By the by, some time ago in the course of writing a paper on Altemeyer's "The Authoritarians" I spent a few days scouring the net for examples of RWA propaganda. I found a really weird trend; the use of octopi.

Initially (and most commonly to this day) a representation of a suspected International Jewish/Communist plot, more recently it has also been used to depict other popular enemies of RWA organizations:

Humanism


Liberalism


Secularism


Globalism


Modernism



What they seem to fear is a modern, liberal, humanist, secular world. Which is a bit funny as that sounds pretty wonderful to me. The direction we're necessarily headed provided things keep getting better.

In light of that I'm considering getting an octopus tattoo. It'd be really neat if we could reclaim it as a general symbol for modernism, liberalism, humanism, secularism and basically every aspect of progress that terrifies/enrages RWAs. :]

griffer: Jews is PIGS?!?!

Ain't tht ironical.

I was told by a person from China that they thought that Jews didn't eat pork because they evolved from pigs.

IkonOlator: j0ndas: You don't see the "Jesus Camp" people, as weird as they are, infiltrating into Muslim countries.

Say, what?

Fundamentalist Christians proselytize all over the world, to lots of non-believers, be they Muslim, Jewish, Catholic, pagans, atheist, Buddhist, whatever. If they don't accept the proselytizer's view of Jesus and the world, they need to be saved from eternal damnation when Jesus comes back. Which will happen any moment now. Really.

Even American soldiers are (sometimes) stupid enough to proselytize to Muslims while on duty in Afghanistan. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbJ63Y4R0dA

Don't be silly, everyone knows Christians minister and Muslims infiltrate.

Mayhem_2006: Hmm, I'm guessing somebody is choosing to ignore the many years of Christian Terrorism in Northern Ireland.

Which pales in comparison in terms of number of incidents and lives lost to what muslims have been showing us lately. You should have invoked the crusades or the holocaust to show what christian societies are capable of.

On another note: Its nice to see that muslims think that being a pedophile is ok, but being gay warrants execution.

Great Odins Raven: "You should have invoked the crusades or the holocaust to show what christian societies are capable of."

The crusades are sufficiently ancient that most Christians dismiss their validity as an example, and while Nazi Germany was technically a Christian society and those doing the exterminating were Christians, core Nazi ideology was rooted in theosophy and occultism.

Better examples of atrocities committed by devoutly, sincerely religious regimes would be Francisco Franco's Spain, Pinochet's Chile, or the Heavenly Kingdom regime in mid-1800s China.

Even Worse!!!

Sybarite: One book for children as young as six is said to ask them what happens to someone who dies who is not a believer in Islam - the correct answer is "hellfire".



Approves

Arthur Brown?

j0ndas: condoms have a 5% failure rate and encourage people to have sex more often and with more people.

Wrong. Idiotically wrong. On both counts.

j0ndas: Abortion clinic bombers are VERY careful to only blow up the clinic when there's nobody in it,

One of the saddest defenses I've ever heard.

j0ndas: never mind that gays are only 3% of the population, 2/3 of those are obese, and there's a high incidence of child molestation

Another lie. FYI--Those pamphlets your church gives you aren't interested in keeping you informed.

j0ndas: Muslims threaten to kill someone whenever they don't get their own way, and gays are pound for pound probably the most powerful lobbying group in the US.

Yeah, that's why gay marriage is legal throughout the US, and we never have to worry about getting fired from our jobs if our boss finds out we're gay. And there's the random wing-nut Muslim who threatens to kill the South Park guys, etc, just as there are random wing-nut Christians who threaten to kill "abortion doctors" or people who put on gay plays in rural towns. But the Christians don't make the news here.

j0ndas: And abortion doctors kill far more women in botched operations in a month than abortionist shooters have over many years. Nobody ever mentions that.

I can't even begin to wrap my head around why you think that's somehow a point in your favor. Unless you're accusing the doctors of killing their patients on purpose?

Mister_Gone: Heh. It's such a common form of imagery in propaganda, but up until recently I'd never noticed that trope.

Why an octopus? It's bizarre.

Zamboro: You're seriously defending the shooters?

i'll give it a try, if you actually believe your stance

any takers?

pro-life or pro-choice which one is better?

or is this a jew vs. muslim vs. xtian vs. atheist thread?

