Postmodernism births sterile wastrels. Choose life instead.

Postmodernism births sterile wastrels. Choose life instead. Postmodernism (and racist eugenicist Margaret Sanger's birth control pill): Helps females become fat pigs. Next, overly attractive males have no females to hook up with. And thus, the Stonewall LGBTQPZ project was born: a place for abused abusive wastrels to go, so as to engage in mutual wankery to no good effect, other than some nice art perhaps, but zero kids born into best-for-the-kids settings. Lives derailed. Lives destroyed. Yes, it's true, wankery in and of itself won't make you a LGBTQPZ. For the Mormons & Ex-Mormons in my feed: Mormon Prophet Spencer Kimball's claim that wankery will may you a sexual invert (i.e. a g,a,y), which was taught textually AND verbally in the Mormon (LDS) Church, yes that's not correct. And mandatory sexually explicit interviews of children and adults absolutely drives some of those people to be angry reactionaries when they get older or become more mature. All abusive Mormon she'at which other flavors of Christianity don't do (e.g. Evangelical and other protestant). But the ultra left is not a panacea answer to the abuses of sections of the ultra right. Oh, yes, as an ex-religionist, you can be so angry angry angry, with religion in general. But, we being evolutionary animals with emergent properties, happen to couch our evolved morals within religious contexts. Religions are evolutionary artifacts and engines themselves. The (French) bullshit postmodernist ideology, derails the lives of many. Gender is binary in the human animal. Yes, children need a mother and a father, for their own best evolved and natural well being. Gender is not changeable in the human animal. There's no such thing as "gender identity," just moronic and stupid and abusive gender dysphoria. Secular people can have bad dumbshit memes running on their brains, too. Thus, to be a conservative, means you want to conserve things. Today being a conservative means conserving free speech. Conserving British Western Enlightenment values. Conserving the American project is the best example of those values. Universal slavery, ended. Science and human knowledge, advanced. True free speech, present, something not as fully present in any other country or community. The ability to fry sacred cows, yes, that's included. But let's not toss the baby of evolved morality out with the bathwater of mysticism. And I agree with Jordan Peterson that even the mystical stores have evolved natural good utilitarian value. Social conservatism is the >default< useful natural evolved position, because that position promotes live, preserves life, and continues life. Ok let's call out abuses, but let's also value what should be valued. Sincerely, Jonathan

The Youtube Purge Hits Jonny: Fighting the Leftist Death Cult, and Choosing life instead.

The Youtube Purge Hits Jonny: Fighting the Leftist Death Cult, and Choosing life instead.

Youtube AKA Google, a piece of shit regressive company, banned the vid which is part of this 2015 post:

https://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2015/07/lives-and-families-are-destroyed-by.html

My channel on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/user/chinadreams888
My new channel on bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/QBbeSiWT3eAM/
My minds feed: https://www.minds.com/jhigbee/
My twitter feed: https://twitter.com/jhigbee2020 - backup in case primary gets shitcanned: https://twitter.com/jhigbee2021
Gab feed: https://gab.com/jhigbee
(aka: You ain't stoppin' me be'atch!!!)

The vid they banned, now on the venerable site BitChute:


Copy of censorship notification email is below. Their assertions are absurd, libelous, and slanderous. I want to fucking, SAVE LIVES (!!!) by not having people drawn into the bastard religion secular cult which is, All The Letters of Stonewall! L G B T, oh and P and Z. One letter after another, one reason after another, to not have kids, or to fuck up the lives of children you happen to have had before being sucked in.

Additional related screen clips:

=========================================

=========================================

=========================================

Censorship shall result in amplification, duplication, and increased visibility.

Operation Clambake, Fighting SJW Edition is in operation.

Sincerely,

Jonathan

Evolutionary Social Conservatism

https://youtu.be/sQ0ALKdwOQU

Naturalistic Secular Advocacy for Social Conservatism.

Normal, natural, evolved human nature. What shall we call this? In today's world racked by the cancer of postmodernist denialism, how about: Evolved Social Conservatism.

Being naturally pro life, pro children, pro family, and pro having children born to and raised by the setting which is best for them via a 1.2 billion year evolved process (the time sex has existed on this planet).         August 2nd, 2019

Related vids:
Happiness vs A failure to Fuck:
https://youtu.be/xCC7FX06HS4

Milo Yiannopoulos & Sargon of Akkad, Denialist abusively permissive classic liberals
https://youtu.be/aApt9aYYP4s

Promote Life!
https://youtu.be/xlYWvXln5EY

Redpill toward choosing life
https://youtu.be/-C5QUl2YAUY

Coming out as a normal inherently reproductive animal  Big Whoop
https://youtu.be/84R2BvR-8uA

Being good without god?
https://youtu.be/4B4Yq-KcMnw

Additional: https://www.youtube.com/user/chinadreams888/videos

Dave Rubin, Feminism, Gay "Marriage," & Postmodernism

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8pBkYFCLrw

Downstream effects of denialist social constructivist postmodernist ideology: 1. Gay "marriage." 2. Feminism, especially third wave. 3. All the letters of the Stonewall project, LGBTQPZetc. 4. Basic human nature denialism. The cancer of culturally Marxist postmodernism cuts deeper than even so-called conservatives will admit. Abusively permissive libertarians, just don't get it. The traditionally religious (especially the so-called religious right) live lives which are more true to our evolutionary heritage. Why? Because they've been hoodwinked by postmoderist ideology less. Key facts denied by the cultural left & postmodernist morons: 1. Humans are a sexually dimorphic species. 2. Sex only happens when two sexual animals engage in activities with their sexual organs which are directly inherently reproductive. 3. Other activities with one's sexual organs are either mutual or individual wankery. And while mutual wankery can enhance pair bonding within a reproductive man & wife couple, still such activites are not selected for by evolution. And all the abusive denialist dead end slow motion suicide letters of the Stonewall project are not selected for by evolution, either. 4. Children need for their own best evolved well-being a man & a woman present as parents. Love, exists to help bring babies into the word and to support them. Same with sex. And same with what we have for a long time now called marriage. Marriage is simply a word which traditionally meant a committed sexual relationship, and a sexual relationship is one where kids are naturally produced. It is sad that there are people sucked into the Stonewall faggyfag gay project. Petty dead end lives, largely. Yes a few exceptions, such as Alan Turing, Oscar Wilde, and Steven Fry. But in contrast to those lights there's also a great deal of abuse, and yes even direct undeniable links to pedophilia (homosexuality & pedophilia, mostly the same diff' with a great deal of overlap - come on, let's be f-ing honest). Evolution doesn't care about your feelings. It doesn't care about the feelings of young Earth creationists, and it doesn't care about the feelings of postmodernists either. Dave Rubin & other classic liberals are in denial on these key points. Rubin should see himself as a victim, of the abusively permissive & abusive ultra left. Yes, he's that. Douglas Murray. Steven Fry. Even Milo Yiannopoulous. Too bad. So sad. No children produced au natural, the way 1.2 billion years of evolutionary history has "intended." People sucked into a denialist meme set. Two gay guys hook up and live together. I'm not asking that such be outlawed. But, don't fucking call that hookup marriage, nor even sex. What the hookup is is just two guys engaging in mutual wankery - not sex, again because sex only & solely happens when there's the possibility of inherent reproduction. Thus I can sympathize with the concerns of the religious right regarding gay marriage & the homosexual project in general. Yes, the concept of gay marriage IS an absolute abuse and an affront to human nature, what human nature is, our evolutionary history, and what basic words like sex & marriage & family actually mean.

The Value of Foreign Brides: Life! Family! - Responding to Stefan Molyneux

https://youtu.be/vQf0lqN-F7Y

The Value of Foreign Brides: Life! Family! Responding to Stefan Molyneux on the issue. Also general commentary on Molyneux's social issue call in shows.

I like 70% of what Stefan Molyneux does with his YouTube show, but the 20-30% social issue call ins are a problem.

My response to the following Molyneux video, and more generally to all of his social issue call ins:
https://youtu.be/CyIM4d_-rcY

To Molyneux:

There is something perverse regarding your fixation on being anti to all things “foreign bride.”

You treat all flowers the same, with an overly harsh broad brush. You have an apparent fixation on the foreign brides issue, and on marrying people outside of your own country. You're not a U.S. citizen (I presume) and yet you seem to comment a great deal about who is allowed or welcome to come to America. You de facto express disdain for a situation where American men might cause some non-American humans to enter America, for any reason. Love. Having a more meaningful life. Children. That's all mostly of no meaning apparently to you, because those men are causing non-Americans to come in. This is the general tone of your approach in my view. But you're not even American, again I presume. You're Canadian.

As for your general social issue call ins: They sound staged. Who, exactly, would call to a stranger and reveal such things, and place their hearts in your cold and harsh hands? Hands cold and overly harsh due apparently to your own problematic upbringing.

Yes your philosophy and anti-Marxism shows are ok. But as for the social issue call ins, bring me a bucket Stefan.

There is beauty and valiance in the world which you know nothing of. Your social issue callers don’t deserve you nor your abuse toward them.

On Marxism and socialism, ok good work. But your cruel crass approach on social issues, is solely your own angry ghosts in action more than anything else.

Gay rights has made us dumber: Atheists of Utah prime example.

"Gay rights has made us dumber..."

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/17/gay-rights-have-made-us-dumber-its-time-to-get-back-in-the-closet/

And the dumbest of these are the frantic crusading moron Stonewall warrior children who run Atheists of Utah (Dan Ellis dumbshit et al.) and similar groups...

More info on the general topic Milo talks about in his article linked to above:
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/bering-in-mind/the-end-of-gays-gay-marriage-and-the-decline-of-the-homosexual-population/

Speaking as a straight man who's been to many gay parties via a nephew, I can confirm that there's a very dark and abusive side to current gay culture.

Yes I like Stephen Fry and Oscar Wilde and Alan Turing.

But children needs a mommy and a daddy. Evolutionary evolved human animal born children. 385 million years of sexual history and 13.8 billion years of evolutionary history ought to count for something.

http://www.livescience.com/48400-origin-of-sex-found.html

And there's only one type of marriage: one where inherently reproductive human animals hook up, period.

I like the art of Michael Zichy and Thomas Rowlandson (classic graphic erotic art) as much as the next guy. And certainly people like Spencer Kimball and Boyd Packer should rot in hell for eternity.

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/Spencer%20Kimball
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/boyd%20packer

But not every dumbshit idea that pops into the brains of leftist snowflake children should be honored and highly valued.

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/homosexuality

So you're a man who thinks you're a woman and you want to visit women's restrooms? WGAS - and stay the F out of my wife's and daughter's restrooms.

This is the precise and proper response to such gender dysphoric bleatings from poor morons like Bruce Jenner.

And yes simultaneously masturbation and oral sex and good things in spite of what evil men like Spencer Kimball claimed. And a bit of porn 2 and 3.0 isn't such a bad thing.

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/porn

People such a Milo Yiannopoulos and Douglas Murray (a gay neocon whom I admire) show there is a non-wastrel side to people with such dispositions (ie: male attraction to other men).

What would a rural Chinese person do who's had zero exposure to the Bible or Quran? They're naturally socially conservative. Whodathunkit.

more info:
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2016/02/lies-present-in-conservative-religion.html

I still likes them boobies and all pretty kitty cats. I just suggest there's some value to outlier-trait male humans continuing to like them as well, and female outlier trait types finding (femmy) heterosexual men to mate and stay with rather than dreaming of a parthenogenic future. And to their all keeping their John Thomases and hoohaws away from the abusive overly permissive deadly evolutionary dead end wastrel glory hole culture of the left.

Having my cake and eating it too? Why not.

Breeders will inherit the Earth.
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/06/breeders-will-inherit-earth-problems.html

The talk I gave at my mother's funeral - February 2010
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2010/12/funeral-talk-that-i-gave-in-february.html

Excerpt:

As far as I can tell, relative to our position in the Universe, we're rather like some moss growing on the top of a mountain.

As moss we're very intelligent. And maybe some day, being the smart green moss that we are, maybe we'll find a way to extract ourselves from the mountain top.

In a few years our lone peak which is the only place we can live is going to get scorched. And we happen to be so smart in fact that we have predicted the future scorching.
                    
So if we are very lucky & very smart indeed, our science & technology may save us.

Or perhaps we'll fade away to dust like most life has on the mountain.

It's either the sky god or the volcano god, or the real truth about our rather humble state.

Noble & beautiful, yes, but if we're going to make it in the long term at least a few of us have to take a longer view.

There is no Christian Armageddon waiting. But in about 500 million years our Sun will be 10% brighter thereby causing the oceans boil off. So our descendants either need to re-engineer the Sun by then, or get us off of this rock. And we've only known about this for ten or so years. And there are other huge risks to our survival.

What we teach our children about science may save humanity.

There's no heaven or hell. But that means we have an added responsibility to care for what we have here. To make this life here & now into a heaven or a hell.

We are related to other animals. We are animals, and our morals come from a combination of genetics and socialization. Whether such a fact is good or bad, it doesn't matter. That's simply the way it is.

Being concerned about legacy is an issue. Who will care that you lived in 100 years? Make a contribution. Be a great artist or a great scientist or have kids. And if you have kids, teach them the value cutting edge art and science, and of the value of taking the proverbial red pill as from the film The Matrix.

---end of excerpt

Quite so.

And if you've found yourself to be a gender or sexual orientation dysphoric human male or female, I suggest there's high value in your tying into inherent reproduction, rather than trying to cheat nature & evolutionary history via trips to the sperm bank.

Children need a mommy and a daddy. And there's only one type of marriage: the naturally inherently reproductive type. And as an enlightened post-leftist atheist I get to have my cake & eat it too on these fronts...

-------------------------------------

Additional links:

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/atheists%20of%20utah


http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/naturalism

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/atheism%20is%20a%20religion

Lies present in conservative religion force children into the abusive arms of the denialist myopic left.

Frankly, the thing which hurts conservatism are the pervasive and *required* lies present within religions like Mormonism and Evangelical Christianity.

Are you a pro-family & pro-life conservative?

Then don't lie to your children about a mystical god, or a about a prophet who's rear end all are required in your religion to kiss, or a non-existent Savior who also likes rear-end kissing (of his own).

By lying to your children, and by forcing them to lie (oh, and by too much shaming regarding such issues as masturbation (!)), you will force them to respond ping pong style.

Ultra-right as a chump in your religion, and THEN ultra-left!

The exact opposite of what you were hoping for.

It's quite true that the left (including the hippie & communist left) deals with the new technology of birth control with the same care & consideration as nuclear bombs were dealt with back in the '50s - ask all the cancer-ridden 'down winders' who were exposed to radiation during that time.

It's quite true that birth control & easy birth-control-connected-abortion have given humans the false impression that sex is for anything BUT reproduction, which it is not. Sex only exists in an inherently reproductive context, period.

So, Mr. & Mrs. conservative religionist, I can see why you're wary of having your children exposed to the vagaries of leftist relativism, extreme naivety, and myopia.

But you aren't helping things via lying to them about your imaginary god, nor about how everyone MUST suck up to your prophet or to your Savior, or else.

The Atheist Movement needs more laxative. Room should and must be made for social & political conservatism.

Exactly what connection does rural China & rural India have to do with the Bible or the Quoran or the Book of Mormon? Zero. So they are essentially a de facto control experiment, and can be accurately seem as an example for your average leftist atheist / "humanist."

Is "religion" the root cause of social conservatism, or is it human nature & evolution? Will life be a f-ing panacea if we can all just live like Bonobos, and let it all hang out? No. Lives are destroyed via such assumptions. We are NOT bonobos.

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2015/10/humans-are-not-bonobos-response-to.html

Let children be raised by two non-inherently-reproductive outlier-type females or males? It matters not, right?

Being "childfree" helps you be the most "true" YOU there is, right?

Don't have children because people in third world countries have too many, but for some reason they don't get enough peas in their diet so you still need to have as many peas in yours as you can in response, right?

Let strangers raise your children while you show that your EQUAL EQUAL EQUAL in all ways to men, right?

These are a few key tenants of current denialist leftistism. Denial of human nature. Denial of human history, evolutionary history, and sexual history.

And when you essentially force your own children out of your house and out of your religion, by a.) forcing your children to believe lies and maintain-as-true key lies, and b.) engaging in far too much (!) sexual shaming & too much shaming & control on other fronts, you will force them right into the hands of abusive leftist relativist denialist moron culture. The exact opposite of your otherwise reasonable goals for them.

So, how to move forward?

Some degree of shame regarding sex is warrantied, the type that helps people avoid lethal STDs for example, but not the type which says that masturbation is evil! Why mention the latter, because f-tard leaders in religions like Mormonism do.

Teach your children about the >fact< of evolution, but also teach them that religion & culture *evolved also and simultaneously* to help us *avoid* destructive behaviors!

Yes we should wake up about the non-existence of all gods and the facts of evolution by natural selection, but we should also be woken up to the FULL facts, not the partial denialist relativist "facts" which are generated solely from the ultra-left side.

Religion is a fully natural phenomenon as is culture.

Yes humans have fully evolved destructive & outlier proclivities which can destroy. Prohibition-elements of various types *also* evolved to counter destructive impulses.

Like it or not that's how things have been set up in us, not by some god, but rather by fully natural evolution by natural selection.

-----
Where does social conservatism come from? From human nature.
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2015/11/where-does-social-conservatism-come.html

Lives and families are destroyed by Tranny and Gay acceptance and promotion - LGBT abusive outliers are not equal
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2015/07/lives-and-families-are-destroyed-by.html

The Atheist Movement needs move laxative - Making room for social & political conservatives!
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-atheist-movement-needs-move.html

Conservative Naturalism: Don't put your willie in the deadly destructive glory hole of the left. You might get both an STD and an MTD
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/conservative-naturalism-dont-put-your.html

Conservative Naturalism: Culture War General Commentary - 5-22-2014
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/conservative-naturalism-culture-war.html

Embracing true honest naturalism: Marriage is about children
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/embracing-true-honest-naturalism.html

More on the ping pong game - hard facts for the Mormon & Catholic churches:
Are Mormonism & Catholicism homosexual & pedophile generators?
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/are-mormonism-catholicism-homosexual_24.html

The talk I gave at my mother's funeral - February 2010
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2010/12/funeral-talk-that-i-gave-in-february.html

Comments in response to the general Mormon stance on marriage

Comments in response to the general Mormon stance on marriage:

I loath Oaks and Kimball and Packer. However it's hard for an exmo to admit that the cultural left is in denial about human nature also. Advocacy for all things "childfree," and not having kids because people in foreign countries supposedly have too many. It's the same logic as eating one's peas because people on China may not eat theirs. The Mormon Church also abuses people by pushing them too far to the left in response.

One of my uncles from Manti had this happen to him - sucked into the equally abusive glory hole culture of San Fran. And one sister who's spent her life traveling and playing and not having kids because of environmental concerns and supposed overpopulation in general - a victim of the left also. Margaret Sanger's life work turning my sister into a near zero on the great mandala.

So it's tough to see value in the cultural middle or right for an exmormon, that's for damn sure. But Dennett's dangerous idea that religion is a natural phenomenon cuts both ways.

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/atheism%20is%20a%20religion

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/childfree

All these things are good:

Having kids.

Masturbation.

Oral sex.

Web 2.0 amateur porn.

Monogamy.

Nudism which does not lie about nudism among adults always having a sexual component.

Being true to our heritage as 13.8 billion year evolved sexual animals who can finally understand how we got here.

Drawing Mohamed and helping free people from cults like Islam and Mormonism.

Showing leftist and rightist Emperors all have no clothes.

Latest thoughts on the pressing issues of the day

I love inherently reproductive sex (AKA sex), children, life, the Universe, the fact that we're the first life here to have some understanding of how we got here, the Internet, amateur porn, oral sex, masturbation, Charlie Hebdo, and sticking it up the right royal ass of all censors and freedom hating cult members, and their dumbass leftist apologists, including cult members of Islam.

I dislike Mormon leaders Oaks, Spencer Kimball, Mark E. Peterson, and Boyd Packer.

