Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 3

[alwight]

Dear Alwight,

I agree! Sounds like a bunch of homophobia here on this thread. I don't like talking about it either, but wow!

In Christ's Loving Care,

Michael

Mainly from aCW, Michael.

 

[MichaelCadry]

Mainly from aCW, Michael.

Thank you very much Alwight!! You're one of my best friends for quite a while now. We are allowed to have friends, eh? Does aCW ever go on other threads besides this one? I did check out those pics of San Francisco and I was not amused. They really go too far! It's ridiculous.

Ciao, Alwight!!

Michael

:singer:

:jump:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

It seems that you take nudity really seriously indeed aCW. :AMR:

Au contraire Uncle Al: I'm not the one defending nudity in public in front of innocent children. As has been shown in numerous posts: perverts that march in 'pride parades' and other homosexual festivals take their nudity very serious.

Heck, even pretend Christians don't have a problem with it:

...I don't think exposing one's genitals in the presence of children is just cause to lock them up...

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3934830&postcount=231

However, no one but you apparently is suggesting that urinating or defecating in view of others might be considered acceptable behaviour.

Why? Like nudity it's a natural thing (and something that homosexuals like to "play around with"; but talking about golden and brown showers is a topic for another time).

No one but you seems to suppose that any of the more basic and intimate bodily functions, including having sex (gay or straight), are ever simply proceeded with without heed or thought for others who probably don't need or want to see or hear it.

So those 10's of thousands of innocent children that are taken by their homosexual 'parents' and aunts and uncles to gay pride parades and homosexual festivals were asked in advance if they wanted to see naked males and females doing simulated sex acts on floats or actual sex acts on the streets?

"Johnny: Would you rather go play in the park today or go someplace where naked people are going to flaunt their peepee's in your face?"

So what is the real issue with nudity here?
Is there really an issue with it at all?

I'd say that generally yes there is. (Re Public nudity)
But it's only because certain body parts are nevertheless reminders of things (as above) that we may not usually want to know about in others and that conventionality and social discourse rather expects them to be covered up normally.
Of course we can't so easily escape the reminders of our own bodily functions by the wearing of clothes.

But are certain parts of the body really such shameful things in themselves that even in an arguably more acceptable context (e.g. changing rooms, saunas ...) should never be witnessed by others, who are then forced to shield their eyes from the ghastly sight of seeing someone else's "private parts"?:shocked:

Errr...no. :idunno:

You tell me Al. Is showering with fellow teammates after a basketball game the same as exposing yourself to 850,000 other people at a gay pride parade? Obviously you seem to think so.

 

[alwight]

It seems that you take nudity really seriously indeed aCW. :AMR:

Au contraire Uncle Al: I'm not the one defending nudity in public in front of innocent children. As has been shown in numerous posts: perverts that march in 'pride parades' and other homosexual festivals take their nudity very serious.

Neither was I, nor anyone else on this thread has supported legalising public nudity to my knowledge.

However, no one but you apparently is suggesting that urinating or defecating in view of others might be considered acceptable behaviour.

Why? Like nudity it's a natural thing (and something that homosexuals like to "play around with"; but talking about golden and brown showers is a topic for another time).

Which of course you will simply baldly presume that no such thing would ever have any heterosexual equivalent right?

No one but you seems to suppose that any of the more basic and intimate bodily functions, including having sex (gay or straight), are ever simply proceeded with without heed or thought for others who probably don't need or want to see or hear it.

So those 10's of thousands of innocent children that are taken by their homosexual 'parents' and aunts and uncles to gay pride parades and homosexual festivals were asked in advance if they wanted to see naked males and females doing simulated sex acts on floats or actual sex acts on the streets?

"Johnny: Would you rather go play in the park today or go someplace where naked people are going to flaunt their peepee's in your face?"

Not having been to any gay parades, yes I tell you no lie aCW, I have no idea how typical such genital exposure actually is or how much of it is set up or encouraged by the media.

However if people do take their own kids along then what they may see there is their responsibility not yours. The fact that kids are taken there suggests to me anyway that you perhaps rather like to exaggerate and dwell on selected instances that tend to help your cause ...no surely not. But as you know I am not in favour of public nudity, which is already against the law, if the police don't enforce it then take it up with them.

