Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Even though he stipulated 'in real life' himself.
Cue more innuendo from aCW, but sorry GJ, you're not my type...wrong gender for a start...
Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 4
- Thread starter aCultureWarrior
- Start date
- Status
Even though he stipulated 'in real life' himself.
Cue more innuendo from aCW, but sorry GJ, you're not my type...wrong gender for a start...
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
One would think that if your main interest in politics deals with environmental causes that you'd spend all of your time in threads about the environment instead of defending homosexuality in threads dealing with that topic.
Yes, I've spent a lot of time and effort building the case for returning to traditional family values in this 200-300 view a day/close to 2,000,000 view-4 part thread, something that I'm very proud of.
What I would like to see from you is the next time the subject of political candidates comes up and you criticize the pro traditional family values candidate that I promote, at least talk about a candidate that you've backed in the UK or one here in the US that you would back if you were an America citizen, i.e. someone that is in line with your pro homosexual/child indoctrinating/socialist worldview.
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
And you are correct: In today's world it's unheard of to see a politician touch important social issues such as traditional family values, that's why I get excited when I see one that does.
In today's ultra morally depraved society, if a political candidate (especially one running for POTUS) uttered the words "No, I would not attend a 'gay' wedding", it would be a political death statement. So needless to say criminalizing sexual sins isn't going to be discussed in an open forum for conservative politicians. That's not to say that people like Ted Cruz who openly supports religious freedom, women and little girls having the right to privacy in places like restrooms and locker rooms, and overturning sexual anarchist SCOTUS rulings doesn't have the same goals as I do in the long run.
One would think that if your main interest in politics deals with environmental causes that you'd spend all of your time in threads about the environment instead of defending homosexuality in threads dealing with that topic.
Yes, I've spent a lot of time and effort building the case for returning to traditional family values in this 200-300 view a day/close to 2,000,000 view-4 part thread, something that I'm very proud of.
What I would like to see from you is the next time the subject of political candidates comes up and you criticize the pro traditional family values candidate that I promote, at least talk about a candidate that you've backed in the UK or one here in the US that you would back if you were an America citizen, i.e. someone that is in line with your pro homosexual/child indoctrinating/socialist worldview.
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
And you are correct: In today's world it's unheard of to see a politician touch important social issues such as traditional family values, that's why I get excited when I see one that does.
In today's ultra morally depraved society, if a political candidate (especially one running for POTUS) uttered the words "No, I would not attend a 'gay' wedding", it would be a political death statement. So needless to say criminalizing sexual sins isn't going to be discussed in an open forum for conservative politicians. That's not to say that people like Ted Cruz who openly supports religious freedom, women and little girls having the right to privacy in places like restrooms and locker rooms, and overturning sexual anarchist SCOTUS rulings doesn't have the same goals as I do in the long run.
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Unlike Donald Trump, there is no doubt in my mind that Ted Cruz would have been a man of his word.
You mean the kind of resistance that the democrats put up when Donald Trump very early in his presidency said that Obergefell v Hodges is "settled law"?
You mean the kind of resistance that democrats put when pro LGBTQ activist Neil Gorsuch was being confirmed for SCOTUS and he said the following?
While being questioned by Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., on the destruction of unborn children, Gorsuch stated “the Supreme Court of the United States has held in Roe v. Wade that a fetus is not a person for purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
When Durbin asked if he accepted that, the judge replied, “That’s the law of the land. I accept the law of the land, senator, yes.”
And when pressed on “same-sex marriage,” Gorsuch acknowledged the Supreme Court had ruled such marriages are protected by the Constitution. He declared Obergefell v. Hodges, which struck down “same-sex marriage” bans nationwide in 2015, to be “absolutely settled law.”
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/03/gorsuch-...ettling-to-conservatives/#im4cyHKf5MMmlVCZ.99
Yep, those democrats really put up a fight against one of their own.
Unlike Donald Trump, there is no doubt in my mind that Ted Cruz would have been a man of his word.
You mean the kind of resistance that the democrats put up when Donald Trump very early in his presidency said that Obergefell v Hodges is "settled law"?
You mean the kind of resistance that democrats put when pro LGBTQ activist Neil Gorsuch was being confirmed for SCOTUS and he said the following?
While being questioned by Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., on the destruction of unborn children, Gorsuch stated “the Supreme Court of the United States has held in Roe v. Wade that a fetus is not a person for purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
When Durbin asked if he accepted that, the judge replied, “That’s the law of the land. I accept the law of the land, senator, yes.”
