After 29 years as a gay activist, former lesbian magazine publisher Charlene Cothran stunned the homosexual community when she announced she had become a Christian.
She has renounced her homosexuality, and changed the format of her magazine to spread the Gospel to the gay community.
full article and video
Article and 30 minute testemony of former gay man who has seen the light
Thursday, 20 September 2007
Saturday, 15 September 2007
Will worldly mods/admins of secular message boards someday enforce rules against criticising pedophilia?
I have a poll at the bottom that asks this question, and as of today, you only have 15 days left to vote in it!
I guess you are wondering why I put it there? Well, I do go to some secular message boards where some of the mods/admins grew up in politically incorrect eras and now embrace the "new morality" which is in reality, immorality. If these same people were asked to support "gay marriages" back in the 80s, they would never have gone along with it. Some of them now support it after going through a 15-20 year process of political correctness. This is similar to the frog that jumps out of boiling water when put into boiling water, but will stay in boiling water if put in cold water that is slowing heated up to the boiling point. If this type of thing worked with them accepting homosexuality, then the same method will work with other forms of "sexuality" and politically correct issues of the future that they might not accept today. After all, some people in the APA and universities are endorsing it.
Do I expect the secular mods/admins to endorse pedophilia at this time? Of course not. Doing so at this time would be similar to promoting gay marriages in the 80s. Would they endorse it in the future? I can't speak for all secular mods/admins, but there is a chance that they would accept it if the political climate changed to that kind of acceptance. Their actions will show what side they are on. There are other sexualities such as bisexuality and transexuality and there is no evidence of any opposition to these lifestyles. That being the case, it is only a matter of time when they will support pedophilia when it becomes politically correct to do so.
So don't forget to vote in my poll down below on this issue.
I guess you are wondering why I put it there? Well, I do go to some secular message boards where some of the mods/admins grew up in politically incorrect eras and now embrace the "new morality" which is in reality, immorality. If these same people were asked to support "gay marriages" back in the 80s, they would never have gone along with it. Some of them now support it after going through a 15-20 year process of political correctness. This is similar to the frog that jumps out of boiling water when put into boiling water, but will stay in boiling water if put in cold water that is slowing heated up to the boiling point. If this type of thing worked with them accepting homosexuality, then the same method will work with other forms of "sexuality" and politically correct issues of the future that they might not accept today. After all, some people in the APA and universities are endorsing it.
Do I expect the secular mods/admins to endorse pedophilia at this time? Of course not. Doing so at this time would be similar to promoting gay marriages in the 80s. Would they endorse it in the future? I can't speak for all secular mods/admins, but there is a chance that they would accept it if the political climate changed to that kind of acceptance. Their actions will show what side they are on. There are other sexualities such as bisexuality and transexuality and there is no evidence of any opposition to these lifestyles. That being the case, it is only a matter of time when they will support pedophilia when it becomes politically correct to do so.
So don't forget to vote in my poll down below on this issue.
Thursday, 30 August 2007
Tolerance Should Be Shown To What God Says About Homosexuality
(The following letter-to-the-editor of the Zanesville, Ohio, “Times-Recorder” was written by Dr. Patrick Johnston in response to the editor’s urging that their community be more tolerant toward homosexuals. Dr. Johnston has announced he is a Republican candidate for the 94th District seat in the Ohio House of Representatives.)
Managing editor Len LaCara decried the intolerance of our community in a recent Sunday editorial. I also would like to see more tolerance, but tolerance of something besides what he proposes we tolerate. Liberals propose we tolerate homosexuality and pornographic literature in our public libraries. I propose we tolerate the standards of morality found in the pages of the Bible.
According to the Bible, homosexual acts are “unnatural” and sinful. Physiology and statistical analysis show that homosexual acts spread dysfunction and disease. Michael Glatze, a major national gay activist, recently came out of the closet to talk about his repentance of homosexuality. He said, “For me, homosexuality was spiritual and psychological death.” The Bible says that homosexuals can change through God’s power (I Corinthians 6:9-11). It is not loving to embrace a sin that our Creator condemns and that is so destructive to those engaging in it. Love constrains us to oppose immorality, even as we lay down our lives (and sometimes our reputations) for those for whom Christ died.
When liberals are losing a debate over morality, they frequently resort to calling Christians “intolerant” and “judgmental.” But aren’t they being judgmental when they call us names? When they preach against our community’s intolerance, aren’t they foisting their morality upon others? Who they are to judge? You see, they violate the very standard they have set up to reprove Bible-believing Christians. Isn’t that hypocritical?
Ask a liberal what their basis for right and wrong is, and which behaviors should be tolerated or not tolerated. Ultimately, the liberal has no basis for his moral standards besides his personal opinion. Christians have the objective standard of right and wrong that has stood the test of time, the Holy Bible. Within the pages of the Bible, our Creator tells us which behaviors are acceptable and healthy. Homosexual acts have traditionally been condemned by the world’s three main religions for good reasons. When tolerance of rebellion to God becomes widespread, destruction, not prosperity, is imminent.
source
Jemdude's Comments:
The article is very true. Christians determine right and wrong in accordance with the Bible, while atheists determine right and wrong according to their own opinion and the changing political climate. Homosexuals and their supporters need to be more tolerant toward those who have different views than they do. Not doing so is failure to practice the very same tolerance that they want everybody else to do toward them.
