Are Muslims a homosexual's worst enemy? - Page 9 - Politics | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Modern liberalism. Civil rights and liberties, State responsibility to the people (welfare).
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
It seems a bit odd that somewhere like Saudi forces women to cover up almost completely to avoid men's gaze, leaving men with only the ability to gaze upon other men. This I would expect from a country that adhered to an ideology of extreme-homosexualism, rather than an extreme ideology that was intolerant of homosexuality.
mikema63 wrote:Yeah, and guess what? I have known and met even more people who've had to live on the streets and have known people who were abused by their families, and have known people who have died because their loving christian families hated gay people more than they loved their children.

And your point is? Homosexuals tend to have one hell of a lot of problems, and shorter life expectancy. It is usually due to their own behavior.

mikema63 wrote:Do you really think Christians haven't been killing gays for decades? You used to beat us in the streets and leave us for dead. You invented the term "fag drag" here in the south. So pardon me while you cry salty tears over the pulse shooting but conveniently forget everything God fearing Christians have ever done to us.

Christians in general are typically non-violent. Your problem with rednecks is understandable, but making enemies of all Christians isn't going to do you any significant favors. It just demonstrates that you are as much of a bigot as you claim others to be.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Please note that the list includes many Christian and conservative groups, but I did not see a single Muslim group.

That's because the Southern Poverty Law center was founded to fight the KKK. So white people are their enemies. It wouldn't take a genius to include the Nation of Islam on that list.


Oxymandias wrote:An educated monarch educated in the West would try to make is country more liberal. The monarch is rich, his son would already have many modern luxuries.

Historically, that has been more a trait of female rulers, like Queen Victoria. King Charles wasn't exactly known for that.

Oxymandias wrote:You need to brainwash your son in order to make so that instead of reacting to the modern world in a positive light, react to it in a negative light.

That's not hard to do. Bashar Assad is well educated, and he doesn't particularly oppose modernism. However, he still retains absolute power.

Oxymandias wrote:I said that you need to brainwash him enough with extremist Islamic propaganda that so when he sees the real world, he sees it in a radicalized view.

I don't think that is particularly hard to do. The modern world is pretty radical.

Oxymandias wrote:Also I don't think you understand what Sadistic Personality Disorder is and I recommend you read up on before you make the large assumption that everyone who is into S&M has Sadistic Personality Disorder.

I'm not slamming the S&M community, I'm just noting that the LGBTQ community doesn't include them.

Oxymandias wrote:Do you have any proof and sources that prove that what you're saying is true?

I think you misunderstood my point. I am not arguing that S&M types are bad. My point is that they aren't included in the LGBTQ community. For Sadists, having power over people is the thrill. For masochists, I theorize that they get an endorphin rush that they like.

Oxymandias wrote:If you think right-wing extremists are all bravado but no bite then why are refusing to acknowledge the links I gave. Either way I don't care. As long as you agree that Muslims are not in fact biggest threat to Western civilization I am fine.

I'm not a fan of statistical arguments, because they are usually a stacked deck. For example, your article doesn't include Omar Mateen or Nidal Hasan. It's typical disingenuous leftist argument. The idea that the political right in the US is more violent than the left is absurd. The Antifa types for example are regularly violent. That's also why I say it's pointless to rant on Christians. Homosexuals are typically their own worst enemies. It's a pitiable condition.

While I don't think Islam is an existential threat to Western Civilization, I do think it is essentially incompatible. In Afghanistan, for example, a father will still literally hold a disobedient child's feet to the fire. The people who are great fans of political correctness also argue for multiculturalism. Although, I have to state that they are mostly just liars. They don't support multiculturalism. They simply hate white people and want to destroy European and European American culture. In other words, they want to displace whites from a position of social and economic superiority. That's why they lament racism, sexism and homophobia, but then let in Muslims who are very typically all of those things.

I think post-modernism and critical theory are the bigger threats to Western Civilization.

Ok let's say you are right. However you can't be so sure that it won't happen. Any form of liberalism is detrimental to Saudi Arabia. Even if he goes a China or a Hong Kong route with Saudi Arabia or even a Switzerland route (there's lots of stuff in Switzerland that may be appealing to male rulers) this will radically change the way Saudi Arabia's society operates. Saudi Arabia is stable because it's populous is ignorant or the outside world or of any alternatives to the current leadership. Once you take that away it all falls apart.

The point isn't the government but society. the society of Saudi Arabia is the thing that allows it to remain stable. Any radical changes such as modernism is going to create social disruption.

Are you expressing a view from your perspective or from the perspective of a Saudi Arabian prince? In other words, do you think the modern world is radical?

That's because S&M is a style of sex, not a sexuality.

Of course it wouldn't. That's because it isn't the topic of the article. Two people aren't large enough to cover the large amount of right wing attacks that happen in America. Antifa is simply more publicly known. No one talks about the KKK and other extremist groups because they hang around in rural areas while Antifa hangs around in urban areas. The urban areas of America are very well-known are more likely to gain attention. Which would sound more appealing to you "There is an Antifa riot happening in New York city" or "There is a KKK riot happening somewhere in Utah"?

That has nothing to do with Islam however. It's a recent cultural thing. A revival of traditional cultural practices after they have been suppressed for two decades by secular Soviet governments. Due to this, Afghan culture never really got a chance to develop like Western culture.
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9

@Julian658 So no evidence. Your arguments are[…]

@Unthinking Majority seems to have a lot of anx[…]

Would you be interested at all in addressing a […]

The language and social organization that "s[…]