Anti-pride month thread

Did I trigger you this much that you had to make a second thread to try to derail mine, JIDF?

Here's the original thread about burning gay flags for freedom

8ch.net/pol/res/6187574.html

...

This. Think of those hippie faggots from the Simpsons when Homer meets his mom.

Again, over here is the same damned thread, made an hour ago, with an actual plan for how to trigger the liberals.

8ch.net/pol/res/6187574.html

This is JIDF trying to slide it.

I wasn't here an hour ago.
Sorry I guess, you
INSUFFERABLE WHINGING FAGGOT

My bad mate. Just trying to get something going that will focus the autism into a massive triggering.

In that case, let's rev up that shitposting!

...

Fuckin' saved.

This kid is gonna grow up to be some fag who shuffles between casual fuck to casual fuck, contracts some incurable shit, and spends the rest of his life in spiraling depression and lonliness since he never developed a relationship based on anything other than fucking.

Goddamnit, don't these people have standards?

I think a good thing of islam coming in europe is at least the anti-faggot ideology they bring in

...

Abdul, please.
You're next on the list after the jews.

What about a gay guy that goes to pride but doesn't do all that degenerate stuff?

They're trying to meme gay parties = average summer.

Be aware of this Holla Forums, be VERY aware, the amount of straight normies that go to gay pride in my city each year is growing exponentially.

That shit is degenerate.
Going to that shit is degenerate.
If you're asking for yourself, you're degenerate.
I masturbate and smoke weed almost every day, so I am, too, but I don't need to ask questions to know.

...

autism pride month when?

Die

I mostly just walked around feeling like i didn't belong honestly and i only went one time a couple of years ago. I'm a neet so I'm not all that degenerate.

That last image was fucking perfect. Please tell me that's how gay men on /lgbt/ actually feel.

Holla Forums does shit on gay people enough these days.

I don't, i would never EVER fuck with mud people. That picture was made by a tranny.

whoops, read that wrong. A lot of gay men on there actually act like that expect for the jamal nigger part.

Reminder that nothing has changed.

Gays that have shown exemplary service to our cause shall be spared and viewed as equals for their sacrifice.

Every other faggot, dyke, tranny, and other variation of bizarre degenerates will hang from trees and swing in the wind. No middle ground. No compromise.

Oh and this thread needs more of the straight-pride flag:

...

Red and blue and a more interesting pattern would work better imo. Calm feminine color, high energy masculine color.

Be careful, it would be close to the bisexual flag, though.

Oops, pic related:

Do fags need to ruin everything? Why do we inevitably get stuck with a boring black and white flag? Maybe an emblem would be better. I don't know how you'd make it look nice and classy without making it overly complicated though. Maybe some artfag can make an emblem of Mars and Venus together?

thats because people get dragged to it by the girlfriend

Everything you there do is sent to the government.

...

This \/ \/

Homosexuals are fucking degenerate. When guys do it, it's beyond disgusting, and when women do it, well it's a complete waste of women.
Let's look at this from a Darwinist perspective. People are programmed to be attracted to the other gender, for purpos of reproduction. Whether you want offspring or not, the drive to be with someone of the other gender is still there, as you should be genetically inclined to do. Even liberals claim it's not a choice, and is genetic. That said, it is an abnormality, and should not be considered 'normal'.
Also:
nydailynews.com/news/national/bakery-pays-135k-refusing-gay-wedding-cake-article-1.2479452
"Equality"

The difference is that one has taken his degeneracy to the point of active self-destruction while the other desires to be a pernicious element in the revitalized society. Of the two the fag dying of AIDS is preferable since he both removes himself and serves as an object lesson to not go down that path.

...

tl;dr "im more righteous than all of you, this book here says so"

What do you mean?

...

No they aint. Not after I blow up all the ISIS , Saudis and Turks and make the middle east great again by resurrecting the persian empire and making clones of syrian genes to make more blue eyed shia muslim arabs.

Turn it into gay white pride month.

Nice try muhammed.

If he's attracted to men but doesn't act on those desires I really don't care.

If he does then he's not pulling his weight in the society that protects and nurtures him, and deserves to, at the very least, be expelled.

Unless they're spreading that attitude to Europeans (they aren't) it doesn't matter.

THIS FUCKING NIGGER WILL BURN IN HELL

fuck off milo, faggotry should never be accepted as normal in a civilized society, it discourages sexual selection

When the fuck did I say that, you illiterate? I explicitly said if he does not act on those desire. That means no faggotry, you fucking tard.

Fags should be encouraged to seek treatment just like anybody else with a mental illness. And sectioned if they refuse.

No disagreement here. I'm torn between facilitating their healing to normal lives and just outright expelling them to some sort of colony.

You nuke that colony afterwards right?

And that is?

Homos are an ever present problem though. What would you do with the new ones?

The 9mm pill.

All gays, (((good))) and bad, will be castrated. It's a necessary thing.

This thread needs more HIP

...

...

...

...

Fuck off you faggots
>>>/oven/

I would make a fake Facebook account just to post these. Doing it tomorrow

...

faggot pedo, go take a long walk off a short pier on the river styx.

make me

I don't see a problem with a degenerate taking it in the ass from another man, so long as he doesn't bother me about it like fucking pridefags.

How about no? I have the right to live.

...

Any drawfags to redrawn them? The style looks like a copy paste of pictures from google.

...

kek

But seriously, if they leave me alone, I don't care.

Let me guess… you live in Europe?

Get out of my country you sodomite

No, I'm an Amerifat. I just don't believe rights exist beyond declaration.

I say you should be more worried about illegals, sand niggers and regular niggers before fags.

I hesitate to take the advice of a sodomite

I would second that advice, actually. Sand niggers, niggers, and spics are higher in number and influence. Get them out first, then deal with the fags.

im selling pitchforks, do you want some?

Hope you have a job that won't be taken away by a illegal.

All i want is a mud free America with jobs brought back from the turd world but i guess that isn't enough for Holla Forums seeing as i happen to like guys. I guess i will have to start gay bashing liberal sjw /lgbt/ people.

HAVE YOU TAKEN A GOOD LOOK AT MODERN WOMEN LATELY?! Even if i was straight i wouldn't want any part of what they have because fuck that.

Are you new to Holla Forums? People act like this all the time. I suspect it's a small few that are the ones frequently doing it, but I see people call for censorship, use the "degenerate" buzzword, make false claims about peoples or countries they know nothing about, and so on. It's the burden of free speech: we have to deal with idiots.

im just making light fun of him, this place loves to go full retard and sucks at actual political discussion, same applies to leftypol

here is your new necklace, try it on

How about no. Like i said you need to worry about Sand niggers, niggers, and spics before worrying about what i do in my bedroom. Honestly grow up.

People like you will never build a civilization. You'll be stuck in the mudhuts not caring and wondering why you can't get anything off the ground.

As if nobody could tell you don't belong here.

You have the right, but that doesn't mean it is or should be guaranteed, defended, or protected.

Stop using words you don't know the meaning of. And stop baiting too.

You can't appeal to liberal morality here. A mature person would recognize that childish apathy about the actions of his brothers in society is suicide for him and his descendants. Stop trying to rationalize it as somehow morally superior. It isn't, and "tolerance" is cancer.

I just want to live without the fear of being gay bashed or worse.

Die faggot.

Earth isn't your safe space you fucking abomination.

Find a different reality then. Nobody is going to fight for you when you won't contribute to the propagation of the society that protects you from being bashed.

Dammed if i do and dammed if i don't. I would rather pick the non liberal side as i can't stand them even though they fight for my rights.

It is an odd thing to know.

I just wanted Holla Forums to know not all of us gays are sluts and whatever other stereotypes of gay people are out there. Thought i could be the voice of reason.

likewise, nobody is going to protect you when the muslims take over europe and caucasian males become an endangered species

That isn't even most of the problem most of Holla Forums — at least the intelligent section — has with homosexuals though. The most glaringly obvious problem is that you don't help propagate society. You can't reproduce. You cannot keep society alive. And for what purpose? Selfish pleasure. That is not a noble or admirable goal, nor is it one most on Holla Forums feel should be fought or died for.

