I'm pleased that Trump has banned transgenders from the military - MAGA
Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 4
- Thread starter aCultureWarrior
- Start date
- Status
Evidently the Secretary of Defense and the Navy Secretary don't read transgender activist* Donald Trump's late night tweets.
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ized!-Part-4&p=5081965&viewfull=1#post5081965
*"I have great respect for the community," Trump said Thursday, according to a pool report. "I think I've had great support, or I've had great support from that community. I got a lot of votes."
http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-transgender-military-ban-favor-2017-8
I'm not sure if drag queen turned genital mutilator Bruce Jenner voted for you Donald, even though you were kind enough to let him use the women's restroom at one of your Trump businesses.
It's been nearly a month since LGBT activist Donald Trump tweeted that transgenders will be banned from serving in the US military, but it appears that there are stipulations to this supposed ban (it really isn't a ban if stipulations are attached is it?).
From Trump lemming headquarters, Faux News:
Trump administration to set rules for military transgender ban
August 23, 2017
WASHINGTON – The White House is expected to send guidance to the Pentagon in coming days on how to implement a new administration ban on transgender people in the military, issuing a policy that will allow Defense Secretary Jim Mattis to consider a service member’s ability to deploy in deciding whether to kick them out of the military.
The White House memo also directs the Pentagon to deny admittance to transgender individuals and to stop spending on medical treatment regimens for those currently serving, according to U.S. officials familiar with the document.
The 2½-page memo gives Mr. Mattis six months to prepare to fully implement the new ban, according to these officials.
Mr. Mattis under the new policy is expected to consider “deployability”—the ability to serve in a war zone, participate in exercises or live for months on a ship—as the primary legal means to decide whether to separate service members from the military, the officials said.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...o-set-rules-for-military-transgender-ban.html
Does this expectation of "deployability" pertain to the LGB in the LGBT acronym as well? (Of course not). Are homosexuals and bisexuals considered deployable, even though (amongst other things) their physical and mental health can take a downturn at any given moment?
We'll see what happens in the next 6 months in Donald Trump's politically correct US Military.
https://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/gays.jpg
From Trump lemming headquarters, Faux News:
Trump administration to set rules for military transgender ban
August 23, 2017
WASHINGTON – The White House is expected to send guidance to the Pentagon in coming days on how to implement a new administration ban on transgender people in the military, issuing a policy that will allow Defense Secretary Jim Mattis to consider a service member’s ability to deploy in deciding whether to kick them out of the military.
The White House memo also directs the Pentagon to deny admittance to transgender individuals and to stop spending on medical treatment regimens for those currently serving, according to U.S. officials familiar with the document.
The 2½-page memo gives Mr. Mattis six months to prepare to fully implement the new ban, according to these officials.
Mr. Mattis under the new policy is expected to consider “deployability”—the ability to serve in a war zone, participate in exercises or live for months on a ship—as the primary legal means to decide whether to separate service members from the military, the officials said.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...o-set-rules-for-military-transgender-ban.html
Does this expectation of "deployability" pertain to the LGB in the LGBT acronym as well? (Of course not). Are homosexuals and bisexuals considered deployable, even though (amongst other things) their physical and mental health can take a downturn at any given moment?
We'll see what happens in the next 6 months in Donald Trump's politically correct US Military.
https://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/gays.jpg
More on LGBTQ activist Donald Trump's deployment hoax regarding transgenders in the US Military:
Average Transgender Soldier Unable to Deploy for 238 Days
White House military ban to be based on deployability
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/average-transgender-soldier-unable-deploy-238-days/
Note how it's the recovery time after gender reassignment surgery that is the problem when it comes to deployment, not the fact that these gender and sexually confused people are in dire need of spiritual and psychological help.
A few things to wonder about:
1. Since many transsexuals serving in the US Armed Forces have already surpassed that 238 day mark, does that make them eligible for deployment?
2. How about those military personnel who identify as someone of the opposite gender but have no desire to have gender reassignment surgery, are they eligible for deployment?