I enjoy Duck Dynasty. 

I like Oscar Wilde, Stephen Fry, and other service oriented and/or highly-artistically-usefully gays.

I don't like and am highly wary of wastrel angel reading bipolar gays who readily befriend convicted pedophiles after they're been released from prison.

I hate doctors who circumcise boys or girls, and Muslims and Jews who continue to genitally rape their own children . Also I hate idiot secular apologists for barbaric religious practices, and John Harvey Kellogg and his legacy in medical pseudoscience.

I like Thunderf00t. I hate Skepchick and all her Atheism-Plus related ultra-retarded cohorts.

I highly admire Christopher Hitchens, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Salman Rushdie, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, and I like Pat Condell. 

I loath Noam Chomsky, Amy Goodman, Scott Atran, and Reza Aslan.

I get nauseous about Unitarian Universalists who claim Mohamed was an advocate for social justice. At one highly illustrative congregation these same people also readily elected a freakish hideously-ugly man-woman-it to be their priest. 

Many humanist and Unitarian groups are seas of gray hair. The hippie-worshipers of all things "childfree."

I dislike dogmatism on the left more than I dislike dogmatism on the right. Both are bad but leftist dogmatism is worse.

I was raised as a liberal. I voted for Obama twice. But I can now see more clearly key fundamental flaws in current liberalism. The near entirety of the current cultural left is failing everyone. They are clueless regarding Islam and abusive cultures. They want to be "childfree," and have inherently non-reproductive "sex" with everyone in every possible combination. They want to actively deny 13.8 billion years of evolutionary history by subverting and denying what sex is and how we all got here - deny and be traitors to their own personal history. 13.8 billion years of evolution by natural selection and 1.2 billion years of sex - and then came the petty "childfree" vain narcissistic wastrels - traitors to the evolutionary and sexual history that brought us here.

It's quite true that there is only one type of "sex" in the human animal, the type which inherently leads to reproduction, and by extension only one type of real marriage. 

But gays are gay I admit. Let's just hope more gay people learn to draw Mohamed.

Why are the champions of gay, "minority," "race," and women's "rights" sucked into Margaret Sanger's and Gloria Steinem's kool-aid, so clueless about Islam? 

If the left is so fundamentally clueless about the root causes of the abuses in Islam are they also clueless about feminism, gay rights, race relations and rights, affirmative action, social justice, and socialism in general?

Is being an idiot about Islam an indication of more widespread memetic disease and intellectual malfunction? 

I believe we can at this point question the validity of their *whole* project perhaps. The liberal permissive hippie project - apparently leads to kissing the ass of Mohamed.

Maybe the Libertarians really are more right. Yes Ayn Rand was a complete fool and idiot. But in general look across the cultural landscape to see exactly who (!) is on the side of Charlie  Hebdo! It's not the UUs. It's not the secular left as shown on MSNBC, the BBC, the PBS Newshour, or the New York Times. 

Look closely. 

Who exactly champions the right to offend religious sensitivities of Muslins? Who loves Charlie Hebdo's very valuable art - who on the cultural landscape?

Not the secular left. Yes the secular right. And also the religious right have some useful agreement with the value of Hebdo's work regarding Islam.

The left, as perfectly exemplified by UU congregations, is obsessed about gay rights and the rights of women to have "sex" without reproduction. The rights of "minorities" to be worshiped and have their collective asses kissed. And they believe Mohamed was an advocate for social justice, even though the complete opposite is true.  

The Hebdo murders was a 9/11 for art. A wake up call. 

Much of the cultural left is engaged in slow motion suicide. 

I'm moving toward being more of a single issue voter. I now care less about disparaging believers in the Bible. Islam is such a huge threat that it must be fought on all levels. Not everything is equal. Not all cultures are of equal value. 

Even the much-worshiped "Native Americans" abuse their own kids when they are allowed by Canadian courts to deny life saving leukemia cancer treatment to their kids for religious reasons. 

Political correctness trumps children's lives in ultra-PC Canada.

So again I'm moving right, happily toward Christopher Hitchens and Pat Condell. 

Freedom of speech. Freedom of thought. Honesty. Moving forward. Survival. Preserving the Reformation and Enlightenment. The current-left are traitors to all.

Federal Appeals Court: Gays Have Right to Marry, And Everyone Has AIDS!

Federal Appeals Court: Gays Have Right to Marry
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/court-utah-gay-marriage-ban-unconstitutional-24298290

And everyone has AIDS:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StPTCo5qk8E

The extreme naivete of Unitarian Universalism, expressed yet again by having one of their churches headed up by a freakish extreme outlier:

http://archive.sltrib.com/images/2009/0619/gayunitarian_0620~3.jpg

...a particularly & acutely unattractive woman to man experiment.

How else UUs are naive:
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-new-creed-of-unitarian-universalism.html

Heard that Mohamed was an advocate for social justice crap at the SVUUS.

This guy is welcomed into the gay community:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/695261750/Secret-shame-Predator-was-coach-Scout-chief.html?pg=all

Gay "marriage" is a key indicator of how the left is in near complete denial of human nature, and evolutionary history.

It's still Duck Dynasty Pride Month:
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/06/duck-dynasty-pride-month.html

And with the passing of Christopher, his brother Peter is becoming more appealing every day, even if he himself doesn't accurately identify where his own morals come from:

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/06/im-in-hitchens-camp-christopher-before.html

Daniel Dennett's dangerous idea is one key: Religion is a natural phonomenon. Thus fully natural & useful human morality exists within religion.

We need protection from the pitfalls of human nature. Protection from outliers. Yes religion & culture help manage all this, for very natural & reasonable & rational & evolutionary reasons. An evolutionary response to how evolution has set us up.

So, judges can be incredibly naive. Even conservative ones. Outliers naturally come about. But they need to be a.) classified & identified for what they are, and b.) curtailed when they're destructive or dangerous. Not forcibly treated as "equal" in all venues IMO. For example maybe a child needs a mommy & daddy, ideally, for it's own best welfare & development - as a normal non-outlier child. Can the left (& libertarians) question their own presuppositions? Are they in denial about human nature also? I have observed that they are.

"Freaks Welcome Here." This is the key motto of the SVUUS, and of Unitarian Universalism / leftistism / atheism plus / most atheists groups. De facto.

But outliers won't inherit the Earth.

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/06/breeders-will-inherit-earth-problems.html

I agree with Adam Corolla on this point: "...I don’t want to be lying on my deathbed and realize gay marriage and legalization of marijuana is all I discussed the last half of my life..."

http://www.salon.com/2014/05/19/adam_carolla_where_are_all_the_jewish_roofers/

The UUs and their kin keep up the pressure.

Apartments? Ok. Jobs? Ok. Being funny? Yes please. Making art. Ok, good.

But raising kids? Not so fast.

When two John Thomases or two hoohaws can produce babies naturally, then there will be gay marriage.

Kids may well need a mommy & a daddy. 13.8 billion years of evolution by natural selection. Is that enough "proof?" Hey at least let's be skeptical of ripping children away form this long established fully natural non-outlier more-healthy norm, ok?

Even Dan Savage says that gay men are "pigs." Should two pigs raise a kid? Where's the naturally moderating force of a female human? The lesbian friends of the Dan-Savage-gay-couple? I don't think so.

Many gay "marriages" cheat:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetro.html

Is a cheatin' marriage a good healthy place to raise kids?

A fully rational response:
https://4simpsons.wordpress.com/tag/same-sex-marriage/

And more general fully rational & reasonable responses:

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Seculars-Against-Same-Sex-Marriage/293011477509961

http://secularpatriarchy.wordpress.com/2013/08/08/marriage-is-masculinity-and-coverture/

http://www.amazon.com/Conscience-Its-Enemies-Confronting-Institutions/dp/1610170709

Gayness is not a race:
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2010/05/1324/

Neither is Islam:
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2012/08/islam-is-not-race-not-ethnicity-salt.html

Gayness is a side effect of how sex gets set up in humans. A side effect. Not a primary effect. The primary effect results in reproduction. Children come from reproduction.

Any oh so natural vegan, and Whole Foods shopper, should recognize the high value in raising children in a more natural & healthy way. And adopted kids should have an environment which most closely matches the natural & health way.

Not a single woman who has no intention of having a man around, knocking on the sperm bank door.

Not two men, or two women, knocking on the sperm bank or adoption agency doors.

Leftist denial of human nature & evolutionary history, all so they can claim to be protecting everyone's rights. What about the right of the majority to be protected from dangerous or destructive outliers? Indeed. We have that right too.

I'm in the Hitchens camp. Christopher before. Peter now. Leftist denial of human nature.

I'm in the Hitchens camp. Christopher before. Peter now.

It's what happens after starting a family with a socially conservative atheist from rural China. No Bibles there.

Peter Hitchens vs Dan Savage


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQY4BuYWD4s
Listening to the incredibly crass way Dan Savage conducts himself is revealing. One wonders if he even knows where babies come from?

The left is in denial about human nature. Built in by evolution by natural selection good human values. Active denial. Dangerous denial. Abusive denial.

Agreed the Mormon Church abuses people. But so does the other side. It's hard to hold onto basic good human values when you've been so severely lied to & deceived. Takes time to recover. And then to recover from recovery.

Both the left & right are in denial about human nature. Both are rather highly upset at the prospect of admitting that we are human, set up by evolution by natural selection, to have build in morality, and an apparent propensity or high susceptibility for mysticism. The right doesn't like admitting that we are evolved animals. The left doesn't like admitting that we are evolved animals with built in morality & evolved culture - culture which helps us avoid the pitfalls built into human nature. Religion (AKA culture - ref Daniel Dennett) is a fully natural effect of how we've evolved.

Outliers naturally come about. But they need to be a.) classified & identified for what they are, and b.) curtailed when they're destructive or dangerous. Not forcibly treated as "equal" in all venues IMO. For example maybe a child needs a mommy & daddy, ideally, for it's own best welfare & development - as a normal non-outlier child. Can the left (& libertarians) question their own presuppositions? Are they in denial about human nature also? I have observed that they are.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-political-brain/
http://www.michaelshermer.com/tag/confirmation-bias/

And back to Peter, he was a leftist, then he moved more right. Same with me, after I met a socially conservative completely-non-bibical atheist from rural China.

My legacy website, more reflective of my first state after leaving Mormonism (ultra left after being ultra right):http://corvus.freeshell.org

Current blog - reflective of my recovery from recovery, and finally growing up:
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com

Breeders will inherit the Earth. Problems with "recovery" from religion.

Is there evidence for a god?

There's evidence that people believe in gods.

There's also evidence that they believe in them for fully natural reasons.

Ref: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WhQ8bSvcHQ

My own experiential & observational evidence shows that when people leave their religions they can assume that the opposite position is healthy or correct. They can then fall right into a virtual pit.

It takes time to "settle" after leaving a religion - if people will settle. Sometimes they don't or can't.

I cannot force myself to believe in clear & apparent lies.

I realize that humans are set up to believe in lies as a means of survival, avoiding destructive behaviors, reproduction, happiness, and so on.

On the other hand, there's some religions which really do grind people down & abuse them.

The ultra-left is just as much a religion as the ultra-right.

Unquestionable dogma & doctrines. Heresy trials. Excommunication.

They also deny basic human nature. Ignoring what desert, African, and Chinese tribes do, while focusing in & only valuing what the "hippie" tribes do & advocate for. Desert-tribe-o-phobia. Non-hippie-tribe-o-phobia.

All of what I've observed first hand.

I try not to surrender to peer pressure. Right now I'm pushing pretty damn hard against peer pressure on the left, just to even consider that the middle or right may have some valid points on some issues. Fully natural fully reasonable points which help protect people. Protection from the pitfalls of human nature. Protection from outliers. Yes religion & culture help manage all this, for very natural & reasonable & rational reasons.

Additional people who helped me on my journey:

Steven Pinker. Daniel Dennett. Christopher Hitchens. Michael Shermer. Sam Harris. And now even Peter Hitchens.

Maybe all of these people are more socially liberal than I am. But all of them have been willing to speak the non-PC truth that questions confirmation bias & presuppositions on the left as well as the right. Anyway just fyi.

First hand observational experience came from having what was an Alice in Wonderland journey or theme park ride through a lot of what ultra-liberalism has to "offer," plus one to China where they're much more socially conservative (and yet no Bible), which all led me to conclude what I conclude today.

I can talk about evidence for this or that. But my main point & position is that religion is simply a way for humans to have a cushion or protective cocoon around fully natural morality. Protection. Survival. Reproduction. And when people leave that cocoon they can go right off a cliff.

Religion is culture. And most all cultures include some form of religion - some more lighter than others. But even your average atheist has de facto doctrine & dogma - political & social views they consider non-questionable.

Religion is such a natural phenomenon that many atheist groups are religions. Unquestionable political & social doctrines & dogma. Exclusion. Attacks against those who are skeptical of their doctrines & dogma. Heresy trials. Excommunication. This all happens readily within most atheist groups.

But the abusive part of atheist religion is how they deny human nature. The part of human nature that says "yes, we should be concerned about outlier behavior." The part of human nature that says "yes, we should value & promote life and normal inherently-reproductive families."

Those who fool themselves into believing that the childfree life / outlier-marriage life is in any way equal to non-outlier inherently reproductive marriage fall right in line with, what is frankly, slow motion suicide. And everyone should be against suicide in any form.

related book:
Decline & Fall: Europe’s Slow Motion Suicide
http://www.amazon.com/Decline-Fall-Europes-Motion-Suicide/dp/1594032068

The low birth rate amongst people who've rejected a god shows how humanity is really only barely ready to not have gods. And in Europe all the childfree liberals are being overrun by humans in the Islam camp. The breeders will inherit the Earth, like it or not. And one place to step away from all this is China. Rural China, where they have very light religion, light ancestor worship, and yet more conservative values. No Bible. No Book of Mormon. How do they do it? They aren't caught up in "recovery" from bad bad religion, like much of the west is. They don't assume that the extreme opposite side is the "answer." And so on.

Duck Dynasty Pride Month!

Outlier pride month is here, out on the streets. And right along with it we must also have Duck Dynasty Pride Month.

Is Mormonism an outlier generation machine?
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/are-mormonism-catholicism-homosexual_24.html

Destructive outlier examples:
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/02/a-high-abundance-of-angel-readers-and.html

Thoughts on adoption:

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/01/thoughts-on-gay-adoption-1-16-2014.html

Recovery from Atheists of Utah:

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/recovery-from-atheists-of-utah.html

It's hard to have pride when the ultra-left seems to be just as much a religion as the ultra-right.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/colorado-baker-shut-shopp-serve-gay-couples-article-1.1815868

Will artists be told what to paint now? Will authors be told what to write? We are being told what to think. And the penalty for not towing the party line is exactly the same as what it was in Mormonism.

Additional interesting posts found:

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/bering-in-mind/2011/06/06/why-im-not-proud-of-being-gay/

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/bering-in-mind/2011/08/01/the-end-of-gays-gay-marriage-and-the-decline-of-the-homosexual-population/

http://jaymans.wordpress.com/2013/01/12/a-gay-germ-is-homophobia-a-clue/

1 out of 10 atheists (or is it 1 out of 100?) is skeptical of outlier pride. A rare gem amongst the naive masses. Now that's something to be proud of...

When is Duck Dynasty appreciation month? I think it's right now.

Maybe this is close also:
Ex-Gay Awareness Month 2014
http://www.voiceofthevoiceless.info/exgayawarenessmonth/

If such actions keep a person away from an AIDS infested glory hole, more power to ya. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glory_hole_%28sexual_slang%29
...very common in SF in the past according to this helpful man:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKxYBch2LVM

July is the month for the non-outlier group!
http://heterosexualawarenessmonth.com/

Go July!

Make a baby! We want to make babies! We have a month to be proud of that!

Every month should be proud-of-life month.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Seculars-Against-Same-Sex-Marriage/293011477509961


For those who believe the "fight" is equal, it ain't:
Interracial Marriage and Same-Sex Marriage
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2010/05/1324/

In a normal regular traditional marriage, AKA a marriage, a human male and a human female can naturally produce a baby. Forcing the marriage term to include a wider scope does lessen the value, and the value of valuing & honoring & supporting, inherently-reproductive marriage. It may also damage children's need for a mommy & a daddy, in adoptive couples. A male & female parent, or adoptive parent, raising normal inherently reproduce-themselves-children.

Maybe I'm not 100% percent against inherently non-reproductive outlier "marriage," But I think it's important to be skeptical of denial of basic human nature, and remembering where life comes from.

Paddy Manning - in favor of retaining the normal regular traditional definition of marriage:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_h6yX4dY1Qs
and check out his written article:
http://thickerthantalk.blogspot.com/2013/11/this-piece-was-published-in-irish-daily.html

Since "pride" is in our face now again, I decided to post this info for your review.

Straight pride. Where'd you come from? Worth remembering & being proud of that - for most people, IMO.

Duck Dynasty Pride Month! Happening right now!

Embracing true honest naturalism: Marriage is about children

Here's a copy of a forum exchange, regarding a post I found from the group Seculars Against Same Sex "Marriage:"

My post:

Marriage is about children. I agree with that... Also children may well need a mommy & a daddy. Sounds good to me. 13.8 billion years. So far so good. Compared to ~20 years of denialism and knocking on the sperm bank door.

Quotes from where I found the link:

----quotes begin

Paddy Manning, who is same-sex attracted and against same-sex “marriage,” debates and explains why he opposes it:

----

*5:30-8:01 “Marriage is a uniquely child-centered institution. It is the only place in our society where children can be created, reared, and socialized; and the institution exists for that. If we move to a status where we have a one-size fits all marriage (institution), we part the idea of children and having children from marriage. After that the state gets to decide what your relationship is with the child. Natural parents never require that decision.

-----

*Let’s be clear, nobody is blanket opposing same-sex adoption. What we want is the recognition that a child has a right PRIMARILY to a mother and father...Do u want to enshrine in law the accidental?

----

*You don’t like the idea that children might have a right to a mother and father; which they do. PRIMARILY the law should recognize that. Everything else comes after that.

-----

*In response to the elderly couples who get married past child-bearing age: “It doesn’t affect the institution."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_h6yX4dY1Qs

----end of quote

In response to posting the above I received the following response:

But this only works if every single person has the goal of making sure that life goes on in the same way it has for 13.8 billion years, as you say. "...that a child has a right PRIMARILY to a mother and father..." is a statement that just goes along with that same theory. All Children have the right to proper nutrition as well, but plenty of kids have died from malnutrition for 13.8 billion years. Only recently has the world tried to stop that. But maybe we are messing with something that was working just for for billions of years. Should we let the kids be? All I am saying is that change is okay, even if that changes the course. We have no inherent responsibility to stay the course.

==============

And here is my reply to the above paragraph:

Hi.

You wrote:

<clip>
>if every single person

Humans have built in traits which come from nature, evolution by natural selection, genetics and memetics.

The traits babies are born with fall onto a bell curve graph.

Outlier traits are less common. More common traits tend to increase genetic/memetic frequency.

Humans are animals, just as much animals as are salmon that swim up stream, birds that sing, and we share a common ancestor with chimps and bonobos. Humans are not bonobos, nor are we chimps, but our nature appears to like both in between and beyond.

>has the goal

The goals of humans come from a combination of genetics & memetics.

>of making sure that life

Most humans within the larger set of more common traits tends to value the continuance of life. If this were not the case, humans would go extinct.

>13.8 billion years

It took ~13.8 billion years for you and I to be here today. The so-called big-bang. Stars living, then exploding. The exploded star matter reforming into new stars & solar systems & galaxies.

A very long process indeed.

>a child has a right

Children generally have several key rights. A right to life is one. I argue that it's fully reasonable, and naturalistic, and human, to just assume, by default, that children need a mommy and a daddy. Plus my own observation of outlier-groups who wish to claim the right to raise children, my observations have yielded direct evidence which I'm generally satisfied with, which show to me that outlier-trait-human-culture, such as it is, is not a particularly healthy environment for children. Also, there are the basic needs of a child, who, more commonly, would be born with the more common trait of being straight. Within that context, a child's "straightness" would be most valued within a house who's parents also fall within the general more-common-trait set. Also, the basic healthy brain & psychological development of human children may well require, ideally, the presence of a male & female in a house - both sexes, not just one or the other, ideally.

