Homosexuals explained.
(media.scored.co)
Comments (18)
sorted by:
I wonder which one of these are most likely to sexually abuse kids (under 12 y/o). Historically it must be the regular homosexuals as they were the only ones to have convenient access as teachers / foster guardians. But nowadays with brazen "pride", it could be worthy to study and wake up some normies if the full blown crazies are also diddlers. And that is real diddlers, not like those epstein/diddy with 16 y/o whores.
I think general consensus is that while a high % of homosexuals were abused as kids, most of them don't continue the trend. (But obviously the few that do, were nearly all abused as kid). And I mean physical abuse, not just shown porn books / drag story hour (which, while disturbing, normies don't care about unfortunately).
You know, I noticed how as soon as you bring up gays molesting kids the left immediately tries to pivot to Catholic priests molesting kids, as if it's not the EXACT SAME THING.
Should start with a picture of Bill Mitchell and read "This type of faggot claims to be straight and may even have a wife, but he gets mad when straight people have fun."
Based jew-doctor.
Now replace gay with pedophile and see if the argument still holds.
What do you mean replace? They can be both, just like Barry and Michael.
That's a fair point. After all they always say "sexuality is a specter, it's not strictly defined", right? Why should we delineate between different kinds of sexual deviants?
An arguing mind implies ones consent holding onto a suggestion by another, while ignoring that perceivable moves. Ignorance implies a fictitious "still-stand" within self, which others exploit by tempting one into a fictitious stand-off against others called reasoning aka arguing.
While many argue pedophile vs gay; few gain the opportunity to exploit what many ignore while arguing against each other...like children for example.
We must keep our eyes at the children at all times. The reason those demons get to them is because we're being weak, apathetic and negligent.
"But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea." - Matthew 18:6
Spiritual practice. Many were healed. Many are literally possessed. This is why they are so given to lust, that they have hundreds of one night partners. Either their lustful ego posessed them or an astral entity, which is most likely. Try talking with spiritual science research foundation on this topic, they have answers from 40 years of research. they have a chat there.
Or better yet, open up the Bible at Mathew 19:11:
"Eunuchs who were born thus from their mother’s womb" here refers not just to asexual people, but to what modern people call "homosexuals". The people you see prancing at the demonic pride parades were meant for monastic life. Satan subverts and inverts all that is good. The wisdom of our science is worldly and limited but Jesus and His Church has told us everything we need to know.
Needing to resist wanted temptation. Sodomy implies want vs not want; while ignoring need.
Pretend (Latin proetendo; to stretch forward) tempts one to ignore being (life) within straight (inception towards death); hence needing to resist the wanted temptation to stretch forward.
Sex (Latin seco; to divide) implies setting apart, while marriage (Latin maritatu; to wed; entering into a wedlock) implies putting together...latter contradicts former.
Needing to set apart implies ones choice to resist; while wanting to put together implies ones choice falling for the temptation to ignore resisting.
Example...intercourse for off-spring implies a setting apart, for which one needs to resist wanted temptation. The less one resists; the more one tempts self to try something else....entrance sodomy; prostitution; abortion; sex-changes etc.
LET, verb - "to suffer; to permit"....only nature (inception towards death) permits suffering (life). Resistance diminishes suffering; temptation diminishes resistance. Life needs to resist wanted temptation, while suffering within the process of dying.
Full implies "containing all that can be received"; which implies ones possessiveness (to receive; to take into possession) over suggested information, contained within ones consenting mind/memory; hence "contain-ment".
Meanwhile in reality...perceivable inspiration flows (inception towards death) through each form (life) and cannot be held onto aka taken possession of aka contained within memory.
Ones denial of perceivable for suggested implies "emptiness", and ones possessiveness of suggested implies "fulfillment".
CELIBATE, noun - "a single life" aka being (bate) sole (celi) implies as one (partial) within oneness (whole).
Celibacy implies each ones status quo of being, which few corrupt by tempting many to "marry" aka to willingly consent to be united in wedlock aka binding together as the inversion of being set apart from one another.
a) "Christ's Second Appearing" implies anointed ones (christ) coming into light (appear) by division (Latin seco; to divide) of whole (oneness) into partials (ones).
The trick...suggesting one that "christ" is another, hence tempting one to count/enumerate/reckon together other ones as second; third; fourth etc.
b) "known as Shaking Quakers" implies shaking (inception towards death) + quaking (life) aka motion generating emotions.
Shaking implies setting apart; quacking implies convulsing together....hence one needing to "shake your booty" aka letting go of what one holds onto.
Another sleight of hand: "Shake, shake, shake, Señora, shake your body line...work, work, work, Señora, work your body line" aka senor (motion) + senora (momentum) for body (life) within line (inception towards death).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xn3tUOJ9yv4
I quoted from that very wiki article (known as Shaking Quakers). The issue...shaking and quaking implies perceivable nature before it can be suggested artificially to describe anything within nature.
Few utilize suggestion to distract many from perception. Groups don't choose names; many follow suggested orders by few leaders; such as consenting to a brand. Nature doesn't group together; it sets units apart from one another.
PRECI'SE, adjective - "exact; definite; having determinate limitations; not loose"...few suggest definitions to trick many to ignore being set free ( will of choice) and spell-craft (linguistic) is how suggestions are being shaped and transferred to one another.
Definition implies "deaf phonetician" aka being deaf to phonics (perceivable sound); when consenting to suggested words.
Language implies "articulating sound" aka utilizing artificial (words) to distract from natural (sound). Nature doesn't shape words; it moves sound.
Aka suggested nihil-ism (Latin nihilo; nothing) tempting one to de-nial perceivable for suggested. Nothing isn't a natural state; but the artificial suggestion to ignore everything natural.
Artificial intelligence cannot adapt to natural knowledge (perceivable inspiration) without contradicting itself. This is all written by ones free will of choice...
a) Only nature gives straightforward (inception towards death) to each one (life) within.
b) Suggested questions tempt one to seek an outcome (suggested answers); while ignoring perceivable origin. If one's alive and being moved from inception towards death; then one needs to resist origin as to sustain self before outcome...others suggest outcomes as the inversion of perceivable origin.
Any question aims towards death; while any answer tempts life to wait for death. Nature doesn't question; nor give answers...it implies solution (inception towards death) generating problems (life); hence each ones struggle to sustain self.
c) Nature gives; those within tempt each other to take. Nature moves matter; matter cannot take motion...but it can be tricked to hold onto other matter, while burdening itself within motion.
d) What does nothing give? What gives nothing?
a) Yes vs no implies a conflict of reason, shaped by ones consent to suggested determinism, hence your "precise linguistic". This conflict continues for as long as one holds onto any side. An answer cannot dissolve a conflict of reason; it simply tempts both sides to seek more answers by questioning each other....a self perpetuating conflict.
b) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugger_family (the last name was originally spelled Fucker)...this implies freemasonry. If one puts bricks on mortar, then the weight squeezes the mortar outwards, which one has to smooth over at the joint...this is called a FUGE.
A mason of free (will of choice) utilizes suggested information as bricks and ones consent as mortar to build walls of ignorance within others...fuge/fuck is used to smooth the joints over, hence the many being tempted to use "fuck" within their endless conflicts of reason to maintain ignorance smooth aka "fuck this; fuck that; go fuck yourself; get the fuck out of here; holy fuck etc."
Free will of choice sets apart bricks and mortar, hence choice being uneven and rough, instead of a "smooth criminal"
For those with eyes to see...fuck/fuge/fugue aka "a fugue is a composition founded upon one subject, announced at first in one part alone, and subsequently imitated by all the other parts in turn".
I don't think it's an island