Other problems exist, such as the statistical likelihood of the degeneracy for homosexuals. If you have a mental disorder, you're likely to do a lot of disordered stuff. We don't care about the "good" ones anymore than we care about the "good" blacks. Statistically they're just a liability, and there is no benefit to trying to get the "good" homosexuals.

That's not to say that those who fight of their own volition ought to be refused, but the hard fact of the matter is that unless they choose not to act on their perverted desires (a very difficult thing to do) they cannot truly be a boon in the end. A small few may be so great as to offset this, but great men are so few in number already that the probabilities of having a homosexual great man is vanishingly small. Most cannot get past their own sexual perversion, and you end up with people like you and Milo who will fight the left but never truly embrace anything like true or beneficial values; they fight to be left alone, not to create something great. It is not an admirable goal. The best that can be said of it is that it is a simple goal of survival, but that is not admirable either, merely a fact. I trust I don't have to spell out the worst of what may be said.

More for my own curiosity than anything else, indulge me in this question: if there was some miraculous procedure that could make you desire women and you were offered it, would you take it?

The homosexuals? No, they aren't going to be protected. They are, by nature itself, a group that will never be anything more than a growth on the successful, unable to have a separate existence, effectively a cancer since they can never provide more than they take.

What about men and women that are barren and can't have kids or straights that don't like kids and never have them? I would say that gays could adopt but i would just be labeled a pedo rapist.

So i have basically have to be alone and sexless till i die?

Yes i would take it BUT i still wouldn't deal with today's modern woman. Too much risk.

All homosexuals are mentally ill though. Therefore they are degenerate for how could someone with a mental illness refuse to cure themselves.

Name a cure that isn't a bullet or a rope.

Mental rehabilitation and chemical castration.

There is two.

As I've been saying, you can't make the law based on the few. That said, yes, these people are drains, but are so insignificantly tiny that they do not merit attention. This is compounded by the fact that, unlike homosexuals, they do not have tendencies to mental disorders and anticivilizational behavior, so far as I know.

Degenerates as well. They are cancers just the same.

And so could Africans. That doesn't make it a good idea. Children deserve a whole family, not too ill men (or women) LARPing as one.

Blame nature. It's no different to a man without arms lamenting that he can never hug his wife.

Good to know, but the risk is exaggerated. It's a balancing act between propagating our people and avoiding the Jewish system and the explosion of your family.

Okay… let's say that is a cure and i start to love women. meet a woman, start dating….

Whoops sorry i don't have junk anymore so no babies for you.

The probability (risk) of that would be balanced against the risk of you being a danger to civilization.

Given how most homosexuals are I'd say it's pretty obvious which is the riskier path.

It is a pill that makes you have no sexual drive. Typical queer having no knowledge of science.

They give it to paedophiles to stop them molesting it works.

yeah i don't give a shit

you guys will never be happy

That's not an argument.

Besides, liking (or being) homosexual is mutually exclusive to being healthy and happy, so I'm not sure what your point is.

t. Stefan

...

From what i know about gays is that it's only risky when you are a god dammed slut druggy that fucks anything that walks.

I'm not a scientist so i wouldn't know about that stuff. I was a working poor stiff but now a neet again till i can find more work.

Don't you make fun of me bro.

(((checked)))

Who would want to employ a mentally ill person?

With so many horrible things in the world it is hard to be happy.

So most of them?

Statistically if I was to get any random homosexual they would be exactly what you described. They would be a cancer on society for multiple reasons. In other words, the risk of neutralizing a productive and beneficial citizen is far outweighed by the benefit of neutralizing an overwhelmingly subversive minority population.

Feel free to argue that most homosexuals aren't like that, and if you can prove it I'd be really interested, but as it stands I'm doubtful it's the case.

Holy shit, that addiction one is great! I'll download and remember that one.

The same type of person that would hire a nigger or illegal.

(((checked again)))

I'm not going to argue that most homosexuals aren't like that because that would be lying.

I'm just saying that I'm not like them. I have my own morals (from when i was still in the closet being a good christian)

There's also a 50% chance they'd be a paedo.

Morals aren't supposed to be subjective. Now go get therapy to try to cure yourself instead of worshipping your illness.

kek

learn how to read statistics correctly

Not like them, but you still cannot or will not take that last leap to be a boon. You cannot even take the comparatively easier step of arguing against philosophies like "live and let live."

I would more readily believe in your virtuousness if I didn't see you telling people that their unwillingness to accept your perversion is immaturity. In the end, how is that much better than the leftists you fight against? When you both still lead civilization off of the cliff?

If people have the right to live are their mortal bodies oppressing them?

I just get upset that people want to kill me even though i did nothing wrong to them personally so i get angry and start to liberal speak even when i don't mean too.

...

The weakness in your thinking is this point. The enemies that soldiers kill have done nothing to the soldiers personally, and yet if the soldiers did not do their job you would be enslaved. It's a shit metric, is my point. Take the "personal" bit out of it. It has nothing to do with how much you warrant death. It's entirely irrelevant.

Sounds like it's still ingrained in your heart, user. You haven't truly become anti-leftist when you harbor their false morals in your mind.

There are plenty of jews and niggers who have done nothing wrong to me personally but I still want to exterminate them. Don't take it personally. Faggotry should just be something you hide like they did in the old days, being open about it starts a slippery slope that ends with the transgender otherkin complaining about not having their own bathroom or fags ruining marriage and in general discouraging men to act like and women to act like women. A healthy society is one in which sexual reproduction is encouraged as much as possible, 'gender fluidity' fucks that up big time. Also fags shouldn't be allowed to adopt kids, it's a bad influence on them.

I suppose i could just shut myself off from everything around me and go full hikikomori but i suppose that would make me a different kind of degenerate.

Well technically I'm not open about it. My friends and family know, that's all. It's not like i go up to random people saying "hey, i suck a billion dicks love is love yass queen bigot blah blah".

Yeah, you're kind of stuck. Best hope that medicine advances enough to restore what nature has robbed of you.

So would it be hypocritical of me to say that i don't really think it was all natures fault?

Could be stuff that companies (((jews))) are putting in the water, food and air.

real bastions of logic and reason there

Could be that too. Consider it my attempt at being poetic, but whatever the case the fact remains you've been robbed of a healthy life, whether by chance or malicious elements, and that you ought to be hoping for some sort of cure.

Can't tell if sarcasm.

...

I'll assume sarcasm then.

it even sages

Well I'm not going to mess up this thread anymore. I enjoyed your comments too me, gives me stuff to think about.

Have some pictures of great things.

new england puritans were fucking lame, virginian anglicans much more based

At least you have good taste.

For what it's worth, I wish you luck, user.

I prefer not dying, not getting castrated, not going under intense conversion/brainwashing therapy and not being celibate because apparently the only point of life is to have children. What are my options?

Just make it white pride month

Find a new reality where society is propagated without children.

Wow. Let me go get my reality-jumping gear to go to some different reality or you could just give an actual answer.

The actual answer is that you're fucked. You might as well be demanding that Santa and the Tooth Fairy be real. You're demanding things that can't happen. What answer can I give you other than that, whatever you want, you won't find it in this reality?

You could just kill yourself or admit that you need to grow some balls and have some kids with a super hot babe of a wife.

So there isn't any other point of life besides having children? Why can't I help the right besides having children, can't I try to support them in other affairs like fighting for my nation or convincing people to join the right?

No, that's not what we're saying. We're saying that if you don't have children you've failed at life, but more relevant to the discussion is that you cannot claim anything from a society you refuse to keep alive out of your own selfishness.

The difference is that other people do that stuff and have children. In other words, compared to the average you're a net waste of resources. The only time that wouldn't be true is if you turned out to be a Napoleon, Jackson, Newton, or Maxwell. But, not to sound derogatory, that probably isn't the case.

Without that ability life would cease to exist. You can support the nation in plenty of ways, just don't be a faggot.

