The Decline and Fall of Britain

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

“We” meaning who, particularly? Californians? Americans? Australians? Liberals? Conservatives? Christians? Muslims?

I imagine whatever most people thought about it today probably thought similar things about it ten years ago.

Perhaps SexMachine can tell us what the reaction of his countrymen was to The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert, which was twenty years ago.

(If you have ever wondered what Hugo Weaving, Terence Stamp and Guy Pearce would look like as flaming drag queens, this is the movie for you.)

[/quote]

SYDNEY, Australia – The closing ceremony of the 2000 Summer Olympics is going to be a drag.

Cross-dressing drag queens will be part of the Games’ finale despite the controversy the move has sparked, ceremonies director Ric Birch said yesterday. He called critics of the plan “right-wing reactionaries.”

Birch also said that including the men who wear outlandish dresses, wigs and makeup in the closing ceremony is justified and a “part of one tiny section” of the event, a tribute to universally acclaimed Australian films that include the 1994 hit “The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert.”

The movie featured two drag queens and a transsexual driving a pink bus through Australia’s Outback. Some of the participants in the closing ceremony will be dressed in original costumes from the film, including a bright, frill-necked lizard outfit.

A report in the Sydney Morning Herald yesterday sparked heated debate about the closing ceremony.

[b]The Rev. Fred Nile, a Christian Democratic politician, was opposed to including drag queens in the ceremonies and said allowing homosexual men to prance around dressed as women would be a national embarrassment.

“Drag queens do not truly represent our great Aussie culture at all,” said Nile[/b], who urged like-minded Australians to express their concerns to Sydney organizers.

One caller to a talk radio station said he would trade his closing ceremony ticket after hearing the news; conservative politicians condemned the idea.

42

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
What did we think of this transgender B.S. a decade ago?[/quote]

“We” meaning who, particularly? Californians? Americans? Australians? Liberals? Conservatives? Christians? Muslims?

I imagine whatever most people thought about it today probably thought similar things about it ten years ago.

Perhaps SexMachine can tell us what the reaction of his countrymen was to The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert, which was twenty years ago.

(If you have ever wondered what Hugo Weaving, Terence Stamp and Guy Pearce would look like as flaming drag queens, this is the movie for you.)

Attitudes toward homosexuality, transsexuality and intersexuality seems to be in constant flux. Not necessarily a straight shot down a slippery slope so much as a meandering cross-country up one hill and down the next.

Note carefully that homosexuality was widely practiced in the Greek and Roman empires, and these empires eventually declined and collapsed into obscurity, so SexMachine just might be onto something here.[/quote]

I talking about the average American on the street. If you talked to people let’s say in 1999 and asked them if they thought transgenderism was a sickness or mental illness, they would agree. If you asked them what they thought about a 8 year old boy getting permission to use the girl’s restroom b/c he feels like he should be a girl, they most likely would laugh in your face.

Now? You get called a bigot if speak out about the 8 year old who doesn’t like his pee-pee. You are called intolerant and it’s suggested you attend sensitivity training or be sent to a camp to be re-educated.

Think I’m joking. This is how it is in California.

43

[quote]cwill1973 wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]cwill1973 wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
His point is probably that the PM of Great Britain is giving shout-outs to two of the institutions that are/will be responsible for the moral and cultural decay of that country. [/quote]

The presence of Muslims and homosexuals within a society is indicative of moral decay? As opposed to global British imperialism? [/quote]

The celebration of homosexuality is in my opinion immoral.

The implementation of British laws specifically designed to comply with Sharia law will lead to cultural decay. Islamic Sharia Law Effectively Enshrined In UK Legal System With New Will Guidance | HuffPost UK News
This is only the beginning.
[/quote]

Is the acceptance of homosexuality as a naturally occurring phenomenon immoral?[/quote]

This argument always cracks me up. Liberals argue that animals engage in homosexuality therefore it’s “natural.” And how about the heterosexual mating practices of animals? I’m pretty sure that if I went up to a strange woman, grabbed her and dragged her behind a tree, started raping her and growled angrily at any man in the area then bashed a policeman to death who tried to stop me - I’m pretty sure that wouldn’t be considered okay just because animals do it.[/quote]

You specifically stated in another thread that your sexual preferences were biological and that you couldn’t help what you preferred. Isn’t that right?
[/quote]

Two points - I’m an adult and my brain has finished developing. Perhaps if I spent my childhood being brainwashed by radical homosexual activists I wouldn’t be the same person I am today. Secondly - a proclivity one is born with does not necessarily mean that proclivity is a good thing. I’m sure a lot of paedophiles claim they were born that way and it’s “natural” because animals do it.[/quote]

The rates of recidivism amongst pedophiles is so high that, mark my words, in the not so near future they will be using similar tactics and arguments the gay lobby used to gain their acceptance.
[/quote]

The rate of recidivism is high because they are for the most part hard-wired that way. From that perspective pedophiles are pretty much fucked in that they don’t have a choice in the matter just like Sex Machine doesn’t have a choice in his preference for Italian women.

That said, pedophiles aren’t in the same boat as homosexuals who are attracted to adults because kids as a matter of law cannot consent to sexual conduct and if a pedophile acts on his preference even once he needs to be removed from society forever. And, no, very few people are going to be persuaded that pedophiles should be allowed to act on their impulses because the protection of children is a paramount concern.

We all have a choice in whether to act on our impulses; pedophiles do not get a pass merely because they are hard wired to prefer children. On the other hand, society has no legitimate interest in demonizing homosexuals merely because they act on their impulses with other, consenting adults.

In sum, the two are not comparable and its not a slippery slope.

44

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

The rate of recidivism is high because they are for the most part hard-wired that way. From that perspective pedophiles are pretty much fucked in that they don’t have a choice in the matter just like Sex Machine doesn’t have a choice in his preference for Italian women.

That said, pedophiles aren’t in the same boat as homosexuals who are attracted to adults because kids as a matter of law cannot consent to sexual conduct and if a pedophile acts on his preference even once he needs to be removed from society forever. And, no, very few people are going to be persuaded that pedophiles should be allowed to act on their impulses because the protection of children is a paramount concern.

We all have a choice in whether to act on our impulses; pedophiles do not get a pass merely because they are hard wired to prefer children. On the other hand, society has no legitimate interest in demonizing homosexuals merely because they act on their impulses with other, consenting adults.

[/quote]

I’m not demonising them. I don’t believe they are inherently evil or anything. I believe that homosexualism is aberrant. And not to be encouraged or normalised.

[quote]
In sum, the two are not comparable and its not a slippery slope. [/quote]

The slippery slope is evident already. Just take a look at gender studies and what culture Bolshies are teaching children.

45

This thread has certainly degenerated due SexMachine’s overcompensation. So it’s time to bring it back on subject.

To understand what is happening to Britain one needs to understand the ideological foundation of it’s leadership is the same as Barrack Obama and Hillery Clinton. David Cameron is a conservative in name only. In reality David Cameron is a disciple of Saul Alinsky. The Tory election manifesto even stated that their inspiration is Saul Alinsky. This article goes into greater depth on the subject.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/100032381/david-camerons-big-society-is-a-grotesque-fantasy-inspired-by-leftist-subversive-saul-alinsky/

“This plan is directly based on the successful community organising movement established by Saul Alinsky in the United States and has successfully trained generations of community organisers, including President Obama.”

That statement, which beggars belief even in the political fairground we now inhabit, is not taken from some far-out Trotskyite samizdat, but from the official Conservative Party introduction to David Cameron?s Big Idea ? the creation of a ?Neighbourhood army? of 5,000 full-time community organisers to implement his grotesque fantasy called ?Big Society?. If you ever doubted that, under Cameron, the Conservative Party has become ideologically and culturally deracinated, has lost its political compass and is occupied by an alien clique that has disfigured it beyond recognition, here is the incontestable evidence.

46

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
^ who tends to behead others? They statically tend to be a people of a particular religion.[/quote]

The Incan and the Mayan religions, definitely.

Although I don’t think they beheaded people statically. They swung those bronze axes pretty dynamically.[/quote]

I’m talking currently. There’s a certain group that has a propensity to sever heads if you disagree with them.
[/quote]

Ah. Mexican cartels.
[/quote]

84% of Egyptian Muslims favor a death sentence for leaving The Religion of Peace. 86% of Jordanian Muslims do as well. I think within a generation Britain will be unrecognizable. It’s going to be destroyed and overrun due to poor immigration policy.

47

[quote]Brett620 wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
^ who tends to behead others? They statically tend to be a people of a particular religion.[/quote]

The Incan and the Mayan religions, definitely.

Although I don’t think they beheaded people statically. They swung those bronze axes pretty dynamically.[/quote]

I’m talking currently. There’s a certain group that has a propensity to sever heads if you disagree with them.
[/quote]

Ah. Mexican cartels.
[/quote]

84% of Egyptian Muslims favor a death sentence for leaving The Religion of Peace. 86% of Jordanian Muslims do as well. I think within a generation Britain will be unrecognizable. It’s going to be destroyed and overrun due to poor immigration policy.

Unlike los Estados Unidos.

48

I wonder what % of British Muslims favor the same?

49

And 82% favor stoning for adulterers. Does this apply equally to both sexes? If not, does this qualify as a “War on Women”?

50

If anyone wants to snitch on a British thought criminal this is the place to go:

It’s a government funded group where you can report “Islamophobic” thoughts and statements and get people sent to prison like this 85-year-old woman:

Or this guy who quoted Churchill:

51

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
If anyone wants to snitch on a British thought criminal this is the place to go:

It’s a government funded group where you can report “Islamophobic” thoughts and statements and get people sent to prison like this 85-year-old woman:

Or this guy who quoted Churchill:

[/quote]

That’s unbelievable. That’s got to be a mistake…

52

[quote]Brett620 wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
^ who tends to behead others? They statically tend to be a people of a particular religion.[/quote]

The Incan and the Mayan religions, definitely.

Although I don’t think they beheaded people statically. They swung those bronze axes pretty dynamically.[/quote]

I’m talking currently. There’s a certain group that has a propensity to sever heads if you disagree with them.
[/quote]

Ah. Mexican cartels.
[/quote]

84% of Egyptian Muslims favor a death sentence for leaving The Religion of Peace. 86% of Jordanian Muslims do as well. I think within a generation Britain will be unrecognizable. It’s going to be destroyed and overrun due to poor immigration policy.

You are making a false assumption by calling this poor immigration policy. The false assumption is that the decision makers who are controlling this are well intentioned individuals who just aren’t smart enough to make the right choices.

What we see happening in the UK, in the US, is a cold, calculated, malevolent design. None of this is happening by mistake, the decision makers know exactly what they are doing. So we need to be a lot less forgiving when choosing words to describe what is being done.

Next point. This poll supports what I wrote several years ago. That we need to contain islam. We need to restrict muslims to their own part of the world and keep them there until such time that they demonstrate that they are willing to get along with everyone else by not forcing sharia on anyone.

53

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
There’s a huge undercurrent of buggery in islam.

Not sure why.

We were always being offered 12 year old boys to bugger in Afganistan.

I think it has a lot to do with the rich guys taking multiple wives, so the rest get to hold their dicks or bugger each other.[/quote]

Interesting enough, OBL was killed and he had multiple wives with him, but his entourage did not and the house was filled with porn (even had porn on the tele when the came into the house).

54

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
Don’t the Muslims have a War on Women?? Lol. But this war is going on 5000 years. [/quote]

I don’t think Moslems have been around for 5000 years. Islam has been around for 1300 years.

55

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
Don’t the Muslims have a War on Women?? Lol. But this war is going on 5000 years. [/quote]

I don’t think Moslems have been around for 5000 years. Islam has been around for 1300 years.[/quote]

Perhaps NorCal was thinking of the Jooooz.

56

[quote]Sifu wrote:
What we see happening in the UK, in the US, is a cold, calculated, malevolent design. None of this is happening by mistake, the decision makers know exactly what they are doing. [/quote]

So what are you saying? Expound please.

57

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
Don’t the Muslims have a War on Women?? Lol. But this war is going on 5000 years. [/quote]

I don’t think Moslems have been around for 5000 years. Islam has been around for 1300 years.[/quote]

They may not have been technically Muslims but you can bet your bottom dollar they were thinking about it.

58

The honorable desendants of Ishmael.

59

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
(even had porn on the tele when the came into the house).[/quote]

I hadn’t heard this. May I ask where you read it?

Edit: Fixed a typo: “Hard” instead of “heard.” Oh Freud…

60

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
(even had porn on the tele when the came into the house).[/quote]

I hadn’t heard this. May I ask where you read it?

Edit: Fixed a typo: “Hard” instead of “heard.” Oh Freud…[/quote]

x2

I hadn’t heard that one.