PDA

View Full Version : The Progressive Gay Agenda - An Analysis



megimoo
12-19-2010, 08:22 PM
Progressive Democrats and Republicans have tried their damnedest to deny any public outrage over the openly gay agenda. How do they do this? "As part of the vast social project of moral leveling.

Standard progressive tactics - shut up the opposition by categorizing them as being morally deviant.

" Charles Krauthammer wrote, "it is not enough for the deviant to be normalized. The normal must be found to be deviant." So anyone speaking out against the gay agenda is considered to be a homophobic, racist, bigot.

Even President Obama's senior advisor Valerie Jarrett was attacked when she said homosexuality is a "lifestyle choice" Standard progressive tactics - shut up the opposition by categorizing them as being...


http://www.redcounty.com/content/progressive-gay-agenda-analysis

CaughtintheMiddle1990
12-19-2010, 10:47 PM
Progressive Democrats and Republicans have tried their damnedest to deny any public outrage over the openly gay agenda. How do they do this? "As part of the vast social project of moral leveling.

Standard progressive tactics - shut up the opposition by categorizing them as being morally deviant.

" Charles Krauthammer wrote, "it is not enough for the deviant to be normalized. The normal must be found to be deviant." So anyone speaking out against the gay agenda is considered to be a homophobic, racist, bigot.

Even President Obama's senior advisor Valerie Jarrett was attacked when she said homosexuality is a "lifestyle choice" Standard progressive tactics - shut up the opposition by categorizing them as being...


http://www.redcounty.com/content/progressive-gay-agenda-analysis

Kind of like a lot of people do with gays?

AmPat
12-19-2010, 10:50 PM
Kind of like a lot of people do with gays?

If gays are not morally deviant, who is?:cool:

wilbur
12-19-2010, 10:58 PM
If gays are not morally deviant, who is?:cool:

Sexually active, morbidly obese, ugly people.

It really grosses me out to think of them having sex.
Therefore, they are moral deviants.

NJCardFan
12-20-2010, 12:26 AM
Sexually active, morbidly obese, ugly people.

It really grosses me out to think of them having sex.
Therefore, they are moral deviants.

You're a rump ranger aren't you.

Rockntractor
12-20-2010, 12:56 AM
You're a rump ranger aren't you.

I certainly wouldn't bet any money against it, he is okay with incest too.

wilbur
12-20-2010, 01:18 AM
I certainly wouldn't bet any money against it, he is okay with incest too.

Uhh, what?!? News to me.

wilbur
12-20-2010, 01:20 AM
You're a rump ranger aren't you.

Hey, I leave no part of my wife's body unexplored. To do otherwise would be a terrible tragedy.

AmPat
12-20-2010, 08:28 AM
Sexually active, morbidly obese, ugly people.

It really grosses me out to think of them having sex.
Therefore, they are moral deviants.

You have a point. So I assume smelling poop is a requirement of yours for "proper" sex?:confused::rolleyes:

CaughtintheMiddle1990
12-20-2010, 09:33 AM
If gays are not morally deviant, who is?:cool:

Rapists. Murderers. Pedophiles and Child Molesters. People who engage in Bestiality.

Gays are just people who have sex with the same sex. I've never gotten why people think they're deviants.

Wei Wu Wei
12-20-2010, 09:49 AM
Rapists. Murderers. Pedophiles and Child Molesters. People who engage in Bestiality.

Gays are just people who have sex with the same sex. I've never gotten why people think they're deviants.

It's about gender. Gender structures our identities more than almost any other concept, and homosexuals upset the wonderfully simple conceptions of gender that many people have (gays cannot be manly, a gay man is letting himself be treated like a woman, a lesbian is giving up her duty of finding a male phallus, homosexuality being associated with submissiveness, weakness, or other things that are "anti-masculine", ect, ect, ect.), which leads them to put up defense mechanisms (homophobia) in order to identify these people as threats to their subconscious model of reality.

For many people, openly accepting a homosexual means having to rethink what it means to be a man or woman, which cannot be done without rethinking yourself. You know that it isn't a good feeling to be confused or to face identity changes, most people subconsciously resist this like the plague. So, to avoid the unpleasantness of having to re-evaluate oneself, they simply see homosexuals as a "thing to be avoided", it's their brain trying to maintain internal consistency via subconscious defense mechanisms

Bailey
12-20-2010, 10:29 AM
It's about gender. Gender structures our identities more than almost any other concept, and homosexuals upset the wonderfully simple conceptions of gender that many people have (gays cannot be manly, a gay man is letting himself be treated like a woman, a lesbian is giving up her duty of finding a male phallus, homosexuality being associated with submissiveness, weakness, or other things that are "anti-masculine", ect, ect, ect.), which leads them to put up defense mechanisms (homophobia) in order to identify these people as threats to their subconscious model of reality.

For many people, openly accepting a homosexual means having to rethink what it means to be a man or woman, which cannot be done without rethinking yourself. You know that it isn't a good feeling to be confused or to face identity changes, most people subconsciously resist this like the plague. So, to avoid the unpleasantness of having to re-evaluate oneself, they simply see homosexuals as a "thing to be avoided", it's their brain trying to maintain internal consistency via subconscious defense mechanisms

You really read to much into such things....

Wei Wu Wei
12-20-2010, 10:32 AM
nah

Lager
12-20-2010, 10:37 AM
Gays are just people who have sex with the same sex. I've never gotten why people think they're deviants.

Because it is a "deviation" from normal behavior. Now, that in itself does not mean that it can't be accepted. But I laugh at the rather desperate attempts in this post to paint the problem with the perceivers. Especially Wee's silly psycho babble assertions about identity politics and gender perception etc.

Here's a simpler distillation of the process: Those who aren't gay, naturally find different levels of discomfort with the idea of individuals who are only attracted to members of the same sex. For a straight man, for example, the thought of sex with another man is so alien, that it causes some measure of revulsion. The next part of the process though, finds the perceiver's intellect reasoning that if two people both consent to it, do not force it on another, and do no other harm to anyone else, than it's of no threat to the perceiver. Thus, some measure of acceptance can overcome initial reactions.

CaughtintheMiddle1990
12-20-2010, 10:43 AM
If gays are not morally deviant, who is?:cool:


Because it is a "deviation" from normal behavior. Now, that in itself does not mean that it can't be accepted. But I laugh at the rather desperate attempts in this post to paint the problem with the perceivers. Especially Wee's silly psycho babble assertions about identity politics and gender perception etc.

Here's a simpler distillation of the process: Those who aren't gay, naturally find different levels of discomfort with the idea of individuals who are only attracted to members of the same sex. For a straight man, for example, the thought of sex with another man is so alien, that it causes some measure of revulsion. The next part of the process though, finds the perceiver's intellect reasoning that if two people both consent to it, do not force it on another, and do no other harm to anyone else, than it's of no threat to the perceiver. Thus, some measure of acceptance can overcome initial reactions.

I dunno, I consider myself a straight guy, but I don't find homosexuality disgusting or revolting...Just something I'm not into or aroused by. But then again, like, there's girls I don't have find attractive, that I wouldn't want to sleep with, but I don't find them disgusting or gross. It's just, like, whatever, do your thing. That's the thing--When I think of gays I think of personality first. My mind doesn't immediately flash to two men having anal sex whenever the word "gay guy" comes up or if I meet a gay, so I just view him as a person and not a sexual act.

Two women, however, is a bit different. I am a staunch supporter of lipstick lesbianism and/or female bisexuality. I would champion those two causes.

Wei Wu Wei
12-20-2010, 10:46 AM
Because it is a "deviation" from normal behavior. Now, that in itself does not mean that it can't be accepted. But I laugh at the rather desperate attempts in this post to paint the problem with the perceivers. Especially Wee's silly psycho babble assertions about identity politics and gender perception etc.

Here's a simpler distillation of the process: Those who aren't gay, naturally find different levels of discomfort with the idea of individuals who are only attracted to members of the same sex. For a straight man, for example, the thought of sex with another man is so alien, that it causes some measure of revulsion. The next part of the process though, finds the perceiver's intellect reasoning that if two people both consent to it, do not force it on another, and do no other harm to anyone else, than it's of no threat to the perceiver. Thus, some measure of acceptance can overcome initial reactions.

I thought my analysis was pretty simple actually, and frankly, it's unrealistic to assume that humans beings are Rational Actors Who Follow Logical Consistency.

I mean come on....

Wei Wu Wei
12-20-2010, 10:51 AM
I dunno, I consider myself a straight guy, but I don't find homosexuality disgusting or revolting...Just something I'm not into or aroused by. But then again, like, there's girls I don't have find attractive, that I wouldn't want to sleep with, but I don't find them disgusting or gross. It's just, like, whatever, do your thing. That's the thing--When I think of gays I think of personality first. My mind doesn't immediately flash to two men having anal sex whenever the word "gay guy" comes up or if I meet a gay, so I just view him as a person and not a sexual act.


I agree with this sentiment. It's like wrinkly old ladies. I don't find an 80 year old woman to be sexually attractive, but I'm sure some people do, and if you do, good for you. More power to you, enjoy that wrinkly sex hell maybe she'll let you take a few tokes from her oxygen tank.

Just because I don't find that attractive doesn't mean any time I see an old woman I picture her sex life, I don't get filled with anxiety or anger or sexy images when I see elderly couples holding hands or even kissing. I don't have any reason to get upset just because I'm not into that.

Now, I'm not gonna go watch some old folks have sex, but if they want to it doesn't affect me the least.


I submit that people only get emotionally invested in things (that includes getting angry or disgusted) that somehow relate to themselves. Some people say that homophobic people are secretly gay, I don't believe that's the case either. However, I do think homophobic people are dealing with their own issues when they are getting angry about gays.

My post above explains how this is the case.

Lager
12-20-2010, 11:09 AM
I dunno, I consider myself a straight guy, but I don't find homosexuality disgusting or revolting...Just something I'm not into or aroused by. But then again, like, there's girls I don't have find attractive, that I wouldn't want to sleep with, but I don't find them disgusting or gross. It's just, like, whatever, do your thing. That's the thing--When I think of gays I think of personality first. My mind doesn't immediately flash to two men having anal sex whenever the word "gay guy" comes up or if I meet a gay, so I just view him as a person and not a sexual act.

Two women, however, is a bit different. I am a staunch supporter of lipstick lesbianism and/or female bisexuality. I would champion those two causes.

Well, you should no doubt be proud at how remarkably and unnaturally tolerant you are. Not many people have their minds "immediately" flash to thoughts of anal sex when thinking about gays. We are talking about thinking about homosexuality in general and not specific homosexual individuals. You know, it may surprise you that most conservatives have run across and interacted with gay people in normal, polite fashion, without trembing in our boots or running away disgust.



It's just like, whatever, do your thing.
Ah, what a remarkable synthesis of today's prevailing wisdom.

Lager
12-20-2010, 11:22 AM
I agree with this sentiment. It's like wrinkly old ladies. I don't find an 80 year old woman to be sexually attractive, but I'm sure some people do, and if you do, good for you. More power to you, enjoy that wrinkly sex hell maybe she'll let you take a few tokes from her oxygen tank.

Just because I don't find that attractive doesn't mean any time I see an old woman I picture her sex life, I don't get filled with anxiety or anger or sexy images when I see elderly couples holding hands or even kissing. I don't have any reason to get upset just because I'm not into that.

Now, I'm not gonna go watch some old folks have sex, but if they want to it doesn't affect me the least.


I submit that people only get emotionally invested in things (that includes getting angry or disgusted) that somehow relate to themselves. Some people say that homophobic people are secretly gay, I don't believe that's the case either. However, I do think homophobic people are dealing with their own issues when they are getting angry about gays.

My post above explains how this is the case.

My, it's so cute the hoops you jump through to show all of us poor neanderthals how tolerant one can be. And the strained but similar way that both you and CITM used visual images of things generally considered unattractive to illustrate how your sensibilities are so unaffected and refined. Why I bet if you were both walking together and saw a dog riding a bike and smoking a cigarette, none of you would even turn your heads, nor your conversation skip a beat. :)

AmPat
12-20-2010, 11:48 AM
However, I do think homophobic people are dealing with their own issues when they are getting angry about gays.


Why do libertards always make this illogical leap? Being "homophobic" does not mean they are "angry" about anything.:rolleyes: Furthermore, let me clear up another favorite lie of the GLBT crowd: Not agreeing with or supporting homosexuality does not automatically make one Anti-homosexual. I don't care what you do in your bedroom. I only want to know why you have to let everybody know your proclivities. Shut your homosexual pie holes and there wouldn't be any problems. I don't run around telling everybody what my favorite orifice is.

Wei Wu Wei
12-20-2010, 11:52 AM
That is what it means.

I understand what the root words mean, and it's supposed to be like that. The anger, hatred, or general antipathy towards things often uses -phobic suffix because even a small amount of introspection shows that fear is the root of anger, hatred, and most negative emotions. This very basic insight is carried over into our use of the word.

CaughtintheMiddle1990
12-20-2010, 12:00 PM
Well, you should no doubt be proud at how remarkably and unnaturally tolerant you are. Not many people have their minds "immediately" flash to thoughts of anal sex when thinking about gays. We are talking about thinking about homosexuality in general and not specific homosexual individuals. You know, it may surprise you that most conservatives have run across and interacted with gay people in normal, polite fashion, without trembing in our boots or running away disgust.

Ah, what a remarkable synthesis of today's prevailing wisdom.

But if it isn't the acts themselves which disgust or cause revulsion in you, what is about homosexuality that's so revolting? Honestly? I mean I could understand someone being grossed out by the acts they do in the bedroom...But just the fact that a man could love another man, or a woman could love and date another woman, idk, to me it just doesn't repel me. It's their thing. They're not harming me.

AmPat
12-20-2010, 12:03 PM
That is what it means.

I understand what the root words mean, and it's supposed to be like that. The anger, hatred, or general antipathy towards things often uses -phobic suffix because even a small amount of introspection shows that fear is the root of anger, hatred, and most negative emotions. This very basic insight is carried over into our use of the word.
I disagree. I don't give a hoot what homos do, as long as they don't throw it in my face, attempt to force it on the public as if it is natural and not deviant, or force it into the military as a social experiment. I know of a large homophobic Texan, and he is entirely capable of ripping the head off of homosexuals if he desired. He does not go hunting for them, does not fear them, and does not seek confrontation with them. He minds his business, a policy gays would be wise to adopt.

wilbur
12-20-2010, 12:06 PM
I disagree. I don't give a hoot what homos do, as long as they don't throw it in my face, attempt to force it on the public as if it is natural and not deviant, or force it into the military as a social experiment. I know of a large homophobic Texan, and he is entirely capable of ripping the head off of homosexuals if he desired. He does not go hunting for them, does not fear them, and does not seek confrontation with them. He minds his business, a policy gays would be wise to adopt.

In other words, they just need to expend every effort to make *you* feel comfortable, regardless of how it makes them feel. Anything else they can do for you while they're at it?

AmPat
12-20-2010, 12:11 PM
In other words, they just need to expend every effort to make *you* feel comfortable, regardless of how it makes them feel. Anything else they can do for you while they're at it?
No dumbass, they need to mind their own business and stop making it everybody elses business. Then, I don't "feel" anything toward them as I wouldn't know in the first place that they enjoyed the taste of poop covered phallus. Any more stupid comments?

Wei Wu Wei
12-20-2010, 12:22 PM
lmao

Apache
12-20-2010, 12:32 PM
That is what it means.

I understand what the root words mean, and it's supposed to be like that. The anger, hatred, or general antipathy towards things often uses -phobic suffix because even a small amount of introspection shows that fear is the root of anger, hatred, and most negative emotions. This very basic insight is carried over into our use of the word.

Homophobia is a made up word, used to try and silence opposition- end of story.

m00
12-20-2010, 12:52 PM
I don't run around telling everybody what my favorite orifice is.

It's the left ear, isn't it?

Lager
12-20-2010, 01:06 PM
But if it isn't the acts themselves which disgust or cause revulsion in you, what is about homosexuality that's so revolting? Honestly? I mean I could understand someone being grossed out by the acts they do in the bedroom...But just the fact that a man could love another man, or a woman could love and date another woman, idk, to me it just doesn't repel me. It's their thing. They're not harming me.

It's not revolting that a man could love another man or a woman a woman. I have love for many men who have been in my life. My argument is that homosexuality is a deviation from a norm. And as such, it is naturally going to cause some type of reaction in many of those who are not homosexuals. To act as if that fact somehow proves intolerance, or fear or latent homosexuality is disingenuous at the least. Perhaps in the not too distant future -- and if the very vocal and active homosexual lobby gets its wish -- it will be so open and prevelant that it will inspire no negative connotations at all. I don't think homosexuals should be demonized, nor do I think people should be demonized who have reservations or questions about the possible harmfulness of homosexual lifestyles.

I'd rather be honest about my feelings on issues than act a poser, trying to prove how open and tolerant I am.

Lager
12-20-2010, 01:09 PM
In other words, they just need to expend every effort to make *you* feel comfortable, regardless of how it makes them feel. Anything else they can do for you while they're at it?

Great point! So you'd agree then, that they don't have to do anything to make me feel comfortable and I don't have to do anything to make them feel comfortable?

megimoo
12-20-2010, 01:13 PM
It's not revolting that a man could love another man or a woman a woman. I have love for many men who have been in my life. My argument is that homosexuality is a deviation from a norm. And as such, it is naturally going to cause some type of reaction in many of those who are not homosexuals. To act as if that fact somehow proves intolerance, or fear or latent homosexuality is disingenuous at the least. Perhaps in the not too distant future -- and if the very vocal and active homosexual lobby gets its wish -- it will be so open and prevelant that it will inspire no negative connotations at all. I don't think homosexuals should be demonized, nor do I think people should be demonized who have reservations or questions about the possible harmfulness of homosexual lifestyles.

I'd rather be honest about my feelings on issues than act a poser, trying to prove how open and tolerant I am.IN that case just how do you feel about pedophilia ?

m00
12-20-2010, 01:14 PM
Assuming there is an upper theoretical limit on how many humans can comfortably live on the planet (where water and food are not infinite resources), homosexuality makes a lot of evolutionary sense as a built-in population control mechanism. Gays (and other kinds of childless couples) are probably the best kind of taxpayer in the sense they pay into the system, but take a lot less out of it.

I'll say this: I don't fear the gay couple living down the street having too many children, raising them improperly, sending them to public schools I pay for, only to have them torment my cats or destroy my property.

CueSi
12-20-2010, 01:22 PM
It's about gender. Gender structures our identities more than almost any other concept, and homosexuals upset the wonderfully simple conceptions of gender that many people have (gays cannot be manly, a gay man is letting himself be treated like a woman, a lesbian is giving up her duty of finding a male phallus, homosexuality being associated with submissiveness, weakness, or other things that are "anti-masculine", ect, ect, ect.), which leads them to put up defense mechanisms (homophobia) in order to identify these people as threats to their subconscious model of reality.

For many people, openly accepting a homosexual means having to rethink what it means to be a man or woman, which cannot be done without rethinking yourself. You know that it isn't a good feeling to be confused or to face identity changes, most people subconsciously resist this like the plague. So, to avoid the unpleasantness of having to re-evaluate oneself, they simply see homosexuals as a "thing to be avoided", it's their brain trying to maintain internal consistency via subconscious defense mechanisms

No. It doesn't. You're overthinking it and saying stuff that is just as ignorant and some other the others here.

~QC

Lager
12-20-2010, 01:24 PM
IN that case just how do you feel about pedophilia ?

I'm abhorred by it.

Wei Wu Wei
12-20-2010, 02:41 PM
It's the left ear, isn't it?

the unintended symbolism here is beautiful

m00
12-20-2010, 05:07 PM
the unintended symbolism here is beautiful

What makes you think that what I say is unintended?

Novaheart
12-20-2010, 06:35 PM
I certainly wouldn't bet any money against it, he is okay with incest too.

Wow, some idiot was listening to Allen "I can't even spell my own name correctly" Hunt today I see.

Rockntractor
12-20-2010, 07:26 PM
Wow, some idiot was listening to Allen "I can't even spell my own name correctly" Hunt today I see.

Welcome back fruitloop!:D

MrsSmith
12-20-2010, 08:02 PM
It's funny how many people speak about "homophobes" hating the same sex couple down the street while completely ignoring the actions those "homophobes" specify. Most people have no problem with the same sex couple down the street, so long as they don't throw big parties with naked drunks messing around on the front lawn, and don't invite my teenage kids to said parties.

However, every caring parent in the world would like to be sure that no adult, straight or gay, molests one of their kids. They'd like to know that their kids can use public restrooms without getting an XXX education. They don't want the Folsom Street Fair to have a local chapter. They don't appreciate their children being brainwashed that any sex is OK if you wear a rubber. They don't want confused adolescents told that the only way they can figure things out is to try everything.

Most people also aren't terribly thrilled by the idea of ponying up tons of money to cover healthcare for everyone...especially when that "everyone" includes people that get thrills from taking chances catching expensive diseases. If the government really tries to reduce healthcare costs, diet and exercise really can't be the only focus.

Sex outside marriage, whether by same or opposite sex peoples, is not horrible. Nor is it in any way admirable. It should neither be condemned any more strongly than any other sin, nor promoted as something good. It should be tolerated, in the actual meaning of the word, as something with which we can disagree without that disagreement being wrong. To condemn someone for disagreeing with the promotion of homosexual sex is just as intolerant as actually condemning those that engage in said sex. {Actually condenming, not simply disagreeing. The condemnation of Christians for disagreeing with the idea that same sex relationships can be marriage is far more intolerant than that Christian view.}

Madisonian
12-20-2010, 08:20 PM
So even though I don't care what 2 consenting adults do in private, but do not see homosexuality as normal, then I am a homophobe.

I guess that makes homosexuals that disagree with me heterophobes.

BadCat
12-20-2010, 08:20 PM
Remember the "gay police" at DU a few years ago?

We got our own version of the same 3 or 4 idiots here.

Rockntractor
12-20-2010, 08:28 PM
Remember the "gay police" at DU a few years ago?

We got our own version of the same 3 or 4 idiots here.

They need their own site, Fruits and Nuts Underground.

CueSi
12-20-2010, 10:57 PM
So even though I don't care what 2 consenting adults do in private, but do not see homosexuality as normal, then I am a homophobe.

I guess that makes homosexuals that disagree with me heterophobes.

Not to me it doesn't. It makes you . . .kinda average. <shrug>

~QC

PoliCon
12-20-2010, 11:01 PM
Remember the "gay police" at DU a few years ago?

We got our own version of the same 3 or 4 idiots here.

