JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: takebackourtemple on November 03, 2010, 06:25:52 AM
-
Californian's have the sense to vote right with initiatives such as banning faggot marriages and banning Marijuana. Why do they pick such leftist representatives?
-
I think a good explanation is that you have a lot of hispanic voters who are anti-gay but vote democrat for welfare handouts. As for marijuana, they probably don't want it in their neighborhoods and a majority of white voters don't want it either. You have a lot of minorities who are socially conservative yet vote democrat for economic handouts/welfare. It happens everywhere. That's why Harry Reid gets elected again despite the fact his state is a wasteland.
-
Californian's have the sense to vote right with initiatives such as banning faggot marriages and banning Marijuana. Why do they pick such leftist representatives?
As a moderator, you should be concerned with the greater good of attracting more people to JTF. You can be against homosexuality without using the word 'faggot' at every urn. You don't look any more heterosexual or righteous when you use words like faggot in every post possible. You won't find one post on this forum of me saying homosexuality is a viable alternative to heterosexuality, but your posts do echo the illegitimate criticisms of people like Gary Ackerman. Using words like faggot and ni**er, and ripping apart how women with whom we disagree with look, make us seem like complete loons, incapable of logical discourse. We will never become a mass movement with this kind of rhetoric. If a person can't speak appropriately in dialogue with others, then this doesn't say much for their ability to engage in persuasive argument without resorting to the kind of language that makes most people cringe, including the kind of people we want to attract to JTF.
-
Californian's have the sense to vote right with initiatives such as banning faggot marriages and banning Marijuana. Why do they pick such leftist representatives?
As a moderator, you should be concerned with the greater good of attracting more people to JTF. You can be against homosexuality without using the word 'faggot' at every urn. You don't look any more heterosexual or righteous when you use words like faggot in every post possible. You won't find one post on this forum of me saying homosexuality is a viable alternative to heterosexuality, but your posts do echo the illegitimate criticisms of people like Gary Ackerman. Using words like faggot and ni**er, and ripping apart how women with whom we disagree with look, make us seem like complete loons, incapable of logical discourse. We will never become a mass movement with this kind of rhetoric. If a person can't speak appropriately in dialogue with others, then this doesn't say much for their ability to engage in persuasive argument without resorting to the kind of language that makes most people cringe, including the kind of people we want to attract to JTF.
Why do you care so much about this word if you left your homosexual life style?
-
Using words like faggot and ni**er, and ripping apart how women with whom we disagree with look, make us seem like complete loons, incapable of logical discourse. We will never become a mass movement with this kind of rhetoric.
That is true. We understand each other. But a lot of people who come to the forum for the first time and find that kind of language will be turned off.
We don't have to sugarcoat everything or try to be politically correct, something that all of us resent. We can remain loyal to our principles and values, we can be incisive, while being careful the way we express ourselves. We must always keep in mind that our objective is to become a mass movement when we speak on this forum, and thus we should avoid being provocative and hurting people's feelings when it is not necessary. Otherwise, we are not doing a favor to this movement and to Chaim Ben Pesach.
-
Californian's have the sense to vote right with initiatives such as banning faggot marriages and banning Marijuana. Why do they pick such leftist representatives?
As a moderator, you should be concerned with the greater good of attracting more people to JTF. You can be against homosexuality without using the word 'faggot' at every urn. You don't look any more heterosexual or righteous when you use words like faggot in every post possible. You won't find one post on this forum of me saying homosexuality is a viable alternative to heterosexuality, but your posts do echo the illegitimate criticisms of people like Gary Ackerman. Using words like faggot and ni**er, and ripping apart how women with whom we disagree with look, make us seem like complete loons, incapable of logical discourse. We will never become a mass movement with this kind of rhetoric. If a person can't speak appropriately in dialogue with others, then this doesn't say much for their ability to engage in persuasive argument without resorting to the kind of language that makes most people cringe, including the kind of people we want to attract to JTF.
Why do you care so much about this word if you left your homosexual life style?
Because it makes us look very ugly.
-
Californian's have the sense to vote right with initiatives such as banning faggot marriages and banning Marijuana. Why do they pick such leftist representatives?
