The Times We Live In

The Times We Live In When Normal Is Wrong
The Times We Live In, When Normal Is Wrong

We, most assuredly sadly, live in an age where all that is not male, not White, and/or not heterosexual is held up as greatness and in which anything male, White, and/or heterosexual is decried as abhorrent or, at the very least, utterly unworthy of praise or recognition due to that very maleness, Whiteness, and/or heterosexuality.

And do be aware and assured that our domestic enemies whole issue with normal people is that they are still the majority and still exemplars of- and adherents to the long-standing, dominant culture in and of America.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

ACLU’s Queer Behavior

Recently, Bangor Area High School held a week-long Gay-Straight Alliance event in which the school’s Gay-Straight Alliance encouraged students to wear different colored shirts each day to raise awareness of queer issues such as bullying and suicide. During the high school’s televised announcements on the last morning of the event, two students on the broadcast wore Chick-fil-A T-shirts. This resulted in a shit of social media attacks against the two students and eventually led to about 15 students who engaged in the cyberbullying to being suspended the following week.

Anti-Christian Litigation Union (ACLU)Anti-Christian Litigation Union (ACLU) Is On The Scene

The result of that is that the ACLU of Pennsylvania is investigating the matter in order to determine if the school can charged with civil rights violations for suspending the students who attacked the two students who dissented against the LGBT event. Mary Catherine Roper, deputy legal director of the organization, described the suspensions as, “pretty harsh punishment.”

Somehow I just don’t think that any sane American could bring themselves to believe that, if the situation were reversed and it was two students wearing rainbow t-shirts who were attacked and bullied, the ACLU would investigate the school for suspending the perpetrators. No, the Anti-Christian Litigation Union (ACLU) doesn’t roll that away…ever.

Of course, the only reason the ACLU isn’t formally described as a hate group is that organization that makes its money by denoting organizations as such, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), is itself a hate group.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Queers Say Don’t Ask!

One of the More Disturbing Faces of Gay Activism - Of course it's from a Gay Pride parade which have always been an insult to common decency and to the bulk of the LGBT communityIt seems that various queer activist groups are having a hissy fit over the US Military’s new questionnaire regarding the possible repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT).

To these groups’ collective consciousness it’s wrong for the Pentagon to even ask the men and women serving in the military how they might respond to openly gay servicemen.

Given the nature of such agendists, this isn’t surprising in the least, but it’s certainly worthy of note and derision.

Gay rights organizations are up in arms over a Pentagon survey on the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” claiming that some of the questions put to U.S. servicemembers are “homophobic.”

The surveys, emailed to 400-thousand active duty, national guard and reserve forces includes questions like;

“IF A WARTIME SITUATION MADE IT NECESSARY FOR YOU TO SHARE A ROOM, BERTH OR FIELD TENT WITH SOMEONE YOU BELIEVE TO BE A GAY OR LESBIAN SERVICEMEMBER, WHICH ARE YOU MOST LIKELY TO DO?

* TAKE NO ACTION
* DISCUSS HOW WE EXPECTED EACH OTHER TO BEHAVE
* TALK TO A CHAPLAIN OR MENTOR
* TALK TO A LEADER TO SEE IF I HAVE OTHER OPTIONS
* OTHER

“IF DONT ASK DONT TELL IS REPEALED AND YOU ARE ASSIGNED TO BATHROOM FACILITIES WITH OPEN BAY SHOWER WITH A GAY OR LESBIAN SERVICE MEMBER…?_

* TAKE NO ACTION
* USE SHOWER AT DIFFERENT TIME

There’s also a question asking servicemembers if a gay or lesbian member moved into military housing with a same-sex partner, would they pick up their family and move out.

Jim Miklaszewski
MSNBC’s First Read, July 9, 2010

That’s right; the agitators and professional grievance-mongers leading a large swath of the queer advocacy groups want people to believe that a questionnaire issued by the Pentagon to 400K+ members is homophobic because it asks military personnel how they might respond to the realities of living, serving, fighting, and dying alongside openly homosexual servicemen and women.

Yeah, I know; most claims of homophobia by queer activists are, like most claims of racism by Black activists or the claims of Islamophobia from Muslim vermin, something to be ignored.

Sometimes. though, ignoring such problems, like ignoring a growing tumor, just allows the cancer to spread unchecked. It’s sometimes necessary to cut or burn out the diseased flesh so that the body may survive.

Apparently our military, charged with defending the lives of the American people, isn’t supposed to be allowed to try to determine if repealing DADT will negatively impact national security and in what ways, if any at all, it might do so – or at least so these treasonous queer activists rant.

NOTE: As an American and a veteran I’m passionately and virulently opposed to DADT, as I’ve posted before on this blog.

[Sic] … Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell should be repealed. It is predicated upon unconstitutional ideas and, as such, should have been struck down by the Courts years ago. Sadly, they have to-date failed to do so, though the SCOTUS has not yet deigned to hear any case regarding it.

From the US Constitution, supposedly the highest law of the land:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

–- US Constitution, Second Amendment

That the right to “bear arms” was intended by our Founders to mean the right to bear arms in the common defense, i.e., serve in the military forces of America, can be deduced from the concerns over the original 2nd Amendment. The Constitution makes it quite clear that such a right exists for every American and it shall not be infringed.

Nowhere does it say, “except for sodomites,” which would have been the term used at the time.

— jonolan
Asking And Telling

That doesn’t mean that I’m going to turn a blind or forgiving eye to rabble-rousers and grievance-mongers from within the LGBT community who want to deny the military the right to determine how repealing such legislation and the underlying ban on openly homosexual people serving in the military it was meant to ameliorate will affect military discipline and operational efficiency.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | |

It’s Not Her Tits (NSFW)

Carrie Prejean sort of semi-nudeCarrie Prejean, currently Miss California, may have her title stripped from her by the Miss USA pageant administration.  She may also lose her position as first runner-up in the 2009 Miss USA pageant, which was held April 19. Both decisions may well be announced tomorrow (Monday, May 10, 2009).

If she is stripped of the title and position that she earned it won’t be because of the semi-nude photos of her that were released by those who are unfriendly towards her – though those photos will undoubtedly be used as the excuse and/or justification for her punishment.

Miss Prejean won’t lose her title over the fact that there are photos in which her tits – which the Miss USA pageant bought for her – weren’t covered by fabric.  If she is stripped of her Miss California title, it’ll be be because she wouldn’t say that she supported Gay Marriage.

Voicing beliefs that don’t match the queers’ agenda is grounds for insult and now punishment.

If having had nude or semi-nude photos of ones’ self in existance were a problem for contestants in the Miss USA pageant, then Miss Rhode Island, Alysha Castonguay, would have been censured as well. While serving as  a New England Patriots Cheerleader she posed semi-nude for Maxim magazine. The Miss USA pageant coordinators had no problems with these photos.

No, it won’t be Carrie Prejean’s unclothed breasts that cost her the Miss California title and that of first runner-up in the 2009 Miss USA pageant. It’ll be because she had the temerity to say when asked that she believed that marriage is between a man and woman as her Christian faith directs her to do.

~*~

NOTE: The Miss USA pageant does have perfectly legal grounds under their contract with Ms. Prejean to strip her of her titles. She did in fact violate her contract with them by not telling them of the semi-nude photos existence. Ms. Castonguay is said to have been upfront about the fact that she had been in at least one semi-nude photoset.

Of course Alysha Castonguay’s semi-nude photos were published in Maxim magazine for all the world to see, whereas Ms. Prejean’s semi-nude photos were made when she was beginning her modeling career at 17 and were merely part of her portfolio which would be sent to various agencies and clients.

But every thinking American knows that the only reason that she’s being persecuted is because she refused to set aside her faith for the sake of the queers’ agenda and the anti-American atrocity of political correctness.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | |

Copyright Thuggery

Perez Hilton aka Mario Lavandeira is the latest thuggish agendist to try to (mis)use US Copyright Laws to silence criticism of his actions and agenda. The queer “media personality” is attempting to get an embarrassing video removed from YouTube, falsely claiming that it violates his copyright of the material.

The video that Perez is bothered by was produced by the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), a group that rather virulently opposes gay marriage. As part of the one-minute video is a three-second clip of Hilton calling Miss California Carrie Prejean a “dumb bitch.”


Perez Hilton: Queer Copyright Thug

NOTE: I’m not sure how long this video will remain online. YouTube has a long history of bending over for homosexuals, Islamists, and other related groups who dislike Free Speech when it’s contrary to their respective agendas, so this video could be pulled at any time. I’ll try to find other sources for it if that happens.

Laviendra’s attorneys have issued a DMCA takedown notice over a TV ad posted to YouTube. YouTube, of course complied – but the video is viral enough that they’ve been, so far, unable to remove all copies of it from the site.

I guess that, since Lavandeira has decided to reinvent himself as a queer rights “activist,” he thinks that he has gained some form of entitlement. That’s abhorrent and pathetic since Lavandeira’s greatest claim to fame or celebrity – well, the greatest claim that can or should be mentioned in polite company at least; he might have others – was posting photos of celebrities – without permission from the copyright owners.

Lavandiera, of course, defended himself against the lawsuits that resulted by claiming that his defacement of the images with sophomorically crude scribbling of penises, cocaine, and semen on the subjects’ faces rendered his conduct Fair Use.

Perez Hilton aka Mario Lavandeira Does, in what passes for Perez Hilton’s deranged mind – AIDS Dementia Complex? – scrawling a few comments and/or crude and insulting graphics on an image is fair use, but including 3 seconds of video in a 30-second ad is copyright infringement? Most likely not.

Lavandeira/ Hilton is just another queer – though worse and more disgusting than most – who is more than willing to use any means available to damage and hopefully silence those who don’t “bend over” for the queer agenda in America.

I’m no great fan of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), and they’ve in the past also over-utilized copyright laws against their detractors, but I certainly hope they use any and all means at their disposal to defeat and break Perez Hilton over this.

Tags: | | | | | | | | |