Are you counting me as one? :confused:

PoliCon
12-20-2010, 11:02 PM
So even though I don't care what 2 consenting adults do in private, but do not see homosexuality as normal, then I am a homophobe.

I guess that makes homosexuals that disagree with me heterophobes.

I agree - what they do in PRIVATE is not my business. It's when it's done in PUBLIC that it becomes my business.

Novaheart
12-20-2010, 11:13 PM
Homophobia is a made up word, used to try and silence opposition- end of story.

So is "sodomite". The difference is that homophobia is a word made up to describe real people, real attitudes, real behaviors and sodomite is the name of a real place used to describe mythological events and imaginary people.

Rockntractor
12-20-2010, 11:22 PM
So is "sodomite". The difference is that homophobia is a word made up to describe real people, real attitudes, real behaviors and sodomite is the name of a real place used to describe mythological events and imaginary people.

It is actually proven that there was a Sodom and Gomorrah and some sort of event did destroy them.

PoliCon
12-20-2010, 11:22 PM
So is "sodomite". The difference is that homophobia is a word made up to describe real people, real attitudes, real behaviors and sodomite is the name of a real place used to describe mythological events and imaginary people.

Are you seriously denying the existence of Sodom?

Novaheart
12-20-2010, 11:27 PM
Welcome back fruitloop!:D

:D

Novaheart
12-20-2010, 11:28 PM
Are you seriously denying the existence of Sodom?

Go back and read what I wrote.

PoliCon
12-20-2010, 11:31 PM
Go back and read what I wrote.

Oh so you're an antisemite and Christophobe.

Rockntractor
12-20-2010, 11:34 PM
Oh so you're an antisemite and Christophobe.

He's just out making waves.

PoliCon
12-20-2010, 11:42 PM
He's just out making waves.

well would you kindly explain to him that that is MY job? :mad:

megimoo
12-20-2010, 11:45 PM
well would you kindly explain to him that that is MY job? :mad:You flatter yourself little man !:rolleyes:

megimoo
12-20-2010, 11:46 PM
Remember the "gay police" at DU a few years ago?

We got our own version of the same 3 or 4 idiots here.She's from NU !

PoliCon
12-20-2010, 11:48 PM
You flatter yourself little man !:rolleyes:

We all get along best when we know what our own little niche is here on CU. Making waves is my job. Posting idiocy is yours.

Kay
12-20-2010, 11:52 PM
She's from NU !

I keep seeing "NU".
What is that?

megimoo
12-20-2010, 11:53 PM
We all get along best when we know what our own little niche is here on CU. Making waves is my job. Posting idiocy is yours.Don't count on it for too long.You do serve one usefull purpose by acting as a foil to the new liberals .

m00
12-20-2010, 11:56 PM
She's from NU !

So am I!

But I was CU first. :p

Rockntractor
12-21-2010, 12:00 AM
So am I!

But I was CU first. :p

Who were you before M Double Aught?

m00
12-21-2010, 12:04 AM
Who were you before M Double Aught?

I was m00 then 00m then double-oh-em and now back to m00 :)

Novaheart
12-21-2010, 12:27 AM
It is actually proven that there was a Sodom and Gomorrah and some sort of event did destroy them.

Hence me saying that it is a real place.

Novaheart
12-21-2010, 12:29 AM
Oh so you're an antisemite and Christophobe.

In the same sense that you are a Helenophobe, a Romanophobe, an anti-druid, and a Hindu hater.

Rockntractor
12-21-2010, 12:32 AM
In the same sense that you are a Helenophobe, a Romanophobe, an anti-druid, and a Hindu hater.

You two would make a nice couple!:)

Rockntractor
12-21-2010, 12:33 AM
Hence me saying that it is a real place.

....with real people and a real event.

megimoo
12-21-2010, 12:39 AM
....with real people and a real event.And all cast into hell !

Novaheart
12-21-2010, 12:41 AM
....with real people and a real event.

And one hell of a myth invented about them.

Novaheart
12-21-2010, 12:42 AM
And all cast into hell !

Hell wasn't invented until centuries later.

megimoo
12-21-2010, 12:43 AM
And one hell of a myth invented about them.

You should have been there !

Rockntractor
12-21-2010, 12:43 AM
And one hell of a myth invented about them.

You don't know that for a fact, it is your opinion.

Rockntractor
12-21-2010, 12:45 AM
Hell wasn't invented until centuries later.

You have never heard of Sheol?

megimoo
12-21-2010, 12:45 AM
Hell wasn't invented until centuries later.Hell has been there since the fall .

PoliCon
12-21-2010, 07:57 AM
In the same sense that you are a Helenophobe, a Romanophobe, an anti-druid, and a Hindu hater.

Bullshit. Apples and oranges.

PoliCon
12-21-2010, 08:02 AM
Hell wasn't invented until centuries later.

Interesting. So when the Scriptures speak of Sheol and Ge Hinom they were clearly referring to the garden of eden eh? :rolleyes:

CueSi
12-21-2010, 01:19 PM
Interesting. So when the Scriptures speak of Sheol and Ge Hinom they were clearly referring to the garden of eden eh? :rolleyes:

Ge-Hinom (Gehenna), was the nickname for a garbage dump outside the city. It could be an allusion to hell's unpleasant conditions...but, it may not.

Much of what we visualize of hell does come from Dante's inferno. That's not to say hell doesn't exist, but that many extra-biblical sources refined the concept to what we know today.

http://www.foolishcreatures.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/the_more_you_know-300x197.jpg

~QC

AmPat
12-21-2010, 01:58 PM
Ge-Hinom (Gehenna), was the nickname for a garbage dump outside the city. It could be an allusion to hell's unpleasant conditions...but, it may not.

Much of what we visualize of hell does come from Dante's inferno. That's not to say hell doesn't exist, but that many extra-biblical sources refined the concept to what we know today.

http://www.foolishcreatures.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/the_more_you_know-300x197.jpg

~QCPartially true. Read the Book of Revelation. Dante was an amateur.

m00
12-21-2010, 02:08 PM
Ge-Hinom (Gehenna), was the nickname for a garbage dump outside the city. It could be an allusion to hell's unpleasant conditions...but, it may not.

Much of what we visualize of hell does come from Dante's inferno. That's not to say hell doesn't exist, but that many extra-biblical sources refined the concept to what we know today.

http://www.foolishcreatures.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/the_more_you_know-300x197.jpg

~QC

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y45/billy416/kent.jpg

Points if anyone gets the reference :p

Odysseus
12-21-2010, 02:44 PM
So is "sodomite". The difference is that homophobia is a word made up to describe real people, real attitudes, real behaviors and sodomite is the name of a real place used to describe mythological events and imaginary people.

A phobia is an irrational fear. Homophobia is, therefore, an irrational fear of homosexuals. If one disagrees with the mainstreaming of some gay lifestyle issues (promiscuity, bathhouse culture, redefinition of marriage), that does not make you irrational or fearful, regardless of trendy opinion. OTOH, those who automatically dismiss rational objections to specific policies as homophobia are doing so to advance an agenda. That would tend to make them homophyles.

PoliCon
12-21-2010, 07:35 PM
Ge-Hinom (Gehenna), was the nickname for a garbage dump outside the city. It could be an allusion to hell's unpleasant conditions...but, it may not.

Much of what we visualize of hell does come from Dante's inferno. That's not to say hell doesn't exist, but that many extra-biblical sources refined the concept to what we know today.

http://www.foolishcreatures.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/the_more_you_know-300x197.jpg

~QC

As I have said before - hell is NOT what most people believe it to be.

Odysseus
12-22-2010, 03:08 PM
We all get along best when we know what our own little niche is here on CU. Making waves is my job. Posting idiocy is yours.

I hate to think what my niche is.