As a moderator, you should be concerned with the greater good of attracting more people to JTF. You can be against homosexuality without using the word 'faggot' at every urn. You don't look any more heterosexual or righteous when you use words like faggot in every post possible. You won't find one post on this forum of me saying homosexuality is a viable alternative to heterosexuality, but your posts do echo the illegitimate criticisms of people like Gary Ackerman. Using words like faggot and ni**er, and ripping apart how women with whom we disagree with look, make us seem like complete loons, incapable of logical discourse. We will never become a mass movement with this kind of rhetoric. If a person can't speak appropriately in dialogue with others, then this doesn't say much for their ability to engage in persuasive argument without resorting to the kind of language that makes most people cringe, including the kind of people we want to attract to JTF.
Why do you care so much about this word if you left your homosexual life style?
Because it makes us look very ugly.
I hear your argument and tend to agree with you JTFe. I'm not even joking, but everytime I hear the word "fag" I think of those westboro baptist nuts.
-
Thanks KWRBT. The fact is that society has always been defined in terms of the procreative possibilities between men and women. This is what makes sense and this is what the Bible says; it is a given. When people go on and on about "faggots" everyday in their speech, including this forum, they help to create an environment in which committing violence towards homosexuals seems more acceptable. In this respect, I believe Daniel was correct. It is a much smaller step to take from 'you fing faggot' to physically harming the person. I know first hand what it is be liked to be called this by lunatics on the street or even in school when I was younger. It didn't to anything at all to help me think homosexuality was wrong. If anything, I thought correctly that no one on this earth should think they have the righ tto make me fear for my physical safety when I didn't do anything to them personally. These words only made me feel like I wanted to kill myself for being this way.
While some people on this forum think that homosexuals killing themselves is a good thing, I think that this is a very bad direction for JTF to go. It is an undoubtedly evil path, that will poison this movement at it's roots. It is far better to be able to explain why a person believes heterosexuality must remain the normative social relation. Constantly referring to or demeaning homosexuals as "faggots" does absolutely nothing to further this goal of making them more in line with what the Bible tells us.
-
Marijuana is already de facto legal in Cali through medical marijuana. All you need to do is pay one of the Doctors turned drug dealers a couple hundred $ to get a card
-
Thanks KWRBT. The fact is that society has always been defined in terms of the procreative possibilities between men and women. This is what makes sense and this is what the Bible says; it is a given. When people go on and on about "faggots" everyday in their speech, including this forum, they help to create an environment in which committing violence towards homosexuals seems more acceptable. In this respect, I believe Daniel was correct. It is a much smaller step to take from 'you fing faggot' to physically harming the person. I know first hand what it is be liked to be called this by lunatics on the street or even in school when I was younger. It didn't to anything at all to help me think homosexuality was wrong. If anything, I thought correctly that no one on this earth should think they have the righ tto make me fear for my physical safety when I didn't do anything to them personally. These words only made me feel like I wanted to kill myself for being this way.
While some people on this forum think that homosexuals killing themselves is a good thing, I think that this is a very bad direction for JTF to go. It is an undoubtedly evil path, that will poison this movement at it's roots. It is far better to be able to explain why a person believes heterosexuality must remain the normative social relation. Constantly referring to or demeaning homosexuals as "faggots" does absolutely nothing to further this goal of making them more in line with what the Bible tells us.
I don't think the word 'faggot' encourages violence, I just think it makes people who say it here look like the toothless guy with a straw in his mouth who lives in a trailer park and works for the circus. Or they sound like the type of people who would use violence against gays even though they aren't that type of person!
-
When God calls something an abomination I think you need to take it very seriously. How do you feel about the word Sodomites? I don't think we need to sink into political correctness.
-
am i the only one disappointed by prop 19 failing? it costs 60k a year to keep a person in jail, its not worth putting someone in jail just for pot.
-
I see nothing wrong with my choice of language. I not only have a right to use it, but an obligation because we have to stand up to evil. I would use more offensive language to describe queers, except I have a limited vocabulary to describe these monstrosities that would be appropriate for a religious forum like this. Plus I try not to use dirty language anyway.
If I offend a few of you, I'm not about to do the wrong thing just to look better and JTF has never caved in on it's values.
I stand strong to my beliefs unless one of the following occurs:
1. You can find a valid religious reason not to offend homosexuals
2. Chaim directs me to stop
3. A respectable Kahanist rabbi directs me to stop.
Perhaps if we want to attract more people to JTF, we can use our torah valued anti-queer message to do so.