And when pressed on “same-sex marriage,” Gorsuch acknowledged the Supreme Court had ruled such marriages are protected by the Constitution. He declared Obergefell v. Hodges, which struck down “same-sex marriage” bans nationwide in 2015, to be “absolutely settled law.”
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/03/gorsuch-...ettling-to-conservatives/#im4cyHKf5MMmlVCZ.99
Yep, those democrats really put up a fight against one of their own.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Well of course you are, it's your pet project and your pompous, deluded boasting over it is hardly news. If you think you have 300 ardent followers because of an average view ratio then you're entirely mistaken however, but you carry on with that delusion if you wish.
See, homosexuality isn't to the fore whenever I vote as it's simply not an issue, as it isn't with most people outside of far right obsessives. So over here, there's no focus on it as there's so many more important issues to address. As I've said I'm cynical in regards to any politicians and pledges as it's the same usual machinations and double speak. By your criteria, practically everyone is 'pro homosexual' for not advocating the same as you, so the bad news for you is that that includes your constitutional party candidate along with Cruz.
Where has Cruz ever stated that he supports re-criminalizing homosexuality? I know you view the guy through rose coloured glasses but that only shows your own gullibility. He wouldn't push for your measures and I reckon you know it.
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
What I would like to see from you is the next time the subject of political candidates comes up and you criticize the pro traditional family values candidate that I promote, at least talk about a candidate that you've backed in the UK or one here in the US that you would back if you were an America citizen, i.e. someone that is in line with your pro homosexual/child indoctrinating/socialist worldview.
What we're seeing in today's ultra morally depraved society is the result of the decriminalization of laws against numerous sexual sins, homosexuality included. Adultery, cohabitation and the glorification of out of wedlock sex being the primary factors behind abortion, i.e. the Libertarian mentality of "It's MY body and I can damn well do with it as I please!"
Since homosexuality was decriminalized (it's still on the legislative books in around 12 States, no matter what Lawrence v Texas says), amongst other things we've seen an assault on parental rights, religious freedom and invaluable institutions (marriage, the family, the Church, Education, the military, the media, etc. etc.) by the LGBTQueer movement which wouldn't have happened if homosexuality were still a criminal act.
Now about you stepping forward and promoting a political candidate (or someone who you would like to see running for political office) :
Let's say that Peter the pedophile Tatchell were to run for political office on the LGBTQ platform of allowing 9 year olds to legallybe raped have sex with their homosexual elders.
http://bernardgaynor.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Tatchell.png
What you would do would be to show how the pedophile's proposed legalization would be helpful not only to society, but to the 9 years olds that (according to the sick degenerate Peter Tatchell) "enjoy it".
Or over here in the States if you think someone like accused pederasts and LGBTQ activists Terry Bean (who founded Human Rights Campaign, the most powerful homosexual organization in the world) or Sodomy and Gonorrhea North Mayor Ed the ped Murray (who is also owner and sole operator of "Ed the peds daycare center for teenage boys"), would represent the LGBTQueer movement well at a national level, then we can follow the same format as our discussion with the guy who thinks raping 9 year olds is ok.
What I would like to see from you is the next time the subject of political candidates comes up and you criticize the pro traditional family values candidate that I promote, at least talk about a candidate that you've backed in the UK or one here in the US that you would back if you were an America citizen, i.e. someone that is in line with your pro homosexual/child indoctrinating/socialist worldview.
What we're seeing in today's ultra morally depraved society is the result of the decriminalization of laws against numerous sexual sins, homosexuality included. Adultery, cohabitation and the glorification of out of wedlock sex being the primary factors behind abortion, i.e. the Libertarian mentality of "It's MY body and I can damn well do with it as I please!"
Since homosexuality was decriminalized (it's still on the legislative books in around 12 States, no matter what Lawrence v Texas says), amongst other things we've seen an assault on parental rights, religious freedom and invaluable institutions (marriage, the family, the Church, Education, the military, the media, etc. etc.) by the LGBTQueer movement which wouldn't have happened if homosexuality were still a criminal act.
Now about you stepping forward and promoting a political candidate (or someone who you would like to see running for political office) :
Let's say that Peter the pedophile Tatchell were to run for political office on the LGBTQ platform of allowing 9 year olds to legally
http://bernardgaynor.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Tatchell.png
What you would do would be to show how the pedophile's proposed legalization would be helpful not only to society, but to the 9 years olds that (according to the sick degenerate Peter Tatchell) "enjoy it".
