@MattFrame sorry but you've been tricked by satan God did not create Faggots satan did and if you knew the bible you would know this homosexuality is only one of the reasons sodom & gomohra were destroyed by God!
@EmilyGreene1984 also asks, "You claim that God approves of homosexuality"
Yes, His clear will in creating & keeping them on His planet conclusively prove this.
"how do you explain these verses...?"
Human myth, misinterpretation, lack of knowledge. The men who wrote the Bible claimed many things, but when their stories contradict God's obvious will, as it does in this case (of course the way He creates His children is not a "sin"), it's best to side with the Lord. JMHO.
@MattFrame You use the same tactic as satan did against Jesus, with the same results.....you lose. Oh, and btw, Jesus is God's truth......get to know Him first and then you can come out of your darkness which is infested with demons.
@dmhtuber rages, "You use the same tactic as satan did against Jesus"
LOL, check you out, vainly trying to compare yourself, and a lifestyle of deceit and bigotry, with Jesus'. Good luck with that. I'm sorry that being outed as a moral deviant has sent you into a rage, but that's what happens when you sow hatred and anti-God rhetoric in public. Those of us who love the Lord denounce you in His name. Sorry.
I think that bitch has her priorities wrong by wasting her time and position telling people that 'people teaching kids to respect homosexuals have their priorities wrong'.
I know...right? We love indoctrination so much were going to start building big fancy buildings where we can herd all the sheep into one area and indoctrinate them.
Angels have intellect and no emotion ( they just obey)
Animals have emotion and no intellect or conciousness.
Humans have both. If your emotion over takes your intellect then you become lower than the animals and if your intellect over takes your emotion then you become higher than the angels. This is what is known as a moral human being.
Thank god for equality! Thank you Great Britain for being an example of humanity and rejecting bigotry of any kind! It is about time the world take a turn toward love and not hate. We are all human and we all deserve equal respect!
There are certain moral principles within humanity which should not be crossed however bad you want to cross them. Such as sleeping with your mum or sister or a man sleeping with a man. Nothing justifies you sleeping with your mum because it is wrong. Same with homosexuality. Would you respect someone who sleeps with his mum? Offcourse you won't even if they're not hurting anyone. What if he told you he couldn't resist? Somehow this perversion became the norm
@Gacs25 To you the relationship is fine but to many others it is not, which means we need a higher power or a higher being to judge between us, one who knows the secrets to our bodies and the secrets to the laws of cause and effect. This is where right and wrong comes in, because what you think is right, others may see as wrong. There is no right and wrong without a higher being because their will always be someone opposing what you say
@Gacs25 So I demonized it based on the laws of God, the all knowing, whereas you've justified it based on the laws of an insignificant creature who's vision is limited and so is their hearing i.e. the human being.
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
@hunkymunky008 When you want to treat somebody poorly and unequally, it's not their obligation to "meet you halfway". Please provide evidence for negative effects on society.
A child isn't a parents property and they are approached without permission about things all the time.
Oppression can cause rebellion, which might be what you're referring to as "throw in peoples faces", though that criticism typically involves a huge double standard being applied compared to heterosexuality. PM ftw.
@hunkymunky008 I am not countering the deviation or abnormality of homosexuality... I have counteredthe relevance of those characteristics to moral validity and even the general perception of whether or not something is good/desirable.
It's irrelevant whether she accepts his relationships as normal or not. She would be mistaken to accept it as normal, were she viewing it from the perspective of gender-pairing.
He was discussing it with her. His motivations are unknown.
@hunkymunky008 Blindness is undesirable. Is it a crime to be blind...? That which is less preferable than a conceivable alternative is not automatically immoral or even the direct cause of it's undesirability.
It is not necessary for me to produce an absolute principal regarding deviations. I only need 1 example of a deviation from anatomical compatibility/predisposition in order to refute your premiss that all deviations are bad (your absolute statement). Which I have done.
@hunkymunky008 I said cause of mental illness, not homosexuality. Chris Crocker may exhibit some characteristics of a stereotype... that doesn't make him representative. In the same way that a person who is male with short hair is not then automatically representative of all men with short hair. I find C. Crockers behaviour odd ;).
Your reference to sex addiction here seems to be totally out of the blue. I don't understand it's relevance at all.
@hunkymunky008 That 5 year old didn't appear to be playing the piano for the first time... and of course even were some people able to instantly do so, that would still not negate my analogy as it would still apply to those pianists that could not do so.
Your anecdotal experience does not constitute strong evidence and your identification of a correlation does not constitute a causal relationship. You're now changing your criterion of morality to mental disorder anyway...
@hunkymunky008 If normality can be either good or bad then it is irrelevant to whether or not something is good or bad.
Whether or not something is desirable is likewise independent of whether or not it can be judged morally (in case you meant to suggest otherwise). The undesirability of homosexuality, though likely not universal, is entirely or almost entirely as a result of heterosexism.
@hunkymunky008 He wasn't forceful with her and didn't directly challenge her assertions, so it's unsurprising she held her ground. That doesn't change the fact that her point had no substance to it at all. She just said he's a man and it's weird... not arguments... just self-delusional semantics.
I don't see why it should remain unfamiliar and it isn't totally unfamiliar, it's taboo. That's the problem.
@hunkymunky008 She describes it as "weird" for him to have a BF. I.E. the only reason she seems to oppose it is because it is unfamiliar. She provides no actual argument or justification for her claim. I still disagree that it is "natural instinct" rather than cultural dogma.
However, even were it instinctive, that does not make it right. Instincts are primitive and in the absence of justification, are nothing more than biologically predisposed stupidity. Plz PM rather than 50 comments.
@hunkymunky008 Deviant, as detailed, refers purely to abnormality, which I have already countered, and is essential for all progress, as I have already pointed out. It itself is therefore not inherently bad and therefore useless as a criticism of something.
There is no disarming or sneakiness any more than any other form of education. The family member isn't disarming anything. He is discussing the issue in a friendly way with his friend and relative.
@hunkymunky008 Your perception of homosexuality as undesirable is not universal and even if it were, that in itself does not make it bad/wrong etc. The number of people who believe something does not alter whether or not it is correct.
The pianist example demonstrates a perfectly acceptable deviation from anatomical predisposition, relative to other available possibilities, therefore refuting your premiss that all deviations from it are bad.
@hunkymunky008 Your reference to societal ridicule/stigmatization as a cause of mental illness is about the only scientifically substantiated claim you have made and instantly makes any criticism of homosexuals on that basis totally hypocritical.
Chris Crocker is hardly representative... I may as well point to his idol Britney Spears as the archetypal heterosexual...
Your reference to sexuality as a matter of taste is just another misrepresentation of reality.
@hunkymunky008 Please provide evidence for your claim that the majority of gay men are effeminate and majority are troubled, and majority is due to "family centered" and that their relationships revolve around fetishes (more so than heterosexuals).
Your anecdotal examples do not constituted evidence that is remotely sufficient to form a mass generalization. Please provide scientific evidence for your claims. Feel free to PM me.
@hunkymunky008 What evidence do you have that some people can sit down and play the piano instantly? That of course doesn't counter my analogy anyway as the vast majority of people are still not anatomically predisposed towards playing the piano.
The premiss that we should conform stringently to our anatomical predispositions is unjustified in the first place and merely a criterion of morality that you have assumed, rather than justified.
@hunkymunky008 Anti-racism initiatives "target our children" because the prejudices are formed from a young age, so it seems highly unsurprising that the same might be true for other types of prejudice. Educating kids and providing an accurate representation of reality, particularly if it counters a distorted one is nothing like manipulating kids for sexual pleasure.
The "inherent instincts" are actually just cultural taboos ingrained from a young age. Instincts are primitive anyway.
@hunkymunky008 The skills are dictated by anatomical compatibility (genetics etc). We are biologically/anatomically far more predisposed towards picking up a ball than to playing the piano, whether you attribute this to the hands or the cerebellum, it is still a biological compatibility.
As I have pointed out, the underlying psychology which you identified is also just as comparable to heterosexuals. Homosexuals are abnormal, just like ginger or blond hair.
@hunkymunky008 Indeed, genetic predisposition is one that science currently considers to exist. Another pre-natal effect which, to my knowledge, is pretty much proven, is the Fraternal Birth Order Effect.
Anyway, you did change argument. Your first one was an attempt to discredit homosexuality by comparison to paedophilia, your second one was a criticism of the anatomical-compatibility of same-sex couples.
@hunkymunky008 That's not an intelligent response that points out the flaw in my argument as far as I can see. Is that your way of avoiding admitting you were wrong again?
Additionally, same sex couples seem no more or less compatible in their ability to love one another. Also, on the topic of sex, which you raised, as ss couples have the same type of genitals, they are likely more compatible for acts such as mutual masturbation and oral sex than opposite sex couples.
@hunkymunky008 The premiss that the possibility to which we are most efficiently anatomically predisposed is the only healthy form of expression appears to be flawed as you would be unlikely to consistently apply it when for instance comparing using the hands to play the piano vs picking up a ball. 1 needs years of training, while the other can be learnt during infancy (therefore the former would seem to be one we are far less anatomically predisposed towards). Are pianists sick?
@hunkymunky008 You're changing your argument to a "biological complementarity" one now but have unfortunately not acknowledged that your previous one was flawed. I did understand your previous point and explained how it was a faulty analogy (I am aware that you weren't stating that homosexuals are paedophiles).
You don't state your conclusion in this new argument but it is implied that homosexuality is a sickness due to reduced biological compatibility.
