URGENT MONKEYPOX ALERT: Some New York City health officials now wondering whether they should be "...encouraging gay men to temporarily change their behavior..."
URGENT MONKEYPOX ALERT: Some New York City health officials now wondering whether they should be "...encouraging gay men to temporarily change their behavior..."
They actually addressed that in some CDC document... I believe the solution was "mutual masturbation" whilst wearing a mask (which might already be part of their costume).
Jul 20, 2022·edited Jul 20, 2022Liked by eugyppius
Forget it. I saw gay men lined up all over NYC to get their jab, which will probably be quite dangerous in terms of antigenic fixation, VAIDS, ADE etc seeing as how they're baseline immune suppressed from their proclivities and covid jabs. But abstain from anal sex? Nah. 🙄
Yes! And that is so crazy! Apparently the gay community doesn't remember that Fauci was responsible for the AIDS years and gay men suffering and dying!
Narcissists worship other narcissists and continue the drama story and lies to support their agenda's. Mass formation psychosis is narcissism at play. They all adore and fall for each others bullshit because they do not know the Truth. You know, the Truth that will set you free.
It's not that there is no memory, it's that 99% of people were not even aware of it at the time. The false 'HIV leads to AIDS' theory, indeed the concocted AIDS designation itself. A dry run for Fauci's Covid.
Absolutely correct! The AIDS operation was also the debut of the "asymptomatic" operation: one could "be" HIV positive yet be entirely well, entirely healthy - and with that "diagnosis" the extremely lethal AZT was routinely prescribed , with the consequent symptomolgy then attributed to AIDS. The perfect crime!
remember the AIDS hyped-up fear and mysterious 'monkey' origins deep in the forests of africa? And the narrative kept changing, maybe this, no...maybe that, "we just don't know", but be scared as hell because it's going to infect EVERYONE. Same narrative we've seen for 2.5 years of corona. And now monkeypox hysteria. Choose to trust God and learn to choose peace, tell man to go to hell if htey are coercing or mandating or fear mongering you. You can only hear the truth when you are at peace. Fear is not being in your right mind and you will choose poorly in that state....for all the jabbed. Do you trust God and His promises or do you not? that is an everyday choice.
"We just don't know" is actually quite scientific. As scientists, there are so many things about nature we "just don't know". Good scientists readily admit that they don't understand many phenomena.
Ya think there's a pattern here? And what was causing the deaths ARE the drugs that they used on the hiv ppl and a repeat today with remdesivir/vents poison Jabs etc.... Killing ppl's immune systems where any virus/cancer can take over and kill. A bunch of idiot intellectuals wanting to control and destroy others, satan at work.
It was sleight of hand. The symptoms of AIDS were probably caused by the insulted immune systems of men who'd been doing poppers and having random sex all night long. Anal sex bombards the body with all kinds of germs. If they stopped the behavior they often recovered. But once they started on AZT that really drove their decline. Total iatrogenic destruction.
Poppers. alkyl nitrites will fuck you up especially in the long run. Guess which drug is very popular in the homo homo sapiens sapiens party establishments.
Poppers give you AIDS? That hypothesis is on shaky grounds. Do junkies also use poppers?
Why is it such an issue for so many to acknowledge that viruses exist and that they do cause certain pathologies? Everyone who has witnessed and experienced an outbreak of Norovirus knows that there are pathogenic, transmissible particles that will make any person sick very quickly, irrespective of how healthy that person is. But hey, the violent, sudden onset puking and shitting that hits people with a 24h interval between inflicted persons is surely caused by toxins, bad fumes or astrological influences, LOL.
"Homosexuals are sexually troubled people engaging in dangerous activities. Because we care about them and those tempted to join them, it is important that we neither encourage nor legitimize such a destructive lifestyle."
Well, I guess some anal stuff between monogamous male and female is also reasonably "safe" besides some discomfort and a urinary tract infection in the worst case.
A while back, Ann Barnhardt had posted a link to a story from a reformed homosexual. It was... horrific. I doubt that a male could read the whole story; it ended with, well, let's just say internal organs falling out. Horrific.
My goodness I hope you're never involved with the late-life care of an elderly female, particularly one who has had lots of children. You'd be surprised what happens with a bad sneeze.
In that there is evidence that getting the jab compromises one's immune system with regard to any disease, if indeed the "gay community" has a high percentage of jab uptake, they may have an even more difficult time shaking off the pox.
Yes and no. Their sexual behavior causes the same immune suppression that would predispose them to AIDS or an AIDS-like illness. Couple that with whatever percentage took an mRNA jab and now layer a pox jab on top of that and you have a potential situation much worse than the original AIDS.
You’ve nailed the heart of the matter, as only you can do. Corona has revealed what is sacrosanct to our elected leaders - gay anal sex orgies, liquor stores, massive riots and burned buildings in support of BLM, graft from Big Pharma, election fraud, & government by edict. What is not important and therefore to be despised and destroyed- families, church, the middle class, small business, savings, food, our children & government by we the people.
Our elected leaders show themselves to despise "families, church, the middle class, small business, savings, food, our children & government by we the people." It appears they also despise gay people.
Why is everyone so afraid of stigmatizing sodomites? All Christians know that this behavior is abhorrent in the eyes of God and should neither be accepted or condoned.
Because, of course, it's entirely rational to stick body parts up one's butt. How enlightened and intelligent! Let's all take the law of identity and simply flush it down the drain. Before you know it, men will be able to get pregnant!
I'm having a difficulty with the phrase "rampant promiscuity." Can you quantify that?
Separately, parents teach their children to avoid exposure to others who are obviously sick. This caution should extend into adulthood. There are diseases which can be recognized on sight, if one were looking, and that can be transmitted via sex. I had more than one in my 20s, and then I got smart (or lucky).
Jonathan , I don’t concern myself with what others choose to do. We all reap what we sow. I do find it telling that, as the collapse of western civilization accelerated under the weight of aberrant behavior, that the public health idiocracy is too intimidated to tell gay men to stop stuffing things up their butts. The parallels between today and late 1920s Germany are frightening.
In it, you seem to say you’re not interested in the ethics of other people’s behaviour but in the public health aspect of the current monkeypox issue.
Yet in one of your earlier comments you said:
"Why is everyone so afraid of stigmatizing sodomites? All Christians know that this behavior is abhorrent in the eyes of God and should neither be accepted or condoned."
That suggests you are concerned with the ethics of what others do, at least when it comes to "sodomites" (i.e. homosexual men engaging in anal sex). Their behavior, in your moral judgment, is always abhorrent to God, presumably regardless of public health.
However, when I ask you about the acceptability in God's eyes of married heterosexual people engaging in anal sex, you refrain from giving your opinion. That's a bit odd.
So please allow me to repeat the question and add a second one:
(1) Is anal sex when practised by heterosexual couples also abhorrent to God?
(2) Is a faithful long-term homosexual relationship between two men who don’t engage in anal sex still abhorrent to God anyway?
Not odd at all ... the fact that I have no opinion should tell you that my premise is actually very consistent. If you wish to marry a woman and place your penis in her butt, go for it. You can also dress up as a giraffe and pretend to graze in your backyard. It's none of my business and I truly don't care. But if the GOVERNMENT begins to sanction such behavior, which certain people might find offensive, you & I have a problem. Our government & public health officials are clearly idiots and the very last people who should be allowed to have any say on these matters. Our Constitution was written to protect us from them. The very fact that they would deprive your 5 year of oxygen and force your spouse to take an experimental gene therapy that kills to keep his or her job, yet is afraid to hurt the feelings of homosexuals IS the issue. I don't have the right to tell you how to live your life. Please don't tell me how to live mine. And if you try to leverage the power of the government to force your beliefs on others or to deprive me of my liberties, expect blow-back and the same in return.
I would say two things: probably God doesn't pay a lot of attention to human copulation. The more important stuff happens elsewhere. And two: your hypothetical heterosexual female, at middle age, is extremely unlikely to require decades of proctological care which is nearly an expected, at least not uncommon, outcome for the typical, so called, "bottom".