Or over here in the States if you think someone like accused pederasts and LGBTQ activists Terry Bean (who founded Human Rights Campaign, the most powerful homosexual organization in the world) or Sodomy and Gonorrhea North Mayor Ed the ped Murray (who is also owner and sole operator of "Ed the peds daycare center for teenage boys"), would represent the LGBTQueer movement well at a national level, then we can follow the same format as our discussion with the guy who thinks raping 9 year olds is ok.
Last edited:
Oh my, this doesn't look good for comrade Donald.
Mueller impanels grand jury in Russia probe
Aug. 3, 2017
Special Counsel Robert Mueller has impaneled a new grand jury in Washington to probe Russia’s interference in the 2016 elections and possible collusion with the Trump campaign, a new report said Thursday.
The development is sign that the investigation is gaining steam, The Wall Street Journal reported, citing a pair of sources close to the probe.
The grand jury began its work in recent weeks, and was considered to be evidence that Mueller’s inquiry isn’t going away any time soon.
A spokesman for Mueller, Joshua Stueve, declined to comment to the paper.
Team Trump has repeatedly attacked the probe as “fake news” and a witch hunt,” and the Kremlin has also denied that it interfered in the race to aid Trump and hurt Hillary Clinton.
But the US intelligence community said there is plenty of evidence of meddling, which prompted an FBI probe, which Mueller was assigned to take over after Trump fired FBI chief James Comey.
“This is yet a further sign that there is a long-term, large-scale series of prosecutions being contemplated and being pursued by the special counsel,” Stephen I. Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas, told the paper.
Read more: http://nypost.com/2017/08/03/mueller-impanels-grand-jury-in-russia-probe/
For those of you not familiar with the role of a Grand Jury:
A grand jury is a legal body that is empowered to conduct official proceedings to investigate potential criminal conduct and to determine whether criminal charges should be brought. A grand jury may compel the production of documents and may compel the sworn testimony of witnesses to appear before it. A grand jury is separate from the courts, which do not preside over its functioning.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_jury
For those Trump lemmings out there whose vocabulary doesn't include two syllable words like "compel":
force or oblige (someone) to do something
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/compel
I can see it now: After being impeached overwhelmingly by Congress the sociopath locks himself in the Oval Office and calls out the military to keep him from being removed, yelling out the window to whoever will listen that the Russia investigation was...
"fake news".
http://images.dailykos.com/images/325555/story_image/Trump-putin-image.jpg?1478804589
Mueller impanels grand jury in Russia probe
Aug. 3, 2017
Special Counsel Robert Mueller has impaneled a new grand jury in Washington to probe Russia’s interference in the 2016 elections and possible collusion with the Trump campaign, a new report said Thursday.
The development is sign that the investigation is gaining steam, The Wall Street Journal reported, citing a pair of sources close to the probe.
The grand jury began its work in recent weeks, and was considered to be evidence that Mueller’s inquiry isn’t going away any time soon.
A spokesman for Mueller, Joshua Stueve, declined to comment to the paper.
Team Trump has repeatedly attacked the probe as “fake news” and a witch hunt,” and the Kremlin has also denied that it interfered in the race to aid Trump and hurt Hillary Clinton.
But the US intelligence community said there is plenty of evidence of meddling, which prompted an FBI probe, which Mueller was assigned to take over after Trump fired FBI chief James Comey.
“This is yet a further sign that there is a long-term, large-scale series of prosecutions being contemplated and being pursued by the special counsel,” Stephen I. Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas, told the paper.
Read more: http://nypost.com/2017/08/03/mueller-impanels-grand-jury-in-russia-probe/
For those of you not familiar with the role of a Grand Jury:
A grand jury is a legal body that is empowered to conduct official proceedings to investigate potential criminal conduct and to determine whether criminal charges should be brought. A grand jury may compel the production of documents and may compel the sworn testimony of witnesses to appear before it. A grand jury is separate from the courts, which do not preside over its functioning.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_jury
For those Trump lemmings out there whose vocabulary doesn't include two syllable words like "compel":
force or oblige (someone) to do something
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/compel
I can see it now: After being impeached overwhelmingly by Congress the sociopath locks himself in the Oval Office and calls out the military to keep him from being removed, yelling out the window to whoever will listen that the Russia investigation was...
"fake news".
http://images.dailykos.com/images/325555/story_image/Trump-putin-image.jpg?1478804589
A grand jury was inevitable in the investigation, it's just standard operating procedure. No crimes
Don't cha just love it when homosexuals share their deadly diseases love with little boys?
HIV-positive coach accused of sexually assaulting boys
July 4, 2017
WALDOLF, Md. --
An HIV-positive former Maryland school aide and track coach has been arrested on suspicion of sexually assaulting several students and recording some of the abuse on video, including on school property, authorities said.
Carlos Deangelo Bell, 30, of Waldorf is accused of assaulting at least seven boys, mostly of middle school age, Charles County Sheriff's Office spokeswoman Diane Richardson said.
Bell was arrested at his home Friday following a six-month investigation. A grand jury indicted him Friday on felony charges of child pornography production and misdemeanor counts of second-degree assault. An investigation continues, and more charges could be filed, the sheriff's office said.
He was removed from his jobs as an instructional assistant at Benjamin Stoddert Middle School in Waldorf and an indoor track coach at nearby La Plata High School late last year when the probe began, Richardson said.
Some of the boys have been tested for HIV, and others are expected to be tested soon, Richardson said. Police are so far not aware of any tests that have come back positive.
Read more: http://abc7chicago.com/news/hiv-positive-coach-accused-of-sexually-assaulting-boys/2181835/
Nothing like video taping oneself possibly giving young boys' a life threatening disease.
https://hips.htvapps.com/htv-prod-m.../images/carlos-bell-charge-cnn-1499197627.jpg
HIV-positive coach accused of sexually assaulting boys
July 4, 2017
WALDOLF, Md. --
An HIV-positive former Maryland school aide and track coach has been arrested on suspicion of sexually assaulting several students and recording some of the abuse on video, including on school property, authorities said.
Carlos Deangelo Bell, 30, of Waldorf is accused of assaulting at least seven boys, mostly of middle school age, Charles County Sheriff's Office spokeswoman Diane Richardson said.
Bell was arrested at his home Friday following a six-month investigation. A grand jury indicted him Friday on felony charges of child pornography production and misdemeanor counts of second-degree assault. An investigation continues, and more charges could be filed, the sheriff's office said.
He was removed from his jobs as an instructional assistant at Benjamin Stoddert Middle School in Waldorf and an indoor track coach at nearby La Plata High School late last year when the probe began, Richardson said.
Some of the boys have been tested for HIV, and others are expected to be tested soon, Richardson said. Police are so far not aware of any tests that have come back positive.
Read more: http://abc7chicago.com/news/hiv-positive-coach-accused-of-sexually-assaulting-boys/2181835/
Nothing like video taping oneself possibly giving young boys' a life threatening disease.
https://hips.htvapps.com/htv-prod-m.../images/carlos-bell-charge-cnn-1499197627.jpg
(Inevitable) Wow, a 5 syllable word from a Trump supporter.
So a grand jury is called to convene even though there's no evidence of a crime?
LOL...uh, ok.
Let me fix that sentence for you:
"...it's just standard operating procedure when there is overwhelming evidence to believe that crime(s) have been committed."
I was glad to see Governer Jimmy of West Virginia ditch the demonrats today and join Trump's party
So you don't want to talk about grand juries and their role in felonious criminal investigations?
Regarding the West Virginia Governor switching parties:
Kinda like Donald Trump deciding which political party is the flavor of the week for him?
:carryon:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Abortion is nothing new, it didn't suddenly appear when draconian laws were taken off the books and your "ideal" would be nothing short of a police state. If people want to shack up together then it's no business of yours or any other 'puritan'. You don't like liberty, go leave the West.
Oh quit with the usual martyr rubbish. Is there anything preventing heterosexuals from getting married or going to church? Is there any censoring of your own blog on here? Where it comes to parental rights then that doesn't include forcing children to undergo abuse and if you think it was only 'gays' that fought against draconian laws then you're deluded once again.
Now about you stepping forward and promoting a political candidate (or someone who you would like to see running for political office) :
Let's say that Peter the pedophile Tatchell were to run for political office on the LGBTQ platform of allowing 9 year olds to legallybe rapedhave sex with their homosexual elders.
http://bernardgaynor.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Tatchell.png
What you would do would be to show how the pedophile's proposed legalization would be helpful not only to society, but to the 9 years olds that (according to the sick degenerate Peter Tatchell) "enjoy it".