@hunkymunky008 Of course that's just an example to demonstrate the flaw. The flaw itself is actually that comparing things which share characteristics is irrelevant unless they share the Relevant characteristic. In this instance you are trying to establish a basis for condemning homosexuality. You use child molestation as it is condemned. It is however condemned because it involves sexually assaulting/raping a non consenting person (child). This characteristic is absent from homo.uality.
@hunkymunky008 I expect heterosexuals consider themselves to be born that way/unchangeable and don't consider it a sickness... so they too share this common psychology it seems...
I assume you can see the flaw in your "argument" now, right?
Regarding homosexuality, I do not claim that homosexuals are "born that way". I claim that (according to scientific consensus), a pre-natal predisposition is involved but the entire causes are not yet fully understood.
@hunkymunky008 Actually there are believed to be two main types of paedophile, regressive and fixative. As far as I remember, fixative are believed to be incurable etc, while regressive are that way due to some emotional disturbance in their relationship with the opposite sex.
Where are you getting your information from anyway? You seem to be mixing up child molestation and paedophilia and confusing involuntary attractions with voluntary actions.
@hunkymunky008 "Deviant" just refers to that which deviates from the norm. So is really another "you're abnormal so you're bad" criticism, which of course fails miserably as a person can be abnormally kind, compassionate or considerate. Deviance is also essential to all progress.
You seem to have no argument as you're appealing to emotion/idiocy by referring to paedophiles. If you have an actual argument, please make it. Immature insults are pointless.
While there are instances of homophobia at schools, there seems to be no basis to even begin to claim that they aren't the right place to deal with it.
The idea that schools "aren't the right place" is also a baseless insinuation, that relies on irrational stigmatization/prejudice to find agreement, not an actual argument at all.
Schools are a place to learn. The idea that kids shouldn't learn about sexuality, which will affect them all, unlike most other topics, seems insane.
I don't see anything but positive messages. People who are bothered by this are being scared of ghosts. The children that learn about it are already either gay or straight. We have to teach everybody to accept and love themselves for who they are and love others as well.
@MRBBJC It is indoctrination to children by promoting an abnormal lifestyle that has no inherent value to human survival. Let us have books about brother and sister who fall in love with each other since that happens in life? Or human beings who fall in love with animals since children's books tend to have animals talking and living with humans?
@NatDemUK You need some education yourself. Gay people fall in love with another human being. We love each other and build healthy, loving families. What's your fear? That kids that are straight are going to become gays? That's pure ignorance. We have to teach our children to be accepting of each other. Stop the hate and the ignorance.
@MRBBJC No, you need education yourself! This is forcing children to accept homosexuality as "normal" which it clearly is not. You do not build families, homosexuality produces nothing, heterosexuality produces and build families, heterosexuality is what brought every one of us into existence! Yes, kids obviously will become gay because of this since it is showing people of the same gender falling in love with each other. People can choose to accept whom they like.
@NatDemUK If you truly believe that a straight person can "become" gay, let me save you many years of therapy and let you know that you are officially either bi-sexual or homosexual, but not heterosexual. This is the most common among homophobes. You guys are either represed bi-sexual (because you believe you and others can change and become gay) or represed gay. Good luck to you.
@MRBBJC One thing I do not need therapy because I know where I am going in life. For one, don't start making that stupid response like every other fuckwit who says that just because you dislike homosexuality means that you are a repressed homosexual. Right, so if I hate a murderer, I am a repressed murderer as well, am I? Seriously grow up. And yes a straight person does become gay, it is through experiment and preference mostly since I have known straight people who have turned gay.
@NatDemUK well I AM a gay person and I'm telling you "becoming" gay is impossible. Realising you always were gay, that happens. But just totally switching sides, that can't happen. Human sexuality simply doesn't work that way.
@Stevie2Sxc You become gay when you realise what you like, you're not born with it. It is just like a murderer who realises that he wants to murder people when he felt that he wanted to do it all the time. Switching sides does happen. Sexuality is a behaviour, if you choose to stick your cock in a man's arse or stick your tongue in a man's mouth, you choose it because you think that it feels good. There is no evidence to prove what causes someone or else we would have found a medical cure for it
@NatDemUK when you realise what you like, you realise you were always that way. you can't be straight and then just suddenly realise you like guys. you were always gay, you just didn't realise. and comparing it to murderers is just stupid whenever someone tries to make the comparison.
and you do choose to sleep with men, you do it because it's what you want to do. and if you think it might feel good enough to try it... odds are you were gay or bi all along.
@Stevie2Sxc You realise it when you experiment it, that does not mean that you were born with it at all. You do not become sexually active until you have passed puberty so to say that one is born gay is contradictory to that. Comparing that to murder is not stupid because the two are a state of mind and are totally abnormal.
@NatDemUK you do understand that there has to be at least SOME same-sex attraction already existing for you to even want to experiment, right?
and no, the murder comparison is very stupid. homosexuality is how a person feels, murder is something a person does because they're fucked up. both not normal, but comparing them is dumb since one does damage and one doesn't
@Stevie2Sxc Yes, there is attraction but it does not mean that you were born to be attracted to one gender. We are attracted to all sorts of things we come across and we choose which one we think is the best. Murder is how someone feels because he feels he wants to take away the life of an innocent for the best of his own ambition and homosexuality is what a person does; it is not a question whether the two cause damage or not, it is a question of the two being inborn.
@NatDemUK "Right, so if I hate a murderer, I am a repressed murderer as well, am I?"
No, but when you say something like "all people have the potential to become murderers" what you would have done is to analise your own pychology and project that onto others.
In much the same way your are projecting your closet homosexuality onto others.
The only way you can see yourself as "normal" is by believing that everyone else is a closet case too.
@ColostomyCake Wah wah wah projecting my own closet homosexuality onto others? Give me break. Come back with a better argument rather than some pathetic accusative excuse by accusing someone for being closetly gay just because they dislike it. Like and dislike are two opposites, they are not the same. Period.
@NatDemUK It's not an accusation, it's an explanation of the flaws in your gay/murderer simile and an half-assed evaluation of your mental process.
If you honestly believe that straight people can simply choose to be gay, and you see yourself as a straight person, then it stands to reason that you believe you could be gay too if you wanted, right?
Straight people simply can't choose to be gay, there is only one reason why you would think otherwise...
@ColostomyCake Yes, I do honestly believe that straight people choose to be gay because they find that they are uncomfortable with the opposite gender for quite a while and prefer to be amongst their own gender. If I say that murder is a choice, does that mean that I am a murderer in the closet? No.
@NatDemUK Not everyone can become a murderer, most murderers have a complete lack of any empathy for their victim and have violent tendencies etc. etc... If you actually believe the only difference between you and that murderer is that they have simply made a choice, then yes it would mean that..
@NatDemUK Um, I wasn't trying to prove that it is normal because they like theater. When I was in high school, the drama department was pretty much the only thing that kept me sane. I'm sure many others feel the same way. Besides, is there any evidence that they were coerced into performing this play? Could they have possibly chosen to do this play themselves?
@MumblingMickey If you can't tell the difference then that's your problem. I have better things to do with my time than to teach you about the facts of life.
@CrankCase08 where "facts of life" is related to "parenting relationships". you're misunderstanding biological functions as being the same as social development.
@CrankCase08 you did and I don't have to explain it as it wasn't me to stand for that argument. now, if you deleted your previous comment, don't come playing rhetoric with me.
@ignoranttwat Did you read that comment... somehow he has this idea in his head that he can stamp 'good genes' or 'bad genes' as a label on people ...
shit I may as well do that myself and stamp the label 'low intelligence' and a product of 'bad genes' on him. We wouldn't wan't our kids being indoctrinated with the idea that having a low intellect like this twit was 'normal' would we?
Yeah, I sort of half think it's not even worth talking to these people, but the their ignorance just gets to me. He probably think eugenics is a good idea too.
ahh another right wing fucking halfwit that somehow thinks people can be 'taught' to be gay... what sort of uneducated fucking arseholes am I sharing this planet with at all?
Hey gobshite! guess what... they teach kids history too... did you never wonder why since it accounts for about 10% of classes why 10% of the population aren't fucking historians?
@MumblingMickey You are the 'fucking halfwit'. This report was made by the BBC.
Incidentally, teaching kids history is not sexualising them. If you can't tell the difference then there's clearly something wrong with you. What a twat.
@CrankCase08 People cannot be taught to be gay. This video is on your channel for one reason and one reason only. You are a self righteous right wing homophobic prick.
Now tell me... exactly what effect have gay people actually had on your life? How does someone being gay have any effect affect your life.
Are you secretly gay perhaps? just afraid to admit it?
You object to homosexuality? Just what the fuck do you think you can do about a phenomena that affects 7% of the human population?
@MumblingMickey No one is claiming this makes people gay, but it does two things: 1. sexualises children at a very early age; 2. indoctrinated the children that homosexual relationships are of equal worth as heterosexual ones.
It's clearly you that is the self-righteous left wing Cultural Marxist twat. I already explained that the report was produced by the BBC. Are you suggesting that's right-wing? Ridiculous logic suggesting anyone who opposes child sexualisation is a repressed homo. Idiot
@MumblingMickey wrong again. The act of sexualising children is not necessarily related to indoctrinating them that homosexual lifestyle is of equal worth to heterosexual lifestyle.
Who's talking about Dennis The Menace and The Beano? That is a pointless, unrelated ad hominem.
You clearly do follow some leftist 'ism' by referring to me as "a right wing homophobic prick" just because I don't conform to your degenerate social perspective.
I pointed out a kids book (the beano) which also presents adults who are in a relationship.
None of the books available to these kids discuss or even allude to sexual behavior. Ergo they cannot be sexualising kids. Sexualisation is when the message is one of a sexual nature (hence the name). Since none do that, its not sexualisation.
Conform or not, you can't 'argue' homosexuality away...its been a feature of humanity a long time, and it'll still be so long after you're gone!
@MumblingMickey In The Beano adults are portrayed as naturally heterosexual parents. It is not possible to have naturally homosexual parents, because single-sex homosexual relations cannot procreate. Therefore, small kids are being indoctrinated that such single sex homo relationships are of equal worth as heterosexual, which they are not because they would ultimately lead to himan extinction. It is therefore bringing the issue of sex into the world of small children.
@CrankCase08 Also I can be perfectly neutral politically, socially etc. and still recognise when someone is overtly right wing as you are.
In this case thinking that somehow your objection personally to a phenomena observed in humans (homosexuality) can somehow be argued against. Thats the dumb since you may as well be arguing people shouldn't be black, or asian... or have two legs.
Its pointless... because apart from anything else... there is nothing you can do about it.
@MumblingMickey The usual Leftist tactic of discounting opposition by labelling opponents as 'right wing'. There's plenty of right wing homosexuals, so how does me being opposed to promoting homosexuality to children make me right wing? My criticism is not of homosexuals, for whatever consenting adults do behind closed doors is their business. The fault lies with indoctrinating small kids that it's as valid as heterosexuality. Paedophilia has always existed, but that doesn't make it acceptable.
And then you go on to draw a vile comparison of homosexuality to paedophilia. To be honest, I don't even know what to say about that, it just disgusts me.
No, but there are other ways to...induce pregnancy, and adoption is always an option too.
On giraffes:
I don't know why I said 96%, I believe that the highest estimate is 94%, while lower ones are around 50%. Source here; Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity by Bruce Bagemihl.
@ignoranttwat Induced pregnancy? You would inflict such an unnatural situation onto a child for the benefit of selfish homosexuals? What about the child's right to be born naturally? Adoption by same-sex parents fails to provide natural male and female mental imprints. It's all child abuse.
You are wrong about giraffes. Bagemi only recordrd that percentage of incidents among a single controlled group, not of 50-90% homosexuality.
I deleted your second comment - I permit only one at a time.
Whenever anyone decides to have a baby it is a selfish choice. The children are born "naturally". Unless they get a C-section or something, of course. That stuff about same sex parents is bollocks, the kids turn out fine, it's a fact. It doesn't matter about the exact figures, but studies have been done which show that giraffes have a lot of gay sex. Homosexuality occurs in nature. And I notice that you have allowed yourself more than one comment.
@ignoranttwat Yeah he does that... gave you the speech about one comment too did he! lol...
It never ceases to amaze me... not one of these idiots has actually worked out that if they were given the opportunity to eradicate every homosexual on the planet then within one generation the very same percentage of the population would be gay.
They haven't worked out that their opinion is immaterial since nature won't be agreeing with them.
@ignoranttwat Upon what grounds is it selfish for heterosexual parents to want a baby?
By born naturally I mean not artificially conceived.
You have no idea whether adoption by same sex parents turns out "fine", because it's too soon to say. It was only 11 years ago when this practice started to be legalised. Your application of anthropocentric animal behaviour detracts from my point about indoctrination of small children with regard to the acceptability and normality of homosexual activity.
It is selfish because they are creating a being in a world which is, let's face it, mostly suffering, to satisfy an urge of their own. What does it matter how the child was conceived? I don't know about you, but thinking about how I was conceived is one of the last things I want to do, thanks. Are you seriously going to say that a) NO child has ever been raised by a homosexual couple until 11 years ago and (continued in the next comment, which you will inevitably delete)
@ignoranttwat I already told you: limit of 1 comment per instance, so your second is deleted.
"A world that is mostly suffering..."?? Grow up! There's always suffering, it's part of the stuff of life. It matters how it was conceived because your methods defy the natural process that has proved successful over millions of years. If someone is homosexual, then in nature that is a genetic dead-end. That's evolution in motion. No child has legally been raised by homosexual parents before 1999.
1) What do you mean "grow up"? You're agreeing with me!
2) The millions of years: We're not talking about genetically modifying babies ffs, who cares?
3)On dead ends: ???? That makes no sense. That means absolutely nothing.
4) I didn't say "legally". You said it's only been legal for so long, and I (in effect) said that it would be extremely foolish to assume that no child had been raised by homosexual parents before then.
2. Homosexuality is a time-proven method for extinction. However that's not the issue. Indoctrinating small unquestioning children about the so-called 'merits' and equal worth of homosexual relationships is.
3. It's you that clearly has no understanding of nature, the overriding requirement of which is to reproduce.
4. It's only been 11 years since same-sex homosexual relationships have started to be legalised, so you still have no proof that there is no harm to children.
2) I'd like to see some evidence. I'm not saying hasn't happened, I'm just saying that I haven't heard of it. The thing is that Humanity is NOWHERE NEAR extinction, in fact we have a SERIOUS over population problem.
3) You have a very narrow idea of "nature". You need to step back and look at the bigger picture.
4) Supposing it hasn't ever happened before 11 years ago. Say a kid was adopted at the age of 5. That kid is 16 now. Surely if something was wrong we would know?
2) So say I decide not to have a child, it doesn't matter whether I'm having gay sex at the time or not, because either way I'm not having a child. +OVERPOPULATION
3) Reproduction is a tiny detail of Existence.
4) I seriously don't know what to say to that. Are you just trying to wind me up or are you actually that stupid?
2. So you prove my point. The ultimate conclusion of homosexual sex is extinction. Therefore it can not be considered of equal worth as heterosexual sex.
3. Reproduction is the primary driving force throughout the animal and plant world. To deny this is to assert ignorant dogma over fact.
4. Scientific investigation does not judge by single instances, but tests, re-tests, questions, and tests again. Yet again, another case of ignorant dogma over fact from you.
2) Well, do you suggest that it is everyone's DUTY to have lots of (unprotected, sans pill) heterosexual sex?
2) You are not seeing biological life within the context of EXISTENCE, that is where you are making your mistake.
4) Believe me, I know that full well. The point is that I was never suggesting about one child, I was explaining the position SOME children will be in now, using one (generic and imaginary) child as an example and you took me quite literally.
2. The issue is not homosexuality but the degeneracy of indoctrinating small children regarding the equal validity of single-sex homosexual parents to natural heterosexual parents.
3. That's a lame reply.
4. I take what you say as you write it. The children you refer to will only be 13 at the most. Too soon to tell, but unlike you I would never treat children like guinea pigs to satisfy your degenerate social experiment.
@CrankCase08 Yeah fine whatever... you go dress you homophobia up in whatever clothing you see fit... but erm... as I said... there's nothing you can do about it... You won't later the fact that a set percentage of humans male and female are gay... you can't affect that positively or negatively.
I didn't see any indoctrination in this video of any sexuality... neither homosexuality or heterosexuality... none. Can you tell me where that is?
@CrankCase08 yeah...look i have no particular worries of the internal workings of the stuff between my ears...
I see nothing wrong with this because at no point does anyone mention anything to do with sex, copulation, reproductive or anything. ie. No sexualisation.
You just don't like it.. I have no idea why! But your trapped there because whatever your emotional state there's nothing you can do about homosexuality... nothing at all. But that won't sop you being a dickhead will it?
@MumblingMickey You've added nothing but prejudicial thinking. Whenever anyone finds themselves on unsafe grounds in an argument they resort to personal insults, as you have done.
@CrankCase08 What prejudicial thinking? where exactly did I say anything prejudicial? What unsafe ground?
Why would it bother me one bit what a homophone thinks. Its not like there's anything you could actually do about your opinions of homosexuality.
You'd have as much chance of getting rid of the color blue, it just won't go away. That's cos nature is in charge and nature says there are gay people..
You need to fucking cope with that...cos 1,000 years after your dead there will be gays!
@MumblingMickey Me a homophobe? Why should I fear homosexuals? Even the fact that someone is a homosexual doesn't bother me, it's their business. What I object to is indoctrinating young children that homosexual relationships and single-sex homosexual parents are normal, and getting that message in before any sexual consiousness appears in them, thereby risking the creation of homoerotic curiosity in the child's mind. It's social engineering that is both degenerate and abusive.
@CrankCase08 Why whats 'not normal' about a smae sex couple? You mean that since homosexuals represent only 5-7% of the population its not common.
Is that what you really need? normality? and you seem to have confused the idea of 'normaility' with 'commonality'
I think maybe you should do another video objecting to wheelchair access... its indoctinating our kids and indeed adults into thinking those with disabiliites are 'normal'.
@MumblingMickey The indoctrination you favour considers same-sex homosexual parentage to be of equal worth to heterosexual parents. That not only flies in the face of the natural prcess, but is also illogical.
I should do another video? I didn't produce this video. It was made by BBC London local news.
Your comment about wheelchair access is truly pathetic. Not all disabled people require wheelchairs, and most of them are heterosexual with perfectly good genes. It makes you look a hissy bitch.
@CrankCase08 Indoctrination, you seem rather fond of that word. Can you give me an example of any classroom teaching which is NOT indoctrination please?
"Not all disabled people require wheelchairs"
Don't act the fucking gobshite you understood what I meant.
Homosexuals have nothing 'wrong' with their genome. Are you actually trying to present the idea that genetic inheritance follows some sort moral guidelines you can choose to agree or object to?
@MumblingMickey There's plenty that is and plenty that isn't indoctrination. However, it helps none to add yet more indoctrination onto small children who are in no position to question it.
Whether you meant that about wheelchairs or not that is what you said. I never claimed there was anything wrong with a homosexual's genome, only that by becoming a homosexual is nature's way of stopping any progress in that line.
If you don't want to listen and be educated then feel free to bugger off.
@CrankCase08 yeah clearly I'm not very well educated... my parents would be so depressed... all that money they spent sending me to college to learn shit... and all I got out of it was 23 years in physics... ho hum!
anyway...yeah as you can probably guess from my channel I'm not really too worried about my educational accomplishments or intellect... but erm yeah... thanks for the suggestion, I'll take it under advisement.
@1991dcb Your analysis of my comment demonstrates you to be the ignorant one. I suggest you take steps to improve your power of comprehension, which is clearly lacking.
@MumblingMickey Furthermore, I've removed your accompanying two comment. I only permit one full comment box at a time in order to stop left-wing fascists (the usual culprits) swamping.
Your homophobia is so stupid. Stop hating. People have been indoctrinated to hate homosexuals for myriads of years. It's time for a change, you filthy slut
We've been indoctrinating kids to hate homosexuals for eons, let's try it the other way and try "indoctrinating" people into believing that homosexuals are actually legitimate human beings, wow, how radical.
I have no doubt! Thank you for alerting us to the sad efforts of the homesexual lobby to justify their lifestyle. Kids will make up their own mind when they're ready! In the meantime let's ensure that we raise our children in love and acceptance, within a solid and supportive family environment. That's all the guidance they need for now!
children should be taught about all sexualities, end of. it's not 'sexual indoctrination' it's education. children who grow up in ignorance of the social diversity that exists within western culture potentially grow up prejudiced too. like it or not society is diverse and does not lick the arse of religious doctrine any more: why shouldn't education follow the progression of society? education of 21stC social issues shouldn't be hindered because a group of arseholes don't like something.
@SuperEgaal We won the war last time. We haven't even declared war on Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya and we're winning. In fact we haven't declared war on a nation since World War 2, that was America's last real war. Now, you're talking to an American who is against the Iraq, Afghanistan and Libyan conflicts and has attended anti-war rallies. Again, I care more about your people than your leaders do so don't piss me off with your non-American arrogance.
@SuperEgaal Kuwait and Dubai adopted western ideology, there are numerous documentaries from all over the world that state that. Go across the borders and do half the shit they do in Dubai and they'll kill you. Also, you're pretty sexist. Maybe if Muslims would stay in their houses and not blow shit up we wouldn't have to kill them...
@SuperEgaal I said almost none at the end, my bad about the beginning. Point being that in a country with no Islam, there's less rape, violence, and horrific acts than countries with it. We're more tolerant and less violent (as seen by your words towards me and other groups) and we're also more intelligent (as proven by the way you speak no offense). Until you realize that you'll be a foolish person. Your god doesn't exist, he was killed a long time ago and society is killing him again.
@SuperEgaal The profit Muhammad slept with children dude, that's the worst. There's no incest anywhere in the U.S., it's illegal and always will be, don't be stupid, this isn't Iraq. Alabama having a lot of incest is a stereotype, it's a joke Americans play because we hate the state of Alabama. I don't like Israel anymore than you do, if it makes a difference I prefer Iran over Israel. Anyway, there's almost no incest in America or Europe. Get a brain please :)
@SuperEgaal No, except for northern Africa and the small middle east I mean the whole world. Lesser developed countries with less education usually don't support it. Most of the world didn't agree with slavery...most of the world almost never agrees with America. Sexuality isn't that complicated, bigotry and idiocy makes it difficult. Incest isn't part of the culture here dude...although your culture supports child rape and grown men marrying 6 year olds so you're in no position to talk..
@altcare Homophobia? This has nothing to do with fear of homosexuality. It's all to do with the sexual indoctrination of children. If you approve of that, it's you who is mentally ill and should be kept away from children.
@CrankCase08 it's not 'sexual indoctrination' you stupid douche, it's called 'teaching them tolerance and teaching them about diversity'. they need to learn not everyone is the same or else they'll be total idiots when they finally encounter a gay person or discover they're gay themselves.
@MattFrame sorry but you've been tricked by satan God did not create Faggots satan did and if you knew the bible you would know this homosexuality is only one of the reasons sodom & gomohra were destroyed by God!
dedski7 2 days ago
Comment removed
EmilyGreene1984 1 week ago
Comment removed
EmilyGreene1984 1 week ago
@MattFrame You claim that God approves of homosexuality, but how do you explain these verses -
Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13, Deuteronomy 23:17, Genesis 19:4-12, Romans 1:18, 26, 27, 32, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, 1 Timothy 1:9-10, 2 Peter 2:6, Jude 7, Ezekiel 16:49, Isaiah 5:20.
EmilyGreene1984 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EmilyGreene1984 also asks, "You claim that God approves of homosexuality"
Yes, His clear will in creating & keeping them on His planet conclusively prove this.
"how do you explain these verses...?"
Human myth, misinterpretation, lack of knowledge. The men who wrote the Bible claimed many things, but when their stories contradict God's obvious will, as it does in this case (of course the way He creates His children is not a "sin"), it's best to side with the Lord. JMHO.
MattFrame 1 week ago
They're absolutely right. School is definitely not the place to get educated. . . .
dropsoffaith 2 weeks ago 2
@MattFrame You use the same tactic as satan did against Jesus, with the same results.....you lose. Oh, and btw, Jesus is God's truth......get to know Him first and then you can come out of your darkness which is infested with demons.
dmhtuber 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dmhtuber rages, "You use the same tactic as satan did against Jesus"
LOL, check you out, vainly trying to compare yourself, and a lifestyle of deceit and bigotry, with Jesus'. Good luck with that. I'm sorry that being outed as a moral deviant has sent you into a rage, but that's what happens when you sow hatred and anti-God rhetoric in public. Those of us who love the Lord denounce you in His name. Sorry.
MattFrame 3 weeks ago
Leave it to the Brits to open wide for a flood of wickedness! This is incredibly disgusting.
dmhtuber 3 weeks ago
Oh no! Gay people are scary, and they make me feel tingly in my private parts...
MyOldName 3 weeks ago 2
wow that would never happen where i live in the south
all the crazy church people would be scared that it would turn the kids gay lol
llllllllllllily 3 weeks ago
BRAINWASHING!
StormReturns 1 month ago
I think that bitch has her priorities wrong by wasting her time and position telling people that 'people teaching kids to respect homosexuals have their priorities wrong'.
myeyeswillburn 1 month ago
I played the part of a heterosexual guy in several school plays and musicals. Did it indoctrinate me into being straight? Did it hell.
gaiopescatore 2 months ago
Isn't religious people complaining about indoctrination kinda like the Twinkie Corp. complaining about creme filling?
clubindiana4 2 months ago
@clubindiana4
except you idiots love indoctrination if it is on your side, while Christians usually have no choice but to take their child to church anyway.
ptbwf 1 month ago
@ptbwf "you idiots love indoctrination"
I know...right? We love indoctrination so much were going to start building big fancy buildings where we can herd all the sheep into one area and indoctrinate them.
Were going to call them gay Churches!
clubindiana4 1 month ago
YUCK
lancegblack 2 months ago
Angels have intellect and no emotion ( they just obey)
Animals have emotion and no intellect or conciousness.
Humans have both. If your emotion over takes your intellect then you become lower than the animals and if your intellect over takes your emotion then you become higher than the angels. This is what is known as a moral human being.
Ghareeb313 3 months ago
THAT'S AWESOME. <3 Let's preach everyone's cool! XD
LilaCaffee 3 months ago
that's sick
janprzybylo 3 months ago
What a crock of bull, no school is told to do this.
smurfboywv 3 months ago
Thank god for equality! Thank you Great Britain for being an example of humanity and rejecting bigotry of any kind! It is about time the world take a turn toward love and not hate. We are all human and we all deserve equal respect!
christopherse2 3 months ago
No wonder European kids are such fuckin faggots nowadays.
FistofAmerica 3 months ago
@FistofAmerica, you like to get fisted, don't you?
MattFrame 3 months ago
There is very little to teach school children about homosexuality, I can see what anyone is so scared of.
Ps. To the one whom said that being gay us a disease, can I call in work tomorrow sick? Sorry, can't come in today, still gay.
leej2000 3 months ago 2
GAYS SUCK LIKE AIDS!!!
DeepSetEyesDance 3 months ago
There are certain moral principles within humanity which should not be crossed however bad you want to cross them. Such as sleeping with your mum or sister or a man sleeping with a man. Nothing justifies you sleeping with your mum because it is wrong. Same with homosexuality. Would you respect someone who sleeps with his mum? Offcourse you won't even if they're not hurting anyone. What if he told you he couldn't resist? Somehow this perversion became the norm
Ghareeb313 4 months ago
@Ghareeb313 Demonizing a perfectly consensual relationship and then going down the slippery slope? How typical.
Gacs25 3 months ago
@Gacs25 To you the relationship is fine but to many others it is not, which means we need a higher power or a higher being to judge between us, one who knows the secrets to our bodies and the secrets to the laws of cause and effect. This is where right and wrong comes in, because what you think is right, others may see as wrong. There is no right and wrong without a higher being because their will always be someone opposing what you say
Ghareeb313 3 months ago
@Gacs25 So I demonized it based on the laws of God, the all knowing, whereas you've justified it based on the laws of an insignificant creature who's vision is limited and so is their hearing i.e. the human being.
Ghareeb313 3 months ago
obviously we shouldn't educate children about homosexuality in school, they're given free practical lessons at church. why waste the tax money.
zodiac822 4 months ago
teach your children that an atheist goverment wants to force ppl to accept homosexuality, violating parents rights
trifulquita15 4 months ago
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 4 months ago
some people are gay, thats ok :)
gsgsgstdsss 4 months ago
Gay is not ok.
AverageRidesAgain 4 months ago
Fucking Marxists.
corioa 4 months ago
Those two kids doing the play are adorable.
Stevie2Sxc 4 months ago
At the very beginning I thought it was sarcasm.
But is this video sarcasm? Don't know...
awsomeyoshi2 5 months ago 2
good teaching acceptance :) it needs to be everywhere :)
SlimShaney08 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 I'll do a response via PM.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 When you want to treat somebody poorly and unequally, it's not their obligation to "meet you halfway". Please provide evidence for negative effects on society.
A child isn't a parents property and they are approached without permission about things all the time.
Oppression can cause rebellion, which might be what you're referring to as "throw in peoples faces", though that criticism typically involves a huge double standard being applied compared to heterosexuality. PM ftw.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 I am not countering the deviation or abnormality of homosexuality... I have counteredthe relevance of those characteristics to moral validity and even the general perception of whether or not something is good/desirable.
It's irrelevant whether she accepts his relationships as normal or not. She would be mistaken to accept it as normal, were she viewing it from the perspective of gender-pairing.
He was discussing it with her. His motivations are unknown.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 Blindness is undesirable. Is it a crime to be blind...? That which is less preferable than a conceivable alternative is not automatically immoral or even the direct cause of it's undesirability.
It is not necessary for me to produce an absolute principal regarding deviations. I only need 1 example of a deviation from anatomical compatibility/predisposition in order to refute your premiss that all deviations are bad (your absolute statement). Which I have done.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 I said cause of mental illness, not homosexuality. Chris Crocker may exhibit some characteristics of a stereotype... that doesn't make him representative. In the same way that a person who is male with short hair is not then automatically representative of all men with short hair. I find C. Crockers behaviour odd ;).
Your reference to sex addiction here seems to be totally out of the blue. I don't understand it's relevance at all.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 That 5 year old didn't appear to be playing the piano for the first time... and of course even were some people able to instantly do so, that would still not negate my analogy as it would still apply to those pianists that could not do so.
Your anecdotal experience does not constitute strong evidence and your identification of a correlation does not constitute a causal relationship. You're now changing your criterion of morality to mental disorder anyway...
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 If normality can be either good or bad then it is irrelevant to whether or not something is good or bad.
Whether or not something is desirable is likewise independent of whether or not it can be judged morally (in case you meant to suggest otherwise). The undesirability of homosexuality, though likely not universal, is entirely or almost entirely as a result of heterosexism.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 Please clarify what your argument actually is I.E. premiss A, premiss B, premiss C, therefore, conclusion A.
If you decide to do multiple comments, please PM me instead. Thanks for taking the time to read and respond.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 He wasn't forceful with her and didn't directly challenge her assertions, so it's unsurprising she held her ground. That doesn't change the fact that her point had no substance to it at all. She just said he's a man and it's weird... not arguments... just self-delusional semantics.
I don't see why it should remain unfamiliar and it isn't totally unfamiliar, it's taboo. That's the problem.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 She describes it as "weird" for him to have a BF. I.E. the only reason she seems to oppose it is because it is unfamiliar. She provides no actual argument or justification for her claim. I still disagree that it is "natural instinct" rather than cultural dogma.
However, even were it instinctive, that does not make it right. Instincts are primitive and in the absence of justification, are nothing more than biologically predisposed stupidity. Plz PM rather than 50 comments.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 Deviant, as detailed, refers purely to abnormality, which I have already countered, and is essential for all progress, as I have already pointed out. It itself is therefore not inherently bad and therefore useless as a criticism of something.
There is no disarming or sneakiness any more than any other form of education. The family member isn't disarming anything. He is discussing the issue in a friendly way with his friend and relative.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 Your perception of homosexuality as undesirable is not universal and even if it were, that in itself does not make it bad/wrong etc. The number of people who believe something does not alter whether or not it is correct.
The pianist example demonstrates a perfectly acceptable deviation from anatomical predisposition, relative to other available possibilities, therefore refuting your premiss that all deviations from it are bad.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 Your reference to societal ridicule/stigmatization as a cause of mental illness is about the only scientifically substantiated claim you have made and instantly makes any criticism of homosexuals on that basis totally hypocritical.
Chris Crocker is hardly representative... I may as well point to his idol Britney Spears as the archetypal heterosexual...
Your reference to sexuality as a matter of taste is just another misrepresentation of reality.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 Please provide evidence for your claim that the majority of gay men are effeminate and majority are troubled, and majority is due to "family centered" and that their relationships revolve around fetishes (more so than heterosexuals).
Your anecdotal examples do not constituted evidence that is remotely sufficient to form a mass generalization. Please provide scientific evidence for your claims. Feel free to PM me.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 What evidence do you have that some people can sit down and play the piano instantly? That of course doesn't counter my analogy anyway as the vast majority of people are still not anatomically predisposed towards playing the piano.
The premiss that we should conform stringently to our anatomical predispositions is unjustified in the first place and merely a criterion of morality that you have assumed, rather than justified.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 Anti-racism initiatives "target our children" because the prejudices are formed from a young age, so it seems highly unsurprising that the same might be true for other types of prejudice. Educating kids and providing an accurate representation of reality, particularly if it counters a distorted one is nothing like manipulating kids for sexual pleasure.
The "inherent instincts" are actually just cultural taboos ingrained from a young age. Instincts are primitive anyway.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 The skills are dictated by anatomical compatibility (genetics etc). We are biologically/anatomically far more predisposed towards picking up a ball than to playing the piano, whether you attribute this to the hands or the cerebellum, it is still a biological compatibility.
As I have pointed out, the underlying psychology which you identified is also just as comparable to heterosexuals. Homosexuals are abnormal, just like ginger or blond hair.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 Indeed, genetic predisposition is one that science currently considers to exist. Another pre-natal effect which, to my knowledge, is pretty much proven, is the Fraternal Birth Order Effect.
Anyway, you did change argument. Your first one was an attempt to discredit homosexuality by comparison to paedophilia, your second one was a criticism of the anatomical-compatibility of same-sex couples.
Both have been refuted.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 That's not an intelligent response that points out the flaw in my argument as far as I can see. Is that your way of avoiding admitting you were wrong again?
Additionally, same sex couples seem no more or less compatible in their ability to love one another. Also, on the topic of sex, which you raised, as ss couples have the same type of genitals, they are likely more compatible for acts such as mutual masturbation and oral sex than opposite sex couples.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 The premiss that the possibility to which we are most efficiently anatomically predisposed is the only healthy form of expression appears to be flawed as you would be unlikely to consistently apply it when for instance comparing using the hands to play the piano vs picking up a ball. 1 needs years of training, while the other can be learnt during infancy (therefore the former would seem to be one we are far less anatomically predisposed towards). Are pianists sick?
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 You're changing your argument to a "biological complementarity" one now but have unfortunately not acknowledged that your previous one was flawed. I did understand your previous point and explained how it was a faulty analogy (I am aware that you weren't stating that homosexuals are paedophiles).
You don't state your conclusion in this new argument but it is implied that homosexuality is a sickness due to reduced biological compatibility.
This is flawed as follows:
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 Of course that's just an example to demonstrate the flaw. The flaw itself is actually that comparing things which share characteristics is irrelevant unless they share the Relevant characteristic. In this instance you are trying to establish a basis for condemning homosexuality. You use child molestation as it is condemned. It is however condemned because it involves sexually assaulting/raping a non consenting person (child). This characteristic is absent from homo.uality.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 I expect heterosexuals consider themselves to be born that way/unchangeable and don't consider it a sickness... so they too share this common psychology it seems...
I assume you can see the flaw in your "argument" now, right?
Regarding homosexuality, I do not claim that homosexuals are "born that way". I claim that (according to scientific consensus), a pre-natal predisposition is involved but the entire causes are not yet fully understood.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 Actually there are believed to be two main types of paedophile, regressive and fixative. As far as I remember, fixative are believed to be incurable etc, while regressive are that way due to some emotional disturbance in their relationship with the opposite sex.
Where are you getting your information from anyway? You seem to be mixing up child molestation and paedophilia and confusing involuntary attractions with voluntary actions.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
@hunkymunky008 "Deviant" just refers to that which deviates from the norm. So is really another "you're abnormal so you're bad" criticism, which of course fails miserably as a person can be abnormally kind, compassionate or considerate. Deviance is also essential to all progress.
You seem to have no argument as you're appealing to emotion/idiocy by referring to paedophiles. If you have an actual argument, please make it. Immature insults are pointless.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
While there are instances of homophobia at schools, there seems to be no basis to even begin to claim that they aren't the right place to deal with it.
The idea that schools "aren't the right place" is also a baseless insinuation, that relies on irrational stigmatization/prejudice to find agreement, not an actual argument at all.
Schools are a place to learn. The idea that kids shouldn't learn about sexuality, which will affect them all, unlike most other topics, seems insane.
Jamieishere1 6 months ago
I don't see anything but positive messages. People who are bothered by this are being scared of ghosts. The children that learn about it are already either gay or straight. We have to teach everybody to accept and love themselves for who they are and love others as well.
MRBBJC 7 months ago
@MRBBJC It is indoctrination to children by promoting an abnormal lifestyle that has no inherent value to human survival. Let us have books about brother and sister who fall in love with each other since that happens in life? Or human beings who fall in love with animals since children's books tend to have animals talking and living with humans?
NatDemUK 7 months ago
@NatDemUK You need some education yourself. Gay people fall in love with another human being. We love each other and build healthy, loving families. What's your fear? That kids that are straight are going to become gays? That's pure ignorance. We have to teach our children to be accepting of each other. Stop the hate and the ignorance.
MRBBJC 7 months ago
@MRBBJC No, you need education yourself! This is forcing children to accept homosexuality as "normal" which it clearly is not. You do not build families, homosexuality produces nothing, heterosexuality produces and build families, heterosexuality is what brought every one of us into existence! Yes, kids obviously will become gay because of this since it is showing people of the same gender falling in love with each other. People can choose to accept whom they like.
NatDemUK 7 months ago
@NatDemUK If you truly believe that a straight person can "become" gay, let me save you many years of therapy and let you know that you are officially either bi-sexual or homosexual, but not heterosexual. This is the most common among homophobes. You guys are either represed bi-sexual (because you believe you and others can change and become gay) or represed gay. Good luck to you.
MRBBJC 7 months ago
@MRBBJC One thing I do not need therapy because I know where I am going in life. For one, don't start making that stupid response like every other fuckwit who says that just because you dislike homosexuality means that you are a repressed homosexual. Right, so if I hate a murderer, I am a repressed murderer as well, am I? Seriously grow up. And yes a straight person does become gay, it is through experiment and preference mostly since I have known straight people who have turned gay.
NatDemUK 7 months ago
@NatDemUK well I AM a gay person and I'm telling you "becoming" gay is impossible. Realising you always were gay, that happens. But just totally switching sides, that can't happen. Human sexuality simply doesn't work that way.
Stevie2Sxc 7 months ago
@Stevie2Sxc You become gay when you realise what you like, you're not born with it. It is just like a murderer who realises that he wants to murder people when he felt that he wanted to do it all the time. Switching sides does happen. Sexuality is a behaviour, if you choose to stick your cock in a man's arse or stick your tongue in a man's mouth, you choose it because you think that it feels good. There is no evidence to prove what causes someone or else we would have found a medical cure for it
NatDemUK 7 months ago
@NatDemUK when you realise what you like, you realise you were always that way. you can't be straight and then just suddenly realise you like guys. you were always gay, you just didn't realise. and comparing it to murderers is just stupid whenever someone tries to make the comparison.
and you do choose to sleep with men, you do it because it's what you want to do. and if you think it might feel good enough to try it... odds are you were gay or bi all along.
Stevie2Sxc 7 months ago
@Stevie2Sxc You realise it when you experiment it, that does not mean that you were born with it at all. You do not become sexually active until you have passed puberty so to say that one is born gay is contradictory to that. Comparing that to murder is not stupid because the two are a state of mind and are totally abnormal.
NatDemUK 7 months ago
@NatDemUK you do understand that there has to be at least SOME same-sex attraction already existing for you to even want to experiment, right?
and no, the murder comparison is very stupid. homosexuality is how a person feels, murder is something a person does because they're fucked up. both not normal, but comparing them is dumb since one does damage and one doesn't
Stevie2Sxc 7 months ago
@Stevie2Sxc Yes, there is attraction but it does not mean that you were born to be attracted to one gender. We are attracted to all sorts of things we come across and we choose which one we think is the best. Murder is how someone feels because he feels he wants to take away the life of an innocent for the best of his own ambition and homosexuality is what a person does; it is not a question whether the two cause damage or not, it is a question of the two being inborn.
NatDemUK 7 months ago
@NatDemUK "Right, so if I hate a murderer, I am a repressed murderer as well, am I?"
No, but when you say something like "all people have the potential to become murderers" what you would have done is to analise your own pychology and project that onto others.
In much the same way your are projecting your closet homosexuality onto others.
The only way you can see yourself as "normal" is by believing that everyone else is a closet case too.
ColostomyCake 6 months ago
@ColostomyCake Wah wah wah projecting my own closet homosexuality onto others? Give me break. Come back with a better argument rather than some pathetic accusative excuse by accusing someone for being closetly gay just because they dislike it. Like and dislike are two opposites, they are not the same. Period.
NatDemUK 6 months ago
@NatDemUK It's not an accusation, it's an explanation of the flaws in your gay/murderer simile and an half-assed evaluation of your mental process.
If you honestly believe that straight people can simply choose to be gay, and you see yourself as a straight person, then it stands to reason that you believe you could be gay too if you wanted, right?
Straight people simply can't choose to be gay, there is only one reason why you would think otherwise...
ColostomyCake 6 months ago
@ColostomyCake Yes, I do honestly believe that straight people choose to be gay because they find that they are uncomfortable with the opposite gender for quite a while and prefer to be amongst their own gender. If I say that murder is a choice, does that mean that I am a murderer in the closet? No.
NatDemUK 6 months ago
@NatDemUK Not everyone can become a murderer, most murderers have a complete lack of any empathy for their victim and have violent tendencies etc. etc... If you actually believe the only difference between you and that murderer is that they have simply made a choice, then yes it would mean that..
ColostomyCake 6 months ago
I wish I could've done Romeo and Julian... Jeez it's theater. Guess who's in the theater groups. Gays? Indeed.
MrC0MPUT3R 7 months ago
@MrC0MPUT3R And alcoholics and drug addicts, now that does not prove that they are normal either.
NatDemUK 6 months ago
@NatDemUK Um, I wasn't trying to prove that it is normal because they like theater. When I was in high school, the drama department was pretty much the only thing that kept me sane. I'm sure many others feel the same way. Besides, is there any evidence that they were coerced into performing this play? Could they have possibly chosen to do this play themselves?
MrC0MPUT3R 6 months ago
"The indoctrination is not in homosexuality, but that it is taught as the equal of heterosexuality in parenting relationships, which it is not."
Why not?
MumblingMickey 7 months ago
@MumblingMickey If you can't tell the difference then that's your problem. I have better things to do with my time than to teach you about the facts of life.
CrankCase08 7 months ago
@CrankCase08 where "facts of life" is related to "parenting relationships". you're misunderstanding biological functions as being the same as social development.
giuvic 7 months ago
@giuvic I did no such thing, and you know it because you failed to explain it.
CrankCase08 7 months ago
@CrankCase08 you did and I don't have to explain it as it wasn't me to stand for that argument. now, if you deleted your previous comment, don't come playing rhetoric with me.
giuvic 7 months ago
@giuvic I deleted none of my previous comments, so don't look for that as a way out. You won't explain it because you can't.
CrankCase08 7 months ago
@ignoranttwat Did you read that comment... somehow he has this idea in his head that he can stamp 'good genes' or 'bad genes' as a label on people ...
shit I may as well do that myself and stamp the label 'low intelligence' and a product of 'bad genes' on him. We wouldn't wan't our kids being indoctrinated with the idea that having a low intellect like this twit was 'normal' would we?
This guy is an absolute buffoon!
MumblingMickey 8 months ago
@MumblingMickey
Yeah, I sort of half think it's not even worth talking to these people, but the their ignorance just gets to me. He probably think eugenics is a good idea too.
ignoranttwat 8 months ago
Death to homosexuals and their agenda.
MrBinieam 8 months ago
@MrBinieam death to homophobes and their sick agenda
idaman12345 8 months ago
Western civilization has hit its lowest point.
MrBinieam 8 months ago
sick assholes
rlilewis 8 months ago
The real question is whether parental rights should be usurped by state advancements.
123MrBee 8 months ago
come on people this is a winderful beginning
jinzo251 9 months ago
ahh another right wing fucking halfwit that somehow thinks people can be 'taught' to be gay... what sort of uneducated fucking arseholes am I sharing this planet with at all?
Hey gobshite! guess what... they teach kids history too... did you never wonder why since it accounts for about 10% of classes why 10% of the population aren't fucking historians?
Twat!
MumblingMickey 9 months ago
@MumblingMickey You are the 'fucking halfwit'. This report was made by the BBC.
Incidentally, teaching kids history is not sexualising them. If you can't tell the difference then there's clearly something wrong with you. What a twat.
CrankCase08 9 months ago
@CrankCase08 People cannot be taught to be gay. This video is on your channel for one reason and one reason only. You are a self righteous right wing homophobic prick.
Now tell me... exactly what effect have gay people actually had on your life? How does someone being gay have any effect affect your life.
Are you secretly gay perhaps? just afraid to admit it?
You object to homosexuality? Just what the fuck do you think you can do about a phenomena that affects 7% of the human population?
MumblingMickey 9 months ago
@MumblingMickey No one is claiming this makes people gay, but it does two things: 1. sexualises children at a very early age; 2. indoctrinated the children that homosexual relationships are of equal worth as heterosexual ones.
It's clearly you that is the self-righteous left wing Cultural Marxist twat. I already explained that the report was produced by the BBC. Are you suggesting that's right-wing? Ridiculous logic suggesting anyone who opposes child sexualisation is a repressed homo. Idiot
CrankCase08 9 months ago
@CrankCase08 "No one is claiming this makes people gay,"
You are, in the title of the video.
"sexualises children at a very early age;"
Do you consider that Dennis the Menaces parents in the Beano sexualises kids?
"It's clearly you that is the self-righteous left wing Cultural Marxist twat."
Wrong again, I have no fucking time for either communism, socialism...or most isms
"Are you suggesting that's right-wing?"
I'm suggesting I've just run out of my single comment.
MumblingMickey 9 months ago
@MumblingMickey wrong again. The act of sexualising children is not necessarily related to indoctrinating them that homosexual lifestyle is of equal worth to heterosexual lifestyle.
Who's talking about Dennis The Menace and The Beano? That is a pointless, unrelated ad hominem.
You clearly do follow some leftist 'ism' by referring to me as "a right wing homophobic prick" just because I don't conform to your degenerate social perspective.
CrankCase08 9 months ago
@CrankCase08
I pointed out a kids book (the beano) which also presents adults who are in a relationship.
None of the books available to these kids discuss or even allude to sexual behavior. Ergo they cannot be sexualising kids. Sexualisation is when the message is one of a sexual nature (hence the name). Since none do that, its not sexualisation.
Conform or not, you can't 'argue' homosexuality away...its been a feature of humanity a long time, and it'll still be so long after you're gone!
MumblingMickey 9 months ago
@MumblingMickey In The Beano adults are portrayed as naturally heterosexual parents. It is not possible to have naturally homosexual parents, because single-sex homosexual relations cannot procreate. Therefore, small kids are being indoctrinated that such single sex homo relationships are of equal worth as heterosexual, which they are not because they would ultimately lead to himan extinction. It is therefore bringing the issue of sex into the world of small children.
CrankCase08 8 months ago
@CrankCase08 Also I can be perfectly neutral politically, socially etc. and still recognise when someone is overtly right wing as you are.
In this case thinking that somehow your objection personally to a phenomena observed in humans (homosexuality) can somehow be argued against. Thats the dumb since you may as well be arguing people shouldn't be black, or asian... or have two legs.
Its pointless... because apart from anything else... there is nothing you can do about it.
MumblingMickey 9 months ago
@MumblingMickey The usual Leftist tactic of discounting opposition by labelling opponents as 'right wing'. There's plenty of right wing homosexuals, so how does me being opposed to promoting homosexuality to children make me right wing? My criticism is not of homosexuals, for whatever consenting adults do behind closed doors is their business. The fault lies with indoctrinating small kids that it's as valid as heterosexuality. Paedophilia has always existed, but that doesn't make it acceptable.
CrankCase08 8 months ago
@CrankCase08
"It is not possible to have naturally homosexual parents, because single-sex homosexual relations cannot procreate."
Well that's funny, because I have a gay aunt who has two children, who she gave birth to. And then there's always adoption etcetera...
"...they would ultimately lead to himan extinction."
Not really, 96% of giraffe sex is homosexual, and they seem to be doing all right.
"...for whatever consenting adults do behind closed doors is their business."
But if they're...
ignoranttwat 8 months ago
@CrankCase08
...straight it's fine, yeah?
And then you go on to draw a vile comparison of homosexuality to paedophilia. To be honest, I don't even know what to say about that, it just disgusts me.
ignoranttwat 8 months ago
@ignoranttwat You must be a real idiot.
Your 'gay aunt' could not conceive through having sex with another female, it's biologically impossible.
I suggest you provide proof that homosexual giraffe sex is 96%. You can't because it's a gay myth based on false assumptions about giraffe behaviour.
Whatever consenting straight or homosexual adults do behind closed doors is their business.
If you think I'm comparing homosexuality to paedophilia you need to improve your powers of comprehension.
CrankCase08 8 months ago
@CrankCase08
On the gay aunt:
No, but there are other ways to...induce pregnancy, and adoption is always an option too.
On giraffes:
I don't know why I said 96%, I believe that the highest estimate is 94%, while lower ones are around 50%. Source here; Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity by Bruce Bagemihl.
On closed doors:
um...yeah..so?
ignoranttwat 8 months ago
@ignoranttwat Induced pregnancy? You would inflict such an unnatural situation onto a child for the benefit of selfish homosexuals? What about the child's right to be born naturally? Adoption by same-sex parents fails to provide natural male and female mental imprints. It's all child abuse.
You are wrong about giraffes. Bagemi only recordrd that percentage of incidents among a single controlled group, not of 50-90% homosexuality.
I deleted your second comment - I permit only one at a time.
CrankCase08 8 months ago
@CrankCase08
Whenever anyone decides to have a baby it is a selfish choice. The children are born "naturally". Unless they get a C-section or something, of course. That stuff about same sex parents is bollocks, the kids turn out fine, it's a fact. It doesn't matter about the exact figures, but studies have been done which show that giraffes have a lot of gay sex. Homosexuality occurs in nature. And I notice that you have allowed yourself more than one comment.
ignoranttwat 8 months ago
@ignoranttwat Yeah he does that... gave you the speech about one comment too did he! lol...
It never ceases to amaze me... not one of these idiots has actually worked out that if they were given the opportunity to eradicate every homosexual on the planet then within one generation the very same percentage of the population would be gay.
They haven't worked out that their opinion is immaterial since nature won't be agreeing with them.
It'd be like hating water being wet! idiots!
MumblingMickey 8 months ago
@ignoranttwat Upon what grounds is it selfish for heterosexual parents to want a baby?
By born naturally I mean not artificially conceived.
You have no idea whether adoption by same sex parents turns out "fine", because it's too soon to say. It was only 11 years ago when this practice started to be legalised. Your application of anthropocentric animal behaviour detracts from my point about indoctrination of small children with regard to the acceptability and normality of homosexual activity.
CrankCase08 8 months ago
@CrankCase08
It is selfish because they are creating a being in a world which is, let's face it, mostly suffering, to satisfy an urge of their own. What does it matter how the child was conceived? I don't know about you, but thinking about how I was conceived is one of the last things I want to do, thanks. Are you seriously going to say that a) NO child has ever been raised by a homosexual couple until 11 years ago and (continued in the next comment, which you will inevitably delete)
ignoranttwat 8 months ago
@ignoranttwat I already told you: limit of 1 comment per instance, so your second is deleted.
"A world that is mostly suffering..."?? Grow up! There's always suffering, it's part of the stuff of life. It matters how it was conceived because your methods defy the natural process that has proved successful over millions of years. If someone is homosexual, then in nature that is a genetic dead-end. That's evolution in motion. No child has legally been raised by homosexual parents before 1999.
CrankCase08 8 months ago
@CrankCase08
1) What do you mean "grow up"? You're agreeing with me!
2) The millions of years: We're not talking about genetically modifying babies ffs, who cares?
3)On dead ends: ???? That makes no sense. That means absolutely nothing.
4) I didn't say "legally". You said it's only been legal for so long, and I (in effect) said that it would be extremely foolish to assume that no child had been raised by homosexual parents before then.
P.S. It's gay pride in London today.
ignoranttwat 8 months ago
@ignoranttwat
1. No, I'm not.
2. No, we're talking about adhering to time proven methods that work.
3. If someone is homosexual then that is obviously nature's way of saying that the genes will go no further.
4. So if any child was raised covertly by a homosexual single-sex couple there would be no means of confirming that no ill-effects would occur.
The indoctrination is not in homosexuality, but that it is taught as the equal of heterosexuality in parenting relationships, which it is not.
CrankCase08 8 months ago
@CrankCase08
2) Homosexuality is a time proven method.
3) I think that you greatly misunderstand nature.
4) Well, we can go and ask them.
ignoranttwat 8 months ago
@ignoranttwat
2. Homosexuality is a time-proven method for extinction. However that's not the issue. Indoctrinating small unquestioning children about the so-called 'merits' and equal worth of homosexual relationships is.
3. It's you that clearly has no understanding of nature, the overriding requirement of which is to reproduce.
4. It's only been 11 years since same-sex homosexual relationships have started to be legalised, so you still have no proof that there is no harm to children.
CrankCase08 7 months ago
@CrankCase08
2) I'd like to see some evidence. I'm not saying hasn't happened, I'm just saying that I haven't heard of it. The thing is that Humanity is NOWHERE NEAR extinction, in fact we have a SERIOUS over population problem.
3) You have a very narrow idea of "nature". You need to step back and look at the bigger picture.
4) Supposing it hasn't ever happened before 11 years ago. Say a kid was adopted at the age of 5. That kid is 16 now. Surely if something was wrong we would know?
ignoranttwat 7 months ago
@ignoranttwat
2. Logic proves it. Homosexual sexual relationship = no reproduction = extinction.
3. The big picture is reproduction. It's the driving force of all animal life.
4. One instance does not make a comprehensive study.
CrankCase08 7 months ago
@CrankCase08
2) So say I decide not to have a child, it doesn't matter whether I'm having gay sex at the time or not, because either way I'm not having a child. +OVERPOPULATION
3) Reproduction is a tiny detail of Existence.
4) I seriously don't know what to say to that. Are you just trying to wind me up or are you actually that stupid?
ignoranttwat 7 months ago
@ignoranttwat
2. So you prove my point. The ultimate conclusion of homosexual sex is extinction. Therefore it can not be considered of equal worth as heterosexual sex.
3. Reproduction is the primary driving force throughout the animal and plant world. To deny this is to assert ignorant dogma over fact.
4. Scientific investigation does not judge by single instances, but tests, re-tests, questions, and tests again. Yet again, another case of ignorant dogma over fact from you.
CrankCase08 7 months ago
@CrankCase08
2) Well, do you suggest that it is everyone's DUTY to have lots of (unprotected, sans pill) heterosexual sex?
2) You are not seeing biological life within the context of EXISTENCE, that is where you are making your mistake.
4) Believe me, I know that full well. The point is that I was never suggesting about one child, I was explaining the position SOME children will be in now, using one (generic and imaginary) child as an example and you took me quite literally.
ignoranttwat 7 months ago
@ignoranttwat
2. The issue is not homosexuality but the degeneracy of indoctrinating small children regarding the equal validity of single-sex homosexual parents to natural heterosexual parents.
3. That's a lame reply.
4. I take what you say as you write it. The children you refer to will only be 13 at the most. Too soon to tell, but unlike you I would never treat children like guinea pigs to satisfy your degenerate social experiment.
CrankCase08 7 months ago
@CrankCase08
I have no idea why I'm still replying to this nonsense.
ignoranttwat 7 months ago
@ignoranttwat NEITHER I know why I'm still also replying @CrankCase08. time to turn ignore mode on.
giuvic 7 months ago
@CrankCase08 Yeah fine whatever... you go dress you homophobia up in whatever clothing you see fit... but erm... as I said... there's nothing you can do about it... You won't later the fact that a set percentage of humans male and female are gay... you can't affect that positively or negatively.
I didn't see any indoctrination in this video of any sexuality... neither homosexuality or heterosexuality... none. Can you tell me where that is?
MumblingMickey 8 months ago
@MumblingMickey You can't see it because you don't want to. That's a problem with your brain, not mine.
CrankCase08 8 months ago
@CrankCase08 yeah...look i have no particular worries of the internal workings of the stuff between my ears...
I see nothing wrong with this because at no point does anyone mention anything to do with sex, copulation, reproductive or anything. ie. No sexualisation.
You just don't like it.. I have no idea why! But your trapped there because whatever your emotional state there's nothing you can do about homosexuality... nothing at all. But that won't sop you being a dickhead will it?
MumblingMickey 8 months ago
@MumblingMickey You've added nothing but prejudicial thinking. Whenever anyone finds themselves on unsafe grounds in an argument they resort to personal insults, as you have done.
CrankCase08 8 months ago
@CrankCase08 What prejudicial thinking? where exactly did I say anything prejudicial? What unsafe ground?
Why would it bother me one bit what a homophone thinks. Its not like there's anything you could actually do about your opinions of homosexuality.
You'd have as much chance of getting rid of the color blue, it just won't go away. That's cos nature is in charge and nature says there are gay people..
You need to fucking cope with that...cos 1,000 years after your dead there will be gays!
MumblingMickey 8 months ago
@MumblingMickey Me a homophobe? Why should I fear homosexuals? Even the fact that someone is a homosexual doesn't bother me, it's their business. What I object to is indoctrinating young children that homosexual relationships and single-sex homosexual parents are normal, and getting that message in before any sexual consiousness appears in them, thereby risking the creation of homoerotic curiosity in the child's mind. It's social engineering that is both degenerate and abusive.
CrankCase08 8 months ago
@CrankCase08 Why whats 'not normal' about a smae sex couple? You mean that since homosexuals represent only 5-7% of the population its not common.
Is that what you really need? normality? and you seem to have confused the idea of 'normaility' with 'commonality'
I think maybe you should do another video objecting to wheelchair access... its indoctinating our kids and indeed adults into thinking those with disabiliites are 'normal'.
fucking hell!
MumblingMickey 8 months ago
@MumblingMickey The indoctrination you favour considers same-sex homosexual parentage to be of equal worth to heterosexual parents. That not only flies in the face of the natural prcess, but is also illogical.
I should do another video? I didn't produce this video. It was made by BBC London local news.
Your comment about wheelchair access is truly pathetic. Not all disabled people require wheelchairs, and most of them are heterosexual with perfectly good genes. It makes you look a hissy bitch.
CrankCase08 8 months ago
@CrankCase08 Indoctrination, you seem rather fond of that word. Can you give me an example of any classroom teaching which is NOT indoctrination please?
"Not all disabled people require wheelchairs"
Don't act the fucking gobshite you understood what I meant.
Homosexuals have nothing 'wrong' with their genome. Are you actually trying to present the idea that genetic inheritance follows some sort moral guidelines you can choose to agree or object to?
Natures not listening, neither am I!
MumblingMickey 8 months ago
@MumblingMickey There's plenty that is and plenty that isn't indoctrination. However, it helps none to add yet more indoctrination onto small children who are in no position to question it.
Whether you meant that about wheelchairs or not that is what you said. I never claimed there was anything wrong with a homosexual's genome, only that by becoming a homosexual is nature's way of stopping any progress in that line.
If you don't want to listen and be educated then feel free to bugger off.
CrankCase08 8 months ago
@CrankCase08 yeah clearly I'm not very well educated... my parents would be so depressed... all that money they spent sending me to college to learn shit... and all I got out of it was 23 years in physics... ho hum!
anyway...yeah as you can probably guess from my channel I'm not really too worried about my educational accomplishments or intellect... but erm yeah... thanks for the suggestion, I'll take it under advisement.
Grow up for fucks sake...
MumblingMickey 7 months ago
@CrankCase08 so you are comparing pedophiles to homosexuals? are you that ignorant!
1991dcb 8 months ago
@1991dcb Your analysis of my comment demonstrates you to be the ignorant one. I suggest you take steps to improve your power of comprehension, which is clearly lacking.
CrankCase08 8 months ago
@MumblingMickey Furthermore, I've removed your accompanying two comment. I only permit one full comment box at a time in order to stop left-wing fascists (the usual culprits) swamping.
CrankCase08 9 months ago
@CrankCase08 and your doing what any right wing fascist would do
ignore most of the conversation
idaman12345 8 months ago
@idaman12345 Kindly justify your assertions that I'm right-wing, a fascist, and that I ignore most of the conversation.
CrankCase08 8 months ago
@TheRotheray
Your homophobia is so stupid. Stop hating. People have been indoctrinated to hate homosexuals for myriads of years. It's time for a change, you filthy slut
CriticsAndComments 9 months ago
We've been indoctrinating kids to hate homosexuals for eons, let's try it the other way and try "indoctrinating" people into believing that homosexuals are actually legitimate human beings, wow, how radical.
videoguy604 10 months ago 2
I have no doubt! Thank you for alerting us to the sad efforts of the homesexual lobby to justify their lifestyle. Kids will make up their own mind when they're ready! In the meantime let's ensure that we raise our children in love and acceptance, within a solid and supportive family environment. That's all the guidance they need for now!
winzigedanke 10 months ago
children should be taught about all sexualities, end of. it's not 'sexual indoctrination' it's education. children who grow up in ignorance of the social diversity that exists within western culture potentially grow up prejudiced too. like it or not society is diverse and does not lick the arse of religious doctrine any more: why shouldn't education follow the progression of society? education of 21stC social issues shouldn't be hindered because a group of arseholes don't like something.
somcbean 10 months ago
@SuperEgaal Good luck on the exams. Salam my friend.
DesignPunkStudios 10 months ago
@SuperEgaal We won the war last time. We haven't even declared war on Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya and we're winning. In fact we haven't declared war on a nation since World War 2, that was America's last real war. Now, you're talking to an American who is against the Iraq, Afghanistan and Libyan conflicts and has attended anti-war rallies. Again, I care more about your people than your leaders do so don't piss me off with your non-American arrogance.
DesignPunkStudios 10 months ago
@SuperEgaal Kuwait and Dubai adopted western ideology, there are numerous documentaries from all over the world that state that. Go across the borders and do half the shit they do in Dubai and they'll kill you. Also, you're pretty sexist. Maybe if Muslims would stay in their houses and not blow shit up we wouldn't have to kill them...
DesignPunkStudios 10 months ago
@SuperEgaal I said almost none at the end, my bad about the beginning. Point being that in a country with no Islam, there's less rape, violence, and horrific acts than countries with it. We're more tolerant and less violent (as seen by your words towards me and other groups) and we're also more intelligent (as proven by the way you speak no offense). Until you realize that you'll be a foolish person. Your god doesn't exist, he was killed a long time ago and society is killing him again.
DesignPunkStudios 10 months ago
@SuperEgaal The profit Muhammad slept with children dude, that's the worst. There's no incest anywhere in the U.S., it's illegal and always will be, don't be stupid, this isn't Iraq. Alabama having a lot of incest is a stereotype, it's a joke Americans play because we hate the state of Alabama. I don't like Israel anymore than you do, if it makes a difference I prefer Iran over Israel. Anyway, there's almost no incest in America or Europe. Get a brain please :)
DesignPunkStudios 10 months ago
@SuperEgaal No, except for northern Africa and the small middle east I mean the whole world. Lesser developed countries with less education usually don't support it. Most of the world didn't agree with slavery...most of the world almost never agrees with America. Sexuality isn't that complicated, bigotry and idiocy makes it difficult. Incest isn't part of the culture here dude...although your culture supports child rape and grown men marrying 6 year olds so you're in no position to talk..
DesignPunkStudios 10 months ago
do you know homophobia is diagnosed as an illness. get help crankCase08. You are mentally ill
altcare 10 months ago
@altcare Homophobia? This has nothing to do with fear of homosexuality. It's all to do with the sexual indoctrination of children. If you approve of that, it's you who is mentally ill and should be kept away from children.
CrankCase08 10 months ago
@CrankCase08 it's not 'sexual indoctrination' you stupid douche, it's called 'teaching them tolerance and teaching them about diversity'. they need to learn not everyone is the same or else they'll be total idiots when they finally encounter a gay person or discover they're gay themselves.
frankly this can o