This Is Going Too Far! Open Pedophilia?

[Sasquatch]

Challenge accepted.

I watched/listened to the whole video at 1x. My first impression was it’s gayer than 69 dudes kissing, which is less than the number of dudes proselytizing for the conversion of children into tolerant human beings, which is kind of a sneaky way of saying those who don’t agree with homosexuality are morally bankrupt.

Regarding the gay agenda, which is oft repeated in the video, I realized I may not know exactly what it is that those folks are talking about, so I googled it and came across a bunch of shît essentially arguing it’s a disparaging label for those who don’t fully support whatever it is that homosexuals want. Some good ol’ right wing Godwin’s law labelling of those partaking of certain religious beliefs creeped into it as well.

Then, I came across this TEDx video on the topic in which an openly gay attempts to articulate that the gay agenda is simply wanting to have the full rights and privileges of the US constitution.



He had me listening up to the 11:16 mark where it became apparent that instead of wanting Constitutional equality, he was arguing for homosexuality to be a Title VI protected right. He specifically pointed out that in states like Texas, he could be fired just for being gay. Well, that’s the essence of right to work; you can be fired for any or no reason at all. So, another mark in book of being sneaky in trying to make an argument.

So, I think the fence I sit on is that all this gayness is simply provocation because they’re hung up on the fact that not everybody is as gay as they are about being gay. Well, tough titty said the kitty; not everybody is as open-minded about an enumerated right as I am either, and sexual flavor ain’t even an enumerated right.

So if a little infringement is good for goose, it’s good for the gander.

You hit a big part of it - they don't want "equal rights" - they want special rights and privlidges that others don't get. They want acceptance and obedience to their will. They won't simply live harmoniously with straights, you HAVE to ACCEPT them and agree with them, or you're a bigot. And if they want to bang your kid, you're a bigot if you won't allow it. If they try to get your son to call himself a girl and wear a dress, and you fight it, you're a bigot.

 

[easy rider]

I posted The Lotus Eaters podcast earlier, but it was their full podcast from their website. They finally posted on Youtube the section of the podcast dealing with just this. This video is about 24 minutes long in total, but the part talking about the "We Are Coming For Your Children" is just several minutes. They also list their sources on their website if interested. So you be the judge on what the intent is:

 

[Wolfwood]

Y'know, as a mod, this thread puts me in an awkward position.

I can understand you not liking the song. It's totally in-your-face with the whole "gay agenda" thing. And, yes, the song actually uses the phrase "gay agenda".

However, absolutely nothing in the song mentions pedophilia or even alludes to it. The theme of the song is found in the line: The song is about influencing society at large, including both children and adults (The song goes on to specifically talk about converting the adults, the parents of the children), to accept homosexuality. It's gay people saying that they want to influence everyone, including children, to "ally" with and accept the homosexual community.

It's not about having sex with kids. Period. Full stop.

So why is this awkward? Well, I'm totally behind your feeling that children should be shielded from non-parentally-approved influences, especially from people you consider to be a bad influence. However, the title of the thread is just flat wrong and inflammatory.

If I were "woke", I'd just delete the thread and ban you for hate speech. Well, I'm not woke. TGT as a whole hasn't been infected with that disease. Even if I think you've made an error in tone, I think you could spark a meaningful conversation. And, needless to say, you're in no danger of a ban.

But that headline using the word "pedophilia"? I'm leaning toward telling you that you need to either justify that or edit your thread title to remove the word. It's probably not a violation of the Code of Conduct but it is stirring shit up when that particular strain of shit didn't even exist to begin with.

However, I'm not married to that position.

I would like to hear some input from easy rider and others regarding this. What is the sense of the community?

Also - Please note in your replies whether or not you've actually listened to the song lyrics.

Respectfully what "they" say and what they mean has never lined up. and the "we are coming for your children" line is having its intended effect.
It is pissing people off. Someone who has sucked as many dicks as that guy can not meet the definition of naive. I have to assume therefore that he knows the effect his words will have, and sings them anyway. Why? Possibly to get views, and cash in. But at least equally likely as part of the over all push that has been in full public view since at least GWBush to groom entire generations of children to think being gay is fun and cool.

Sure they aren't coming for your son's butthole directly, they are going to molest his mind first in the schools, through the television in your home, through their cell phones, through their scout troop. They are coming for your children to make compliant. Not to teach them, but to train them.

 

[kyletxria1911a1]

People's way of life is their choice I care less love who you want.

Respectfully what "they" say and what they mean has never lined up. and the "we are coming for your children" line is having its intended effect.
It is pissing people off. Someone who has sucked as many dicks as that guy can not meet the definition of naive. I have to assume therefore that he knows the effect his words will have, and sings them anyway. Why? Possibly to get views, and cash in. But at least equally likely as part of the over all push that has been in full public view since at least GWBush to groom entire generations of children to think being gay is fun and cool.

Sure they aren't coming for your son's butthole directly, they are going to molest his mind first in the schools, through the television in your home, through their cell phones, through their scout troop. They are coming for your children to make compliant. Not to teach them, but to train them.

Man I hope not that can get someone hurt bad

 

[BeatTheTunaUp]

 

[rusty tweezers]

Yeah I couldn’t hold back.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

They sure are getting alot more "clicks" than they normally would...

 

[CyberWolf]

...However, there are always layers of meaning to everything. The more I read, the less I'm willing to take the lyrics at face value.

We've reached the point where nothing whatsoever can or should be taken at face value - (at least, not for anyone who hasn't been lost).

(tl;dr warning)

There's so much going on, across so many facets of life, with observable/quantifiable themes -

1. stretched out over time;
2. "sharded" across different planes of perception/experience; and,
3. ever-more cleverly obfuscated by advancing knowledge decoupled from any sense of morality;

In fact, I suggest the only reason the broader themes and interconnections between them are even perceptible at all - to anyone, is that we're approaching a critical nexus and major societal inflection point with far-reaching and global (dare I even say potentially existential ) considerations.

I'm not yet prepared to lean more-heavily in my opinion towards the root-issue(s) being tied to malice or true (biblical-style) Evil, but I no longer have any doubt that at least one is involved.

The challenge is that these topics can be extremely painful and difficult to work through, given Human Nature. I believe this is also deliberate - the combination of factors is just too damn cunning to be random IMO...

Without getting into any topic tied to religion, I'll link this quote back to M. Ghandhi (though I understand it's biblical origins): "Hate the sin, not the sinner..."

This is directly applicable in this case - not so much in the context of "sin", but understanding that many find themselves involuntarily captive to circumstances outside not only their control, but often their very perception. Bunch of paradox to unwrap here, but demonstrable and supportable; it is the mastery of manipulation, and as Sun Tzu said, "The greatest victory is that which requires no [physical] battle". One could even extend that to something like "The truly greatest victory, beyond even that which requires no battle, is victory without perception of conflict".

Think about that a bit, and ask yourself if you can spot any common "themes" . (suggest looking at things in terms of multi-generational, but not overy-excessive timelines)

^in other words (in case this bit is needed for clarification to keep anyone's panties from getting all twisted up), from my perspective - the fact that someone may be gay or not is no different than whether they are tall or short, skinny or fat, light or dark, funny or boring, loud or soft-spoken, etc. What matters is how they conduct themselves, and considerations of how they use (or abdicate) their own agency.

ETA: one last clarification, in case it wasnt clear - that last statement above is broad-stroke perspective; there are some actions/behaviors which, regardless of actual intent, circumstances, or perceived reasoning (or lack thereof) -active pedophilia being one in particular- are an abomination any way you look at it and should be dealt with by society swiftly, and in proportion to the severity of offense (clinically in most instances; excessively and publicly punitive for the most extreme cases).

 

[andre3k]

Sure they aren't coming for your son's butthole directly, they are going to molest his mind first

This is probably the funniest thing I've read on TGT, which is sad, because it's probably true.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[easy rider]

This is probably the funniest thing I've read on TGT, which is sad, because it's probably true.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Unless of course you have a young son.

My kids are grown, and so far my grandkids are of an age where, if they haven't been indoctrinated yet, it's probably a bit late. (Granddaughter just graduated with a bachelors and the grandson just graduated from high school)

Thing is, I care what harm kids may be exposed to, even if they aren't mine.

 

[toddnjoyce]

I got a second opinion.

Played it for my wife with no explanation, I said just listen and tell me what you think and hit play.

At the end, she had just one thing to say, “It’s disgusting to hear men say that about their desires for little kids.” She was pretty livid that a song like that could be thought up, much less recorded and distributed.

Just a data point.

 

[seeker_two]

To liberal extremists like these, "tolerance" means "wholeheartedly accepting and participating with no exceptions". Anything less is hate speech and violence towards them.

If they don't respect my values and culture, why should I respect theirs?

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[popsgarland]

I don't think people should say that all LGBT+ are all alike., but.

This is the extent of my personal experience.

I have a grandson who is 19 and has been a transsexual, acts and dresses as a female, for the past 5 years.

I have a grand daughter who is 25 and has been in a relationship with the same female for over 9 years.

I have a niece that has married her female partner over 10 years ago. They adopted a baby boy that is 8 years old now. They have NEVER tried to make/get him to be anything but a heterosexual. They have plenty of gay and straight friends and treat each other as a person and not as anything else.

All of the people above are some of the nicest people you would ever want to meet and they don't try to push their believes on anyone.

 

[CyberWolf]

...All of the people above are some of the nicest people you would ever want to meet and they don't try to push their believes on anyone.

And this Sir, is a perfect example of the difference between:

1. Good people doing their best to play the hand they've been dealt; and,

2. Those with nefarious intent, either directly or indirectly (on behalf of others)

 

[BeatTheTunaUp]

I don't think people should say that all LGBT+ are all alike., but.

This is the extent of my personal experience.

I have a grandson who is 19 and has been a transsexual, acts and dresses as a female, for the past 5 years.

I have a grand daughter who is 25 and has been in a relationship with the same female for over 9 years.

I have a niece that has married her female partner over 10 years ago. They adopted a baby boy that is 8 years old now. They have NEVER tried to make/get him to be anything but a heterosexual. They have plenty of gay and straight friends and treat each other as a person and not as anything else.

All of the people above are some of the nicest people you would ever want to meet and they don't try to push their believes on anyone.

They sound like fine people. Honestly. It sounds like they're not activists which is pretty much the deciding factor of my return respect. I wish people like those in the video wouldn't make it harder for the "normal" gay people.

 

[Sam7sf]

Wow. Really good content in this thread. A few immediate thoughts:

Ben you have got to be the best moderator in all the web. I have seen my share of bad mods elsewhere and I respect the time you take to educate us and challenge us and respect our freedom of speech.

Easy Rider is spot on and took the words out of my mouth.

Children are innocent and adults who influence their perversions onto kids have no moral compass. Even if their intentions are political only, it’s horrible. The only thing a child should learn is school work.

 

[easy rider]

With the push to let children transition through drugs and surgery, and now this, I don't think they have the best of intentions towards children when they say they are coming for your children. I can't help but think what I would have done if this was the state of our nation when my kids were young.

 

[toddnjoyce]

.. They won't simply live harmoniously with straights...

At some point today, I learned the appropriately homo term for heterosexuals is in debate; apparently we are either ‘breeders’ or ‘chest feeders’. Whatever floats their boat, don’t bother me.

Then I had a queer thought on the whole song thing and remembered that flavor of the species perpetually dies off due to the inability to naturally procreate, therefore recruitment is requisite.

Fûck them; recruit from grown-assed folks that can make up their own damn minds. May not legally be pedophelia, but it damn sure ain’t right.

 

[digger]

Exposed

You are being redirected...

rairfoundation.com

 

[benenglish]

Exposed

I was aware of all that. When I get back home to my desktop I'll have a bit to say. And by "bit", I mean I hope I can get it composed and posted by mid-afternoon.

A question, first. Would anybody be uncomfortable with me revealing personal details of my life to illustrate a point? I haven't made the decision to do so but I know that if I do, some folks will view me differently...and that's something I really don't want.