December 22, 2011
-
Perversion on TV
Yesterday I saw something disgusting on TV. ABC news was on and as I was passing through the room they suddenly showed two women making out. It was the most disgusting thing I had ever seen on TV. Of course my dad changed the channel immediately but it was too late, the image was already burned into my mind.
Since when did it become acceptable to show that kind of sickness on TV? Where is the FCC? Who said they could show that on TV? What if someone had their children with them while they were watching the news? It just goes to show how vile and perverted our culture has become. Actually, it is not our culture, it is the culture of the media.
I also wanted to know why something like that was even considered newsworthy, because without taking agenda into account it seemed entirely random. However, it is not random. The media jackals are self appointed social engineers. They are pushing both a cultural and a political agenda. The reason they probably chose that particular gay couple is becuase the way they made out was somewhat reminiscent of an old yet famous picture taken at the end of WWII:
I do not know the exact circumstances behind that picture, but basically WWII was over and the soldiers were happy to be home and glad that the war was over. They were ready to pursue tranquil domestic lives, and get married and have children. That is where the “Baby Boom” generation comes from. People celebrated the war in different ways, and obviously this soldier was glad to be back home, and this photo was considered significant and newsworthy. So what sort of message is the liberal media trying to convey with the lesbian make-out scene? Where are they going and where are they trying to take us?
It is disgusting. Have things decayed so far that we can no longer even let our children watch the news?
In general I do not understand the left wing obsession with homosexuality, and why they are always rubbing it in our faces. They are not fascinated with every form of sexual sickness or they would be showing us incest and beastiality. I believe that they are anti-family, anti-Christian, and anti-reproduction. Not only does homosexuality violate the laws of God and nature, but it also produces no children, and it mocks the institution of marriage and family. Of course, perhaps if we give them enough time they will give attention to the woman who likes doing it with horses.
Comments (16)
Luckily, it seems no one’s reading your insane dreck.
http://john-q-normal.xanga.com/758253896/item/?nextdate=1524139020&direction=n#1524139020
^ That’s a brilliant entry. ENJOY!
@Hi_Nutty_Fuckwad - The fact that you think that entry is brilliant says a lot about you.
Of course it does! It says that I appreciate lesbian sex, which is the most awesome thing on the planet (second only to blowjobs).
It also means that I’m a tolerant person, without any intentions of thwarting in any way other people’s desires and urges.
Sex is fun, awesome, and most of all NATURAL, you fucking retard.
Like the entry said, since you’re over 30 now, and apparently you only want a virgin, you’re OBVIOUSLY going to HAVE TO look for women much younger than yourself. The lowest legal age is 18, so you’d better start there. Good luck finding an 18 year old that’s a virgin AND intellectually stimulating and mature enough for you. On top of that, it must be someone that doesn’t see anything wrong with a guy over 30 wanting EXCLUSIVELY a virgin.
I’d easily bet all the money I have in the bank that you don’t find anyone that fits that criteria, marry her, and your marriage lasts more than 3 years. The likelihood of that happening is probably very close to zero. If you don’t realize how fucked up your head is, then nothing I say (or anyone for that matter) will help. You’re a hopeless case.
Later, doofus!
@You’re_a_Nutjob - First of all, you’re a coward for not posting under your actual username. Still, I can probably guess who you are, H loves C/In Reason I Trust. A great misnomer that one is.
Second, homosexuality is perverted, wrong, and fruitless. I can’t help it if your tastes are twisted, but you should realize that if all women were lesbians you wouldn’t be getting any action, assuming you are right now anyways, and humanity would go extinct as there would be no new children born.
Sex is natural and fun I’m sure, but it is intended for marriage. If you have sex now the quality of your marriage will certainly be reduced. Also, you are opening yourself to the risk of contracting STD’s, but maybe you already have some and are eager to spread them.
How would marrying a younger person be a bad thing? That would mean more sex and longer child bearing years after marriage. Also, I’m not really looking outside my religion, and there is nothing wrong with my preferences from a Biblical perspective. Why do you care anyways?
It is your views and expectations on marriage and relationships which are backwards. You have lived in evil and filth for so long that it is all you can see. In any case, the problems of divorce, marital infidelity, and limited quality are easily circumvented by looking into other cultures. My preference is towards Indian women, and there is an abundant supply of Indian women who are highly religious, sexually pure, and physically attractive.