No So what is the real issue with nudity here?
Is there really an issue with it at all?

I'd say that generally yes there is. (Re Public nudity)
But it's only because certain body parts are nevertheless reminders of things (as above) that we may not usually want to know about in others and that conventionality and social discourse rather expects them to be covered up normally.
Of course we can't so easily escape the reminders of our own bodily functions by the wearing of clothes.

But are certain parts of the body really such shameful things in themselves that even in an arguably more acceptable context (e.g. changing rooms, saunas ...) should never be witnessed by others, who are then forced to shield their eyes from the ghastly sight of seeing someone else's "private parts"?:shocked:

Errr...no. :idunno:

You tell me Al. Is showering with fellow teammates after a basketball game the same as exposing yourself to 850,000 other people at a gay pride parade? Obviously you seem to think so.

Quelle surprise! (Some more French for you aCW) exactly what I don't think, but well done for being so consistently misrepresentative, I doubt if anyone ever believes a word you say. :nono:

 

[shagster01]

The queens, fairies and dykes of the lifestyle and movement that you defend sure don't have a problem displaying their genitalia in public. As I've shown throughout the thread, public nudism is very popular at pride parades and homosexual festivals. Public nudity was so bad in the libertine capital of the US (San Fransicko), that the degenerates running the city even passed legislation prohibiting public nudity.(Peter LaBarbera shows in this article how those that proudly partake in homosexual behavior are taking the law very seriously).

What happens if you see some genitalia, aCW? Can you not stop the flood of immoral thoughts that enter your mind? Do you turn gay?

Once you've seen one, you've seen them all.

I would ask you Doper why you think societies have public decency laws, but since you weren't even able to define what decency means to you, I figured that would be taxing that one live brain cell of yours again.

What about those tribes in Africa or South America? Are they sinning by not covering up to your standards even though it is the normal way of life and they don't know any different?

I remember reading an article about an African bushman (whose female member of course don't cover their breasts). He said he can't figure out way other societies care so much about breasts as they are only for nursing children with. It's the lady with the biggest disk in her lip that is the most attractive there. Should they then cover their lips?

How about I just ask you a few personal questions and we can see how you feel about nudity.

Do you and the wifey run around in the nude around your children? (If the kids get offended, they shouldn't look at it. It's not your job to make sure they see only things that they want).

You know how when some people invite guests over to their house they ask them to take off their shoes? Do you ask them to take off their clothes? (hopefully your neighbors aren't ashamed of what God gave them).

Bathroom doors: they're for prudes. So what if the kids see you urinating or defecating, it's as natural as the naked human body, so what's the big deal?

I won't go into you showering with other members of the family, as people might think I'm talking about incest (I'm not, it's only two human beings that are closely related to each other showering in a close proximity of one another).

Bedroom doors. So what if the kids see you and the wifey getting intimate, it's natural.

I could go on and on with more examples, but I think those will keep that Libertarian brain of yours busy for a while:

I don't do those things, but here is something that will blow your little mind. . .

Just because I don't do something, doesn't mean that the entire world shouldn't do it either. I know that's hard for you to understand, but the 7 billion people here are not just like me or you.

I would consider myself a bit of a prude for sure. But just because I'm a prude, should everyone be?

You know how when some people invite guests over to their house they ask them to take off their shoes? Do you ask them to take off their clothes? (hopefully your neighbors aren't ashamed of what God gave them).

Again, I know it's hard for your one live brain cell to understand, but I am not into forcing people to live my lifestyle one way or another.

cuz if it's done on private property, it's morally right.

Morals depend on the person, not on what aCW thinks.

 

[resurrected]

Once you've seen one, you've seen them all.

speaking as a medical professional who has seen more than one, allow me to assure you that you are quite mistaken :chuckle:

 

[shagster01]

speaking as a medical professional who has seen more than one, allow me to assure you that you are quite mistaken :chuckle:

Yes, well I'm sure those oddball (no pun intended) ones didn't exactly get the impure thoughts flowing either.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Au contraire Uncle Al: I'm not the one defending nudity in public in front of innocent children. As has been shown in numerous posts: perverts that march in 'pride parades' and other homosexual festivals take their nudity very serious.

Neither was I, nor anyone else on this thread has supported legalising public nudity to my knowledge.

Uh huh. Since the Doper didn't answer my question, perhaps you can tell us why civilized societies have and enforce public decency laws. While you're at it, tell us what doctrine here in western civilization is the basis for such laws.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Why? Like nudity it's a natural thing (and something that homosexuals like to "play around with"; but talking about golden and brown showers is a topic for another time).

Which of course you will simply baldly presume that no such thing would ever have any heterosexual equivalent right?

Yes Al, there are perverts that solely engage in heterosexual behavior. They also march in gay pride/moral degenerate parades in the name of solidarity. I believe the sodomites call them "allies":

GLBTQQ&A: Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgender Queer Questioning and Allies


Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

So those 10's of thousands of innocent children that are taken by their homosexual 'parents' and aunts and uncles to gay pride parades and homosexual festivals were asked in advance if they wanted to see naked males and females doing simulated sex acts on floats or actual sex acts on the streets?

"Johnny: Would you rather go play in the park today or go someplace where naked people are going to flaunt their peepee's in your face?"

Not having been to any gay parades, yes I tell you no lie aCW, I have no idea how typical such genital exposure actually is or how much of it is set up or encouraged by the media.

LOL...I can only imagine that you and Mikey Cadry are just chomping at the bit wishing gay pride/moral degenerate parades were as "loose" back in the day when you were both "active" as they are today.

However if people do take their own kids along then what they may see there is their responsibility not yours. The fact that kids are taken there suggests to me anyway that you perhaps rather like to exaggerate and dwell on selected instances that tend to help your cause ...no surely not. But as you know I am not in favour of public nudity, which is already against the law, if the police don't enforce it then take it up with them.

As we've seen throughout the 3 part thread: indoctrination of innocent children is a HUGE part of the homosexual agenda. Of course societies that embrace decency legislate and enforce laws that protect children from sexual deviants. Those days are long gone here in the good ole US of A.


Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

You tell me Al. Is showering with fellow teammates after a basketball game the same as exposing yourself to 850,000 other people at a gay pride parade? Obviously you seem to think so.

Quelle surprise! (Some more French for you aCW) exactly what I don't think, but well done for being so consistently misrepresentative, I doubt if anyone ever believes a word you say.

Then why the comparison between gay pride/moral degenerate parades where public nudity is displayed in a sexually oriented theme and places like saunas and gym showers where they're not?

Quote: Originally posted by alwight

But are certain parts of the body really such shameful things in themselves that even in an arguably more acceptable context (e.g. changing rooms, saunas ...) should never be witnessed by others, who are then forced to shield their eyes from the ghastly sight of seeing someone else's "private parts?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
The queens, fairies and dykes of the lifestyle and movement that you defend sure don't have a problem displaying their genitalia in public. As I've shown throughout the thread, public nudism is very popular at pride parades and homosexual festivals. Public nudity was so bad in the libertine capital of the US (San Fransicko), that the degenerates running the city even passed legislation prohibiting public nudity.(Peter LaBarbera shows in this article how those that proudly partake in homosexual behavior are taking the law very seriously).

What happens if you see some genitalia, aCW? Can you not stop the flood of immoral thoughts that enter your mind? Do you turn gay?

Once you've seen one, you've seen them all.

I must say Doper, I'm quite surprised to see you here this early. Being that it's the weekend, I figured that you'd be out til the early morning hours with the band doing drugs and hanging out with underage groupies.


Quote:
I would ask you Doper why you think societies have public decency laws, but since you weren't even able to define what decency means to you, I figured that would be taxing that one live brain cell of yours again.

What about those tribes in Africa or South America? Are they sinning by not covering up to your standards even though it is the normal way of life and they don't know any different?

i.e. we should be more like uncivilized pagan societies.

Quote:
How about I just ask you a few personal questions and we can see how you feel about nudity.

Do you and the wifey run around in the nude around your children? (If the kids get offended, they shouldn't look at it. It's not your job to make sure they see only things that they want).

You know how when some people invite guests over to their house they ask them to take off their shoes? Do you ask them to take off their clothes? (hopefully your neighbors aren't ashamed of what God gave them).

Bathroom doors: they're for prudes. So what if the kids see you urinating or defecating, it's as natural as the naked human body, so what's the big deal?

I won't go into you showering with other members of the family, as people might think I'm talking about incest (I'm not, it's only two human beings that are closely related to each other showering in a close proximity of one another).

Bedroom doors. So what if the kids see you and the wifey getting intimate, it's natural.

I could go on and on with more examples, but I think those will keep that Libertarian brain of yours busy for a while:

I don't do those things, but here is something that will blow your little mind. . .

Just because I don't do something, doesn't mean that the entire world shouldn't do it either. I know that's hard for you to understand, but the 7 billion people here are not just like me or you.

I would consider myself a bit of a prude for sure. But just because I'm a prude, should everyone be?

But Doper, the African tribes do it. Besides, you shouldn't care what the Jews wrote down 5,000 years ago. By golly if it's good enough for your fellow sexual deviants to do at gay pride/moral degenerate parades, it should be good enough for you to do in front of your family and neighbors.


Quote:
cuz if it's done on private property, it's morally right.

Morals depend on the person, not on what aCW thinks.

Spoken like a true nihilist:

total rejection of established laws and institutions.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nihilism

 

[Christian Liberty]

Just a note.

I have never said that everything that could be done on private property is morally right.

I never said exposing your junk is "acceptable." I said it wasn't just cause to lock someone up. Big difference.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

The only reason I have engaged in conversation with the sick moral degenerates that call themselves "Libertarian" is to show what you'll get with any political candidate that has libertarianism ideology. Keep in mind that these political candidates aren't exclusively using the Libertarian Party to push their lunacy, they're using the Republican and Constitution Party as well.

So in the upcoming elections beware of those candidates, as you'll be getting people like the Jr. Libertarian, WizardofOz and the Doper drafting Godless legislation, only they'll be smiling and wearing an expensive suit while doing it.

 

[Rusha]

Just a note.

I have never said that everything that could be done on private property is morally right.

I never said exposing your junk is "acceptable." I said it wasn't just cause to lock someone up. Big difference.

It IS public indecency, and there really is no good reason for anyone to participate in this violation.

 

[Christian Liberty]

The only reason I have engaged in conversation with the sick moral degenerates that call themselves "Libertarian" is to show what you'll get with any political candidate that has libertarianism ideology. Keep in mind that these political candidates aren't exclusively using the Libertarian Party to push their lunacy, they're using the Republican and Constitution Party as well.

So in the upcoming elections beware of those candidates, as you'll be getting people like the Jr. Libertarian, WizardofOz and the Doper drafting Godless legislation, only they'll be smiling and wearing an expensive suit while doing it.

Rand Paul isn't even a libertarian, nor does he claim to be. And for what its worth, I'm uncomfortable with some of the anti-libertarian stances he's taking. Maybe that will encourage you to vote for him.

It IS public indecency, and there really is no good reason for anyone to participate in this violation.

I understand, and I agree. All I'm saying is that I don't think you should be arrested for it. That doesn't mean I think it is acceptable, moral, normal, condoned, or encouraged.

 

[shagster01]

The only reason I have engaged in conversation with the sick moral degenerates that call themselves "Libertarian" is. . .

. . . because this stupid thread would be dead in the water without us.

 

[Rusha]

I understand, and I agree. All I'm saying is that I don't think you should be arrested for it. That doesn't mean I think it is acceptable, moral, normal, condoned, or encouraged.

How, then, would you discourage the participation in such a manner that it wouldn't happen?

 

[shagster01]

I must say Doper, I'm quite surprised to see you here this early. Being that it's the weekend, I figured that you'd be out til the early morning hours with the band doing drugs and hanging out with underage groupies.

Avoiding the topic.

i.e. we should be more like uncivilized pagan societies.

The idea of executing gay people is what you'd call "civilized" I presume?

But Doper, the African tribes do it. Besides, you shouldn't care what the Jews wrote down 5,000 years ago. By golly if it's good enough for your fellow sexual deviants to do at gay pride/moral degenerate parades, it should be good enough for you to do in front of your family and neighbors.

Again, you have this idea that supporting somebody's right to do something means that you have to do it too.

I wonder if you think that all food you don't like should be outlawed too? After all, if it's not good enough for you, how could you support the rights of someone else to eat it?

 

[shagster01]

How, then, would you discourage the participation in such a manner that it wouldn't happen?

What is your objection to public nudity? Why are you against it?

 

[Rusha]

What is your objection to public nudity? Why are you against it?

Because it's ... public. There is no good reason that people cannot rent out a place if they wish to display nudity and use a disclaimer. That is what nudist colonies are for.

No one should have to avert their eyes when they are out in public.

 

[resurrected]

What is your objection to public nudity? Why are you against it?

for one thing, up here in the winter you'd be tripping over the frozen dead bodies


so it's a public safety concern

 

[alwight]

Neither was I, nor anyone else on this thread has supported legalising public nudity to my knowledge.

Uh huh. Since the Doper didn't answer my question, perhaps you can tell us why civilized societies have and enforce public decency laws. While you're at it, tell us what doctrine here in western civilization is the basis for such laws.

Well, since I am perhaps culturally Christian and thankfully used to seeing only clothed people in public places then I would not particularly want that to change now. If I'd been raised in a different culture then perhaps, who knows how I'd feel about it?
I think I've already explained my reasoning against public nudity in a previous post, but I suspect that you'd rather like me to "flesh it out" so to speak, which perhaps I'll pass on here.

Which of course you will simply baldly presume that no such thing would ever have any heterosexual equivalent right?

Yes Al, there are perverts that solely engage in heterosexual behavior. They also march in gay pride/moral degenerate parades in the name of solidarity. I believe the sodomites call them "allies":

GLBTQQ&A: Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgender Queer Questioning and Allies

I think it stands to reason aCW that statistically there are far more perverted heterosexuals than homosexuals, whatever one's definition of a pervert is, and that most of them don't go to gay pride parades or have much cause to associate with gay activists.

Not having been to any gay parades, yes I tell you no lie aCW, I have no idea how typical such genital exposure actually is or how much of it is set up or encouraged by the media.

LOL...I can only imagine that you and Mikey Cadry are just chomping at the bit wishing gay pride/moral degenerate parades were as "loose" back in the day when you were both "active" as they are today.

I can't speak for Michael aCW but if I had or ever do want to go to a gay parade at any time then I would just go, since it wouldn't cause me any particular problems, other than perhaps I really don't like parades in general.
Actually I don't think they mind if straight people attend unless perhaps they are fundamentalist Christians or perhaps more specifically a repressed gay fundamentalist Christian who thinks he can somehow wilfully choose not have nagging gay thoughts by actively campaigning against homosexuality. lain:

However if people do take their own kids along then what they may see there is their responsibility not yours. The fact that kids are taken there suggests to me anyway that you perhaps rather like to exaggerate and dwell on selected instances that tend to help your cause ...no surely not. But as you know I am not in favour of public nudity, which is already against the law, if the police don't enforce it then take it up with them.

As we've seen throughout the 3 part thread: indoctrination of innocent children is a HUGE part of the homosexual agenda. Of course societies that embrace decency legislate and enforce laws that protect children from sexual deviants. Those days are long gone here in the good ole US of A.

As we know the protection of children is always your main goal here aCW, ...although it does sometimes seem to me at least that your no doubt sterling efforts are pretty much entirely directed only at homosexual perpetrators for some reason, rather than perhaps at sex molesters in general.

Quells surprise! (Some more French for you aCW) exactly what I don't think, but well done for being so consistently misrepresentative, I doubt if anyone ever believes a word you say.

Then why the comparison between gay pride/moral degenerate parades where public nudity is displayed in a sexually oriented theme and places like saunas and gym showers where they're not?

I don't find any nudity offends me in the right context but why would I accept that a sexual context in public was one?

Quote: Originally posted by alwight
"But are certain parts of the body really such shameful things in themselves that even in an arguably more acceptable context (e.g. changing rooms, saunas ...) should never be witnessed by others, who are then forced to shield their eyes from the ghastly sight of seeing someone else's "private parts?"

Do you find certain body parts shameful aCW? If so why exactly?
I bet it's that ancient scripture again that they seem to bang on about so much in these 'ere parts.
Wasn't it about eating fruit from the tree of something or other? :think: