deep Christian concerns for all of God's children aCW, I enjoy a good laugh.I was in another thread talking about the recent marriage ruling by SCOTUS and wrote something that I'd like to share here (and as always, open it for debate to those who disagree) :
Marriage has become a joke. Since adultery was decriminalized, no fault divorce laws were put in place and laws allowing cohabitation, sodomite 'marriage' is only putting the final nail in the proverbial coffin.
One issue that I'd like to talk about... is the term we all heard so much about during the sodomite marriage debate: "Slippery Slope", i.e. that allowing sodomites to marry would lead to incestuous and other sexual deviant behavior marriages.
In order for there to be a "slope", homosexuals would first have to stand on a higher ground than those who engage in incest, sex with animals or pedophilia. They don't, like all of the behaviors that I just mentioned, those who engage in homosexuality are just as much perverts as the rest of them.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/ce/1b/a1/ce1ba1a3ca3711fa84cbadd9f6043e35.jpg
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I was in another thread talking about the recent marriage ruling by SCOTUS and wrote something that I'd like to share here (and as always, open it for debate to those who disagree) :
Marriage has become a joke. Since adultery was decriminalized, no fault divorce laws were put in place and laws allowing cohabitation, sodomite 'marriage' is only putting the final nail in the proverbial coffin.
One issue that I'd like to talk about... is the term we all heard so much about during the sodomite marriage debate: "Slippery Slope", i.e. that allowing sodomites to marry would lead to incestuous and other sexual deviant behavior marriages.
In order for there to be a "slope", homosexuals would first have to stand on a higher ground than those who engage in incest, sex with animals or pedophilia. They don't, like all of the behaviors that I just mentioned, those who engage in homosexuality are just as much perverts as the rest of them.
Come on Al, put that kindergarten education of yours to work and tell us how those who engage in homosexuality are better than those who have sex with animals or their sister/brother/father/mother. Take the moral high ground here Al (but you MUST hold your nose in the air when doing so).
http://lh6.ggpht.com/-QHHwa0c0-Wo/U...bo%2520nose22_thumb%255B1%255D.jpg?imgmax=800
I was in another thread talking about the recent marriage ruling by SCOTUS and wrote something that I'd like to share here (and as always, open it for debate to those who disagree) :
Marriage has become a joke. Since adultery was decriminalized, no fault divorce laws were put in place and laws allowing cohabitation, sodomite 'marriage' is only putting the final nail in the proverbial coffin.
One issue that I'd like to talk about... is the term we all heard so much about during the sodomite marriage debate: "Slippery Slope", i.e. that allowing sodomites to marry would lead to incestuous and other sexual deviant behavior marriages.
In order for there to be a "slope", homosexuals would first have to stand on a higher ground than those who engage in incest, sex with animals or pedophilia. They don't, like all of the behaviors that I just mentioned, those who engage in homosexuality are just as much perverts as the rest of them.
Tell us again about your deep Christian concerns for all of God's children aCW, I enjoy a good laugh.
Come on Al, put that kindergarten education of yours to work and tell us how those who engage in homosexuality are better than those who have sex with animals or their sister/brother/father/mother. Take the moral high ground here Al (but you MUST hold your nose in the air when doing so).
http://lh6.ggpht.com/-QHHwa0c0-Wo/U...bo%2520nose22_thumb%255B1%255D.jpg?imgmax=800
Here's yet another great article by our friends at MassResistance talking about what our predominately Christian Founding Fathers went through to help form this once great Christian nation:
Independence Day: A message about fear
Let’s be honest. Being called nasty names or boycotted, etc., is small potatoes in the context of things
July 4, 2015
...The men who signed the Declaration of Independence back in 1776 would put us all to shame.
As Rush Limbaugh observed:
What kind of men were the 56 signers who adopted the Declaration of Independence and who, by their signing, committed an act of treason against the crown?
... With only a few exceptions, such as Samuel Adams of Massachusetts, these were men of substantial property. All but two had families. The vast majority were men of education and standing in their communities. They had economic security as few men had in the 18th Century.
… Each had more to lose from revolution than he had to gain by it. John Hancock, one of the richest men in America, already had a price of 500 pounds on his head. He signed in enormous letters so that his Majesty could now read his name without glasses and could now double the reward. Ben Franklin wryly noted: "Indeed we must all hang together, otherwise we shall most assuredly hang separately."
… These men knew what they risked. The penalty for treason was death by hanging. And remember, a great British fleet was already at anchor in New York Harbor. They were sober men … They were all conservatives, yet they rebelled.
They risked everything they had for a principle. And many of them eventually suffered enormously, including death. It makes us seem pretty pathetic in comparison. I think of this a lot when people talk to me about how “brave” I am for simply doing what we all ought to be doing...
On this Independence Day, let us all renew ourselves for the battle at hand. As we’ve said before, the other side may appear at this point to be invincible. But it is an illusion. Our victory will come. We just need to do what it takes to make it happen (as we will outline in upcoming posts).
Read more: http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen2/15c/July-4-message-Fear/index.html
We can learn a lot from the 56 Founding Fathers who signed the Declaration of Independence.
Independence Day: A message about fear
Let’s be honest. Being called nasty names or boycotted, etc., is small potatoes in the context of things
July 4, 2015
...The men who signed the Declaration of Independence back in 1776 would put us all to shame.
As Rush Limbaugh observed:
What kind of men were the 56 signers who adopted the Declaration of Independence and who, by their signing, committed an act of treason against the crown?
... With only a few exceptions, such as Samuel Adams of Massachusetts, these were men of substantial property. All but two had families. The vast majority were men of education and standing in their communities. They had economic security as few men had in the 18th Century.
… Each had more to lose from revolution than he had to gain by it. John Hancock, one of the richest men in America, already had a price of 500 pounds on his head. He signed in enormous letters so that his Majesty could now read his name without glasses and could now double the reward. Ben Franklin wryly noted: "Indeed we must all hang together, otherwise we shall most assuredly hang separately."
… These men knew what they risked. The penalty for treason was death by hanging. And remember, a great British fleet was already at anchor in New York Harbor. They were sober men … They were all conservatives, yet they rebelled.
They risked everything they had for a principle. And many of them eventually suffered enormously, including death. It makes us seem pretty pathetic in comparison. I think of this a lot when people talk to me about how “brave” I am for simply doing what we all ought to be doing...
On this Independence Day, let us all renew ourselves for the battle at hand. As we’ve said before, the other side may appear at this point to be invincible. But it is an illusion. Our victory will come. We just need to do what it takes to make it happen (as we will outline in upcoming posts).
Read more: http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen2/15c/July-4-message-Fear/index.html
We can learn a lot from the 56 Founding Fathers who signed the Declaration of Independence.
Saying that all or even most gay men molest boys is as idiotic as saying that all or most straight men molest little girls and rape them, or teenage ones . Yes, some do, unfortunately , but the overwhelming majority do not.
Culture Warrior is either lying or totally ingorant of the facts about homosexuality , or just palin deluded .
Culture Warrior is either lying or totally ingorant of the facts about homosexuality , or just palin deluded .
Speaking of John Adams (you know, one of those many Founding Fathers that secular humanists claim were deist) :
Excerpts from his letter to Benjamin Rush:
...But my friend there is something very serious in this business. The Holy Ghost carries on the whole Christian system in this Earth. Not a baptism, not a marriage, not a Sacrament can be administered but by the Holy Ghost, who is transmitted from age to age by laying the hands of the Bishop on the heads of candidates for the Ministry. In the same manner as the Holy Ghost is transmitted from monarch to monarch by the holy oil in the vial at Rheims which was brought down from Heaven by a dove and by that other phial [vial] which I have seen in the Tower of London. There is no authority civil or religious: There can be no legitimate government but that which is administered by this Holy Ghost. There can be no salvation without it. All without it is rebellion and perdition, or in more orthodox words damnation.
Read more: http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles.asp?id=59755
https://dmswriter.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/john-adams-hulton-archive-getty1.jpg
This culture war is far from over Al.
alwight
New member
Unlike the UK the state and church are separate in the U.S. I don't think that your Founding Fathers aCW were particularly keen to enshrine the same kind of theocratic doctrine and control that they had escaped from in Europe.
Probably very wise too.
Religion is the power to control, something recognised by Karl Marx too I believe.
Probably very wise too.
Religion is the power to control, something recognised by Karl Marx too I believe.
- Status