Was it autism?
Was it autism?
yes
how many LGBTs throughout history suffered because of this contemptible tome? millions? billions?
Yeah, sure, there wouldn't have been such laws otherwise. That's probably the least autistic part of the entire book, since that's only mentioned shortly.
It's not books who kill people though. It's the people who do it.
LGBTs are a dumb group who vote incorrectly.
I used to think the same until I recognized how destructive the "LGBT community" is to society. This sexual revolution and the destruction of marriage is the root cause of so many societies ills. Crime, poverty, violence, disease, and drug abuse, are all strongly linked to broken homes which is caused by this homosexual ideology.
Preach
So other straight marriages fail because some guys and girls prefer to fuck inside their own sex?
truth
I hate to break it to you, but every culture was against homosexuality. And for good reason. People meme about the Greeks and homosexuality, but they were actually very much against it. They were somewhat fine with a guy fucking some boy, since those guys were generally married and considered straight. But being fucked by a guy branded you as a social outcast, and was heavily looked down upon. It has been known for thousands of years that homosexuality is exceptionally deviant and ruins civilizations, but we somehow forget about this fact now, because we don't want to hurt peoples feelings.
No, straight marriages fail now because marriage is meaningless, and because it's meaningless divorce is no longer socially unacceptable. Now people get married without ever truly discerning whether they should in the first place since divorce is an easy option. This acceptance of gay ideology and "free love" had a significant impact in making marriage meaningless.
There's nothing gay about wanking your mate off
The essence of LGBT as an identity didn't exist until the late 19th century when romanticism paired with darwinist sociology and biology reduced love to lust determined by genetics. Before that it was just old school pederasty and misdirected sexual impulses.
Only because you (be you male or female) are lusting over somebody because of physical appearance (be it male or female) doesn't mean you're immortally in love with that person. Love doesn't work that way. Hell, people were married off to someone they had never met by their parents for millennias. Those people learned to love each other. Why can't a so-called homosexual learn to love a person of the opposite sex?
Pro-tip: He or she can.
lifesitenews.com
Freud was right when he pointed out that humans are basically bisexual.
>people are infinitely malleable argument
>coming from a communist
ok.
I just like the look of Lenin stroking pussy.
Personally I care more about totalitarian aesthetics than any specific ideology.
All faggots need to hang
metaphysically
gorillions
this tbqh
interesting
No, its because of jews silly.
not enough desu
Kek
>broken homes which is caused by this homosexual ideology.
lol
there's plenty of affluent gay people raising families far more functional than most heterosexual atomic family units
No there's not. Gay parents are worse for a child than a single mother.
What's it like in fantasy land?
it's the falling rate of profit and failures in the global surplus recycling mechanisms you clown
Get back to your fantasy general
Actually autists are statistically more like to have bizarre fetishises including sodomy since they're incapable of understanding proper behavior so Leviticus is anti-autistuc.
To be honest there are broad misunderstandings of Greek homosexuality.
We know through their art that the Greeks idealized the human body as the pinnacle of beauty and form.
Greek men didn't "fuck" boys in the anal sex sense. They more had one could say "outercourse" with them.
>being this ideologically cucked
sorry but financially stable homes produce well adjusted children regardless of the sexes of the parents
I know you'd like that to be true, to justify your proclivities, but they are unfounded
imagine blaming total strangers for your failures
now you know what it's like to be a conservative
>imagine blaming total strangers for your failures
Is that really what you saw when you read that post?
What does having a fetish have to do with understanding whether or not it's proper behaviour?
I doubt that's true, they're just more open about it because of the lack of awareness which is what gives you that impression.
>sorry but financially stable homes produce well adjusted children regardless of the sexes of the parents
Why do you believe this is true that the only necessity for the healthy rearing of children is financial stability?
>No, straight marriages fail now because marriage is meaningless, and because it's meaningless divorce is no longer socially unacceptable.
You have your causality mixed up, retard. Marriage is meaningless, and because it's meaningless you can get a divorce? No, because you can easily get a divorce marriage is meaningless. How the fuck are you going to blame YOUR divorce on the fact that some faggot in California married some other faggot? What a joke, isn't personal responsibility the core of conservative family values?
>How the fuck are you going to blame YOUR divorce
How do you people keep seeing this? This is some spooky hallucination.
It is unequivocally stated in this thread as the reason against gay marriage. You cannot deny what is directly in front of people you know, they can see.
>some faggot sucking dicks a world away without fear of being killed for it is why my wife left me
Okay then maybe I'm hallucinating. Can you point out exactly where anyone is blaming gays for their personal divorce? What I'm seeing is somebody claiming that the hedonistic attitude towards sex that is perpetuated by the LGBT community contributes to the weakening of marriage as an institution, leading to higher rates of divorce.
You're obfuscating the matter because you don't care about the logic (your position has none) but only the outcome (arbitrary and irrational hate). The blame is in your very post, and other similar stupid posts itt. Feel free to read them.
Could you explain to me how the view that I expressed--that the hedonistic attitude towards sex weakens the institution of marriage--leads to hatred?
What a load of horse shit. You have absolutely no idea what the gay experience is like. Your conception of heterosexual love is the same as a homosexuals for their love. Likewise your inability to empathise with the homosexual love and it's experience is the same for heterosexuality as it is to the homosexual.
The homosexual male can be seen as a factor of stability in the palaeolithic tribe. Offering no mating competition to hetro males and no resource competition to childbearing females; the homosexual male is an altruistic figure. He works in the interest of the tribe and not for himself, helping to raise children and gather resources.
I'd also like to point out that the homosexual in the gay-friendly west has a far better romantic experience than the heterosexual male. The hetro male's ideals of romance and intimate relations with women have been twisted and contoured beyond definition and recognition by clash of feminism against centuries of social norms of courtship and patriarchy. The power dynamic of the homosexual relationship is equal and balanced with little to no historical baggage or conditioned behaviour; allowing for a more stable and loving relationship that can blossom organically.
The homosexual experience is far superior for the modern male. Imagine never having to deal with women, ever? I'm so fucking happy to be gay. Is it so hard to imagine that what you feel for women, I feel for men and vice versa?
homosexuality is far too numerous in the animal kingdom for it not to have an evolutionary purpose
No user, it hurts my feelings, that means it's not natural.
If homosexuality is morally neutral because it’s natural, then adoption by same-sex couples must be wrong because for homosexuals, parenthood would be unnatural.
Adoption is also something that happens in the animal kingdom.
Same-sex marriage however, is not.
Sure, just explain how homosexuality weakens the 'institution' of marriage first.
>Same-sex marriage however, is not.
en.wikipedia.org
These faggot Penguins are faithful and monogamous.
same way it causes hurricanes and earthquakes
>they let those penguins adopt
Christ almighty, that baby bird is doomed.
Sorry, I meant to say heterosexual marriage. Just the institution of marriage as a whole, really. Completely unnatural.
>the adopted one came out gay
Welp, this proves it
You made the claim that my views leads to hatred and I would like you to substantiate that. Why do you believe this is true? If you misspoke or you don't actually believe this is true I won't hold that against you, but don't evade the question by obfuscation which is what your doing by changing the subject. I'm not going to participate in a conversation with you if you're not going to be a willing to be a good faith participate as well. You're not even accurately representing my views by framing it as me believing that homosexuality itself is what weakens marriage.
still waiting for you to explain
oh you can't? so weird
There's countless species of animals that mate for life with one partner, marry effectively.
>the adopted one came out gay
Nice source you have there (none).
They certainly don't have any problems with divorce courts or which gender the animals choose to partner with.
Read Lorenz.
No I can't explain what you're asking me to because that's not what I believe. You have it in your head that I'm blaming homosexuality itself for the weakening of marriage and your stuck on stupid so I can't correct you.
>old testament
literally who cares
this is the same book that suggests the only thing more evil than gay sex is eating shellfish
>more goal post moving and obfuscation
You said it contributed to the weakening of the institution of marriage (whatever that is), NO-ONE AT ALL said it's the only cause, only that it is a cause. You can't explain what you don't believe that no-one said you did? That's so crazy, far out man.
You still haven't substantiated a single thing. How does it contribute user? Huh? You're like 5 posts in without offering the slightest bit of an answer. Because you don't have one.
What does that have to do with anything? You know that just because you replied, doesn't mean you answered. I mean, that's too irrelevant to even be a red herring I think.
eating shelfish is a known factor in today's moral decay user
it's no coincidence red lobster localities and divorce rates are both at an all time high
I said the hedonistic ideology perpetuated by the LGBT community is what contributes to the weakening of marriage. Can you see the difference between this and saying that homosexuality itself is what weakens marriage? Or do you believe that all homosexuals are hedonists? It is the hedonism and "free love" attitude that causes people to not take marriage seriously, and this evidently true from the rising divorce rates.
I'm not even sure what you're arguing for, I just wanted to point out that the institution of marriage is unnatural. Monogamous animals are monogamous without it, and remain so regardless of how many other animals like it up the pooper or not as the case may be.
God I hope you're only pretending.
Pretending to what? No animals build churches or registrar offices. Marriage is unnatural. This is indisputable.
Did you even read the page you fucking retard? Roughly half of the content is devoted to talking about the penguin they adopted, named Tango, and how it turned out gay too.