I highly doubt that I've failed at life if I don't have children and while I am not a Napoleon, Jackson, Newton or Maxwell. Also by using that logic a net waste of resources also applies anyone who hasn't had children and not to be derogatory I highly doubt that you've had children. So I guess that makes us both net waste of resources.

I know but why do I have to not be a faggot to support my nation?

Because, almighty Satan, faggots don't make nations great, straight people do.

Well I guess there aren't many straight people then.

There's more to it than that you smug faggot, we also need straight people who aren't cuckolds and who love their race. We need to re-instill certain values.

You've failed at being an organism, which falls under failing at life.

If they're past the ability to have them, yes.

The difference is that I plan to, as I do not selfishly expect society to both cater to me and not require my assistance in return.

No, just you, so long as you're shirking your duty. Either that or as long as you're not a self-sufficient hermit.

Well since I am not a cuckold and I love my race, I should qualify for at least 66% greatness which is much more than the average straight person these days.

So I should consider myself an organism like an animal or a plant? Sorry but I don't subscribe to that philosophy.
So elderly and infertile straight people are to be cut off from supplies? I think good morals are one of the best points the right-wing has and that is not morally right.
Plans are things that don't exist. I do not expect society to selfishly cater to me also and I am giving my assistance by doing my job as best I can.
It isn't a duty, it's a biological function that needs to be used to ensure that the population grows. I am not a self-sufficient hermit but I do my job which helps society grow and I get money to buy food to ensure my life is continued, so I don't exactly get things for free.

It's called a fact. Or do you think humans are somehow above the need to reproduce?

They've done their duty. Why would they be punished?

Maybe, but it's honestly not worth the effort. Genuine infertility in straight people is vanishingly rare to the point it's basically unheard of. Most any form of supposed infertility is medically treatable, as homosexuality will be once the taboo on researching it properly as a mental disorder is broken.

How is it not morally right to cut off those who do you harm?

I can already see where this discussion is going. Tell me now if you're going to deny objective truth or logic so that we don't waste anymore time.

The best job that you can? You are rendering service the best that you are able? You can't think of any other function you might be repressing because of sexual urges that might be useful to society?

The fact of the matter is that you are not giving society your best, and are, in fact, refusing to perform one of the most crucial functions in keeping it alive all because of a biological defect you refuse to overcome.

The two aren't exclusive. Being alive is a biological function and generally a duty when you're part of a society. To have a society where being alive is not a duty makes no sense at all.

And since the population growing is a requirement for the continued existence of civilization and society, it is your duty as a member of that society to perform functions facilitating this requirement. What's so hard to grasp about this?

Perhaps you should be, since you are unwilling to perform one of the most basic duties of any citizen.

No, you merely prosper off of others while contributing less. That's called being a leech. You perform fewer duties and yet expect the same position as others who do more than you.

The thing I don't get is how these anti-gay crusaders feel like the gay agenda is trying to infringe their rights and control their life when they add a gay character to their favorite sitcom… then the same people will unironically advocate killing all gay people.

You have bitch fits about "anti-civilized" gay behavior and then call for mob violence and speech control and death and chemical castration and so on.

You seek to infringe the gays' rights more than they seek to infringe theirs.

This same hypocrisy always comes up– "fuck these uppity fags asking for rights and respect! The fucking nerve of them! I mean all I wanted to do as kill and chemically castrate them…"

Also, some of the the language and arguments in this thread point to obvious closet gay tendencies. Like referring to homosexuality as some addiction or temptation you have to resist, as if everyone else also had these gay tendencies they constantly had to suppress. Men bitching about "muh white babies, gotta make babies" while being 23 with no girlfriend, bitching in the feminist thread about how women are mean and gross and smell bad and why can't we just have a pure, noble, chiseled aryan society with no women allowed.

typo
*You seek to infringe the gays' rights more than they seek to infringe yours.

you're sick and need to be hung by the neck

So Laqueesha with 14 babies in section 8 on food stamps is less of a drain to society than a gay man because she can shit more kids out her pussy?

Shitting out kids isn't the only way to contribute to society, by that logic India's the most civilized place on earth.

We are talking about more children, not apes. Learn the difference.

The difference is that one helps and promotes civilization and man rising to be something greater. The other promotes savagery and the destruction of civilization. The two are not equal.

Homosexual behavior inevitably leads to civilization collapsing. This is indisputable.

I guess you consider it hypocritical or against freedom to lock up the mentally ill too. In other words, you're a retarded absolutist. One can have degrees of things as all civilizations have had, and one can call for the correction of that which destroys civilization without having also to call destruction on that which makes it thrive.

To speak for myself personally, however, my general preference is for the mentally ill to seek help, and to be deported if they cannot/won't be rehabilitated.

Straight from the Gary Johnson convention, I presume? Rights are not things that must be inherently protected, and there is no cognitive dissonance in "infringing" on the rights of those who should not have their rights guaranteed in the first place (as they refuse to protect and serve that which would potentially do so). Just the same as it is fine to "infringe" on the rights of criminals, or the rights of the foreign, or the rights of the traitorous.

That's not hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is applying a different standard to identical things, and if you honestly think homosexuals and normal people are identical you're retarded. Homosexuals are, by definition, mentally ill.

Right, this is bait. I should have seen it sooner.

Do or don't homosexuals have sexual temptations towards those they should not?

Underrated post.
FAGGOTS BELONG IN A FIRE

Because gays subvert culture and sensibilities of the society and spread acceptance for moral decay. Back in the day even talking about straight sex openly was a taboo thing and for a good reason - it was a private matter between man and his wife. Everyone still knew where babies came from and prostitution always existed, but there was never a need for open displays of lewd images or behaviour from anyone.

I am not a puritan by any stretch of imagination, but we currently suffer from an inherent lack of restraint and over-saturation of sexual imagery and products in ordinary lives, which ruins younger generations and cheapens relationships and gays exacerbate it without shame.

Back to the closet or to the oven, it matters not to me, but if you don't do it voluntarily, it will be done for you and without asking politely.

A foreign invader is not part of the society. She's not a boon. I don't even know why you'd have to ask that.

It is one of the most basic and necessary ways. Anything you do on top of that is a benefit and contribution, but if you don't do it you've nullified any good you might have done. It's the same as earning $50 but spending $100. You've put yourself in the moral red.

You're being illogical and implying that which does not logically follow. Not having kids means being a net waste to society, but that doesn't logically imply that the only way to ever contribute to society is by having children. Perhaps you ought to invest in some sort of logic course.

Having healthy and intelligent children willing to contribute to their society, and doing the same yourself through a myriad of ways, is what benefits society and constitutes a net contribution. This really isn't hard to figure out.

So this is the intellectual calibre I'm dealing with.

I agree that homosexual behavior often accompanies societal collapse, but that's because ALL morals tend to dissolve at that point. It's more like a symptom than a cause. If you think gay buttsex is more important than wealth accumulation, corruption, demographic shift or generational disconnect you are sorely mistaken.

You say gays shouldn't have their rights guaranteed. Why? Where is the evidence they destroy societies? I know, muh birth rates and all that. But that is not a valid reason to end someone's life. If you consider murder the solution to people liking different sex stuff than you, you might just be a sociopath more harmful to society than any faggot.

I mean the supposedly "straight" posters. They act like resisting gay tendencies is some fact of life that we all deal with. Like we're all seconds away from ripping our clothes off and having gay sex unless the rules are in place. The social condemnation they try to shift onto others is based in fears of how they believe society will treat them if their sexuality was revealed.

You like penis in your asshole.

You don't deserve rights.

I also want to point something out. By posting here, you are committing hate speech. The people who "protect and serve" our society (aka Jew masters) hate you, consider you a neo-nazi, and would strip you of all your rights. You shouldn't have your rights guaranteed, you're a fuckin nazi! You're mentally ill! You should be in a re-education camp by the standards of today! Therefore, because you're such an evil nazi, you don't deserve rights.

I definitely agree with this. The difference is, I don't think we should be criminally punished for failing to do this.

I am not a puritan by any stretch of imagination, but we currently suffer from an inherent lack of restraint and over-saturation of sexual imagery and products in ordinary lives, which ruins younger generations and cheapens relationships and gays exacerbate it without shame.

I definitely agree with this. The difference is, I think straight sexuality is just as gross and subverted. Seeing Jessica or Jacob twerk on live TV on jumbotron is the same to me.

I believe humans do need to reproduce but the fact is they can think and do all kinds of wonderful things like create art, write poetry, make music and learn. Can a cat paint a picture? Can a plant write poetry? No because it's not human.
Correct. So can I adopt to do my duty or does that not count?
Well tell me when you find a way to convert homosexuals besides brainwashing them, castrating them or murdering them.
We don't cut off terminally ill patients and they leech even more resources, don't reproduce and they can't work because it is morally wrong.
Plans are things that have the chance to not happen and change constantly. You won't be the same person you were before you enacted the plan. Nobody can predict the future, just guess it.
Lots of people have biological defects that they need to overcome like cancer, malaria and various other diseases but we don't have non-cancer pride. Some cancer patients choose to not undergo chemo as they cannot afford it.
Good point. But I don't think you're getting what I was saying.
8% is the rough amount of people that are gay, so it likely isn't going to affect society in the long run. Straight people have 92%, so I don't think we are going to cause the end of society unless we automagically become 92% of the population and straight people 8%.
Yes and I'll start a moon colony with gay people that will eventually die off.
A leech is something that drains something without giving anything in return. Maybe I shouldn't be allowed to be president, mayor or any sort of administrative job because I can't reproduce. But I should be allowed to live, eat and do most things straight people are allowed to do.

Homosexuals -> no children -> no people -> no civilization. It's not hard.

Even assuming this is true, what intoxicant in your brain makes you think that somehow you will be able to permit homosexuality whilst keeping intact all other moral barricades? Moreover, it is obviously easier to not tolerate homosexuality, and so this then begs the question of what the point of protecting homosexuality is.

When have I said that? What prevents me from condemning all the evils which plague my civilization?

Because there is literally no point in doing so. I gave you the reason in that very sentence. No civilization that guarantees the rights of those who refuse to sustain and revitalize it will survive. That is a fact. Ergo, either there is some benefit to civilization in protecting the rights of homosexuals (and even then there is debate on which rights), or such an effort is entirely pointless and thus homosexuals deserving of ejection or correction.

Right in front of your eyes. AIDS is only a problem because of them. They not only help lower birthrates, they, statistically, are plague-carriers and standard-bearers of the traitors and enemies. Homosexuals are not friends of any civilization and never have been, as history asserts quite clearly. There is no evidence that they have ever, in any significant capacity, helped any civilization anywhere, anytime.

According to you only. Besides, I advocated for expulsion before, but I'm open to outright termination. I see it as a bit unnecessary, but if it was proved to be necessary I wouldn't shy away from it.

Always with the childish comparisons like it's a fucking preference of ice cream flavor. They aren't equal. There is no comparison, and nor is it logical to boil down punishing homosexuals for helping the collapse of civilization to a mere difference in opinion over what gets one's dick hard. If you honestly are that simplistic in the brain you have no business being alive anyhow.

>"Ha, with my illogical premise I'll prove he's the one who's degrading society! Remember, killing those who harm society is actually more harmful to society!"
Either you actually believe that or you're trying to conceal blatant falsehoods with tenuous fabrications.

Sounds more like you can't imagine people not being that way, because you're so degraded yourself. But I'm not here to do cringey psychological evaluation, and you trying to feebly project things onto other posters rather than addressing arguments is not making your pro-homo position any stronger.

I don't condone the upper slope and degeneracy, but I'd love to see these same people backpedaling in some years when (((they))) start trying to make bestiality/pedophilia/necrophilia/etc acceptable or even via legalizing it.

Or more simple than that, that some people start getting tired of these fag pride parade and fag pride month and they themselves now start pushing for straight pride parades. No degeneracy or a straight couple fucking on the street, just traditional, average families parading in their best clothes holding their hands and holding their children's hands.

Why not just be straight by then? Honestly why not?

The problem starts when the 8% demands rights and promotes exposure of itself as if they were 50%, when it is known and statistically shown that this small percentage is responsible for a large portion of sexual abuse, deviancy and STDs among ENTIRE society.

All people should have a chance to live, work, and love, but not when private bedroom conduct and sexual preference become a political badge and a rallying point for a minority lifestyle, it becomes a huge problem. It's called deviancy.

I don't mind gays as long as they are deep in the closets, but flamboyant parades are just an invitation to be purged.

You didn't "fail." The circumstances of life didn't trip you up. You chose not to, and deliberately choosing an action that harms society is worthy of punishment.

Moreover, being treated for mental illness isn't a punishment. My preferred method, expulsion and deportation, is very much adequate for failing to do your duty. You don't deserve to live in a society you choose not to support for the sake of a few orgasms. But that's a moral judgement that's neither here nor there; more practical and real is the fact that civilizations that don't expel and punish such people collapse because they, by definition, do not receive enough support to stay functioning and alive. I like my civilization not extinct, and therefore I advocate policies keeping it very much alive, and part of that is punishing or expelling those who do not help it along. This is the only sane position you can take if you like living in civilization, unless you're a depraved hedonist with no thoughts for anyone but himself, in which case there is no point in me saying anything but "Off yourself."

Because faggots are even more "muh dik" than niggers.

Yes because making a gay character promotes savagery and killing off 8% of the population because they cannot reproduce helps civilization.
Explain because you seem to think that the homosexuality is like global warming.
There is a difference between locking up the schizophrenic that wants to eat their own mother and kill everyone and using mob violence, speech control and chemical castration to prevent men from having sex from men.
How does being gay mean refusing to protect and serve other people, if they do work and possibly help war efforts? Criminals infringe on rights can be executed or locked up to prevent future infringements, foreigners are very likely to be criminals and traitors are people who intentionally hurt the people that protect them.
So if homosexuals are mentally ill they would be akin to someone who thinks that they are living on a terraformed planet that isn't Earth. They're weird yes but besides that they definitely don't cause harm by throwing axes because the voices told them to. They should seek some help but besides that they shouldn't be sent into electroshock therapy, locked up or be lobotomized because of it.

This is literally irrelevant to the point being made. Are you seriously saying that because cats can't paint the Sistine Chapel humans have no duty to propagate their societies? That's absurd.

Are you adopting with a woman and striving to the best of your ability to provide the adopted child with as close to a healthy family as he can expect within the bounds of reality?

If you honestly consider the correction of unhealthy thought processes — for both the individual and civilization — to be brainwashing or unjustified I honestly don't know what to say to you. Do you stand staunchly against trying to rehabilitate the mentally ill then, since it's brainwashing which, according to you, is automatically bad?

I actually don't advocate castration, because it solves nothing. Death is an option of last resort if there are really no other ways of solving the problem. Deportation is my good-to option.

Depends on the definition, but there is a drastic difference between terminally ill patients and homosexuals that you're overlooking (whether intentionally or not I can't tell). Homosexuals are willing and deliberate leeches. They choose to be burdens and to be parasites. The terminally ill do not. You're morally equating a man who crashes a truck and kills people accidentally to a serial killer because the result is the same.

While this is true, that was a clever dodge around my point. You know very well (if you don't live under a rock) that, being normal, I have a high likelihood of reproducing and serving my society as well as can be expected. Homosexuals are the opposite of that; they are overwhelmingly likely to be exceedingly harmful.

Consider it like investments. They aren't instantly profitable, but if you invest right it has a high chance of paying off in the future. Homosexuals, on the other hand, are the equivalent of investing in the Nigerian space program.

And most to the best of their ability strive to overcome those. You're arguing for precisely the opposite; I have no beef with homosexuals who choose to work against their ill desires to be functioning members of their societies. You're arguing that I should have no problem with those who willfully refuse to even make a token effort in resisting their desires.

Yeah. That's why 2% of the US population hasn't affected it. Not at all. Nor has another specific 13%…

If you run your business on small but permanent deficits, eventually your business will fail. There is no reason not to attempt to run at maximum efficiency. You have yet to give a reason why this is not, in fact, desirable. At best you have argued that we shouldn't care, but that is no defense against policies seeking to change the situation.

If you like.

No, a leech is something that takes more than it gives. Homosexuals are leeches.

Not in the same civilization, since you aren't willing to do the best you can to preserve it.

You say homosexuals degrade the moral fabric of society simply by being homosexual, end of story. And that allowing homosexuals will create a spiral of total economic and cultural collapse, dooming our race and society. I don't think that is an accurate idea. However, we are all allowed our opinions.

I think the fundamental difference is what we consider a contributor to society. You think that the average citizen who pays taxes, works, votes, raises a family, and grows vegetables in his garden is noble, but if he were to become gay he would be a net drag because the moral degradation of society that he causes by being homosexual cancels out all of those other contributions. Furthermore, the only way to repair the moral fiber is to remove the gays, and the moral good this will do our society is more important than the rights and liberties of these gays. Again, I don't think this is a realistic stance, and it's likely you just don't like fags. And that's okay. But don't pretend you're doing humanity some service.

It does. How is that in any way in doubt?

Yeah, it does. That 8% is a net drain. What, are you going to tell me that society wouldn't prosper if we killed off 50% of the current US population (all nonwhites and traitors)? That's an absurd position. You're trying to obscure the fact that killing or expelling the parasitic or cancerous is obviously helpful by putting population numbers on it. It doesn't matter how many there are if they're all a net drain.

How is it not obvious? No people, no civilization. Do I have to explain this? Give one reason why homosexuals should be allowed and protected in society, from the perspective of preserving civilization.

You keep pulling out this line like it means anything, or even like I advocated that. What on Earth makes you think that homosexuals wouldn't be treated just like any other mentally ill person? What makes you think homosexuals are so special a class of the mentally ill that they would warrant everything extra that you keep listing?

Because you are refusing to do your best to help the civilization that protects and nurtures you. How is this hard to understand? No reproduction, civilization goes bye-bye. What's confusing or vague here?

Net drain. You know what the word "net" means? It means that they've done bad overall; that any good they did has been outweighed by the harm they caused. Homosexuals do not replace themselves and do not promote healthy sexual environments, things infinitely more valuable than any amount of material goods they could bring into the world.

Not all criminals. Only in libertarian-land is this the case. Some criminals are locked up even though they (according to libertarians and their ilk) "were only hurting themselves." This is because through the ruthless combat of life civilizations have found that such individuals do hurt the civilizations they exist in.

You're not seriously arguing that the only reason the state doesn't guarantee the rights of everyone is on the assumption that every foreigner is a criminal, are you? That's inane.

Sounds sort of like homosexuals.

Nope. Those sorts of people cause far less harm than homosexuals. They do not threaten a healthy moral order and are fairly likely to do their duty to society and propagate it.

It's a shame for you that homosexuals are closer to that second kind of crazy than the first.

As should homosexuals. I also would not be averse to some amount of coercion, should they, like many of the harmful mentally ill, think, like you, that they are doing no wrong.

Now you're just putting words in my mouth. Or does "treatment" automatically mean "electroshock therapy" to you? I would advocate whatever stops them being homosexual, that cures them of their illness. Whatever that may be is yet to be determined because research is stifled by pernicious moralists.

That's an actual good point but besides that I think I've answered the questions here already in a different post.

I already explained why in another post. The gist of it is that 8% won't affect society unless it automagically becomes 92%.
It's also easier to shit in your pants than in the toilet but that doesn't mean we should. So you'd prefer it if we had no morals rather than morals with one less moral.

What kind of ethics do you have in your brain? Because I think you might be a sociopath, That's like we shouldn't guarantee the rights of terminally ill.
How is AIDS a problem because of them? They seem to be dying off and they can't infect straight people unless they rape them, I thought you wanted to cut them off? You also seem to love statistics rather than individuals don't you? Also Alan Turing is an example.
You seem to be getting testy. Are we making too much sense?
It's not a fabrication because only a sociopath would compare murder and expulsion to a clinical vaccine.
Well he might but I am addressing your arguments.

but what right and liberties am I taking away from them? If they are adult citizens of the country, they already enjoy same rights and responsibilities as the rest of us. I'm not promoting stripping them of their rights, I only want them to take their smut off the streets. I''m not parading without pants on the street and brag how many women I bang or how I worship pussy, because it's degenerate and idiotic. I ask for the same courtesy and if they intent on making it an identity thing and to go around and behave like a degenerate half-wit, then don't be surprised when people want to treat them like they are scum of the earth.

Not end of story, unfortunately. They also by their nature contribute to the lessened success of society and are unwilling to do their best because they want to get their dicks hard. Moving to the realm of probability, they are also likely to be all manner of other harmful things.

A slower one, but that is inevitable, yes. More likely is that they'll be accompanied by elements who accelerate it, but that's neither here nor there.

Then you are either blind or willfully ignorant. You have provided no reason for homosexuals to be allowed to persist in their sorry state. Merely asserting (falsely) that they do no net harm is not an argument for why they cannot be made to help just as much as everyone else they so selfishly take advantage of.

Well he wouldn't have a family, for a start, which automatically puts him in the negative. As I've said so often it's getting boring, he also is a net negative in many other ways.

I'll state it again here for convenience: I have no problems with homosexuals who do not act on their desires; or, more accurately, who work against them to be a good citizen. I have no reason to condemn those people; they might even be considered more virtuous than the average citizen.

No, that is merely part of the process, just as adding 2 to 1 is a necessary, but not total, part of the process of getting 3. One cannot achieve a healthy society while still permitting those who are fundamentally unhealthy to spread their illness to others and bring everyone down.

Yes, society does not exist to protect their rights. That's absolutely ridiculous, and if they want a society that does so they can set one up elsewhere and see how long it lasts. i.e. any such society is self-defeating. It collapses; it cannot sustain itself. This is not a moral judgement but a fact of reality.

Yeah, yeah, Mr. Holier Than Thou. Pretty ironic you accuse us of this when we state facts while at the very same time, in the same words, elevating yourself as morally superior. You aren't. Tolerance is a cancer to any thought of higher existence, and any society that adopts it as a virtue collapses. It is objectively not a virtue, and you are, in the end, someone arguing that orgasms for the mentally ill are more important than human civilization.

That's flawed logic, as I've pointed out. 8% is not negligible by any stretch of the imagination. Nor is that an argument for why that 8% shouldn't be made to contribute just as much as the other 92%. Give me a reason.

This line of reasoning only works if you consider tolerance to be moral. It isn't. I am not sacrificing any morals.

The logical course of action is not to tolerate homosexuality; there is literally no reason to, and until you provide one it will stay that way. The only argument you have so far fielded in this area is a feeble attempt at invoking the false virtue of tolerance.

Another argument I have refuted. Homosexuals are making a conscious choice to do the immoral; it is not comparable to the terminally ill who not only had no choice in their state, but also on the whole work to make themselves as small of a burden as possible. Homosexuals do not do this; you are not even arguing that they should. You are trying to excuse their terrible choices and crying when people mention punishment for their willful criminality.

You must be joking. AIDS is only in existence because of homosexuals; it's why it was originally called GRIDS.

Now you're just being willfully ignorant. Not only is it historical fact that AIDS came from homosexuals (and therefore logically must have been spread to normal people by them in some way), but you're also ignoring the "bisexuals" you homos love so much.

Civilizations function on statistics. I could just as easily accuse you of loving the individual to the point of suicide. The difference is that I promote what is good for civilization; you promote what makes you feel good.

Dangerous move to invoke a man who helped defeat Germany on Holla Forums. Luckily for you I'm not a NatSoc, and so I'll give you the assumption that he benefited his civilization in some way. Then I'll point out that not only was he only ever alleged to be homosexual (certainly he never displayed it openly enough to be a burden). Then I'll point out he was a great men, i.e. an exception I was talking about earlier. Newton was a virgin, but he almost single-handedly created modern physics and the foundation of modern mathematics. I can give him a pass for never having a family. Homosexuals like that are not even one in a million. I'd be surprised if they were more than one in a trillion. Last of all, I'll point out I was talking about homosexuals as a group. They have always been a net burden for their societies. You would need a thousand Turings to outweigh them, and you don't have a thousand Turings.

