ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 3 of 10
< 123 4567 > Last »
Washington DC and The Holy Land>The 5 stages of Homofascism
Merde Furieux 05:15 AM 08-16-2019
http://www.scottlively.net/2019/06/3...f-homofascism/


THE FIVE STAGES OF HOMOFASCISM
A Primer on “Gay Supremacy” in America
Comments of Dr. Scott Lively on the 4th Anniversary of Obergefell v Hodges, June 26, 2019, US Supreme Court, Washington DC

I am Dr. Scott Lively and I’m here to explain how the LGBT movement gained legal, cultural and political supremacy over Christianity in America in just 50 years. It advanced through five stages and four supreme court rulings.

The Five Stages of Homofascism are:

1. Tolerance
2. Acceptance
3. Celebration
4. Forced Participation
5. Punishment of Dissenters

The original goal of the LGBT movement in the 1950s was tolerance, what Dale Jennings of the Mattachine Society called “The right to be left alone.”

But exactly 50 years ago in the Stonewall riots, homofascism was born – when the movement set its sights on replacing family-centered society with sexual anarchy. Their detailed agenda was published soon after as “The 1972 Gay Rights Platform,” and they launched a united national campaign for “sexual freedom” to be recognized as a constitutional right.

In response, the pro-family movement arose during the Reagan administration in the 1980s to defend marriage and the natural family. In 1986, Justice Byron White (appointed by JFK) dealt a death blow to the LGBT “sexual freedom” strategy in the majority opinion of Bowers v Hardwick, expressly recognizing the right of states to regulate all sexual conduct in the public interest, but specifically homosexual sodomy.

Undeterred, the “gays” launched a new strategy in the late 1980s to characterize so-called “sexual orientation” as an immutable condition and to classify themselves as a civil rights minority. They made the “born that way” argument the centerpiece of their propaganda narrative, and then hijacked the Black civil rights movement to implement their political agenda, essentially stealing Jesse Jackson’s “Rainbow-Push Coalition” for themselves and adopting the rainbow flag as their banner.

All across America LGBT activists then used their growing power in the Democrat party to create “Human Rights Commissions” at the local and state level which in turn pushed for the passage of anti-discrimination laws in which sexual orientation was bundled together with established civil rights minority classes. Wherever resistance to normalizing homosexuality was strong, they followed a two step process, adding sexual orientation later, usually after a media campaign focusing on “hate crimes” reporting (most of which was unverified and almost certainly fraudulent). In all cases the Human Rights Commission tactic was driven by the “gays,” though rarely openly.

In response, the Oregon Citizens Alliance (of which I was Communications Director) pioneered the No Special Rights Act in 1992 to prohibit sexual orientation from being included in anti-discrimination laws. A version of our No Special Rights Act passed in Colorado as Amendment 2, becoming the basis for the supreme court case Romer v Evans in 1996.

Romer was the first of four major cases by which swing voter Justice Anthony Kennedy (the worst enemy of the family in the history of the court) established “Gay Supremacy” in America.

Our pro-family movement had essentially won the culture war with Amendment 2, because the well established test for identifying a “suspect class” (civil rights minority) in constitutional law included two elements that the “gays” could not meet: political powerlessness and an immutable condition like skin color.

But Kennedy simply disregarded the law, saying that Amendment 2 was not a valid exercise of state power because in his opinion it was motivated by “animus” (hatred) – in one stroke both voiding Amendment 2 while simultaneously coaching the political left to cry “Hate” at any conservative policy they wanted to invalidate in the future.

Kennedy followed up on Romer with Lawrence v Texas (2003) in which he used the pretext of striking down Texas’ virtually unenforced sodomy laws to repeal Bowers v Hardwick. (Reportedly Lawrence and his sodomy partner staged the scene to ensure his arrest to create legal standing to sue the state.)

Killing Bowers was a necessary prerequisite to legalizing “gay marriage” which happened the following year in Massachusetts, thanks to the full and immediate acquiescence of fake conservative then-governor Mitt Romney.

In response to the inevitable wave of “gay marriage” laws that followed in liberal states, the pro-family movement created the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which quickly became law in 35 states and the federal government.