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-mTWgBTe6m.../w1d79NQ7Xn4/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/Klinger.jpg
3. From a legal/lawsuit standpoint: Will all US military personnel who aren't considered 'deployable" be removed from the US Armed Forces?
Average Transgender Soldier Unable to Deploy for 238 Days
White House military ban to be based on deployability
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/average-transgender-soldier-unable-deploy-238-days/
Note how it's the recovery time after gender reassignment surgery that is the problem when it comes to deployment, not the fact that these gender and sexually confused people are in dire need of spiritual and psychological help.
A few things to wonder about:
1. Since many transsexuals serving in the US Armed Forces have already surpassed that 238 day mark, does that make them eligible for deployment?
2. How about those military personnel who identify as someone of the opposite gender but have no desire to have gender reassignment surgery, are they eligible for deployment?
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-mTWgBTe6m.../w1d79NQ7Xn4/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/Klinger.jpg
3. From a legal/lawsuit standpoint: Will all US military personnel who aren't considered 'deployable" be removed from the US Armed Forces?
Last edited:
I'd never heard of Patriot Prayer or it's founder Joey Gibson until recently. I'm not sure if Gibson is going to be the new heartthrob of the new Libertarian leaning Republican Party like openly homosexual/pedophile defender Milo Yiannopoulos was a few months ago, but here's a little bit of background on Gibson and his group:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40cLKHFdRM0
So a group that has the word "Prayer" in it's name isn't religious, and has transsexual and atheist speakers?
More on Joey Gibson's Transsexual/Atheist Patriot Prayer movement later...
So a group that has the word "Prayer" in it's name isn't religious, and has transsexual and atheist speakers?
More on Joey Gibson's Transsexual/Atheist Patriot Prayer movement later...
Last edited:
Evidently due to massive protests, Joey Gibson and his transsexual/atheist Patriot Prayer movement had to cancel their rally in San Fransicko.
Maybe you should have more drag queens/transsexuals and atheists speaking on stage next time Joey.
Joey Gibson cancels Patriot Prayer rally in SF
http://koin.com/2017/08/25/joey-gibson-cancels-patriot-prayer-rally-in-sf/
Snakes in the Grass: Who is Benefiting From Joey Gibson’s Rallies?
https://itsgoingdown.org/snakes-grass-benefiting-joey-gibsons-rallies/
Maybe you should have more drag queens/transsexuals and atheists speaking on stage next time Joey.
Joey Gibson cancels Patriot Prayer rally in SF
http://koin.com/2017/08/25/joey-gibson-cancels-patriot-prayer-rally-in-sf/
Snakes in the Grass: Who is Benefiting From Joey Gibson’s Rallies?
https://itsgoingdown.org/snakes-grass-benefiting-joey-gibsons-rallies/
With the white supremacist/neo Nazi/fascist movement and the communist Antifa/"anti fascist" movement in the news practically everyday battling it out over such things as free speech, I thought that I'd take this opportunity to show the vast similarities between the two movements and why they're really not enemies at all.
Communism vs. Fascism
Communism versus Fascism comparison chart
Philosophy
Communism
From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. Free-access to the articles of consumption is made possible by advances in technology that allow for super-abundance.
Fascism
The state must gain glory through constant conquest and war. The past was glorious, and that the State can be renewed. The individual has no value outside of his or her role in promoting the glory of the State. Philosophies varied by country.
Ideas
Communism
All people are the same and therefore classes make no sense. The government should own all means of production and land and also everything else. People should work for the government and the collective output should be redistributed equally
Fascism
Union between businesses and the State, with the state telling the business what to do, with nominally private ownership. Corporatism in Italy, National Socialism in Germany. Central planning of National economy. Redistribution of wealth (Nazi).
Key Elements
Communism
Centralized government, planned economy, dictatorship of the "proletariat", common ownership of the tools of production, no private property. equality between genders and all people, international focus. Usually anti-democratic with a 1-party system
Fascism
Actual idealism, centralized government, social Darwinism, planned economy, anti-democratic, meritocratic, extreme nationalism, militarism, racism (Nazism). Traditional and/or exaggerated gender roles. One party system
Private Property
Communism
Abolished. The concept of property is negated and replaced with the concept of commons and ownership with "usership".
Fascism
Nominally permitted. Contingent upon service, obedience, or usefulness to the State
Religion
Communism
Abolished - all religious and metaphysics is rejected. Engels and Lenin agreed that religion was a drug or “spiritual booze” and must be combated. To them, atheism put into practice meant a “forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions
Fascism
Fascism is a civic religion: citizens worship the state through nationalism. The state only supports religious organizations that are nationally/historically tied to that state; e.g., the Iron Guard in Romania supported the Romanian Orthodox church
Read more: http://www.diffen.com/difference/Communism_vs_Fascism
https://americainchains2009.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/nazi-com1.jpg
Communism vs. Fascism
Communism versus Fascism comparison chart
Philosophy
Communism
From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. Free-access to the articles of consumption is made possible by advances in technology that allow for super-abundance.
Fascism
The state must gain glory through constant conquest and war. The past was glorious, and that the State can be renewed. The individual has no value outside of his or her role in promoting the glory of the State. Philosophies varied by country.
Ideas
Communism
All people are the same and therefore classes make no sense. The government should own all means of production and land and also everything else. People should work for the government and the collective output should be redistributed equally
Fascism
Union between businesses and the State, with the state telling the business what to do, with nominally private ownership. Corporatism in Italy, National Socialism in Germany. Central planning of National economy. Redistribution of wealth (Nazi).
Key Elements
Communism
Centralized government, planned economy, dictatorship of the "proletariat", common ownership of the tools of production, no private property. equality between genders and all people, international focus. Usually anti-democratic with a 1-party system
Fascism
Actual idealism, centralized government, social Darwinism, planned economy, anti-democratic, meritocratic, extreme nationalism, militarism, racism (Nazism). Traditional and/or exaggerated gender roles. One party system
Private Property
Communism
Abolished. The concept of property is negated and replaced with the concept of commons and ownership with "usership".
Fascism
Nominally permitted. Contingent upon service, obedience, or usefulness to the State
Religion
Communism
Abolished - all religious and metaphysics is rejected. Engels and Lenin agreed that religion was a drug or “spiritual booze” and must be combated. To them, atheism put into practice meant a “forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions
Fascism
Fascism is a civic religion: citizens worship the state through nationalism. The state only supports religious organizations that are nationally/historically tied to that state; e.g., the Iron Guard in Romania supported the Romanian Orthodox church
Read more: http://www.diffen.com/difference/Communism_vs_Fascism
https://americainchains2009.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/nazi-com1.jpg
Aside from the pro Trump propaganda piece, this is a pretty informative video.
Steven Crowder Explains Why Antifa And The White Nationalists Are Basically The Same (Video)
http://barbwire.com/2017/08/28/steven-crowder-explains-antifa-white-nationalists-basically-video/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-9--B4Jhts
Steven Crowder Explains Why Antifa And The White Nationalists Are Basically The Same (Video)
http://barbwire.com/2017/08/28/steven-crowder-explains-antifa-white-nationalists-basically-video/
I like blunt commentators and writers, people who don't beat around the bush but get straight to the truth. Mike Adams in one of those (I have a few disagreements with his article, but the theme of it is what's important).
Why I Left The GOP
August 29, 2017
Mike Adams
https://www.picsofcelebrities.com/m...ctures/medium/images-of-ryan-sommers-baum.jpg
Over the last fifteen months, I have received numerous requests to speak at GOP events. In response, I have had to write numerous polite notes to my would-be hosts explaining that I must decline, as I am no longer a member of the Republican Party. Rewriting variations of the same note has become so tedious that I have decided to write a column I can forward to Republicans explaining why I can no longer speak at their events. But, first, let me say some positive things about why I joined the party in the first place.
My status as a left wing Democrat began to become a bit shaky in December of 1992. That was when a fraternity brother of mine was abducted and murdered along with his girlfriend who was also sexually assaulted before she was shot at point blank range in the head. Both were unarmed. I immediately abandoned my previous support for a federal ban on handguns...
Since joining the GOP in 1999, I can safely say that they have failed to nominate a single conservative over the span of five presidential election cycles. Three of those nominees have been particularly problematic with the last finally driving me over the edge and making me re-register as an independent. I will deal with each disappointment in chronological order.
George W. Bush. Candidate Bush had his finest moment of the campaign in debate No. 2 when he lectured Al Gore on the dangers of nation building. As President Bush, his view on nation building was close to the exact opposite of that of Candidate Bush. But long before our entanglement in Iraq, he began to display his big government utopian tendencies. In his first year in office, Bush worked with Ted Kennedy to expand the federal Department of Education’s stranglehold on public education. In addition to increasing the power of federal agencies that should never have existed he added more, such as the Department of Homeland Security...
Mitt Romney. I am deeply ashamed of the fact that I pulled the lever for Mitt back in 2012. If there is anyone who can watch the video of Mitt explaining to Bill O’Reilly how he was “always pro life” and believe it then I can probably convince you that Madonna is a virgin. Candidate Romney was a liar and a bad one at that. Clearly, Mitt’s support for socialized medicine with $50 copay abortions should have been enough to keep him from gaining the nomination of any truly pro-life party...
Donald Trump. I don’t even know where to begin with this embarrassment...
After a few debates, I realized that the Republicans were finally going to do the inevitable and actually nominate a Democrat for president. That’s when I finally jumped ship and left the party....
In the months following the Trump inauguration, the GOP showed us all that with control of the House, the Senate, and the White House they could neither dismantle Obamacare nor defund Planned Parenthood. Thus, it should go without saying that they are no longer merely a useless appendage in the body politic. They are more like a cancerous organ that needs to be removed.
Read more: https://townhall.com/columnists/mikeadams/2017/08/29/why-i-left-the-gop-n2374243
It took me a while to figure out that the political party that gave us Roe v Wade (and hasn't done anything about it in 44 years) is a fraud (better late than never).
I owe a mountain of gratitude to those Libertarians and democrats that crossed party lines to help elect the moral degenerate to the most powerful political office in the world. Who knows, if Trump hadn't been elected maybe I'd continue believing that the Republican Party really does stand for traditional family values.
Hopefully true conservatives will tire of the politics as usual Republican Party and start a conservative political party.
Why I Left The GOP
August 29, 2017
Mike Adams
https://www.picsofcelebrities.com/m...ctures/medium/images-of-ryan-sommers-baum.jpg
Over the last fifteen months, I have received numerous requests to speak at GOP events. In response, I have had to write numerous polite notes to my would-be hosts explaining that I must decline, as I am no longer a member of the Republican Party. Rewriting variations of the same note has become so tedious that I have decided to write a column I can forward to Republicans explaining why I can no longer speak at their events. But, first, let me say some positive things about why I joined the party in the first place.
My status as a left wing Democrat began to become a bit shaky in December of 1992. That was when a fraternity brother of mine was abducted and murdered along with his girlfriend who was also sexually assaulted before she was shot at point blank range in the head. Both were unarmed. I immediately abandoned my previous support for a federal ban on handguns...
Since joining the GOP in 1999, I can safely say that they have failed to nominate a single conservative over the span of five presidential election cycles. Three of those nominees have been particularly problematic with the last finally driving me over the edge and making me re-register as an independent. I will deal with each disappointment in chronological order.
George W. Bush. Candidate Bush had his finest moment of the campaign in debate No. 2 when he lectured Al Gore on the dangers of nation building. As President Bush, his view on nation building was close to the exact opposite of that of Candidate Bush. But long before our entanglement in Iraq, he began to display his big government utopian tendencies. In his first year in office, Bush worked with Ted Kennedy to expand the federal Department of Education’s stranglehold on public education. In addition to increasing the power of federal agencies that should never have existed he added more, such as the Department of Homeland Security...
Mitt Romney. I am deeply ashamed of the fact that I pulled the lever for Mitt back in 2012. If there is anyone who can watch the video of Mitt explaining to Bill O’Reilly how he was “always pro life” and believe it then I can probably convince you that Madonna is a virgin. Candidate Romney was a liar and a bad one at that. Clearly, Mitt’s support for socialized medicine with $50 copay abortions should have been enough to keep him from gaining the nomination of any truly pro-life party...
Donald Trump. I don’t even know where to begin with this embarrassment...
After a few debates, I realized that the Republicans were finally going to do the inevitable and actually nominate a Democrat for president. That’s when I finally jumped ship and left the party....
In the months following the Trump inauguration, the GOP showed us all that with control of the House, the Senate, and the White House they could neither dismantle Obamacare nor defund Planned Parenthood. Thus, it should go without saying that they are no longer merely a useless appendage in the body politic. They are more like a cancerous organ that needs to be removed.
Read more: https://townhall.com/columnists/mikeadams/2017/08/29/why-i-left-the-gop-n2374243
It took me a while to figure out that the political party that gave us Roe v Wade (and hasn't done anything about it in 44 years) is a fraud (better late than never).
I owe a mountain of gratitude to those Libertarians and democrats that crossed party lines to help elect the moral degenerate to the most powerful political office in the world. Who knows, if Trump hadn't been elected maybe I'd continue believing that the Republican Party really does stand for traditional family values.
Hopefully true conservatives will tire of the politics as usual Republican Party and start a conservative political party.
That's the answer. Leave the GOP. Fortunately, more Americans are abandoning the defunct democratic party
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
I owe a mountain of gratitude to those Libertarians and democrats that crossed party lines to help elect the moral degenerate to the most powerful political office in the world. Who knows, if Trump hadn't been elected maybe I'd continue believing that the Republican Party really does stand for traditional family values.
You Libertarians couldn't get Ron Paul nominated on the Republican Presidential ticket, so the next best thing was someone who at least stood for Libertarian social values: Donald Trump.
I owe a mountain of gratitude to those Libertarians and democrats that crossed party lines to help elect the moral degenerate to the most powerful political office in the world. Who knows, if Trump hadn't been elected maybe I'd continue believing that the Republican Party really does stand for traditional family values.
You Libertarians couldn't get Ron Paul nominated on the Republican Presidential ticket, so the next best thing was someone who at least stood for Libertarian social values: Donald Trump.
Perhaps ... because if the Republican party reallllly ever stood for Christian family values, they would have rejected and fought Trump every step of the way. Instead, they have become his willing accomplice.
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
You Libertarians couldn't get Ron Paul nominated on the Republican Presidential ticket, so the next best thing was someone who at least stood for Libertarian social values: Donald Trump.
In essence the people of the Republican Party are guilty of compounding a crime.
http://www.yourdictionary.com/compounding-a-crime
They'll continue to put on a good show by having a conservative party platform (even though they won't demand that it be enforced) and have a supposed social conservative (i.e. Mike Pence) on the Presidential ticket to draw the votes of those who pretend to care about traditional family values.
It may take some time, but the Republicrat Party will eventually implode.
You Libertarians couldn't get Ron Paul nominated on the Republican Presidential ticket, so the next best thing was someone who at least stood for Libertarian social values: Donald Trump.
In essence the people of the Republican Party are guilty of compounding a crime.
http://www.yourdictionary.com/compounding-a-crime
They'll continue to put on a good show by having a conservative party platform (even though they won't demand that it be enforced) and have a supposed social conservative (i.e. Mike Pence) on the Presidential ticket to draw the votes of those who pretend to care about traditional family values.
It may take some time, but the Republicrat Party will eventually implode.
Even though Pence would be 100% better than Trump (anyone would), Pence has compromised his integrity and IMO, will forever wear the taint of Trump. Aren't you at all disappointed in Ted Cruz? At first, he seemed to be one of the few who was going to refuse to be one of Trump's robotic minions. The one time he seemed to show a star quality ... and then .... he allowed himself to be Trumped.
Mike Pence? The same Mike Pence who cowered to the LGBTQ movement by not backing the religious freedom bill while governor of Indiana? The same Mike Pence who along with Donald Trump stated that Obergefell v Hodges is "the law of the land"?
If Pence is a conservative, I'll take a pass on conservativism.
As I mentioned to a Trump lemming several pages back: Cruz reluctantly endorsed Donald Trump for President after receiving all kinds of hate mail from repubilcrats. Since then I'm not aware of Cruz being a cheerleader for Trump, in fact he's been quite silent about the Degenerate in Chief.
Huh? :AMR: I am not arguing that Mike Pence is a conservative or presidential material, etc., but rather that he is better than Trump. Which considering the fact that Nixon was better than Trump, it's not much of a compliment.
So he, like others, allowed the Bully-N-Chief to intimidate him into submission? I wonder if he got a sticker that says "attaboy"? Insofar as hate mail from rethuglicans ... when has being hated ever stopped Cruz?
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Mike Pence? The same Mike Pence who cowered to the LGBTQ movement by not backing the religious freedom bill while governor of Indiana? The same Mike Pence who along with Donald Trump stated that Obergefell v Hodges is "the law of the land"?
If Pence is a conservative, I'll take a pass on conservativism.
I posted this back on Nov. 4, 2016. It shows Mike Pence's progressiveness (i.e. liberalism) as Governor of Indiana.
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ized!-Part-4&p=4852701&viewfull=1#post4852701
Frauds of a feather...
Please don't play the lesser of two evils card here Sandy, that's what got Donald Trump elected.
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
As I mentioned to a Trump lemming several pages back: Cruz reluctantly endorsed Donald Trump for President after receiving all kinds of hate mail from repubilcrats. Since then I'm not aware of Cruz being a cheerleader for Trump, in fact he's been quite silent about the Degenerate in Chief.
There is no doubt in my mind that Senator Ted Cruz loooooooooathes Donald Trump, not only for the lies Trump told about his family but for his liberal stance on most issues.
In order to survive in the Republican Party (and hence promote true conservatism),Ted Cruz had to endorse Donald Trump's Presidency over Trump's fellow liberal Hillary Clinton.
Call it a sellout if you like, I call it making a necessary move in the world of politics.
Mike Pence? The same Mike Pence who cowered to the LGBTQ movement by not backing the religious freedom bill while governor of Indiana? The same Mike Pence who along with Donald Trump stated that Obergefell v Hodges is "the law of the land"?
If Pence is a conservative, I'll take a pass on conservativism.
I posted this back on Nov. 4, 2016. It shows Mike Pence's progressiveness (i.e. liberalism) as Governor of Indiana.
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ized!-Part-4&p=4852701&viewfull=1#post4852701
Frauds of a feather...
Please don't play the lesser of two evils card here Sandy, that's what got Donald Trump elected.
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
As I mentioned to a Trump lemming several pages back: Cruz reluctantly endorsed Donald Trump for President after receiving all kinds of hate mail from repubilcrats. Since then I'm not aware of Cruz being a cheerleader for Trump, in fact he's been quite silent about the Degenerate in Chief.
There is no doubt in my mind that Senator Ted Cruz loooooooooathes Donald Trump, not only for the lies Trump told about his family but for his liberal stance on most issues.
In order to survive in the Republican Party (and hence promote true conservatism),Ted Cruz had to endorse Donald Trump's Presidency over Trump's fellow liberal Hillary Clinton.
Call it a sellout if you like, I call it making a necessary move in the world of politics.
I didn't ... I am not speaking evil. I am speaking DANGEROUS. Disagree with me if you like, but the only difference I see between Trump, Putin and Kim Jong Un is that in our current government, Trump has not yet been able to achieve the kind of power to be a dictator just as they are ... however, he DOES have their mindset. I don't worry about Pence using the nuclear codes over the annoyance of a tweet. With Trump, our world could no longer exist tomorrow. With Pence, when tomorrow comes, he can be removed for a better candidate.
People who are evil are dangerous.
Admit Sandy, Trump's pro LGBTQ stance is palatable in the eyes of liberals. Regarding Trump being a wannabe tyrant: He was first exposed as one when he gave accolades to the mass murdering Chinese Communists in his Playboy Magazine interview back in the 90's.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_0ykdBUAAAGZbl.jpg
Don't go building a bomb shelter yet Sandy. Trump is controlled by others who won't allow his mental illness to destroy much of mankind.
Poor Sandy
- Status