Or over here in the States if you think someone like accused pederasts and LGBTQ activists Terry Bean (who founded Human Rights Campaign, the most powerful homosexual organization in the world) or Sodomy and Gonorrhea North Mayor Ed the ped Murray (who is also owner and sole operator of "Ed the peds daycare center for teenage boys"), would represent the LGBTQueer movement well at a national level, then we can follow the same format as our discussion with the guy who thinks raping 9 year olds is ok.
If he did he wouldn't get my vote and I ain't interested in flogging that particular dead horse again as it is.
I'll ask you again: Are you interested in debate or is this post yet another one of your drive-by troll posts?
Since repentance is the key to Christianity and eternal salvation (turning from your old ways and accepting Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior: Matthew 18:3 )
anyone who repents is "better in the sight of God" than those who don't.
As far as the seriousness of the sin of homosexuality: God destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah because of it (and I'm not going to debate that they were destroyed because of "inhospitality", although I will agree that a bunch of sodomites gang raping angels doesn't show much in the way of hospitality), and in the Old Testament God ordered those caught in the act of homosexuality be put to death (Jesus rescinded the death penalty phase, but not the seriousness of the act).
If you want to debate the above, I'm here, if not, thanks for trolling by.
Unless "aCultureWarrior" can claim to be an Administrator or Moderator for "Theology Online," he is no position to dictate the conditions upon which a member is allowed to participate/not participate in this thread!
Acts 4
3 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
If "the wages of sin is death," then all sin brings with it a death penalty - focusing on homosexuality is nothing more than "cherry picking!"
"aCultureWarrior" has yet to address the issue - that if we are all "sinners," why is he so adamant that the sin of "homosexuals" be criminalized - but not his own sins?
Last edited:
Quote Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
What we're seeing in today's ultra morally depraved society is the result of the decriminalization of laws against numerous sexual sins, homosexuality included. Adultery, cohabitation and the glorification of out of wedlock sex being the primary factors behind abortion, i.e. the Libertarian mentality of "It's MY body and I can damn well do with it as I please!"
Yet Roe v Wade along with those decriminalized laws dramatically increased the amount of abortions here in the US.
According to Solinger’s own source, the Guttmacher Institute, the number of abortions performed in the United States did increase dramatically in the years after Roe. As detailed in the Institute’s most recent abortion fact sheet, the abortion rate climbed dramatically from 1973 to 1981. The number of abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44 rose from 16.3 in 1973 to 26.4. in 1977 to 29.3 in 1981. The Institute also notes that the number of legal abortions increased throughout the 1970s...This is due, in large part, to the fact that jurisdictions began liberalizing their abortion laws prior to Roe.
http://volokh.com/2013/04/23/roes-effect-on-abortion-rates/
If laws (or Supreme Court rulings) didn't have such on impact on society (along with cultural mores'), then the abortion/LGBTQueer movements wouldn't have fought so hard for Roe v Wade, Lawrence v Texas and Obergefell v Hodges to get those rulings enacted and to keep them.
I'm just pointing out why those laws were enacted (to strengthen the nucleus of society, i.e. the traditional family) and showing what has happened after they were decriminalized (abortion, fatherless homes, drug abuse, crime...disease, misery and death).
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Since homosexuality was decriminalized (it's still on the legislative books in around 12 States, no matter what Lawrence v Texas says), amongst other things we've seen an assault on parental rights, religious freedom and invaluable institutions (marriage, the family, the Church, Education, the military, the media, etc. etc.) by the LGBTQueer movement which wouldn't have happened if homosexuality were still a criminal act.
While countless cases of "homofascism" happened before this July 2014 article was written dating back to Lawrence v Texas alone, and many many more cases have happened since the article was written: how about we review these
300 Examples You Have to Read to Understand the Term ‘Homofascism’
http://barbwire.com/2014/07/07/300-examples-read-understand-meant-term-homofascism/
and you can tell me that they would have still happened if homosexuality were a criminal act?
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Now about you stepping forward and promoting a political candidate (or someone who you would like to see running for political office) :
Let's say that Peter the pedophile Tatchell were to run for political office on the LGBTQ platform of allowing 9 year olds to legally be raped have sex with their homosexual elders.
http://bernardgaynor.com.au/wp-conte...3/Tatchell.png
What you would do would be to show how the pedophile's proposed legalization would be helpful not only to society, but to the 9 years olds that (according to the sick degenerate Peter Tatchell) "enjoy it".
Or over here in the States if you think someone like accused pederasts and LGBTQ activists Terry Bean (who founded Human Rights Campaign, the most powerful homosexual organization in the world) or Sodomy and Gonorrhea North Mayor Ed the ped Murray (who is also owner and sole operator of "Ed the peds daycare center for teenage boys"), would represent the LGBTQueer movement well at a national level, then we can follow the same format as our discussion with the guy who thinks raping 9 year olds is ok.
As I wipe an imaginary tear away from my eye, I have to say that your puritan morals are heartwarming Art.
Now can I get you to say that leading UK homosexual activist Peter Tatchell is a "sick child molesting degenerate" for even saying that some children as young as 9 years old enjoy being raped by an adult?
I'll again patiently await your critical analysis of Peter the Pedophile Tatchell.
What we're seeing in today's ultra morally depraved society is the result of the decriminalization of laws against numerous sexual sins, homosexuality included. Adultery, cohabitation and the glorification of out of wedlock sex being the primary factors behind abortion, i.e. the Libertarian mentality of "It's MY body and I can damn well do with it as I please!"
Yet Roe v Wade along with those decriminalized laws dramatically increased the amount of abortions here in the US.
According to Solinger’s own source, the Guttmacher Institute, the number of abortions performed in the United States did increase dramatically in the years after Roe. As detailed in the Institute’s most recent abortion fact sheet, the abortion rate climbed dramatically from 1973 to 1981. The number of abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44 rose from 16.3 in 1973 to 26.4. in 1977 to 29.3 in 1981. The Institute also notes that the number of legal abortions increased throughout the 1970s...This is due, in large part, to the fact that jurisdictions began liberalizing their abortion laws prior to Roe.
http://volokh.com/2013/04/23/roes-effect-on-abortion-rates/
If laws (or Supreme Court rulings) didn't have such on impact on society (along with cultural mores'), then the abortion/LGBTQueer movements wouldn't have fought so hard for Roe v Wade, Lawrence v Texas and Obergefell v Hodges to get those rulings enacted and to keep them.
I'm just pointing out why those laws were enacted (to strengthen the nucleus of society, i.e. the traditional family) and showing what has happened after they were decriminalized (abortion, fatherless homes, drug abuse, crime...disease, misery and death).
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Since homosexuality was decriminalized (it's still on the legislative books in around 12 States, no matter what Lawrence v Texas says), amongst other things we've seen an assault on parental rights, religious freedom and invaluable institutions (marriage, the family, the Church, Education, the military, the media, etc. etc.) by the LGBTQueer movement which wouldn't have happened if homosexuality were still a criminal act.
While countless cases of "homofascism" happened before this July 2014 article was written dating back to Lawrence v Texas alone, and many many more cases have happened since the article was written: how about we review these
300 Examples You Have to Read to Understand the Term ‘Homofascism’
http://barbwire.com/2014/07/07/300-examples-read-understand-meant-term-homofascism/
and you can tell me that they would have still happened if homosexuality were a criminal act?
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Now about you stepping forward and promoting a political candidate (or someone who you would like to see running for political office) :
Let's say that Peter the pedophile Tatchell were to run for political office on the LGBTQ platform of allowing 9 year olds to legally be raped have sex with their homosexual elders.
http://bernardgaynor.com.au/wp-conte...3/Tatchell.png
What you would do would be to show how the pedophile's proposed legalization would be helpful not only to society, but to the 9 years olds that (according to the sick degenerate Peter Tatchell) "enjoy it".
Or over here in the States if you think someone like accused pederasts and LGBTQ activists Terry Bean (who founded Human Rights Campaign, the most powerful homosexual organization in the world) or Sodomy and Gonorrhea North Mayor Ed the ped Murray (who is also owner and sole operator of "Ed the peds daycare center for teenage boys"), would represent the LGBTQueer movement well at a national level, then we can follow the same format as our discussion with the guy who thinks raping 9 year olds is ok.
As I wipe an imaginary tear away from my eye, I have to say that your puritan morals are heartwarming Art.
Now can I get you to say that leading UK homosexual activist Peter Tatchell is a "sick child molesting degenerate" for even saying that some children as young as 9 years old enjoy being raped by an adult?
I'll again patiently await your critical analysis of Peter the Pedophile Tatchell.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
If you care about abortion so much then start a blog as dedicated as this one is to homosexuality. Your obsession lies with the latter though, so you only bring abortion into this project of yours as an aside. Abortion didn't escalate when sanity prevailed and homosexuality was taken off the criminal list along with the mental illness one. If there weren't draconian laws in place to begin with you wouldn't have a backlash from people rebelling against the freedom and equality they should already have had.
Puritanical laws based on religious zealotry don't strengthen any society aCW. They merely oppress those who aren't deemed to be living suitably moral lives. While homosexuality was still a crime, society was hardly healthy, disease was rampant and living conditions often appalling at the lower end of the scale. Ever read Charles Dickens?
"Barbwire"?! Nope, not interested. Oh, and if you think the "cure" for any such thing is to oppress people and take away their rights then you can look to yourself and similar ilk as to why you have pride parades and the like today.
I suggest you bring up the myriad posts on this that must be in your table of contents? Cos I'm not interested in rehashing this all over again for what, the fourth or fifth time now? Link to the former exchanges on this as you must surely be able to do?
Otherwise my comments have been clear all along where it comes to the separate topic of child molestation and anyone guilty of it. Zero tolerance.
Quote Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I'll ask you again: Are you interested in debate or is this post yet another one of your drive-by troll posts?
If you want to debate the above, I'm here, if not, thanks for trolling by.
I can legitimately claim to be the author of this 4 part thread who is interested in debate, something that hasn't happened in your past drive-by troll/monologue posts.
But since you're here let's review:
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Since repentance is the key to Christianity and eternal salvation (turning from your old ways and accepting Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior: Matthew 18:3 )
anyone who repents is "better in the sight of God" than those who don't.
As far as the seriousness of the sin of homosexuality: God destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah because of it (and I'm not going to debate that they were destroyed because of "inhospitality", although I will agree that a bunch of sodomites gang raping angels doesn't show much in the way of hospitality), and in the Old Testament God ordered those caught in the act of homosexuality be put to death (Jesus rescinded the death penalty phase, but not the seriousness of the act).
Now that it's been established how serious God takes the act of homosexuality (and need I post a picture of a millstone around the neck of a sodomite who leads a child astray again to show where God stands on the indoctrination of children?) besides homosexuality, what other sexual sins would you like to see decriminalized: heterosexual incest? (two brothers or two sisters getting it on would fall under the Lawrence v Texas ruling); bestiality? (What man and his best friend do in the privacy of a dog kennel is no ones business is it jgarden?); Necrophilia? (i.e. extended 'love' between a homosexual whose expiration date hasn't yet come up and his life long partner of 20 minutes whose expiration date did).
Maybe there are some things that you would like to see criminalized, like sharing the Word of God with sexually and gender confused people?
The floor is yours jgarden:monologue debate away.
I'll ask you again: Are you interested in debate or is this post yet another one of your drive-by troll posts?
If you want to debate the above, I'm here, if not, thanks for trolling by.
I can legitimately claim to be the author of this 4 part thread who is interested in debate, something that hasn't happened in your past drive-by troll/monologue posts.
But since you're here let's review:
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Since repentance is the key to Christianity and eternal salvation (turning from your old ways and accepting Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior: Matthew 18:3 )
anyone who repents is "better in the sight of God" than those who don't.
As far as the seriousness of the sin of homosexuality: God destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah because of it (and I'm not going to debate that they were destroyed because of "inhospitality", although I will agree that a bunch of sodomites gang raping angels doesn't show much in the way of hospitality), and in the Old Testament God ordered those caught in the act of homosexuality be put to death (Jesus rescinded the death penalty phase, but not the seriousness of the act).
Now that it's been established how serious God takes the act of homosexuality (and need I post a picture of a millstone around the neck of a sodomite who leads a child astray again to show where God stands on the indoctrination of children?) besides homosexuality, what other sexual sins would you like to see decriminalized: heterosexual incest? (two brothers or two sisters getting it on would fall under the Lawrence v Texas ruling); bestiality? (What man and his best friend do in the privacy of a dog kennel is no ones business is it jgarden?); Necrophilia? (i.e. extended 'love' between a homosexual whose expiration date hasn't yet come up and his life long partner of 20 minutes whose expiration date did).
Maybe there are some things that you would like to see criminalized, like sharing the Word of God with sexually and gender confused people?
The floor is yours jgarden:
- Status