Managing editor Len LaCara decried the intolerance of our community in a recent Sunday editorial. I also would like to see more tolerance, but tolerance of something besides what he proposes we tolerate. Liberals propose we tolerate homosexuality and pornographic literature in our public libraries. I propose we tolerate the standards of morality found in the pages of the Bible.
According to the Bible, homosexual acts are “unnatural” and sinful. Physiology and statistical analysis show that homosexual acts spread dysfunction and disease. Michael Glatze, a major national gay activist, recently came out of the closet to talk about his repentance of homosexuality. He said, “For me, homosexuality was spiritual and psychological death.” The Bible says that homosexuals can change through God’s power (I Corinthians 6:9-11). It is not loving to embrace a sin that our Creator condemns and that is so destructive to those engaging in it. Love constrains us to oppose immorality, even as we lay down our lives (and sometimes our reputations) for those for whom Christ died.
When liberals are losing a debate over morality, they frequently resort to calling Christians “intolerant” and “judgmental.” But aren’t they being judgmental when they call us names? When they preach against our community’s intolerance, aren’t they foisting their morality upon others? Who they are to judge? You see, they violate the very standard they have set up to reprove Bible-believing Christians. Isn’t that hypocritical?
Ask a liberal what their basis for right and wrong is, and which behaviors should be tolerated or not tolerated. Ultimately, the liberal has no basis for his moral standards besides his personal opinion. Christians have the objective standard of right and wrong that has stood the test of time, the Holy Bible. Within the pages of the Bible, our Creator tells us which behaviors are acceptable and healthy. Homosexual acts have traditionally been condemned by the world’s three main religions for good reasons. When tolerance of rebellion to God becomes widespread, destruction, not prosperity, is imminent.
source
Jemdude's Comments:
The article is very true. Christians determine right and wrong in accordance with the Bible, while atheists determine right and wrong according to their own opinion and the changing political climate. Homosexuals and their supporters need to be more tolerant toward those who have different views than they do. Not doing so is failure to practice the very same tolerance that they want everybody else to do toward them.
Wednesday, 29 August 2007
The problem with Mighty Markie's reasoning on the issue of children
Mighty Markie is one of the administrators in one of the message boards I sometimes frequent. He is of the opinion that only parents should be involved in child issues and that if one is not a parent, then they have no business with child issues whatsoever. To date, this is the only person I've met that thinks this way. I am going to explain why this is flawed reasoning.
1) If only parents are allowed to engage in child issues, then only parents can get involved in the pro-life/pro-abortion issues. The reasoning that anyone who is not a parent should keep out of this if flawed.
2)Some issues are not purely parental issues. A good example is the issue as to whether to lower the voting age to 16. Such an issue is a political issue as well as a parental issue. Another issue are laws outlawing spanking. These are political issues and therefore, are legitimate topics to talk about by anyone; not just parents.
3) I have my own childhood experiences to draw upon. In other words, I used to be a kid myself. I haven't forgotten what it was like to be one. I also had a little brother to guide and take care of. So the idea that not being a parent means that I have zero knowledge about kids is completely false.
4) Mighty Markie is opposed to the young marriages that I advocate. Nothing wrong with that. However, he seems to think that it is of my own thinking when in reality, it is a Bible principle that is geared toward people of conservative religious faiths. He is not a member of such a faith and yet he opposes it so much. If he doesn't like it, then he should take it up with God.
(I have modified my position on young marriages to ages 18-25 which I believe that the vast majority can wait until. Marriages at ages 16-17 with parent's permission is good in special circumstances, but not recommended for the majority of people.)
What is ironic is that he seems unconcerned about gay organizations in Canada who support keeping the age of consent at 14. Why this inconsistency is something that has yet to be explained.
5) Mighty Markie supports the "right" of parents to consent to doctors in hospitals to mutilate their child if they have a mental disabiity that makes them unaware of what is happening to them. A good example is the "Ashley treatment" where her parents consented to having perfectly healthy body parts removed to keep her "childlike". This is a violation of human rights that even parents should not break. So much for the rights of people with disabilities.
1) If only parents are allowed to engage in child issues, then only parents can get involved in the pro-life/pro-abortion issues. The reasoning that anyone who is not a parent should keep out of this if flawed.
2)Some issues are not purely parental issues. A good example is the issue as to whether to lower the voting age to 16. Such an issue is a political issue as well as a parental issue. Another issue are laws outlawing spanking. These are political issues and therefore, are legitimate topics to talk about by anyone; not just parents.
3) I have my own childhood experiences to draw upon. In other words, I used to be a kid myself. I haven't forgotten what it was like to be one. I also had a little brother to guide and take care of. So the idea that not being a parent means that I have zero knowledge about kids is completely false.
4) Mighty Markie is opposed to the young marriages that I advocate. Nothing wrong with that. However, he seems to think that it is of my own thinking when in reality, it is a Bible principle that is geared toward people of conservative religious faiths. He is not a member of such a faith and yet he opposes it so much. If he doesn't like it, then he should take it up with God.
(I have modified my position on young marriages to ages 18-25 which I believe that the vast majority can wait until. Marriages at ages 16-17 with parent's permission is good in special circumstances, but not recommended for the majority of people.)
What is ironic is that he seems unconcerned about gay organizations in Canada who support keeping the age of consent at 14. Why this inconsistency is something that has yet to be explained.
5) Mighty Markie supports the "right" of parents to consent to doctors in hospitals to mutilate their child if they have a mental disabiity that makes them unaware of what is happening to them. A good example is the "Ashley treatment" where her parents consented to having perfectly healthy body parts removed to keep her "childlike". This is a violation of human rights that even parents should not break. So much for the rights of people with disabilities.
Saturday, 25 August 2007
Uganda: ABC Aids Strategy is the Way to Go
STATISTICS project that in 2010, 100 million people will be HIV-positive globally. As usual, majority of these will be the poor from Africa and Asia. Uganda's success story of reducing HIV prevalence from 30% to 6% will soon be a gone case. We have forgotten where we came from yet uncertain of the future.
Uganda's point was clear: Aids kills, abstain from sex before marriage and be faithful in marriage. Hope was restored and Uganda became a universal focal point on the Aids issue.
However, the consequences of Uganda's approach were not business friendly because condom-makers would not sell. Secondly, some organisations earn their daily bread from HIV/Aids. These advocate the change of the prevention strategy to anything other than ABC.
Today, abstinence is viewed as a primitive and religious act, but I do not agree with that. What matters is my life. A female friend in her 30s told me how a man had live sex with her after having begun with a condom. She was at that time too emotional to resist. She is now infected with Aids and regrets why she did not choose abstinence.
It is clear to anyone who reads between lines that UNAIDS does not appreciate the ABC model. If, indeed, they supported ABC, their funding would be highest on abstinence.
The Uganda Aids Commission (UAC) has of late been reluctant to do the right thing - pursuing the ABC strategy. Now in their quest to get funding, the UAC bows down to donor demands. They have become more of reporters on Aids than "trouble-shooters". Recently, they reported that Aids is fast spreading among married people without doing anything to protect marriage. They should defend the ABC strategy, especially before the donors. And where principle is involved, be deaf to expedience. What good is there in getting the money and you lose lives?
Let us make our point clear that we are not about to change our strategy. All Ugandans should rise up to defend this cause at any cost.
We also need to fund abstinence activists and come up with programmes to promote marriage to counter the reports of increased infections among married people.
The secret to success is consistency of purpose and this is what every human being should pursue. We can do our job well in one accord and kick Aids out of Uganda.
source
Jemdude's Comments:
It looks like there is more to the incentive to promote condom use than meets the eye. It is really shameful when organizations put money over people just because they make more money promoting condoms than saving lives and good health. It is even more shameful when they actually make money on the disease itself and want to keep the disease from being curable. Condoms may reduce the risk, but they do not eliminate the risk.
Uganda's point was clear: Aids kills, abstain from sex before marriage and be faithful in marriage. Hope was restored and Uganda became a universal focal point on the Aids issue.
However, the consequences of Uganda's approach were not business friendly because condom-makers would not sell. Secondly, some organisations earn their daily bread from HIV/Aids. These advocate the change of the prevention strategy to anything other than ABC.
Today, abstinence is viewed as a primitive and religious act, but I do not agree with that. What matters is my life. A female friend in her 30s told me how a man had live sex with her after having begun with a condom. She was at that time too emotional to resist. She is now infected with Aids and regrets why she did not choose abstinence.
It is clear to anyone who reads between lines that UNAIDS does not appreciate the ABC model. If, indeed, they supported ABC, their funding would be highest on abstinence.
The Uganda Aids Commission (UAC) has of late been reluctant to do the right thing - pursuing the ABC strategy. Now in their quest to get funding, the UAC bows down to donor demands. They have become more of reporters on Aids than "trouble-shooters". Recently, they reported that Aids is fast spreading among married people without doing anything to protect marriage. They should defend the ABC strategy, especially before the donors. And where principle is involved, be deaf to expedience. What good is there in getting the money and you lose lives?
Let us make our point clear that we are not about to change our strategy. All Ugandans should rise up to defend this cause at any cost.
We also need to fund abstinence activists and come up with programmes to promote marriage to counter the reports of increased infections among married people.
The secret to success is consistency of purpose and this is what every human being should pursue. We can do our job well in one accord and kick Aids out of Uganda.
source
Jemdude's Comments:
It looks like there is more to the incentive to promote condom use than meets the eye. It is really shameful when organizations put money over people just because they make more money promoting condoms than saving lives and good health. It is even more shameful when they actually make money on the disease itself and want to keep the disease from being curable. Condoms may reduce the risk, but they do not eliminate the risk.
Friday, 10 August 2007
Is Pedophilia The Next 'Sexual Orientation' To Be Normalized?
by Rev. Louis P. Sheldon
Chairman, Traditional Values Coalition
Washington, DC - The "Sexual Orientation" lobbyists are at it again. In mid-May, 2003, members of the American Psychiatric Association (APA) met in San Francisco and listened to a psychiatrist argue for the declassification of pedophilia, fetishism, transvestism, voyeurism, and sadomasochism from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR).
Rev Lou Sheldon
Dr. Charles Moser with San Francisco's Institute for the Advance Study of Human Sexuality (IASHS) and Dr. Peggy Kleinplatz with the University of Ottawa, presented a paper entitled: "DSM-IV-TR and the Paraphilias: An Argument for Removal." (Moser's IASHS is a Kinsey-based sexologist training group that approves of homosexuality, pornography, sadomasochism, and other deviant sexual practices.)
