Which is more common?

A stereotypical Bible thumper talking about fire and brimstone who beats his wife and thinks blacks are sub-human or an anti-theist gay guy?

I'd put money on the latter.

"I'm just glad I don't have to believe that fairy tales and mythical creatures in the sky exist just to be good to others and to get through my day to day life lol. You religious people are pathetic."

"I long for the day when we live in a completely secular society, it likely won't happen in my lifetime but I hope that it will for future generations."

How could you?

If you say you're an attacking helicopter on Thursday, a bisexual on Friday and Saturday, and a boring straight male the rest of the week you have no compassion and devoid of a soul.

Apparently one's compassion and soul is measured if you're really, really nice towards the LGBT, in this case the transgenders.

Also eating meat. Delicious murder. Gosh, where is your soul?

Oh modernism. You come up with the darndest things.

Vegan: If you care about the well-being of animals you wouldn't put them through fear and death. When you support the slaughtering of animals you support  a holocaust.

Same-sex Mirage Supporter: Your personal ideology and ego are getting in the way of supporting your homosexual family member when you refuse to attend his wedding. Your act is vile.

Same-sex Mirage Supporter #2: Those traditional, fundamental Christians hate everything that has to with gays. I'm so sick of them! I support a household, regardless if it's a traditional family or not, when it produces happy and healthy kids!

IMDB shuts down its infamous forums and the portrayal of LGBT's.

This is disappointing. Every now and then I'd hop on over to see some opinions on an actor/movie/series/director what have you. In fact, I hopped on over a few minutes ago to look for some thoughts on a new tv series, The Good Fight, didn't find the forum on its page, and remembered that IMDB was taking that particular element down.

Reason being because IMDB concluded that the forums were too hard to monitor and that discussion became vile and rude. I sought out the views of this action and some agreed while some didn't. Those that agreed with the move said that vile ones tended to be "racist/sexist/homophobic/off topic.* "Funny enough a couple of posters followed up that though such things can manifest such things were the minority of cases. I tell ya, I'd me rich every time someone complains about racism, sexist, LGBTphobic and whatever so-called phobia or -ism that makes a leftists heart burn with rage.

One poster said that because of indecent comments that "we can't have nice things." I disagree. The forums were fine. If you wanted to express your thoughts then you could. You might get a fruitful discussion going. You might get someone calling you a bigot or an idiot. Okay, that sucks, but oh well. Report the fellow if you feel so.

Interest in certain tv series will slightly suffer because movies are always going to be the ones that gain traction unless the tv series is a major hit. Alternatives to IMDB, the one that I know of, is Criterion Forum. I believe Awards Daily also axed their forum for reasons different than IMDB (Sharon Stone is the worst). I know no other Criterion Forum equivalent solely dedicated to tv series. 

In the end I think IMDB is shutting down an avenue of free speech, at least the exchange of ideas between like-minded and not so like-minded people about a given medium of visual entertainment. The site probably knew its forums weren't seen in much respect (as opposed to The Criterion Forum), saw that some forums weren't getting much traffic, realized that said forums were eating up a lot of space, and decided to ax the entire thing all together. That's a shame.

*Speaking of "homophobic" remarks The Good Fight has one of the main characters, the granddaughter of the main principle, in a same-sex pairing. Okay, fine. The weird part? The girlfriend and the granddaughter  are played by attractive actresses.  In what reality does a same-sex female relationship have two very attractive women? They're the minority within their own minority. In my experience female relationships tend to fall in three categories: one is more butch while the other is sort of attractive, both are meh or both are rather ugly. Not this. I mean, seriously? This is laughable.