I don't see any refutation in there. I'll take that as a passive-aggressive admission that I was right.

That doesn't avoid the truth that expelling or killing net drains helps society. Label it whatever you want, but it won't change the facts. You might as well call me racist, sexist, or homophobe, and it'd be as good an argument. I merely state facts; that you derive moral weight from them does not reflect on me.

Somewhat. And for that somewhat I am thankful. But only slightly.

Did it ever occur to you that I might not want to brainwashed, undergo electroshock or be lobotomized?

It seems you're the hedonist with no thoughts for anybody for but themselves and anyone who shares their views.

I am saying that you are acting like that people have no other point in existence but to reproduce. Thoughts like that are what causes society to degrade.
I will strive to the best of my ability to provide them with a healthy and prosperous environment as they can expect within reality but I cannot with a woman but I'll have a couple of friends who act as aunts.
I am against lobotomy, electroshock therapy and pain therapy for both and I think therapy and actual mental help will be better. Also half of the people who claim to be cured of homosexuality are faking it, 55% of people that have undergone such therapies have confessed to not have changed.
Really? I never knew. However I do not willingly leech off people, I try to do my best to provide for myself also it's not my fault I got homosexuality and I don't want to undergo lobotomy.
[sarcasm]Yes because I am a homosexual I want to destroy society and create degeneracy.[/sarcasm]. If you are what is considered normal, being sociopathic and uncaring I don't want to be normal. I guess I am the opposite of normal and because of that I have morality and ethics that you say are harmful.
I would become straight if I could do it without electroshock, lobotomy or pain therapy.
I don't get what you're saying unless you're referring to random percentages that somehow managed to make a mark on society.
Implying society should be run like a business is despicable.
Great, can I also get Mars too? We won't harm Earth we just want to start a gay space empire.
No find another metaphor because leeches drain without giving is a fact.
I am doing my best.

My sides.

This is simply prejudice. I know Holla Forums makes prejudice cool but sometimes it clouds your judgement.

Where are you getting this idea that gays are fleecing society and taking more than their share? How are they "not helping as much as everyone else" or "taking advantage"?

You have this narrative of gays being some Jew riding on the coattails of society, holding it back like a lion who has bitten onto an antelope's leg. I just don't see it man. You define being a good citizen and being homosexual as mutually exclusive. Again, I don't see it.

I don't get what's "spreading" or how it brings us down. Decent homosexuality (muh Rohm) is way different than SJW bullshit.

And you are someone who believes that orgasms for the mentally ill will collapse human society.

You have presented your arguments, I don't think they suffice. Maybe we carry different genes for in-group selection, I don't know. You know how you want a great society for your people? I consider homosexuals part of "my people", and I want life and liberty for them. Part of that is being able to express themselves how they wish. When a straight man benefits from his society's support it's national socialism in action, yet when a gay man benefits in the same way he's robbing the people blind, cause he's gay. And that gayness will corrupt society in ways that you seem unable to elucidate.

To me, gays having freedom of expression is a net good. I don't like SJWs, but they would be there gay or not. They would have something else to bitch about.

To me, curtailing that freedom of expression in the name of the "greater good" is worse for a free society than buttsex.

I agree that tolerance isn't always a virtue, but to signal it as useless is just stupid. I think the division that intolerance creates is a greater danger. I don't tolerate Islam, because it doesn't tolerate the rights of a bunch or different people. However I do tolerate 80's hair metal, because it isn't hurting anyone (even if it hurts my soul).

Seeing as you've provided no evidence for this this seems more like projection on your part. I'm not the one arguing that human civilization should be allowed to die so I can have an orgasm in the manner I prefer.

I am saying that it is a fundamental and ineluctable part of existence within a functioning civilization. Why this is so foreign to you I do not understand, but perhaps it's because you care more about being able to ejaculate in a man's ass than continuing that which has been so wrongfully given to you.

Somehow I doubt civilization will collapse because of my encouraging my people to have more children and to be healthy.

Yeah, you're actually, physically unable to.

No, you aren't. You are perfectly capable of being with a woman, you just don't want to. You consider your own desires to be more important than giving the adopted child the best possible environment (as I fully suspected), thus showing you are unfit to raise any child. No, that obviously does not count as fulfilling your duty when you aren't willing to give up your own desires for it. "Sacrificing" when it's convenient and not painful isn't sacrificing at all.

I have seen no evidence either way. I will likely be in favor of whatever cures homosexuals when it emerges.

Assuming this is true, this doesn't invalidate what I said. The mentally ill faking sanity doesn't prove they can never be helped.

I bet.

Do you live in a civilization? If the answer is yes, then you are leeching off people (as we have already established your homosexuality). You are taking more than you give back. That's being a leech.

That is painfully obvious. I'm more concerned that you refuse to do your best for the civilization that gives you such a good life.

It is your fault that you do not do your best to overcome it though. Stop trying to dodge responsibility. You're like the obese blaming their conditions on genetics. It is within your power to be better and you refuse; that is not the fault of your personal lottery.

Discussing things logically goes much better when you address what people actually say, rather than concocted fantasies.

That said, it's not about what you want anyway. Serial killers don't want to go to prison, but I don't consider that an adequate reason for not sending them there.

You're statistically likely to, for a start, and for another thing you've already proven your are in this thread. You are willfully being a burden because you can't stand to subbordinate your desires to your will. You are also advocating for cancerous things that destroy civilization. How is that not destroying civilization? Your argument would be more convincing if you were an upstanding citizen fighting against his desires arguing against a man insisting that even having homosexual desires should be punished, but unfortunately for you that's not the case. You have proven your lack of worth to civilization over and over again, so it's a bit rich of you to try some Tumblr-tier passive-aggressiveness in asserting that you aren't destroying society.

When did I state that? Normal people should never have to consider homosexuals, because in a healthy society there would be none (at least that anyone would be able to tell).

Yes, all about what you want. Jesus, where did you come from, preaching about being caring? This is fucking Holla Forums. We advocate for mass killings and expulsions here. Why are you trying to appeal to being caring like this is some hippie kumbaya circle preaching about the "real" tolerant Nice Guy Jesus? We don't buy any of that shit here and fully admit that killing some people is necessary. Stop crying about it.

You are a societal cancer, as you have proven again and again in this thread. This is not a moral judgement on my part to insult you, it's a statement of fact. You take out of civilizations more than you put in, and if any civilization ran according to your rules it'd disintegrate and/or be overrun by civilizations that didn't abide such retardation. You can also stop virtue signalling. This isn't Facebook or National Review. We're not going to applaud you for being "moral" and "ethical" (not that you are).

You should advocate, as I do, searching for such cures then. As I have said repeatedly, killings are a last resort measure. If I could turn all homosexuals into good citizens I would.

How new are you?

The analogy went right over your head, I see.

Sure. I'll have fun watching it collapse when it inevitably runs out of people and/or eats itself from individualist cancers.

You've said repeatedly that you aren't, and then blamed it on other things.

Answer the test

...

Prove it. Prove that homosexuals are not more likely to be cancers on society for any number of reasons. Prove that homosexuals by and large resist their desires in order to be good citizens. I won't ask you to prove that they do not contribute to the lessened success of society, because that's what homosexual behavior, by definition, does.

It's not even hard to figure out, considering how many times I've pointed out in this thread. Homosexuals do not have children. They contribute less than any normal person. If they have an equal experience in society to normal people, they are by definition pulling less than their fair share. Normal people contribute more and yet are treated no better. That's like paying two people the same when one does less work. Get this through your skull, because it's a simple concept.

Because you are being willfully blind and explaining away everything as "not really being necessary" because "something something I pay my taxes."

Homosexuals fundamentally undermine any healthy sexual order. The tolerance and existence of homosexuality teaches that purely sexual desire without any possibility of productive outlet is good. In a moral order where homosexuality is tolerated or condoned, on what basis can other cancers such as premarital sex, promiscuity, incest, bestiality, and all manner of other things done purely for pleasure be advocated against? The answer is that they can't, because there is no logical dividing line between homosexuality and all those other things.

It still undermines order and is inherently a burden on the society. There is no such thing as "decent" homosexuality. That makes no sense. There can only be those who are decent in spite of it, as people like you seem so averse to being.

Freely permitting the mentally ill around collapses society. If you don't think this I encourage you to live with the mentally unsound (besides yourself and your friends).

You might as well want life and liberty for traitors and criminals too. There is no logical dividing line between them.

Yeah, no, that's part of the cancer that needs to be ruthlessly excised.

No, because he acts on his desires, and those actions inherently degenerate society and make him a net loss. A net waste of resources. In short, a cancer. If he resists his desires I have no quibble with him. You are not doing that.

I have repeatedly done so. You have merely ignored or argued that they are good. You have provided no reason why homosexuality ought to be tolerated, other than the bullshit concept of "free expression." Leftism is free expression; why do you not logically support all leftists in their free expression? Why do you not support the incestuous? The insane? After all, they can all contribute things to society, which according to you is the only criteria.

Your path leads to collapse. There has never been a successful civilization to start out with toleration of homosexuals (obviously, as I have repeatedly explained), and yet you are arrogant enough to excuse your particular fetish as somehow "not harmful."

I do not fight for a free society. The freedom I fight for is tangential to the makings of a great civilization, and as soon as it hinders that I no longer support it. Such is the case with homosexuals. They do not make great civilizations, nor does their toleration. It destroys them.

I can definitively say that tolerance of homosexuality is useless and self-defeating.

Yes, I'm sure the militant homosexuals will be more dangerous to civilization than the regular ones. That'd be a feat to see.

Hairstyles are incomparable to homosexuality.

You are from Reddit, right? I can tell by the painfully obvious need to signal how evil your opponents are. How about you try actually addressing points instead of trying to signal how good you are?

lazy typing skills

Before it goes down, we have to locate the Breivik and release him from his captors

...

I guess all the facts about documented higher incidences of disease among homosexuals is just a myth, huh, you dumb faggot. I guess faggots don't get higher rates of prostate cancers, prostate ulcers, sphincter evacuations, AIDS, HIV, countless fecal diseases and STDs. No, no, the "society" lies about that, doesn't it, faggot? "Not all fags, man!". Faggots are a disease in the society and they are medically and culturally unsafe for a nation to have. Of course, then come the mental diseases. As you should know, being a fag does not end at liking dick, it's a whole plethora of mental illnesses taking hold. Why are all faggots unstable, overly feminine or outright dangerous? Why are most of them on at least one prescription pill?

Fags are a disease.

we advocate people like you eating a bullet

Who's "we," faggot? You and the two other butt-blasters who'll be living in mudhuts come ten years because they couldn't be bothered reigning in their urges for the sake of civilization?

Why do you choose to be a faggot?

A lot more for me to read in this thread.

dude…

It's almost as if succesfull entrepreneurs appreciate personal freedoms over being part of the conservative hivemind.

Daily reminder that faggots and dykes are more than 10 times more likely to report being sexually touched as a child.
Daily reminder that faggots cannot reproduce the way nature and god intended by filling the fertile womb of a loving woman so they reproduce instead by molesting children, who are psychologically damaged, become fags themselves, and the cycle repeats itself.
Daily reminder that homosexuals are no more than 2 percent of the population and commit between 25 to 40 percent of all sex crimes against children.
Homosexuality is a mental illness caused by child sex abuse, birth defects, and environmental xenoestrogens and should be treated as such.

It wasn't our fault this happened to us.

Source on the first statement? Probably true, but I'm always curious on how they sample this shit.
As for myself, I cannot imagine having sex with another male unless it's an asian twink.

Wait, shouldn't homosexuality then be more rampant in child-molestation centrals, such as japan, belgium and middle-east?

I don't know.

Really not making a case for yourself when they tell you to just date women.

Exactly, I am not saying homosexuality is bad in a morally culpable way (except child molesters, bugchasers, etc.), but bad in a pathological way, people with other types of mental illness deserve some level of treatment and compassion as do homosexuals, only problem is that the only treatment for homosexuality is preventative, after a child has been molested it causes irreversible damage to psyche and sexual development, same with excessive estrogen during prenatal development, however normalization of this will exacerbate the proliferation of the mental illness of homosexuality, so while treatment and compassion should be available, a certain measure of stigma and gay bashing is also necessary to prevent normalization, a disease is nothing to be proud of nor an innocuous part of ones identity, if you present it as such you should rightfully get your ass kicked or be subject to ridicule and ostracism. Faggots should also not be allowed to adopt or interact with children in any capacity, nor hold any sort of political franchise as they have no stake in the future since they don't have biological kids. Basically homosexuals should accept that they are mentally ill second class citizens and focus on the few uses they do have like making designer clothing and music, you are not important and the future belongs to others.

Are you saying that molested children need to be put through more trauma?

I'm getting mixed signals here…

Which one is it?

There is no reliable cure, only prevention.

WELL THAT DOESN'T HELP ME

Looks like i will have to make a time machine then.

...

Did i forget any?

Why is this captcha relevant ?

Yes /fit/.

Trashed

Molestation is what spreads the microbe, its not two different explanations.

What makes you think japan and belgium have lots of molested boys?

Full of SHOTA porn.

Oh you poor, stupid, faggot…

We know how rabies works. An infected animal becomes more aggressive prior to death. It will end up biting other animals to spread the infection along. This is an example of a behavior-modifying organism.

What you probably don't know is that there are hundreds of other organisms that also affect behavior. A virus causes caterpillars to climb up trees. Then it liquifies their organs so the body disintegrates and the virus can be spread by the wind. [1] There is a STD for grasshoppers that makes them more sexually active. [2] In the days prior to experiencing the symptoms of the flu, the virus will make you more sociable so can transmit it more. [3]

Here's the real kicker though: There is a parasite that has the ability to modify sexual preference. Toxoplasma gondii. You've probably heard of T. gondii as the amoeba that infects cats. There's a lot more to it than that. Rats are a carrier of T. gondii. When infected, a rat will be attracted to cat urine, making it more likely to be eaten by a cat, the intended host. How does it work?

Toxoplasma alters the brain to make the rat sexually attracted to cat urine. [4]

Toxoplasma's ability to make rats sexually attracted persists even after the rat is no longer infected. [4.1]

That's right- a parasite has the ability to PERMANENTLY ALTER SEXUAL PREFERENCE in its host. Dig deeper into the facts behind T. gondii and we see:

1/3 of all humans are chronic carriers of toxoplasma. [6]

Males with toxoplasma are taller and have more attractive faces (Allowing you to have more sex and spread the virus further). [5]

Toxoplasmosis increases the concentration of dopamine in the brain of infected humans (You become more likely to do risky, thrill-seeking behavior). [5]

Toxoplasma immunoglobulins are found in 9% of newborns in the US (Hmm, where have we seen this figure before… Oh, right–it's same figure claimed as the percentage of homosexuals in the US). [6]

Toxoplasma transfers from pregnant woman to their baby. [7]

Toxoplasma infected women have male sons 72% of the time. [8]

If you haven't pieced together the facts yet, I'll fill you in. Toxoplasma infects the fetus of pregnant mothers, making the baby more likely to be male and permanently altering the baby’s brain to create sexual attraction to men. You’ve probably heard the false “genetic hypothesis" that claims that female siblings of gay men have more babies, meaning that gayness must be an advantage. The "gay gene" has been disproven, but toxoplasma explains why the sisters are having more babies. The same toxoplasma that altered their brother's brain altered their brain to increase their sexual attraction to men. Homosexual men are having more sex than their heterosexual counterparts, spreading toxoplasma further. Use HIV as a proxy for how effective homosexual behavior is at transmitting disease: homosexuals are 10% of the population but account for 60% of new HIV cases.