The Bible is very clear: God would like us to be obedient to what his expectations are. Both Biblical history and human history clearly reveal that when we are obedient, good things happen. When we aren't, all sorts of bad things happen. This is, of course, a broad generalization, but for the most part, very accurate. Our Christian nation ratified for the first time in human history that our natural rights were endowed by our Creator and that the only excuse to even tolerate a limited government was to protect those rights. This foundation and what it fostered propelled the entire world out of centuries of pestilence, misery & death. The largesse we created has led to inevitable decline, to the point where idiot public health officials who are more than willing to kill & maim millions and deprive children of oxygen are afraid to hurt the feelings of those who would stuff penises up their butts indiscriminately. If you understand what God's expectations are for each of us and for the world, this should scare the hell out of you.
oops - I really shouldn't speak for him; it just seemed to me that if one were attempting to assess character (against a rigorous standard of perfection) the amount and usefulness of non-copulatory data collection possibilities far exceed the copulatory. How one raises one's kids, or treats aging parents or serves one's community; that sort of thing.
Seems like more of the commenters than the author. Never forget that humanity’s number one pastime is judging others to gain a sense of superiority. Which is also warned about in the Bible, with a tad more frequency than homosexual affairs, but that’s not nearly as fun.
Please note the hypocrisy of my comment too. Like I said, humanity’s number one pastime!
The difference here is a healthy fear of God. One of us has it and one of us does not. This has nothing to do with judging others or feeling superior, but understanding what eventually happens to everyone & anyone who gives God the middle finger.
You are welcome to keep telling yourself that, but that is a very narrow, inaccurate view of what God is (based largely off of deifying a book/religion.) Ironically, I think you’re idolizing the material world as much as those that you think are on the wrong path, which is perhaps why you feel the need to demonize others. We often most detest the behaviors in others that we see in ourselves. But that’s just my opinion, as is everything you’ve written is just yours. Not much more than naval gazing in the grand scheme of things.
Again, I have to disagree. As you say, we are both entitled to our opinions. For example, 35 years ago, I was an atheist and my opinion was very different than it is today. Any Christian that truly understands who God is and what the Bible is doesn't "deify" the Bible. The Bible is absolutely the Word of God and all of the objective evidence in the world is there to support this premise. This isn't about detesting behavior we see in ourselves or any other such pop culture psycho babble bullshit, but about a change in our culture. I'll repeat it again for the fourth time: our worthless public health idiocracy will use the coerceive powers of government to muzzle children and force a toxic, experimental gene therapy on the public which will kill & maim millions. But they are afraid to tell sodomites to stop sticking other individuals body parts up their butts so as not to hurt their feelings. I'm sorry if this offends, but sometimes confronting reality is uncomfortable. And the reaility is that we have, for far tool long, compromised what we know to be true and real in the name of "tolerance". Some of us, myself included, truly believe and understand that much of what has happened and will continue to happen is demonic in nature and this cycle has repeated itself throughout human history. So call it naval gazing or whatever you like, the time for tolerance of those who willfully seek the destruction of all that is good will only end when we all start calling things for what they are ... and by their real names.
where the bible says "if you keep going your own way, God will turn you over to your lusts and passions" terrible summary but too lazy to look it up ; ). We actually choose our own stumbling by our arrogance and obstinance, God sortof lets us go so we can learn the lesson. Same reason you don't run bail your kid outta jail or else it's gonna get worse and you brought it on yourself. Let the kid spend the night and really learn the lesson. Sometimes if you try to save someone, you prolong their agony in this life b/c you try to save them from pain! That is how we cry out to God for help, sometimes when we're backed into a corner and feel pain. Do not try to play God in others lives, direct them to God and remind them of His love for them, they have just as much ability to turn as we all have from our messes. It's called the santification process....to burn out the arrogance and narcissism we all struggle with.
Yes, the lack of belief in or fear of God seems to be accelerating, as our culture devolves into naked apes, seeking mindless self-gratification. With that also comes death, disease, decay and insanity.
The same happened in God fearing societies, human insanity is universal and has nothing to do with God. But I know that it makes no sense to discuss religion. Believe what you want to If it helps you.
nope, ppl here speak the truth. which is difficult for many to hear. Funny how the truth is always met with bigot homophobe mis-information etc... name calling always shows who's deceived.
Tolerating those who would use the coercive, destructive power of government is what has allowed this to happen. Why is the public health idiocracy afraid to hurt the feelings of people who can't stop sticking other peoples body parts up their butts, but they are willing to deprive children of oxygen and maim/kill millions of people with a toxic gene therapy? It's almost Luciferian, wouldn't you say?
I second that. I think that sodomy, drug use or whatever fun activity is totally fine. Everyone can do whatever the fuck they want as long as it doesn't hurt other people. If they choose to continue the orgies, let them do it and contract monkeypox, it was their choice and that is fine.
As we've seen over the past decade, it went from "we just want to have our fun behind closed doors" to "let us mutilate your son, transphobe!" extremely quickly.
Yeah, but I don't think it is the regular gay people pushing those ideas. Especially not the ones having orgies in dark rooms, I cannot imagine those people as serious activists, they are probably just somewhat degenerated hedonists. Which is fine, let them fuck like mad and bear the consequences.
It is the loony leftists that are pushing trans garbage ideology. Alongside "climate change", "racism", "gender" and all their other lunatic shit. They want to "transform" our societies into something else. Obviously, that won't work and they will just end up turning our countries into socialist shitholes, likey they always do. In the end, there won't be money left for climate action, sex changes or whatever, just look a Venezuela for a template.
> Especially not the ones having orgies in dark rooms, I cannot imagine those people as serious activists, they are probably just somewhat degenerated hedonists.
Yes, and they'd rather not have to confine their hedonism behind closed doors. Or have to worry about getting arrested just because one of the targets of their hedonism is the wrong age. Also, hedonism gets stale so hedonists constantly find themselves looking for new taboos to break.
> They want to "transform" our societies into something else.
They already did. Only you probably consider that transformation "a good thing".
Actually, the Holy Bible and all of Christian history is quite clear, so there's no need to create anything. As Solomon so wisely pointed out, there's nothing new under the sun. Human beings acting like animals never ends well.
Well, I doubt God wants to send people to hellfire and damnation if, say, they kiss their tubercular spouses. Life on earth is itself a contagion-spreading condition.
That isn't really the point. The same idiot public health officials who want to muzzle 5 year olds and deprive them of oxygen are carefully tip-toeing around potentially telling grown men to stop sticking body parts up their butts. It's sign 'o the times.
Sodomites prefer stigmatizing Christians whose behavior is abhorrent in their eyes. What's accepted or condoned is the purpose of The Narrative the NYT reinforces at every turn. Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four has been transformed into an operating manual: war is peace, up is down, 2+2=5, etc.
All media is entertainment. It's best to laugh at the NYT in order to keep one's sanity.
But please could you explain why you've liked this comment by Joseph about "sodomites"? The statement makes no distinction between wild drug-fuelled sex parties (which is one thing) and faithful long-term relationships (which is quite another in my view)?
In other words, do you agree with Joseph that all homosexual relationships are abhorrent in God's eyes, that they shouldn't be accepted or condoned, and that we shouldn't be afraid to stigmatize such relationships within our societies?
Whatever the author likes or dislikes is somewhat immaterial. I get your drift but think it unnecessary. His views about homosexual activity are not the topic. Would his article be any less on-target if he disliked the nature of homosexual activity? The point is that authorities imposed great restrictions and prohibitions on society in general something they are unwilling to do for a perceived group of special interest.
The fact that most Monkeypox infections seem associated with homosexual group sex parties is obvious. But likely indiscriminate sex among any group might be equally an issue so perhaps there are hidden dangers in the anal aspect of the sex. I would think obvious lesions might be a turn-off in such an arrangement but maybe the anal lesions aren't observable.
At one level you're right - Eugyppius' main article about the stupidity and hypocrisy of the health authorities remains valid, even though he's liked a somewhat off-topic comment in the thread about how western societies should go back to stigmatizing all homosexuals.
But imagine how stupid and hateful western countries like Germany, USA or UK would have to become to successfully go back to stigmatizing gay people in that way. Such a prospect fills me with the same kind of dread that I've felt over the past 2 years during the covid nightmare.
That's why I'd like Eugyppius to say whether he really agrees with Joseph's Carroll's comment or not. If it turns out he perhaps misread the comment as merely condemning wild drug-induced gay sex parties, then that'd be welcome clarification.
But if he does in fact believe that it would be good for societies to go back to stigmatizing all homosexual men, then for me that undermines all the otherwise excellent work he's done challenging the covid authoritarianism we've all been experiencing since 2020.
> But imagine how stupid and hateful western countries like Germany, USA or UK would have to become to successfully go back to stigmatizing gay people in that way.
So you're saying all countries were "stupid and hateful" until 20 years ago? Have you considered that the problem is on your end?
Thanks for your comment but once more I totally disagree.
In the European country where I live, you’d have to go back 30-40 yrs to return to the days when gay people were still widely stigmatized and 40-50 yrs to find almost universal stigmatization. Back then certain negative attitudes to black/Asian people and towards women were also still widespread. And yes, I’d say that all such attitudes were stupid and hateful, as well as pointless and harmful.
20 years ago, however, things were probably at their best since all the major equality battles had essentially been won – i.e. the vast majority no longer cared about a person’s sexual orientation (or the color of their skin or their biological sex). We were as near to MLK’s dream as we ever were likely to get in a country containing tens of millions of people, because the pockets of prejudice that remained were small and without much influence.
But since the early 2000s things have gone off the rails, slowly at first but quickly in the last few yrs, as a kind of totalitarian identity politics (aka wokism) has gone from the fringes to the mainstream. That includes, of course, the so-called LGBTQIA+ movement which in my view is in reality deeply anti-gay (and viciously anti-women).
So the problem is not at my end but with the stigmatising position you've adopted about homosexuals (which reminds me of things people commonly used to say 40 yrs ago), as well as with the poisonous LGBTQIA+ movement (which is obviously much newer). Strangely, they strike me as two sides of the same stigmatising coin - and so when it comes to the subject of homosexuality, you have much more in common with the LQBTQIA+ crowd than you might think!
> 20 years ago, however, things were probably at their best since all the major equality battles had essentially been won
The problem is that those things are not in fact equal. Which meant that the "equality" you obsess over so much consisted of requiring people to pretend unequal things were equal, despite increasingly obvious evidence to the contrary.
> But since the early 2000s things have gone off the rails, slowly at first but quickly in the last few yrs, as a kind of totalitarian identity politics (aka wokism) has gone from the fringes to the mainstream.
"Things were going so well after jumping off the cliff, right up to the point where I hit the ground, why couldn't things have stayed like they were when I was 5 ft above the ground?"
I am tolerant enough that a single viewpoint disagreement isn't adequate to dismiss a body of work. I think his viewpoint about homosexuals is immaterial. I have my own viewpoint and have been at too many bedsides of gay friends to not see their humanity in death.
from the pattern that i mostly observed in various substacks, authors many times use 'like' button to mark a comment as 'read', not as 'like' as to easier sort which comments are new.
> The statement makes no distinction between wild drug-fuelled sex parties (which is one thing) and faithful long-term relationships (which is quite another in my view)?
No one makes that distinction, least of all the sodomites themselves. The only reason anyone talks about the latter is as a wedge to get people to accept the former.
I completely disagree because I've got to know numerous homosexuals couples over the years, both gay men and lesbians, who are in long-term monogamous relationships. Further, your use of the term "sodomites" is demeaning and vile - it's like using the n-word for black people or the k-word for Jews.
> I completely disagree because I've got to know numerous homosexuals couples over the years, both gay men and lesbians, who are in long-term monogamous relationships.
Are you sure? For a gay, a long-term partner is someone you visit the bathhouse with.
In any case you can test this theory. See whether your gay friends get monkeypox.
The issue isn't gays, the issue is men. A minority of men, of any sexual persuasion, are completely obsessive, fetishistic, sex-addicted degenerates.
The difference is that if they are gay, they have far more opportunities to engage in their perversions because they find other men like themselves. Straight men have fewer opportunities, constrained by the unwillingness of most women to be objectified and engage in degeneracy.
But I still bet you anything that the number of perverted straight men in absolute terms far exceeds the number of perverted gay men.
The sumerians were one of many, many cultures that had sacred protitution, including judaism which as you know is the foundation of christianity after mithraism and elements of the cult of Sol Invictus, Jupiter and some others were added. Wasn't until the 4th century sacred prostitution became an issue in Rome either, due to the intolerance, totalitariansim and authoritarianism inherent and endemic to christianity (and its offspring islam).
The aztecs even had a specific god for homosexual prostitutes.
Let me ask, since the part about condemning sodomy is in the OT and apparently matters, do you also follow the rest of the laws and ordinances laid down by Moses? Theirs a whole slew of them that would make modern life difficult, and that's without going into the fact that the christian bible is the most heavily edited book in existence; there's been more stuff taken out than what's left, and some stuff never made it in despite being contemporary with whoever the prophet rebranded as Jesus really was.
Might want to go easy referring to that book as some absolute source of truth, yes?
Might I suggest that the lack of a prohibition on gay sex reflects a recognition that the gays wouldn't obey it? And might I also suggest that there is a lesson here for everyone? ie. If they know you won't obey, they won't dare give the order.
Gay or straight, degenerate behavior will never be discouraged. Fauci gave the thumbs up to grinder and tinder hookups in April 2020. He said something along the lines of, as long as the people are comfortable with the risk. One of the only activities they allowed people to decide for themselves.
Unfortunately, I agree. I believe that in Canada, health 'experts' gave advice about how to have sex with minimal contact, including with sex workers. However going to church, being with dying family and friends etc was all too dangerous etc
I think the UK recently put out a PSA on responsible glory hole use. Half the time I think this kind of stuff has to be satire, and it's not surprising anymore when it isn't.
Only if the numbers are small enough. It is a certainty that governments at least in the west rule by opinion polls - if enough people said 'no', the tide would turn fast.
Wasn't it South West airlines where enough pilots said no to the covid shots so the company had to drop their mandate?
Two big differences with this example though. Pilots are in the small class of people who actually really need to know what they are doing and are often in short supply plus this is a private company not part of the government bureaucracy
The Quebec gov in Canada wanted to impose a fine on the unvaxxed. However, they cancelled the plan when they saw it was too unpopular. Jordan Peterson, a well known Canadian psychologist stated in a youtube video that the Ontario gov made decisions based on opinion polls. He heard this from a 'high up' gov source.
It makes sense: gov officials need votes to keep their jobs so they do whatever they can. Squeeky wheel gets the oil.
Perhaps not every politician is like this and a few perhaps go to bat for their constituents but I don't really see this. Do you?
Yes, politicians want to be in power and up to recently had the support to impose mandates and restrictions. Now that the crack has opened and economies are tanking, they continue to throw money around to stay in power. However restrictive powers remain on the books and certainly in New Zealand there's not much choice about who to vote for. Also officials are not voted in and continue to manage huge aspects of our lives
It isn't that simple; it's much deeper. Homosexuals certainly "obeyed" the vaccine imperative and advocated vigorously that others do so as well. I recall that the bathhouses in San Fransisco were not closed during CA's otherwise fairly draconian lockdowns; something to do with them being an essential part of the city's "culture" . Overall, homosexuals as a class and their compliance are extremely useful to the Rulers. There is some value in demonstrating the absolute arbitrariness of "stigmatizing" the entire global population (social distance, etc) yet being seen as giving that class a complete pass on that requirement. The arbitrariness being a demonstration of power - and of our powerlessness - in this case.
Another good example is the full institutional support of the 2020 violent rioters compared to years long imprisonment and persecution of people waved into the capital building on Jan 6.
Woe to the conquered sums it up; ... I should step back some and de-generalize; there are, of course, members of these magic minorities who understand perfectly well how the game is played and who resist their assigned roles. Many gay people were and have remained very vocal opponents of the ruler Faucci - going back at least to the late 1980s and the AZT catastrophe. Others will - perhaps quite suddenly - come to understand that they have been among the conquered right from the start.
It's like when the authorities recognize less than half the population is wearing masks, they then declare the mask mandate has been relaxed. Trying to maintain the illusion of control.
That still haunts my thinking. We agreed to a loss of freedom temporarily except it wasn't so temporary. Now that "emergency" allow suspension of all sorts of rights we can expect that to be reused as convenient. Worse some courts have suggested the powers can be indefinite in some states. I recall a quote by Ben Franklin noting freedom-security trades rarely work well.
And yet here we are voicing our opinions. We're not done yet and they haven't taken everything from us....yet. Keep the faith and as you keep telling us, Ryan, we keep fighting and speaking out!
And yet gun ownership is through the roof since Barry Soetero scammed the WH. And who are the latest round of new gun owners? Not Bubba and his hunting friends....no, it's white libs, black females and black males. So, who in the government honestly believes they're going to take away a Sistah's 9mm? No white guy in the ATF or FBI would dare try. And the libs who bought their 1st handgun when the riots started won't give up their little 380s....they need to protect their Prius.
"Don't fuck while you're festering" seems good advice for any creature that inserts any one of its parts into one or another of the parts of any other creature, for fun or procreation.
I have said before and ill say it again. The covid wars are just getting started. The lockdowners, vaccinators and maskers have found themselves in a position of power, and will continue to wield it and use it. Those muscles are trained now and there is no problem that can't be solved with a mandate or restriction of some kind.
In fairness to gay men and monkeypox, they already dont care about getting infected with HIV. Monkey pox is not going to change their behavior. If only they had this clarity on covid
The precious snowflakes of the LGBTQ "community" must not be offended. This is DNC rule number one. Never ask the victim class they represent to be held accountable for their behaviors. Blame the gun, not the criminal, blame the "injustice / police" not the BLM rioters, blame the parents not the teachers unions or school boards, blame the SCOTUS not the bad constitutional interpretation and on and on. Asking gay men to stop screwing each other with wanton abandon is too much to ask just to stop spreading a potentially dangerous disease. The world is now officially a clown show and is being run by literal idiots. Time for a change and not a small one. Pray, plan, prepare and RESIST.
A somewhat relevant anecdote: once upon a time, I worked in local tv. I had an African American co-worker that habitually came in late on the weekend shift when there was no management around. As in one to two HOURS late. If anyone called him on it, he just said he'd call the NAACP. I had to cover for him in an emergency.
One day an emergency happened on a Sunday and he was not in. Our token gay director was however, and he complained to management. From then on, African American co-worker came in on time when gay director was there.
Bang on, Eugyppius (sorry). Non-procreative sex is indeed the lynchpin of the ideology. You'd have to pry it from their cold, dead, monkeypox-infested hands. Keep emphasizing this because it points to the reality, which too many are unaware of, that this is literally a Satanic assault on our freedom--true freedom, of course, NOT being the right to screw whoever one likes, but freedom of will.
The larger part of me reads this and thinks "surely grown men do not need pubic health authorities to tell them that it's best to avoid sexually profligate behavior during an outbreak of a sexually transmitted disease that only affects gay men," but then I remember the last two years. Sigh.
Admittedly, this is coming from a woman (whatever that is) and a CIS gender heteronormative one at that ( I think I got the jargon right there), but isn't it more caring to gay men to urge abstinence (or at least go down to one partner) for a few months than worrying that their feelings might be hurt over the suggestion?
It reminds me of the recent push for abolishing the police at the price of more minorities dying.
The emphasis on feelings reminds one of the supposedly Christian act of masking to not offend those irrationally fearful of COVID. It is not the truly loving thing to do. But again, the "loving" being compelled only goes in one direction: to the left.
The church, for the most part was a big disappointment.
I think they forgot the main tenants of the Bible and the constitution.
They're lucky they had just enough fighter's, like you, on these stacks'.
They "felt" powerless besides undoubtedly knowing one of Jesus's most important lessons: “For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.” 2 Timothy 1:7
IMO, that message, in and of itself, checks all the boxes that could have prevented the forthcoming carnage.
Time for some Christians to self reflect. And perhaps consider the least among us. After all, they WILL be the ones that pay the dearest cost.
If not they may end up in bondage. Which I'm pretty sure Jesus would disapprove of.
Have a come to Jesus if you feel like this applies to anyone on this stack.
If doesn't apply, politely spread the word tacitly. Practice what you preach. Learn.
And as Churchill said:
"I'd rather be right than consistent "
"Right now is the right time to be RIGHT" - Yours truly
Your error is in thinking that TPTB are seeking to act in a 'caring' manner. They're only acting in a manner that cares about votes, for the most part at least.
Yes to this (caring about votes) only. They care as much about the health and not hurting gay men's feelings as those calling to defund the police cared about poor inner city minorities (mainly minorities. ) Not one iota.
If they can put a PSA in the subways with a middle finger saying "just wear your fucking mask", they can say "stop butt-fucking each other."
Reducing the number of sexual partners from 69 to 64 is like wearing a cloth mask.
Reducing the number of sexual partners from 69 to 58 is like wearing a surgical mask.
Reducing the number of sexual partners from 69 to 52 is like wearing a N95 mask.
Laughed so hard at this thread…
69, I see what you are doing there.
Who knows, maybe the other numbers are even naughtier.
66?
"15 days to *straighten* the curve"
Wonder how they are going to deal with the 6 feet distance rule
They actually addressed that in some CDC document... I believe the solution was "mutual masturbation" whilst wearing a mask (which might already be part of their costume).
Solution:
Give them pamphlets, with instructions on how to suck their own cocks.
They'd never leave the house.
Dead end for the virus.
Penis extensions? That a thing?
I believe you'd need donors of boners.
Ok... it's waaay too late to be posting. Sorry ...
I mean, I would actually donate money for those signs to be made 🤣😂
👬🙊✋
The time to be polite about sodomy is long past.
Post for the ages. Thank you so much!
lol
Seems reasonable. So of course it will never happen.
Forget it. I saw gay men lined up all over NYC to get their jab, which will probably be quite dangerous in terms of antigenic fixation, VAIDS, ADE etc seeing as how they're baseline immune suppressed from their proclivities and covid jabs. But abstain from anal sex? Nah. 🙄
Yes! And that is so crazy! Apparently the gay community doesn't remember that Fauci was responsible for the AIDS years and gay men suffering and dying!
They don't care. He helped fight the stigma of homosexuality. As for all the gays that died as a result, those were *other* gay men.
Gays don't care when their fellow gays die except in so far as it means they themselves might die from the same thing.
When you are right, you are right!
Exactly Dawn!
It is nuts, f-cking nuts!
Narcissists worship other narcissists and continue the drama story and lies to support their agenda's. Mass formation psychosis is narcissism at play. They all adore and fall for each others bullshit because they do not know the Truth. You know, the Truth that will set you free.
It's not that there is no memory, it's that 99% of people were not even aware of it at the time. The false 'HIV leads to AIDS' theory, indeed the concocted AIDS designation itself. A dry run for Fauci's Covid.
Absolutely correct! The AIDS operation was also the debut of the "asymptomatic" operation: one could "be" HIV positive yet be entirely well, entirely healthy - and with that "diagnosis" the extremely lethal AZT was routinely prescribed , with the consequent symptomolgy then attributed to AIDS. The perfect crime!
remember the AIDS hyped-up fear and mysterious 'monkey' origins deep in the forests of africa? And the narrative kept changing, maybe this, no...maybe that, "we just don't know", but be scared as hell because it's going to infect EVERYONE. Same narrative we've seen for 2.5 years of corona. And now monkeypox hysteria. Choose to trust God and learn to choose peace, tell man to go to hell if htey are coercing or mandating or fear mongering you. You can only hear the truth when you are at peace. Fear is not being in your right mind and you will choose poorly in that state....for all the jabbed. Do you trust God and His promises or do you not? that is an everyday choice.
"We just don't know" is actually quite scientific. As scientists, there are so many things about nature we "just don't know". Good scientists readily admit that they don't understand many phenomena.
Amen!
hiv virus that causes aids
SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes coronavirus
Ya think there's a pattern here? And what was causing the deaths ARE the drugs that they used on the hiv ppl and a repeat today with remdesivir/vents poison Jabs etc.... Killing ppl's immune systems where any virus/cancer can take over and kill. A bunch of idiot intellectuals wanting to control and destroy others, satan at work.
San Francisco still believes HIV leads to AIDS. I kid you not.
If it is not HIV, what is causing AIDS? And why is that causative agent being transmitted in gay men and IV drug users?
It was sleight of hand. The symptoms of AIDS were probably caused by the insulted immune systems of men who'd been doing poppers and having random sex all night long. Anal sex bombards the body with all kinds of germs. If they stopped the behavior they often recovered. But once they started on AZT that really drove their decline. Total iatrogenic destruction.
Poppers. alkyl nitrites will fuck you up especially in the long run. Guess which drug is very popular in the homo homo sapiens sapiens party establishments.
Poppers give you AIDS? That hypothesis is on shaky grounds. Do junkies also use poppers?
Why is it such an issue for so many to acknowledge that viruses exist and that they do cause certain pathologies? Everyone who has witnessed and experienced an outbreak of Norovirus knows that there are pathogenic, transmissible particles that will make any person sick very quickly, irrespective of how healthy that person is. But hey, the violent, sudden onset puking and shitting that hits people with a 24h interval between inflicted persons is surely caused by toxins, bad fumes or astrological influences, LOL.
Well, maybe not dry. argh
Very important reading.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2009/02/medical-consequences-of-what-homosexuals-do/
"Homosexuals are sexually troubled people engaging in dangerous activities. Because we care about them and those tempted to join them, it is important that we neither encourage nor legitimize such a destructive lifestyle."
"Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error." Romans 1:27
I believe the due penalty refers to diseases
If men stuck with men for their "shameful acts" we would not need laws prohibiting abortion. Not that we "need" them.
So monogamous homosexual men are more prone to disease than heterosexual couples?
Monogamous homosexual men?
Wow, your "so you're saying" game is really on point.
On the other hand, people insistent upon engaging in stupid, self destructive,
life threatening behavior, are perhaps best left to allow evolution to have its way.
So heterosexuals are never "sexually troubled" nor engage in "dangerous activities"?
Obviously not true.
But a monogamous male female couple is clearly a safer 'option.'
I think we can all agree on that, and anal intercouse does not have to be 'in play.'
Well, I guess some anal stuff between monogamous male and female is also reasonably "safe" besides some discomfort and a urinary tract infection in the worst case.
Excellent example of the "so you're saying" fallacy, maybe even surpassing Cathy Newman's summarily dishonest interview of Jordan Peterson!
A while back, Ann Barnhardt had posted a link to a story from a reformed homosexual. It was... horrific. I doubt that a male could read the whole story; it ended with, well, let's just say internal organs falling out. Horrific.
My goodness I hope you're never involved with the late-life care of an elderly female, particularly one who has had lots of children. You'd be surprised what happens with a bad sneeze.
Not relevant.
Can't stop a shart.
Bowels are usually first to go.
Cruel trick indeed.
Lol.
You may have ended this heterosexual's libido forever!
Just nasty shit....literally
In that there is evidence that getting the jab compromises one's immune system with regard to any disease, if indeed the "gay community" has a high percentage of jab uptake, they may have an even more difficult time shaking off the pox.
That's the plan, but not just for homosexuals.
Bingo.
Well they already have compromised immunity due to the original AIDS.
Yes and no. Their sexual behavior causes the same immune suppression that would predispose them to AIDS or an AIDS-like illness. Couple that with whatever percentage took an mRNA jab and now layer a pox jab on top of that and you have a potential situation much worse than the original AIDS.
Or perhaps be in a loving monogamous relationship….officials would never suggest that.
This quote on a possible solution from health folk was telling..
“having one consistent casual partner as opposed to multiple people”
one consistent CASUAL partner. Isn’t that kind of language considered gay-bashing? Or playing on stereotypes?
My point is they get away with language and behavior for which we would be excoriated.
I don't see much hope for any messaging if having pustules still allows you to make the cut.
ProcliviDies?
You’ve nailed the heart of the matter, as only you can do. Corona has revealed what is sacrosanct to our elected leaders - gay anal sex orgies, liquor stores, massive riots and burned buildings in support of BLM, graft from Big Pharma, election fraud, & government by edict. What is not important and therefore to be despised and destroyed- families, church, the middle class, small business, savings, food, our children & government by we the people.
I got the memo, anal sex is important, breathing is not.
Our elected leaders show themselves to despise "families, church, the middle class, small business, savings, food, our children & government by we the people." It appears they also despise gay people.
Why is everyone so afraid of stigmatizing sodomites? All Christians know that this behavior is abhorrent in the eyes of God and should neither be accepted or condoned.
Wow I had no idea this substack held so many irrational bigoted beliefs. Too bad because I thought I had found an oasis from the covid cult.
Because, of course, it's entirely rational to stick body parts up one's butt. How enlightened and intelligent! Let's all take the law of identity and simply flush it down the drain. Before you know it, men will be able to get pregnant!
It is perfectly rational to seek pleasure and there are nerve endings in many parts of our bodies.
The issue is that it is irrational to do it at the expense of one's health.
The point is to discourage rampant promiscuity, not stigmatise the act of anal sex itself (which is hardly the preserve of gay men).
I'm having a difficulty with the phrase "rampant promiscuity." Can you quantify that?
Separately, parents teach their children to avoid exposure to others who are obviously sick. This caution should extend into adulthood. There are diseases which can be recognized on sight, if one were looking, and that can be transmitted via sex. I had more than one in my 20s, and then I got smart (or lucky).
> It is perfectly rational to seek pleasure and there are nerve endings in many parts of our bodies.
No, seeking pleasure just for the sake of pleasure is the preserve of degenerate hedonists.
Just out of interest, in your view is it ok in God's eyes if married heterosexual couples engage in anal sex if they want to on occasion?
Jonathan , I don’t concern myself with what others choose to do. We all reap what we sow. I do find it telling that, as the collapse of western civilization accelerated under the weight of aberrant behavior, that the public health idiocracy is too intimidated to tell gay men to stop stuffing things up their butts. The parallels between today and late 1920s Germany are frightening.
Thanks for your reply.
In it, you seem to say you’re not interested in the ethics of other people’s behaviour but in the public health aspect of the current monkeypox issue.
Yet in one of your earlier comments you said:
"Why is everyone so afraid of stigmatizing sodomites? All Christians know that this behavior is abhorrent in the eyes of God and should neither be accepted or condoned."
That suggests you are concerned with the ethics of what others do, at least when it comes to "sodomites" (i.e. homosexual men engaging in anal sex). Their behavior, in your moral judgment, is always abhorrent to God, presumably regardless of public health.
However, when I ask you about the acceptability in God's eyes of married heterosexual people engaging in anal sex, you refrain from giving your opinion. That's a bit odd.
So please allow me to repeat the question and add a second one:
(1) Is anal sex when practised by heterosexual couples also abhorrent to God?
(2) Is a faithful long-term homosexual relationship between two men who don’t engage in anal sex still abhorrent to God anyway?
Not odd at all ... the fact that I have no opinion should tell you that my premise is actually very consistent. If you wish to marry a woman and place your penis in her butt, go for it. You can also dress up as a giraffe and pretend to graze in your backyard. It's none of my business and I truly don't care. But if the GOVERNMENT begins to sanction such behavior, which certain people might find offensive, you & I have a problem. Our government & public health officials are clearly idiots and the very last people who should be allowed to have any say on these matters. Our Constitution was written to protect us from them. The very fact that they would deprive your 5 year of oxygen and force your spouse to take an experimental gene therapy that kills to keep his or her job, yet is afraid to hurt the feelings of homosexuals IS the issue. I don't have the right to tell you how to live your life. Please don't tell me how to live mine. And if you try to leverage the power of the government to force your beliefs on others or to deprive me of my liberties, expect blow-back and the same in return.
(1) Is anal sex when practised by heterosexual couples also abhorrent to God?
Frankly, yes even if not as bad.
(2) Is a faithful long-term homosexual relationship between two men who don’t engage in anal sex still abhorrent to God anyway?
Those really don't exist, but yes they would be.
I would say two things: probably God doesn't pay a lot of attention to human copulation. The more important stuff happens elsewhere. And two: your hypothetical heterosexual female, at middle age, is extremely unlikely to require decades of proctological care which is nearly an expected, at least not uncommon, outcome for the typical, so called, "bottom".
The Bible is very clear: God would like us to be obedient to what his expectations are. Both Biblical history and human history clearly reveal that when we are obedient, good things happen. When we aren't, all sorts of bad things happen. This is, of course, a broad generalization, but for the most part, very accurate. Our Christian nation ratified for the first time in human history that our natural rights were endowed by our Creator and that the only excuse to even tolerate a limited government was to protect those rights. This foundation and what it fostered propelled the entire world out of centuries of pestilence, misery & death. The largesse we created has led to inevitable decline, to the point where idiot public health officials who are more than willing to kill & maim millions and deprive children of oxygen are afraid to hurt the feelings of those who would stuff penises up their butts indiscriminately. If you understand what God's expectations are for each of us and for the world, this should scare the hell out of you.
> probably God doesn't pay a lot of attention to human copulation.
Why wouldn't He? Copulation is how new humans are made, so it would in fact be really important to Him.
oops - I really shouldn't speak for him; it just seemed to me that if one were attempting to assess character (against a rigorous standard of perfection) the amount and usefulness of non-copulatory data collection possibilities far exceed the copulatory. How one raises one's kids, or treats aging parents or serves one's community; that sort of thing.
Lol no it's not.
Frankly, no it's not.
In this case DEATHINGpersons?
You're going to have to accept, as I have, that the Covid-sceptic movement is necessarily a broad church.
If only the great mass of people loved freedom as much as gay men love sex, we'd all be a lot better off.
But, truth is a narrow path, and Argos is way off it.
The truth can be curved like the human heart. (Thanks Tennessee Williams)
Sure in the "Jedi Truth" sense.
Acceptance in the "broad church" goes both ways and many ways.
Seems like more of the commenters than the author. Never forget that humanity’s number one pastime is judging others to gain a sense of superiority. Which is also warned about in the Bible, with a tad more frequency than homosexual affairs, but that’s not nearly as fun.
Please note the hypocrisy of my comment too. Like I said, humanity’s number one pastime!
The difference here is a healthy fear of God. One of us has it and one of us does not. This has nothing to do with judging others or feeling superior, but understanding what eventually happens to everyone & anyone who gives God the middle finger.
You are welcome to keep telling yourself that, but that is a very narrow, inaccurate view of what God is (based largely off of deifying a book/religion.) Ironically, I think you’re idolizing the material world as much as those that you think are on the wrong path, which is perhaps why you feel the need to demonize others. We often most detest the behaviors in others that we see in ourselves. But that’s just my opinion, as is everything you’ve written is just yours. Not much more than naval gazing in the grand scheme of things.
Again, I have to disagree. As you say, we are both entitled to our opinions. For example, 35 years ago, I was an atheist and my opinion was very different than it is today. Any Christian that truly understands who God is and what the Bible is doesn't "deify" the Bible. The Bible is absolutely the Word of God and all of the objective evidence in the world is there to support this premise. This isn't about detesting behavior we see in ourselves or any other such pop culture psycho babble bullshit, but about a change in our culture. I'll repeat it again for the fourth time: our worthless public health idiocracy will use the coerceive powers of government to muzzle children and force a toxic, experimental gene therapy on the public which will kill & maim millions. But they are afraid to tell sodomites to stop sticking other individuals body parts up their butts so as not to hurt their feelings. I'm sorry if this offends, but sometimes confronting reality is uncomfortable. And the reaility is that we have, for far tool long, compromised what we know to be true and real in the name of "tolerance". Some of us, myself included, truly believe and understand that much of what has happened and will continue to happen is demonic in nature and this cycle has repeated itself throughout human history. So call it naval gazing or whatever you like, the time for tolerance of those who willfully seek the destruction of all that is good will only end when we all start calling things for what they are ... and by their real names.
where the bible says "if you keep going your own way, God will turn you over to your lusts and passions" terrible summary but too lazy to look it up ; ). We actually choose our own stumbling by our arrogance and obstinance, God sortof lets us go so we can learn the lesson. Same reason you don't run bail your kid outta jail or else it's gonna get worse and you brought it on yourself. Let the kid spend the night and really learn the lesson. Sometimes if you try to save someone, you prolong their agony in this life b/c you try to save them from pain! That is how we cry out to God for help, sometimes when we're backed into a corner and feel pain. Do not try to play God in others lives, direct them to God and remind them of His love for them, they have just as much ability to turn as we all have from our messes. It's called the santification process....to burn out the arrogance and narcissism we all struggle with.
I cannot accept that there is an entity such as God. We naked apes are alone on this planet, left to our own devices. For better or for worse.
Yes, the lack of belief in or fear of God seems to be accelerating, as our culture devolves into naked apes, seeking mindless self-gratification. With that also comes death, disease, decay and insanity.
The same happened in God fearing societies, human insanity is universal and has nothing to do with God. But I know that it makes no sense to discuss religion. Believe what you want to If it helps you.
nope, ppl here speak the truth. which is difficult for many to hear. Funny how the truth is always met with bigot homophobe mis-information etc... name calling always shows who's deceived.
The ones who screech bigot sure are intolerant of those holding a different opinion
"Intolerant" to criticize a blanket characterization of a whole class of people?
Tolerating those who would use the coercive, destructive power of government is what has allowed this to happen. Why is the public health idiocracy afraid to hurt the feelings of people who can't stop sticking other peoples body parts up their butts, but they are willing to deprive children of oxygen and maim/kill millions of people with a toxic gene therapy? It's almost Luciferian, wouldn't you say?
By no stretch could anyone claim that I advocate tolerating the use of "coercive, destructive power of government".
Well, if the characterization is true.
Forgot people believe in "The Science" here.
I second that. I think that sodomy, drug use or whatever fun activity is totally fine. Everyone can do whatever the fuck they want as long as it doesn't hurt other people. If they choose to continue the orgies, let them do it and contract monkeypox, it was their choice and that is fine.
As we've seen over the past decade, it went from "we just want to have our fun behind closed doors" to "let us mutilate your son, transphobe!" extremely quickly.
Yeah, but I don't think it is the regular gay people pushing those ideas. Especially not the ones having orgies in dark rooms, I cannot imagine those people as serious activists, they are probably just somewhat degenerated hedonists. Which is fine, let them fuck like mad and bear the consequences.
It is the loony leftists that are pushing trans garbage ideology. Alongside "climate change", "racism", "gender" and all their other lunatic shit. They want to "transform" our societies into something else. Obviously, that won't work and they will just end up turning our countries into socialist shitholes, likey they always do. In the end, there won't be money left for climate action, sex changes or whatever, just look a Venezuela for a template.
> Especially not the ones having orgies in dark rooms, I cannot imagine those people as serious activists, they are probably just somewhat degenerated hedonists.
Yes, and they'd rather not have to confine their hedonism behind closed doors. Or have to worry about getting arrested just because one of the targets of their hedonism is the wrong age. Also, hedonism gets stale so hedonists constantly find themselves looking for new taboos to break.
> They want to "transform" our societies into something else.
They already did. Only you probably consider that transformation "a good thing".
Always fun to see people creating God in their own images.
Discouraging unhealthy behavior doesn't need to come with any dogma attached.
Actually, the Holy Bible and all of Christian history is quite clear, so there's no need to create anything. As Solomon so wisely pointed out, there's nothing new under the sun. Human beings acting like animals never ends well.
And yet here we are.
Well, I doubt God wants to send people to hellfire and damnation if, say, they kiss their tubercular spouses. Life on earth is itself a contagion-spreading condition.
That isn't really the point. The same idiot public health officials who want to muzzle 5 year olds and deprive them of oxygen are carefully tip-toeing around potentially telling grown men to stop sticking body parts up their butts. It's sign 'o the times.
Hypocrisy and expedience have been around forever.
So what? The point still stands, despite your disdain.
haha, nice.
OF COURSE we need religion to discourage unhealthy behavior. One wonders how you could think otherwise.
Dogma: the beliefs of people I disagree with or dislike, or both. Preferably both.
No.
Sodomites prefer stigmatizing Christians whose behavior is abhorrent in their eyes. What's accepted or condoned is the purpose of The Narrative the NYT reinforces at every turn. Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four has been transformed into an operating manual: war is peace, up is down, 2+2=5, etc.
All media is entertainment. It's best to laugh at the NYT in order to keep one's sanity.
Sorry to put you on the spot, Eugyppius!
But please could you explain why you've liked this comment by Joseph about "sodomites"? The statement makes no distinction between wild drug-fuelled sex parties (which is one thing) and faithful long-term relationships (which is quite another in my view)?
In other words, do you agree with Joseph that all homosexual relationships are abhorrent in God's eyes, that they shouldn't be accepted or condoned, and that we shouldn't be afraid to stigmatize such relationships within our societies?
Whatever the author likes or dislikes is somewhat immaterial. I get your drift but think it unnecessary. His views about homosexual activity are not the topic. Would his article be any less on-target if he disliked the nature of homosexual activity? The point is that authorities imposed great restrictions and prohibitions on society in general something they are unwilling to do for a perceived group of special interest.
The fact that most Monkeypox infections seem associated with homosexual group sex parties is obvious. But likely indiscriminate sex among any group might be equally an issue so perhaps there are hidden dangers in the anal aspect of the sex. I would think obvious lesions might be a turn-off in such an arrangement but maybe the anal lesions aren't observable.
At one level you're right - Eugyppius' main article about the stupidity and hypocrisy of the health authorities remains valid, even though he's liked a somewhat off-topic comment in the thread about how western societies should go back to stigmatizing all homosexuals.
But imagine how stupid and hateful western countries like Germany, USA or UK would have to become to successfully go back to stigmatizing gay people in that way. Such a prospect fills me with the same kind of dread that I've felt over the past 2 years during the covid nightmare.
That's why I'd like Eugyppius to say whether he really agrees with Joseph's Carroll's comment or not. If it turns out he perhaps misread the comment as merely condemning wild drug-induced gay sex parties, then that'd be welcome clarification.
But if he does in fact believe that it would be good for societies to go back to stigmatizing all homosexual men, then for me that undermines all the otherwise excellent work he's done challenging the covid authoritarianism we've all been experiencing since 2020.
> But imagine how stupid and hateful western countries like Germany, USA or UK would have to become to successfully go back to stigmatizing gay people in that way.
So you're saying all countries were "stupid and hateful" until 20 years ago? Have you considered that the problem is on your end?
Thanks for your comment but once more I totally disagree.
In the European country where I live, you’d have to go back 30-40 yrs to return to the days when gay people were still widely stigmatized and 40-50 yrs to find almost universal stigmatization. Back then certain negative attitudes to black/Asian people and towards women were also still widespread. And yes, I’d say that all such attitudes were stupid and hateful, as well as pointless and harmful.
20 years ago, however, things were probably at their best since all the major equality battles had essentially been won – i.e. the vast majority no longer cared about a person’s sexual orientation (or the color of their skin or their biological sex). We were as near to MLK’s dream as we ever were likely to get in a country containing tens of millions of people, because the pockets of prejudice that remained were small and without much influence.
But since the early 2000s things have gone off the rails, slowly at first but quickly in the last few yrs, as a kind of totalitarian identity politics (aka wokism) has gone from the fringes to the mainstream. That includes, of course, the so-called LGBTQIA+ movement which in my view is in reality deeply anti-gay (and viciously anti-women).
So the problem is not at my end but with the stigmatising position you've adopted about homosexuals (which reminds me of things people commonly used to say 40 yrs ago), as well as with the poisonous LGBTQIA+ movement (which is obviously much newer). Strangely, they strike me as two sides of the same stigmatising coin - and so when it comes to the subject of homosexuality, you have much more in common with the LQBTQIA+ crowd than you might think!
> 20 years ago, however, things were probably at their best since all the major equality battles had essentially been won
The problem is that those things are not in fact equal. Which meant that the "equality" you obsess over so much consisted of requiring people to pretend unequal things were equal, despite increasingly obvious evidence to the contrary.
> But since the early 2000s things have gone off the rails, slowly at first but quickly in the last few yrs, as a kind of totalitarian identity politics (aka wokism) has gone from the fringes to the mainstream.
"Things were going so well after jumping off the cliff, right up to the point where I hit the ground, why couldn't things have stayed like they were when I was 5 ft above the ground?"
I am tolerant enough that a single viewpoint disagreement isn't adequate to dismiss a body of work. I think his viewpoint about homosexuals is immaterial. I have my own viewpoint and have been at too many bedsides of gay friends to not see their humanity in death.
> But likely indiscriminate sex among any group might be equally an issue
Except other groups don't engage in indiscriminate sex.
> I would think obvious lesions might be a turn-off in such an arrangement
Or perhaps gays don't care about these things. During the 1970s gays would wear their STDs with pride, until AIDS started killing them.
from the pattern that i mostly observed in various substacks, authors many times use 'like' button to mark a comment as 'read', not as 'like' as to easier sort which comments are new.
How else can you interpret Eugyppius's like? Joseph's comment was brief and didn't have any additional--redeeming--points.
Eugyppius has never said anything good about AfD. The party is probably too pro-homosexual for him.
Thanks, I too was thinking this.
> The statement makes no distinction between wild drug-fuelled sex parties (which is one thing) and faithful long-term relationships (which is quite another in my view)?
No one makes that distinction, least of all the sodomites themselves. The only reason anyone talks about the latter is as a wedge to get people to accept the former.
I completely disagree because I've got to know numerous homosexuals couples over the years, both gay men and lesbians, who are in long-term monogamous relationships. Further, your use of the term "sodomites" is demeaning and vile - it's like using the n-word for black people or the k-word for Jews.
> I completely disagree because I've got to know numerous homosexuals couples over the years, both gay men and lesbians, who are in long-term monogamous relationships.
Are you sure? For a gay, a long-term partner is someone you visit the bathhouse with.
In any case you can test this theory. See whether your gay friends get monkeypox.
The issue isn't gays, the issue is men. A minority of men, of any sexual persuasion, are completely obsessive, fetishistic, sex-addicted degenerates.
The difference is that if they are gay, they have far more opportunities to engage in their perversions because they find other men like themselves. Straight men have fewer opportunities, constrained by the unwillingness of most women to be objectified and engage in degeneracy.
But I still bet you anything that the number of perverted straight men in absolute terms far exceeds the number of perverted gay men.
> But I still bet you anything that the number of perverted straight men in absolute terms far exceeds the number of perverted gay men.
Perhaps, homosexuality isn't the only perversion. Most straight men aren't perverted. Whereas all gay men are.
Everyone of good heart makes that distinction.
Ah yes, the old use of "good heart" as a euphemism for "naive idiot".
I appreciate you sorting yourself out so beautifully.
Quite well put. Lord help us.
because THEY HATE GOD, SATAN IS THEIR FATHER
And here you are, devoted to Sumerian folklore.
Nah, the Sumerians were the ones who had temple prostitutes. We're following in the footsteps of those who spoke up against that.
The sumerians were one of many, many cultures that had sacred protitution, including judaism which as you know is the foundation of christianity after mithraism and elements of the cult of Sol Invictus, Jupiter and some others were added. Wasn't until the 4th century sacred prostitution became an issue in Rome either, due to the intolerance, totalitariansim and authoritarianism inherent and endemic to christianity (and its offspring islam).
The aztecs even had a specific god for homosexual prostitutes.
Let me ask, since the part about condemning sodomy is in the OT and apparently matters, do you also follow the rest of the laws and ordinances laid down by Moses? Theirs a whole slew of them that would make modern life difficult, and that's without going into the fact that the christian bible is the most heavily edited book in existence; there's been more stuff taken out than what's left, and some stuff never made it in despite being contemporary with whoever the prophet rebranded as Jesus really was.
Might want to go easy referring to that book as some absolute source of truth, yes?
> The sumerians were one of many, many cultures that had sacred protitution, including judaism
So you have no idea what the h*ll you're talking about. Got it.
Learn to stop talking out of your *rse.
I mean the fallen star of the morning guy you guys turned into Satan.
And here you are, supremely troubled by it.
"...supremely troubled"
Might I suggest that the lack of a prohibition on gay sex reflects a recognition that the gays wouldn't obey it? And might I also suggest that there is a lesson here for everyone? ie. If they know you won't obey, they won't dare give the order.
Might apply to gays but don't think it would work for non victim/nonpride groups. I think we would be arrested.
Gay or straight, degenerate behavior will never be discouraged. Fauci gave the thumbs up to grinder and tinder hookups in April 2020. He said something along the lines of, as long as the people are comfortable with the risk. One of the only activities they allowed people to decide for themselves.
Unfortunately, I agree. I believe that in Canada, health 'experts' gave advice about how to have sex with minimal contact, including with sex workers. However going to church, being with dying family and friends etc was all too dangerous etc
I think the UK recently put out a PSA on responsible glory hole use. Half the time I think this kind of stuff has to be satire, and it's not surprising anymore when it isn't.
Gay sex does not increase the population, so I'm guessing it's Double Plus Good to Our Betters.
Only if the numbers are small enough. It is a certainty that governments at least in the west rule by opinion polls - if enough people said 'no', the tide would turn fast.
Wasn't it South West airlines where enough pilots said no to the covid shots so the company had to drop their mandate?
Two big differences with this example though. Pilots are in the small class of people who actually really need to know what they are doing and are often in short supply plus this is a private company not part of the government bureaucracy
The Quebec gov in Canada wanted to impose a fine on the unvaxxed. However, they cancelled the plan when they saw it was too unpopular. Jordan Peterson, a well known Canadian psychologist stated in a youtube video that the Ontario gov made decisions based on opinion polls. He heard this from a 'high up' gov source.
It makes sense: gov officials need votes to keep their jobs so they do whatever they can. Squeeky wheel gets the oil.
Perhaps not every politician is like this and a few perhaps go to bat for their constituents but I don't really see this. Do you?
Yes, politicians want to be in power and up to recently had the support to impose mandates and restrictions. Now that the crack has opened and economies are tanking, they continue to throw money around to stay in power. However restrictive powers remain on the books and certainly in New Zealand there's not much choice about who to vote for. Also officials are not voted in and continue to manage huge aspects of our lives
It isn't that simple; it's much deeper. Homosexuals certainly "obeyed" the vaccine imperative and advocated vigorously that others do so as well. I recall that the bathhouses in San Fransisco were not closed during CA's otherwise fairly draconian lockdowns; something to do with them being an essential part of the city's "culture" . Overall, homosexuals as a class and their compliance are extremely useful to the Rulers. There is some value in demonstrating the absolute arbitrariness of "stigmatizing" the entire global population (social distance, etc) yet being seen as giving that class a complete pass on that requirement. The arbitrariness being a demonstration of power - and of our powerlessness - in this case.
Another good example is the full institutional support of the 2020 violent rioters compared to years long imprisonment and persecution of people waved into the capital building on Jan 6.
As Moldbug would put it, vae victus.
Woe to the conquered sums it up; ... I should step back some and de-generalize; there are, of course, members of these magic minorities who understand perfectly well how the game is played and who resist their assigned roles. Many gay people were and have remained very vocal opponents of the ruler Faucci - going back at least to the late 1980s and the AZT catastrophe. Others will - perhaps quite suddenly - come to understand that they have been among the conquered right from the start.
Learning some of the history of Fauci and AIDS in RFK's book was an eye opener. Yes, woe to everyone under institutions like this.
It's like when the authorities recognize less than half the population is wearing masks, they then declare the mask mandate has been relaxed. Trying to maintain the illusion of control.
"If they know you won't obey, they won't dare give the order."
Except when it comes to guns.
Do you realize that Americans allowed, with the exception of 2A, for all the amendments to be rendered useless - de facto neutered?
All in a matter of a few months.
FEAR is a powerful elixir.
I am so ashamed of my country.
That still haunts my thinking. We agreed to a loss of freedom temporarily except it wasn't so temporary. Now that "emergency" allow suspension of all sorts of rights we can expect that to be reused as convenient. Worse some courts have suggested the powers can be indefinite in some states. I recall a quote by Ben Franklin noting freedom-security trades rarely work well.
I know HardeeHo. It is an existential threat.
90% of people don't realize this. And that's not surprising because history is 100% on that.
The Founders wouldn't be surprised, but they'd slap the shit out of us.
And yet here we are voicing our opinions. We're not done yet and they haven't taken everything from us....yet. Keep the faith and as you keep telling us, Ryan, we keep fighting and speaking out!
And yet gun ownership is through the roof since Barry Soetero scammed the WH. And who are the latest round of new gun owners? Not Bubba and his hunting friends....no, it's white libs, black females and black males. So, who in the government honestly believes they're going to take away a Sistah's 9mm? No white guy in the ATF or FBI would dare try. And the libs who bought their 1st handgun when the riots started won't give up their little 380s....they need to protect their Prius.
That's a universal argument against having any laws.
BOOM
"Don't fuck while you're festering" seems good advice for any creature that inserts any one of its parts into one or another of the parts of any other creature, for fun or procreation.
I have said before and ill say it again. The covid wars are just getting started. The lockdowners, vaccinators and maskers have found themselves in a position of power, and will continue to wield it and use it. Those muscles are trained now and there is no problem that can't be solved with a mandate or restriction of some kind.
In fairness to gay men and monkeypox, they already dont care about getting infected with HIV. Monkey pox is not going to change their behavior. If only they had this clarity on covid
EXACTLY! Just because Fauci and some other Vaxxinators have retired, doesn't mean we'll get a reprieve.
To the contrary in my opinion.
Acolytes are rarely less tyrannical; they've been waiting their whole life for that opportunity.
Sometimes the devil you know is better than the devil you don't.
Either way, this crap is going to go on indefinitely until people are willing to pay a price and RESIST
Many however did stop hooking up because of covid. Such is the irony.
Bro you’re on fire 👏🏆🎯. Keep telling the truth.
The precious snowflakes of the LGBTQ "community" must not be offended. This is DNC rule number one. Never ask the victim class they represent to be held accountable for their behaviors. Blame the gun, not the criminal, blame the "injustice / police" not the BLM rioters, blame the parents not the teachers unions or school boards, blame the SCOTUS not the bad constitutional interpretation and on and on. Asking gay men to stop screwing each other with wanton abandon is too much to ask just to stop spreading a potentially dangerous disease. The world is now officially a clown show and is being run by literal idiots. Time for a change and not a small one. Pray, plan, prepare and RESIST.
A somewhat relevant anecdote: once upon a time, I worked in local tv. I had an African American co-worker that habitually came in late on the weekend shift when there was no management around. As in one to two HOURS late. If anyone called him on it, he just said he'd call the NAACP. I had to cover for him in an emergency.
One day an emergency happened on a Sunday and he was not in. Our token gay director was however, and he complained to management. From then on, African American co-worker came in on time when gay director was there.
gay> black> woman
The victim class hierarchy ... funny.
Bang on, Eugyppius (sorry). Non-procreative sex is indeed the lynchpin of the ideology. You'd have to pry it from their cold, dead, monkeypox-infested hands. Keep emphasizing this because it points to the reality, which too many are unaware of, that this is literally a Satanic assault on our freedom--true freedom, of course, NOT being the right to screw whoever one likes, but freedom of will.
They didn't seem concerned at all about offending others by usurping their rights.
The larger part of me reads this and thinks "surely grown men do not need pubic health authorities to tell them that it's best to avoid sexually profligate behavior during an outbreak of a sexually transmitted disease that only affects gay men," but then I remember the last two years. Sigh.
Admittedly, this is coming from a woman (whatever that is) and a CIS gender heteronormative one at that ( I think I got the jargon right there), but isn't it more caring to gay men to urge abstinence (or at least go down to one partner) for a few months than worrying that their feelings might be hurt over the suggestion?
It reminds me of the recent push for abolishing the police at the price of more minorities dying.
Sorry, hurt feelings of special groups trump everything else
The emphasis on feelings reminds one of the supposedly Christian act of masking to not offend those irrationally fearful of COVID. It is not the truly loving thing to do. But again, the "loving" being compelled only goes in one direction: to the left.
Exactly!
The church, for the most part was a big disappointment.
I think they forgot the main tenants of the Bible and the constitution.
They're lucky they had just enough fighter's, like you, on these stacks'.
They "felt" powerless besides undoubtedly knowing one of Jesus's most important lessons: “For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.” 2 Timothy 1:7
IMO, that message, in and of itself, checks all the boxes that could have prevented the forthcoming carnage.
Time for some Christians to self reflect. And perhaps consider the least among us. After all, they WILL be the ones that pay the dearest cost.
If not they may end up in bondage. Which I'm pretty sure Jesus would disapprove of.
Have a come to Jesus if you feel like this applies to anyone on this stack.
If doesn't apply, politely spread the word tacitly. Practice what you preach. Learn.
And as Churchill said:
"I'd rather be right than consistent "
"Right now is the right time to be RIGHT" - Yours truly
Your error is in thinking that TPTB are seeking to act in a 'caring' manner. They're only acting in a manner that cares about votes, for the most part at least.
Frankly, at this point even votes are way down on the list of things they care about.
Yes to this (caring about votes) only. They care as much about the health and not hurting gay men's feelings as those calling to defund the police cared about poor inner city minorities (mainly minorities. ) Not one iota.
You will see they will shut down the economy again, so that some "vulnerable people can continue with their sex practices".
I propose a one step plan:
Double Mask their Ass Plan!
This is infuriating!
Stand up. Be counted. Fight back!
What is GAE?
Globalist American Empire. Their flag is the pride flag.
And George Floyd is their patron saint.
I don’t know what GAE is either. Eugy?
Yes. I want to share this, but I need to know what he means GAE to stand for. I tried to figure it out, but apparently am not smart enough!