Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 5

[aCultureWarrior]

In LGBTQ tyranny news:

Christian Couple Who Lost Bakery After Heavy Fine for Not Making Lesbian Wedding Cake Loses Appeal

Dec. 29, 2017

The Oregon Court of Appeals ruled on Thursday against a Christian couple who lost their bakery after a heavy fine for refusing to create a cake for a same-sex wedding back in 2013.
Judge Chris Garrett wrote in his opinion that although Aaron and Melissa Klein, former owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa, may have sincere religious objections to making gay wedding cakes, people who are opposed to interracial marriages could also ask for the same exemptions, if granted.
"The Kleins seek an exemption based on their sincere religious opposition to same-sex marriage; but those with sincere religious objections to marriage between people of different races, ethnicities, or faiths could just as readily demand the same exemption," Garrett argued...

Read more: https://www.christianpost.com/news/...ing-lesbian-wedding-cake-loses-appeal-211854/

I've read numerous verses throughout both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible where it says that homosexuality is immoral and that marriage is for one man and one woman, but never have I seen where it says that marrying someone of a different race is immoral Judge Chris.

Perhaps some of your like minded LGBTQ activists here on TOL could point that out, as I know that you and the lesbian Governor of Oregon are busy getting ready to persecute the next Christian that stands up against LGBTQ tyranny and don't have time to share your ignorance of Holy Scripture on internet forums.

Have I mentioned that Christianity and the LGBTQ/abortion/secular humanist movement can't coexist?

https://grandmageri422.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/christian-persecution-in-america.jpg

 

[Arthur Brain]

I guess I'm not up to speed Arthur. I wasn't aware that charges of election fraud that were filed yesterday by attorney's representing Judge Roy Moore have been "thrown out". Perhaps you could provide a link showing that?

You don't keep up to date do you? It's official, your guy lost.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42506727

The sodomites and baby murderers orchestrated an unprecedented modern day smear campaign against Judge Roy Moore, done 24/7 for several months prior to the election and continue to do so even afterwards.

A polygraph taken by Roy Moore shows what those with common sense knew all along:

That the WAPO and the lemmings that they used to libel Judge Roy Moore were lying.

Nope, that didn't answer the question. Why didn't Moore get a polygraph test before the night of the election? If he was contesting the results based on voter fraud and not the allegations of sexual misconduct then why did he bother to get one anyway? Furthermore, you may be willing to waive the allegations away and take this guy's word for it but until the polygraph findings are corroborated then who knows how valid it is. Suffice to say, it's decidedly odd that he would wait so long to get one done, especially as he must have known how damaging such allegations were (the Hannity interview alone) so why didn't he get one sooner?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I guess I'm not up to speed Arthur. I wasn't aware that charges of election fraud that were filed yesterday by attorney's representing Judge Roy Moore have been "thrown out". Perhaps you could provide a link showing that?

You don't keep up to date do you? It's official, your guy lost.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42506727

Roy Moore issues statement on election certification

Dec. 28, 2017

MONTGOMERY, Ala. (WPMI) — On Thursday, Judge Roy Moore issued the following statement after the certification of the election results.

"Election fraud experts across the country have agreed that this was a fraudulent election. Even the Secretary of State himself was forced to stop fraudulent and intimidating advertisements from an organization known as Highway 31, predominantly funded by the Democratic Senate Majority PAC.
"I’ve had to fight not only the Democrats but also the Republican Senate Leadership Fund and over $50 million in opposition spending from the Washington establishment.
"I have stood for the truth about God and the Constitution for the people of Alabama.
"I have no regrets. To God be the glory."
http://weartv.com/news/local/roy-moore-issues-statement-on-election-certification

Oh but Arthur, Judge Roy Moore didn't lose; those that smeared his good name by calling him a "child molester" will have to answer to God in the end.

Isaiah 5:20

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
The sodomites and baby murderers orchestrated an unprecedented modern day smear campaign against Judge Roy Moore, done 24/7 for several months prior to the election and continue to do so even afterwards.

