And so… Paul installed the lightning rod and then sat by it waiting, wondering if he should put his hand on it or just stand by and watch at first.
It seems I was wrong. I retract my statement. Until further notice, that is.
I hereby reinstate my initial statement…
Ha ha perfectly timed. I was alluding to your initial statement with mine at the end. Wonder what he’ll try next to keep pole position in the “hot topic” section?
“Gay Jew Paedophilia, Don’t Knock It Until You’ve Tried It?
Let’s wait and watch…
But seriously, this is one of those few issues on which I personally disagree with ALL parties in the dispute:
— The voodoo-certified lady who looks like somebody’s favorite and kind aunt babbles nonsense fit to include in a satirical play: “You must have been sexually abused a child, you don’t remember it because it is in you but not in your mind. There are no studies but I have seen it in my practice.”
NOTE: The infamous scandals in the US over the psychotherapists and psychologists who investigated “repressed sexual abuse memories” in kindergarten children and managed to implant them themselves into the kids’ minds, later used in court, destroyed hundreds of people’s lives and shattered their families for ever. These are dangerous quacks that, given credibility and legal authority, can and will act as a Salem witch tribunal.
– The gay activists–not kindergarten kids but adults, many well established in the gay “community” life, who claim that this “cure” damages them are hypocrites who use it solely as a politically motivated ploy. Any adult gay who goes to a psychotherapist to explore whether he has any Masons in his family tree or was left alone as a baby long enough to turn gay has more serious, possibly incurable problems, like the IQ of a turnip.
– The BMA kicking this woman out of of the ranks of the quackery group they recognize as a science and a legitimate branch of medicine are as hypocritical and politically motivated as an AZZ who “criticizes” Israel for “going too far” in one or another instance of brutality and inhumanity.
“The BMA kicking this woman out of of the ranks of the quackery group they recognize as a science and a legitimate branch of medicine are as hypocritical and politically motivated as an AZZ who “criticizes” Israel for “going too far” in one or another instance of brutality and inhumanity.”
very well said.
“Can gays be ‘cured’?”
a couple of short videos:
You coulda knocked down with a feather! But that’s me.
This is an actors reconstruction of a someone pretending to be gay reported as news by our “twice blessed friend” at channel four. It seems like its barely news and the kind of dubious practices that Emperor Murdoch would have used himself. Nevertheless it is interesting because the mainstream want to make all this sort of discussion forbidden.
Oh, I forgot that it was a reconstruction when I described the voodoo lady…
I hope the real one looks as gemütlich because I liked the dissonance. It would play well on the stage.
this was someone pretending to be a gay christian who wanted to be ‘cured’ when in reality he was a crusading gay journalist looking to entrap a witless psychotherapist (who in having been told he was christian couched her response in christian terms), and make an example of anyone who has the temerity to suggest that ‘gayness’ can be cured!
Good point, somoe.
They should have sent a gay jew and then a gay muslim to see how she molded her “therapy.”
it did look rather fake. this how a real psychotherapy session looks when the subject is gay:
I really doubt whether the psychotherapist was offering gay cures. More like Channel 4 thought it would be a great headline and entrapped this woman by pretending to by Christian and having doubts about being gay.
I am not sure whether you can be cured or not. But either way the Channel 4 journalism on display is worthy of the Leveson inquiry.
I would say it lacks ethics and breaks journalistic codes regarding entrapment.
Left wing christian net–an excellent site to follow regularly–posted a while ago this:
The preacher had to backtrack but his first instinct was what distinguishes us Americans from nambi-pambies who try to correct devilish deviations with talk, now wasn’t it?
The Media seems to have a distinct and powerful “Pink Lobby”, which promotes Gay issues and education. But there is no one promoting heterosexual lifestyle.
you think it’s bad now, go back 60 years:
Link doesn’t work
try this one:
or this one:
The second from the left is Aba Ebban.
Sorry, Abba Eban
“Sorry, Abba Eban”
No need to apologise, he’s a bad ‘un. In this interview, “The Winner Takes It All” Abba sets out his stall in defence of “little israel”. 4.10 mins onwards
abba eban? an israeli? really? they look like typical southern christian preachers. clever people, those israelis. i looked at the wikipedia entry for that guy and it doesn’t mention his musical talent. such info should not be missing from his history. it deprives people of the full abba eban experience. a full account of his musical past, along with a picture of the album cover needs to be editted in to that entry so people have a full understanding of what he is all about. anyone signed up as a wikipedia editor?
Just wondering Jonathan- why do you think heterosexuality has to be promoted? Do you really think heterosexuality is endangered? About 90 – 92% of the population is heterosexual, consistently, through all races and cultures. The promotion of gay rights is necessary simply because gay people have never had the same rights as straight people.
Because it is not promoted anymore (other than porn and i dont think that is the answer). Its a bit like the Jewish power problem. A dis-ppropotionate amount of “Homosexuals” occupy postions of influence in Media and Education. Gays should have equal right no problem wiht that at all, proportional to their numbers.
I would argue that Marriage is a pro-creation ritual. If Homosexual’s want to have a cival ritual fine Pagans do but a marriage is something different aimed at making families. It’s not a right that is ludicrous. Its a choice.
My reasoning for the above comment is on the “You Gotta Love This Guy” thread – it’s part of a response to Paul – all will become clear
Totally disagree Jonathon. Marriage is a right. And the evidence for this is that it can be voted on at all. Women didn’t have the right to vote in America until 1920. It was not considered a “right”. Now it is. I would not have had the right in several American states to marry my wife until 1967.
But additionally, there are other rights CONNECTED with marriage. Imagine having a life partner for several decades, that partner becomes ill and incompetent, and medical decisions are left up to blood relatives. You are EXCLUDED because there is no marriage. Similarly with a will. Don’t know about in the UK but here in the US a spouse is assumed to be the primary recipient in cases of death where a will is absent. In gay relationships where marriage is not allowed, the spouse (or partner if you prefer) is excluded.
“there are other rights CONNECTED with marriage. ”
It is true and significant. Nevertheless these deficiencies could be legally redressed with ‘legal partnership’ provisions that would give homosexual couples all the rights and obligations (alimony?) that married heteros have.
Hey, that is nothing compared to legislating the concept of a corporation having ‘personhood.’
The problem with gay marriage in the eyes of the heteros is not so much the notion that it ‘undermines the institution of marriage” but that it offends their image of marriage, the icon of the traditional family and it promotes ‘gay propaganda’ in schools starting with the kindergarten (“Heather Has Two Mommies”). It is one more fringe group impinging on the majority.
I would support legal partnership agreements and don’t understand their fixation on marriage, and why gays, insisting on being seen as different and special insist on mimicking hetero rituals, just as I don’t understand why men who are attracted to men want to dress like women. But that’s my ignorance speaking.
A big problem with gay rights advocacy is that having the means (lots of money) and political power to do it they have imposed their agenda of not equal rights, but special rights, the whole litany of political correctness, “hate crimes,” political litmus tests of candidates running for office, etc that make them a typical fringe group like the jewish lobby, overlapping with the jewish lobby and cooperating with the Jewish lobby. They drown out the political discourse saturating the “news” with Obama’s stance on gay marriage instead of Obama as a war criminal, as they drown out the discourse of Palestinian rights with loud noise about the sorry fate of gays in islamic communities vs the enlightened paradise that Israel is for gays.
PS- as for promoting heterosexuality: This goes to the argument that homosexuality is entirely natural and legitimate. For those of us who are heterosexual, it is absolutely obvious and central to who we are. Nobody could talk me out of the desire for a female mate. And as long as God keeps making pretty women I’ll keep looking at them (even if as a married man I’m not supposed to.) And I look at them even when they’re half my wife (or especially when they’re half my age) and frankly it’s shameful. That’s because I’m WIRED that way, and more than 90% of the population is wired hetero. To say that heterosexuality needs promotion is like saying food needs promotion. People are going to eat. The vast majority of people are also going to have hetero sex. For the minority of the population which is gay, clearly they are also WIRED that way. As much as I personally do not wish to have sexual relations with another man, I can only make the obvious conclusion that, for those men who do, it must be as strong and natural for them as hetero desires are for me. So I do the only reasonable and civilized thing: I RESPECT it.
But you have not made a case as to why homosexuality needs to promoted–if both are wired in their respective ways (on which I agree) why the concerted promotion of the gay life style?–and there IS that.
Homosexuality does NOT need to be promoted. Where do I say that it does? I’m just advocating equal rights. Now- if the gay rights issue is being deliberately manipulated to create anti-Muslim feeling, or to sidetrack public attention away from other issues, that is truly unfortunate, and needs to be addressed. But even so it doesn’t detract from the efficacy of equal rights.
Yeah, I agree – equal rights but with no special treatment.
‘So I do the only reasonable and civilized thing: I RESPECT it.”
I don’t respect it.
I acknowledge the existence of it, but I don’t respect it.
And I definately don’t like their culture thrown down my, and my closest ones, throat.
Whatever one does in his/her bedroom is not my business. I do not need to know it, and see or hear about it.
The disgusting gay parades, the obnoxious behavior of some of those gay groups, the books thrown at children and youth promoting their flashy,vain,narcisstic, selfish,morally unrestrained life style.
Keep it away from it. It is garbage, and I don’t want it near me or my closed one.
Why people do not listen what GAY people say about THEIR Culture?????
Here is a sample by Simon Fanshawe.
I am sure that he is treated (for revealing the truth)by many homosexual groups the same as Gilad is treated by many of the Jewish groups.
As a self-hating gay man. Anti-gey.
“A British homosexual journalist admits that his documentary on the London gay scene is likely to “burn every bridge in the gay world I’ve got.”
Simon Fanshawe is a writer and broadcaster who created the documentary “The Trouble With Gay Men” after becoming increasingly alarmed at the shallowness and destructiveness of the “gay lifestyle.” The film, made for BBC 3 television, questions the emotional and psychological immaturity, narcissism, nihilism and self-destructive tendencies of many in the homosexual community. Fanshawe says he wants homosexual men to “grow up” and get beyond their state of “extended adolescence.”
Fanshawe, who was involved in the early homosexualist political movement, says, “We’ve fought discrimination and prejudice, only to wreck ourselves with drugs and wild sex.”
In his documentary Fanshawe admits that the homosexualist movement has in the main achieved its political goals of equalising homosexuality with natural sexual relations, in abolishing laws against sodomy and creating legal equivalency with marriage and adoption. Given these achievements, Fanshawe asks, “Why do we seem hell bent on behaving like eternal teenagers?”
“We’re hooked on vanity, and regard older men with contempt. Despite AIDS we’re still chasing the ultimate sexual high and what’s more are determined to wreck ourselves on designer drugs. We’re happy to assist the straight world in keeping alive the image of all gay men as limp-wristed queens.”
He says that he has recently “started to worry” about the ways in which “gay liberation is celebrated” in his hometown of Brighton, a major centre of the homosexual subculture. At the annual “Mr. Gay” beauty pageant, which he describes as a “pathetic display of self-delusion”, Fanshawe tells a contestant, “I’m old enough to remember when all those women were fighting against Miss World…What we’re all saying about ourselves is that actually to be really gay, properly gay, what you’ve got to be is cute, and young.”
“Extreme vanity” he says, has been “sewn into gay culture.” It “is now so mainstream in the gay community that otherwise intelligent young men are happy to be treated as sex objects on a demeaning meat rack.Gay men, he says, are so “hardwired” towards finding casual sexual encounters, some going as far as plastic implants to enhance their appearance, that finding genuine intimacy is “practically impossible.”
“Vast amounts of our leisure time are organised around sex, straight or gay. But what gay men have done is organise our identity around sex. And that is corrosive. And to make things worse, promiscuity has become the norm.”
The documentarian asks the proprietor of a gay sex bath house, “Paul”, who had just related some graphic stories of group sexual encounters in the establishment, “Are we just swimming around in a sewer which we’re just sort of saying is normal?”
For objecting to the lifestyle of pursuing casual and “extreme” sex and for holding genuine human intimacy as a goal, Paul told Fanshawe that he is “the closest thing to a straight person in a gay man’s body I have ever met. There should be an operation for you, dear.”
Paul was adamant and forthright in his belief that the gay lifestyle is incompatible with happiness and fidelity in human relations, expressing his dissatisfaction with civil unions legislation. “The temptation of other things will always stand in the way of two gay men having a long-term, loving, caring relationship.”
Fanshawe says he is horrified at the lack of emotional involvement and at the willingness of men to engage in “unsafe sex.” The film includes statistics that show the deadly consequences of the homosexual lifestyle. One in nine gay men in London is HIV infected and new cases of HIV have doubled in the city in five years. Incidences of syphilis have increased in the same time period 616 per cent.
“Unsafe” sex, he says, is not the only way in which gay men are self destructive. “If there’s a new drug, gay men will find it and take it,” he states.At one point Fanshawe interviews a homosexual man who has “done all the drugs” and now campaigns in gay clubs against the growing use of crystal methamphetamine. The man, who could not be identified for fear of reprisals from drug dealers, said that crystal meth is preferred in the gay community because it reduces the inhibitions and allows sex to be brought to an “animalistic” level “devoid of emotion.” The film says that one in five gay men in London use crystal meth…”
“Vast amounts of our leisure time are organised around sex, straight or gay.
But what gay men have done is organise our identity around sex.
And that is corrosive.
And to make things worse, promiscuity has become the norm”
That raises an interesting question.
One view has the homosexuals just wanting to be treatd as equal citizens and, having won their rights (including marriage), they would settle into the mainstream uneventfully with marriages as successful and durable (or “un’ and “non”) as the heteros.
Another view is that expressed by the dissenting gay:
‘But what gay men have done is organise our identity around sex.
And that is corrosive. And to make things worse, promiscuity has become the norm.”
