Canada: Gaystapo In Action, And Taxpayer-Funded


In case you had any doubt about the extremely repressive nature of the “gay” mafia, consider that Canada has now opened a “register” of “homophobic” expressions clearly meant to intimidate right thinking citizens from saying what they think.

Stop one moment and reflect what would have happened if some conservative organisation had proposed the creation of some “Faggot Register”, where all expressions favourable to sodomy/lesbianism/whatever form sexual perversion takes are registered for – there can be no other aim – present intimidation or future use.

Of course, everyone would have cried “Nazism”, nicht wahr?

Well, it appears the Gaystapo is intent in doing just that, and if they think we will be intimidated they must be a bunch of hysterical bitches thinking their voice must only be shrill enough and they will get their way (wherein, I prefer not to think…).

Still, and irrespective of the – miserable – prospects of success, intimidation it still is, and sponsored by the Canadian taxpayer to boot. These faggots must really be taught to behave.

Yours truly would like to be one of the first to be inscribed in the register, and therefore humbly asks to be recorded with the following:

Perverts. Faggots. Disgusting cretins. It would be better to lie than to live in such dishonour. Not only are their passions satanic, but their lives are diabolic. They are even worse than murderers, because a murdered only separates the soul from the body, whereas they destroy the soul inside the body. Their sins against nature are abominable and deserve punishment whenever and wherever they are committed.There is nothing, absolutely nothing more mad or damaging than this perversity. For if the sins of the flesh are commonly censurable because they lead man to that which is bestial in him, much more so is the sin against nature, by which man debases himself lower than even his animal nature.

In the meantime, the taxpayer-sponsored initiative has certainly already started to localise other names worthy of inscription; all of them extremely dangerous fomenters of discord and intolerant homophobics. Let us see a couple of them (all emphases mine):

1) There is Tertullian, who is on record with the following:

“All other frenzies of lusts which exceed the laws of nature and are impious toward both bodies and the sexes we banish … from all shelter of the Church, for they are not sins so much as monstrosities.” (Tertullian, De pudicitia, IV, in J. McNeil, op. cit., p. 89)

2) Then there would be Saint Basil of Caesarea. The poor chap was so homophobic (the new ways of saying “Christian”) that he wrote the following:

“The cleric or monk who molests youths or boys or is caught kissing or committing some turpitude, let him be whipped in public, deprived of his crown [tonsure] and, after having his head shaved, let his face be covered with spittle; and [let him be] bound in iron chains, condemned to six months in prison, reduced to eating rye bread once a day in the evening three times per week. After these six months living in a separate cell under the custody of a wise elder with great spiritual experience, let him be subjected to prayers, vigils and manual work, always under the guard of two spiritual brothers, without being allowed to have any relationship … with young people.” (St. Basil of Caesarea, in St. Peter Damien, Liber Gomorrhianus, op. cit. cols. 174f.)

3) I wouldn’t forget Saint Augustine, the daddy of all Catholic womanising chauvinists and, basically, a walking homophobic threat:

Sins against nature, therefore, like the sin of Sodom, are abominable and deserve punishment whenever and wherever they are committed. If all nations committed them, all alike would be held guilty of the same charge in God’s law, for our Maker did not prescribe that we should use each other in this way. In fact, the relationship that we ought to have with God is itself violated when our nature, of which He is Author, is desecrated by perverted lust.”

Elsewhere, he finds other words worthy of inscription in the bitching faggots’ register:

“Your punishments are for sins which men commit against themselves, because, although they sin against You, they do wrong in their own souls and their malice is self-betrayed. They corrupt and pervert their own nature, which You made and for which You shaped the rules, either by making wrong use of the things which You allow, or by becoming inflamed with passion to make unnatural use of things which You do not allow” (Rom. 1:26). (St. Augustine, Confessions, Book III, chap. 8)

4) Then there would be Saint John Chrysostom, and you have already started noticing that “homophobia” was rather well represented among saints. Let’s read him:

“All passions are dishonorable, for the soul is even more prejudiced and degraded by sin than is the body by disease; but the worst of all passions is lust between men…. The sins against nature are more difficult and less rewarding, since true pleasure is only the one according to nature. But when God abandons a man, everything is turned upside down! Therefore, not only are their passions [of the homosexuals] satanic, but their lives are diabolic….. So I say to you that these are even worse than murderers, and that it would be better to die than to live in such dishonor. A murderer only separates the soul from the body, whereas these destroy the soul inside the body….. There is nothing, absolutely nothing more mad or damaging than this perversity.” (St. John Chrysostom, In Epistulam ad Romanos IV, in J. McNeill, op. cit., pp. 89-90)

How about that, boys’ n girls? Would it do for some years in a Canadian jail?