A polygraph taken by Roy Moore shows what those with common sense knew all along:

That the WAPO and the lemmings that they used to libel Judge Roy Moore were lying.

Nope, that didn't answer the question. Why didn't Moore get a polygraph test before the night of the election?

Answer the question yourself. I'm not interested in why an innocent man didn't do this or that at an earlier time, I'm more interested in the fact that those that purposely lied about one be brought to justice. Have I mentioned that God's wrath against those who lied about Roy Moore won't be pretty?

If he was contesting the results based on voter fraud and not the allegations of sexual misconduct then why did he bother to get one anyway? Furthermore, you may be willing to waive the allegations away and take this guy's word for it but until the polygraph findings are corroborated then who knows how valid it is. Suffice to say, it's decidedly odd that he would wait so long to get one done, especially as he must have known how damaging such allegations were (the Hannity interview alone) so why didn't he get one sooner?

I was hoping that you'd return to this thread so that we could review those "allegations". Instead of talking about the issues that the good people of Alabama needed to hear, Roy Moore spent a good part of his campaign showing that those whom he was accused of sexual improprieties with 40 years earlier were lying. Even after that evidence was made public, the sodomites and baby murderers continued their relentless smear campaign against Moore.

That being said: which 'victim' shall we start with Arthur?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

For those of you that are new to this now 5 part thread, I went into great detail about the smear campaign against Judge Roy Moore near the end of Part 4. One of his accusers, a Beverly Nelson, stated that Moore had sexually assaulted her outside of a restaurant that she states that she worked at.
The sodomites at the Washington Post also started the bold faced lie that Roy Moore was banned from a mall because he was constantly hitting on teenage girls.

The forgery of Roy Moore's signature in Beverly Nelson's high school yearbook is revealed in another post.

Here's a post from Part 4 that reveals those lies:

11-21-17

“On Monday evening, the Moore Campaign unveiled statements from key witnesses that completely bust the story of Beverly Nelson and Gloria Allred and further reveal an unconscionable bias on the part of state and national press to hide the truth from Alabama voters...

Nelson said Moore allegedly offered her a ride home from the Olde Hickory House where she worked when she was 16. He then allegedly parked his car near dumpsters behind the building and attempted to force her to have sex with him, she said. Nelson has also gone public with her high school yearbook which she claims was signed by Moore.

...In Monday evening’s statements, the campaign quoted multiple witnesses who used to work at Olde Hickory House, attempting to poke holes in Nelson’s account of the incident.
A former waitress said the restaurant didn’t hire anyone under the age of 16, but Nelson said she was 15 when she started. Two former employees questioned the location of the dumpster, saying it was on the side of the building, not the back. A few of Moore’s witnesses said there wasn’t an entrance to the building from the back of the parking lot and another former employee said the restaurant never closed before 11 p.m., which they said contradicts Nelson’s claims that the restaurant closed at 10 p.m. the night of the alleged assault.
The campaign also claimed that these witness accounts had been shared with multiple news outlets, but “the outlets have failed to report.”
The second statement included quotes from three former employees of Gadsden mall, one of whom oversaw mall security, attempting to discredit reports that Moore was banned from the mall because of his alleged behavior toward teenage girls.
One witness, Johnnie V. Sanders who the Moore campaign said was an employee of Gadsden Mall from the late 1970s to the mid-2000’s, said there was a different “prominent” man who was banned from the mall for similar reasons and said he may have been confused with Moore.
“There was a prominent man of Etowah County, whom is now deceased that was banned for reasons such as the allegations against Judge Moore. However, due to respect for the family, I decline to reveal his name,” Sanders said in the statement. “Despite allegations against other patrons of the mall, I never heard of Roy Moore’s name come in conversation with any such misconduct against women or a supposed banning from the Gadsden Mall.
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ized!-Part-4&p=5135283&viewfull=1#post5135283
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...s-story/ar-BBFrevj?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp

 

[aCultureWarrior]

A quick review towards the end of Part 4 revealed this information about another Roy Moore accuser:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cXK6zhGZ24
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ized!-Part-4&p=5142272&viewfull=1#post5142272

I'll see if I can find the post showing where one of Roy Moore's accusers was a Hillary Clinton/Joe Biden/Doug Moore fan who actually worked for Hillary at one of her speeches.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Roy Moore issues statement on election certification

Dec. 28, 2017

MONTGOMERY, Ala. (WPMI) — On Thursday, Judge Roy Moore issued the following statement after the certification of the election results.

"Election fraud experts across the country have agreed that this was a fraudulent election. Even the Secretary of State himself was forced to stop fraudulent and intimidating advertisements from an organization known as Highway 31, predominantly funded by the Democratic Senate Majority PAC.
"I’ve had to fight not only the Democrats but also the Republican Senate Leadership Fund and over $50 million in opposition spending from the Washington establishment.
"I have stood for the truth about God and the Constitution for the people of Alabama.
"I have no regrets. To God be the glory."
http://weartv.com/news/local/roy-moore-issues-statement-on-election-certification

Oh but Arthur, Judge Roy Moore didn't lose; those that smeared his good name by calling him a "child molester" will have to answer to God in the end.

Well, yes he did, by more than 21,000 votes in the end and his feeble petition on the grounds of 'voter fraud' was summarily thrown out in short order. I know it's a bit of a blow to you as you didn't seem to realize this whereas people who keep up to date with current events already knew but your guy lost so deal with it. Frankly, I doubt most people would want some crank who thinks 9/11 was a judgment on America to be sitting in office anyway regardless of the allegations made against him.

Answer the question yourself. I'm not interested in why an innocent man didn't do this or that at an earlier time, I'm more interested in the fact that those that purposely lied about one be brought to justice. Have I mentioned that God's wrath against those who lied about Roy Moore won't be pretty?

Very easily. Tackle them head on if you're innocent. If I were accused of anything akin to the allegations against Moore and knew I wasn't guilty I'd be pushing for a lie detector test to prove my innocence, all above board, verified by independent authority and publicly to boot. Then I'd be pushing for action against those false accusers to the full extent of the law. So how come Moore didn't think about this instead of going for a polygraph test with someone after he'd already lost the election?! What, it didn't occur to him that these allegations were going to have an adverse effect on his campaign, even after Hannity had publicly called him out after his interview and Republicans were distancing themselves away from him? What, was he more concerned in getting last minute horse riding lessons so he could 'trot' to the polling booth pretending he was a cowboy?

I was hoping that you'd return to this thread so that we could review those "allegations". Instead of talking about the issues that the good people of Alabama needed to hear, Roy Moore spent a good part of his campaign showing that those whom he was accused of sexual improprieties with 40 years earlier were lying. Even after that evidence was made public, the sodomites and baby murderers continued their relentless smear campaign against Moore.

That being said: which 'victim' shall we start with Arthur?

Well, no, he didn't. If he'd taken a lie detector test at the time these allegations were coming to light in public instead of fumbling around in interviews and media where the '?' were further growing then he may have laid some things to rest but he didn't. So why the hell did he wait until after the official results were in to then use an apparent polygraph test as part of his campaign to halt proceedings based on 'voter fraud', a separate issue?

Do tell.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Then there's the post showing where wannabe comic Jimmy Kimmel breaks Alabama law by sending one of his fellow sexual anarchists into a Roy Moore event held at a church to disrupt it:

When little Jimmy's employee Tony Barbieri, aka Jake Byrd disrupted a meeting in an Alabama church where Judge Roy Moore was speaking, he violated Alabama criminal code 13A-11-7

Disorderly Conduct:

(a) A person commits the crime of disorderly conduct if...

(4) Without lawful authority, disturbs any lawful assembly or meeting of persons.
http://codes.findlaw.com/al/title-13...-13a-11-7.html

Since little Jimmy Kimmel obviously was behind this tasteless act, little Jimmy has violated Alabama criminal code 13A-4-3

(a) A person is guilty of criminal conspiracy if, with the intent that conduct constituting an offense be performed, he agrees with one or more persons to engage in or cause the performance of such conduct, and any one or more of such persons does an overt act to effect an objective of the agreement.
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ized!-Part-4&p=5142843&viewfull=1#post5142843

Isn't the LGBTQueer movement and it's allies pathetic Art?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Oh but Arthur, Judge Roy Moore didn't lose; those that smeared his good name by calling him a "child molester" will have to answer to God in the end.

Well, yes he did, by more than 21,000 votes in the end and his feeble petition on the grounds of 'voter fraud' were summarily thrown out in short order.

I can't blame you for not wanting to talk about the wrath of God that awaits those that have lied about Roy Moore, because if I were in your shoes, I wouldn't want to think about it, let alone talk about it.

That being said: "Three national Election Integrity experts reached the same independent conclusion: “with a reasonable degree of statistical and mathematical certainty…election fraud occurred."

Seems to me that the voters of Alabama are entitled to hear the truth from these 3 "national Election Integrity experts".

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Answer the question yourself. I'm not interested in why an innocent man didn't do this or that at an earlier time, I'm more interested in the fact that those that purposely lied about one be brought to justice. Have I mentioned that God's wrath against those who lied about Roy Moore won't be pretty?

Very easily. Tackle them head on if you're innocent.

I know that this is a difficult fact for the LGBTQueer movement to grasp, but an individual is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. It should be that way in the court of public opinion, but we both know how the LGBTQ smear campaign operates don't we Arthur?

I've posted two articles showing that more than 2 of Judge Moore's accusers lied, here's your opportunity to show that there is validity behind the LGBTQueer smear campaign by providing evidence that they or others didn't lie.

I'll wait...

 

[aCultureWarrior]

While I await evidence from LGBTQ apologist Arthur Brain showing that those who accused Roy Moore of sexual improprieties close to 40 years ago weren't lying, here's a little bit of information about the perverts that make up the editorial board at the LGBTQ flag waving Washington Post.

One of the biggest LGBTQ contributors to the WAPO is an openly homosexual male named Jonathan Capehart and according to the Washington Post "Jonathan Capehart is a member of the Post editorial board"

https://i1.wp.com/washingtonlife.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/menathrc.jpg?resize=595,325

WAPO columnist/editorial board member Jonathan Capehart (middle) attending a Human Rights Campaign* gala

*Founded by pederast Terry Bean
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ized!-Part-4&p=5143502&viewfull=1#post5143502

 

[Arthur Brain]

I can't blame you for not wanting to talk about the wrath of God that awaits those that have lied about Roy Moore, because if I were in your shoes, I wouldn't want to think about it, let alone talk about it.

Oh, hey, if anyone's found guilty of making up false allegations against Moore, then I fully support them being prosecuted to the full extent of the law. You, on the other hand simply want to dismiss such allegations as non existent despite there being more than a '?' over Moore in regards to them. You comfortable with being so dismissive if it turns out that any of these people were in fact victims? Might wanna turn that little mirror on yourself there aCW.

That being said: "Three national Election Integrity experts reached the same independent conclusion: “with a reasonable degree of statistical and mathematical certainty…election fraud occurred."

Seems to me that the voters of Alabama are entitled to hear the truth from these 3 "national Election Integrity experts".

Summarily dismissed within hours and some of the sources are hardly credible as it is. Conspiracy theory?

:shocked:

I know that this is a difficult fact for the LGBTQueer movement to grasp, but an individual is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. It should be that way in the court of public opinion, but we both know how the LGBTQ smear campaign operates don't we Arthur?

