Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
I saw the conversation at the time and you're squirming out of answering. Why are you claiming the term you were using ended in 'h' when it actually ends in 'g'? It's a vulgar and pathetic term but adding 'ing' to it would make no sense so why were you so reticent to not type it out in full and write what could only reasonably be construed as obvious implied profanity? Got no answer?

Since Art can't defend the decriminalization of homosexuality and the jack booted thug agenda that goes with it he does what he does best:

drama.

(Why watch soap operas on tv when you can come to the WHMBR! thread to see the queen of drama queens perform?).
 

Christian Liberty

Well-known member
Since Art can't defend the decriminalization of homosexuality and the jack booted thug agenda that goes with it he does what he does best:

drama.

(Why watch soap operas on tv when you can come to the WHMBR! thread to see the queen of drama queens perform?).

Says the guy who wants to criminalize drugs.

And yeah, I'd get on Art if he said similar things about you. You are both state-worshippers who don't believe the gospel of Christ. I think its hillarious how you both go back and forth about calling each other authoritarians. You're both right but its so like the pot calling the kettle back.

(To be fair, Art is generally a little more respectful about his support for jack-booted thugs.)
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
I'm going to nominate myself for "most libertarian." Anyone want to challenge me on that?;)

You're the winner of the "Disclaimer Award" Jr.. I haven't got around to creating the award post yet, but it's clear in my mind that you're more than worthy of it.

Meshak isn't really an anarchist, she's just anti-political. Genuine anarchists are downright opposed to the State as an institution. Meshak just thinks Christians should ignore it.

...and let evil prevail. What would you call someone like meshak Jr.?

Here, let me answer that question for you, Art Brain, GFR7, annadennetti, Rusha, alwight the atheist, the barbarian, Traci and all of the secular humanists and atheists that have posted in this 3 part thread:

"An ally".

I'm more anarchist than she is.

Hardly. The Libertarian movement is not only an ideology, it's a political movement.
 

Christian Liberty

Well-known member
You're the winner of the "Disclaimer Award" Jr.. I haven't got around to creating the award post yet, but it's clear in my mind that you're more than worthy of it.

Probably. I'm not sure the average person here is smart enough to understand me without them.
...and let evil prevail. What would you call someone like meshak Jr.?

Here, let me answer that question for you, Art Brain, GFR7, annadennetti, Rusha, alwight the atheist, the barbarian, Traci and all of the secular humanists and atheists that have posted in this 3 part thread:

"An ally".

Funny, the only person on that list that is close to me ideologically, as far as I can tell, is GFR7. The rest are either indifferent to me or downright opposed to me.

Hardly. The Libertarian movement is not only an ideology, it's a political movement.

Rothbard was the original ancap and yet he supported political involvement. I don't think the two are necessarily contradictory, though there are good people that disagree with me.
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Says the guy who wants to criminalize drugs.

And yeah, I'd get on Art if he said similar things about you. You are both state-worshippers who don't believe the gospel of Christ. I think its hillarious how you both go back and forth about calling each other authoritarians. You're both right but its so like the pot calling the kettle back.

(To be fair, Art is generally a little more respectful about his support for jack-booted thugs.)

Now that you've said your piece Jr., I believe Ron Paul is having a special on crack cocaine tonight down at his compound in Texas (i.e. you can leave now).

ron-paul-2012-battaile-politics-1353020158.gif
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Granted, it was a given that anna was the type of woman that just loves to hang around male homosexuals (they exchange dresses and talk about hairstyles, etc.)?

The idea that you spent even two seconds thinking about what I do really creeps me out.

Yet you're not creeped out by unnatural (and immoral) disease-ridden behaviors. Interesting.


Quote:
(I've seen a picture of Art, and he definitely doesn't have the Tony Orlando look going on...but he is without a doubt TOL's...

Queen of Denial).

It must be so frustrating to you, knowing that no matter what inanity you come up with you're just one post away from another one, and another and another.