There are more Huxtables and (were) Cleavers around in real life than the linked picture. The same thing happened with the House of Cards. TV entertainment has a weird of portraying homosexuals; they're either lovable or one, or both, parties in a relationship is insanely attractive. And the LGBT need "allies"? Proof that the LGBT would never advance as a demographic if it weren't for their straight counterparts. They need straights to get babies. They need straights to rule them into law. They need straights to slowly incorporate their history into education. They need straights to approve them (they say the don't need it but they truly, truly do). A same-sex pairing cannot survive on its own. It is the complete opposite of an opposite-sex couple. In other words, they aren't the same thing.

Conversation about elites running the country. And the LGBT.

ME: I think we should look at the academic inbreeding that happens in the Supreme Court nominations. There's a lot of Harvard and Yale alumni.
PERSON: Yea, but there's even more networking that happens on lower level courts.
ME: Okay, well I just looked up a couple of Court of Appeals and a vast  majority aren't from the Ivies.
PERSON: Stop denying there's networking being done.
ME: I'm sorta not since networking happens in business, academia, entertainment, family stuff etc. I'm pointing to a specific job and you're pointing to some underground New World that's happening on the lower level federal courts.

Discussion goes into "regular" people getting into politics.

PERSON: It makes it harder for regular people getting into the elites of politics. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sarah Palin (yuck).
ME: But Arnold was a celebrity before he was California's governor. What's up with Palin? Is she's the wrong type of Joe?
PERSON: Sarah Palin holds atrocious views on gay people and she's dumb as a brick wall! She is the wrong type of Joe and she's a joke!
ME: I'd be rich for every person under 35 saying X politician is horrid simply for the fact they do not support gay marriage or, even, fights back against its normalization. Rich. I'd also be rich for every person saying Palin is equally as dumb as GWB. Does it make it true? No. What's closer to the truth is that those who say such things have been listening to popular media and the MSM for far too long.
PERSON: #&@%
ME: Typical of your kind.

NOTE: When did the LGBT become the beloved dog of modernism? 

Beware of the pro-LGBT non-prog.

For they sing the same tune of "being more accepted." Writer Liberty Wolf is a transgender who classifies himself as a classical liberal. He's a smart guy, but what I've seen from many LGBT non-progs who fall under any of the letters is that they support their own kind in terms of "rights."

Here's what Liberty Wolf wrote (emphasis my own) -

"I’ll admit that I have yet to watch the Bruce Jenner interview with Diane Sawyer that is making headlines today.  I am very burned out on trans issues and mostly I yawn when I hear of a news story.  Even so, I have to admit that apparently, we are making progress.   There’s no question that today it is easier and more acceptable to medically transition than it was when I began in 1989.   Certainly, people who change their sex and legal and social gender are still pariahs, on both the left and the right – but we are more accepted than we have ever been and certainly more visible.  Visibility erodes the mystery and a more informed public is less fearful and hopefully, in time, a little less confused.  It is still not an easy road for anyone and I don’t recommend it unless transition is really something that you must do.  Even so, if it is right for a person it is the best thing, and can save a person’s life and open up new vistas.  So, I am going to watch the Jenner interview.   The weight on Jenner’s head to say all the right things for all of us is enormous and no one can.   Each person is ultimately only representative of themselves although certainly each visible trans person often has many things in common with other trans people.  And also, many characteristics in common with other Americans or people all over the world.  That should be obvious but it isn’t always."

There is a similar mentality that is held with the LGBT non-progs that they share with the LGBT leftists: their acceptance just needs familiarity, visibility and time.

"Don't worry. Your wife will accept your Wednesday beatings as a sign love. All you have to do is keep it up and she'll eventually get use to it."

Liberty Wolf pleads his case here.

They need to be the victim.

The LGBT can't really point fingers at Christians for killing them. That's Muslim extremists. They can't really logically form an argument that blames Reagan for AIDs since that was their own doing. They can't really blame bigots for hate crimes because a vast majority of them have been proven false.

What can they do now? Claim homelessness. But homelessness by parents who "kick them out" because they're part of the LGBT community. Now, I know some teenagers are kicked out, but it's not even to a point where Obama has to make a speech about it like he did with the fuckery that is transgenderism. Just say the LGBT are being kicked out of their homes at this very moment (sorta like the urgency for people to believe that 1 out 4 woman are raped on campuses) because of narrow-minded, hateful parents. They can't prove it entirely and you can't really disprove That's the beauty of it. The LGBT advocates of the modern age thrive on accusations and guilt and grey areas. Isn't that ironic?

"How can you not believe bisexual kids are being kicked to the curb by their old-fashioned parents? There are statistics to show that a good chuck of homeless kids are part of the LGBT community."
"Sure, I'll partially buy into that. But how accurate of these stories anyways? What I've noticed when an LGBT person buys into the 'ma parents hate me for me' they adopt a heavy victimhood mentality and over night they become like any other LGBT 'ma love is good as yours!' type."
"Well we can't be certain but it does happen!"

Privilege.

When met with people who say you have such-and-such privilege when referring to your race, sex or sexual orientation say, candidly, "Go fuck yourself."

When people say the LGBT face persecution, say, "In America? In the past. Now? Not so much. But hey, the Muslim extremist are coming after you. But if you think you got it bad Christians were persecuted in droves in the Middle East in the past few years and national newspapers didn't give a shit."

When a bisexual who is married to a straight says a part of her is "invisible" because not everyone knows she's a bisexual say, "Okay ... Do you want privacy or do you want recognition? Make up your damn mind. Oh wait, you want society to support same-sex mirage just in case you want to marry a woman. Make sure you tell your husband that in case you want to leave him for a woman. I mean, you sound like an elderly with breathing problem who needs accommodations when flying. Or worse, a vegetarian or vegan."

When people say women are met with sexism say, "Look, I got standards. If the woman is taking birth control I'll wonder why. Most likely it isn't for medical reasons which the pill so happens to bestow on the woman. It's probably because she wants to have sex without the consequence aka baby. And if you got a sizeable chest and it shows it'll be hard for me to keep my eyes above your collar bone. Just sayin'."

When people say that voter ID laws create barriers and infringe on the poor and minority "rights" say, "The perceived hardships of obtaining the documents to get an ID is bullshit. If poor takes three buses and walks 1 mile to work then I'm sure he can also find the means to gather the documents to obtain an ID."

When people say the dark pigment of their skin makes them targets of cops say, "Well, if your demographic didn't cause so much shit in residential neighborhoods you wouldn't be profiled. Look at Asians. Sure, some cheat on standardized tests, but damn, they have perfect attendance. You should probably take a page out of their book."

When people say you're privileged because of the amount of money in your bank account say, "You're right. And I like it that way."

No entertainment for you! Because LGBT.

Adam Silver, commissioner of the NBA, has stated he will move the 2016 NBA All-Star game, originally to be played in North Carolina, due the state's HB2 bill.

The language used to express the infringement of "rights" is amusing.

"Since March, when North Carolina enacted HB2 and the issue of legal protections for the LGBT community in Charlotte became prominent, the NBA and the Charlotte Hornets have been working diligently to foster constructive dialogue and try to effect positive change," the league said. "We have been guided in these discussions by the long-standing core values of our league. These include not only diversity, inclusion, fairness and respect for others but also the willingness to listen and consider opposing points of view.

Legal protections? How about protection of females and young girls? "Positive" change just means bend over and let transgenders use whatever bathroom they want. And what are these "long-standing core values" of the NBA? There aren't any. Silver is just talking out of his ass because being "inclusive" towards transgenders is the new "it" thing. This is despite the fact that there hasn't been a massive boycott or petition to move the event due to North Carolina's bill. People would have attended the game, probably in no lesser amount than before, if the game was still using the state as its location. This all is virtue signaling.

I'm rather confident that Silver did not read the bill nor did he factor in the concept of a man using a man's restroom and a woman using a woman's restroom. This decision was political based on shallow points.

After Obergerfell v Hodges, talks about Captain America, Spider-Man, and Po Dameron being gay, creation of the first same-sex cartoon pairing, the suing of numerous businesses not catering to same-sex mirages, the LGB fervor have moved on to T. I guarantee you the "willingness to listen and consider opposing  of view" will happen, but the decision was already made: make an example of those who oppose the LGBT - by suing, stripping away their entertainment, and by national and international ridicule and mockery. There's little doubt that UK news outlets have already splashed this story on their front page, because Americans are so gosh darn bigoted!

Fuck these groups.

Namely because I find them to be self-righteous and smug bastards. These groups I find are just disrespectful bastards who are vindictive. If they want to fuck tradition because they're wallowing in their bitterness because EVERY FACET OF SOCIETY HASN'T ACCEPTED ME then I say fuck the world they want to build because I know it's going to be shit.

1. Gnus
2. immensely insecure LGBT people
3. SJWs (college students, third wave feminists, liberal professors)
4. anti-theists
5. people who accuse everyone for being a "cuck"
6. black people who are hypothetically on the plantation

Honorable goes to No Country types and moderates.

For numerous reasons I'm starting to lose patience with the LGBT community and their supporters. Why do they get the star treatment?

They got ya beat, LGBTQASOPNMZ

Nice, France - Bastille Day. July 14, 2016. Currently there's a report saying 80 are dead and 202 wounded.

People just celebrating France's sovereignty, something bigger than who they get AIDS from and who they plan to buy children with.

The Idiot Parade

of leftists is just as bad as the Gay Pride Parade.

Like clock work we got a couple of ACLU lawyers saying that terrorist attack on the gay Florida night club was stoked by "200 anti-gay laws" and The View host Kristine Haines said that conservative religious politicians should keep their religion "in their homes" and "out of politics" where they can impress it upon people.

How did Haines make an act of terrorism into "them Christian folks"? Well, she's on The View so that might explain her aptitude of just going with any modern day talking point.

Hate crimes against Muslims have risen 3x says Hillary Clinton! Interesting. Though anecdotal, my parents live near a community called "Little Palestine" and local news have not reported any crimes against the Muslim immigrants in the area. This area is nestled between "Little Poland" and blue collared neighborhoods whose residents are old-school white Americans. After all these years, as Little Palestine grew, there has been peace amongst the old and new residents. Something tells me the MSM and Mrs. Clinton are just making shit up as they go.

You know they have an agenda.

Sociology Phil Zuckerman, an atheist, says that children in secular households turn out better than kids raised in religious homes.

Studies are lauded when it shows that children come from same-sex households "show no difference" when compared to kids raised with a mother and father. In fact, the narrative goes even farther: kids raised in same-sex households sometimes turn out better.

Studies like the Mark Regnerus study showing that same-sex households raising kids are worse? You get sites like TheRegnerusFallout.com coming into existence. You get a very disdainful sociology professor at SIU (who has a blog that shows his true side) tearing it apart. You get a governing body of social research to send a professor, said SIU professor,  to vet every page.

I mean, really?

The end goal is to officially establish The New Normal.

We have young couples in San Francisco, opposite sex, who wish that their kids turn out to be LGBT because it'll be more interesting and they'll score extra points for being so open-minded towards their LGBT child.

We have people calling couples of the opposite "breeders."

And we have pissed off college students who actually believe in "white privilege."

These people don't need (sound) studies or debate. All they need is momentum. 

The indignant pro-LGBT strikes again.

Professional sports is a business (don't forget that MLS and socialist fans). Associations like the NBA, MLS and the NHL have agreements with "watchdogs" to suspend and crack down on supposedly anti-LGBT words and statements. By doing this they at least can't be deemed a bigot or hateful, free from the grasps of the Stonewall activists.

Chicago Blackhawks forward, Andrew Shaw, is the latest victim of this "watchdog." Shaw, according to a clip, says, "Fuck you, you fucking faggot." It's not audible but you can make out the words pretty clearly.