I drunk what: "i'll give it a try, if you actually believe your stance"

What do you think my stance is?

thomps: right, and don't forget that they had to travel to f*cking uganda in order to find a viable audience.

No, just an audience with more power.

As someone else posted upthread, a secular government puts a damper on all sorts of that nonsense.

beoswulf: The BBC just discovered the Koran? This material isn't based on a Saudi curriculum, it's straight out of the Islamic holy text.

Sura 2:65 And you know well the story of those among you who broke Sabbath. We said to them: "Be apes-despised and hated by all." 66 Thus We made their end a warning to the people of their time and succeeding generation, and an admonition for God-fearing people. (Maududi)

Sura 5:60 Then say: "Should I inform you of those, who will have even worse recompense from Allah than the transgressors? They are those whom Allah has cursed; who have been under His wrath; some of whom were turned into apes and swine"

Sura 7:166 But when even after this they disdainfully persisted in that from which they were forbidden, We said to them, "Become apes-despised and disgraced!"

Surah al-Baqara: They were chosen by God for a mission (44:32) and God raised among them many Prophets and bestowed upon them what He had not bestowed upon many others (5:20)

Surah al-Ma'idah: 20 He, also, exalted them over other nations of the earth and granted them many favors: "O Children of Israel! Remember My favor wherewith I favored you and how I preferred you to (all) creatures."

/fencing with scripture should be an Olympic sport.

Itstoearly: IkonOlator: I saw the documentary "Jesus Camp" over the weekend.

Boy, there are a lot of similarities between the folks profiled in the film and the folks who support the curriculum mentioned here. Too bad neither group could possibly recognize how similar they are.

How many Christians are calling for the death of homosexuals? That's right, none. Not even that nut job Fred Phelps.

You're right there. No Christians call for the death of homosexuals. If they want one dead, they just gang up and stomp 'em to death. Or is gay bashing in the states basically a muslim thing, you're saying?

Zamboro: By the by, some time ago in the course of writing a paper on Altemeyer's "The Authoritarians" I spent a few days scouring the net for examples of RWA propaganda. I found a really weird trend; the use of octopi.

What they seem to fear is a modern, liberal, humanist, secular world. Which is a bit funny as that sounds pretty wonderful to me. The direction we're necessarily headed provided things keep getting better.

In light of that I'm considering getting an octopus tattoo. It'd be really neat if we could reclaim it as a general symbol for modernism, liberalism, humanism, secularism and basically every aspect of progress that terrifies/enrages RWAs. :]



I see what you did there.

Grass Hopper: Itstoearly: IkonOlator: I saw the documentary "Jesus Camp" over the weekend.

Boy, there are a lot of similarities between the folks profiled in the film and the folks who support the curriculum mentioned here. Too bad neither group could possibly recognize how similar they are.

How many Christians are calling for the death of homosexuals? That's right, none. Not even that nut job Fred Phelps.

You're right there. No Christians call for the death of homosexuals. If they want one dead, they just gang up and stomp 'em to death. Or is gay bashing in the states basically a muslim thing, you're saying?

Phelps and many other Christians do in fact call for gays to be executed, especially in Uganda.

Zamboro: I drunk what: "i'll give it a try, if you actually believe your stance"

What do you think my stance is?

um, i'm guessing pro-choice?

I drunk what: "um, i'm guessing pro-choice?"

Hopefully you realize that's not the same as pro abortion.

yert: Jorge Sum: Itstoearly: IkonOlator: I saw the documentary "Jesus Camp" over the weekend.

Boy, there are a lot of similarities between the folks profiled in the film and the folks who support the curriculum mentioned here. Too bad neither group could possibly recognize how similar they are.

How many Christians are calling for the death of homosexuals? That's right, none. Not even that nut job Fred Phelps.

This. Fred Phelps is, at the moment, pretty much the worst thing that Christianity has to offer, but by Islamic standards he'd be a "moderate".

I'll go find more (new window)

That's an awesome PS source pic in that article:



He needs to be combined with the "moran" sign carrying guy

Zamboro: Mister_Gone: Heh. It's such a common form of imagery in propaganda, but up until recently I'd never noticed that trope.

Why an octopus? It's bizarre.

I think it is because octopuses are the criminal masterminds of the mollusk world.

p.s. When god made all the animals, he tickled them each one time to test their nervous system... except for cephalopods. He gave them ten tickles.

We shouldn't judge their beliefs.

Zamboro: I drunk what: "um, i'm guessing pro-choice?"

Hopefully you realize that's not the same as pro abortion.

what's the difference?

and

are you pro-abortion?

I drunk what: Zamboro: I drunk what: "um, i'm guessing pro-choice?"

Hopefully you realize that's not the same as pro abortion.

what's the difference?

and

are you pro-abortion?

You guys seriously think that, don't you?

eddiesocket: You guys seriously think that, don't you?

think what? i haven't seen a question answered yet...

what do you think?

abortion: are you for it or against it?

I drunk what: eddiesocket: You guys seriously think that, don't you?

think what? i haven't seen a question answered yet...

what do you think?

abortion: are you for it or against it?

Do you think gay people should be thrown in prison or executed for engaging in adult consensual sex? If not, does that make you "pro gay"?

I drunk what: "what's the difference?"

I don't like abortions. I don't celebrate them or promote them as positive. I think we live in an imperfect world which often demands that we make hard choices. There are certain ugly necessities, things you come to understand as an adult that you would have difficulty explaining to a child. A child has no concept of why an animal shelter would continuously euthanize strays. They would see it as terribly evil, as they haven't considered the alternative. Likewise we don't send gradeschool children on tours of slaughterhouses because their inability to understand the logistics of supporting the nutritional needs of a population of tens of millions would lead them to conclude that adults are horrible cruel monsters who hate cow, pigs and chickens.

There exists a publicly visible organization with a childlike view of slaughterhouses, animal shelters, zoos and so on. It's called Peta.

Anti-abortion organizations suffer from the same basic naievete.

I drunk what: "are you pro-abortion?"

No. In a perfect world nobody would need one. But we don't live in that world, and occasionally an abortion is morally preferable to the alternative.

I do think partial birth abortions cross the line, and in fact I'd place that line just before the point where the brain develops as determined by embryology. I realize that's cutting it very close but I see it as a compromise which has a basis in science rather than religion, and which should satisfy all parties.

even though i'm afraid your bad analogy is going to confuse you even more, i'll answer it anyway, as a sign of good faith

eddiesocket: Do you think gay people should be thrown in prison or executed for engaging in adult consensual sex?

execution? heavens no. jail? hmm, that depends, when you approach one of these people to discuss their lifestyle choice and they respond with "I can't help it, it's just the way I am!" and you respond, "well you can help it but it's quite possible that it would be a very difficult choice for you". and they take the position that they are not in control of their actions and can't be held accountable for their actions, then yes I would recommend some form of incarceration for them, perhaps with some kind of psychological support system..?

but yeah the moment they become delusional to the point where they equate a lifestyle with a race, clearly they've gone off the deep end...

wouldn't you agree?

eddiesocket: If not, does that make you "pro gay"?

gay people are still people, and i'm for people

so yes i am pro "gay"

/i'm just against their lifestyle choice

///not sure what all this has to do with abortion
//patiently waits to see

I drunk what: "but yeah the moment they become delusional to the point where they equate a lifestyle with a race, clearly they've gone off the deep end...

wouldn't you agree?"

If it is your view that discrimination against gays is legitimate because it is a choice, and it cannot be bigotry to judge and hold people accountable for their choices, then on what grounds would you object to discrimination against Christians? Religion is also a choice, and a lifestyle.

I drunk what: even though i'm afraid your bad analogy is going to confuse you even more, i'll answer it anyway, as a sign of good faith

eddiesocket: Do you think gay people should be thrown in prison or executed for engaging in adult consensual sex?

execution? heavens no. jail? hmm, that depends, when you approach one of these people to discuss their lifestyle choice and they respond with "I can't help it, it's just the way I am!" and you respond, "well you can help it but it's quite possible that it would be a very difficult choice for you". and they take the position that they are not in control of their actions and can't be held accountable for their actions, then yes I would recommend some form of incarceration for them, perhaps with some kind of psychological support system..?

but yeah the moment they become delusional to the point where they equate a lifestyle with a race, clearly they've gone off the deep end...

wouldn't you agree?

eddiesocket: If not, does that make you "pro gay"?

gay people are still people, and i'm for people

so yes i am pro "gay"

/i'm just against their lifestyle choice

///not sure what all this has to do with abortion
//patiently waits to see

/You already know the answer.
//Won't have a discussion with a nasty bigoted fark who would like to put me in jail.
///Let me guess: that makes me "the intolerant one".

boobsrgood: Unh-huh. And God will send bears to eat you if you make fun of bald people, but it's OK to sell your daughter into prostitution or kill people if they have a different God than you do.

Take a close look at the tenets of any religion and you are left with no choice but to abandon all faith in humanity. We white folks just like to focus on the bad religion those brown people on the wrong side of the planet practice.

Your first visit to Fark?

The penalty for gay sex is execution

Wait a minute, don't some islamic countries execute people for having gay sex? While the practice is reprehensible, teaching this is technically correct (in some countries), isn't it?

Vega.: The penalty for gay sex is execution

Wait a minute, don't some islamic countries execute people for having gay sex? While the practice is reprehensible, teaching this is technically correct (in some countries), isn't it?

Not in England, where this is being taught. If they're teaching Saudi laws, I guess it's okay to report them factually, but the material's a little old for first graders, I'd say.

Vega.: The penalty for gay sex is execution

Wait a minute, don't some islamic countries execute people for having gay sex? While the practice is reprehensible, teaching this is technically correct (in some countries), isn't it?

Why is "correct" always a synonym for "evil" with these people...?

Zamboro: I don't like abortions.

oh good, neither do i :)

maybe i should just stop here, since we both can agree, cuz i'm afraid if i keep reading i'm gunna find a " ...but, [words]..."

Zamboro: I don't celebrate them or promote them as positive.

hmm, this sounds like you're prepping yourself for some "necessary evil" delusions:

Zamboro: I think we live in an imperfect world which often demands that we make hard choices.

yep, so then if we have a really really really really good reason then it is ok?

Zamboro: There are certain ugly necessities, things you come to understand as an adult that you would have difficulty explaining to a child.

I hope I never have to explain to my children that there are certain situations when it is ok to murder children...

/ya know cuz they are children
//and they might put 2 and 2 together :o
///and never sleep again :(

Zamboro: A child has no concept of why an animal shelter would continuously euthanize strays.

is this the analogy you are going to use with your children, to explain abortion? wow Zamby, i had no idea

father Zamby: sweetie, we need to talk, about our recent problems

Zamby's daughter: daddy, i'm sorry i've been such a burden on you and mommy, i know it's hard to make a living these days, and having an extra mouth to feed isn't making anything easier

father Zamby: yeah, that's why i've brought you a present, it's a little medicine that will help you go to sleep... a deep long sleep, then everything will be better after that.

Zamby's daughter: well at least you gave me some dignity and didn't compare me to some stray dog or some crap like that.

oh sorry, you were saying?

Zamboro: They would see it as terribly evil, as they haven't considered the alternative.

is this one of them false dicho things, cuz i'm pretty sure you're smarter than that

/let's pretend you didn't say that

Zamboro: Likewise we don't send gradeschool children on tours of slaughterhouses because their inability to understand the logistics of supporting the nutritional needs of a population of tens of millions would lead them to conclude that adults are horrible cruel monsters who hate cow, pigs and chickens.

There exists a publicly visible organization with a childlike view of slaughterhouses, animal shelters, zoos and so on. It's called Peta.

so, did all those words convince you that euthanizing animals is the same as abortions?

Zamboro: Anti-abortion organizations suffer from the same basic naievete.

*sigh* sometimes i wish i wouldn't ask... :(

Zamby, when you're ready, we need to have a serious talk.

Zamboro: No. In a perfect world nobody would need one.

so again, if we have really really good reason? then everyone is ok? shall we apply this methodology to all our morals?

Zamboro: But we don't live in that world, and occasionally an abortion is morally preferable to the alternative.

[spanishswordsman.jpg]

Zamboro: I do think partial birth abortions cross the line, and in fact I'd place that line just before the point where the brain develops as determined by embryology. I realize that's cutting it very close but I see it as a compromise which has a basis in science rather than religion, and which should satisfy all parties.

ah good, i like definitions!

so using this horribly gray definition, if one of those right-wing nutjobs was bombing clinics or shooting at docs that regularly perform partial birth abortions, you would have no problem with such things?

speaking of gray def.s

do you foresee any problems with using that def. for abortion?

anyone? anyone? bueller...bueller?

j0ndas: boobsrgood: Come back to reality. Xtianity is the most aggressive, invasive, and propagandizing religious group on the planet. They infiltrate every populated square mile with frothing missionaries who will stop at nothing to persuade non-believers. They specialize in such tactics as teaching Africans that condoms do not prevent the spread of AIDS in their misguided efforts to force them to resort to celibacy. It had the opposite effect, and they are directly responsible for a huge decline in the number of Africans practicing safe sex.

But you go on thinking your xenophobic, racist, inbred, uneducated floor-wigglin, tongue-speakin, god-fearin xtians is the righteous folks of the Earth. Every stupid person I know thinks every club they belong to is the best one there is.

You mean missionaries who provide free medical help in places where people die from small wounds and dentistry is a rusty set of pliers? Missionaries who regularly get assassinated (Sudan) or thrown into jail (China)? If you think Christianity is worse than Islam (or atheism, for that matter), you've been seriously brainwashed.

Condoms do prevent the spread of AIDS, but only if you assume a fixed amount of sex. Abstinence is 100% effective if practiced, condoms have a 5% failure rate and encourage people to have sex more often and with more people. Overall, condoms are not that much better, and -paying- for the condoms and essentially endorsing sex with multiple partners goes against our religion. Also, Africans generally ignore the condoms anyway, even if given them for free and told that they're the best way to stop STD's. You could carpet-bomb Africa with condoms and it wouldn't put a serious dent in the spread of disease.

Your last paragraph probably isn't serious, from the sound of it. And practically speaking, Christianity -is- the best club on Earth, things have taken a serious downturn over the last few dozen years only because the US has been secularized and is now following a statist, socialist agenda rather than a righteous one. Many of our politicians even on the Republican side made it in only because they had the most money.

Zamboro: As opposed to bombing abortion clinics and shooting doctors? Not nearly as common, but the restraint imposed by a secular government will do that.

Abortion clinic bombers are VERY careful to only blow up the clinic when there's nobody in it, so it's a civil offense rather than a capital offense. And virtually all Christians, including myself, discourage clinic bombings or abortion clinic doctor shootings (of which there are extremely few, and some of those even were motivated more by the shooter's baby having been aborted). Muslims kill hundreds of thousands of each other every year, I fail to see how a tiny handful of isolated incidents over here match up. And abortion doctors kill far more women in botched operations in a month than abortionist shooters have over many years. Nobody ever mentions that.

The thing is, in the minds of people like that, we've already been "taken over". By whom? Depends on the group. Some object to nonwhites (Christian Identity movement) some object to gays (National Organization for Marriage) but most lately seem to share an ideology which rolls up everything that conflicts with a traditionalist Biblical worldview (liberalism, atheism, feminism, darwinism, homosexuality, socialism, Islam, and occasionally Judaism) into a single conspiracy theory. You may have heard of it, Pat Robertson wrote a book on the topic:

Well, if you look at the media, we have already been taken over by Muslims (fat chance finding footage about American Muslim clerics calling for the slaying of all non-Muslims, or Sudanese missionaries and converts being mutilated and murdered, or really anything even slightly bad) and gays (Christians are almost always exaggerated into fat, hypocritical bigots, yet there's always a quirky gay in every TV show - never mind that gays are only 3% of the population, 2/3 of those are obese, and there's a high incidence of child molestation). Muslims threaten to kill som ...

Wow, you are my new favorite Troll. You are pretty good at it. Keep it up.

/all religion ALL of it is mythology
//recycled from thousands and thousands of years back

If you don't agree with the laws of the country you are immigrating to, then please stay in whatever godforsaken little hellhole you came from.

joestinkpants: If you don't agree with the laws of the country you are immigrating to, then please stay in whatever godforsaken little hellhole you came from.

I'm not sure mocking or belittling gays or Jews is against the law in England. It's nasty behavior, to be sure, but as long as they're not breaking the law, I think the best the English media can do it public shaming.

I drunk what: "I hope I never have to explain to my children that there are certain situations when it is ok to murder children...

/ya know cuz they are children"



I drunk what: "is this one of them false dicho things, cuz i'm pretty sure you're smarter than that"

In the case of animal population control, no it isn't. You may have read articles about events in third world nations which mentioned in passing the problem of packs of dogs roaming the streets. That's the sort of shiat that happens when you don't manage your population of strays.

I drunk what: "so, did all those words convince you that euthanizing animals is the same as abortions?"

I didn't say that, and will not continue to argue with you if you continue to misrepresent my views. The slaughterhouse and the animal shelter bits were both examples of necessary evils, not intended to be direct metaphors for abortion.

I drunk what: "so again, if we have really really good reason? then everyone is ok? shall we apply this methodology to all our morals?"

I think when you are instead wholly inflexible in your morality and derive justification from a religious source you wind up cutting off the hands of thieves and stoning women to death for sleeping around.

I drunk what: "so using this horribly gray definition, if one of those right-wing nutjobs was bombing clinics or shooting at docs that regularly perform partial birth abortions, you would have no problem with such things?"

No, because it's still terrorism. Why would you even suggest this? You seem intent on attributing views to me which I do not hold.

I drunk what: "do you foresee any problems with using that def. for abortion?"

No.

The poster who would like me to leave my partner of four years and live the rest of my life celibate or else face imprisonment is also "pro life". Not a surprise. And of course, like most pro-life people, he's against contraceptives. To be both pro-life and against contraception is an absurd contradiction. I believe some pro-lifers genuinely believe that abortion is murder, and I respect that view even if I don't agree with it. But most social conservatives want to see people (and especially women and gays) punished for their "sins" and see STDs and unplanned pregnancies and even date rape as the just consequences of a lustfull lifestyle. And wearing a condom or having an abortion is "cheating" the system.

Zamboro: If it is your view that discrimination against gays is legitimate because it is a choice, and it cannot be bigotry to judge and hold people accountable for their choices, then on what grounds would you object to discrimination against Christians? Religion is also a choice, and a lifestyle

zamby, slow down deep breathes, you're getting eddie all ansy

that's not what i said, nor was it even what i was implying

first off before you both start foaming at the mouth, i would not suggest that homosexuals should be placed in prison

2nd Religion =/= homosexuality, which explains so much of why we have communication problems

3rd unloading the first part of your statement we discriminate against lifestyles choices ALL the time, such as theft, murder, etc..

4th Religion is not a choice, it is a tool for understanding, though you are correct that we can choose to increase our knowledge or not

5th Religion is not a lifestyle choice, see previous point, it provides guidance for our lifestyles it doesn't live and choose for us

6th we're talking about abortion not homosexuality, one at a time lad

I drunk what: first off before you both start foaming at the mouth, i would not suggest that homosexuals should be placed in prison

I drunk what: yes I would recommend some form of incarceration for them, perhaps with some kind of psychological support system..?

Do you seriously believe people's memories are that short?

I drunk what: 4th Religion is not a choice,

Wow. So I guess there's no point in being a missionary or preaching your religion to anyone. Because apparently, we have no choice in the matter. Amazing. Perhaps if you're not in control of your own actions and what god you worship, and you lack the cognitive abilities to decide for yourself if it's possible to put two kinds of every animal on a boat for 40 days, then I would recommend some form of incarceration, perhaps with some kind of psychological support system.

eddiesocket: Not a surprise.

learn to read dude

/and don't learn from nk

I drunk what: "2nd Religion =/= homosexuality, which explains so much of why we have communication problems"

I didn't equate them. I compared them on the grounds that you consider homosexuality to be a lifestyle choice, which is what I consider religion to be.

I drunk what: "3rd unloading the first part of your statement we discriminate against lifestyles choices ALL the time, such as theft, murder, etc.."

Sure, and what are our criteria for deciding whether or not a lifestyle choice should be legal?

I drunk what: "4th Religion is not a choice"

Gonna stop you right there, yes obviously it is. You're not born with any specific religious worldview. It's something you choose to adopt later in life or which you're brainwashed into from youth.

I drunk what: "it is a tool for understanding, though you are correct that we can choose to increase our knowledge or not"

Religions are not fact-finding methodologies. They are self-referential stores of doctrinal claims. If religions were in fact a tool for understanding reality we should expect to see technological examples of applied religion, but we don't.

eddiesocket: Do you seriously believe people's memories are that short?

not but i'm quite sure that people's bias interferes with their reading comprehension

but i've alos heard that i'm a terrible speaker, so please allow me to clarify:

I drunk what: hmm, that depends, when you approach one of these people to discuss their lifestyle choice and they respond with "I can't help it, it's just the way I am!" and you respond, "well you can help it but it's quite possible that it would be a very difficult choice for you". and they take the position that they are not in control of their actions and can't be held accountable for their actions, then yes I would recommend some form of incarceration for them, perhaps with some kind of psychological support system..?

but yeah the moment they become delusional to the point where they equate a lifestyle with a race, clearly they've gone off the deep end...

here i was indicating that some people like to hide behind politically correctness to shield them from having to defend their choices and i WAS suggesting that those people should be thrown in jail for fraud

however, concerning the fact that some people struggle with homosexuality more than others, is not a good reason to jail someone

ihth

I drunk what: "here i was indicating that some people like to hide behind politically correctness to shield them from having to defend their choices and i WAS suggesting that those people should be thrown in jail for fraud"

So you're saying that the gays who will not agree with you that their homosexuality is a choice are "frauds" and deserving of jail time?

I drunk what: "however, concerning the fact that some people struggle with homosexuality more than others, is not a good reason to jail someone"

They do not "struggle" with their homosexuality. They struggle with religious fascists who strive to create a society that excludes them.

But you're losing that battle, and you know it. Do you plan to continue in your desperate attempts to suppress non-Christian outgroups until all of society is aligned against the church?

Also, related to an earlier post, here's a fascinating interview with Dr. Bob Jones III, of the famous Bob Jones University. It touches on some elements of modern RWA ideology I referred to earlier.

"KING: Why can't black kids date white kids?

JONES: OK.

KING: Because you didn't take black kids for a long time, right?

JONES: Well, 50 percent of American colleges as late as the mid- 1960s still didn't take black students, so...

KING: But you were late?

JONES: 1970, so we weren't that late. Furman (ph) University in our town took their first black I believe it was in '65, Clemson in '63. So, you know, we were not exclusive in this by any means.

KING: But will you admit, as Jerry Falwell has said, you were wrong, you should have taken them?

JONES: Yes, we do. We do, of course we do.

KING: All right, why -- explain this, why they can't date.

JONES: Well, being a Bible believing institution, Larry, we try to base things on Bible principle. The problem we have today is that our principle is so greatly misunderstood. People think we don't let them date because we are racist, in other words to be racist you have to treat people differently. We don't. We don't let them date, because we were trying, as an example, to enforce something, a principle that is much greater than this.

We stand against the one-world government, against the coming world of anti-Christ, which is a one world system of blending, of all differences, of blending of national differences, economic differences, church differences, into a big one ecumenical world. The Bible is very clear about this.

We said, you know, way back years ago, when we first had a problem, which was -- by the way, we started this principle, back in the mid-'50s, I was a college student at BJU at the time and it was with an Asian and Caucasian is -- we didn't even have black students for another 15 years. So it was not put there as a black thing, I think people need to understand that.

KING: So the fear of one world relates back to two people dating?

JONES: Now, we realize that a inter-racial marriage is not going to bring in the world the anti-Christ by any means, but if we as Christians stand for Christ and not anti-Christ, and we see -- we are against the one world church. We are against one economy, one political system.

We see what the Bible says about this, so we say, OK, if they're going to blend this world -- and inter-racial marriage is a genetic blending, which is a very definite sort of blending -- we said as -- let's put this policy in here, because we are against the one world church and, way back, 17 years ago when I was on your program, I was saying on programs all across America, we are not going to the Supreme Court fighting for our rule and our -- we are fighting for our right to it. There is a religious freedom issue, that's all we ever fought for."