Video: Gay Marriage Proponents Attack Elderly Woman

Originally posted by undo
yep, that's basically it. for example, when china instituted the one child policy, they knew how their people would react. they knew what they believed and they knew it would cull out of the population, the baby producers, like so many head of cattle on a farm.

Culling the female population is the ONLY way to create a society with more males.

And in the case of China (and India) they realize it is a problem and they are trying to stop it. If lots of female infants are culled and the gender ratio gets thrown off it creates a LOT of problems in society. In India for example, some provinces are experiencing this problem now and they are "buying" sex slave wives from other poor areas. It is believed that in some cases 2 or 3 brothers within ONE family will "share" the same wife (omg I can't imagine how bad those women have it, serving several guys and probably being treated like a lowely slave with no family nearby to help them, no rights, nothing).

The men do not all go gay, but the lack of females leads to trafficking of women, kidnapping, and a whole lot of other problems. Some males cannot get wives. This has happened before and the guys that can't get wives are the lowest class (poor and uneducated) and they end up becoming a very very ANGRY lower class that becomes destructive. I believe China had this problem a few centuries ago and it resulted in the disenfranchised males turning into marauding gangs.

If they are "gay or straight" has little to do with it, the men want families and they want HEIRS to their fortunes and such. That is why the Greeks and Roman's were often bisexual, but they still got married and had families in most cases.


[edit on 13-11-2008 by Sonya610]

the power elite doesn't need to take over. they've been in charge for thousands of years.

you said:

Gay women would obviously not agree with this agenda, for instance.

If you've noticed, gay women have been completely marginalized. they are waaay behind the curve. gay men have a significantly larger social acceptance than gay women. this is the natural result of gay men in a patriarchal system. the only time gay women are even considered useful by the general populace of men, is as porno stars (2 women together scenarios). otherwise they are called ugly, butches and so forth.

in fact, it was this stereotype that was used to marginalize hillary -- scheming, crafty, ugly butchess. and the opposite stereotype, to marginalize sarah -- vacant, stupid, beauty queen. both titles of which reveal a really weird disdain for women in general. this is the trend.
they say sarah is the future of the republican party. don't make me laugh.
they aren't gonna let a woman of any variety near the oval office except as a president's/vice president's wife.

it's one big survival of the fittest scenario for alot of these people and the weak do not inherit the earth

reply to post by Sonya610


ah the wonders of science. you'll be able to clone your child from any number of donors. perhaps they have the foresight to save some female dna in little jars.

reply to post by undo


as long as we are in agreement that the homosexual orientation is just a piece of this puzzle and not the hand crafting the agenda....

...So if it is the same power elite now as it was then, surely they have learned something from history (I mean you have right?) and they would not promote such a decline in female populace that it would cause their empire to collapse again?... Is their main motive pro-men or anti-women. Which one ultimately takes precedence over the other?

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


the agenda, i believe, is anti-human. zero population growth is the target. save the planet. animals never shot anyone with a gun. so on and so forth.

reply to post by undo


So I am curious, are you personally against homosexuals because you feel they are ultimately contributing to this power elites agenda?

Also, if the agenda is anti-human. Surely the collapse of society then was caused by some kind of innate nihilism on life itself and certainly not a sexual orientation.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


i'm not against homosexuals at all. to me, they're people just like anyone else. it's not my business what they do in the privacy of their bedroom or during a romantic interlude by the ocean. it's only my business, as a christian, to repeat what jesus said, and hope someone finds it useful. if not, that's free will for ya.


the rest of the data is just the way i see the future heading. i figured since the greeks had all been convinced to the degree that they had, to follow pederasty and kill their newborn daugthers, that a similar scenario could unfold only in this case, with homosexuality being the social norm. and that the entire thing would be orchestrated from on high, to solve the population problem.

did you know in india, there were so few women the maharajis would fight wars over them. to alleviate the problem of having their women taken away in a skirmish, they would gather them up in the middle of town and burn them all to death, including the female children, old ladies, female teenagers, female middle agers and so on. bonfire. pretty soon they had no women at all and had to resort to kidnapping females from neighboring countries. they are doing that in china now. it's bad over there. not just china but the whole middle, far and near east, is really hard on their women folk.

Originally posted by nyk537
Nothing says "respect our beliefs" quite like assaulting an old woman and stomping on her cross for not respecting your beliefs.

Idiots.

yeah...ok...so if there was 100 of you that just got your right to own firearms taken away and 1 old lady came right into the middle of your protest with an aclu sign...you all would be cordial and let her stand right in front of you and wave that sign in front of you?..........yeah.......rrriiiggghhttt!!!!!!!

Anyone planning on protesting any time in the near future should use this display of idiocy as a guide on "how to NOT protest"

They're like a bunch of crazy monkeys - it's embarrassing and totally counter-productive. Any allies they might have previously gained through sympathy they've definately now lost due to their total lack of tact and utilization of the correct brain cells.

Those dont look like your typical homosexual males though, they're more like gay truckers... scary.

Originally posted by undo
as a christian, to repeat what jesus said, and hope someone finds it useful. if not, that's free will for ya.

Not to derail the flow of our conversation but The Bible does not have Jesus saying anything anti-gay. The only thing one could extrapolate is that he talked about female and male union. He said nothing directly anti-gay though. He did speak much about tolerance and compassion. The anti-gay parts of the Bible are not the words of Jesus.

I am not too familiar with those occurences in India no I guess a little more aware of them in the Middle East.. I know it's bad, without even knowing the extent of it, I know it's bad.

You previous post seems to go back on the motive being anti-women...but I thought it was anti-human population..

p.s I am happy to hear you have tolerance and compassion towards homosexuals.

[edit on 13-11-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]

we do not live under gods law, period. that's why we have a constitution, and by the way, the constitution violates many of god's laws. keep god in your churches and homes and out of my life, i do not live under his rule, and i'm not going to take you telling me to do so. if this sounds familiar, you might want to study the history of this country. of course, you have to be patriotic to do that.

Originally posted by undo
did you know in india, there were so few women the maharajis would fight wars over them.

I doubt if they were burning them due to a shortage, more likely because they were property and they did not want to see the conquering enemy enjoy "using" their property.

You're Christian right? Well see God's chosen people did similar things. Your God told them to kill all that they conquered in many cases, the old women, the pregnant women, all the males including infants and the elderly, etc...all except VIRGIN females that they could keep for "their own use".

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


well that's how it works out in the final rinse. no new people.

oh the vedic texts are a horror. it was considered honorable, if a female child was born and you wanted a male (which they usually did due to dowry stipulations) to draw your sword, toss the female baby up in the air and catch her on your sword -- skewered like a pig. why the digusting drama, i dunno, but that's how it is written. the whole ancient world, it appears, viewed women as a blight on the planet. the hebrews were almost mild by comparison, although the egyptians have them beat on mildness. of course, the egyptians were into everything. even bestality and necrophilia. to me, they are an anomalie, like someone cut them out of history from some place else and planted them here with their advanced civilization building skills intact.

anyway, women are treated with the strangest dichotomy of reverence and abhorrence. it's bizarre. to this day, they haven't fully recovered from that position. now either the ancients are right and we ladies are bad news, or they're wrong, in which case, it's just time to stop perpetuating that particular thought process. i don't believe it will happen though. i think that position has been necessary, throughout history, to get the men to involve themselves in thinning the herd via removal of their female children. jesus was against this type of thing but paul contradicted him by sharing ideas that men viewed as gospel. i dunno what to think of that.

reply to post by Sonya610


i have my doubts on that story. i dunno for certain (although i have theories) what the deal is with it but i do know it was a war that started before the flood and was still ongoing in king david's time.

Originally posted by undoi have my doubts on that story. i dunno for certain (although i have theories) what the deal is with it but i do know it was a war that started before the flood and was still ongoing in king david's time.

What? You have doubts that the Bible states this? Or you have doubts that it is TRUE even though the Bible clearly states it?

So it is all the word of GOD except the parts that you don't like, that you have doubts about. But the parts you like, well those parts are real. How convenient.

reply to post by Sonya610


i don't doubt that the story is telling an event that happened, but i have doubts over who said what, when and where. see, i'm discovering, as i learn the ancient languages that there's some mix-up in the way back. i dunno exactly what caused it -- but something's buggy. for example, the story of the tower of babel can also be read in an akkadian text entitled, enmerkar and the lord of aratta and also in a section of the enuma elish. in the text, the god who most emulates the serpent in the garden, ends up doing what it says god did in the biblical text. -- i.e., confusing the languages. so the question then was, who really did it? so i started following the trail. i learned that the sumerian equivalent for jehovah, was named enlil. enlil's god name was ILU and that by the time of the building of the tower of babel, ILU had become a generic word for any god. thus the EL in babEL. (EL is ILU). technical stuff ya know.

anyway, that's when i realized, the story, as it had been passed down via oral tradition, had attached something's to EL that were not EL's activities and so on and so forth. ya get the drift. it's a maze, to be sure.



[edit on 13-11-2008 by undo]

briefly, here's a passage from "the nam-shub of enki"
see if you can distinguish who is who

In those days, the land Shubur-Hamazi,
Harmony-tongued Sumer, the great land of the me of princeship,
Uri, the land having all that is appropriate,
The land Martu, resting in security,
The whole universe, the people well cared for,
To Enlil in one tongue gave speech.

Then the lord defiant, the prince defiant, the king defiant,
Enki, the lord of abundance, whose commands are trustworthy,
The lord of wisdom, who scans the land,
The leader of the gods,
The lord of Eridu, endowed with wisdom,
Changed the speech in their mouths, put contention into it,
Into the speech of man that had been one.

source
deoxy.org...

[edit on 13-11-2008 by undo]

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by undo

 

So I am curious, are you personally against homosexuals because you feel they are ultimately contributing to this power elites agenda?

Also, if the agenda is anti-human. Surely the collapse of society then was caused by some kind of innate nihilism on life itself and certainly not a sexual orientation.

what?... you shouldn't bring a logical arguement into this. a reasoned approach just doesn't work in these types of discussions. you have to be inflamatory, verbose, simple-minded, to even get your point across.

Originally posted by undo
ah the wonders of science. you'll be able to clone your child from any number of donors. perhaps they have the foresight to save some female dna in little jars.

Even in plants (the easiest things to clone), after several generations of cloning, there is something lost. This would be a bad idea IMO.

Are you trying to say that the male elite want to rid the world of women and have an all male society?

reply to post by jimmyx


well there ya go, summed me up in a nut shell. now i can join the ranks of hillary the butchess and palin the dumb beauty queen, as the inflammatory, verbose, simple-minded one. you do me a great honor. of course i didn't reason this out. i don't know how to use my brain. heck i can't even read. this is an inflammatory illusion and the only people ever picked on ever ever ever, are gay people.

[edit on 13-11-2008 by undo]