Suppose he is right and that a fixation on sex and on a life-style that through insistent ostentation offends and threatens the hetero culture constitute an inseparable part of the homosexual identity, as unchangeable as the sexual orientation itself.
whenever a small, marginal, yet very well organised ,( financed and supported by whom?), group tries forcefully impose their corrosive demands on the rest of
society/-ies, there is a risk of …well…
a tyranny, opressions, etc directed by this marginal group(-s) on the rest.
What we are observing, with the loud activities of many pro-gay groups is exactly the case.
They try to FORCE the majority to accept ,
to be quiet and tolerant of their decadent “culture” being imposed on everybody.
I would call it a tyranny of the Gay-pack.
I think the problem of a general impotence, meekness and ignorance of heterosexual men has a lot to do with that.
Vanity is a problem in the gay community which is the main reason why RACISM ranks quite high in the gay community and is much worse than the so-called racism that the pseudo-Left alleges exist in the Tea Party.
Finally, Deadbeat you found a group whose racism makes the Tea Partiers’ racsim look a lot better
searching, when you work yourself up into a lather about homosexuality, it makes me wonder how naive you are about the catholic church. The priesthood is rampant with homosexuality, FACT.
Always was, is and will be. OK.
It only seems to be you and you alone who lives in a world of denial about this. A monastery is just a live in gay bar. Get real ffs.
“promoting their flashy,vain,narcisstic, selfish,morally unrestrained life style.”
By that, do you mean this?
Thank you for bringing this up.
I seriosly consider post Vatican Council II CChurch as infiltrated by judeo-christian sect.
Here is an excellent interview with
Randy Engel , the author of ” The rite of sodomy , Homosexuality in the catholic Church”.
It explains a LOT what and WHY is going on currently in the CChurch.
Listen to it.
Randy… an unfortunate first name… but seriously do you really and truly believe the nonsense spouted by this woman that
– homosexuality between adults is recent historic phenomenon (?!)
–that the Catholic church was “infiltrated” and corrupted by masons, communists, and jews of course, etc and that for all practical purposes rampant homosexuality among catholic priest was introduced by a “foreign element” ?!?
You can’t be serious.
Arianda, with all due respect,
you know nothing about the subject, and it is hard to explain something to somebody who is ignorant in that area, and probably wants to stay ignorant.
Muhamed Ali, in his interview, correctly stated that “only black woman can fully understand the soul of a black man”.
I can paraphrase it ,and say that only a true catholic can understand what’s fully going on in the Catholic Church now.
I ma not happy to watch what Is going on in the CChurch , especially that it confirms the book of Revelation in which I am sure ,you don’t believe.
“only a true catholic can understand what’s fully going on in the Catholic Church now.”
The word “true” is a good safeguard. If another Catholic disagreed with you you would trounce him by informing him he is not a a “true” catholic.
Does it ever occur to you that your catholicism is rather horse-blindered: the Catholic church can never be impugned with anything it has ever done or does–it’s all attributable to ‘outside forces.”
No, I admit I don’t have much truck with the Book of Revelations. Is all the TRUTH contained in it? Would I grasp it by myself or will I need an interpreter and should that be a Catholic one?
Above all, remember that in these comments we express OPINIONS. Yours may be the “TRUTH” to you but not to others. You can call them ignorant if that makes you feel better–I for one am game–but it is pointless.
Randy Engel>Gay Mafia>Absolutely Fabulous
Sorry, Adriana, but YOU ARE ignorant in the matters of Catholicism and Catholic faith. You don’t know too much of it, yet you claim to be an expert on it.
If you are for “the game”, educated yourself on the subject, and try to go more deeply, instead of swimming in the shallow water with plenty of anti-catholic sharks.
For starter, you may want to ponder those beautiful words:
“We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
MAKER of heaven and earth,
and of ALL that IS, SEEN and UNSEEN…”
You see, I believe in it, you probalby don’t. And that’s why ,it’s hard to find a common language on this subject.
“We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
MAKER of heaven and earth,
and of ALL that IS, SEEN and UNSEEN…”
That is the creed of all Christians and all Muslims agreee with it exactly as it is. It proves also that Jesus a.s. is not God because God created ALL things including Jesus a.s.
“It proves also that Jesus a.s. is not God because God created ALL things including Jesus a.s.”
It does not prove anything because the next part of The Nicene Creed is:
“And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God……….”
God is an eternal , immaterial, spiritual being that became a “material” being , placed in space and time 2000 years ago, known as Jesus Christ.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God……….”
God is an eternal , immaterial, spiritual being that became a “material” being , placed in space and time 2000 years ago, known as Jesus Christ.
But this was added in by whom? Certainly Jesus didn’t claim to be God neither did he say this creed.
The whole Gospel is full of the quotes in which Jesus , His disciples, and people around Him claimed/confirmed that He IS God.
Here is a sample.
I’m not so quick to dismiss searching’s arguments.
If it is reasonable that a group can conceal themselves as “anti-Zionist Zionists” in order to debase the Palestinian Solidarity Movement and organized as the Zionist Power Configuration to take over the United States of America then it is not implausible that the Catholic Church has befallen the same fate.
the catholics have probably committed more genocide than any other group. genocide in the sense they totally obliterated whole contininents of cultures. in europe, central and south america, large regions of africa and europe, the cultural destruction is almost totally complete. in latin america, what few people left in the amazon still beyond their reach is all that is left of what were once thriving and very diverse societies. in every just about every aspect of human contact with catholicism, the result has been harmful. it is probably the single largest influence holding back human development throughout the last 1000 years. catholicism is also the base from which fascism sprang. the catholic religion, its multitude of warts and its uber conformist state of repressed being, deserves no sympathy. any zionist influence on catholicism wouldn’t be corrupting, it would be just more of the same sort of soul and mind destroying decay.
it actually did. The freemasonery took over a majority of the Church Hierarchy, especially in the USA and european countries.
It is a FACT, very well documented. Many info on it. Officially it started with Vatican Council II in 1962-4.
Here is a very good site on the topic.
” it is not implausible that the Catholic Church has befallen the same fate.”
through… turning them gay?
catholicism is the original gay christianity. it started as a gay religious retreat, but some gay roman emperor adopted it and made it required subject matter for all christians. worship the emperor and bugger your bro became the new roman motto to replace the old one which was falling into disuse. later, some heteros rebelled and forced the catholic church into the closet, but they were never able to regain their lost sexual freedom and remained sexually repressed. meanwhile, at the vatican, the party continued unobserved and remarked upon by the outside.
from where this kind of garbage you take,
from some luciferian websites?
“from some luciferian websites?”
shhhhh, you don’t want god to hear. but if you are brave enough to experiment with the dark side:
“catholicism is the original gay christianity.”
It HAD to have been gay. Jesus never asked his disciples to be celibate.
The idea that a priest who claims never to have any sexual life at all, who never marries or raises children of his own gives counseling to men, women and married couples about their intimate and family is ridiculous.It is a gay club. Beats the navy.
“Jesus never asked his disciples to be celibate.”
my earlier claims aside , catholicism probably wasn’t celibate originally. i’ve read that priests didn’t pracitice celibacy universally in the catholic church until around the middle ages. before then priests were allowed to marry and raise families and were much like greek orthodox. in the late 13th century, the catholic hierarchy got a bug up their arse and really clamped down on everything and that is when celibacy became required. this is when they also outlawed all pagan practices and demanded people stop bathing and rot in their own stink. that rotting in one’s own stink continues today among the leadership. if one will notice that when the pope goes out from the vatican and is paraded among the people, they make sure he is hermetically sealed in a box. this is to keep that stink from reaching the faithful’s collective noses. that stink has been made sacred, and like masonic rituals, only the fully initiated may partake in it.
You are severly anti-Catholic.
maybe wannna/gonna be satanist??
Your ignorance on the subject is breath taking, yet the amount of misinformations, false informations and lies that you bring here up is of no surprise to me.
You are just a typical propagandist, who instead of looking for the truth, picks and chooses only things that already fit in his quite narrow view of the world. no matter if there are true or not.
i don’t respect that.
You are totally sterotyping and labeling, which further proofs your massive ignorance of the subject. Beat it.
I admit to my “massive ignorance ” on Catholicism. But there is hope for me, no doubt.
What I’d love to see is a debate between you and Laura on whether Jesus is God or not.
“A big problem with gay rights advocacy is that having the means (lots of money) and political power to do it they have imposed their agenda of not equal rights, but special rights, the whole litany of political correctness, “hate crimes,” political litmus tests of candidates running for office, etc that make them a typical fringe group like the jewish lobby, overlapping with the jewish lobby and cooperating with the Jewish lobby.
They drown out the political discourse saturating the “news” with Obama’s stance on gay marriage instead of Obama as a war criminal, as they drown out the discourse of Palestinian rights with loud noise about the sorry fate of gays in islamic communities vs the enlightened paradise that Israel is for gays.”
Amen to THAT Ariadna.
You should write the whole article based on this comment.
Certain groups like to push their evilish agenda using the language of compassion, equality, tolerance. Many fall for this politically corrected garbage, because it’s served in a pretty, rainbow colored package.
there is a downside to repressing gays. god does not like it when people do that. say what? you say – watch the video below about what happened to the people of california when they banned gay marriage:
fire and brimstone. it’s probably better to play it safe and not let god know one is against gay unions. but god is all knowing people say, he’ll find out anyway. not really, there are billions of people on the planet and he doesn’t have time to read everyone’s mind all the time. it’s like santa claus determining if one has been naughty or nice. if one isn’t getting into trouble all the time, it’s likely he’ll never find out. to avoid catching god’s attention regarding gay marriage, i suggest simply not attending the wedding so one wont get all worked up about it. that way god probably wont notice one’s strong, emotional feelings on the subject. out of sight, out of mind, you know.
Persuasive. Except… what if God really hated California in general.
Why else would He make people who move there lose 10 IQ points for every year lived there?
“Why else would He make people who move there lose 10 IQ points for every year lived there?”
i’m not sure god is responsible for that:
Don’t blaspheme— nothing moves without His knowledge and approval. We may not know why (his ways are mysterious) but they are all His decisions.
I sometimes suspect He has a cruel sense of humor and cretins amuse him no end or else He wouldn’t keep making them and if God thinks it right for so many to live in California who are you to question it?
PS Do you live in CA? God allows for exceptions.
“PS Do you live in CA?”
If you did I would have thought you must have only moved there mere days ago…
Similar but less than the punishment God is apparently going to give to anyone who dares to destroy the S.o.I.
Are American politicians in fear of that – Does anyone know?
Sorry to interrupt the regular’s banter, but allow me to throw in a spanner (not sure if I’m using in its right context, I’m not british..):
Q) Will we see the day when paedophile rights movements start to crop up in the streets of London and San Fran? What if some scientist or whatever claimed that it’s possible to be born with that kind of inclination (just as homosexuals claim)? would we have to accept that there are people born who enjoy .. you know what..?
What about the animal fetish gene? Anyone found that one yet?
Don’t be silly!
Here’s a question for you:
Q) How do you “content” yourself? When you answer remember to keep it clean and keep in mind you’re in the presence of highly developed spiritual persons who are a cat’s cock hair away from purrfection.
Am I supposed to respond to this british sarcasm?
by all means, deLiberate away.
You make a false analogy.
There is a huge distinction you fail to make, namely, what Gilad succinctly put as “at the expense of others.”
Society rightfully interdicts/punishes (or should) that behavior (irrespective of whether caused by innate traits or not) which harms others.
Homosexuality, as consensual sex between adults does not fall in that category.
Murder, rape, abuse of minors (sexual or not), domestic abuse, bestiality (absent the animal’s signed confession of uncoerced agreement), theft (pickpocketing or grabbing whole countries), unprovoked war, all go together.
And homosexuality doesn’t harm society? Has the fabric of society become stronger in dealing with domestic violence, substance abuse, alcoholism, etc as a direct result of broken families?
You’ve reduced homosexuality to a nice loveydovey sexual act between ‘adults’. Apart from giving us brokeback mountain, how has homosexuality benefited society?
Aah a case of the mythical Golden Age of the family
“Apart from giving us brokeback mountain, how has homosexuality benefited society?”
We have relationships to benefit society? Or because we want to be with someone?
Personally I can’t get my head round this antipathy to gay relationships. Why do you care who people choose to relate to?
“homosexuality doesn’t harm society?”
I don’t see how if they stop behaving like a tribal lobby.
I have no idea what kind of sexual act it is–loveydovey or not –and I am NOT INTERESTED. It’s their business.
“I have no idea what kind of sexual act it is”
i could post some educational videos for you, but i don’t think that would really help the site. but what i can do is post a fairly representative example of what things look like after:
it sucks to high heaven they went under. now one is left with airlines like united and american and the mossad duped nutcases setting off pyrotectnics in their shorts.
Heres the stark truth. Homosexuality is not sustainable and can only ever exist as a subset of a larger heterosexual community. Therefore their interests should represented proportionately.
That is a very big thought. Lots of very big words and it’s late but very profound Jonathon well done.
Thanks for your perspectives and arguments. It helps me rethink my “politically correct” views on homosexuality and “Gay” marriage.
For all the flaws in gay culture as articulated by self-hating gay person Fanshawe, as posted by “Searching” (I guess it’s safe to be anonymous!) one important detail is left out: A consistent percentage of the population is gay, has always been gay, and will always be gay. Most of those who want marriage rights just want a sense of normalcy in their lives that straight people have always had. Additionally they want the right to make medical decisions about a spouse, the right to default inheritance, the right to legal consideration for alimony in case of divorce, etc. etc. Most are not glamorous, young, half-naked flailing lunatics that can be seen at gay parades. (And I don’t mind that flailing. The Hallowe’en parade in Greenwich Village, NYC is a lot of fun!) Most are average work-a-day middle aged people in long-term relationships whose sexual preference has always made them outsiders in society, and they would like for that to change. And so would I.
re: Jonathon’s remark that homosexuality is not sustainable: So what? And what does “proportional rights” mean? They either have equal rights or not. And if you don’t want for them to have it, exactly how is that different from bigotry?
for claiming not to be a gay person ,you seem to be a pretty good advocate of gay rights,
somewhat dellusioned though.