You're trapped forever in the WHMBR crazy maze, with no way out. (That's a good thing for the rest of us.)

It must be terribly frustrating for you anna that you can't refute my OP.

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3921996&postcount=1

Care to have a shot at it?
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Since Art can't defend the decriminalization of homosexuality and the jack booted thug agenda that goes with it he does what he does best:

drama.

(Why watch soap operas on tv when you can come to the WHMBR! thread to see the queen of drama queens perform?).

Um, no, I asked you to explain just why you said you'd used a term apparently ending in 'h' when it would actually end in 'g' and as pathetic as it would be to use such to anna how adding 'ing' to it would make any sense. After all, you made a big drama of my own infraction for...'potty mouthed' behaviour with such a big deal and yet you can't defend your own?

Drama queen indeed Connie, and then some...
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Says the guy who wants to criminalize drugs.

And yeah, I'd get on Art if he said similar things about you. You are both state-worshippers who don't believe the gospel of Christ. I think its hillarious how you both go back and forth about calling each other authoritarians. You're both right but its so like the pot calling the kettle back.

(To be fair, Art is generally a little more respectful about his support for jack-booted thugs.)

Er, aCW is about as authoritative as a pina colada, so you really wanna buy a clue as I 'worship' the state as much as the above. I call aCW out on being the crank that he is and that's it.
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
I AM A RACIST GAY MAN ! I AM the winner of the "Disclaimer Award" Jr.. I haven't got around to creating the award post yet, but it's clear in my mind that I AM more than worthy of poop. I HATE EVERYBODY. Especially those closest to me. I NEED HELP, I can't break away from the demons that control me. I HATE MYSELF, SO I CAN'T LOVE ANYONE !!!!!!!! EVIL AND HATE DOMINATE MY EVERY THOUGHT. AND GAY MEN. AND CRACK. I LIVE OFF FOOD STAMPS AND OBAMA. I AM A CULTUREWARRIOR, FIGHTING TO GO BACK TO MEDIEVIL TIMES. WHEN GAY PEOPLE WERE KILLED AN JAILED.



...and let evil prevail. What would you call someone like meshak Jr.?

Here, let me answer that question for you, Art Brain, GFR7, annadennetti, Rusha, alwight the atheist, the barbarian, Traci and all of the secular humanists and atheists that have posted in this 3 part thread:

"An ally".

JAIL GAY PEOPLE. THAT'S MY PLAN. PART 9

Hardly. The Libertarian movement is not only an ideology, it's a political movement.
 

Jedidiah

New member
..."We know that the law is good if one uses it properly."
1 Timothy 1:8

Let's start using it properly people and put an end to this insanity.
1 Corinthians 6:18 -- Flee fornication: Euery sinne that a man doeth, is without the body: but he that committeth fornication, sinneth against his owne body.

The Bible says that fornication (KJV, from Greek root PORN, means any kind of sexual immorality) is sin only against our own bodies. We aren't sinning against our neighbors, in other words, but only against ourselves.

Seatbelt laws and helmet laws are not burdensome. The penalty for noncompliance is light. What are some ideas on laws that would be equally as not-burdensome, and still be effective ?
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
..."We know that the law is good if one uses it properly."
1 Timothy 1:8

Let's start using it properly people and put an end to this insanity.

1 Corinthians 6:18 -- Flee fornication: Euery sinne that a man doeth, is without the body: but he that committeth fornication, sinneth against his owne body.

The Bible says that fornication (KJV, from Greek root PORN, means any kind of sexual immorality) is sin only against our own bodies. We aren't sinning against our neighbors, in other words, but only against ourselves.

Welcome to the politics forum of TOL Jed (i.e government: one of 3 institutions that God ordained for the governance of man).

Seatbelt laws and helmet laws are not burdensome. The penalty for noncompliance is light. What are some ideas on laws that would be equally as not-burdensome, and still be effective ?

