Blog Archives

Michael Voris on “Homophobia”

Interesting reflections from Michael Voris, pointing out to the enemy within.

Personally, I would like to add a couple of observations:

1) As far as I know, the term “homophobia” was coined in decades past in the medical community to describe the hate homosexuals have for themselves. This might or might not be true, but it cannot be denied one of the plagues coming with this perversion is an extremely strong despise of self, which in itself leads to high numbers of suicides, psycho-somatic diseases, and the like. It also leads, if you ask me, to a desperate need of a stage providing them with public approval, which is why so many homosexuals end up in the entertainment industry, or in politics.

2) I am not entirely sure Voris does homosexuals a favour when he calls their affliction a “cross”. Yes, of course it is a cross in the same way as pedophile tendencies are “a cross”, but to me a “cross” is rather something one can’t do anything about, and must carry because it is the Lord’s will that he does. Say, a mother bears the cross of her son deceased in Afghanistan, or of a disease: there is no remedy to the evil, and the cross must be born as one can.

I this case, the use of the word “cross” might engender the (utterly wrong) impression that God makes people pervert, and they have to bear the cross because hey, there’ s no remedy to it, they’re born that way.

I think this is not the way Voris thinks, but wanted to point out to it because in the strange and disturbing times we live the step between being charitably concerned for one’s wrong tendencies and justifying one in his being homosexual is rather short.

Once again: God makes no one pervert. It might be that someone has acquired this perversion in early years, but this cannot have happened in an involuntary manner. One becomes homosexual in the way one becomes pedophiles: not listening to, and going against, the natural law God has planted within him as in everyone else.

Mundabor

BBC and Catholic Martyrs

From the blog of E F Pastor Emeritus

Twenty-six pastoral workers–including 18 priests, four sisters, and four laity–were killed in 2011, according to the news agency of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples. Seven were killed in Colombia, five in Mexico, three in India, two in Burundi, and one each in Brazil, Paraguay, Nicaragua, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, South Sudan, Tunisia, Kenya, the Philippines, and Spain.Twenty-six pastoral workers–including 18 priests, four sisters, and four laity–were killed in 2011, according to the news agency of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples. Seven were killed in Colombia, five in Mexico, three in India, two in Burundi, and one each in Brazil, Paraguay, Nicaragua, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, South Sudan, Tunisia, Kenya, the Philippines, and Spain.

Perhaps I was not paying attention, but I didn’t notice anything along these lines reported on the BBC.

But just let a real or – more probably – supposed case of “homophobia” come up, and you can hear them barking and bitching around like there’s no tomorrow…..

Mundabor

To start the Year, a “Homophobic” Monthy Python video

Let us start the year with a clearly “insensitive”, “homophobic” Monthy Python video.

I can see our Prime Minister and his Prime Girlfriend taking this seriously, and praising it as an example of the new times….

Hat tip to Linen on the Hedgerow

Murdered Homosexual Not A Martyr After All

 

Murdered by his own hired sex toy: David Kato

It is always instructive to observe how the liberal press and media are never slow in mounting the next “homophobia” story, but never seem to pay the same attention when the story turns out to be not only utterly wrong, but damaging to their ideological agenda.

To make a sordid story short, it happened (read the beautiful contribution from the “Reluctant Sinner” blog) that David Kato, the Ugandan homosexual activist with the dubious honour of landing on a conservative newspaper’s list of prominent homos with the questionable headline “hang them”, was subsequently murdered.

After the tragedy, the ululations of the homo-wolves were longer and higher-pitched than usual and a “homophobic attack” presented as the very likely cause of the sad loss of a human life (and probably the ever sadder loss of an immortal soul). Sadly for the ulutating wolves, it turns out that the chap was murdered by… a fellow poof who was… his hired lover. You can’t make protest marches with that I am afraid.

Strangely, the space given to this story was – in my perception and, I bet, in yours –  nowhere near the one given to the first, “homophobic” one. How very strange.

Reflecting on these matters, I would now be at a loss to mention heterosexuals killed by their occasional lovers, or killed by people who had been their “guests” for some time.

If on the other hand I think of the supposedly “gay”, several examples come to mind of homos killed by their own lovers, who were being paid by them.

Think of Pierpaolo Pasolini, a wasted talent and the epitome of everything that is filthy, killed in the most squalid of circumstances after quarrelling with male prostitutes about, well, professional fees. Whilst in recent times someone has tried to rewrite history, no one of a sane mind has, or ever had, the slightest doubt about the circumstances leading to his death.

Or think of Gianni Versace, killed by another homosexual very probably “known” to and already “hired” by him. Here too, attempts are being made at re-writing history to divert the attention from the relish with which supposedly “gay” people kill each other, but what became clear is that the man was no stranger to hiring desperate or drug addicted sexual deviants for very cheap money. Like the rather well-off Pasolini, Versace was another cheapskate because of his hate, I think. I’ll come back to this.

Now the case of David Kato, the Homo-Martyr-That-Never-Was. It turns out that the man was killed by the very poor boytoy “gardener” he kept in his home (gardener? GARDENER? Wait a minute! Kato was not wealthy at all and lived in a very dangerous neighbourhood, right?) against shelter, food and you-know-what.

Here too, money is at the centre of the tragedy and here too, “gayness” seems to go together with being a liar and a cheapskate at that or – depending on from what side you see it – a murderer of the man you were screwing just hours before. How very romantic. Kato apparently promised money to his (cough) “gardener” but then failed to deliver and the other had a bout of (cough) “gay pride” and found nothing better to do than to kill him. No doubt, in a few years’ time the attempts to rewrite history will be started here too.

I can’t avoid from all this the impression that homosexuals use, enslave, cheat, and murder their “lovers” with rather alarming frequency; that the idea of hiring sex slaves seems to be rather well spread (no, I do not think that his murderer was very much “romantically involved” with Kato; do you? And didn’t even Oscar Wilde, once in France, start to fish among the poorest and most destitute to satisfy his cravings?); that, in short, these oh so sensitive flowers screaming “homophobia!” and threatening with suicide if one says to them so much as poof often have a way to relating to each other that to me seems dominated by brutal exploitation and raw hate.

Which makes sense, because if there is one sensible conclusion that can be drawn from the extremely high rate of suicide, diseases of all kind and general brutality with each other that the supposed “gay” population exhibits, is that these people hate their own guts with a passion, and the guts of those like them with an ever greater one. Prepotence without manliness, and bitchiness without femininity.

Hate of oneself, then. Wait a minute, how is it called in medical terms?

Yep: homophobia.

Mundabor

 

%d bloggers like this: