Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 3

[aCultureWarrior]

....You crap on me like this,
and give excuse for Allworts to caricature me as a Conspiracy Theorist,
then you post this:

How is this inconsistent with my observation?

You've just proven my point, only failed to give me the credit.

Here's what you wrote in a previous post my friend:

Quote:
Originally Posted by lovemeorhateme
The fact of the matter is that people are being diagnosed with HIV and dying of AIDS and most of these people are not homosexual men.

I agree with this.

Only neither of you are mentioning the gigantic elephant in the room.

Racist Eugenics programs against Africans so that Corporations
can take the continent from them and exploit their resources.

Racism, Eugenics, and Big business go hand in hand with bankers.

Its the last "frontier" of undefended wealth.

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3931216&postcount=148

So tell me Naz, since Pete can't come up with an answer: Why is Africa the only place in the world where males that practice homosexuality aren't afflicted with AIDS?

Regarding corporations and big business infecting women and children with the HIV/AIDS virus so that they can exploit the resources of Uganda: Why not just overthrow the country like the communists did in South Africa, Rhodesia and numerous other African countries?
http://www.tldm.org/news2/africa.htm

Clear your head of this conspiracy theory regarding the infection of women and children with AIDS, it's asinine.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Is that really all you have aCW?

When it comes to homosexual pedophilia and pederasty, I haven't even scratched the surface.

Don't forget Surfer Girl. . . "Girl, Surfer girl, my little surfer girl."

(Oh brother, the Stoner's singing Beach Boy songs, look what you've started Al).

 

[Nazaroo]

So tell me Naz, since Pete can't come up with an answer: Why is Africa the only place in the world where males that practice homosexuality aren't afflicted with AIDS?

Your loaded question isn't helping your position.

I merely agreed that millions of AIDS victims in Africa are not male homosexuals.

This is obvious, since over half the victims are in fact women and children,
and so can't be male homosexuals.

I never suggested that practicing homosexuals can't or don't get AIDS,
in any country or continent.

But the agreed upon facts, which you yourself have referenced,
make it plain that the majority of victims of AIDS in Africa are not men,
and not homosexuals.

They ARE women and children.

Regarding corporations and big business infecting women and children with the HIV/AIDS virus so that they can exploit the resources of Uganda: Why not just overthrow the country like the communists did in South Africa, Rhodesia and numerous other African countries?
http://www.tldm.org/news2/africa.htm

Again, any racist, European Eugenicist, or International Banker will tell you:

If you merely overthrow a government, you're still stuck with millions of
people you don't want to be alive, and occupying your real estate.

Especially in this modern age of high tech automation,
slaves are almost obsolete, and are simply an unnecessary burden,
and a huge logistic liability and obstacle.

Its obvious that a vast number of Arabs and Muslims want to simply
push all the Jews into the Sea.

Similarly, it is trivially true that all Euro-racists want blacks and Arabs dead,
not occupying mining and oil properties.

If you doubt this, look at Iraq.

This is really a no-brainer, and I'm sincerely puzzled that you
seem to be struggling with such a transparent fact.

Clear your head of this conspiracy theory regarding the infection of women and children with AIDS, it's asinine.

Whats assinine, is that you seem to admit to the fact that
the majority of AIDS victims in Africa are women and children,
but you won't admit that it isn't an accident,
but the simple result of the UN vaccination program.

 

[Christ's Word]

LOL .. these, by far, are the most entertaining responses ever posted on this thread.

Seriously, after all this time on TOL, don't you guys know better than to try to carry on a discussion with ACW?

Spoken like the morally bankrupt shrill that you are.....

 

[Christian Liberty]

I didn't say the subject matter necessarily bores me. I said you yourself will bore me. There is a difference.



'Faggotry' isn't even a word. If your research 'skills' are as good as your English skills then we're in trouble. As for your claim that it runs rampant in Uganda, what proof do you have to back it up?



Extensive research? From which sources exactly? Sources that are only sympathetic to your preconceived misconceptions I assume. As for AB on the subject of Hitler and the SS I find myself agreeing with him. What you have said about the topic isn't something that any credible historian believes and you have no reliable evidence to back up the claims.

Hold on, is aCW seriously arguing over whether Hitler was a homosexual or not?

Seriously? Who the heck cares?

Does aCW really believe that Hitler did what he did because he was a homosexual?

Wow... this is absurd.

Just legalize discrimination again and a big part of the problem will go away. The biggest problem with the homosexual movement today is that they want to force people to associate with them in contexts which other people feel that it would be morally wrong to associate (The Christian baker who didn't want to bake a cake for a gay wedding is a good example).

 

[Christian Liberty]

Spoken like the morally bankrupt shrill that you are.....

I don't know what exactly you believe or why you are calling her a morally bankrupt shill, but even Lighthouse considers aCW to be a moron, and Lighthouse was always even more "anti-gay" in terms of actual policy than aCW is (aCW isn't a theonomic reconstructionist.)

aCW's MO is to make false accusations against people who disagree with him. He should be ignored, even if you agree with him on some circumstantial points.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
So tell me Naz, since Pete can't come up with an answer: Why is Africa the only place in the world where males that practice homosexuality aren't afflicted with AIDS?

Your loaded question isn't helping your position.

I merely agreed that millions of AIDS victims in Africa are not male homosexuals.

This is obvious, since over half the victims are in fact women and children,
and so can't be male homosexual.

I never suggested that practicing homosexuals can't or don't get AIDS,
in any country or continent.

But the agreed upon facts, which you yourself have referenced,
make it plain that the majority of victims of AIDS in Africa are not men,
and not homosexuals.

They ARE women and children.

Then you're as ignorant on the subject as Pete is. Do your own research, type "African AIDS Hoax" into a search engine.

Quote:
Regarding corporations and big business infecting women and children with the HIV/AIDS virus so that they can exploit the resources of Uganda: Why not just overthrow the country like the communists did in South Africa, Rhodesia and numerous other African countries?
http://www.tldm.org/news2/africa.htm

Again, any racist, European Eugenicist, or International Banker will tell you:

If you merely overthrow a government, you're still stuck with millions of
people you don't want to be alive, and occupying your real estate.

Especially in this modern age of high tech automation,
slaves are almost obsolete, and are simply an unnecessary burden,
and a huge logistic liability and obstacle.

Its obvious that a vast number of Arabs and Muslims want to simply
push all the Jews into the Sea.

Similarly, it is trivially true that all Euro-racists want blacks and Arabs dead,
not occupying mining and oil properties.

If you doubt this, look at Iraq.

This is really a no-brainer, and I'm sincerely puzzled that you
seem to be struggling with such a transparent fact.

So purposely infecting ONLY poverty stricken black heterosexual women and children with the AIDS virus somehow gives the international bankers a way to overthrow a country? (Someone has been listening to Alex Jones a tad too much).

Quote:
Clear your head of this conspiracy theory regarding the infection of women and children with AIDS, it's asinine.

Whats assinine, is that you seem to admit to the fact that
the majority of AIDS victims in Africa are women and children,
but you won't admit that it isn't an accident,
but the simple result of the UN vaccination program.

"African AIDS Hoax".

 

[lovemeorhateme]

As I'd discussed in previous posts about Uganda (refer to the table of contents) it's mostly male homosexuals from foreign countries that is the problem, i.e. "gay” sex tourism targeting desperately poor Ugandan boys and teenagers".

Scott Lively: Fact Sheet on Uganda and Homosexuality
http://americansfortruth.com/2013/09/05/scott-lively-fact-sheet-on-uganda-and-homosexuality/

UGANDA CONFRONTS "LOUD-MOUTHED HOMOSEXUAL LOBBY"
http://www.newswithviews.com/Kincaid/cliff389.htm

SPREADING A.I.D.S. TO UGANDA
"As part of the foreign-inspired effort to derail the bill, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called and spoke with Uganda President Museveni for 45 minutes and was frankly told that European homosexuals were targeting Uganda’s children for sexual purposes. Clinton seemed surprised by the revelations and told Museveni she wasn’t aware of the problem.

Officially, the State Department is supposed to combat human trafficking for sexual purposes. Obama has declared January “National Slavery and Human Trafficking Prevention Month.”'
http://newswithviews.com/Kincaid/cliff386.htm

Homosexual Imperialists Target Uganda
"George Oundo, a former homosexual, has confessed that he recruited school children into homosexuality as part of a program funded by foreign interests and operating in Uganda under the cover of a group called Sexual Minorities Uganda.
http://sexualminoritiesuganda.com/

The United Nations has been caught distributing a pamphlet encouraging homosexuality among teenagers."
http://www.rightsidenews.com/201001...al/homosexual-imperialists-target-uganda.html

We may have discussed this previously, but what are your thoughts on the criminalization of homosexuality in Uganda?

None of which proves anything. If President Museveni said something the chances are it isn't true. Oh and Sexual Minorities Uganda is run by Ugandans. In a country where it is said that 98% of people oppose homosexuality and support the killing of homosexuals one hardly expects there to be a large homosexual community. Unless there are statistics which show how many homosexuals there are in Uganda, none of what you posted proves nothing.

I am opposed to the criminalisation of homosexuality in Uganda. I believe it to be wrong, I believe it will lead to 'witch hunts' and people being blackmailed. The police are very corrupt and often don't need much evidence, just money. If someone has the money and wants someone arrested they can easily make it happen. Even worse is that the law compels anyone who suspects someone may be homosexual to report them or face penalties themselves. How is that conducive to helping someone? If a homosexual goes to their pastor to ask for help, the law compels the pastor to report that homosexual to the police.

Where shall we start?

The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party
http://www.defendthefamily.com/pfrc/books/pinkswastika/html/the_pinkswastika_4th_edition_-_final.htm

Again, this proves nothing. There are many more credible historians who would say this is a load of rubbish.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

I am opposed to the criminalisation of homosexuality in Uganda. I believe it to be wrong,...

Of course you do Pete. I wouldn't expect anything other than that from a sexual anarchist.

Again, this http://www.defendthefamily.com/pfrc/books/pinkswastika/html/the_pinkswastika_4th_edition_-_final.htm proves nothing. There are many more credible historians who would say this is a load of rubbish.

One of Pete's "credible historians".

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3926129&postcount=79

 

[Christian Liberty]

Of course you do Pete. I wouldn't expect anything other than that from a sexual anarchist.




One of Pete's "credible historians".

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3926129&postcount=79

What the heck is a sexual anarchist? One is either an anarchist or he isn't. Based on what I remember from Pete, he isn't an anarchist even by the loosest possible definition of the term. By contrast, I might actually be an anarchist depending on how one defines the term. Even still, I don't believe rape or pedophilia should be legal. So, what is a sexual anarchist? Someone who wants less laws against sex than you do?

 

[lovemeorhateme]

Of course you do Pete. I wouldn't expect anything other than that from a sexual anarchist.

Is there no end to your selective cherry picking of quotes? I gave many good reasons for my stance but I see you chose not to address those. I'm no 'sexual anarchist' as you call me and you know full well that I believe all ultimate authority belongs to God.

One of Pete's "credible historians".

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3926129&postcount=79

Using one example is not reflective of academic historians as a whole and you should know that.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

What the heck is a sexual anarchist? One is either an anarchist or he isn't. Based on what I remember from Pete, he isn't an anarchist even by the loosest possible definition of the term. By contrast, I might actually be an anarchist depending on how one defines the term. Even still, I don't believe rape or pedophilia should be legal. So, what is a sexual anarchist? Someone who wants less laws against sex than you do?

The perverts that hang out at ronpaulforums would be a good example of sexual anarchists.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Of course you do Pete. I wouldn't expect anything other than that from a sexual anarchist.

Is there no end to your selective cherry picking of quotes? I gave many good reasons for my stance but I see you chose not to address those. I'm no 'sexual anarchist' as you call me and you know full well that I believe all ultimate authority belongs to God.

Then be consistent and promote the decriminalization of other sexual perversions: incest, bestiality, necrophilia, to name 3.


Quote:
One of Pete's "credible historians".

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums...9&postcount=79

Using one example is not reflective of academic historians as a whole and you should know that.

My purpose behind exposing Hitler and his SS as homosexuals was to point out how much in common the modern day homosexual movement has with the Nazi Party (violence, intolerance, sexual perversion). Educate yourself Pete, as a brain is a terrible thing to waste, and quite frankly I'm embarrassed for you that you're wasting it.

 

[Christian Liberty]

The perverts that hang out at ronpaulforums would be a good example of sexual anarchists.

At least some of us actually are anarcho-capitalists (I bet you don't even know what that term means). But you still haven't defined your term. What IS a sexual anarchist? What must one believe or do to be in this category? What things can one believe or do to be disqualified from that category?