Yes, later. Next time come by with your real username, and we will have some real fun.
@You’re_a_Nutjob - Oh and one more thing. How much money is in your bank?
When I “look to other cultures,” I see a lot of women being treated as property. A woman who is raped is forced to marry the rapist, because she isn’t “sexually pure” enough to marry anyone else. That’s not fair, and it’s not the way we do things here.
This is a country where freedom of religion is of paramount importance (it’s the first amendment to the Constitution). That means that other people don’t have to believe in the same god as you. They don’t have to attend your church, and they don’t have to follow your god’s rules. That means that they can be lesbian if they want to.
Please stop treating gays and lesbians disrespectfully. I’d be proud to have my kids see same-sex romance. It would teach them that there are many ways of life, and that it’s ok for people who mind their own business and don’t hurt anyone to be different from themselves.
Please do not insult people. If you say sex spreads STDs, that is meaningful. But when you accuse people of wanting to spread STDs, that is mean for no good reason, and false. No one here wants to spread STDs. I don’t see why it matters how much money people have in the bank. That has nothing to do with the quality of their argument.
I hope you’d also be happy to bag groceries for a woman, or serve her in a restaurant. We’re all equals here. Anyone can bag groceries for anyone.
Above all else, please look to the world with curiosity. Don’t decide the answer before you study something. The best-informed answers take evidence from the world into account. Don’t be afraid to change your mind. That is strength, not weakness. Admitting an old belief was wrong is difficult. Remember that not every change is an improvement, but every improvement is a change. Each person has many beliefs, and the chance that every single one of them is correct is very very small. But, just like children who believes in fairies and then change their minds, you can only become less wrong by changing your mind.
@wobster109 - I don’t think you understood, my comments to that guy were specific to him, not general. You have to understand, this character has been trolling my page for years. His original username was H loves C, but then he changed it to “In Reason I Trust” because he thought he was making a clever pun. But I think it also has to do with his girlfriend dumping him. He resurfaces from time to time to troll my page, and in the meantime he talks about me all over xanga but blocks me on his own page. Now, I don’t mind too much when he comes to my page because he is easy to swat, and I find him humorous, but I also do not feel obligated to show him mercy or respect. Most people who engage in devious and/or irresponsible sexual practices probably do not want to contract STD’s, or deliberatly try to share them, but there are some people who are like that and I wouldn’t be surprised if this guy was one of them. He definitely has a desire to destroy and tear down things that are good and pure.
The comments about the bank account were intended for him, because he said he would give me all the money in his bank account if I could succesfully marry someone who met my criterion. I was just trying to collect.
I would not be happy to bag groceries for anyone. I have been through college twice but have still had to work service industry jobs because of what your guy Obama did to the economy, and I would like to work in the service industry again about as much as I would like to be executed slowly by Muslims.
As for your comments, I think you have made a serious error in assuming that liberalism (and probably atheism as well) are the pinnacle of enlightenment. What is your objective basis for calling anything right or wrong?
Change is a good thing if it goes in a good direction, but there is nothing good about liberalism. Liberalism is what is destroying our culture and economy. It is the primary cause of white decline as well.
I’m not saying that there should be laws making homosexuality illegal, but I don’t want to see images of it on TV, whether it’s the news or a TV series I’m following. Just like how I don’t want to randomly see a porn scene, or someone doing something with an animal, etc. At the very least there should be a warning on explicit content. Homosexuality used to be properly considered a mental disorder. There is no sane or logical reason for depicting a deviant fringe behavior as mainstream, except to push a particular social agenda. Today it’s homosexuality, tomorrow it’s animals and children.
@wobster109 - Anything that’s questionable and/or explicit ought to be optional, and by optional I don’t mean turning on your TV vs. perpetually leaving it off. I mean it should be unlockable content, child protected, or something that you have to pay for separately. Know what I mean?
No, I don’t entirely understand. They weren’t having sex, just kissing. That’s not porn. I think it’s unfair to censor homosexual kissing but still have other kissing be ok. It’s as unfair as censoring, for example, Hispanic people kissing, but having French people kissing be ok.
There’s a great big difference between homosexuality and having sex with children. The first thing is that children are often too young to understand, and so they can’t give informed consent. Also, they might be injured in the process. Consenting homosexuals injure no one.
I think there is a great deal good about being liberal in general. That means controlling people as little as possible, and letting them decide for themselves what they consider pure and good, so long as they do not injure anyone else.
I’m proud that homosexuality was taken off the mental disorders list. It
should never have been there. A “mental disorder” is something that
disables a person, and being homosexual doesn’t do that.
Ok, the bank comment makes more sense now. I’m curious to see how that plays out. I apologize for attacking that without understanding the circumstances.
In my best estimate, In Reason I Trust has always posted thoughtfully, and would not want to intentionally spread STDs. He doesn’t seem like a mean person, to me.
It is not atheism that I see as the pinnacle of enlightenment, but rather science. I call something right if it can make predictions about the world that turn out to be right. For example, if the doctor says beforehand, “patients who take this medicine will get well faster than patients who don’t”, and then we measure how long it took them to get well, and it was true, then I’d say the doctor was right. If Copernicus says “Earth moves around the sun”, but the church says “everything moves around the Earth”, and they each use their theories to predict where Jupiter will be, then afterwards we see where Jupiter really is. And if Jupiter is where Copernicus said but not where the church said, then I’d say Copernicus was right and the church was wrong. And if Jupiter is not where either one said, I’d say they were both wrong.
This is important because if we believe wrong things, then we wouldn’t be able to send spaceships where we want them to go. The Voyager 2 probe reached Uranus within a second (one single second!) of the predicted time, 8 and a half years after it left Earth. If we assumed the Earth was the center of the solar system, it would never have worked. Because the prediction was so accurate (within one second, after a journey of almost 10 years!) that means the scientists’ beliefs about physics and the solar system are very likely right.
That is also one of the reasons I think science is the pinnacle of enlightenment, because it lets us do great things. Galileo and other early astronomers said something that the church did not like, and the church tried very hard to silence them. They looked at the world and said, “this is what looks true”, and they did not limit what they said to what was safe to say. Because of that, humans can now send spaceships away from Earth, out of the solar system. That’s a very great thing we’ve done.
It is science, not religion, that made us a vaccine for measles, so that children today don’t have to suffer the way children in the past had to suffer. It is science, not religion, that eradicated smallpox. It is science that made us pacemakers, so that people who once had to die can now live.
Science is Enlightenment because it has effects, real effects, upon the world. It takes the world and changes it to make it friendlier to humans, so that humans can live longer and healthier lives than before. It is science that tries to be as right as it can. Each time we do an experiment, we are looking for an answer. We aren’t trying to prove we’re right. We don’t decide the answer beforehand. Whatever the experiment says, that is what we believe, because if what we believe does not match the way the world behaves, then we can’t use our knowledge to change things like measles and smallpox. If we continued to believe that demons caused illness, medicine would never have progressed.
@wobster109 - It’s deviant behavior and it’s wrong. Comparing homosexuality, which is a lifestyle choice, to race is jacked up. I don’t understand why liberals are always doing that. A man and a woman is still natural, even if it crosses racial lines, but a man and a man or a woman and a woman is not natural. It is a twisting of the natural order of things, just like having sexual relations with animals. Not having properly functioning sexuality IS a disability. Taking a disorder like that and saying it’s not a disorder doesn’t suddenly mean that it’s proper. It’s still pretty backwards, and I shouldn’t have to see it while changing channels. Some children are pretty kinky, I wouldn’t assume that the child is not consenting in all cases, and in any case the same people who are advocating homosexuality are also advocating abortion. What consent does the unborn baby give before he gets sucked down the blender?
Science is good, but I see liberals far too often associating science with atheism. Believing that everything came from nothing completely on it’s own is not scientifict, in fact it is counter-intuitive anti-science. A lot of good innovations have come from science, but science cannot function properly in the long term when people have a skewed and inaccurate worldview. Look at how backwards the Middle East has become because of Islam. Most of the worlds earliest civilizations were in the Middle East and North Africa, but if you look at it now the average IQ is 80, which is getting close to retarded. Not a single innovation has come from there. Similarly, atheism has done nothing to help science in the western world. For example, when my mom was in high school they were saying the age of the earth was in millions, when I was in high school it was about 3 billion or so. Now they are saying 4.8 billion, and when I was in my early 20′s it was 4.3. That is a huge margin of error which would NEVER be accepted in any field of operational science (which is real science).
Here is another example. Back in the days of my parents a lot of people had their appendix removed along with their tonsils. Why? Because the current level of medical science had been unable to determine the function of the appendix, and since they were evolutionists they made predictions based upon that which led them to conclude that the appendix was a vestigial organ. But now it turns out that the appendix is part of the lymph system AND the digestive system. If you lose it then you can survive, but your other organs have to do more work which means a shorter lifespan for you.
In the last few years we have seen the US crumble massively. Our military has been weakened, and our space program has been destroyed almost completely.
As for your comments about “science” and “religion.” True science and true religion should never contradict, because truth is truth. End of story. If one person looks at my dog and sees that he’s brown, and another has a vision from God that shows him my dog is brown, then they are both right and both true. Regarding the Catholic Church and Copernicus: You have to keep in mind that during Roman times the Ptolomaic worldview was the accepted view among the majority of scientists. When the Empire collapsed the Catholic church attempted to provide political and scientific stability to Europe, as well as spiritual leadership. They were trying to fill 3 roles at once. The Catholic church carried on the Ptolomaic worldview after the Empire collapsed, and they had their own educational system and observatories. They didn’t like anyone else encroaching on what they saw as their territory. Now personally, I don’t believe in the authority of the Catholic church, and I don’t care for a lot of what they did during the middle ages. They were brutal, manipulative, and theologically flawed on many levels, but they did preserve a lot of scientific, historical, and literary documents which otherwise would have been lost.
I don’t think that science is enough to have a properly functioning worldview. For example, during WWII the Germans and Japanese were very scientific, methodical, and efficient, but they had no objective source of morality, so they applied their knowledge and abilities with no thought for anyone but themselves, and everyone else suffered as a result.
@wobster109 - Also, if you think H loves C is intelligent listen to the last debate I had with him spoken, and see if he still sounds intelligent to you. I didn’t change any of his words, just copied and pasted, and the program provided the voices: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptdFyC6aha0&context=C345dd38ADOEgsToPDskJWXu_tOdAp08XXoYDFvKDS
On the contrary. A fundamental principle of science is that it never invokes the supernatural. Anything supernatural is not an answer. So I don’t say that science promotes atheism, but I do say that science is fundamentally non-theist. If science assumed a god, then it’d think it had an answer, and it wouldn’t look anymore.
I think it’s unfair to say that the Germans were atheists. Hitler targeted the Jews. That’s a religious group. He had a religious reason for targeting a religious group. And the Japanese are perfectly fine, friendly people today.
Just because Hitler did something doesn’t make it automatically wrong. Hitler ate food, and eating food is not wrong. Hitler believed that people should wear clothes in public. That wasn’t wrong either. Also, from this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler#Religious_views, it appears that Hitler was basically Christian, but wanted himself and not the churches to be in power.
One more thing! Many things are not natural, but they aren’t bad either. People wear glasses or use pacemakers, and those aren’t natural, but they are good things. Homosexuality might not be the most common, but that doesn’t mean it’s wrong.
Research shows that homosexuality is not a choice. People can’t change it just by trying. If you google it, most of the results will say that it is something people are born with, and not a choice. It’s much less of a choice than religion is. (Why do you believe it is a lifestyle choice? Is there any evidence that will convince you otherwise? There should be, because someone who refuses to look at evidence isn’t looking for the truth.) Even if it was a choice, I say, fine, let them make that choice! Everything is permitted unless it harms someone else. If two people want to be homosexual, let them choose that. They aren’t requiring you to be homosexual. They don’t want you to support them. They aren’t asking to live in your house or wear your clothes or take up your time. They don’t impact your life. They just want you to let them be.
@wobster109 - No, I fundamental principle of science is that it deals only with what can be empirically discovered. Observation and repeatability are necessary requisites. Which puts origins safely outside the purview of science. HOWEVER, some origin beliefs are more compatible with a scientific understanding of the universe than others. For example, the belief that the universe popped in from nothing completely on it’s own is not compatible with the first law of thermodynamics, the belief that it built itself up from an explosion is not compatible with the second. The idea of an infinite universe when all the data and scientific observation points to it being finite is not scientific either. Do you understand where I’m going with that?
I didn’t say they were all atheists, I said that they had no objective source of morality. Jews are an ethnic group first, not all of them are religious. Hitler and his people didn’t like them because they were white supremacists, and white supremacists hate Jews even more than they hate blacks or aboriginals. The Jew is the boogyman who hides in their closet and gives them nightmares. Look at David Duke, former KKK leader. He blames the Jews for everything that is wrong in the world. He even blames them for Muslims being so crazy.
Japanese people are friendly today but it took 2 nuclear bombs to end their colonialism. But even so, their government is still highly racist. It’s just that the international community says nothing about it. If they ever go imperialist again it will be more of the same. But I don’t think they will because their military was permanently weakened and they suffer from low birth rates like western countries.
Wikipedia is nothing but a left wing atheist propaganda piece. If you want to see what Hitler’s true beliefs are then you need to read Hitlers books. My guess is that you probably haven’t done that, but I have. Here are some quotes so that you can see what he actually believed:
Hitler, Adolf., “Mein Kampf.” Translated by Walter Manheim, A Mariner Book, Boston, New York 1999
“In general, Nature herself usually makes certain corrective decisions with regard to the racial purity of earthly creatures. She has little love of bastards.” p. 400
“In this, we must see the cforrection of Nature. But often she goes even further. She limits the possibility of propagation. Thereby she prevents the fertility of continued crossings altogether and thus causes them to die out.” p. 400
“Man, once he has lost his instinct and fails to recognize the obligation imposed upon him by Nature, is on the whole not justified in hoping for such a correction on the part of Nature as long as he has not replaced his lost instinct by perceptive knowledge; this knowledge must then perform the required work of compensation.” p. 401
“Eternal Nature inexorably avenges the infringement of her commands.” p. 65
“The general impression could only be that the Catholic clergy as such was grossly infringing on German rights.
Thus the Church did not seem to feel with the German people, but to side unjustly with the enemy. The root of the whole evil lay, particularly in Schonerer’s opinion, in the fact that the directing body of the Catholic Church was not in Germany, and that for this very reason alone it was hostile to the interests of our nationality.” p. 109
“Just as Nature does not concentrate her greatest attention in preserving what exists, but in breeding offspring to carry on the species, likewise, in human life, it is less important artificially to alleviate existing evil, which, in the view of human nature, is ninety nine percent impossible, then to ensure from the start healthier channels for future development.” p. 29
Hitler was a mystical naturalist, his deity was nature, which he often referred to in the feminine. I got a copy of Mein Kampf years ago because I kept getting into arguments with Neo-Nazis, so I decided to examine the basis for their beliefs so that I could refute them better.
@wobster109 - True, just because something is unnatural doesn’t make it wrong. As In Reason I Trust likes to point out pretty much every time he visits my page, the fact that I abstain from sex is unnatural. The natural male tendency is to nail as many women as possible whenever possible. Just like dogs, however, I follow a moral code which is higher than that, and as a result, if I get married my life will be a lot better and so will hers. What is best is not always what is natural, but when something is not best, and it’s unnatural, then it is safe to say that thing is bad.
I disagree sharply that they are born with it. There is no empirical data to corroborate that assumption. It is a environmental factors, and/or individual rebellion against God, parents, and nature that cause people to be that way. It maybe that not everyone can help it, but that is why mainstream science used to consider it a mental disorder. People who are like that should receive treatment not congratulations.
You are welcome to browse my entries as far back as you want. You will find that I have never once said that there should be laws restricting anyone’s sexual practices. The only form of sexual deviance that I would like to see a harsh legal crackdown on is rape. Take as much time as you want. Now what I have said, is that it’s wrong and unnatural, and I will continue to say that.
I disagree that they just want to be left alone. Some of them do, but a lot of them are the biggest attention whores in the world. Look at all the “pride” parades and complaining and campaigning they do. Also the increasing prevalence in entertainment and news. Also legal cases that are staged. They often target Christians with their protests and legal persecution. There was that gay couple who chose to go to a Christian run wedding cake business to purchase a cake. There were lots of other places they could have gone but they chose to go there because they wanted to raise a fuss. When the store owners declined to make them a cake they sued. They could have just gone somewhere else but instead they tried to drive these people out of business. That’s what I’m talking about.
Now as for the issue before, again, I was just saying that having to view homosexual acts should be optional, just like having to view porn. I don’t want to see it while I’m changing channels, I don’t want to see it in my favorite TV series, and I don’t want my kids to see it when/if I have them.
@Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex - tl;dr