While I have ridden in a vehicle without a seatbelt, and rode a bike without a helmet, not once did it cross my mind that what I was doing was akin to committing an act of sodomy with someone of my own gender.

Nice try though Jed.
 

Christian Liberty

Well-known member
1 Corinthians 6:18 -- Flee fornication: Euery sinne that a man doeth, is without the body: but he that committeth fornication, sinneth against his owne body.

The Bible says that fornication (KJV, from Greek root PORN, means any kind of sexual immorality) is sin only against our own bodies. We aren't sinning against our neighbors, in other words, but only against ourselves.

Seatbelt laws and helmet laws are not burdensome. The penalty for noncompliance is light. What are some ideas on laws that would be equally as not-burdensome, and still be effective ?

So we only steal a little bit of your money for absolutely no good reason whatsoever, simply because somebody decided to take a risk with their own body. Not even for doing anything immoral mind you, but simply for deciding to do something the government arbitrary decides is "safe."

BTW: guys, this is why I said women shouldn't be able to vote. Women are more inclined to be emotional about this stuff (clarification: I am just making this as a general side point. I'm not trying to imply that you are a woman.)

Making something "illegal" even without any punishment will convince the stupidest members of society not to do a given thing. But using that method encourages an idolatry of State and thus should not even be considered.

When Paul says "the law is a teacher" he is clearly referring to the Mosaic Law, not made up laws by men. For those who think the Mosaic Law is actually supposed to be applied today, I can understand why they would think that refers to legislation that should be enforced by men, though I would disagree. But for everyone else, its talking about MORAL laws, made by and enforced by God, not man-made penalties.

To me the really weird thing is people that support "punishing" homosexuality with a punishment less than death. Doubly so those who aren't against the death penalty on principle.

Either you believe, like me, that the Mosaic Penal Law on this point is not longer in force and therefore that God does not command any penalty, or you believe that the Mosaic Law is in force in which case the death penalty should be used. Prisons aren't a Biblical form of punishment. Nor "mandatory counseling."

aCW will probably respond to this with some rambling about "2,000 years of Christian tradition." Which is a really Catholic thing to say, and thus odd for a Protestant. They told Luther 1,500 years of Christian tradition disagreed with him. But so what?


CW - what's up with post 4590 ? i can't believe you said all that ! terrible :devil:

lol! I think we should probably leave people's words alone instead of editing them, even if the person is vile:)


Er, aCW is about as authoritative as a pina colada, so you really wanna buy a clue as I 'worship' the state as much as the above. I call aCW out on being the crank that he is and that's it.

"authoritarian" not "authoritative."

Jedidiah gave a clue above. Liberals scream bloody murder at the thought of regulating their pet sins like homosexuality, yet they are perfectly OK with regulating activities that aren't even immoral. Things like seatbelt laws, laws regarding guns, anti-gambling legislation, laws against "speeding", "minimum wage" legislation, etc. (this is nowhere near an exhaustive list.) You may not want the State to solve the particular problem of homosexuality, but you still look to leviathan to solve your problems.

You are a nicer person than aCW. By far. I'll give you that much. But after awhile, nicely telling people you want to control them, doubly so when the reasoning is autonomous, isn't good enough. You are both more similar than you would dare admit. And people like me terrify you both, because we attack your sacred idols at the root.
 

Christian Liberty

Well-known member
While I have ridden in a vehicle without a seatbelt, and rode a bike without a helmet, not once did it cross my mind that what I was doing was akin to committing an act of sodomy with someone of my own gender.

Nice try though Jed.

Did you enforce those laws when you were a pig? Even though they were doing something you've done yourself and that you realize isn't immoral?

What did that have to do with "punishing evil and rewarding good?"
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Memory-Lane--825x510.png


For those of you that have been following this 3 part thread, you know that in early January of the past two years I handed out awards to those who proudly and unapologetically defend evil. Since they refuse to listen to reason and they're not someplace where they can get the help that they so desperately need (a mental institution or jail), what else is there to do but mock them?