 

[Christian Liberty]

Then be consistent and promote the decriminalization of other sexual perversions: incest, bestiality, necrophilia, to name 3.

OK, assuming that the incest is not rape (which all forms of pedophilia would be) why not? Why is it something that should be combated using violence rather than the gospel?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
The perverts that hang out at ronpaulforums would be a good example of sexual anarchists.

At least some of us actually are anarcho-capitalists (I bet you don't even know what that term means). But you still haven't defined your term. What IS a sexual anarchist? What must one believe or do to be in this category? What things can one believe or do to be disqualified from that category?

In the case of those who proudly and unrepentantly engage in homosexual behavior, it's decriminalizing laws that basically allow them to run loose like dogs in heat. But unlike dogs in heat, homosexuals infect each others with deadly incurable diseases, molest the minds and bodies of innocent children, and of course create an agenda that destroys institutions such as marriage, the family, the military, education, youth mentor groups, etc.

I've been over this numerous times before, but I have to remember who I'm dealing with here:

An "If it feels good do it" mindless Libertarian.

Here's Matt Barber's article, for those with a mind and an ounce of decency in them.

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/mbarber/110903

 

[Christian Liberty]

In the case of those who proudly and unrepentantly engage in homosexual behavior, it's decriminalizing laws that basically allow them to run loose like dogs in heat.

What does that have to do with anarchy?

But unlike dogs in heat, homosexuals infect each others with deadly incurable diseases,

So because they might hurt other consenting parties, you see the need to point your gun (government) at them first? Hurt them so they can't hurt themselves? How absurd!

molest the minds

How in the world do you molest a mind? This is one of the dumbest comments I have ever seen.

and bodies of innocent children

Who is suggesting that pedophilic rape be legalized?

, and of course create an agenda that destroys institutions such as marriage,

Gays can't get married. No, literally, they can't. Its impossible. So what are you worried about? Them playing pretend? Really?

the family,

This does happen. But more violence (government) isn't the solution. The gospel is the solution.

the military,

What the military as a group did in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Korea, both World Wars, etc. was far more evil than homosexuality. You have your priorities warped. I hope homosexuals do take over the military, maybe it will convince Christians to stay away from it.

education,

You asked for that problem when you endorsed a government controlled education system. Get the government out of public schools, and homeschool your children or send them to a private school that does not allow homosexuals to teach. Problem solved.

youth mentor groups, etc.

Pick one of the above responses and I'm sure you'll find one that fits (not the one about the military, of course)

I've been over this numerous times before, but I have to remember who I'm dealing with here:

Contrary to your lies, I do NOT believe "if it feels good" do it. I don't even believe that everything that feels good should be legal. Your arguments are ridiculous.

 

[Nazaroo]

Then you're as ignorant on the subject as Pete is. Do your own research, type "African AIDS Hoax" into a search engine.

Quote:
Regarding corporations and big business infecting women and children with the HIV/AIDS virus so that they can exploit the resources of Uganda: Why not just overthrow the country like the communists did in South Africa, Rhodesia and numerous other African countries?
http://www.tldm.org/news2/africa.htm

"why not just overthrow the country like the communists..?"

Short answer:

Thats not an easier or better solution than simple genocide.



Option A: anarchy, and country still full of crazy blacks with machetes.

Option B: country empty, mining and drilling ready to go using imported labour.

Which do you think Big Oil and the Military Industrial Complex prefers?

You have 30 seconds, so take your time....

supplementary response:

Communists are single-minded idiots and not in the elite NWO club. Duh.

So purposely infecting ONLY poverty stricken black heterosexual women and children with the AIDS virus somehow gives the international bankers a way to overthrow a country?

The targeting doesn't have to be that specific. All blacks are targets.

Clear your head of this conspiracy theory regarding the infection of women and children with AIDS, it's asinine.

"African AIDS Hoax".

Sorry, I'm just not buying your excuses.

Remember when the Europeans engaged in brutal genocidal war against
the Natives in North America, handing out Small Pox covered blankets and stuff?

Early Biological War on Native Americans

[FONT=New York,Times New Roman] FCN: So you are arguing that the United Nations and the World Health Organization (WHO) pretended to assist Africans and other dark people while actually inoculating them to wipe them out? DJF: A few Whites make the argument against themselves. Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz wrote a book called "Emerging Viruses: AIDS and Ebola Nature, Accident, or Intentional?" He argues AIDS was man-made and designed for population reduction. Dr. Horowitz also wrote "Death in the Air: Globalism, Tourism and Toxic Warfare." In it he asks, "What if the CDC was really the White Center for (Control of the Diseases in people of color)?" What if the WHO was actually the White Health Organization? And what if the people sick people depend upon to heal them are responsible for manufacturing and manipulating diseases? He argues that they do. Dr. Robert Strecher and Dr. Alan Cantwell also argue in their books that AIDS was man-made. Lyndon LaRouche spent years in jail for claiming AIDS was man-made and designed to reduce targeted populations. FCN: So what is your spin on the UN Conference on AIDS that just ended in Madrid, Spain? DJF: It was a sham like the rest of the AIDS conferences White folks have held. Let me give you an example. If people have syphilis or gonorrhea, [doctors] give them a shot of penicillin which knocks out the disease. If you have any other disease, they would give you a shot to kill the disease. No sane person would come up with a vaccination to cure an existing disease. They are spreading the disease with the vaccinations. They do not intend to find a cure because it is doing what they want. It is reducing the Black, Brown, Yellow and Red populations and they are making money (in pharmaceutical sales). The UN is a sham. It was set up after White (sic) War II to carve up the rest of the world for White people. One of the early secretary-generals, Kurt Waldheim of Austria, was a Nazi and the Preamble to the UN Charter was written by Apartheid era South African General Smut. It is all a sham against dark people. [/FONT]

But you'll be denying that happened too, just like the Holocaust, right?

I'm guessing you have a lot of things in common with David Duke.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Option A: anarchy, and country still full of crazy blacks with machetes.

I guarantee you that aCW hates David Duke, after all, David Duke supported Ron Paul. I'm sure that bugs him more than the fact that Duke was a racist.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Clear your head of this conspiracy theory regarding the infection of women and children with AIDS, it's asinine.

Sorry, I'm just not buying your excuses.

Remember when the Europeans engaged in brutal genocidal war against
the Natives in North America, handing out Small Pox covered blankets and stuff?

Ah yes, the conspiracy to wipe out the American Indian by the evil white man.

Like I said, educate yourself.

Smallpox in the New World:

Some of the African slaves brought by Columbus to be used on the sugar plantation of the West Indies carried the smallpox virus. In 1495, fifty-seven to eighty percent of the native population of Santa Domingo, and in 1515, two-thirds of the Indians of Puerto Rico were wiped out by smallpox. Ten years after Cortez arrived in Mexico, the native population dropped from twenty-five million to six million five hundred thousand a reduction of seventy-four percent.

Prior to the arrival of Europeans, various sources estimate native population in North and South America at ninety to one hundred million. It is impossible to arrive at the number of Indians in the Americas killed by European diseases with smallpox the deadliest by far. Even the most conservative estimates place the deaths from smallpox above sixty-five percent (Bray).

Stearn and Stearn estimated there were approximately one million Indians living north of the Rio Grande in the early sixteenth-century. By the end of the sixteen hundreds, smallpox had spread up and down the eastern seaboard and as far west as the Great Lakes. Bray estimated by 1907 there were less than four hundred thousand Indians north of the Rio Grande. This precipitous decline was not due to smallpox alone. Other diseases played a role, as did intertribal warfare and conflicts with the United States army.

The first major outbreak of an infectious disease on the eastern coast of North America was between 1616-19. The Massachusetts and other Algonquin tribes in the area were reduced from an estimated thirty thousand to three hundred(Bray). When the Pilgrims landed in 1620, there were few Indians left to greet them. Many observers believe this infectious disease was smallpox. Researchers believe smallpox reached the Atlantic Coast of what was to become the United States either from Canada or the West Indies.

It was inevitable European diseases would run rampant through the indigenous populations of the Americas. The native populations of North and South America had no immunities, or genetic tolerance, to any of the European diseases, and not all white Americans had immunities to them either. The estimate is about twenty-five percent of the emigrants lacked immunity to the smallpox virus.
http://www.thefurtrapper.com/indian_smallpox.htm

What are those two words I like to use when I've heard enough nonsense Al?

Moving on...

Thanks.