Moser and Kleinplatz argued that these various sexual interests are culturally or religiously forbidden-and thus should not be considered mental illnesses. They claimed that because psychiatry has no baseline to determine what is normal or abnormal behavior, these sexual behaviors should no longer be stigmatized.
Over the past few years, the APA has done several flip flops on its position on pedophilia as a mental disorder. According to Linda Ames Nicolosi with the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), the APA's DSM-III maintained that merely acting upon sexual urges against children is sufficient to earn a diagnosis of pedophilia. However, in the DSM-IV, the APA changed the definition. It claimed that only if a person experienced significant stress or social impairment, would his sexual attraction to children be considered pedophilia. In other words, if the person felt no remorse for molesting kids, he wasn't really a pedophile.
Is this really how the APA wants to define what is and isn't a mental disorder? If a person doesn't feel bad about his behavior, then he's normal. Using this definition, one could say that a person who feels no emotional discomfort from having sex with dead people or animals is perfectly normal. Would APA psychiatrists argue that Jeffrey Dahmer was a normal person because he felt no remorse or social impairment for cannibalizing his sex victims?
Has the psychiatric community gone insane? After bad publicity over this watered-down definition of pedophilia, the APA again flip flopped and issued a statement saying that pedophilia was morally wrong.
The debate, however, continues within the APA with the Sexual Orientation lobbyists working feverishly to normalize what most rational humans would consider serious mental disorders and sexual dysfunctions.
The leaders of the North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), the Christian Boy-Love Forum, Girl Love Garden, and Philia (all pedophile web sites) must be pleased with the debate going on within the APA.
But will children?
Source
Video about pedophile activist
26 minute video interview with pedophile activist
Jemdude's Comments:
I sincerely believe that this will someday be a "sexual orientation" of the future that will be given public acceptance someday. This doesn't mean that I want that to happen. I actually don't. But with the way political correctness works, it's only a matter of time.
Pedophile activists are even "coming out" now. These guys are sick!
Chairman, Traditional Values Coalition
Washington, DC - The "Sexual Orientation" lobbyists are at it again. In mid-May, 2003, members of the American Psychiatric Association (APA) met in San Francisco and listened to a psychiatrist argue for the declassification of pedophilia, fetishism, transvestism, voyeurism, and sadomasochism from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR).
Rev Lou Sheldon
Dr. Charles Moser with San Francisco's Institute for the Advance Study of Human Sexuality (IASHS) and Dr. Peggy Kleinplatz with the University of Ottawa, presented a paper entitled: "DSM-IV-TR and the Paraphilias: An Argument for Removal." (Moser's IASHS is a Kinsey-based sexologist training group that approves of homosexuality, pornography, sadomasochism, and other deviant sexual practices.)
Moser and Kleinplatz argued that these various sexual interests are culturally or religiously forbidden-and thus should not be considered mental illnesses. They claimed that because psychiatry has no baseline to determine what is normal or abnormal behavior, these sexual behaviors should no longer be stigmatized.
Over the past few years, the APA has done several flip flops on its position on pedophilia as a mental disorder. According to Linda Ames Nicolosi with the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), the APA's DSM-III maintained that merely acting upon sexual urges against children is sufficient to earn a diagnosis of pedophilia. However, in the DSM-IV, the APA changed the definition. It claimed that only if a person experienced significant stress or social impairment, would his sexual attraction to children be considered pedophilia. In other words, if the person felt no remorse for molesting kids, he wasn't really a pedophile.
Is this really how the APA wants to define what is and isn't a mental disorder? If a person doesn't feel bad about his behavior, then he's normal. Using this definition, one could say that a person who feels no emotional discomfort from having sex with dead people or animals is perfectly normal. Would APA psychiatrists argue that Jeffrey Dahmer was a normal person because he felt no remorse or social impairment for cannibalizing his sex victims?
Has the psychiatric community gone insane? After bad publicity over this watered-down definition of pedophilia, the APA again flip flopped and issued a statement saying that pedophilia was morally wrong.
The debate, however, continues within the APA with the Sexual Orientation lobbyists working feverishly to normalize what most rational humans would consider serious mental disorders and sexual dysfunctions.
The leaders of the North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), the Christian Boy-Love Forum, Girl Love Garden, and Philia (all pedophile web sites) must be pleased with the debate going on within the APA.
But will children?
Source
Video about pedophile activist
26 minute video interview with pedophile activist
Jemdude's Comments:
I sincerely believe that this will someday be a "sexual orientation" of the future that will be given public acceptance someday. This doesn't mean that I want that to happen. I actually don't. But with the way political correctness works, it's only a matter of time.
Pedophile activists are even "coming out" now. These guys are sick!
Sunday, 5 August 2007
Jemdude's reporting
I guess those of you who have been reading my blog have been wondering why I report so much about homosexuality? I will tell you. I do it because in the mainstream media, you only hear about homosexuals in the best possible light. You are not allowed to say anything bad about them; even if what you are saying is true.
Much of what I post here about homosexuals are the things that they themselves are doing. So if you don't like what I'm posting here, blame it on the homosexuals. Instead, people tend to take a "shoot the messenger" approach and blame me. But in reality, if the homosexuals were not doing the things that I'm reporting on, I would have nothing bad to report.
Some people like to dismiss what I am reporting by claiming that it's something that can happen to anyone and not just homosexuals. This is not necessarily true. For example, homosexuals are the ones that engage in immoral and illegal activity such as having naked people at gay pride parades, support public washroom sex, and at the same time, tell people they are being "hateful and bigoted" for opposing these activities.
Some people will say to me, "I don't believe you". The problem with this is, I'm reporting actual activities that the homosexuals themselves are doing. So what is there that can't be believed?
There is nothing hateful or bigoted about reporting the truth. If you don't like my reports, then do something about the people that I'm reporting on. In other words, don't put your head in the sand and pretend these things are not happening. If you live in Fort Lauderdale Florida, you need to know about the things I reported on in my last post. Most parents are more concerned about their children's well-being than being politically correct. Are you one of them or not?
Some people on the nostalgia message boards have really changed. If we were back in the 80s and earlier, they would never put up with this PC crap. In fact, if it were possible to go back in time, I'm convinced that I would have a much easier time adjusting than the others who have accepted political correctness. Imagine trying to defend gay rights and gay marriages in the 80s?
So what caused these people to change their views? I think the experiment of the frog and boiling water holds the answer. If you put a frog in boiling water, the frog will jump out. But if you put the frog in cold water and slowly heat it up, the frog will stay there even if it's boiling and die. I believe the same thing is happening here. At this present time, political correctness does not support pedophilia. But will that be the same 15 or more years from now, or even in the not too distant future? Current events are showing that if change happens slowly enough, people will end up supporting the most outrageous issues that they never would have supported in previous times and that's exactly what has happened in our present time.
Much of what I post here about homosexuals are the things that they themselves are doing. So if you don't like what I'm posting here, blame it on the homosexuals. Instead, people tend to take a "shoot the messenger" approach and blame me. But in reality, if the homosexuals were not doing the things that I'm reporting on, I would have nothing bad to report.
Some people like to dismiss what I am reporting by claiming that it's something that can happen to anyone and not just homosexuals. This is not necessarily true. For example, homosexuals are the ones that engage in immoral and illegal activity such as having naked people at gay pride parades, support public washroom sex, and at the same time, tell people they are being "hateful and bigoted" for opposing these activities.
Some people will say to me, "I don't believe you". The problem with this is, I'm reporting actual activities that the homosexuals themselves are doing. So what is there that can't be believed?
There is nothing hateful or bigoted about reporting the truth. If you don't like my reports, then do something about the people that I'm reporting on. In other words, don't put your head in the sand and pretend these things are not happening. If you live in Fort Lauderdale Florida, you need to know about the things I reported on in my last post. Most parents are more concerned about their children's well-being than being politically correct. Are you one of them or not?
Some people on the nostalgia message boards have really changed. If we were back in the 80s and earlier, they would never put up with this PC crap. In fact, if it were possible to go back in time, I'm convinced that I would have a much easier time adjusting than the others who have accepted political correctness. Imagine trying to defend gay rights and gay marriages in the 80s?
So what caused these people to change their views? I think the experiment of the frog and boiling water holds the answer. If you put a frog in boiling water, the frog will jump out. But if you put the frog in cold water and slowly heat it up, the frog will stay there even if it's boiling and die. I believe the same thing is happening here. At this present time, political correctness does not support pedophilia. But will that be the same 15 or more years from now, or even in the not too distant future? Current events are showing that if change happens slowly enough, people will end up supporting the most outrageous issues that they never would have supported in previous times and that's exactly what has happened in our present time.
Thursday, 26 July 2007
Mayor Issues Apology Demanded by Homosexuals, But Not One They Expect
Tells citizens he will end scourge of public sodomy in Ft. Lauderdale
By Peter J. Smith
FORT LAUDERDALE, Florida, July 26, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A major metropolitan mayor has finally issued an apology that has homosexual activists enraged and pro-family advocates cheering for his defense of decency.
Ft. Lauderdale Mayor Jim Naugle called a press conference at City Hall Tuesday afternoon telling reporters that he intended to make an "apology." Homosexual activists and reporters expected Naugle to retract comments published earlier in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel in which the mayor said that a proposed self-cleaning, automatic toilet the city was going to buy for the beach would have an added benefit idof deterring "homosexual activity.''
Naugle, the city's Democratic mayor, had also gone on record as saying that he preferred to use the term "homosexual" not "gay" since homosexuals are "unhappy" touching off calls from homosexual activists that he resign or apologize.
Mayor Naugle finally did apologize, except that instead of retracting his controversial statements he instead apologized to the citizens of Fort Lauderdale for failing to do more to put an end to the public homosexual activity taking place in Fort Lauderdale's parks, beaches and public restrooms.
"I was not aware how serious the problem was of the sexual activity that is taking place in the bathrooms in public places and parks around Broward County, particularly in the city of Fort Lauderdale," Naugle told reporters Tuesday.
"I've been educated on that and I want to apologize to the children and to the parents of our community for not being aware of the problem."
Naugle's office had been receiving information from all over the country, but Naugle said the most important information came from a local homosexual activist and "a guy I call a friend", Norman Kent, who wrote an article condemning the practice of sex in public places and alerted Naugle to a website called "cruising for sex." The site lists 13 printed pages of "cruisy" places in the Fort Lauderdale metropolitan area for anonymous homosexual hookups. The website itself is bedecked with homosexual pornography and references to parks, fitness centers, department stores, shopping malls, farmers' markets, beaches, etc. (A greatly sanitized list can be viewed on the American's for Truth website - warning even the sanitized content is offensive and inappropriate for children: http://americansfortruth.com/news/homosexual-male-cruising-s...)
"This to me is totally unacceptable," the Mayor told reporters. "I don't think that in the name of being inclusive or tolerant that anyone in the community should have to tolerate this."
"My goal is to get the city parks removed from these lists," concluded Naugle, who urged all citizens to contact the police department if they witness any illegal activity.
Naugle also called upon "responsible members of the homosexual community" to help the city put a stop to this public homosexual behavior. He stated that the county health department recently announced that Broward County is leading the nation in new HIV/AIDS cases in the MSM (men having sex with men) category and criticized the Tourist Board for inviting homosexuals to Broward County with the HIV/AIDS health crisis ongoing.
"I'm really asking the homosexual community to join with me, to cease this activity, for the benefit of the children, the parents, and the community."
When a homosexual reporter asked him if he had any apologies to offer homosexuals, Naugle deftly replied, "I apologize for not having brought this earlier, maybe some lives could have been saved."
As he left the conference, angry homosexual activists began shouting at Naugle saying "shame, shame" and "you're an embarrassment to our city."
Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth said Mayor Naugle should be congratulated for his courageous stand against a "vocal fringe and the liberal media."
"Finally, a public servant with the courage to stand up to the homosexual militants and their fellow travelers in the media," LaBarbera said. "Imagine: a big-city mayor tries to stop gross perversions from occurring in public places - and the pro-'gay' lobby says HE is the problem and is embarrassing the city!"
A video of the news conference can be found here at the Sun-Sentinel:
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sfl-724naugleapology,0,5688916.s...
Those who wish to contact Mayor Naugle to thank him for his actions may do so at this e-mail address: mayorjames@aol.com
source
Jemdude's Comments:
I also hope that responsible members of the homosexual community join with the mayor and do something about the gross public indecency that others in the homosexual community are doing. This shouldn't be tolerated. Not all homosexuals support public sex as the mayor pointed out, but the ones that did ought to be ashamed of themselves. They actually wanted to promote public sex in the name of "tolerance and diversity"! Please watch the video.
Additional video!:
Here is another video in support of Mayor Naugle and against public gay sex.
video
By Peter J. Smith
FORT LAUDERDALE, Florida, July 26, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A major metropolitan mayor has finally issued an apology that has homosexual activists enraged and pro-family advocates cheering for his defense of decency.
Ft. Lauderdale Mayor Jim Naugle called a press conference at City Hall Tuesday afternoon telling reporters that he intended to make an "apology." Homosexual activists and reporters expected Naugle to retract comments published earlier in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel in which the mayor said that a proposed self-cleaning, automatic toilet the city was going to buy for the beach would have an added benefit idof deterring "homosexual activity.''
Naugle, the city's Democratic mayor, had also gone on record as saying that he preferred to use the term "homosexual" not "gay" since homosexuals are "unhappy" touching off calls from homosexual activists that he resign or apologize.
Mayor Naugle finally did apologize, except that instead of retracting his controversial statements he instead apologized to the citizens of Fort Lauderdale for failing to do more to put an end to the public homosexual activity taking place in Fort Lauderdale's parks, beaches and public restrooms.
"I was not aware how serious the problem was of the sexual activity that is taking place in the bathrooms in public places and parks around Broward County, particularly in the city of Fort Lauderdale," Naugle told reporters Tuesday.
"I've been educated on that and I want to apologize to the children and to the parents of our community for not being aware of the problem."
Naugle's office had been receiving information from all over the country, but Naugle said the most important information came from a local homosexual activist and "a guy I call a friend", Norman Kent, who wrote an article condemning the practice of sex in public places and alerted Naugle to a website called "cruising for sex." The site lists 13 printed pages of "cruisy" places in the Fort Lauderdale metropolitan area for anonymous homosexual hookups. The website itself is bedecked with homosexual pornography and references to parks, fitness centers, department stores, shopping malls, farmers' markets, beaches, etc. (A greatly sanitized list can be viewed on the American's for Truth website - warning even the sanitized content is offensive and inappropriate for children: http://americansfortruth.com/news/homosexual-male-cruising-s...)
"This to me is totally unacceptable," the Mayor told reporters. "I don't think that in the name of being inclusive or tolerant that anyone in the community should have to tolerate this."
"My goal is to get the city parks removed from these lists," concluded Naugle, who urged all citizens to contact the police department if they witness any illegal activity.
Naugle also called upon "responsible members of the homosexual community" to help the city put a stop to this public homosexual behavior. He stated that the county health department recently announced that Broward County is leading the nation in new HIV/AIDS cases in the MSM (men having sex with men) category and criticized the Tourist Board for inviting homosexuals to Broward County with the HIV/AIDS health crisis ongoing.
"I'm really asking the homosexual community to join with me, to cease this activity, for the benefit of the children, the parents, and the community."
When a homosexual reporter asked him if he had any apologies to offer homosexuals, Naugle deftly replied, "I apologize for not having brought this earlier, maybe some lives could have been saved."
As he left the conference, angry homosexual activists began shouting at Naugle saying "shame, shame" and "you're an embarrassment to our city."
Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth said Mayor Naugle should be congratulated for his courageous stand against a "vocal fringe and the liberal media."