-
am i the only one disappointed by prop 19 failing? it costs 60k a year to keep a person in jail, its not worth putting someone in jail just for pot.
The solution is to banish them from the country. Many years ago, we had a strong campaign for voluntary expatriation of welfare bums. People who were just bums would have the choice to go to a third world nation of their choice and receive a one time lump sum payment never to come back. Not even to visit. Illegals and criminals wouldn't even have the choice.
Unfortunately the problem is that once drug users get caught, we not only fund their imprisonment, but we don't even let them leave the country once they get out.
-
idk, i just don't see the point of going after people if they only poison themselves.
-
am i the only one disappointed by prop 19 failing? it costs 60k a year to keep a person in jail, its not worth putting someone in jail just for pot.
[Although I voted for it*] I think it is good that it failed, because the topic will be taken more seriously now. There is too much social upheaval to flat out change the law of the land from illegal to legal [dealing with stoned drivers immediately comes to mind][when technology catches up with what a society needs to police itself, and legislation takes the need to police itself at the same time as legalization it would be one step to a justifiable legislation].
*I could go into details, but its not really a huge interest of mine; smallest issue I voted on.
-
I see nothing wrong with my choice of language. I not only have a right to use it, but an obligation because we have to stand up to evil. I would use more offensive language to describe queers, except I have a limited vocabulary to describe these monstrosities that would be appropriate for a religious forum like this. Plus I try not to use dirty language anyway.
If I offend a few of you, I'm not about to do the wrong thing just to look better and JTF has never caved in on it's values.
I stand strong to my beliefs unless one of the following occurs:
1. You can find a valid religious reason not to offend homosexuals
2. Chaim directs me to stop
3. A respectable Kahanist rabbi directs me to stop.
Perhaps if we want to attract more people to JTF, we can use our torah valued anti-queer message to do so.
One of the things I have been considering regarding the vernacular we use is that Chaim never says the word "faggot" [at least that I have heard].
Regarding the synagogue that was recently discussed here, it is a Sodomite fake shul abomination*, the Jewish community at large should be ashamed of itself for not petitioning it and ruling it Cherem [when JTF and those who agree with us and love Torah are mainstream and Jews return to Judaism I imagine such things to occur].
*I could approve of a shul designed by people who struggle with homosexual desires if it was non-endorsing of homosexual acts [I approve of the program I have seen which I think is called, JONAH; I Chaim as mentioned them before].
-
am i the only one disappointed by prop 19 failing? it costs 60k a year to keep a person in jail, its not worth putting someone in jail just for pot.
[Although I voted for it*] I think it is good that it failed, because the topic will be taken more seriously now. There is too much social upheaval to flat out change the law of the land from illegal to legal [dealing with stoned drivers immediately comes to mind][when technology catches up with what a society needs to police itself, and legislation takes the need to police itself at the same time as legalization it would be one step to a justifiable legislation].
*I could go into details, but its not really a huge interest of mine; smallest issue I voted on.
In my opinion Pot is already legal here in CA. I know about medical marijuana and I support it. There are medical marijuana laws in several states. If you go to an approved doctor you can be issued a card which allows you to legally possess up to an ounce of pot, and you can grow a certain amount of it also, all legally.
I can go into a Medical Marijuana dispensary and choose from amongst 10 varieties of the most green marijuana available to man. California has the best pot in the world, IMHO.
I don't believe it should be obtainable in liquor stores or pharmacies. I am against young people smoking it because in many cases it can lead to lack of academic drive. In my case, when I was in highschool, all the nerds smoked and still maintained high averages in their classes. I know personally that the valevictorian who ended up going to Cornell was an avid pot smoker. In my college there were many pot smokers too... I do not think that it is very dangerous, but without the proper intention it can lead to other more dangerous drugs...
PS: I voted *against* prop 19...
-
I see nothing wrong with my choice of language. I not only have a right to use it, but an obligation because we have to stand up to evil. I would use more offensive language to describe queers, except I have a limited vocabulary to describe these monstrosities that would be appropriate for a religious forum like this. Plus I try not to use dirty language anyway.
If I offend a few of you, I'm not about to do the wrong thing just to look better and JTF has never caved in on it's values.
I stand strong to my beliefs unless one of the following occurs:
1. You can find a valid religious reason not to offend homosexuals
2. Chaim directs me to stop
3. A respectable Kahanist rabbi directs me to stop.
Perhaps if we want to attract more people to JTF, we can use our torah valued anti-queer message to do so.
What kind of ben Torah would ever throw around the term "fag" or other obscenities? It is language not befitting a Jew! We don't talk like toothless guys who run the circus.
-
I see nothing wrong with my choice of language. I not only have a right to use it, but an obligation because we have to stand up to evil. I would use more offensive language to describe queers, except I have a limited vocabulary to describe these monstrosities that would be appropriate for a religious forum like this. Plus I try not to use dirty language anyway.
If I offend a few of you, I'm not about to do the wrong thing just to look better and JTF has never caved in on it's values.
I stand strong to my beliefs unless one of the following occurs:
1. You can find a valid religious reason not to offend homosexuals
2. Chaim directs me to stop
3. A respectable Kahanist rabbi directs me to stop.
Perhaps if we want to attract more people to JTF, we can use our torah valued anti-queer message to do so.
What kind of ben Torah would ever throw around the term "fag" or other obscenities? It is language not befitting a Jew! We don't talk like toothless guys who run the circus.
I agree that a Jew should not lower himself to using offensive language. But there are some people who have become accustomed to such language, and we certainly are not supportive of Politically Correct philosophies.
But I don't think that only toothless guys who run the circus talk like that either.
-
What kind of ben Torah would ever throw around the term "fag" or other obscenities?
This is language that I grew up using so I don't consider the term to be an obscenity. I will consider Muman's suggestion that a Jew should not use offensive language. The point is valid when the language is directed towards people. The question is whether such language should be used to describe the horrendous act or support of it by a community.
-
I see nothing wrong with my choice of language. I not only have a right to use it, but an obligation because we have to stand up to evil. I would use more offensive language to describe queers, except I have a limited vocabulary to describe these monstrosities that would be appropriate for a religious forum like this. Plus I try not to use dirty language anyway.
If I offend a few of you, I'm not about to do the wrong thing just to look better and JTF has never caved in on it's values.
I stand strong to my beliefs unless one of the following occurs:
1. You can find a valid religious reason not to offend homosexuals
2. Chaim directs me to stop
3. A respectable Kahanist rabbi directs me to stop.
Perhaps if we want to attract more people to JTF, we can use our torah valued anti-queer message to do so.
What kind of ben Torah would ever throw around the term "fag" or other obscenities? It is language not befitting a Jew! We don't talk like toothless guys who run the circus.
Gimme a break ::)
-
Marijuana has been proven many times over in research studies to be a gateway drug. Takeback, keep using whatever language you want. Gd gave us free will for a reason. Same for you, Ruby. What's another JTFer driven away anyway. I have really learned my lesson here defending people. Baruch Hashem for providing it at such a small personal cost.
-
Marijuana has been proven many times over in research studies to be a gateway drug. Takeback, keep using whatever language you want. Gd gave us free will for a reason. Same for you, Ruby. What's another JTFer driven away anyway. I have really learned my lesson here defending people. Baruch Hashem for providing it at such a small personal cost.
I don't want to drive you away. I liked most of your posts and I think you're a nice person.
All I said was that the word didn't offend me. I don't think it should be used against a person to bully them, but I do think that it's appropriate sometimes when used against those in gay pride parades, for example.
I also asked you what you thought about the word Sodomites but you never answered. That's a Biblically-based term, and might be less offensive than "fag".
-
idk, i just don't see the point of going after people if they only poison themselves.
What about the dangers that can be caused to others as a result of someone using Marijuana?
-
I see nothing wrong with my choice of language. I not only have a right to use it, but an obligation because we have to stand up to evil. I would use more offensive language to describe queers, except I have a limited vocabulary to describe these monstrosities that would be appropriate for a religious forum like this. Plus I try not to use dirty language anyway.
If I offend a few of you, I'm not about to do the wrong thing just to look better and JTF has never caved in on it's values.
I stand strong to my beliefs unless one of the following occurs:
1. You can find a valid religious reason not to offend homosexuals
2. Chaim directs me to stop
3. A respectable Kahanist rabbi directs me to stop.
Perhaps if we want to attract more people to JTF, we can use our torah valued anti-queer message to do so.
What kind of ben Torah would ever throw around the term "fag" or other obscenities? It is language not befitting a Jew! We don't talk like toothless guys who run the circus.
Gimme a break ::)
Ron, English is not your first language so you don't get it. It's not befitting a Jew to throw around a slur like that. There are other ways to say things.
-
I see nothing wrong with my choice of language. I not only have a right to use it, but an obligation because we have to stand up to evil. I would use more offensive language to describe queers, except I have a limited vocabulary to describe these monstrosities that would be appropriate for a religious forum like this. Plus I try not to use dirty language anyway.
If I offend a few of you, I'm not about to do the wrong thing just to look better and JTF has never caved in on it's values.
I stand strong to my beliefs unless one of the following occurs:
1. You can find a valid religious reason not to offend homosexuals
2. Chaim directs me to stop
3. A respectable Kahanist rabbi directs me to stop.
Perhaps if we want to attract more people to JTF, we can use our torah valued anti-queer message to do so.
What kind of ben Torah would ever throw around the term "fag" or other obscenities? It is language not befitting a Jew! We don't talk like toothless guys who run the circus.
Gimme a break ::)
Ron, English is not your first language so you don't get it. It's not befitting a Jew to throw around a slur like that. There are other ways to say things.
Well if you want intend to insult than "fag" is the word to shoot. But "fag" is not a dirty word like, say, "m4r f4r". In Yiddish (and so also in Hebrew though rarely used) , there is the similar word "Fagale".
-
Here is a question for you guys, If marijuana is such an evil drug than why does it have alot of medical bennefets for people who have cancer? Has marijuana alone killed anybody? How can marijuana be a gateway drug when the user might've already tried crack/cocaine or was about to do it anyways?
-
Here is a question for you guys, If marijuana is such an evil drug than why does it have alot of medical bennefets for people who have cancer? Has marijuana alone killed anybody? How can marijuana be a gateway drug when the user might've already tried crack/cocaine or was about to do it anyways?
In my opinion pot is not an 'evil' drug. There is nothing about pot which makes it evil. There are medical benefits for cancer patients and those with chronic pain. Marijuana alone has not been shown to be fatal but there needs to be more research into the topic. There is no 'lethal dose' that I know of concerning marijuana. The long term effects on the lungs have to be investigated though I have seen some studies which shows that pot smoking may help prevent some cancers.
Regarding its gateway drug status... In general it is not a rule that if you smoke pot you will certainly get into other drugs. But a young person who likes to experiment with psycho-active chemicals may be inspired to try even more hard-core drugs such as LSD, Ecstasy, and eventually get into the Cocaine and Meth... I know this from personal experience. That is how I got into doing those hard-drugs {though I never ever even thought of trying Heroine}.
-
I am happy they voted against legalizing.. If anyone knows about the Netherlands, it is legal there and people are stoned, if you take a good look at them they look like they have no control over their well being. They say pot doesn't damage.. Oh yes it does, much more then cigarettes and cigarettes are so dangerous. It controls sense and judgment.
-
I am happy they voted against legalizing.. If anyone knows about the Netherlands, it is legal there and people are stoned, if you take a good look at them they look like they have no control over their well being. They say pot doesn't damage.. Oh yes it does, much more then cigarettes and cigarettes are so dangerous. It controls sense and judgment.
Actually what you say is not true according to my experience. Cigarettes are much more dangerous to the lungs and general health of the people. And it's affect on driving skills are not even comparable to the effect of alcohol. Of all the drugs there are Pot is the least harmful of them all, including Alcohol and Tobacco.
I do not smoke cigarettes nor do I drink alcohol..
-
I look at it this way. I could smoke pot and I wouldn't go use cocaine or methamphetamine. I could smoke pot and not cause a ruckus. It all comes down to personal responsibility. Legalize it already. Alcohol abuse causes far, far more deadly crimes than pot smoking and alcohol consumption is legal.
There is no logical arguement to banning pot but legalizing alcohol. Alcohol causes more assaults, domestic violence, car accidents, etc than pot smoking ever will. Cigarettes also put a far greater strain on the medical system by causing an innumerable amount of diseases because of all the chemicals in them.
-
Unfortunately, the research is clear: marijuana opens the door to over psychoactive substances. There are anti-emetic/nausea properties that can be helpful, but this is no justification for widespread legalization
-
I hate the smell of Marijuana. It also makes people do stupid things. While I don't mind someone smoking it behind closed doors in the privacy of their own home, I do mind having people smoke anything in my face. I also hate when people are so inconsiderate that they throw lighted cigarettes out of their windows. If they are not going a have the common sense to use an ash tray and litter, at least they can put it out first.
My argument about the odor pollution extends to the incense that bums sometimes light on the street.
-
Unfortunately, the research is clear: marijuana opens the door to over psychoactive substances. There are anti-emetic/nausea properties that can be helpful, but this is no justification for widespread legalization
-
Unfortunately, the research is clear: marijuana opens the door to over psychoactive substances. There are anti-emetic/nausea properties that can be helpful, but this is no justification for widespread legalization
Didn't you already post this message verbatim? Why the duplicate?
You even duplicated the typo...
I think that you meant to say "... : marijuana opens the door to other psychoactive substances..."
-
Unfortunately, the research is clear: marijuana opens the door to over psychoactive substances. There are anti-emetic/nausea properties that can be helpful, but this is no justification for widespread legalization
Didn't you already post this message verbatim? Why the duplicate?
You even duplicated the typo...
I think that you meant to say "... : marijuana opens the door to other psychoactive substances..."
Muman, he probably didn't do it on purpose. Isn't that the most logical conclusion?
-
Unfortunately, the research is clear: marijuana opens the door to over psychoactive substances. There are anti-emetic/nausea properties that can be helpful, but this is no justification for widespread legalization
Didn't you already post this message verbatim? Why the duplicate?
You even duplicated the typo...
I think that you meant to say "... : marijuana opens the door to other psychoactive substances..."
Muman, he probably didn't do it on purpose. Isn't that the most logical conclusion?
Ok, I guess... Maybe he hit the 'Go back one page' button in his browser and re-posted the same post.. That is about the only way I can figure it could be done accidentally.
-
In this respect, I believe Daniel was correct.
In what way was that troll correct? He drove away two of the best JTFers we've had and actually compared Orthodox Judaism to Nazism. If that isn't textbook for "scum of the earth", I don't know what is.
And the homosexual movement has plenty of blood on its hands, and I mean real blood. How many of history's great Nazis, including Shitler himself, were homosexuals? Does the name Jesse Dirkishing also ring a bell?
-
Unfortunately, the research is clear: marijuana opens the door to over psychoactive substances. There are anti-emetic/nausea properties that can be helpful, but this is no justification for widespread legalization
Didn't you already post this message verbatim? Why the duplicate?
You even duplicated the typo...
I think that you meant to say "... : marijuana opens the door to other psychoactive substances..."
Muman, he probably didn't do it on purpose. Isn't that the most logical conclusion?
Ok, I guess... Maybe he hit the 'Go back one page' button in his browser and re-posted the same post.. That is about the only way I can figure it could be done accidentally.
Probably posting from his phone.
-
I am happy they voted against legalizing.. If anyone knows about the Netherlands, it is legal there and people are stoned, if you take a good look at them they look like they have no control over their well being. They say pot doesn't damage.. Oh yes it does, much more then cigarettes and cigarettes are so dangerous. It controls sense and judgment.
yes, even though Holland is full of stoners, it will probably be the 1st country to save itself from Islam due to the rise of Geert Wilders.
see, it dosnt do that much brain damage
-
yes, even though Holland is full of stoners, it will probably be the 1st country to save itself from Islam due to the rise of Geert Wilders.
see, it dosnt do that much brain damage
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
-
I am happy they voted against legalizing.. If anyone knows about the Netherlands, it is legal there and people are stoned, if you take a good look at them they look like they have no control over their well being. They say pot doesn't damage.. Oh yes it does, much more then cigarettes and cigarettes are so dangerous. It controls sense and judgment.
yes, even though Holland is full of stoners, it will probably be the 1st country to save itself from Islam due to the rise of Geert Wilders.
see, it dosnt do that much brain damage
Ba-zing! :::D :::D :::D
-
In this respect, I believe Daniel was correct.
In what way was that troll correct? He drove away two of the best JTFers we've had and actually compared Orthodox Judaism to Nazism. If that isn't textbook for "scum of the earth", I don't know what is.
And the homosexual movement has plenty of blood on its hands, and I mean real blood. How many of history's great Nazis, including Shitler himself, were homosexuals? Does the name Jesse Dirkishing also ring a bell?
Not that I particularly want to defend him, but, to be honest, he quickly apologized for that comparison and his apology sounded sincere to me. We can all say stupid things we later regret in the heat of the debate.