In response to homosexuality, homosexual disgust (aka “homophobia”) has evolved as a means to avoid toxoplasma infection. The purpose of disgust is disease avoidance. [10] You are disgusted at the sight of feces because feces have a lot of bacteria. You didn’t need to learn to avoid feces; it's just genetic. Similarly, homophobia was found to be genetic, and also present in nearly half the population. [11] This means that homophobia evolved because it increases your darwinian fitness by helping you avoid toxoplasma.

[1] phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2011/09/08/liquefying-virus-uses-one-gene-to-make-caterpillars-climb-to-their-doom/
archive.is/wu3Wz

[2] phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2014/03/27/sexually-transmitted-virus-sterilises-insects-turns-them-on/
archive.is/8c7Cg

[3] ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20816312
archive.is/vCrbk

[4] plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0023277
archive.is/3Txq

[4.1] newscenterterkeley.edu/2013/09/18/toxoplasma-infection-permanently-shifts-balance-in-cat-and-mouse-game/
archive.is/9hx53

[5] journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0023866
archive.is/XznG8

[6] ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3488815/?report=classic
archive.is/u2XwZ

[7] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxoplasmosis
archive.is/TrXJG

[8] theguardian.com/science/2006/oct/12/uk.health
archive.is/WSFP7

[9] ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17827351
archive.is/CLnyA

[10] cargocollective.com/whp/Disgust-Disease
archive.is/U54S5

[11] ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18347968
archive.is/4Ehf3

Tl;dr - You are a diseased faggot and Holla Forums is disgusted by you because our brains actually work properly; not because you are a poor oppressed individual. You aren't welcome here.

Just because they sell alot of it doesn't mean a lot of it occurs

Testing.

I'm not acting smug you jerk. I'm just trying to get a list so i can research them.

Does Holla Forums really hate gay people, or do you guys just hate how much the MSM pushes gay shit?

Because most non-flaming fags seem cool.

wait aren't you the one advocating faggotry

top kek your own sources shit on you, read a book nigger.

oh wow didnt realize this fucker was samefagging

you can say yes or no to sticking your dick in a dude's ass.

their is no such thing as sexuality. Their is only the act of sex itself. don't have gay sex, and you aren't a faggot. don't have sex with a pig, and you aren't a zoophile, don;t screw a 3 yr old and you wont be a pedo.

deal with it

Homosexuality is either a birth defect or a perversion.

If the former, it is to be sympathised with, not celebrated, and if the latter, to be treated as a psychological flaw, not a positive choice.

It is

I actually agree - I don't think it's a choice to be homosexual. I am however not as convinced when it comes to adoption - and marriages should be a no. The latter is the foundation of a healthy society.

As long as they keep to themselves and don't peddle their smut it's fine.

Well you would be supporting the whole LGBTGMOWKFGBBQ movement- which is as a whole, degenerate and toxic in of itself.

On the other hand, gays don't really have an alternative community so socializing with gays outside your social circle is pretty much impossible outside of the lgbtgejsfikjefbbq community.

there is a board for slightly less degenerate faggots like you btw. /logcabin

Pretty sure he's referring to the whole anti-homosexual attitude that Holla Forums has as a D&C thing.

Not all homosexuals agree with the extreme leftist agenda- forcing gay marriage, gay adoption, +etc.

Right-Wing Homosexuals are a thing.

kek typical

Accepting the majority of faggots to accept that their homosexuality is a mental illness is enough of a stretch as it is.

But you seriously expect those who are open enough to consider that to kill themselves?

What purpose would that serve?

If they're rational enough to seriously consider homosexuality as a mental illness, why should they kill themselves- sounds like a good way to discourage them from being rational people in the first place.

Look I can see the purpose in the irrational tumblr-types killing themselves as their mentality is contagious and overall makes society a shittier place.

Discourages? Lol wtf. No, the mentally sane, those with a healthy psychological well being will continue to reproduce.

The majority of gays don't have control of their same-sex attraction. No there isn't necessarily a gay gene, but that's why it's a mental illness.

Someone with depression cannot control being depressed for instance.

It's interesting because there is no option for the homosexual that recognizes that homosexuality is a mental illness. Who is opposed to all of the "gay rights" and other sjw bullshit.

No it should never be accepted as normal or by any means encouraged.

But there is no "cure" for it. What would you rather they try to live a normal life and [possibly] pass on their homosexual traits to their offspring?

Or would you rather they just go on being homosexual, but keep it behind closed doors?

Well what if it comes to pass that there isn't a treatment for it?

A lot of people are diagnosed with General Anxiety Disorder- which has no cure. One can take medication to treat some of its symptoms but overall they have it for life.

What exactly is the consequence of them acting on homosexuality desires?

What? He's just reading & relaying verifiable facts and things that homsexuals have written themselves.

There already is and a lot of people have already been cured.

pfox.org/

Ex Flamboyant Gay Man NOW Born-Again Testimony
trigger warning for some of you cause it's from a Christian perspective. Bretty gud tbh

I will look into this.

Doesn't trigger me. I eat at chick fil-a and that is a christian place.

Did you bother to think about what you typed before you posted it? Or were you just desperate to act like a dumbass?

Fuck my bad. My response was meant for

not

So,

Pretty sure he's referring to the whole anti-homosexual attitude that Holla Forums has as a D&C thing.

Not all homosexuals agree with the extreme leftist agenda- forcing gay marriage, gay adoption, +etc.

Right-Wing Homosexuals are a thing.

>pfox.org/

Interesting. I just looked into it, they cite the American Psychiatric Association's claim that there are no replicated scientific studies to support that people can be born “gay” or that homosexuality is innate.

However, the very same association claims that:

Now, if homosexuality could actually be cured- and not for some people but everyone that would be great.

However, we can hardly grasp the cause of homosexuality to begin with. If we cannot figure out what causes it, how the hell to they expect to be able to "cure" it.

But my question still stands.

Wait-I thought he named June Nigger Music Month…?

At least he's lumping all the shit together so it's easier to discard.

June is also the month when the biting flies are so awful. Makes sense.

I know that… I'm one of them and I'm not a kike like milo.

Many diseases work through poorly understood–or even completely unknown–mechanisms. The same applies to plenty of treatments.

It doesn't matter why a treatment works, as long as it works.

It would be great even if it only helped a minority of people. There are exceedingly few treatments that help everyone.

Maybe there is already a cure but these big pharmacy companies (((jew owned))) don't want that getting out.

Same thing about hiv/aids and any type of cancer. There is too much money in the "treatments" than out right curing something.

Is that too much tinfoil hat speak or am i correct?

I hate the fact that a rainbow, something that represented something beautiful when I was a kid (80's) is now a representation of gay anal sex.

That rustles my jimmies fam

Make America Straight Again

Why would anybody take pride in sodomizing someone, much less sodomizing another man?
I'm proud to be a straight man because I'm proud of my role as a husband, father, etc. I don't take pride in the fact I like vaginas.

Those Hitler dubs demand it

This just proves all faggots are mentally ill and need to accept treatment or be disposed of.

Man+man Can't have children, thus can never contribute to the state.
The only reason the state loves marriages so much is because marriages result in children.

I can't wait to hang some fags and pedos when the day of the rope come.

the day of the rope will never come though

lol okay?

Not with that attitude.

as a literal faggot that is against the lgbt movement, i agree with this sentiment.

even if homosexuality was to be completely excepted 100% in society, there is no reason to take pride in the attraction in of itself- there is no point.

No you are at least partially correct. Unfortunately the issue of homosexuality overlaps with transexuality/transgender shit. Probably because of the close tie-in with the lgbt-together movement.

There is more profit to be made in deluding people into paying for ludicrous cosmetic surgeries and medicinal treatments to become the opposite sex, than there is in simply working to get people to accept themselves for being who they are, and making them comfortable in their own bodies.

Pharmaceuticals definitely are a factor to be considered.

m8, the flag was created in the 80s.

homosexuality has always been represented with bright colors.

kek there are other ways to contribute to the state outside of having secks with the opposite sex.

homosexuality has always been represented/associated with bright colors*

I tend to go from Holla Forums to /x/ tier at the drop of a hat. The Georgia Guidestones thing is real tho.