Saturday, July 11, 2015

Quickies: The Camel Is Inching Forward

     Perhaps you thought once the Supreme Court had recognized a “right” to same-sex marriage, the Sturm und Drang would be over. But within hours, polygamists were demanding the legal recognition of their “marriages.” And why not, after all? A man married himself shortly before that. If you can have zero or one spouses, why not two or more? And of course, the pedophiles are waiting for their day in court.

     (Note: The publication Miss Valente’s article mentions cannot currently be found at Amazon. Apparently, Amazon has delisted it. Too much blowback? Or was it some sort of sick joke?)

     Say, remember when Senator Rick Santorum said publicly that if there’s a “right” to same-sex marriage, then you have “a right to anything” -- ? He was roundly condemned for that blatant sin against the PC Code. Here’s a sample just in case you’ve forgotten:

     Santorum wants a a ban on gay marriages. He would likely bring back antiquated anti-sodomy laws as well. “If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual [gay] sex within your home, then you have a right to bigamy, you have a right to polygamy, you have a right to incest, you have a right to adultery. You have a right to anything.”

     When Santorum gets on the subject of homosexuality, one can’t help noting a tinge of hysteria, along with a generous helping of illogic and exaggeration. Santorum would probably try to ban other related activities, such as the use of contraceptives to prevent pregnancy. He certainly wants to get rid of Planned Parenthood.

     What this adds up to is that when Santorum says religious values should play a greater role in government policy, he means that there should be lots of laws regulating your personal life, particularly your sex life. This is pretty typical of religious fundamentalists, particularly American Christian ones. They just can’t leave other people’s bedrooms alone.

     Is Lawrence Davidson, the author of the above article, a “fudge packer,” a “meat smoker,” a faggot? I wouldn’t know. But he’s definitely pro-sodomy, pro-infanticide, and a religious bigot, as you can see from his words above.

     Which brings us to this obscenity:

     A homosexual man has filed a $70 million lawsuit against Bible publishers Zondervan and Thomas Nelson, alleging that their version of the Bible that refers to homosexuality as a sin violates his constitutional rights and has caused him emotional distress....

     [Litigant Bradley LaShawn] Fowler, who is representing himself in both cases, claims that Zondervan manipulated Scripture by using the term “homosexuals” in 1 Corinthians 6:9 of their 1982 and 1987 revised edition Bibles. He also contends that the reference to homosexuality were deleted by the publisher in later versions without informing the public.

     He alleges that since the older Kings James Version containing the term “homosexuals” is used by his family pastor, he has been outcast by his family.

     The 39-year-old is suing the Grand Rapids publisher for compensation of 20 years of “emotional duress and mental instability,” he told WOOD-TV in Grand Rapids.

     “But what harm could it do to let them marry one another?” far too many good-hearted conservatives argued. Now you know.

4 comments:

  1. I'm holding my breath waiting for Bradley Flower, excuse me, Fowler, to sue publishers of the Koran for publishing and encouraging their views of homosexuality.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm just waiting for God to zot this accursed government.

    ReplyDelete
  3. His lawsuit _should_ go down in flames, but if it does, it won't be with gales of laughter. Christians are such a serious target of the Left that they will do anything to destroy them, to make their religion unlawful, illegal. While, at the same time, they give a complete pass to the atrocities performed by muslims - commanded, in fact, by the qu'ran. Given the current SC®OTUS, I wouldn't be surprised to see this deviate win in court.

    Bigamy, polygamy will likely be next, followed by pedophilia sanctioned as "marriage". As I've written elsewhere, there has been a movement for some years now to remove it as a disorder in the DSM (now in version 5). Since the Left refuses to condemn muslims when they obey the dictates of the qu'ran - as perfectly adhered to and expressed by ISIS - the promulgation of sharia means accepting pedophilia. Wish I could show it here, or the URL if I had it, but I have a graphic of mohammed saying, "My wife called me a pedophile. That's a pretty big word for a nine-year-old."

    ReplyDelete
  4. I meant to add that I am curious as to Pope Francis' thoughts on gay marriage. Has he expressed any in public? He is so fond of muslims, it makes me wonder how he feels about pedophilia being an integral part of islam. Of course, in spite of the majority of Catholic priests (at least back when I was child being raised as a Catholic) being decent human beings, the Church did (has always had) problems with pedophiliac priests. It might be an issue about which Pope Francis would rather avoid speaking.

    ReplyDelete

Comments are moderated. I am entirely arbitrary about what I allow to appear here. Toss me a bomb and I might just toss it back with interest. You have been warned.