So there's several needs & issues at play. What do children have a right to. What does the human animal, in the form of growing children, really need.

When it comes to the current situation, there is incredible pressure to not be honest on these points - not in the secular community.

The so-called secular community is so very angry at being lied to about the presence of a god, and about the bad aspects of religion, they have come to incorrectly include that all allowable answers must oppose what religious people may advocate for.

So, regarding physics, cosmology, and basic biology, yes on those topics your average scientists has no issues with being more objective. However, when it comes to social issues, the left-leaning scientists will introduce confirmation bias, and denialism, into his or her interpretations of evidence, what questions to ask, what studies to do, what conclusions to draw, and so on.

For many years the so-called "right" denied human nature, or connection to other animals, and so on.

Now, today, the left also denies human nature, the fact that religion is a natural phenomenon cuts both ways - in that fully natural human morality, morality which can otherwise protect us from dangerous outlier behavior, is fully rooted within middle & right religion.

Confirmation bias can also be seen in the study of anthropology. Yes, the 60s era hippie scientists/anthropologists go to visit tribes who happen to agree with their hippie views on life. But what about the "aboriginal tribes" who created the Bible? What about the "aboriginal tribes" who live in rural China - people who've had zero contact with the Bible or the Torah? What do they advocate for? What do they think?

Honesty about why people do the things they do. That's what we need more of.

The religious may well have their religion because it helps them better survive. Some lies, and a lot of truths, all mixed together - helping humanity survive.

Rip out one part, tear a person away from their religion, and they can go right off the cliff! Yes, this is quite true.

I've personally gone on an Alice in Wonderland Style Journey. Gathering data over several years. Seeing what different groups do. Nudists. Polys. Sex party people. Gay house parties & bars (via my gay nephew). Making note of what happened with an uncle who grew up in Manti, but who fell prey to what happens when you jump to the extreme opposite side.

In the case of Atheists of Utah, they celibate the fact that they were nominated by Q Salt Lake to be the best religion, and a runner up for the best social group. Parties centered around raffling off wheelbarrows full of booze. They see themselves as the key answer to Mormonism!

Where does such a generalized status leave humans born into the more-common less-of-an-outlier set of naturally I-want-to-reproduce set? The set that helps keep humanity alive?

Saying "there's plenty of other people who breed, why do I need to?" is an incredibly crass & nihilistic & abusive way of looking at the world, and at your own life. People who say this are frankly victims of a slow-motion-suicide destructive meme set on the left.

So there's several issues at play here.

Societies can become ill, sick, defective. Honesty is one way to fix problems. And for me, listening to people like Steven Pinker, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, plus also listening to what the middle & right say - really listening & trying to understand why they say the things they do, plus also having a direct connection to Chinese-aboriginal-culture which states that non-outlier naturally-reproductive human culture & activity is more valuable than forcibly embracing outlier activity like the left does in America & Europe.

So, tearing someone away from their religion can screw up their life, or even kill them. It can cause them to lead a petty dead end life. And I say this fully realizing that religions also can destroy & grind down people. What's the cure? More honesty on all sides. The type of honesty that realizes that yes, very damn good parts of human morality & nature, the parts which help us avoid destructive behaviors & protect us from outliers, do fully & naturally reside within religions. The type of honesty that recognizes abuse where it's present, on all sides. Honesty about there being no god, the fact of evolution, and the lack of divinity of scripture. But also honesty that fully natural & useful human nature came up with some pretty damn good rules to help protect us.

Humans, writing things down, for very human reasons. Some of the things they wrote down do help people survive & thrive. Embrace those things. And try to reject the more destructive things.

>plenty of kids have died from malnutrition

What is the most common desire of parents in this regard? To help their children live. What does a healthy society advocate in this regard? To ensure that all children get enough food. What do other animals advocate for in this regard? The same.

>Only recently has the world tried to stop that.

Hardly.

See above.

>maybe we are messing

Yes, we are "messing." Denying our history. Denying our nature. Denying what may well be the most-healthy nature of our kids. Denying what kids may well need. Denying the abuse that happens, very commonly, today in outlier sets. Denying our place on the great mandala - the tapestry of life that we can either choose to be a part of, or not. I advocate that we choose life.

>Should we let the kids be?

"Letting them 'be'" would mean letting them grow up in a traditional long standing history most natural most common household, for their own good (for many reasons, including their own needs, plus the more common directly observed problems with outlier 'culture').

Fucking with them, would mean forcing them to grow up in a two mommy household where one mommy had to knock on a sperm bank door, and having no father in the house. Plus not helping a straight child growing up in a house which values & honors & promotes straightness (eg: the most common productive, more-healthy, set).

>We have no inherent responsibility to stay the course.

Responsibility comes from several sources. Being true to ourselves. Getting along in a community. Helping ensure that other people don't go off a cliff.

Sex, in the more common set, is wisely selfish. Even an Randian objectivist could appreciate that (even though Ayn Rand was a complete know-nothing idiot). If we AREN'T sucked in, by nature, to reproduction, we may well, and can easily, lead a petty & dead end life.

So, why are Catholics concerned about birth control?

Why does sperm bank use by single women & lesbians cause people to be concerned?

Why do people get concerned about homosexuality, pedophilia, zoophilia, sociopathy, psychopathy, schizophrenia, and other outlier-traits? Why do most all human cultures have rules & recommendations & concerns about these outlier traits which some people are either sucked into, or born into?

We don't want to see people go off a cliff.

Discounting the rules & prescriptions & suggestions of the religious, just because their god may not exist, is far far too simplistic - and is usually a completely wrong evaluation of what is actually happening.

So, honoring our history. Honoring & supporting life. Remembering that it may be dangerous to stray too far from our natural path. And remembering that, damn it, even the fucking right is "right" on some things. Damn, that's hard to admit, but it's true.

==============

Further response received on 5-29:

Seculars against same sex marriage. That is pretty ironic. I don't think they actually have any good arguments... but that is just me.

I doubt they have that big of a group.... most secular people are for equal rights of gays.

This idea that children deserve a biological mother and father to best succeed is not proven.

If it were, you would still have to deal with single parents, grandparents, foster parents, etc....

So if you oppose gay marriage, do you oppose these OTHER things as well?

My response:

Points raised & my responses:

Point 1: Most people believe in X.

Response:

Argumentum ad populum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

"...In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or most people believe it."

2. Ironic.

Response:

There's many ironies to life.

Explore some: http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/

3. What about equal rights?

Response:

Equal rights should be given when equality is deserved, warranted, healthy, safe, valuable, and applicable.

The right to civilly unite? Ok. Whatever.

The right to use the "marriage" term, which implies access to children, not so sure.

Doesn't matter how many naive judges are convinced, or the number of naive liberals jumping on board like lemmings.

I've acquired enough experiential knowledge & expertise on the subject at hand to change my position - change from the oh-so-predictable position of the naive left, to one more in the center or right, on this issue.

Leftists are naive about many things.

Leftists run the Salt Lake City Library.

Muslim Journeys:
http://www.slcpl.org/events/view/2945/
and this fool:
http://www.slcpl.lib.ut.us/events/view/1965/

A response to the leftist love of Tariq Ramadan:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fighting_words/2007/09/islamism_goes_mainstream.html

The primary Muslim journey that comes to my mind is when several adherents flew planes into buildings on 9/11. That is the preeminent "Muslim Journey" of our age.

Also, Mohamed was not an advocate for social justice.
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-new-creed-of-unitarian-universalism.html

Come to find out liberals are naive about gays as well.

Knee jerk liberals. Yes, Mr. & Mrs. Conservative, I'm starting to understand now. And I say that as a guy who's for single payer and who fully maintains that Ayn Rand was a complete & utter fool.

From Jesse Bering: "...Even in societies where homosexuality was tolerated, such as in Ancient Greece, men tended to engage in pederasty with adolescent boys while maintaining wives and families at home..."

from http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/bering-in-mind/2011/08/01/the-end-of-gays-gay-marriage-and-the-decline-of-the-homosexual-population/

Yet another connection between homosexuality & pedophilia. My goodness. Not so good of an environment for kids.

Are Mormonism & Catholicism homosexual & pedophile generators? | Connections between homosexuality & pedophilia
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/are-mormonism-catholicism-homosexual_24.html

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/pedophilia
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/homosexuality

Also Bering has written the book "Perv: The Sexual Deviant in All of Us."

I guess he'd know, as per even his direct stated connection between homos and pedos (my apologies to liberal sensibility for using the short word homo, but it seemed apt given what's being discussed) listed above - and since he's a homosexual.

Don't fuck animals. Hey, the Bible was right! Don't put your dick in an asshole! Damn, how'd they figure that one out?

Even non-Biblical cultures have figured these key truths out. Why is your average liberal in denial?

4. Noted annoyance at discovering that there are "seculars against same sex marriage."

Response:

Bursting the bubble of the liberal meme set is unpleasant also, for the liberal.

"There's people who disagree." Hmmm. Honest scientists may not be surprised. But "skeptics," no, they should never be presented with evidence counter to their suppositions.

5. Children deserve a mother & father, ideally is not proven.

Response:

The left cannot be trusted to provide an unbiased response on the matter.

Hey, maybe a kid ideally needs a mommy & a daddy. Damn, that's a hard one. We need to go to the lab to study that one.

Lame retrograde denialism.

The simplest, & most healthy, ideas from religion, discounted too soon & too quickly by your average secularist.

Do we need to prove that children need air? Water? Food?

How departed from our natural history, examining what all cultures do & advocate for, and what all people think on the matter, do we have to be?

I'm skeptical of anything but the default position: male & female raising children, for several reasons. One reason is what the child may need. Another reason is what I've observed first hand - observed things which most secularists / liberals have not observed.

Even if we want to test: It is unethical to "test," even though de facto tests are going on right now. I have a cousin lesbian conducting such a test right now. The daughter of my uncle from Manti who died of AIDS. Of course she turned gay. No problem there.

updated religious and political views... an atheist moderate / conservative
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2013/08/updated-religious-and-political-views.html

We can gather relevant evidence by a.) examining our own long standing natural history, and b.) examining what all cultures do in this regard - not just the ones that happen to agree with the leftist relativist hippie position, and c.) examining what other animals do, and d.) asking the children of gays what they think, and e.) making note of the probably-inherantly-abusive nature of "gay" culture.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/not-all-children-raised-by-gay-parents-support-gay-marriage-i-should-know-i/

A very high level of skepticism regarding anything but the default natural position. Gathering evidence from all sides & all tribes. Personal experiential evidence. All this has led me to conclude that children need a mommy & a daddy, and should not be placed in gay, nor single parent, households, period.

6. Single parents.

Less than ideal situation. Most everyone agrees with this.

Grandparents. At least it's usually a male & female, and they're grandparents after all.

Foster parents. Male & female.

7. If you oppose gay marriage, do you oppose these OTHER things as well?

Response: I'm highly skeptical of gay "marriage," based on first hand experiential knowledge of gay culture, plus what I've learned from others about the issue, plus what I know about biology & evolutionary history.

I oppose any use of sperm banks, except for male & female couples.

I believe abortion after viability should be illegal, and before viability discouraged.

I believe birth control should be legal, but discouraged.

I believe that the entirety of liberalism is, in part, a death cult - engaging in advocacy for slow motion suicide for everyone.

I have observed that liberals are denialists about human nature & natural history just as much as conservatives have been.

8. Do you also oppose people that cannot have children getting married? Why not?

Response: Adoption is ok, with a male & female adopting.

I oppose single female, lesbian couple, and gay male couple, use of the sperm bank or adoption.

The courts have decided trivially that tomatoes are vegetables.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/12/26/256586055/when-the-supreme-court-decided-tomatoes-were-vegetables

Putting on robes and being a pompous know-it-all doesn't mean you know anything.

The destructive memetic infection has reached conservatives & libertarians, passed on to them from persistent liberals.

Denial of human nature. Ignoring our natural history. Toying with the lives of children. Ignoring huge problems with gay "culture."

What are the facts? What do people observe? Do you listen to what they say? What do cultures do who don't agree with your suppositions? Do we want to toy with the lives of children?

It's not my fault that atheism does not imply skepticism, and that skepticism does not imply free thought, and that free thought does not imply honesty - when it comes to groups who use these words as part of their names.

I'm not a libertarian, but Shermer has a point:

Michael Shermer on confirmation bias, on the left:
http://www.michaelshermer.com/tag/confirmation-bias/

The Political Brain
A recent brain-imaging study shows that our political predilections are a product of unconscious confirmation bias
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-political-brain/

People are born dumbshits. That's why god invented Christopher Hitchens, Steven Pinker, and Daniel Dennett. All of those dudes may be more accepting of so-called gay, butt fuck, marriage than I am. But I've gathered more direct data than probably ALL of them combined  -  except for Hitchens possibly.

In any case I'm satisfied & generally happy with my transition to the skeptical-of-gay-marriage-and-adoption meme set / camp. And I have one advantage that many others do not: I've already been through the pain of leaving an abusive meme set (eg: Mormonism). Thus social cajoling, pressure, and attacks are far less able to affect me.

I'm interested in the truth and in honesty, even if that means that my previous liberal suppositions are overturned in part.