"Finally, a public servant with the courage to stand up to the homosexual militants and their fellow travelers in the media," LaBarbera said. "Imagine: a big-city mayor tries to stop gross perversions from occurring in public places - and the pro-'gay' lobby says HE is the problem and is embarrassing the city!"
A video of the news conference can be found here at the Sun-Sentinel:
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sfl-724naugleapology,0,5688916.s...
Those who wish to contact Mayor Naugle to thank him for his actions may do so at this e-mail address: mayorjames@aol.com
source
Jemdude's Comments:
I also hope that responsible members of the homosexual community join with the mayor and do something about the gross public indecency that others in the homosexual community are doing. This shouldn't be tolerated. Not all homosexuals support public sex as the mayor pointed out, but the ones that did ought to be ashamed of themselves. They actually wanted to promote public sex in the name of "tolerance and diversity"! Please watch the video.
Additional video!:
Here is another video in support of Mayor Naugle and against public gay sex.
video
Tuesday, 24 July 2007
Bill O'Reilly and Rod Wheeler Apologize for Inaccuracies in Their Report on Violent Lesbian Gangs
July 3, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - On July 3rd LifeSiteNews and many other services reported on a Fox News Bill O'Reilly segment on violent lesbian gangs in Washington, DC. and elsewhere. The report included video footage of violent incidents and a report from crime investigator Rod Wheeler. O'Reilly and Wheeler now report that there were significant inaccuracies and exaggerations in the the report.
In his apology Wheeler states, "During the O'Reilly Factor segment on June 21st, while engaged in a discussion on Lesbian gangs, I inadvertently stated that gang members carry pistols that are painted pink and call themselves the "Pink Pistol Packing Group." I was not referring to the gay rights group "Pink Pistols" who advocates for the lawful rights of gays to carry weapons for protection. Further, I mentioned that there are "over 150 of these gangs" in the greater Washington DC area. What I actually meant is that there are over 150 gangs in the Washington DC area, some of which are in fact lesbian gangs. Lastly, I mentioned in the segment that there is this "national epidemic" of lesbian gangs. A better choice of words would have been to say that there is a growing concern nationally, and especially in major urban areas, of increased gang activity, which includes some lesbian gang activity. I apologize for any misunderstanding this may have caused."
See also a YouTube video of Bill O'Reilly's apology and clarification of the issue at
video
See the original LifeSiteNews story which has been updated to reflect the new information
link
source
Jemdude's comments:
It is good to know that Fox News, Lifesitenews.com and even Jemdude's Truly Outrageous Blog are not afraid to print corrections when the information has proven to be inaccurate. This proves that alternative news sources can be trusted. Now don't get me wrong. Although the numbers and some other details were either greatly exaggerated or wrong, it doesn't change the fact that there are Lesbian gangs out there doing harm to other people in addition to other types of gangs.
In his apology Wheeler states, "During the O'Reilly Factor segment on June 21st, while engaged in a discussion on Lesbian gangs, I inadvertently stated that gang members carry pistols that are painted pink and call themselves the "Pink Pistol Packing Group." I was not referring to the gay rights group "Pink Pistols" who advocates for the lawful rights of gays to carry weapons for protection. Further, I mentioned that there are "over 150 of these gangs" in the greater Washington DC area. What I actually meant is that there are over 150 gangs in the Washington DC area, some of which are in fact lesbian gangs. Lastly, I mentioned in the segment that there is this "national epidemic" of lesbian gangs. A better choice of words would have been to say that there is a growing concern nationally, and especially in major urban areas, of increased gang activity, which includes some lesbian gang activity. I apologize for any misunderstanding this may have caused."
See also a YouTube video of Bill O'Reilly's apology and clarification of the issue at
video
See the original LifeSiteNews story which has been updated to reflect the new information
link
source
Jemdude's comments:
It is good to know that Fox News, Lifesitenews.com and even Jemdude's Truly Outrageous Blog are not afraid to print corrections when the information has proven to be inaccurate. This proves that alternative news sources can be trusted. Now don't get me wrong. Although the numbers and some other details were either greatly exaggerated or wrong, it doesn't change the fact that there are Lesbian gangs out there doing harm to other people in addition to other types of gangs.
Sunday, 22 July 2007
Stuttering (Stammering)
I want to talk about one of the most misunderstood disabilities out there; and that is stuttering, also known as stammering in Europe. It's misunderstood because some people think that it is not a disability, when it is. Some people think that because I can still walk, see and hear, that it's not too serious. However, the truth is that it is the disability that gets lots of discrimination despite how intelligent such a person is.
Here are a couple of videos that show a couple of people who stutter and the device they are using to help in their situation. It costs around $5000 and it doesn't work for everybody all the time. I hope these videos give you a better idea on what stutters have to go through:
video 1
Video 2
Video 3
Here are a couple of videos that show a couple of people who stutter and the device they are using to help in their situation. It costs around $5000 and it doesn't work for everybody all the time. I hope these videos give you a better idea on what stutters have to go through:
video 1
Video 2
Video 3
Monday, 16 July 2007
The hyprocracy of atheists in religious matters
Atheists can be very hypocritical when it comes to religious matters; especially when it comes to religion.
A good example of this is Harry Potter. Harry Potter is based on Witchcraft and the Occult. Yet many Atheists will defend Harry Potter products and try to pass it off as secular. Atheists will say that the Harry Potter books are educational. If that is the case, then why do they reject Christian books that are also educational? They do the same thing for Halloween which is an official religious holiday of Wicca.
Why do Atheists try to pass off stuff from Satan, Witcraft, or the Occult as secular?
A good example of this is Harry Potter. Harry Potter is based on Witchcraft and the Occult. Yet many Atheists will defend Harry Potter products and try to pass it off as secular. Atheists will say that the Harry Potter books are educational. If that is the case, then why do they reject Christian books that are also educational? They do the same thing for Halloween which is an official religious holiday of Wicca.
Why do Atheists try to pass off stuff from Satan, Witcraft, or the Occult as secular?
Tuesday, 10 July 2007
The Truth About Gay Pride Parades
Have you ever watched a gay pride parade? If you watch on the news, they will show same-sex people hugging and kissing each other. But in reality, a lot more than that takes place. What they don't want you to know is that excessive lewdness and nudity takes place in these parades and the police fail to enforce anti-decency laws. Here is a link to some photos at Toronto's gay pride parade of 2006.
(Warning: nudity!)
link
Here is a news article that talks about these things and lies about the true number of people at these parades and the gay's continued use of the 10% figure that has proven to be false years ago.
link
It's interesting that homosexuals say they want equality, but they are really gaining special rights when they are able to engage in law breaking activities in public nudity with the police doing nothing about it.
(Warning: nudity!)
link
Here is a news article that talks about these things and lies about the true number of people at these parades and the gay's continued use of the 10% figure that has proven to be false years ago.
link
It's interesting that homosexuals say they want equality, but they are really gaining special rights when they are able to engage in law breaking activities in public nudity with the police doing nothing about it.
Tuesday, 3 July 2007
Lesbian Gangs Raping Young Girls, Some Attacked in School Washrooms
Here is some news footage that politically correct people do not want you to know about about.
I'll put the disclaimer that this doesn't represent the entire homosexual community as a whole. So please don't write in claiming that's what I'm trying to do.
I would be interested in knowing what the homosexual community plans to do about groups like this?
Video 1
Video 2
full article
I'll put the disclaimer that this doesn't represent the entire homosexual community as a whole. So please don't write in claiming that's what I'm trying to do.
I would be interested in knowing what the homosexual community plans to do about groups like this?
Video 1
Video 2
full article
Friday, 29 June 2007
Why Canadians know more than Americans
I believe that it is absolutely true that Canadians as a whole are much more knowledgeable about what is happening around the world than Americans do and that Canadians are more adaptable than Americans.
One of the reasons is because Canada is bilingual, not just in the language of English and French, but because of the differences in Canadian and American spelling. Occasionally an ignorant American will say that I spell a word wrong when, in reality, it's the Canadian spelling.
Another reason why Canadians know more is because we have to keep track of 2 different political systems. Not only do we have to know about what the Republicans and Democrats are doing in the US, but we also have to know about what the Conservatives, Liberals, NDP, and Bloc Quebecois are doing in Canada. We have to know what Prime Minister Stephen Harper is doing as well as President George W. Bush.
Canadians also get Canadian media and American media, but Americans only get American media. In the age of the internet, Canadian media is accessible to Americans, but few Americans use it. They probably think that Canada is not important, but they are wrong. Canada is the US's largest trading partner. That's a good enough reason to know what is going on in Canada because whatever Canada is experiencing has a good likelihood of it happening in the US.
Americans are not concerned about certain issues unless it is happening in their own country. For example, Planned Parenthood and EGALE are two of the organizations that are fighting to keep Canada's current age of consent for sex at 14. This is also happening in other countries around the world. But since it is not yet happening in the US in a significant way, the Americans are not concerned about it. However, most politically correct American parents who defend organizations like Planned Parenthood and EGALE would be really angry if these same organizations were doing in their country what they are currently doing in Canada.
So there you have it. Canadians as a whole know more about what is happening in the world than Americans.
One of the reasons is because Canada is bilingual, not just in the language of English and French, but because of the differences in Canadian and American spelling. Occasionally an ignorant American will say that I spell a word wrong when, in reality, it's the Canadian spelling.
Another reason why Canadians know more is because we have to keep track of 2 different political systems. Not only do we have to know about what the Republicans and Democrats are doing in the US, but we also have to know about what the Conservatives, Liberals, NDP, and Bloc Quebecois are doing in Canada. We have to know what Prime Minister Stephen Harper is doing as well as President George W. Bush.
Canadians also get Canadian media and American media, but Americans only get American media. In the age of the internet, Canadian media is accessible to Americans, but few Americans use it. They probably think that Canada is not important, but they are wrong. Canada is the US's largest trading partner. That's a good enough reason to know what is going on in Canada because whatever Canada is experiencing has a good likelihood of it happening in the US.
Americans are not concerned about certain issues unless it is happening in their own country. For example, Planned Parenthood and EGALE are two of the organizations that are fighting to keep Canada's current age of consent for sex at 14. This is also happening in other countries around the world. But since it is not yet happening in the US in a significant way, the Americans are not concerned about it. However, most politically correct American parents who defend organizations like Planned Parenthood and EGALE would be really angry if these same organizations were doing in their country what they are currently doing in Canada.
So there you have it. Canadians as a whole know more about what is happening in the world than Americans.