The supposed Catholic Kennedy again thwarted us in his ruling in US v Winsor, striking down the federal DOMA. Two years later he finished the job by creating a supposed constitutional right to “gay marriage” in Obergefell v Hodges by judicial fiat: icing the LGBT cake with a declaration in the ruling that homosexuality must now be accepted as “immutable.”

Having fulfilled his globalist mission to establish “Gay Supremacy” in America, Kennedy recently retired from the court after (I strongly suspect) assuring that his legacy would be preserved by the nomination of his former clerk Brett Kavanaugh to fill his vacancy. I sincerely hope I am wrong about Kavanaugh and will apologize profusely if in future cases he shows integrity in helping to reverse Kennedy’s errors.

So here we stand in 2019, four years after Obergefell and the LGBTs instant pivot to “transgenderism” (and pedophilia), watching small children being deliberately infected with hypersexual transgender insanity to the applause of the entire leftist bloc, and Congress seriously debating the so called Equality Act to criminalize Christianity in America.

Throughout this decades-long process America has been pushed inexorably by the leftist elites through the five stages of homofascism until today celebration of all things LGBT is the norm, forced participation in “gay” culture is increasing rapidly, and punishment of dissenters is a virtual mandate of social justice in the minds of the Millennials. God help us!

Can this process be reversed? I believe it can, but only if conservatives, including our presumed five member majority on the supreme court remember what it is that conservatism exists to conserve: the God-fearing, family centered, constitutional republic our founders fought a bloody revolution to secure for us.
[Reply]
patteeu 07:13 AM 08-17-2019
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
Does that diminish the need for civil rights? This is exactly what's wrong with this country. In both cases, we fight intolerance with overtolerance. We fight overtolerance with intolerance. The majority of the country just wants the middle. Lots of people recognize minority oppression while also hating pc nutjobs and affirmative action. I'd imagine a huge chunk of our country, including conservatives, support gay rights so long as it isn't forced on them or doesn't affect their daily lives.
I don’t think you can really talk about this at that level. No one knows what you mean by gay rights.
[Reply]
chiefzilla1501 09:16 AM 08-17-2019
Originally Posted by stevieray:
....get out more.

I take great confidence knowing that when I drive my 93 S10 to work in KC, it will be nicer than any other vehickle a minority is driving.

you know, white supremacy and all.
And if you got out of your neighborhood you'd find lots of those minorities who can't afford a car. Just because a few minorities earned special privileges through things like affirmative action doesn't mean they are better off
as a whole. And by the way, just because minorities are oppressed doesn't mean white people aren't oppressed too.
[Reply]
chiefzilla1501 09:23 AM 08-17-2019
Originally Posted by patteeu:
I don’t think you can really talk about this at that level. No one knows what you mean by gay rights.
Equal access to things like healthcare, protection from workplace discrimination and harassment, etc... In addition to the idea that religion doesn't have to recognize civil unions, but if atheists receive benefits why shouldn't gay unions too. Like civil rights... Equal, not extraordinary, rights.
[Reply]
Merde Furieux 09:41 AM 08-17-2019
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
And if you got out of your neighborhood you'd find lots of those minorities who can't afford a car. Just because a few minorities earned special privileges through things like affirmative action doesn't mean they are better off
as a whole. And by the way, just because minorities are oppressed doesn't mean white people aren't oppressed too.
:-)
[Reply]
chiefzilla1501 10:34 AM 08-17-2019
Originally Posted by Merde Furieux:
:-)
You've proven my point of exactly too. The opposite of overtolerance is intolerance. That is not an acceptable alternative.
[Reply]
patteeu 10:58 AM 08-17-2019
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
Equal access to things like healthcare, protection from workplace discrimination and harassment, etc... In addition to the idea that religion doesn't have to recognize civil unions, but if atheists receive benefits why shouldn't gay unions too. Like civil rights... Equal, not extraordinary, rights.
See, I don't agree with you that civil unions are a gay right. In fact, I'm not sure I agree with any of it. Why do gays need special protection from workplace discrimination or healthcare?
[Reply]
MahiMike 11:03 AM 08-17-2019
Originally Posted by AdolfOliverBush:
The more a man acts offended and disgusted by gays, the more likely he is to want a large black cock in his shitter.
oh my:-)
[Reply]
Merde Furieux 02:21 PM 08-17-2019
No matter how far they push the envelope, it is only an invitation for someone else to push it farther still. You thought Bruce Jenner and Bradley Manning are freakish? Check out Richard Hernandez.

Via Daily Mail:

A 58-year-old former banker turned ‘dragon lady’ has spent a whopping $75,000 on more than 20 body modification procedures to transform into a genderless mythical creature.

Tiamat Legion Medusa [born Richard Hernandez], who identifies as a transspecies reptilian, has undergone castration, ear removal, tongue splitting, and 18 horn implants over the past two decades after an AIDS diagnosis left them fearing for their life.

‘I am in the process of going genderless, so I prefer they, them pronouns,’ The Los Angeles resident explained. ‘My ultimate preference is to simply be called an ‘it,’ just like my own kind, the snakes.’

Mr Hernandez, who came out as homosexual at age 11, was female for a while, but no longer:

They took hormones to grow 38B breasts and also underwent prostate removal and castration – removing the testicles – while transitioning from male to female. However, they now want to be genderless.

Other freakifications include having removed most of his teeth, with the remaining ones sharpened to points. He apparently also identifies as the Harry Potter character Voldemort.

The whites of his eyes have been stained green. His bifurcated tongue makes the skin crawl.

Fortunately, they are not yet putting maladjusted schoolchildren through these procedures, although giving them hormone treatments is certainly a step in this direction.

If Bruce Jenner is a woman, then surely Richard Hernandez is a genderless snake, or a gay transspecies reptilian, or whatever else he says he is. Don’t forget to call him “they.”

Do not click through to see pictures if you are prone to nightmares. It is really getting scary out there.

https://moonbattery.com/richard-hern...ranssexuality/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...reptilian.html
[Reply]
chiefzilla1501 02:40 PM 08-17-2019
Originally Posted by patteeu:
See, I don't agree with you that civil unions are a gay right. In fact, I'm not sure I agree with any of it. Why do gays need special protection from workplace discrimination or healthcare?
They don't need special protection. They need protections everyone has to be consistent to them. Nothing I've advocated for is anything any ordinary citizen wouldn't enjoy. That's very different from a special privilege like affirmative action.
[Reply]
patteeu 03:09 PM 08-17-2019
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
They don't need special protection. They need protections everyone has to be consistent to them. Nothing I've advocated for is anything any ordinary citizen wouldn't enjoy. That's very different from a special privilege like affirmative action.
No, you're advocating for special protection (e.g. against discrimination in the workplace based on sexual orientation) and special accomodation (e.g. in favor of an alternative form of marriage).
[Reply]
Sweet Daddy Hate 03:17 PM 08-17-2019
Blech.
[Reply]
Merde Furieux 05:33 PM 08-17-2019

[Reply]
chiefzilla1501 10:01 PM 08-17-2019
Originally Posted by patteeu:
No, you're advocating for special protection (e.g. against discrimination in the workplace based on sexual orientation) and special accomodation (e.g. in favor of an alternative form of marriage).
It is not a special protection. It is offering the same protection everyone else is entitled to. If gay people were pushed away from voting, would you say its a special protection if they were allowed to vote? This isn't advocating for special rights that nobody else has. It's advocating for the same rights as anyone else.

The civil union may be more of a special protection. But again, it isn't a special protection. It's asking for the same benefits that atheist parents who also aren't recognized by the church receive.

It is not a special protection to ask for the same rights everyone else is entitled to. That's not like affirmative action where a class of people get rights no other class is entitled to.
[Reply]
Sweet Daddy Hate 11:21 PM 08-17-2019
Originally Posted by Merde Furieux:
The title alone says, "my associates and I would love to meet your bullets asap".
[Reply]
stevieray 09:16 AM 08-18-2019
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:

It is not a special protection to ask for the same rights everyone else is entitled to.
which are what?
[Reply]
Page 3 of 10
< 123 4567 > Last »
Up