5) This list would of course not be complete without the Doctor Angelicus. Saint Thomas Aquinas (another saint! You don’t say!) was so ashamed of this abomination – as we all were until some years ago, when the rampant homosexualism around us forced us to talk openly about disgusting things like zoophilia, or sodomy – is on record with the following:

“However, they are called passions of ignominy because they are not worthy of being named, according to that passage in Ephesians (5:12): ‘For the things that are done by them in secret, it is a shame even to speak of.’ For if the sins of the flesh are commonly censurable because they lead man to that which is bestial in him, much more so is the sin against nature, by which man debases himself lower than even his animal nature.” (St. Thomas Aquinas, Super Epistulas Sancti Pauli Ad Romanum I, 26, pp. 27f)

and I am sure he has deserved the inscription in the above mentioned bitching faggots’ register, with a special mention.

If you want to expand your knowledge, please click the site whence I took all this useful information, which seems rather thoroughly researched, and say a prayer for the person – or the people – who have taken the time to inform us about basic Christianity, talking to us not only through common sense and basic decency, but through the voice of great men of the past.

Mundabor

Posted on June 19, 2012, in Catholicism and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 4 Comments.

  1. Mund, another good site for useful information about this subject is http://www.newengelpublishing.com Randy Engel is probably the world’s greatest expert on sodomy. Her book, “The Rite Of Sodomy” is probably the best book on the market on this distasteful subject. Her site also has free articles that you can download too. Give it a gander, you won’t be disappointed.

    • Thanks Stephen,
      for the moment I am rather “satisfied” with the knowledge of the matter I have, and every time I write about it it makes me feel as if an exterminating angel were to appear son.

      Still, you are right even this distasteful subject shoul dbe covered in more detail. The general public now seems to link sodomy with fancy absurd words like “gay marriage” rather than with the shocking reality of sexual depravity.

      M

  2. I agree with what you say, Mundabor, but is there really use for such language? It’s very American. You don’t see the saints you quote, who condemn it so firmly, speak in such a passionate and inflammatory way. Not even St. John Chrysostom. I understand that you’ve built up quite the image of being “rough”, but the message you promote, the Good News you’re supposed to represent, is far too important and truthful to be clouded by base language. When we know the Truth and the punishment for these vile sins, all the more important for us to show humility and care for them.

    “Nothing is so strong as gentleness, nothing so gentle as real strength”
    – St. Francis de Sales quotes

    In any case, that site you link to support the Bayside hoax, which is one of the more ridicilous apparition hoaxes of our time. We shouldn’t, therefore, support it in any way. Coincidentally, Unam Sanctam Catholicam just made a post about the Bayside silliness.

    • John,

      you make three very common mistakes:

      1. you think you are the first one writing to me about the rather harsh (for today’s sensitive mentality) words I use, and possibly thinking I do such things for no particular reason, or because I would need to keep an “image” as “rough”.

      Think again. Better still, browse this blog if you want.

      2. You write to me about the fact that the one or the other site I have linked to has something you don’t like. You don’t think every time I link to a page I endorse all the content of the site, right? I even link to the “Tablet” at times…

      3. You think you can carry an argument by quoting here and there. This is so Protestant. Jesus did not hesitate in whipping, and the Church did not hesitate in sending people to… burning. Faggots must be very thankful we live in such emasculated times even to call them what they are is considered “too much” or, in some strange and unfathomable way, “uncharitable”.

      Again, feel free to browse around the forum if you think it fit.

      M

%d bloggers like this: