Homosexual Propaganda Exposed

[sufiandy]

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
If you’d read the links you would see that gay men are the main source of HIV infection to women. It’s a public health problem. And what is particularly disturbing is the trend of ‘bug chasing’ and ‘gift giving’ where gay men deliberately spread and contract HIV.
[/quote]

Is this something your really concerned about? I’ve never had this concern with women, maybe you are hanging around the wrong types if its an actual problem in your life.

So hypothetically if they ever find a cure for HIV you have no problems will gays and will stop making threads like this?[/quote]

You’re an idiot. HIV is only one of more than a dozen STDs and STDs are only one reason amongst many that I oppose the normalisation of homosexuality.
[/quote]

We can get to the other reasons but I am not convinced STDs are a real reason so I am curious why you brought that up first when I asked a straight forward question.

The bottom line is you are at much greater risk of STDs from a chain of heterosexual transmissions. Most STDs were more prevalent before homosexuality was normalized. This means you are at lower risk today yet are still trying to blame homosexuals who are more accepted today than ever.[/quote]

No heterosexuals are not at a greater risk than homosexuals of contracting STDs. I don’t know of anyone who makes that claim. And HIV became widespread due to homosexuals and IV drug users. I don’t know of anyone who denies that either.[/quote]

Not at all what I said. As a heterosexual why do you care what their risk favor is compared to yours? Your risk has declined in the last 30 years. Societies acceptance of gays has obviously not made it worse in this area so I don’t understand why its on your list of reasons.
[/quote]

I’m merely pointing out that it’s risky behaviour. They also infect many women thereby spreading the virus into the heterosexual population.
[/quote]

That is a small minority yet you are holding the entire group responsible. Its also against the law, so maybe you just have a problem with criminals? At least we can agree on that.

Again why do you keep bringing up the fact its risky behavior? Do you ever engage in risky behavior like speeding or parkour? Do you hate yourself for it?

[/quote]

I don’t keep bringing it up. I brought it up in response to interrogation. And yes I have engaged in risky behaviour and payed a heavy price for it. I don’t hate myself nor do I hate homosexuals.[/quote]

Then what is even the point of this thread? The homosexual agenda is not to promote risky behavior, most homosexuals would condemn the things you keep bringing up. Their agenda is to educate people like you that the stereotypical homosexual you keep mentioning (the minority) is not the majority.

[SexMachine]

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
If you’d read the links you would see that gay men are the main source of HIV infection to women. It’s a public health problem. And what is particularly disturbing is the trend of ‘bug chasing’ and ‘gift giving’ where gay men deliberately spread and contract HIV.
[/quote]

Is this something your really concerned about? I’ve never had this concern with women, maybe you are hanging around the wrong types if its an actual problem in your life.

So hypothetically if they ever find a cure for HIV you have no problems will gays and will stop making threads like this?[/quote]

You’re an idiot. HIV is only one of more than a dozen STDs and STDs are only one reason amongst many that I oppose the normalisation of homosexuality.
[/quote]

We can get to the other reasons but I am not convinced STDs are a real reason so I am curious why you brought that up first when I asked a straight forward question.

The bottom line is you are at much greater risk of STDs from a chain of heterosexual transmissions. Most STDs were more prevalent before homosexuality was normalized. This means you are at lower risk today yet are still trying to blame homosexuals who are more accepted today than ever.[/quote]

No heterosexuals are not at a greater risk than homosexuals of contracting STDs. I don’t know of anyone who makes that claim. And HIV became widespread due to homosexuals and IV drug users. I don’t know of anyone who denies that either.[/quote]

Not at all what I said. As a heterosexual why do you care what their risk favor is compared to yours? Your risk has declined in the last 30 years. Societies acceptance of gays has obviously not made it worse in this area so I don’t understand why its on your list of reasons.
[/quote]

I’m merely pointing out that it’s risky behaviour. They also infect many women thereby spreading the virus into the heterosexual population.
[/quote]

That is a small minority yet you are holding the entire group responsible. Its also against the law, so maybe you just have a problem with criminals? At least we can agree on that.

Again why do you keep bringing up the fact its risky behavior? Do you ever engage in risky behavior like speeding or parkour? Do you hate yourself for it?

[/quote]

I don’t keep bringing it up. I brought it up in response to interrogation. And yes I have engaged in risky behaviour and payed a heavy price for it. I don’t hate myself nor do I hate homosexuals.[/quote]

Then what is even the point of this thread? The homosexual agenda is not to promote risky behavior, most homosexuals would condemn the things you keep bringing up. Their agenda is to educate people like you that the stereotypical homosexual you keep mentioning (the minority) is not the majority.[/quote]

No, their agenda is to force bakers, florists, priests, rabbis etc. to participate in gay weddings. And to persecute private citizens who give money to organisations they don’t agree with. And to force the state to fund sex change treatments. And many other things besides. Homosexual activists are fascists.

[SexMachine]

[quote]ZJStrope wrote:

B/c the decline in marriage rates has nothing to do with:

1. Living longer

[/quote]

Why on earth would that affect marriage rates?

2. More people going to college

The majority of people graduate from college in their early 20’s. Higher education is not a barrier to marriage.

3. Waiting until they are older to have children

That wouldn’t affect the marriage rate either.

4. Women’s acceptance and prevalence in the work place, as such, being able to survive on their own

I already mentioned feminism as a contributing factor.

5. Men being scared shitless of making a mistake and then having everything taken from him b/c the courts side predominately with the woman

Okay I’ll give you that one.

6. It does not take into long-term, monogamous relationships and/or co-habitation

A quick look at the birth rate will show you there’s a major problem.

7. The severe costs of having a wedding. Yes, I know you don’t have to have a wedding, but try telling that to a woman.

Not a very plausible reason.

[sufiandy]

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
If you’d read the links you would see that gay men are the main source of HIV infection to women. It’s a public health problem. And what is particularly disturbing is the trend of ‘bug chasing’ and ‘gift giving’ where gay men deliberately spread and contract HIV.
[/quote]

Is this something your really concerned about? I’ve never had this concern with women, maybe you are hanging around the wrong types if its an actual problem in your life.

So hypothetically if they ever find a cure for HIV you have no problems will gays and will stop making threads like this?[/quote]

You’re an idiot. HIV is only one of more than a dozen STDs and STDs are only one reason amongst many that I oppose the normalisation of homosexuality.
[/quote]

We can get to the other reasons but I am not convinced STDs are a real reason so I am curious why you brought that up first when I asked a straight forward question.

The bottom line is you are at much greater risk of STDs from a chain of heterosexual transmissions. Most STDs were more prevalent before homosexuality was normalized. This means you are at lower risk today yet are still trying to blame homosexuals who are more accepted today than ever.[/quote]

No heterosexuals are not at a greater risk than homosexuals of contracting STDs. I don’t know of anyone who makes that claim. And HIV became widespread due to homosexuals and IV drug users. I don’t know of anyone who denies that either.[/quote]

Not at all what I said. As a heterosexual why do you care what their risk favor is compared to yours? Your risk has declined in the last 30 years. Societies acceptance of gays has obviously not made it worse in this area so I don’t understand why its on your list of reasons.
[/quote]

I’m merely pointing out that it’s risky behaviour. They also infect many women thereby spreading the virus into the heterosexual population.
[/quote]

That is a small minority yet you are holding the entire group responsible. Its also against the law, so maybe you just have a problem with criminals? At least we can agree on that.

Again why do you keep bringing up the fact its risky behavior? Do you ever engage in risky behavior like speeding or parkour? Do you hate yourself for it?

[/quote]

I don’t keep bringing it up. I brought it up in response to interrogation. And yes I have engaged in risky behaviour and payed a heavy price for it. I don’t hate myself nor do I hate homosexuals.[/quote]

Then what is even the point of this thread? The homosexual agenda is not to promote risky behavior, most homosexuals would condemn the things you keep bringing up. Their agenda is to educate people like you that the stereotypical homosexual you keep mentioning (the minority) is not the majority.[/quote]

No, their agenda is to force bakers, florists, priests, rabbis etc. to participate in gay weddings. And to persecute private citizens who give money to organisations they don’t agree with. And to force the state to fund sex change treatments. And many other things besides. Homosexual activists are fascists.[/quote]

So its the liberal activists you don’t like? You just need to be more specific like this and nobody will accuse you of disliking them for what is beyond their control.

[H_factor]

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]ZJStrope wrote:

B/c the decline in marriage rates has nothing to do with:

1. Living longer

[/quote]

Why on earth would that affect marriage rates?

2. More people going to college

The majority of people graduate from college in their early 20’s. Higher education is not a barrier to marriage.

3. Waiting until they are older to have children

That wouldn’t affect the marriage rate either.

4. Women’s acceptance and prevalence in the work place, as such, being able to survive on their own

I already mentioned feminism as a contributing factor.

5. Men being scared shitless of making a mistake and then having everything taken from him b/c the courts side predominately with the woman

Okay I’ll give you that one.

6. It does not take into long-term, monogamous relationships and/or co-habitation

A quick look at the birth rate will show you there’s a major problem.

7. The severe costs of having a wedding. Yes, I know you don’t have to have a wedding, but try telling that to a woman.

Not a very plausible reason.[/quote]

Let me help you out SexMachine by googling some of these things for you so you don’t have to. Forgive me if the sites aren’t right wing enough for you, these are just easy answers you can find on google with actual sources unlike your assertions with the 6 things you came up with:

on Number 1: “Risk and mortalityâ??Parents have fewer children when they have more hope that children will survive into adulthood.” The economics of declining birth rates - Futurity

Number 2: Higher educated people have less children. They are more likely to get married later and put their careers first.

Less-Educated Women Have More Children. Or Is It the Other Way Around? |...

Number 3: Waiting later to get married wouldn’t effect the marriage rate, but would the fertility rate which is what you are sounding the warning bells on.

Number 6: Major problem? Teen Birth Rate Reached New Historic Low in 2012 | Live Science SONOFABITCH REMEMBER THE GOOD OLD DAYS OF SHOTGUN WEDDINGS? Fucking teens not doing their part by getting knocked up. Probably due to birth control. END OF THE WORLD!

All over the world, birthrates tend to fall along with economic development, for numerous reasons including (a) the move away from a labor-intensive small-farm economy and (b) women’s ascendance in the workforce, which uses time that used to be devoted to child-rearing. Families in richer countries tend to have fewer kids. In places like Japan and Western Europe, national populations are actually peaking.

Wonder why they didn’t mention gay people? Maybe they don’t have a subscription to mass resistance? The U.S. Economy's Big Baby Problem - The Atlantic

Number 7: Actually the economy is the biggest cite in most articles when you google this. Not big cites? Almost all the shit you mention including religion, family values, and other shit that is subjective.

[H_factor]

I’d never heard of MassResistance before this thread, but it has an interesting history: Of course this is all from wikipedia, but seems like a great site for promoting true family values!

In 1996 MassResistance’s leader, Brian Camenker claimed that suicide prevention programs aimed at gay youth actually were ?put together by homosexual activists to normalize homosexuality?.

Would be better if they just killed themselves?

MassResistance has made claims that no homosexuals died in the The Holocaust of World War II, that the “pink triangle the Nazis forced imprisoned gays to wear actually signified Catholic priests”, and that “gays are dangerous to kids”. They have also made comments regarding “skyrocketing homosexual domestic violence”[3][27] and called a gay pride event a “depraved” display that featured “a great deal of obviously disturbed, dysfunctional, and extremely self-centered people whose aim was to push their agenda”.[3]

Ok.

According to MassResistance, the “homosexual anti-bullying agenda” is exploiting the legitimate problem of school bullying, with the aim of pushing “homosexual-normalization propaganda” at children.

Makes sense if you’re fucking crazy.

[H_factor]

In October 2008, MassResistance employee Michael Olivio was arrested for disorderly conduct at a school after parents became concerned about his taking many pictures of their children.[58] When questioned by police, he explained that he was filming footage for a documentary, but mistook an elementary school for a high school. When asked by police to leave, Olivio began to “act erratically”; he “ran through yards […] shedding clothing”. Camenker supported Olivio’s statement that he was working for the MassResistance, but went to the wrong school.

It’s a good thing these people are keeping an eye on the safety of our children…wait a second.

Keeping America safe by filming people as they go to the bathroom:

Men in Skirts Use Women's Restroom at Mass. Marriott Hotel

[H_factor]

How about Spearhead another site that SexMachine linked?

One section of categories is for Girls who cry Rape. http://www.the-spearhead.com/category/girls-who-cry-rape/

A link to a blog for pro/male-Anti-feminist technology.

How about this blog post? http://www.the-spearhead.com/2013/10/14/why-you-might-want-to-think-twice-about-sending-your-daughter-to-college/

Let me save you some reading:

[quote]She, like most other college girls, is simply parroting what?s been fed to her by her profs. Girls are good at that, which is why teachers like them so much ? they?re easy.

If you?re the father of an American girl, is this really what you want your daughter to absorb over the course of four years? Does it add any value whatsoever to the family or to the nation?

Your money would be much better spent sending her to sewing or baking school. Let?s face it: Ms. Fleig isn?t going to discover the cure for cancer. Despite being an attractive young woman, she isn?t going to colonize Mars, either (at her size, she?d be too expensive to launch out of the Earth?s atmosphere). In all likelihood, the best she could hope for is a nonprofit or government job fully funded by her father?s and brother?s tax bills.

And yet she represents 60% of college students. What an enormous, unsustainable waste. It?s impolitic to point it out, but from a cost-benefit point of view, in most cases higher education is entirely wasted on women, and as in Ms. Fleig?s case is often counterproductive.[/quote]

If you want to figure out why SexMachine thinks the way he does why not look at the websites he reads? Haven’t heard of any of them like me? Maybe that is a good thing.

[DBCooper]

[quote]pushharder wrote:

RainbowBert wrote:

SexMachine is gay as fuck. You know how I know? He’s been getting his ass pounded this whole thread, and you just blew a gigantic fucking load all over his face. NICE![/quote]

Seriously, Bert, this ain’t happenin’. SM is fending off the Gay Militia rather well, I’d say.

Although I’m not surprised you ambled out of your Chicken Little thread to launch one of your patented ICBM’s. I bet you’re even sportin’ one them thar pink tutus left over from that landmark thread where you trolled purt near e’eryone but your dear old amigo, Push the Indefatigable. Eh?

You calling me Chicken Little? This from the guy who is convinced that gay marriage and homosexuality in general is an inevitable precursor to the collapse of the family unit and the end of western civilization as we know it? I laugh.

[RATTLEHEAD]

[quote]H factor wrote:
How about Spearhead another site that SexMachine linked?

One section of categories is for Girls who cry Rape. http://www.the-spearhead.com/category/girls-who-cry-rape/

A link to a blog for pro/male-Anti-feminist technology.

How about this blog post? http://www.the-spearhead.com/2013/10/14/why-you-might-want-to-think-twice-about-sending-your-daughter-to-college/

Let me save you some reading:

[quote]She, like most other college girls, is simply parroting what?s been fed to her by her profs. Girls are good at that, which is why teachers like them so much ? they?re easy.

If you?re the father of an American girl, is this really what you want your daughter to absorb over the course of four years? Does it add any value whatsoever to the family or to the nation?

Your money would be much better spent sending her to sewing or baking school. Let?s face it: Ms. Fleig isn?t going to discover the cure for cancer. Despite being an attractive young woman, she isn?t going to colonize Mars, either (at her size, she?d be too expensive to launch out of the Earth?s atmosphere). In all likelihood, the best she could hope for is a nonprofit or government job fully funded by her father?s and brother?s tax bills.

And yet she represents 60% of college students. What an enormous, unsustainable waste. It?s impolitic to point it out, but from a cost-benefit point of view, in most cases higher education is entirely wasted on women, and as in Ms. Fleig?s case is often counterproductive.[/quote]

If you want to figure out why SexMachine thinks the way he does why not look at the websites he reads? Haven’t heard of any of them like me? Maybe that is a good thing. [/quote]

Holy hell, some of that stuff is nuts.

[H_factor]

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:
How about Spearhead another site that SexMachine linked?

One section of categories is for Girls who cry Rape. http://www.the-spearhead.com/category/girls-who-cry-rape/

A link to a blog for pro/male-Anti-feminist technology.

How about this blog post? http://www.the-spearhead.com/2013/10/14/why-you-might-want-to-think-twice-about-sending-your-daughter-to-college/

Let me save you some reading:

[quote]She, like most other college girls, is simply parroting what?s been fed to her by her profs. Girls are good at that, which is why teachers like them so much ? they?re easy.

If you?re the father of an American girl, is this really what you want your daughter to absorb over the course of four years? Does it add any value whatsoever to the family or to the nation?

Your money would be much better spent sending her to sewing or baking school. Let?s face it: Ms. Fleig isn?t going to discover the cure for cancer. Despite being an attractive young woman, she isn?t going to colonize Mars, either (at her size, she?d be too expensive to launch out of the Earth?s atmosphere). In all likelihood, the best she could hope for is a nonprofit or government job fully funded by her father?s and brother?s tax bills.

And yet she represents 60% of college students. What an enormous, unsustainable waste. It?s impolitic to point it out, but from a cost-benefit point of view, in most cases higher education is entirely wasted on women, and as in Ms. Fleig?s case is often counterproductive.[/quote]

If you want to figure out why SexMachine thinks the way he does why not look at the websites he reads? Haven’t heard of any of them like me? Maybe that is a good thing. [/quote]

Holy hell, some of that stuff is nuts.[/quote]

It’s weird I knew this type of shit existed on the internet, but I’d never searched for it or really given any thought to it. Spearhead alone is scary loony. And this is just the shit from 10 minutes of googling and browsing. Imagine if you took a deeper look? This is the shit you don’t want kids seeing coming from someone who is claiming the demise of family values and lack of religion.

Some really scary stuff that I wish I didn’t know the names of now.

[RATTLEHEAD]

[quote]H factor wrote:

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:
How about Spearhead another site that SexMachine linked?

One section of categories is for Girls who cry Rape. http://www.the-spearhead.com/category/girls-who-cry-rape/

A link to a blog for pro/male-Anti-feminist technology.

How about this blog post? http://www.the-spearhead.com/2013/10/14/why-you-might-want-to-think-twice-about-sending-your-daughter-to-college/

Let me save you some reading:

[quote]She, like most other college girls, is simply parroting what?s been fed to her by her profs. Girls are good at that, which is why teachers like them so much ? they?re easy.

If you?re the father of an American girl, is this really what you want your daughter to absorb over the course of four years? Does it add any value whatsoever to the family or to the nation?

Your money would be much better spent sending her to sewing or baking school. Let?s face it: Ms. Fleig isn?t going to discover the cure for cancer. Despite being an attractive young woman, she isn?t going to colonize Mars, either (at her size, she?d be too expensive to launch out of the Earth?s atmosphere). In all likelihood, the best she could hope for is a nonprofit or government job fully funded by her father?s and brother?s tax bills.

And yet she represents 60% of college students. What an enormous, unsustainable waste. It?s impolitic to point it out, but from a cost-benefit point of view, in most cases higher education is entirely wasted on women, and as in Ms. Fleig?s case is often counterproductive.[/quote]

If you want to figure out why SexMachine thinks the way he does why not look at the websites he reads? Haven’t heard of any of them like me? Maybe that is a good thing. [/quote]

Holy hell, some of that stuff is nuts.[/quote]

It’s weird I knew this type of shit existed on the internet, but I’d never searched for it or really given any thought to it. Spearhead alone is scary loony. And this is just the shit from 10 minutes of googling and browsing. Imagine if you took a deeper look? This is the shit you don’t want kids seeing coming from someone who is claiming the demise of family values and lack of religion.

Some really scary stuff that I wish I didn’t know the names of now. [/quote]

Indeed, most definitely an internet rabbit hole I no longer wish to explore lol.

[H_factor]

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:
How about Spearhead another site that SexMachine linked?

One section of categories is for Girls who cry Rape. http://www.the-spearhead.com/category/girls-who-cry-rape/

A link to a blog for pro/male-Anti-feminist technology.

How about this blog post? http://www.the-spearhead.com/2013/10/14/why-you-might-want-to-think-twice-about-sending-your-daughter-to-college/

Let me save you some reading:

[quote]She, like most other college girls, is simply parroting what?s been fed to her by her profs. Girls are good at that, which is why teachers like them so much ? they?re easy.

If you?re the father of an American girl, is this really what you want your daughter to absorb over the course of four years? Does it add any value whatsoever to the family or to the nation?

Your money would be much better spent sending her to sewing or baking school. Let?s face it: Ms. Fleig isn?t going to discover the cure for cancer. Despite being an attractive young woman, she isn?t going to colonize Mars, either (at her size, she?d be too expensive to launch out of the Earth?s atmosphere). In all likelihood, the best she could hope for is a nonprofit or government job fully funded by her father?s and brother?s tax bills.

And yet she represents 60% of college students. What an enormous, unsustainable waste. It?s impolitic to point it out, but from a cost-benefit point of view, in most cases higher education is entirely wasted on women, and as in Ms. Fleig?s case is often counterproductive.[/quote]

If you want to figure out why SexMachine thinks the way he does why not look at the websites he reads? Haven’t heard of any of them like me? Maybe that is a good thing. [/quote]

Holy hell, some of that stuff is nuts.[/quote]

It’s weird I knew this type of shit existed on the internet, but I’d never searched for it or really given any thought to it. Spearhead alone is scary loony. And this is just the shit from 10 minutes of googling and browsing. Imagine if you took a deeper look? This is the shit you don’t want kids seeing coming from someone who is claiming the demise of family values and lack of religion.

Some really scary stuff that I wish I didn’t know the names of now. [/quote]

Indeed, most definitely an internet rabbit hole I no longer wish to explore lol.
[/quote]

I guess the only good thing is those websites are so obscure and represent such a minority of people’s viewpoints that no one here had really heard about them before.

[bigflamer]

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
The wit and wisdom of Christopher Hitchens is always inspiring.

Hitchens On Homosexuality

[/quote]

A self confessed Marxist radical attacking organised religion and praising a self hating homosexual Jew. Inspiring.[/quote]

Amateurs “attack” organized religion, Hitchens tore it apart at it’s core with artistic intellectual brutality. And yes, he was very inspiring.

Reading your posts, is like thumbing through the documented ramblings of a religious zealot, proud of his lunacy. If this conversation was happening in person, I’d be the guy slowly backing away from your crazy ass, with a cautious “oooookay then…buh bye”, just like I’d probably do with any crazy person.

You’ve been continued proof that religion not only justifies ignorance, intolerance, and hatred, but serves to empower that person to commit to these destructive values with fervor.

I think a break from the T-Nation politics forum is in order once again for me. One can only ingest so much slaphapy religious drivel. Good luck with your religious zealotry, hope it works out for you.

[H_factor]

I’ve found myself posting less and less in this political forum. Unfortunately I feel the quality and diversity of the topics has really dropped off in the past few months. When you’ve got people’s responses to the threads they make already figured out and are listening to the same people argue the same thing ad nauseaum you start to question the value in it.

[DBCooper]

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

RainbowBert wrote:

SexMachine is gay as fuck. You know how I know? He’s been getting his ass pounded this whole thread, and you just blew a gigantic fucking load all over his face. NICE![/quote]

Seriously, Bert, this ain’t happenin’. SM is fending off the Gay Militia rather well, I’d say.

Although I’m not surprised you ambled out of your Chicken Little thread to launch one of your patented ICBM’s. I bet you’re even sportin’ one them thar pink tutus left over from that landmark thread where you trolled purt near e’eryone but your dear old amigo, Push the Indefatigable. Eh?

You calling me Chicken Little? This from the guy who is convinced that gay marriage and homosexuality in general is an inevitable precursor to the collapse of the family unit and the end of western civilization as we know it? I laugh.[/quote]

Best post.

Kinda.

Well maybe not.

Nope, not at all.

Sorry.

BTW, copy and paste in this thread where I supposedly said the things you claim I said. Take your time and get it right. I’ll wait.[/quote]

Ah, the standard fallback position. Place the onus on me to sift through dozens of pages of bullshit to validate the point that you and I both know has merit to it. As if you’ve never said that gay marriage could lead to an entire colony of people marrying each other, or animals, or a rock, or even the complete breakdown of the family unit.

Sure, the “end of western civilization as we know it” is open to interpretation, but I think you and I can both agree that if people really started marrying animals or the members of a country club or some shit like that, societal collapse can’t be too far around the corner. I simply don’t think that gay marriage is the Chicken Little situation you, as well as others, have made it out to be.

[SexMachine]

[quote]H factor wrote:
How about Spearhead another site that SexMachine linked?

One section of categories is for Girls who cry Rape. http://www.the-spearhead.com/category/girls-who-cry-rape/

A link to a blog for pro/male-Anti-feminist technology.

How about this blog post? http://www.the-spearhead.com/2013/10/14/why-you-might-want-to-think-twice-about-sending-your-daughter-to-college/

Let me save you some reading:

[quote]She, like most other college girls, is simply parroting what?s been fed to her by her profs. Girls are good at that, which is why teachers like them so much ? they?re easy.

If you?re the father of an American girl, is this really what you want your daughter to absorb over the course of four years? Does it add any value whatsoever to the family or to the nation?

Your money would be much better spent sending her to sewing or baking school. Let?s face it: Ms. Fleig isn?t going to discover the cure for cancer. Despite being an attractive young woman, she isn?t going to colonize Mars, either (at her size, she?d be too expensive to launch out of the Earth?s atmosphere). In all likelihood, the best she could hope for is a nonprofit or government job fully funded by her father?s and brother?s tax bills.

And yet she represents 60% of college students. What an enormous, unsustainable waste. It?s impolitic to point it out, but from a cost-benefit point of view, in most cases higher education is entirely wasted on women, and as in Ms. Fleig?s case is often counterproductive.[/quote]

If you want to figure out why SexMachine thinks the way he does why not look at the websites he reads? Haven’t heard of any of them like me? Maybe that is a good thing. [/quote]

I didn’t use either of the sites as a primary source. Those sites just happened to contain links to studies by the CDC, WHO etc. don’t pretend that I endorse the views of every blogger on the site. I don’t.