Why are liberals obsessed with homosexuality

So you think premarital and extramarital sex, bastardy, homosexuality, transgenderism, and other forms of destructive, immoral sexual perversion, are inventions of the Marxists? LMAO! All of those things have been going on since the beginning of time.

I didn't say that. Of course they've been around for as long as humanity has. And they've been properly recognized as immoral, harmful, and ultimately destructive to society. What Marxism brought us was acceptance of these evils, a move to normalize them and treat them as if thee is nothing wrong with them; and the motive is obvious when you look at the original context. Marx wanted to destroy society, as it was then known, to be replaced by a completely different kind of society. And destruction of the family, which has always been the foundation of every successful human society throughout history, was a crucial starting point for Marx. But this aspect of Marxism broke off and took on a life of its own, becoming a destructive disease within society.

Harmful? Really? No. The ban on premarital sex is about control of the people. Bastardy is harmless if the parents take care of their child. Homosexuality and transgenderism are certainly not harmful or destructive to society. "Sexual perversions" is just a term people use when they stick their nose in other people's business and bedrooms.

No one is destroying the family. They have expanded the definition, to include gays and transpeople.
 
By God we all know that rightist have never done anything like that, tell the Log Cabiners(GOP members that are ghey) that you want them out of the RNC and to stop living by killing themselves..
You really are a sick twisted liar..

View attachment 138344

No idea what significance this has on the topic.

Straw man
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".

Moonglow, rather than addressing anything I actually said, purported to argue against me by attributing to me several things that I did not say and arguing against those.
 
So you think premarital and extramarital sex, bastardy, homosexuality, transgenderism, and other forms of destructive, immoral sexual perversion, are inventions of the Marxists? LMAO! All of those things have been going on since the beginning of time.

I didn't say that. Of course they've been around for as long as humanity has. And they've been properly recognized as immoral, harmful, and ultimately destructive to society. What Marxism brought us was acceptance of these evils, a move to normalize them and treat them as if thee is nothing wrong with them; and the motive is obvious when you look at the original context. Marx wanted to destroy society, as it was then known, to be replaced by a completely different kind of society. And destruction of the family, which has always been the foundation of every successful human society throughout history, was a crucial starting point for Marx. But this aspect of Marxism broke off and took on a life of its own, becoming a destructive disease within society.
Then by that reasoning Thomas Jefferson was pushing the gay lifestyle when he stated that "all men are created equal" in the Declaration of Independence....
 
By God we all know that rightist have never done anything like that, tell the Log Cabiners(GOP members that are ghey) that you want them out of the RNC and to stop living by killing themselves..
You really are a sick twisted liar..

View attachment 138344

No idea what significance this has on the topic.

Straw man
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".

Moonglow, rather than addressing anything I actually said, purported to argue against me by attributing to me several things that I did not say and arguing against those.
I addressed your misguided assumptions...Your illogical assumptions. The fact that you're myopic in observations of the human race..That paradigms you expouse doesn't give you a better Archie Bunker mentality than George Jefferson's..
To note: That wasn't a pic of strawmen...
 
Harmful? Really? No. The ban on premarital sex is about control of the people. Bastardy is harmless if the parents take care of their child. Homosexuality and transgenderism are certainly not harmful or destructive to society. "Sexual perversions" is just a term people use when they stick their nose in other people's business and bedrooms.

No one is destroying the family. They have expanded the definition, to include gays and transpeople.

And what is amazing is how blind some of you have become, that the harm is all around you, the cause is obvious, and you refuse to see what is right in front of you. There is none so blind as he who will not see.
 
So you think premarital and extramarital sex, bastardy, homosexuality, transgenderism, and other forms of destructive, immoral sexual perversion, are inventions of the Marxists? LMAO! All of those things have been going on since the beginning of time.

I didn't say that. Of course they've been around for as long as humanity has. And they've been properly recognized as immoral, harmful, and ultimately destructive to society. What Marxism brought us was acceptance of these evils, a move to normalize them and treat them as if thee is nothing wrong with them; and the motive is obvious when you look at the original context. Marx wanted to destroy society, as it was then known, to be replaced by a completely different kind of society. And destruction of the family, which has always been the foundation of every successful human society throughout history, was a crucial starting point for Marx. But this aspect of Marxism broke off and took on a life of its own, becoming a destructive disease within society.

No.

In fact, one can make the argument that wage labor is destructive to families as it caused one individual to leave the home in search of work thus.

That said, it all looks pretty good on paper but that is it. Just like the free market philosophy.
 
Then by that reasoning Thomas Jefferson was pushing the gay lifestyle when he stated that "all men are created equal" in the Declaration of Independence....

In fact, one can make the argument that wage labor is destructive to families as it caused one individual to leave the home in search of work thus.

That said, it all looks pretty good on paper but that is it. Just like the free market philosophy.

A non-sequitur isn't an argument. It's just meaningless nonsense.
 
Homosexuality has always existed, but lately it has become an obsession.

You see it in every movie, every TV show, and literally, it seems that Hollywood is determined to show us gay sex scenes whether or not we want to see them.

I see it as part of the decline of Western civilization.

It's like putting too many rats in a cage, or too many humans in a city. When animals or humans become too crowded, they become homosexual, and then they die out.

It's Mother Nature's way of saying, "I'm done with you. Go extinct."

Why do you overgeneralize?
 
Harmful? Really? No. The ban on premarital sex is about control of the people. Bastardy is harmless if the parents take care of their child. Homosexuality and transgenderism are certainly not harmful or destructive to society. "Sexual perversions" is just a term people use when they stick their nose in other people's business and bedrooms.

No one is destroying the family. They have expanded the definition, to include gays and transpeople.

And what is amazing is how blind some of you have become, that the harm is all around you, the cause is obvious, and you refuse to see what is right in front of you. There is none so blind as he who will not see.

Really? What harm is done? I mean, we stopped beating up gays just because they are gay. I would say that is preventing harm. But if two men or two women fall in love with each other, how does that harm anyone? How does that even effect you at all?

And the biggest flaw in your logic is easily pointed out. Your premise is that marxists want more gays and trannies so the family will be destroyed. If that is true, why do marxist regimes always outlaw homosexuality and transexualism? Can you name a marxist regime that promoted, embraced or even tolerated the things you claim they are using to destroy the family?
 
Then by that reasoning Thomas Jefferson was pushing the gay lifestyle when he stated that "all men are created equal" in the Declaration of Independence....

In fact, one can make the argument that wage labor is destructive to families as it caused one individual to leave the home in search of work thus.

That said, it all looks pretty good on paper but that is it. Just like the free market philosophy.

A non-sequitur isn't an argument. It's just meaningless nonsense.

It is not a non-sequitur to point out a method of destroying the family that counters your claim. And the low wages (which makes 2 incomes necessary) has done far more to destroy the family than homosexuality and trangenderism.
 
And the biggest flaw in your logic is easily pointed out. Your premise is that marxists want more gays and trannies so the family will be destroyed. If that is true, why do marxist regimes always outlaw homosexuality and transexualism? Can you name a marxist regime that promoted, embraced or even tolerated the things you claim they are using to destroy the family?

As I said, this aspect of the original Marxism broke off from any sincere efforts to implement Marxism, and took on a life of it's own, separate from Marxism. Mainstream Marxism rejected this one aspect of Marx's plan.

I'm not sure that Marx even imagined that homosexuality and transgenderism would be part of his plan, but those movements, as they now exist, are undeniably rooted in Marx's original intent to destroy marriage and family, and to destroy the sort of society that required these as its foundation.
 
Now who and what are these Marxist orthodox forces which are destroying our society and corrupting a straight man's butthole?
 
And the biggest flaw in your logic is easily pointed out. Your premise is that marxists want more gays and trannies so the family will be destroyed. If that is true, why do marxist regimes always outlaw homosexuality and transexualism? Can you name a marxist regime that promoted, embraced or even tolerated the things you claim they are using to destroy the family?

As I said, this aspect of the original Marxism broke off from any sincere efforts to implement Marxism, and took on a life of it's own, separate from Marxism. Mainstream Marxism rejected this one aspect of Marx's plan.

I'm not sure that Marx even imagined that homosexuality and transgenderism would be part of his plan, but those movements, as they now exist, are undeniably rooted in Marx's original intent to destroy marriage and family, and to destroy the sort of society that required these as its foundation.

Funny, you have no evidence of a connection between marxism and homosexuality/transgenderism/sexual perversion. But there is ample evidence that the low wages that sent both parents out into the workforce can be demonstrated to cause harm to the family.

I tell you what. I will list actual damages done by having both parents work. And you list actual damages done by society accepting gays and trannies? OK?

Lets see:

1) Latchkey kids
2) Eating dinner as a family becomes rare
3) Sacrificing family time in favor of money to live on.
4) Children are taught money is more important than family
5) So much more time apart allows the family bonds to be strained
6) Additional stresses on both parents.
7) Children being raised by sitters, after school programs or raising themselves


Can you name things that you claim are destroying the family that are due to homosexuality? I don't mean your vague claims, but actual concrete examples.
 
Last edited:
Look at recent illegitimacy rates. About 40% for the population as a whole, in this country. That's forty percent of children not being born into an intact family, with a mother and a father. In some ethnic groups, this rate is as high as 75% to 80%. There is your destruction of the family, and there is your destruction of society. That is what Marx wanted, but which even his overt followers knew better than to seek. That is what the pervert-rights movement, a breakaway from Marxism, is seeking to achieve, and which, to some degree, is successfully achieving.

To be sure, there are other forces also exerting undue stress against the family, but this is the core of the problem.
 
Look at recent illegitimacy rates. About 40% for the population as a whole, in this country. That's forty percent of children not being born into an intact family, with a mother and a father. In some ethnic groups, this rate is as high as 75% to 80%. There is your destruction of the family, and there is your destruction of society. That is what Marx wanted, but which even his overt followers knew better than to seek. That is what the pervert-rights movement, a breakaway from Marxism, is seeking to achieve, and which, to some degree, is successfully achieving.

To be sure, there are other forces also exerting undue stress against the family, but this is the core of the problem.

The core? WTF? How many illegitimate children do have 2 parents? No stats for that?
 
Look at recent illegitimacy rates. About 40% for the population as a whole, in this country. That's forty percent of children not being born into an intact family, with a mother and a father. In some ethnic groups, this rate is as high as 75% to 80%. There is your destruction of the family, and there is your destruction of society. That is what Marx wanted, but which even his overt followers knew better than to seek. That is what the pervert-rights movement, a breakaway from Marxism, is seeking to achieve, and which, to some degree, is successfully achieving.

To be sure, there are other forces also exerting undue stress against the family, but this is the core of the problem.

And if illegitimacy rates are your measuring stick, perhaps you and other social conservatives can own a significant part of that. The abstinence only sex education has been a dismal failure. Perhaps if some of those people (teens?) had been taught how simply using a condom can prevent most unwanted pregnancies and the spread of diseases, the rates would be lower. Or the availability of condoms, which your ilk has fought tooth & nail. Think that might have helped the rates?
 
How about offering some concrete examples of harm?

Lets look at a scenario. Suppose my wife and I live in a neighborhood with our 3 kids. New neighbors move in. They are a same sex couple who married. How are they going to effect my family at all?
 
But hey, there ARE too many people on the planet, perhaps it is the world's way of saying "fuck off and die some, so that other animals can have their place", the world is an amazing place.

Scratch any progressive's surface and you find at the root self-loathing like this, that they translate to the concept of Humanity as a disease on the face of planet Earth.
 
But hey, there ARE too many people on the planet, perhaps it is the world's way of saying "fuck off and die some, so that other animals can have their place", the world is an amazing place.

Scratch any progressive's surface and you find at the root self-loathing like this, that they translate to the concept of Humanity as a disease on the face of planet Earth.

It seemed an appropriate response to the statement that homosexuality will result in human extinction.
 

Forum List

Back
Top