Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 6

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally posted by aCultureWarrior View Post
What is it about this that you don't agree with?
"We believe that respect for individual rights is the essential precondition for a free and prosperous world, that force and fraud must be banished from human relationships, and that only through freedom can peace and prosperity be realized.

Consequently, we defend each person’s right to engage in any activity that is peaceful and honest, and welcome the diversity that freedom brings. The world we seek to build is one where individuals are free to follow their own dreams in their own ways, without interference from government or any authoritarian power."

I already set out my ideology, it is markedly distinct from libertarianism (anarcho-capitalism or anarchistic liberalism).

It was a simple question based on what is the core of libertarian doctrine. Do you agree with it or disagree?

Originally posted by aCultureWarrior View Post
Surely you're not against diversity are you?

What does diversity mean here?

What do you think it means?


Originally posted by aCultureWarrior View Post
Cuz conserving liberalism is what I'm all about.

You're liberal with a conservative (paternalistic) bent.
.Unless you're just a conservative, in which case your paternalism would be the controlling factor in your ideology, rather than human rights.

Yeah, this 5 part thread on recriminalizing homosexuality has been a real hit with liberals

Originally posted by aCultureWarrior View Post
What if God finds it gross? (Psssst, this is where you write about theocracies).

God is liberal.

I think that He's more like you...libertarian..

'What people do in privacy is no ones business'.

 

[Lon]

Attempting to change the subject won't make who the vast majority of TOL'ers (and without a doubt you) voted for President (Donald Trump) and what he and his SCOTUS picks have done to promote the homosexual agenda go away.

Did it matter (I didn't vote for him)? When both parties support this, or abortion, generally there is a force to vote for one or the other (or not vote by objection but I'm not convinced that has any kind of purpose or power).

Next: Have these threads morphed into rejecting both Democrats and Republicans across board? Seems like a different discussion to me, but it seems to be a main focus in the last two threads.
When it comes to political parties, my eyes start glazing over and the main point of threads gets lost in the shuffle (not a critique, just a passing comment of what keeps or loses my particular interest). -Lon

 

[Idolater]

Originally posted by aCultureWarrior View Post
What is it about this that you don't agree with?
"We believe that respect for individual rights is the essential precondition for a free and prosperous world, that force and fraud must be banished from human relationships, and that only through freedom can peace and prosperity be realized.

Consequently, we defend each person’s right to engage in any activity that is peaceful and honest, and welcome the diversity that freedom brings. The world we seek to build is one where individuals are free to follow their own dreams in their own ways, without interference from government or any authoritarian power."



It was a simple question based on what is the core of libertarian doctrine. Do you agree with it or disagree?

You could have just read what I already wrote about this very subject. That too is simple. Would have been. Had you done that.

But no, I know I know. Your thread. You're allowed to act like a caricature and never break character.

Originally posted by aCultureWarrior View Post
Surely you're not against diversity are you?



What do you think it means?

It means whatever you want it to mean.

Which is why I asked the question.

Obviously.

Originally posted by aCultureWarrior View Post
Cuz conserving liberalism is what I'm all about.



Yeah, this 5 part thread on recriminalizing homosexuality has been a real hit with liberals

Nobody agrees with you more that gross genital behavior wrecks people's lives, than me. We champion chastity. Chastity is our calling, it is God's law, and it's God's love when we're chaste. This culture has attempted to decimate chastity and now we've gotten so far away from outlawing gross genital behavior, that we're seeing all manner of its celebration.

It reminds me now in today's culture how extreme the New Testament is in enumerating the gross genital behaviors going on during the first century around the Mediterranean. It's like we're back there and then---but with smartphones . . . and the internet . . . smh.

Originally posted by aCultureWarrior View Post
What if God finds it gross? (Psssst, this is where you write about theocracies).



I think that He's more like you...libertarian..

'What people do in privacy is no ones business'.

In private or not, if people preserve, protect, acknowledge, recognize, defend, honor, and affirm our natural, pre-political, native, inborn, inherent, intrinsic, inviolable, inalienable, sacred, fundamental, indefeasible, indubitable, indivisible and absolute individual basic human rights, then they are no criminals. They may not be Catholics, but it'd be wicked if I attempted to impose Catholicism upon them against their will. That's what prompted the Reformation don't you know? Catholicism being imposed upon (i.e., the right of religious liberty and freedom of conscience were treated contemptuously) the people of Europe, prompted the Reformation.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Did it matter (I didn't vote for him)? When both parties support this, or abortion, generally there is a force to vote for one or the other (or not vote by objection but I'm not convinced that has any kind of purpose or power).

Next: Have these threads morphed into rejecting both Democrats and Republicans across board? Seems like a different discussion to me, but it seems to be a main focus in the last two threads.
When it comes to political parties, my eyes start glazing over and the main point of threads gets lost in the shuffle (not a critique, just a passing comment of what keeps or loses my particular interest). -Lon

What's the point of your post?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

You could have just read what I already wrote about this very subject. That too is simple. Would have been. Had you done that.​

Why the denial?​

 

[Lon]

What's the point of your post?

I don't think your threads need to focus so much on the ancillary, Donald Trump. I simply think he plays to crowds and that his rainbow flag was par. He repealed a couple of Obama's laws that favored them.

For me? Neither here nor there, but if I read your thread, it is generally to be informed as you list articles and stats. I get quite enough of Trump from other threads. Maybe discussion needs to center on him in your threads, but such loses my interest going so many pages long. :e4e:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

I don't think your threads need to focus so much on the ancillary, Donald Trump. I simply think he plays to crowds and that his rainbow flag was par. He repealed a couple of Obama's laws that favored them.

.

Which ones are you talking about? If it's not allowing the rainbow flag of perversion and death to be flown along side or on the same flag pole as the US flag at US Foreign Embassies, it's a violation of flag protocol. They can still display the rainbow flag elsewhere.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...cision-defence

 

[Idolater]

Why the denial?

So I've told you that I'm a boy. You keep saying, No you're a girl. I said again No, I'm a boy, read what I said again. Now you ask this.

So this now is just gas lighting on your part. I'm a boy. Slash LIBERAL---not a libertarian. I'm denying I'm libertarian, because I'm not a libertarian. I know what a libertarian is, and I know what a liberal is, just like I know the difference between boys and girls, and I am definitely not a libertarian and I am definitely liberal.

Why the gas lighting?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

. I know what a libertarian is, and I know what a liberal is, ...

Then you would know what the core tenet of both ideologies are: 'It's my body and I can do with it as I please!'

 

[Idolater]

Then you would know what the core tenet of both ideologies are: 'It's my body and I can do with it as I please!'

The core tenet if there is one of liberalism is that there exist certain universal rights, and that they are moral in nature and in character.

Libertarianism, anarcho-capitalism, or just capitalism, are all liberalisms, that lean toward the distinct ideology known as anarchism. They all believe in the core tenet of liberalism mentioned above, but they lean toward anarchism. If or when in any doubt about what our universal rights are, libertarians opt for the anarchistic interpretation, which wouldn't be too far off from your suggestion, that it's "My body and I can do with it as I please!"

Liberals don't lean, not fundamentalist liberals like me. Our universal rights are the whole shebang. We identify, define, and enumerate them, and we insist that they are protected equally, because we believe they are indivisible, that while they can be enumerated as distinct rights, that they all together form our universal rights as a unit or single entity. To disregard one of them is to disregard all of them, in a way, in the way that has them not all being of equal value. A fundamentalist liberal believes them all to be equal, and all deserving of equal protection under the law.

Like for example, there is a universal right to do gross things with our genitals, and there is a universal right to find all that behavior gross, and to say that it's gross, and to advise against doing any unchaste thing, and to insulate our children from people who want to say that it is not gross.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

The core tenet if there is one of liberalism is that there exist certain universal rights, and that they are moral in nature and in character.

Like libertarianism, moral to the believers of that doctrine.

 

[Idolater]

Like libertarianism, moral to the believers of that doctrine.

No. Universal. It doesn't matter if you're a liberal or a socialist or a conservative or an anarchist or an absolute monarchist or a fascist or whatever, no matter who or what you are, if you infringe anybody's universal rights without justification then you are immoral in so doing.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

No. Universal. It doesn't matter if you're a liberal or a socialist or a conservative or an anarchist or an absolute monarchist or a fascist or whatever, no matter who or what you are, if you infringe anybody's universal rights without justification then you are immoral in so doing.

Spoken like a diehard Libertarian.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Hope that you don't need a blood transfusion...

July 28, 2020

Blood donations by people taking drugs to treat, prevent HIV could be ‘cause for concern’

Blood donations from people on antiretroviral therapy to treat HIV or pre-exposure prophylaxis to prevent HIV infection could increase risk for HIV transfusion transmission if tests cannot detect the virus in the donations, study results showed...

“The clinical implications [of the findings] are currently unknown,” Custer said. “The potential or cause for concern is that ART and PrEP by definition are taken to alter the course of HIV infection; thus, the use of ART or PrEP could impact our ability to detect HIV infection in donated blood because blood tests for HIV measure the presence of viral RNA or antibodies to HIV infection.”

This could lead to transfusion transmission of HIV, although there is no direct idence of such transmission under these circumstances, he added.

Read more: https://www.healio.com/news/hematolo...se-for-concern

 

[Idolater]

Spoken like a diehard Libertarian.

lain: Uh-huh.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

I am free': Alice Marie Johnson thanks Trump for commuting her sentence at the RNC
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cid=spartanntp

Johnson was arrested in 1993 and convicted in 1996 of eight federal criminal counts relating to her involvement in a Memphis, Tennessee-based cocaine trafficking organization.^[3] In addition to drug conspiracy counts, Johnson was convicted of money laundering and structuring, the latter crime because of her purchase of a house with a down payment structured to avoid hitting a $10,000 reporting threshold.^[3] The Memphis operation involved over a dozen individuals.^[6] The indictment, which named 16 defendants,^[7] described Johnson as a leader in a multi-million dollar cocaine ring, and detailed dozens of drug transactions and deliveries.^[8] Evidence presented at trial showed that the Memphis operation was connected to Colombian drug dealers based in Texas.^[9] Johnson was sentenced to life imprisonment without parole in 1997. At the sentencing hearing, U.S. District Judge Julia Gibbons said that Johnson was "the quintessential entrepreneur" in an operation that dealt in 2,000 to 3,000 kilograms of cocaine, with a "very significant" impact on the community.^[9] Co-defendants Curtis McDonald and Jerlean McNeil were sentenced to life and 19 years in federal prison, respectively.^[9] A number of other co-defendants who testified against Johnson received sentences between probation and 10 years...​

Johnson's was one of the 16,776 petitions filed in the Obama administration's 2014 clemency project.^[11] In 2016, she wrote an op-ed for CNN asking for forgiveness and a second chance.^[18] Her application was denied just before Obama left office.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Marie_Johnson

Obama was tougher on drug pushers than Trump is.

Up next: A convicted drug queen pin wasn't the only special guest speaking at the RNC: an ardent homosexual activist did as well.​

 

[aCultureWarrior]

It's embarrassing to watch Donald Trump make a complete fool out of himself:

"You spent 22 years in prison for something people today wouldn't be going to jail for."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...ice-marie-johnson/vi-BB18tKC7?ocid=spartandhp

 

[eider]

It's embarrassing to watch Donald Trump make a complete fool out of himself:

"You spent 22 years in prison for something people today wouldn't be going to jail for."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...ice-marie-johnson/vi-BB18tKC7?ocid=spartandhp

Hello CW.......
If the President is returned to the White House, (and I think he will be) then he won't need to worry about appealing to the voters quite so much because, obviously, he cannot be re-elected a third time.

In which case I think he will push much harder for LGBTQ folks than ever before. You wait.

 

[Idolater]

So this thread might as well just be called Biden-Harris Democrat party campaign headquarters at this point.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Hello CW.......
If the President is returned to the White House, (and I think he will be) then he won't need to worry about appealing to the voters quite so much because, obviously, he cannot be re-elected a third time.

In which case I think he will push much harder for LGBTQ folks than ever before. You wait.

Homosexual activist Richard Grenell speaking at the RNC.