All the more reason to clear your name instead of fumbling around, pretending you can ride a horse and hope it all blows over. It wasn't going to and Moore's own words undid him more than any smear campaign could hope to achieve as it was. I refer you to the Hannity interview again. So, why didn't he take the prudent step, the only one in the 'political arena' that could have really, and take a darn lie detector test?

I've posted two article showing that more than 2 of Judge Moore's accusers lied, here's your opportunity to show that there is validity behind the LGBTQueer smear campaign by providing evidence that they or others didn't lie.

I'll wait...

Um, no, you get on with why your candidate didn't have the gumption to clear his name prior to election night. Else, you can wait all you like. As usual with you, you've proved nothing.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
I've posted two article showing that more than 2 of Judge Moore's accusers lied, here's your opportunity to show that there is validity behind the LGBTQueer smear campaign by providing evidence that they or others didn't lie.

I'll wait...

Um, no, you get on with why your candidate didn't have the gumption to clear his name prior to election night. Else, you can wait all you like. As usual with you, you've proved nothing.

Thanks for acknowledging that there is no evidence that backs the LGBTQueer smear campaign against Judge Roy Moore.

I told another LGBTQ activist in another internet forum who was gloating over the supposed Doug Jones victory this:

"It must be frustrating for you LGBTQ activists to be winning the culture war but not being able to win the war against contracting HIV/AIDS, anal cancer and a long list of STD's that I can't pronounce let alone spell."

I told the poor lost soul who at least had least been honest enough to talk about how he is 'married' to another male about Jesus and repentance (he's an atheist like you are) and give him information on organizations and people that can help him with his spiritual, psychological and sexual confusion.

Hopefully he'll pursue that information before it's too late.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

I wouldn't be fair to LGBTQ activist Arthur Brain if I didn't explain to him how evidence works.

When I say that most if not all major LGBTQ "pioneers" were either pedophiles/pederasts or supported the pedophile/pederast movement, I need to back that claim with "evidence".

When I say that LGBTQ pioneer Harry Hay supported NAMBLA, it isn't Hay's job to prove me wrong, it's my job to provide evidence.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-McehxYr-kZc/UVsy35xn90I/AAAAAAAAEcg/wjvOh9t7A2E/s1600/AAA.jpg

Or when I state that homosexual/LGBTQ UK activist Peter Tatchell wrote a letter to the editor explaining how some children as young as 9 years old enjoy being raped by adults, it's not Tatchell's job to prove me wrong, it's my job to provide evidence.

http://matthewhopkinsnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Tatchell-Letter-1997-06-26.png

Or when I say that LGBTQ pioneer/homosexual and fraud psychologist Frank Kameny talked about how it's ok to have sex with animals (and that he once spoke to NAMBLA), it's not Kameny's job to prove me wrong, it's my job to provide evidence.

‘Gay Rights’ Icon Frank Kameny Tells AFTAH: Bestiality OK ‘as Long as the Animal Doesn’t Mind’
https://americansfortruth.com/2008/...tiality-ok-as-long-as-the-animal-doesnt-mind/

I could talk about homosexuals/LGBTQ icons like HRC founder Terry Bean and former Seattle Mayor Ed Murray raping younger boys and the evidence to back those accusations, but I hope that you get my point Arthur.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Thanks for acknowledging that there is no evidence that backs the LGBTQueer smear campaign against Judge Roy Moore.

I told another LGBTQ activist in another internet forum who was gloating over the supposed Doug Jones victory this:

"It must be frustrating for you LGBTQ activists to be winning the culture war but not being able to win the war against contracting HIV/AIDS, anal cancer and a long list of STD's that I can't pronounce let alone spell."

I told the poor lost soul who at least had least been honest enough to talk about how he is 'married' to another male about Jesus and repentance (he's an atheist like you are) and give him information on organizations and people that can help him with his spiritual, psychological and sexual confusion.

Hopefully he'll pursue that information before it's too late.

I'm neither an atheist or homosexual. I'm only an 'activist' in your deluded little world whereby not agreeing that homosexuals should be persecuted is tantamount to being one. Same ole' with you aCW. Projection at its lowest. Not a jot as to why someone accused of sexual assault would wait so long to 'tackle' the problem I notice?

 

[Arthur Brain]

I wouldn't be fair to LGBTQ activist Arthur Brain if I didn't explain to him how evidence works.

When I say that most if not all major LGBTQ "pioneers" were either pedophiles/pederasts or supported the pedophile/pederast movement, I need to back that claim with "evidence".

When I say that LGBTQ pioneer Harry Hay supported NAMBLA, it isn't Hay's job to prove me wrong, it's my job to provide evidence.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-McehxYr-kZc/UVsy35xn90I/AAAAAAAAEcg/wjvOh9t7A2E/s1600/AAA.jpg

Or when I state that homosexual/LGBTQ UK activist Peter Tatchell wrote a letter to the editor explaining how some children as young as 9 years old enjoy being raped by adults, it's not Tatchell's job to prove me wrong, it's my job to provide evidence.

http://matthewhopkinsnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Tatchell-Letter-1997-06-26.png

Or when I say that LGBTQ pioneer/homosexual and fraud psychologist Frank Kameny talked about how it's ok to have sex with animals (and that he once spoke to NAMBLA), it's not Kameny's job to prove me wrong, it's my job to provide evidence.

‘Gay Rights’ Icon Frank Kameny Tells AFTAH: Bestiality OK ‘as Long as the Animal Doesn’t Mind’
https://americansfortruth.com/2008/...tiality-ok-as-long-as-the-animal-doesnt-mind/

I could talk about homosexuals/LGBTQ icons like HRC founder Terry Bean and former Seattle Mayor Ed Murray raping younger boys and the evidence to back those accusations, but I hope that you get my point Arthur.

You mean the very same and boringly predictable deflection 'go to's' when you're bereft of an argument on point? The same as you've utilized for the last six plus years?

You're being asked specifics in regards to senator Roy Moore and his reticence to take a lie detector test when it might actually have mattered. I told you exactly what I'd have done regardless of political office, wouldn't you have done the same?

:think:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
I wouldn't be fair to LGBTQ activist Arthur Brain if I didn't explain to him how evidence works.

When I say that most if not all major LGBTQ "pioneers" were either pedophiles/pederasts or supported the pedophile/pederast movement, I need to back that claim with "evidence"...

I'm neither an atheist or homosexual. I'm only an 'activist' in your deluded little world whereby not agreeing that homosexuals should be persecuted is tantamount to being one. Same ole' with you aCW. Projection at its lowest. Not a jot as to why someone accused of sexual assault would wait so long to 'tackle' the problem I notice?

Sorry Arthur, but you've set the new rules for evidence, see below.

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
I could talk about homosexuals/LGBTQ icons like HRC founder Terry Bean and former Seattle Mayor Ed Murray raping younger boys and the evidence to back those accusations, but I hope that you get my point Arthur...

You mean the very same and boringly predictable deflection 'go to's' when you're bereft of an argument on point? The same as you've utilized for the last six plus years?

You're being asked specifics in regards to senator Roy Moore and his reticence to take a lie detector test when it might actually have mattered. I told you exactly what I'd have done regardless of political office, wouldn't you have done the same?

:think:

I must say that I'm rather excited about your new rules for evidence. Not only can a person's life be scrutinized 40 years back (or more if necessary), but no evidence of wrong doing need be established. Heck, you've even taken it a step further and require that the accused take a polygraph to show that the baseless accusations have no merit.

How about we start off with you taking a polygraph and I'll write a list of questions that the polygraph examiner can ask?

http://cf.ltkcdn.net/addiction/images/std/113981-411x292-Polygraph.jpg

 

[aCultureWarrior]

I've been rather hesitant about posting Selwyn Duke's article entitled

"Misandry rises; in defense of men"

because there are so many Donald Trump supporting women haters out there (and let's not forget that Trump's former employer Hugh Hefner hated women so much that he used them as sex objects) that I'm concerned that they'll use the article as ammunition to continue their hatred towards women. (Homosexual males are some of the worst women haters out there. I think it stems from when mommy dressed them up like little girls, but that's just speculation on my part. Do an internet search for "Misogyny in the LGBT community/movement" for further evidence).

Being that the man-hating feminist movement is an integral part of the LGBTQueer movement, I'll share excerpts of Duke's article showing how insane these people have become.

Misandry rises: in defense of men

By Selwyn Duke
December 14, 2017

Don't vote for men!" is the message of a recent campaign ad. Issued by Dana Nessel, Democratic attorney general contender in Michigan, what she literally says is, "Who can you trust most not to show you their [sic] penis in a professional setting?"

She answers that it's the candidate who doesn't have one.

Now, a person could easily go tit for tat (not that I'd ever consider such a thing!). Noting how some voters, addressing politicians' pusillanimity, lament how we need leaders with "a pair," one could ask "Who can you trust most to have a pair?" and answer "The candidate who by definition has one."

But the anti-male bias animating Nessel has long been brewing. In 2004, Sweden's Left Party (yeah, that's its actual name) proposed a "Man Tax," a special levy on men designed to compensate society for the cost of male violence. I always answer that I'll be happy to pay my man tax – as long as I also get royalties for all of history's man-birthed inventions and innovations. I'll then use what's left over to self-fund a presidential run...

Of course, responding to Nessel's claim that sexual misconduct is a male domain, we could highlight the continual stories about female teachers having relations with young male students or the NYC juvenile-detention center where female guards were allegedly using the teen boy inmates as "sex slaves." And man-tax misandrists should note that women are actually more likely than men to initiate domestic violence...

Returning to anti-male insanity, years ago feminists in Sweden, Germany and Australia adopted a new cause – compelling men to sit down while urinating – and did succeed in getting the urinals removed from a Swedish elementary school. They claimed that the typical way men tend to a nature call is symbolic of, as Dr. Walter E. Williams related it, "triumphing in their masculinity." Of course, it's triumphant masculinity that created the whole modern world and that made arguments over urination technique possible. Because, yeah, men invented the flush toilet, too.

Speaking of which, that's precisely where feminism and equality dogma ought to be put.

Read more: http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/duke/171214

https://pics.me.me/feminist-picnic-falls-apart-after-no-one-makes-any-sandwiches-topics-19627226.png

 

[Arthur Brain]

I must say that I'm rather excited about your new rules for evidence. Not only can a person's life be scrutinized 40 years back (or more if necessary), but no evidence of wrong doing need be established. Heck, you've even taken it a step further and require that the accused take a polygraph to show that the baseless accusations have no merit.

Well, let's see. Apart from the allegations themselves there was Moore's interview with Hannity, about as convincing as a party election broadcast - so much so that even Hannity publicly called on Moore to address the allegations. Then there was his reputation at the local mall, Moore's own contradictions in regards to not knowing any of the women and then that he had etc. What you like to wave off as fabrication can be summed up by Moore's own faltering 'testimony'.

I don't 'require' Moore to have done anything. What he should have done if innocent is take the test as that would have been the prudent thing to do. He's in politics - the public arena and under constant scrutiny. Even Janet Porter admitted he should have taken one when asked why it had taken Moore over a month after the allegations were made to finally get one. To be fair, Moore had the most laughably inept "support team" as someone should have been telling Moore to get one at the time but as his spokespeople seemed to have a risible understanding of basic law even (not having to swear on the bible to enter public office etc) it's not surprising he wasn't exactly getting 'optimum advice'...

Chances are there was an arrogant complacency that Alabama was a safe bet for a Republican no matter what. Moore probably thought he could wing it and win regardless but not to be.

How about we start off with you taking a polygraph and I'll write a list of questions that the polygraph examiner can ask?

Eh, I can just imagine the kind of questions you'd like to ask and you'd be sorely disappointed with the results dude.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I must say that I'm rather excited about your new rules for evidence. Not only can a person's life be scrutinized 40 years back (or more if necessary), but no evidence of wrong doing need be established. Heck, you've even taken it a step further and require that the accused take a polygraph to show that the baseless accusations have no merit.

Well, let's see. Apart from the allegations themselves

Which as shown in my previous posts were lies, lies that you haven't attempted to defend.

...there was Moore's interview with Hannity, about as convincing as a party election broadcast - so much so that even Hannity publicly called on Moore to address the allegations.

So Judge Moore didn't interview well when LGBTQ fag...ahem...flag waving Faux News told one of their puppets to grill him.

Hardly evidence.

Then there was his reputation at the local mall,

Pay attention Art: that lie was refuted in an earlier post as well.

Moore's own contradictions in regards to not knowing any of the women and then that he had

Confirmed that he didn't know any of the lying pro Clinton/Biden/Jones women when the polygraph test was taken.

etc.

One of my favorite "etc's." is the forgery of Judge Moore's name in a high school yearbook and how the accuser later said that she wrote in the yearbook so that she could remember who wrote in it.

Why do you think Beverly Nelson Young's pimpette Gloria Allred refused to let handwriting experts analyze the hand writing before the election?

Can we talk about that "etc." Arthur?

I don't 'require' Moore to have done anything...

A job awaits you at the Washington Post Arthur as I'm quite certain that there is always room for a LGBTQ flag waver who will lie about good descent people at the WAPO.

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
How about we start off with you taking a polygraph and I'll write a list of questions that the polygraph examiner can ask?

Eh, I can just imagine the kind of questions you'd like to ask and you'd be sorely disappointed with the results dude.

Why use a polygraph machine when the evidence has already been established in the 4 prior threads?

 

[Arthur Brain]

Which as shown in my previous posts were lies, lies that you haven't attempted to defend.

You didn't show any such thing. You don't get to wave things away just because you've convinced yourself doofus.

So Judge Moore didn't interview well when LGBTQ fag...ahem...flag waving Faux News told one of their puppets to grill him.

He dropped himself in it and he was hardly being "grilled". Have you even seen the interview?

Hardly evidence.

More than enough to raise a fair few eyebrows and question marks, which is what happened.

Pay attention Art: that lie was refuted in an earlier post as well.

No, it wasn't.

Confirmed that he didn't know any of the lying pro Clinton/Biden/Jones women when the polygraph test was taken.

Oh, you silly, pompous, gullible clown...

One of my favorite "etc's." is the forgery of Judge Moore's name in a high school yearbook and how the accuser later said that she wrote in the yearbook so that she could remember who wrote in it.

Why do you think Beverly Nelson Young's pimpette Gloria Allred refused to let handwriting experts analyze the hand writing before the election?

Can we talk about that "etc." Arthur?

When you get around to addressing other things perhaps. As before, if anyone has lied about Moore then they should be prosecuted.

A job awaits you at the Washington Post Arthur as I'm quite certain that there is always room for a LGBTQ flag waver who will lie about good descent people at the WAPO.

He's either guilty or innocent. As his own spokesperson Janet Porter conceded, he should have taken a polygraph at the time instead of a month later. If he had nothing to hide he could have proven his innocence while he was still in the political race. Under the public gaze and scrutiny it was the only sensible way to go and yet he didn't and his support team didn't push for him to do it either. Why? If he had and he was innocent he might be senator now, but he didn't and he isn't.

Why use a polygraph machine when the evidence has already been established in the 4 prior threads?

What on earth "evidence" would that be? Surely you're not implying any sort of lying sleaze or innuendo about people are you? That would hardly tie in with conservative Christian values...

:think:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Let's hope that LGBTQ flag wavers who insisted that Judge Roy Moore take a polygraph insist the same of his accusers (aCW checks a calendar for when Hell will be freezing over).

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017...uit_claiming_that_he_h-m-24_1514481109774.jpg