CHICAGO -- Chicago Blackhawks forward Andrew Shaw has been suspended one game and ordered to undergo sensitivity training after uttering an anti-gay slur from the penalty box to someone on the ice in Chicago's Game 4 loss at home to the St. Louis Blues.
Shaw was also fined $5,000 for "directing an inappropriate gesture" at the on-ice officials. He will miss Game 5 in St. Louis on Thursday when the Blues, who are up 3-1 in the series, will try to knock the defending Stanley Cup champions out of the playoffs.

"While Mr. Shaw was apologetic and remorseful for both the offensive comments and the inappropriate gesture directed at the on-ice officials, he must be held accountable for his actions," NHL senior executive vice president of hockey operations Colin Campbell said in a statement. "The emotion of the moment cannot and will not be a mitigating factor for the conduct that is expected of an NHL player."

"He must be held accountable for his actions." Wow. Apparently issuing a public apology and being find $5, 000 is a little much.  All of a sudden the PC moral police are out in full force in professional sports.

Shaw was sent off for interference at 17 minutes, 56 seconds of the third period, hurting Chicago's chance for a comeback in what ended up being a 4-3 loss. While sitting in the box, Shaw pounded on the glass with his stick and then yelled at someone on the ice. As video of the incident spread online, the You Can Play project, a group supporting inclusiveness in athletics, swiftly tweeted that it was planning to contact the NHL.

After the game, Shaw was asked twice about what happened and said he didn't remember.

"Being like I just said -- I'll repeat myself for you -- emotions are high,'' he said. "I don't know what was said. Obviously I was upset with the call. I wasn't happy with the call."
A day later, Shaw said he saw the video after he returned home from the arena and said he was "sincerely sorry for the insensitive remarks that I made."

Anyone who has played sports in a halfway decent league knows that there's tension and players get pissed at one another and at the referee. The players, and coaches, say things out of anger. It's clear that Shaw's outburst was out of frustration and not geared towards the LGBT community. It wasn't even geared to a player with the suspicion of him not being straight.

"I apologize to many people, including the gay and lesbian community, the Chicago Blackhawks organization, Blackhawks fans and anyone else I may have offended," he said. "I know my words were hurtful, and I will learn from my mistake."

The team said it was "extremely disappointed" by the incident. Shaw scored a goal in the second period and had two assists in the loss, which left the defending Stanley Cup champions on the brink of elimination.

Extremely disappointed. Huh. Interesting. What's more interesting is what follows.

The team recently highlighted its partnership with You Can Play, which lobbies for equal and respectful treatment of all athletes without regard to sexual orientation. Defenseman Niklas Hjalmarsson and goaltender Scott Darling participated in a video supporting the group's mission.

"Our team pledges to support all our coaches, teammates and fans," Darling says in the video. "We believe that athletes should be judged by their character, work ethic and talent, not their sexual orientation or gender identity."

True about being judged by work ethic, character and talent, but it's a rather insidious move on You Can Play's part. It's a play on one's psyche to begin with. By making sexuality trivial on the field, as it should be, it also greatly helps in being non-thinking when it comes to supposed "rights."

You Can Play issued a statement after the suspension was announced.

"All of us at You Can Play were saddened and offended to see Andrew Shaw's use of homophobic slurs during an NHL game. We wholeheartedly support the NHL's decision to discipline Mr. Shaw," it read. "After four years of working with You Can Play, NHL players can no longer use ignorance as an excuse for not understanding the power of their words and the effect they have on their teammates, fans, and the LGBT community.

We look forward to continuing our partnership with the NHL, the Blackhawks, and Mr. Shaw as we work to finally eradicate homophobia in hockey culture."

So here's the watchdog: You Can Play. It's not just a watchdog but it has dictated the rhetoric of players on and off the ice. 

A national television audience heard former NBA star Kobe Bryant shout the same slur in 2011 at a referee he thought had made a bad call during a basketball game. Chicago Bulls center Joakim Noah yelled it at a Miami Heat basketball fan who had been antagonizing him during a game a month later. Both quickly apologized, and the NBA hit them with large fines: Bryant was fined $100,000, and Noah was fined $50,000.

Also in the NBA, Sacramento Kings point guard Rajon Rondo was suspended one game in December for using the slur as he berated official Bill Kennedy, who subsequently came out as gay. Major League Baseball in 2014 suspended Yunel Escobar, then a shortstop with the Toronto Blue Jays, for stenciling the word, in Spanish, onto his eye black.

The LGBT has become the beloved protected class, competing against blacks for the "Biggest Victim" winner.

Like MLB, the NHL has never had an openly gay player on an active roster. The founder of You Can Play, Patrick Burke, works in the NHL's player safety office. He has championed the LGBT cause and said earlier this year that he has met gay players through the years who have been on active NHL rosters.

Unless there has been noted violence and blackballing towards non-straight professional athletes Burke's motivation to police and fine speech that is deemed anti-LGBT is highly ironic. Then again The Left is highly contradictory and non-thinking. Here's Burke's bio -

Patrick currently attends law school at New England Law of Boston while residing in the city.  The 2010 Co-Sportsperson of the Year for Outsports.com, Patrick’s advocacy is done as an on-going tribute to his late brother Brendan, who was one of the first people associated with the National Hockey League to come out as openly gay.  Brendan also served as the student manager for the Miami University ice hockey team, and the love and acceptance shown by his teammates and family is an on-going inspiration for the sports world.

 So he's doing this for his late brother. How touching. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

The site that hosts his bio, Changing the Game (let's not make it so obvious now), is a pro-LGBT sports site dedicated to sensitizing players that being part of the LGBT community is A-OKAY. Now, as I said, if there were constant reported incidents where LGBT athletes have been met with violence and blackballing then I can see where they're coming from, but this is just an indignant movement. The founder of the site, Pat Griffin, is a lesbian who was a collegiate athlete who later competed in the Gay Games IV & V. The fact that Griffin goes around the country to speak on behalf of her sexuality isn't proof of the bigotry of professional sports, let alone sports, but of her own insecurity.

In a game where grown men are allowed to repeatedly punch each other in which the game is temporarily suspended, it's amusing that players can't express frustration - at least frustration that was never intended to malign.

The comments were rather refreshing for a change, but there were people who have bought into the "those are bad words and bad thoughts" mentality. Take for instance Peter Nygaard said -

 I just wonder how many of the people commenting about the NHL going soft would be saying the same things if he'd been suspended for using the N-word.

Doug Roberts who responded to another saying that gay/faggot, though slurs, aren't on the same level of the n_gger -

Nah, I doubt it was as well. But the point of the whole thing is to understand that the word is similarly offensive and that we ought to try to get it out of our day-to-day vocabulary.

Are any of these people religious? Such a puritan lot. So clean and proper. Victorian, even.

Davor Danvenski writes -

I am absolutely for LGBT rights. We still have a long ways to go until the LGBT community get treated fairly, as everyone else, but if Shaw gets one game for a slur, then Bellemare should get more than one game for his intentional hit on Orlov. That hit could have easily ended Orlov's career. It could have easily ended with Orlov being paralyzed. Just my view.

Given that LGBT "rights" aren't the focus of the ESPN article it's safe to say that this is the knee-jerk reaction to anyone that supports LGBT "rights." It's purely an emotional thing, a of course I'm for LGBT rights, I mean, they're just like you and me! He then goes on, like every good Ally, that there is a "long ways to go" until true equality and diversity is achieved. The scary thing is is that it's not just in policy that the Danvenskis of the world want. It's thought as well. It's the changing of social norms. It's the changing of institutions. It's the implementation that "LGBT is good" on every societal level and in every mind in America. It's a purge. It's a quiet revolution.

Davenski didn't articulate what he meant by "long ways to go until the LGBT community get treated fairly," but since he expressed such thoughts I will put it against him and his kind that they are Cultural Marxists. Obergefell v Hodges wasn't enough. It didn't satiate his hunger. It's as if Hitler has risen and has a goal to achieve.

Where's Milo Yiannopoulos when you need him?

A Texas pastor ordered a cake from Whole Foods, asking to have "Love Wins" written. The cake decorator went above and beyond his duties, though.

"The attorneys for Pastor Jordan Brown said he ordered a cake from a Whole Foods store with the personalized message "Love Wins," but when he received it, the cake said "Love Wins F**."'

 Whole Foods is popular with urban yuppies and "raw food" eaters who tend to lean left on economic and social issues, so this was a little funny. But then again Christians are publicly mocked (SNL, Modern Family, Law & Order, academia) and it doesn't become national news. The word "fag/faggot" has become to the new n-word in terms of that word of socially unacceptable pejoratives. 

Highlights of March 9th, 2016.

INT. COLLEGE CLASSROOM,  AFTERNOON

ME: I'm from [American city]. I'm currently [a job].

WOMAN: I'm from [same American city as me]. I do [a job].

AN HOUR PASSES

WOMAN: So me and my wife are going on our honeymoon this June. Will I be able to attend the online class in our hotel? Is that okay?

INSTRUCTOR: Yes! That's fine! You have to tell her that you'll do 'some work' on the computer when you're at the beach.

SOME CHUCKLE

EXT. COLLEGE CAMPUS, AFTERNOON

MOTHER AND TWO SONS 

SON: The Republicans just seem like backstabbing people . . . 

INT. PIZZA PARLOR,  NIGHT, SAME DAY

YOUNG MAN: Look, I I work 14 hrs a day. After my first job I go home and eat. Straight afterwards I go to my next job.

OLDER MAN: I understand. I'm just saying that polls are open at these hours. The election is up to you if you choose not to participate.

YOUNG MAN: I have a family to feed. SHAKES HEAD.

CASHIER LOOKS AT THEM WITH CONCERN.

OLDER MAN LEAVES 

CASHIER 2: Have you've been helped yet?

ME: No.

CASHIER IS STILL LOOKING AT YOUNGER MAN WITH CONCERN

Don't Ask Don't Tell: Struck Down. Eliminate the Natural: Just Ask.

California's policy now lets women receive ABC without a prescription.

The culture of death spreads.

Jeffrey Tucker says what I was thinking.

It's a dated article, 2001, but even 15 years ago, the LGBT were still playing the same cards as they are today.

Tucker writes about the supposed modern day victimhood status that the LGBT dearly and desperately want to keep alive and believe -

David Tuller writing for Salon Magazine, the left-liberal bellweather, reports that "Virtually every gay person I know is distraught at the rise of the Bush-Cheney presidency and the passing of the gay-friendly Clinton-Gore administration." Leave aside whether this guy personally knows anyone who isn't distraught at the Bush presidency, and suppose that he is right.

Why would gays be upset at Bush? Is the new administration plotting some grand crackdown that would jail people for homosexual acts? Is it planning to send out the BATF to gay clubs to crack skulls? Is it preparing tanks to mow down gay churches or burn them to the ground? Is it agitating for a law that would prevent or otherwise punish private businesses and associations from hiring gays?

Of course not. In fact, Bush went out of his way during the campaign not to offend the gays. He uttered no statements that could be pigeon-holed into the anti-gay category. However, it is instructive to see precisely what Tuller considers to be anti-gay political positions: 1) opposing the extension of hate-crime law to covering gays, 2) cutting back funding for AIDS research, 3) permitting public schools to bar pro-gay seminars for students in the guise of AIDS education, and 4) opposing the extension of "civil rights" to gays at the federal level.

It's an excellent read. Unfortunately, Tucker has "broadened" his views on legal rights since the time of this article and now supports civil unions. As one anarchist puts it, referring to Tucker's original stance on same-sex civil unions, "I may not agree with his stance on civil unions, as I support them as a halfway measure between state-sanctioned marriage and a stateless society."

You see, with anarchists is that they appeal to a moral order but then they play the whole "stateless society" bullshit card. And this anarchist is a Christian. 

CAF: The gift that keeps on giving.

Interacting with atheists, Presbyterians, Lutherans, socially liberal Catholics and non-denominational Christians makes my brain question why there is grey matter, all the while destroying my grey matter.

Can such people just say, "Who gives a shit? Well, only when ones feelings are hurt and when LGBT aren't given their way or if there's a lack of support." Too bad I can't tell them I stupid they are directly.

Meet Jordan Crook.

Jordan Crook is the Senior Writer for TechCrunch. I first found out about Crook when she interviewed professional basketball player Harrison Barnes. The interview was relatively interesting, going into how technology plays a part in Harrison's life on and off the court.

In the beginning the voice over was really irritating, and I immediately thought to myself that the person speaking is either a girl who is taking hormones to be "the right gender" or just a lesbian techie. It was the latter. And whoa.

Crook is a horrible interviewer - her posture sucks and she awkwardly is leaning forward, elbows resting on her knees. It's just weird. Her questions were okay; like I said the entire interview was relatively interesting. Harrison mentioned that he didn't have the mind of an engineer and that coding wasn't his strong suit, but I get the feeling he knows more about coding than Crook.

You may be asking why am I acting this way towards Crook? Honestly, her entire demeanor was just odd to me. I didn't want to assume, but I dd anyways. I assumed that her twitter account would be either of two things. In her bio she writes "Voice of a generation." I'm not entirely sure what that means, but I have a vague ballpark understanding, and if that vague ballpark is correct then she's filled with hubris.

First, her tweets being tech related, and the second being that she'll tweet about LGBT issues. I assumed correctly. I went down her tweet history and landed on September 11th. No tweets about the attack or about remembrance. The tweets that day were nothing related to the country's soul or to the victims of that day. I then scrolled down to July 4th. I did find a tweet linking to a stamp of the American flag with the word EQUALITY underneath. I saw where this was going. No mention of how thankful she is about the country she lives in or any pics of an All-American barbecue, or even a toast of alcohol towards the country. Nothing any of that sort. I then scrolled down to June 26th. What I found were many tweets about the Obergefell v Hodges decision. In one tweet Crook said that she was happy that the government recognized her as a "human capable of love." In another she admitted to leaving a voicemail on her mom's cell asking her to "pick the state and I'll pick the girl."

So, by (A) the tone of her voice before I even saw her face (B) her posture while interviewing and (C) her role as Senior Writer  -- what qualifies her for this role I do not know, I basically read her like a book. My assumptions were right, and I'm glad they were right because that means my instincts when understanding the mentality of people like Crook is that her type (techies) are paper thin people who are boring as fuck. She doesn't come across as interesting. Almost everything personal I've come across from her tells me she's filled with narcissism. I mean, yes, I'm being judgmental on one public appearance and just a skim through twitter, but when I hit the bulls-eye that should count for something.

Yes, she dresses like a guy and so I thought she had to be a lesbian if not bisexual before she even mentioned about her "equality." She said her gaydar was horrible in one tweet - my gaydar is finally tuned and it accurately read, "You're are one typical lesbian." But why does it matter? In the grand scheme of things it doesn't, but one's fashion can tell some things about the wearer. One's tweets can say a lot about the person tweeting. She never tweeted anything beyond herself on two very important dates that truly defines the country, and when she did it was in reference of June 26th. I guess that's the only July 4th she ever saw the American flag in a reverent way.

In the end, Jordan Cook is a predictable person living in Brooklyn, making a living in an industry that leans to the modern left. All of a sudden that cubicle worker who lives in the Midwest seems much more appealing.