|
Post by Lone Wanderer on Jun 17, 2019 10:24:09 GMT
Pedophiles Believe They Should Be A Part Of The LGBT CommunityPedophiles are rebranding themselves as “MAPs” or “Minor Attracted Persons” in an effort to gain acceptance and be included into the LGBT community, according to several reports from LGBT news sites. According to Urban Dictionary, the blanket term MAP includes infantophiles (infants), pedophiles (pre-pubescent children), hebephiles (pubescent children), and ephebophiles (post-pubescent children). Some MAPs also refer to themselves as NOMAPs or “Non-Offending Minor Attracted Persons”. These pedophiles seek to be a part of the LGBT+ community, even going so far as to make a “Pride” flag for Gay Pride Month. The “MAP/NOMAP community” tries to pull at people’s heartstrings by claiming that pedophiles are misunderstood marginalized people, and that as long as their attraction to children is not acted upon — or in some cases when they get permission from the child — that they should not be villainized. Many blogs exist on Tumblr showing support for MAPs, claiming that they should be a part of the LGBT community and attempting to create “safe spaces” for these “minor attracted persons”. The blog “Pedophiles about Pedophilia” also presents many sob stories of “marginalized” pedophiles in pretty pastel colors, claiming that they mean no harm and just want to be loved like everyone else as shown in such headlines as “Why Pedophilia And Pedophiles Are Not A Risk To Children”, “Growing Up A Pedophile” and “How I came out as an anti-contact pedophile to the woman I love”. This name change seems to follow in the liberal trend of rebranding things by giving them more “politically correct” names, but is the next step really normalizing pedophilia? dailycaller.com/2018/07/09/pedophiles-lgbt-community/
|
|
|
Post by thesageofmainstreet on Jul 12, 2019 20:01:05 GMT
There is no binary law of sex. That much is obvious. Homosexuality is perfectly natural and has been identified in thousands of animal species. Mostly mammals, but also birds and amphibians. Of course the plant kingdom does not have a binary sex law either, with many plants being neuter, others able to change sex, and others being hermaphrodite. Some of the most common plants species such as hemp can have examples which are male, female or both. Dogs and cats are most commonly observed since they are in our homes, to have sex with their own gender. There is one undoubtedly perfect, clear, beautiful, extravagant, delicious, tasty and crystal law of sex - is our will to prolong our lives raising children. This law was used milliards of times. There is no objections to it. No one. Examples of homo in any species as well as in different cultures (the Ancient Greece, Emperor's Japan, etc) aren't good in their anti-argument against prolonging a life of humanity. Maybe I didn't choose sexuality, and maybe a culture had big influence to it. So what? The law of surviving, the law of creating another life is much more powerful against any form of pervercy. And why do we call some weird sexuality as pervert forms? Be-cause it is not the way to continue our life. This is really important, I beg you to hear it: any forms of sexuality are possible and there's no global objections to it. - A specie can do anything possible to do for it; but for what? - This "for what" is more important, than anything. Usually we understand it being too old, to reverse time back. All the humanity is hurrying somewhere. If they were not, all the kinds of sexuality would be as good as any other; or - there would be no objections to those forms, if we weren't mortal. Mortality and the other things (e.g. climate, chemical conditions) hold many other types of preferences. I'd say this was a key to understand why binary sex (not sexuality) had been living for many years, because it was one of the best types of living systems our living nature could use. And - this means that sexes are products of the nature. The nature must be responsible for such separations. It's likely that homosexuality as well as heterosexuality has no place at all. The nature divide them as such sexes, and our thinking that homosexuality was correct while heterosexuality wasn't correct (or even that all of them were possible) must be on the wrong way. As long as the purpose of life isn't defined, there's no point to going to find the answer on this question. A Molested Generation Loses the Will to Grow UpThere is a co-existent law: the survival of the group. Too many births from sexuality would cause an existential threat. So it would have been logical to encourage same-sex activity to bring the population down to a sustainable level. But that activity, which is not a sexuality at all despite the name the enemies of the human race give it, must have been itself seriously destructive of the tribe's survival, or else it would have been frequently used as a solution to the crisis of overpopulation. Instead of that horror, the human race had to resort to the horrible but not annihilating practices of infanticide, cannibalism, human sacrifice, and constant intertribal genocide.
|
|
sculptor
Full Member
Posts: 121
Likes: 20
Meta-Ethnicity: Homonid
Ethnicity: Sapiens Sapiens
Country: United Kingdon of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Region: South
Location: Brighton
Ancestry: Homo Sapiens
Taxonomy: Mammalian
mtDNA: From mt EVE
Politics: Left
Religion: None
Relationship Status: MYOB
Hero: My Grandmother
Age: too old
Philosophy: Always
|
Post by sculptor on Jul 13, 2019 8:34:30 GMT
Ive been reading stuff here for quite a while there was no signs of me as an atheist... I never been a one. So why did god create paedophiles, homosexuals, and transgender people?? Was it to give YOU the fun of persecuting them?
|
|
sculptor
Full Member
Posts: 121
Likes: 20
Meta-Ethnicity: Homonid
Ethnicity: Sapiens Sapiens
Country: United Kingdon of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Region: South
Location: Brighton
Ancestry: Homo Sapiens
Taxonomy: Mammalian
mtDNA: From mt EVE
Politics: Left
Religion: None
Relationship Status: MYOB
Hero: My Grandmother
Age: too old
Philosophy: Always
|
Post by sculptor on Jul 13, 2019 8:41:36 GMT
There is one undoubtedly perfect, clear, beautiful, extravagant, delicious, tasty and crystal law of sex - is our will to prolong our lives raising children. This law was used milliards of times. There is no objections to it. No one. Examples of homo in any species as well as in different cultures (the Ancient Greece, Emperor's Japan, etc) aren't good in their anti-argument against prolonging a life of humanity. Maybe I didn't choose sexuality, and maybe a culture had big influence to it. So what? The law of surviving, the law of creating another life is much more powerful against any form of pervercy. And why do we call some weird sexuality as pervert forms? Be-cause it is not the way to continue our life. This is really important, I beg you to hear it: any forms of sexuality are possible and there's no global objections to it. - A specie can do anything possible to do for it; but for what? - This "for what" is more important, than anything. Usually we understand it being too old, to reverse time back. All the humanity is hurrying somewhere. If they were not, all the kinds of sexuality would be as good as any other; or - there would be no objections to those forms, if we weren't mortal. Mortality and the other things (e.g. climate, chemical conditions) hold many other types of preferences. I'd say this was a key to understand why binary sex (not sexuality) had been living for many years, because it was one of the best types of living systems our living nature could use. And - this means that sexes are products of the nature. The nature must be responsible for such separations. It's likely that homosexuality as well as heterosexuality has no place at all. The nature divide them as such sexes, and our thinking that homosexuality was correct while heterosexuality wasn't correct (or even that all of them were possible) must be on the wrong way. As long as the purpose of life isn't defined, there's no point to going to find the answer on this question. A Molested Generation Loses the Will to Grow UpThere is a co-existent law: the survival of the group. Too many births from sexuality would cause an existential threat. So it would have been logical to encourage same-sex activity to bring the population down to a sustainable level. But that activity, which is not a sexuality at all despite the name the enemies of the human race give it, must have been itself seriously destructive of the tribe's survival, or else it would have been frequently used as a solution to the crisis of overpopulation. Instead of that horror, the human race had to resort to the horrible but not annihilating practices of infanticide, cannibalism, human sacrifice, and constant intertribal genocide. All of this speculation assumes that society is being controlled. This is not how it works. Nature does not one day wake up and figure out that there are too many people and start making gay babies. Nor do humans wake up and respond with some sort of "logic" (your word) to reduce population, and insist that people practice no behaviour. Human sacrifice (in the tiny number of examples in history) have had NO impact on population; neither has cannibalism with is extremely rare, and usually a ritual practice to honour the dead. Infanticide is personal not societal in all cases, and can be a response to rape or poverty. Intertribal genocide is not a logical response to over population, but far more complex.
|
|
|
Post by fschmidt on Jul 13, 2019 8:58:51 GMT
The Puritans and their descendants the Yankees... What percent of Yankees actually descended from Puritans? I seriously doubt it is over 50%. This is standard Calvinism. Most American Christians believed this. What was the religion of the Southerners and didn't they also believe this? I am reluctant to read long history books since I feel my time is better spent reading primary sources. Can you suggest something short, or a primary source, or, best of all, a collection of primary sources?
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jul 13, 2019 9:23:24 GMT
there was no signs of me as an atheist... I never been a one. So why did god create paedophiles, homosexuals, and transgender people?? Was it to give YOU the fun of persecuting them? I don't persecute anyone. What makes you say that? You're not right thinking that God has created pedophiles, transgenders, and the other people which primary don't like us. God created souls. Nameless ones. They incarnated into bodies and one of possible scenarios happened. I mean that there could be many scenarious of the world (the universe), but we're living in one of it. God knows everything that knows a demon of Laplas but He also is able to create the universes, angels, souls. He knows that body B1 in time T1 will be at place P1 and its energy at this point will be E1 and the direction, relating to another body B2, will be D1. So, He can calculate a history of the soul, but He doesn't know which soul is it, because all souls are equal. Except all physical things, all circumstantial, each soul has something that we can all an intention. An intention to good, or to evil. Any soul chooses which direction to choose. And its results can be seen at its hesitations on a choice. At the end God will see all the souls, and a sum of intentions of a sould will be seen on it. Depending on what intention had been chosen a soul would go to heaven or hell. Intention of a soul is what God doesn't know.
|
|
sculptor
Full Member
Posts: 121
Likes: 20
Meta-Ethnicity: Homonid
Ethnicity: Sapiens Sapiens
Country: United Kingdon of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Region: South
Location: Brighton
Ancestry: Homo Sapiens
Taxonomy: Mammalian
mtDNA: From mt EVE
Politics: Left
Religion: None
Relationship Status: MYOB
Hero: My Grandmother
Age: too old
Philosophy: Always
|
Post by sculptor on Jul 15, 2019 11:03:22 GMT
So why did god create paedophiles, homosexuals, and transgender people?? Was it to give YOU the fun of persecuting them? I don't persecute anyone. What makes you say that? You're not right thinking that God has created pedophiles, transgenders, and the other people which primary don't like us. God created souls. Nameless ones. They incarnated into bodies and one of possible scenarios happened. I mean that there could be many scenarious of the world (the universe), but we're living in one of it. God knows everything that knows a demon of Laplas but He also is able to create the universes, angels, souls. He knows that body B1 in time T1 will be at place P1 and its energy at this point will be E1 and the direction, relating to another body B2, will be D1. So, He can calculate a history of the soul, but He doesn't know which soul is it, because all souls are equal. Except all physical things, all circumstantial, each soul has something that we can all an intention. An intention to good, or to evil. Any soul chooses which direction to choose. And its results can be seen at its hesitations on a choice. At the end God will see all the souls, and a sum of intentions of a sould will be seen on it. Depending on what intention had been chosen a soul would go to heaven or hell. Intention of a soul is what God doesn't know. You are not worth speaking to. A person that has convinced himself that he knows the mind of god is deluded.
|
|
Clovis Merovingian
Prestige/VIP
Elder
Posts: 2,697
Likes: 1,758
Meta-Ethnicity: Anglo-American
Ethnicity: Deep Southerner
Country: My State and my Region are my country
Region: The Deep South
Location: South Carolina
Ancestry: Gaelic (patrilineal), English, Ulster Scots/Scots Irish, Scottish, German, Swiss German, Swedish, Manx, Finnish, Norman French/Quebecois (distantly), Dutch (distantly)
Taxonomy: Borreby/Alpine/ Nordid mix
Y-DNA: R-S660/R-DF109
mtDNA: T1a1
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Christian
Hero: Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, James K. Polk
Age: 30
Philosophy: I try to find out what is true as best I can.
|
Post by Clovis Merovingian on Jul 16, 2019 6:03:08 GMT
The Puritans and their descendants the Yankees... What percent of Yankees actually descended from Puritans? I seriously doubt it is over 50%. They are cultural descendants of Puritans. There is a famous law in cultural studies called the Doctrine of First Effective Settlement which states that the first people to settle an empty area or that dislodges an earlier population from their land have a pivotal impact upon the trajectory and culture of the society they create even if its only a few hundred people. "Yankeedom" or as historians called this particular settlement pattern, the Yankee Empire, refers to the area where New Englanders settled in the colonies and later spread west into Upstate New York, the Upper Midwest, and later the West Coast and is one of the many different cultures in the United States of America created in this way. The colonies that became the United States were settled by different types of people. There were the Dutch in New York, the Quakers and Germans in Pennsylvania, the Cavaliers who settled Virginia, the Caribbean plantation owners who settled my state of South Carolina, and the Scots Irish who settled the back country of the Southern colonies. Many of these cultures spread west and did not mingle because of ethnic prejudice, different religious traditions, cultural prejudice, and different farming techniques.The first two books I've mentioned Albion's Seed and American Nations are devoted to the study of these different cultures. Below i'll show you a map of all of them and how they are reflected in how Americans cluster genetically in this country.
The map (Left Coast was also settled by New Englanders)
The Genetics
American Dialects also conform to this. And the political differences between these cultures supersede even the "urban rural divide" in politics. medium.com/s/balkanized-america/no-the-divide-in-american-politics-is-not-rural-vs-urban-and-heres-the-data-to-prove-it-c6cc8611f623This is standard Calvinism. Most American Christians believed this. What was the religion of the Southerners and didn't they also believe this? American religion was not only or even majority Calvinist and not all Calvinists are the same. The difference in the divide between the Yankees and the southern cultures religiously were private Protestantism vs public Protestantism. Public Protestantism holds that God has already decided the fates of all humans on earth and thus evangelism is kind of pointless. Thus the main focus for public Protestantism then is to create a more perfect Godly society on earth making it very reform minded. Where a private protestant would see alcoholism as individual sin and vice to repent of, a public protestant would see alcoholism as a societal problem to be remedied through governmental and social engineering.Private Protestants believe that this is a fallen world and that people are evil and that that Utopian pursuits are a pipe dream as long as the world is cursed by the sin of Adam. Private Protestantism's main goal is to save individual souls from damnation before Christ comes back rather than perfecting society. It focuses more on evangelism and is more individualistic while public protestants are more collectivist. Southern Baptist Evangelicals are a good example of private Protestantism.I am reluctant to read long history books since I feel my time is better spent reading primary sources. Can you suggest something short, or a primary source, or, best of all, a collection of primary sources? The third book, The Yankee Problem in American history is actually a very short collection of essays on the subject by Professor Clyde Wilson.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jul 20, 2019 16:41:40 GMT
I don't persecute anyone. What makes you say that? You're not right thinking that God has created pedophiles, transgenders, and the other people which primary don't like us. God created souls. Nameless ones. They incarnated into bodies and one of possible scenarios happened. I mean that there could be many scenarious of the world (the universe), but we're living in one of it. God knows everything that knows a demon of Laplas but He also is able to create the universes, angels, souls. He knows that body B1 in time T1 will be at place P1 and its energy at this point will be E1 and the direction, relating to another body B2, will be D1. So, He can calculate a history of the soul, but He doesn't know which soul is it, because all souls are equal. Except all physical things, all circumstantial, each soul has something that we can all an intention. An intention to good, or to evil. Any soul chooses which direction to choose. And its results can be seen at its hesitations on a choice. At the end God will see all the souls, and a sum of intentions of a sould will be seen on it. Depending on what intention had been chosen a soul would go to heaven or hell. Intention of a soul is what God doesn't know. You are not worth speaking to. A person that has convinced himself that he knows the mind of god is deluded. This speech is over. I've tried. How can you say that I'm a person who's not worth to speak, and at the same time you don't wanna hear anything I tell you? Just incredible. "To know God's mind"? I'm sorry, where have you got it? There are obvious things, and to say that "there's a God", and to claim at the same time that "He doesn't know something" is contradiction, because "God is omniscience".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2019 17:47:47 GMT
Ive been reading stuff here for quite a while there was no signs of me as an atheist... I never been a one. then why did u write, how did u figure out i was an atheist instead of saying what makes u say i am an atheist.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jul 20, 2019 18:41:54 GMT
there was no signs of me as an atheist... I never been a one. then why did u write, how did u figure out i was an atheist instead of saying what makes u say i am an atheist. I could write either ways. I see no big difference. Anyway, what makes you say that?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2019 18:46:14 GMT
then why did u write, how did u figure out i was an atheist instead of saying what makes u say i am an atheist. I could write either ways. I see no big difference. Anyway, what makes you say that? learn proper English boy. Thats all i can say
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jul 21, 2019 6:42:53 GMT
I could write either ways. I see no big difference. Anyway, what makes you say that? learn proper English boy. Thats all i can say There's no need to be rude. Please, keep your grammar nazi crap at yourself.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2019 11:26:08 GMT
learn proper English boy. Thats all i can say There's no need to be rude. Please, keep your grammar nazi crap at yourself. so ironic, its not about the grammar though
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Jul 21, 2019 21:25:39 GMT
Please stay on the topic guys and don't be rude to each other. Just tell them why you disagree and move on. No one single person in the entire world will ever think 100% like you on everything so it's something to get used to. If you're looking for followers then Twitter has some desperate individuals looking for people to follow.
|
|
|
Post by thesageofmainstreet on Jul 21, 2019 21:42:19 GMT
learn proper English boy. Thats all i can say There's no need to be rude. Please, keep your grammar nazi crap at yourself. For Hundreds of Years, the Rulers Have Intentionally Made English Spelling ChaoticAmerican college graduates have a ten-year-old's knowledge of grammar, so you should try to improve your English in order to put them in their place. The Diploma Dumbos claim that since they are "educated," any way they decide to speak, especially when they copy new grammatical errors created by the media, sets new and improved standards for proper grammar. It's really pathetic when they misuse high-sounding words like "oxymoron" or "data" in order to make people think their superficial education has any value.
|
|