Here are links to the past two years winners of these prestigious awards.

For 2012:
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3314243&postcount=4267

and for 2013:
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3740981&postcount=4027

Before I get to the top 5 lunatic posts of 2014, I wanted to give honorable mention to a couple of homosexualists.

He's a Libertarian through and through and has made statements in regards to his pro abortion stance like: "How do you murder something that hasn't been born yet?"
He's a defender of all things indecent, and compares the act of homosexuality to that of eating bacon and sugar (he points out that bacon and sugar are bad for you, but evidently putting the harmful chemicals in his lungs from all of the dope he smokes isn't).

This years "Best use of one live brain cell" award goes to shagster01, aka "The Doper".

My wife is a dietician. Are you fine with legally being required to eat what she tells you to because she knows what is best for you? No more bacon or sugar as those lead to disease and bring nothing but misery and death to those who eat it.

Or is it only you allowed to control others "health"?
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4172140&postcount=4525

The next honorable mention goes to that feisty Eyetalian brunette with beautiful brown eyes (that turn fiery red when she's mad), who called me a LIAR! LIAR! LIAR! 3,027 times in one post (ok, it wasn't that many times, but it seemed like it).

The "LIAR! LIAR! PANTS ON FIRE!" award goes to none other than anna denetebbi:

...I told you that you were a liar, and that everyone could see that but you...

You're a liar. You lie all the time, and you don't own up to it. If I gave you the benefit of the doubt, it would be that you're so consumed by your own hatred and obsession that you really can't see that you're lying...

The destruction of truth is merely collateral damage to you. You've lied (or used innuendo to accomplish...

you lied about me sending you a "very HATEFUL note" because I didn't send you a note, and telling you that you're a liar isn't being hateful.

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4165978&postcount=4493

(I feelz the love, and that's no...ahem...lie).

Back later with the top 5 homosexualists and their posts from 2014 in the "Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 3 thread brought to you exclusively on TheologyOnline.com.
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
And now onto the top 5 homosexualists and some of their posts from 2014.

5. He's a two time awardee in previous years: The first year for adamantly comparing cigarette smoking with homosexuality (he shut up when I told him that those who engage in homosexual behavior disproportionately smoke) and last year for his indoctrination of children:

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior:

The "Honey, we need to screen our babysitter better" award goes to Art Brain (you've all come to know and looooathe him as "Auntie Art"), who when asked what he would say if two children (who he was scheduled to baby sit on New Year's Eve) who asked him about homosexual relationships, responded with:

... If they saw that bizarre clip,or anything similar, they wouldn't even ask that, and even if they did and were persistent I'd say what's important is that people love each other and treat their partner and children with love and respect.

He's a drama queen to the bone and a denier of truth, be it about reparative therapy for sexually confused children, the fact that Adolf Hitler and his barbaric SS were homosexuals, or as seen here, denying that homosexuality is a disease ridden, child molesting 'deathstyle':

This years "Queen of Denial" award goes to Art Brain:

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Obviously showing that homosexuality is an absolutely filthy, disease ridden behavior which has an agenda that involves the physical, mental and spiritual molestation of innocent children hasn't helped you change your mind on the subject Art.

Personal soap boxes and lugubrious cut and pastes from 'blogs', along with misinformation from said does not a convincing argument make. What two consenting adults do behind closed doors, be they gay or straight is none of your business. Your paranoid delusions about some global gay agenda are the stuff of manic conspiracy theorists...
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3967128&postcount=616

4. The next sexual anarchist is another return awardee who doesn't have a lot to say, but when he does, he speaks pure perversion. He's not only a defender of homosexuality, but incest as well (which will be the next perversion legalized by the sexual anarchist movement):

The winner of "The family that...ahem..." award goes to the barbarian:

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
By the way, are you still for the legalization of incest?

I still don't see a compelling public interest in banning incest between adults...
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4156574&postcount=4204

3. When you look up the word "straight jacket" in the dictionary you'll see a picture of this Libertarian nutcase next to it (imagine Daddy Paul about 150 years younger and you'll have a picture of Christian Liberty).
ron+paul+straight+jacket.jpg


He's the alleged son of a Christian pastor, who at age 20 finally packed up his Barbie dolls and left home to live in a college dorm (rumor has it that Jr. had to find a surrogate mommy to tuck him in at night) and his knowledge of Holy Scripture leads him to believe that any consensual acts done between adults is acceptable (it's that Libertarian "victimless crime" thing).
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3641503&postcount=5

I spent a good portion of Part 2's thread dealing with Jr. and his pro homosexual, pro abortion, pro recreational drug, pro prostitution, pro pornography (kiddy porn included) Libertarian movement, as I wanted to show people what they'll be getting if they vote for someone like Libertarian (pretend republican) Rand Paul.

While the Jr. Libertarian does openly support the things that the God-HATING Libertarian movement wants to remain legal or legalize, he's known for always throwing a disclaimer into his sick posts, as if mommy and daddy were monitoring him.

This years "Disclaimer"award goes to Christian Liberty, aka the Jr. Libertarian, who as seen in this post defends perverts exposing themselves to children at gay pride parades.

As disgusting as it is, no I don't think exposing one's genitals in the presence of children is just cause to lock them up, as immoral as it is. It isn't actually a physical threat.
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3934830&postcount=231

2. What can you say about the next homosexualist other than "He tries SO hard!" to make himself look like a moderate (or even a conservative), yet his posts throughout Part 3's thread reveal the truth about him. While I have the utmost sympathy for him because he was victimized as a child (as seen in Part 3's most important post), I can't help but mock him because he's tried every angle that there is showing why homosexuality shouldn't be recriminalized (his latest ploy is that homosexuality should be recriminalized, but that it's not practical).

This years "He tries SO hard!" award goes to GFR7, shown here in one of his earlier posts where he talks about the homosexual agenda being a passing fad like the disco era and if recriminalized, there would be "door to door searches" (a typical scaremongering tactic) :

Yes, you are right but at this point I would love to see the movement reach it's apex and reversal and just collapse - it is possible, as with the hippie movement and the disco era - door to door searches to see who is/is not engaging in gay sex after all this SCOTUS and federal backing just sounds surreal
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3969394&postcount=655

And now...

1. Since GFR7 started posting, the following homosexualist rarely shows his face on TOL anymore...hmmmm, it must be a coincidence (he'll stop by the thread on occasion to see if I said anything that could be construed as a policy violation, hoping that the truth about this disease ridden behavior and the jack booted thug-child molesting agenda that goes with it can be suppressed).

He was the winner of last years top award and is more than worthy of this years award which I've named:

The "Captain Obvious" award, because after my opening post where I talked about how the LGBTQueer movement infiltrated our society's invaluable institutions; how the LGBTQueer movement indoctrinates children; how the LGBTQueer movement is violent and intolerant and how disease ridden and deadly homosexual behavior really is, he replied with these words:

1). aCW lies about me twice in post #4...

2). aCW calls me a "moderate Libertarian"...
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3922003&postcount=3

(Talk about a smokescreen. Is this guy obvious or what?).

Since I don't expect the above sexual anarchists to change their ways anytime soon, let's all give them a big round of applause for all of the misery and death that they've helped bring to our once great Christian nation.

joker-golf-clap.gif
 

TracerBullet

New member
If by "acting on" you mean acts of force against whatever group you don't like, we of course agree.

On the other hand, if it means only passive non-association, that should be completely legal. I am not sure why you care so much about the current laws. The US government isn't a moral authority.

voting to limit the rights of a minority is acting on it. Supporting bullying and name calling even though inaction on your part is acting on it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top