I am not going to give you statistics about a huge amount of venereal diseases among gay communites or high promiscuity that is norm there, beacuse you may want to look for them yourself.
They want to have SPECIAL rights protected heavily by so-called political correctness.
And the gay lobbies are heavily supported and financed by the Jewish Power Elite.
This itself says/expalains it all, your honour.
BTW. If you don’t like what this” self-hating gay”, Fanshawe, said about gay community ,then your reaction is similar to all AZZ’s, who labeled Gilad to be a ” self-hating Jew” just beacuse he revealed the inner truth about Jewish identity and tribal loyalty.
Fine. You want to call me a “faggot”. Go ahead. I really don’t care. I could prove paternity of my daughter with blood tests but I really have no need to do that. (And you would probably STILL think I’m gay. I just had a hetero moment long enough to father a child! Or maybe it was done in-vitro!)
I didn’t say that I didn’t like what Fanshawe wrote. Look what I wrote: “For all the flaws in gay culture as articulated by self-hating gay person Fanshawe, one important detail is left out”. That statement actually would indicate AGREEMENT with what he wrote, with the stipulation that there is an OMISSION.
As for calling me an AZZ and indicating that I am in agreement with those who call Gilad a “self-hating Jew”, I invite you to read an essay I wrote, published on this very website, called “Permission to Examine Jewishness”. Then get back to me.
For clarity, a short “PS”: YOU called Fanshawe a self-hating gay man. I took that cue from you, and I repeated it in what I thought was a humorous way, but evidently it didn’t read that way. I think the label “self-hating” is hysterical, whether it pertains to someone accusing Gilad or myself of being a self-hating Jew (and I have been VERY often accused) or accusing this gay man of same in offering a critical view of gay subculture. To say that someone is self-hating because he/she wants to confront dysfunction is just stupid.
You have a big chip on your shoulder ,Rick. Drop it.
Gilad actually says that he is “a proud self-hating Jew”. I read it as a sign of his good sense of humor ,and a slight distance to himself and people’s opinions.
I admire that.
I used a term “self-hating gay” half jokingly knowing how easily Zionists use this label towards people who don’t agree with them ,and happen to be of Jewish origin.
You have to work a little on your sense of humor, my dear.
“You have a big chip on your shoulder…” but it’s inconspicuous compared with that Cross on yours that you constantly try to get others to help you carry, wouldn’t you say?
I did not said that you are gay, so you don’t have to waste your keyboard too much acting like I did.
I know your position on Gilad. self-hating and AZZ’s reactions . I’ve read your essay and I actually liked it.
But I will repeat myself because I think you misunderstood me there:
“If you don’t like what this” self-hating gay”, Fanshawe, said about gay community ,THEN your reaction IS SIMILAR to all AZZ’s, who labeled Gilad to be a ” self-hating Jew” just beacuse he revealed the inner truth about Jewish identity and tribal loyalty”.
how many gay people do you know??
“Most of them”??
I also know some gay people, and they are “most of the time” fine people.
One of them is avery good friend of mine, and I love the guy.
But we are talking here about gay lobbies, and gay pop-culture that is very decadent and corrosive as “self-hating” gay, Fanshawe, depicted it himself. Very well I may add.
“For all the flaws in gay culture as articulated by self-hating gay person Fanshawe”
That’s an unfortunate statement. I wish you hadn’t made it.
Tell you what, I’ll work on my sense of humor if you can help me out by telling me what’s funny about this: “BTW. If you don’t like what this” self-hating gay”, Fanshawe, said about gay community ,then your reaction is similar to all AZZ’s, who labeled Gilad to be a ” self-hating Jew” just beacuse he revealed the inner truth about Jewish identity and tribal loyalty.”
And- speaking of unfortunate statements: “what if God really hated California in general. Why else would He make people who move there lose 10 IQ points for every year lived there?”
God doesn’t hate.
It was I who made that crack about California, Rick, and I defend my right to make it until you prove that (1) God exists; (2) God distinguishes people according to the US Survey Dept maps; (3) Californians are a distinct ethnical or political group; (4) you have lived in CA more than week but less 40 days*; (5) you have a sense of humor.
*An Arab proverb has it that if you live within the walls of a city more than 40 days you become one of them.
Ariadna, what makes you think Rich wasn’t aware it was you who made that statement?
”And- speaking of unfortunate statements: “what if God really hated California in general. Why else would He make people who move there lose 10 IQ points for every year lived there?”
God doesn’t hate.”
that was not My statement. Go and read it again.
how can i explain funny to somebody, who seems to have a chip on his shoulder. you either get it or not . “only black women can understand the soul of black man” ( mohammed ali quote).
correct. I was responding to two different posts. Why is an idiotic Mohammed Ali quote relevant to anything?
