PDA

View Full Version : 'They are afraid of being killed by Muslims.'



Odysseus
06-04-2013, 11:51 AM
June 4, 2013
Kevin DuJan explains why gay activists attack Christians while avoiding Muslims.
Kurt Wayne

Living in Arkansas, the same state where the Murfreesboro Crater of Diamonds is located, I've heard stories of people who have unearthed massive gemstones that, upon first sight by untrained eyes, were dismissed as mere rocks.

In that vein, there were some fascinating "gems" to be extracted from the June 3 blog post by Kevin DuJan, former Hillary Clinton backer and now conservative gay columnist, who is not afraid to use his eloquence to attack any sacred cows -- particularly those of the modern American left and in the GLBT community.


Marking "Gay pride month 2013" by taking questions from his readers asking about GLBT issues, Mr. DuJan fielded a question about Islam (and Marxism) and gay people with a 12-paragraph response that seems to have some extraordinary, or at least extraordinarily risky (for him), candor:



Christians are depicted as the greatest villains of all time to gays, with the Gaystapo high command of "community leaders" declaring that Christian institutions must be destroyed as much as possible. Some lesbian went on tee-vee over the weekend saying that she wants "gay marriage" to pass because it both weakens the Church and traditional families...and I think there are a lot of subversives who do things like complain about Christmas trees or nativity displays in the War Against Christian Holidays in order to further undermine and weaken the Church. Gays love having an enemy, and the gay community leaders know that unless gays are focused on an enemy they will just go off into a million different directions (because dealing with gays is like herding cats if you don't have a colorful and epic enemy to focus on).


Nowhere near content to end his post with an affirmation that, indeed, "gay marriage" is an issue that is being used to "break" American evangelical Christianity (which, regardless of the definition, Mr. DuJan both identifies with and compliments), he drew a sharp distinction between Christianity and Islam:


Gays bash Christians because they know they can get away with it...and they steer clear of ever criticizing Islam for anything because they are too scared that a Muslim will bomb, behead, brutalize, or do other horrible things to them...as "The Religion of Peace" consistently does all around the world.


As a member of the community, I can tell you that gay people are very stupid when it comes to Islam. They listen to the tee-vee and they just accept without question the rationalization that Islam is "just a religion like any other"...and they accept the Koran as a peer to the Bible or the Torah (which it most certainly is not). Very few gays understand that the Koran is setup so that any of the "peaceful poetry" that the Left likes to cite when promoting Islam is superseded by the violent exhortations to war and conquest that come later in the Koran. The Bible and the Torah do not work this way...and also do not advocate violent conquest of the world through any means necessary, the way the Koran does.


Clearly, DuJan is not afraid of painting a pink bull's-eye on his backside to draw a slew of high-velocity rainbow-colored arrows. He says quite a bit more in this column, but what's striking is the dearth today of people, emphasized by the contrast DuJan presents, who are unafraid to speak truth while living in an environment (Chicago, in Mr. DuJan's case!) in which they are the richest of targets.


Kurt Wayne is married and has two grown children. A web developer, he lives in Bella Vista, AR and works with Brazilian web-based ministries.



Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/06/they_are_afraid_of_being_killed_by_muslims.html at June 04, 2013 - 09:18:45 AM CDT

noonwitch
06-04-2013, 12:30 PM
The same thing applies to a lot of liberal feminists, too. They will trash Christianity as a patriarchal sausage factory, but ignore the abuse of women that is so widespread in the Muslim world.

Novaheart
06-04-2013, 12:59 PM
June 4, 2013
Kevin DuJan explains why gay activists attack Christians while avoiding Muslims.



[INDENT]Christians are depicted as the greatest villains of all time to gays, with the Gaystapo high command of "community leaders" declaring that Christian institutions must be destroyed as much as possible.

I've never heard of the guy and I visit at least one gay news website daily.

I have never heard a "gay leader" (for our purposes meaning director of a mainstream political organization like HRC or GLAAD) declare that Christian institutions in general must be destroyed "as much as possible". I can't recall ever hearing a gay person say that UNited Methodist Women or Feed the Children or any other legitimate church charity should be destroyed. Groups which promote hate and violence towards the gay community while performing legitimate or nominal charity have indeed been called out. Those organizations are well known to everyone here, and to refer to them generally as "Christian institutions" would be rather like referring to Barbara Spectre as a grandmother and Hadassah thrift store volunteer.

Odysseus
06-04-2013, 03:21 PM
The same thing applies to a lot of liberal feminists, too. They will trash Christianity as a patriarchal sausage factory, but ignore the abuse of women that is so widespread in the Muslim world.

It applies to the left as a whole. Leftists put advancement of leftist causes ahead of actual results, which is why there is a Boycott, Divestment and Senctions movement against Israel, but not against Sudan, Iran, Syria, China, Russia or any of the other cosmic hellholes where religious minorities suffer vicious persecutions. Feminism, as defined by Betty Friedan, was part of the wave of liberation movements that saw capitalism and America as the enemy (Friedan was a Marxist and NOW, her creation, routinely supported far left causes such as the Nuclear Freeze). The obvious proof of this was when NOW and other feminists groups came out in favor of Bill Clinton during his various sex scandals. They put party discipline ahead of their professed issue of gender equality.


I've never heard of the guy and I visit at least one gay news website daily.

I have never heard a "gay leader" (for our purposes meaning director of a mainstream political organization like HRC or GLAAD) declare that Christian institutions in general must be destroyed "as much as possible". I can't recall ever hearing a gay person say that UNited Methodist Women or Feed the Children or any other legitimate church charity should be destroyed. Groups which promote hate and violence towards the gay community while performing legitimate or nominal charity have indeed been called out. Those organizations are well known to everyone here, and to refer to them generally as "Christian institutions" would be rather like referring to Barbara Spectre as a grandmother and Hadassah thrift store volunteer.

Okay, you've never heard of that guy. Does that make what he says false? Aside from Westboro Baptist, I know of no church, and certainly no major one, that promotes hate or violence towards gays (although there are many that don't accept the radical redefinition of marriage that gay activists propose, but that isn't promotion of hate or violence). But look at all of the gay groups, especially on college campuses, that have made common cause with jihadis when they attack Jews. No campus antiwar or anti-Israel rally would be complete without the LGBT groups. This article discusses the various LGBT groups that have established themselves to advance the goals of Fatah and Hamas: http://truth-out.org/news/item/12553-de-pinkwashing-israel. And let's not forget that Islamists aren't the only ones that gay activists have avoided offending. Prop 8 in California lost by huge margins among blacks and Latinos, especially among church-going blacks and Latinos, and the response of gay activists was to target... Mormons? That makes sense only if you accept that blacks and Latinos are hard core Democratic Party constituencies, and the gay activists are leftists first.

DumbAss Tanker
06-04-2013, 05:09 PM
Kevin DuJan explains why gay activists attack Christians while avoiding Muslims.

I.e. they're pussies. What a shocker.

Novaheart
06-04-2013, 05:16 PM
Okay, you've never heard of that guy. Does that make what he says false?

No, it means that what he says carries no more weight than what you or I say.




Aside from Westboro Baptist, I know of no church, and certainly no major one, that promotes hate or violence towards gays (although there are many that don't accept the radical redefinition of marriage that gay activists propose, but that isn't promotion of hate or violence).

You're changing the terms of the discussion. "Christian institutions" is not limited to our basic picture of a church or denomination. It would also refer to those groups which label themselves Christian but which engage in politics and do indeed promote discrimination, hate, and violence. You simply cannot teach people that Gay people are abominations, bestialists, and child molesters and then deny that your words are a promotion of hate.

Hawkgirl
06-04-2013, 06:48 PM
Liberalism is a mental illness.

JB
06-05-2013, 04:23 AM
Christians don't want gays marrying. Muzzies don't want gays breathing. Probably why there's no gays in Iran. Then again, they don't want anyone breathing.

NJCardFan
06-05-2013, 06:32 AM
It applies to the left as a whole. Leftists put advancement of leftist causes ahead of actual results, which is why there is a Boycott, Divestment and Senctions movement against Israel, but not against Sudan, Iran, Syria, China, Russia or any of the other cosmic hellholes where religious minorities suffer vicious persecutions. Feminism, as defined by Betty Friedan, was part of the wave of liberation movements that saw capitalism and America as the enemy (Friedan was a Marxist and NOW, her creation, routinely supported far left causes such as the Nuclear Freeze). The obvious proof of this was when NOW and other feminists groups came out in favor of Bill Clinton during his various sex scandals. They put party discipline ahead of their professed issue of gender equality.



Okay, you've never heard of that guy. Does that make what he says false? Aside from Westboro Baptist, I know of no church, and certainly no major one, that promotes hate or violence towards gays (although there are many that don't accept the radical redefinition of marriage that gay activists propose, but that isn't promotion of hate or violence). But look at all of the gay groups, especially on college campuses, that have made common cause with jihadis when they attack Jews. No campus antiwar or anti-Israel rally would be complete without the LGBT groups. This article discusses the various LGBT groups that have established themselves to advance the goals of Fatah and Hamas: http://truth-out.org/news/item/12553-de-pinkwashing-israel. And let's not forget that Islamists aren't the only ones that gay activists have avoided offending. Prop 8 in California lost by huge margins among blacks and Latinos, especially among church-going blacks and Latinos, and the response of gay activists was to target... Mormons? That makes sense only if you accept that blacks and Latinos are hard core Democratic Party constituencies, and the gay activists are leftists first.

This is typical of Nova and what he's doing is basically proving your point. He's never heard of this person so since he's never heard of him then it's easy to be dismissive of what this person says. However notice that Nova doesn't try to dispute any of the facts given. Again, typical.

txradioguy
06-05-2013, 06:54 AM
I have never heard a "gay leader" (for our purposes meaning director of a mainstream political organization like HRC or GLAAD) declare that Christian institutions in general must be destroyed "as much as possible".

Ok then how about someone who enjoys support and contributions from:

Human Rights Campaign

Democratic National Committee

LGBT Equality Caucus

The World Bank

United States Senate and

White House staff


Would someone with that kind of backing be considered "mainstream enough for you"

Here's what that person has to say about Christian Institutions.

About Pope Bennedict the XVI retiring:


“That Motherfucking Power-Hungry, Self-Aggrandized Bigot In the Stupid Fucking Hat Announces His Retirement.”



About the bible in general...and I notice this person calls things mythical just like you do.


“If you believe it is the divinely inspired word of God, if you believe in the literal truth of the Bible, I challenge you to read the first five (expletive) pages. There are two creation myths in Genesis.”

This person says the "Bible is a radically pro-slavery document" and:


•"Slave owners waved Bibles over their heads during the Civil War and justified it."
• "The shortest book in the New Testament is a letter from Paul to a Christian slave owner about owning his Christian slave. And Paul doesn't say, 'Christians don't own people.' Paul talks about how Christians own people."
• "... the Bible got the easiest moral question that humanity has ever faced wrong: slavery. What are the odds that the Bible got something as complicated as human sexuality wrong? One hundred percent."


This mainstream person tells kids what's in the Bible is "bullshit"...lies about what is actually said in the Bible and tells people to ignore what it says.

Sounds like someone supported by the mainstream gay organizations and their supporters advocating bringing down religion as we know it.

You'll probably agree with what he says becase you both share the same Atheist crib notes that all Libtards do when it comes to the Bible.

Novaheart
06-05-2013, 01:28 PM
............

Pope Benedict was/is a POS and the Bible/koran is irrelevant to any discussion held outside of a church/mosque/synagogue.

Odysseus
06-05-2013, 01:51 PM
No, it means that what he says carries no more weight than what you or I say.

But is he wrong? Address the argument, please.


You're changing the terms of the discussion. "Christian institutions" is not limited to our basic picture of a church or denomination. It would also refer to those groups which label themselves Christian but which engage in politics and do indeed promote discrimination, hate, and violence. You simply cannot teach people that Gay people are abominations, bestialists, and child molesters and then deny that your words are a promotion of hate.

To me, a Christian institution is a church. If you are claiming that outfits that are not afiliated with any church are Christian institutions, then you can stretch that definition to anything, including the various Aryan Nations groups, which is another typical liberal trick for tarring Christians as violent. And, once again, you ignore the point. Gay activists have avoided confrontations with groups that are left of center or prone to violence, and instead focused on easier, softer targets. True or false?


This is typical of Nova and what he's doing is basically proving your point. He's never heard of this person so since he's never heard of him then it's easy to be dismissive of what this person says. However notice that Nova doesn't try to dispute any of the facts given. Again, typical.

Yeah, I know, which is why I end up repeating myself constantly to get an answer from him on these topics.

txradioguy
06-05-2013, 05:16 PM
Pope Benedict was/is a POS and the Bible/koran is irrelevant to any discussion held outside of a church/mosque/synagogue.

Yup...that's about the kind of pavlovian response I expected from you...right after your bullshit argument was exposed for what it is.

Odysseus
06-06-2013, 11:51 AM
Yup...that's about the kind of pavlovian response I expected from you...right after your bullshit argument was exposed for what it is.

Except that instead of salivating, he's foaming.

djones520
06-06-2013, 01:17 PM
The same thing applies to a lot of liberal feminists, too. They will trash Christianity as a patriarchal sausage factory, but ignore the abuse of women that is so widespread in the Muslim world.

I got into a huge argument with a feminazi friend of mine a couple months ago regarding this. She compaired a nun's garb to the hijab, and was trying to draw a comparison that Christianity was evil because nun's wear clothing that isn't revealing. She couldn't grasp the differance in nun's doing so willingly, while the majority of the Islamic world doesn't give an "option" on the matter. It was very frustrating.

Odysseus
06-06-2013, 06:17 PM
I got into a huge argument with a feminazi friend of mine a couple months ago regarding this. She compaired a nun's garb to the hijab, and was trying to draw a comparison that Christianity was evil because nun's wear clothing that isn't revealing. She couldn't grasp the differance in nun's doing so willingly, while the majority of the Islamic world doesn't give an "option" on the matter. It was very frustrating.

Did you explain about the aerodynamic qualities of the habit?
http://c300221.r21.cf1.rackcdn.com/the-flying-nun-1350102349_b.jpg

NJCardFan
06-06-2013, 08:12 PM
I got into a huge argument with a feminazi friend of mine a couple months ago regarding this. She compaired a nun's garb to the hijab, and was trying to draw a comparison that Christianity was evil because nun's wear clothing that isn't revealing. She couldn't grasp the differance in nun's doing so willingly, while the majority of the Islamic world doesn't give an "option" on the matter. It was very frustrating.

As a former Catholic, I can attest that comparing the 2 is idiotic. The Habit are work clothes. When "off the clock" so to speak, nuns can wear blue jeans if they so choose. Priests too. Nuns also don't have to have their hair completely covered or their faces. And the big difference between the 2, a woman joins the order voluntarily. Nuns also aren't beaten if they leave the convent like Muslim women are in a fundamentalist society.

JB
06-06-2013, 10:26 PM
...the Bible/koran is irrelevant to any discussion held outside of a church/mosque/synagogue.Then the "a person is born gay" argument is irrelevant outside of the last bathroom stall on the left.