JTF.ORG Forum

General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Dan Ben Noah on July 26, 2013, 10:59:17 AM

Title: Shalom
Post by: Dan Ben Noah on July 26, 2013, 10:59:17 AM
Shalom
Title: Re: Oxford Dictionary changing its definition of marriage to please fags
Post by: Irish Zionist on July 26, 2013, 01:20:54 PM
The Queer of England  :::D

(http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/images/Gallery/g_19387.jpg)
Title: Re: Oxford Dictionary changing its definition of marriage to please fags
Post by: Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks on July 26, 2013, 01:30:29 PM
Well, in all fairness, this freak would probably do a better job than the real Her Majesty.  :laugh:
Title: Re: Oxford Dictionary changing its definition of marriage to please fags
Post by: Binyamin Yisrael on July 26, 2013, 01:59:29 PM
What's next, Elton John as queen?

Title: Re: Oxford Dictionary changing its definition of marriage to please fags
Post by: JTFenthusiast2 on July 27, 2013, 08:39:02 PM
The Queer of England  :::D

(http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/images/Gallery/g_19387.jpg)

How could anyone think this look was anything but freakish and grotesque?  DO you think this person thinks he is sexually appealing to others?  This is a serious question.
Title: Re: Oxford Dictionary changing its definition of marriage to please fags
Post by: JTFenthusiast2 on July 27, 2013, 09:00:20 PM
He thinks this because he has a mental disorder.  The same thing could be said of homosexuality in general.  Why doesn't everyone think that's freakish and grotesque?  Because of mental problems which the APA refuses to correct.

Yes, but you could look at a person who happens to be homosexual without knowing it and think, cognitively, that is a good looking woman or man. And that would be the end of the thought before you had another thought about something else.   One cannot think that here.   I dont think so at least.  This seems to be done for what effect, I dont know.  I'm trying to reach beyond the fact that I on a gut level dont like this.