Hey Rich, you’re doing great man. It’s like the god squad needed something, preferably someone, to sacrifice for their poor “fruit” harvest.
Lord Paul Summereisen smugly attired in a yellow polo neck set the bait, Gilad’s band played, the self-righteous throng gathered and before you new what was happening they smocked you out in a tasty white cotton one-piece….
It’s not so idiotic Rich. I often think that only someone brought up as a Jew can really understand what it feels like. What’s so idiotic about that or what Muhammad Ali said?
It was idiotic in the context that it was used because it was completely irrelevant.
It’s idiotic generally because the human experience is the same for everyone. When I meet Bassam Aramin and talk to him about the experience of losing his daughter- shot by Israeli border police while walking home from school, I am horrified for him. Because I am a father. And An Ashkenazi Jewish father living in America is no different from an Arab Muslim father living in Palestine. I’ve known African Americans who express this sentiment articulated by Mohammed Ali. And I find it egotistical and ridiculous. It’s an infantile way of taking racism and returning it.
Wait a minute Rich are you saying you are an Ashkenazi Jew? I thought having God parents was a Christian thing.
I can tell you why having a child shot and killed in Palestine by an Israeli is different to having a daughter shot in the USA, the difference in the USA you can hope for some justice. I am not saying the loss of the child is less or more just that hope for justice and closure.
Who was talking about the difference between having a child shot in one country or another? I was talking about EMPATHY, something that human beings are often capable of, and, it seems, just as often not.
Godparents may well be a Christian thing. I also go to church. I was born Jewish. I was also born in the state of Illinois, USA. I have not remained in either the tribe or the location. Come to think of it, I was also born a baby, and I’m not that any more either.
“It’s an infantile way of taking racism and returning it.’
You completely misunderstood MUhammed Ali’s quote. he says ,quite rightly, that only black women can fully understand the soul of the black man. he does not say that black women should only marry black man and vice versa.
he just says that having a choice is better for both of them.
have you ever tried to translate poetry from one language to another.?
I tried, and I will tell you , this is the hardest thing to translate. Poetry, especially poetry of great poets that is connected with
so- called soul of the nation ,is the hardest to translate. And the hardest for the other side to grasp its true meaning.
great poetry hides the soul of a nation, its history , pain, joys, hopes, believes etc.
i can understand polish poetry in a second, you probably, even if it were transalted into english ,would not be able to grasp its meaning fully.
Muhammed Ali’s statement was not racists at all. He was just simply stating facts as they are.
He was just saying the truth.
if the truth is racists in your eyes….then we have another problem to discuss.
It was hardly irrelevant since he was talking about why he would prefer to have a black wife etc.
And as far as being generally idiotic, well of course all humans feel pain etc and nobody is saying that the feeling is much different from one group to the next – but I’m sure you already knew that I wasn’t saying that.
I think that your remark was just a normal knee-jerk reaction to anything that could even remotely refer to race, and I also think that this is part of the post-war, post-Holocaust, largely Jewish discourse under which we’re all labouring. What do you think?
I must have missed something. I did no see where he’s looking for a black wife, and looking back over the posts, I still couldn’t find it. If that was stated then the quote was indeed relevant.
If I’m guilty of post-war post-holocaust, largely Jewish discourse, then I’m really a hopeless case despite myself. What I believe my remark came from is experience with minority groups- with my own- which feels it have a monopoly on victimization and has had a tribal experience that no one else could possibly understand, and also with African Americans. As an American musician I have spent much time in the black community among black people. In particular, as a music student in Indiana I toured with a group called the IU Soul Revue, (Indiana University) and while with them I was the only white face on a tour bus with 50 people. This was largely a very positive experience, but I also know well the attitude that their tribal experience is unique and nobody else could possibly understand them.
Paul is the master of the Zen article, and pretty funny too. He does in two words what many fail to do in 2000. It makes me a laugh every time.
There is a lot of hate on this site.
I say love everyone Rightists Leftists
Gays, Straights, Bisexuals
Be really for human rights include and protect everyone
there is criticism not hate
Did those words come from Rabbi Madonnas speech in Israel ?
Jeanpierre, those are fine feelings you are sporting, although I, for one, don’t think one has to “love” anybody in particular, only respect EVERYBODY, try hard not to rob them, kill them, steal their land, drop phosphorus bombs on them, deprive them of their human rights.
It is in fact easier to respect and have empathy for everybody than to keep making lists of the specific groups recommended for “loving.”
But if you’re up to it, by all means, love them separately. It will require precise definition of each though. So…
In case anyone else would like to try your a la carte loving, please define “Palestine.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.