You know, I'm not enthusiastic about sodomy laws, because it could be used as an excuse to discriminate against normal homosexual men just living their lives like normal human beings - but at least they kept this sort of thing in the closet. Or possibly made it impossible.
They closed schools for 2 years, locked you up in your home, but asking a homosexual not to drink the piss of 30 random strangers every week, is too much. I mean, I'd be shocked if I did not already know how awful the regime is.
Sodomy laws work like weed laws. Weed is a regulated substance but people smoke regardless and they have been for ages, and as long as they don't flaunt it too much, noone cares. (No, gorillions of negroes aren't in prison for decades "for a little plant", it's always "a little plant oh and also a murder" because weed is like ghetto rat catnip and they always have some on them when they get busted.)
The real purpose of these laws is to make something relatively harmless "illegal" and therefore taboo, so that rebelious teenagers focus on that. Either they just smoke and move on, or they get caught, get a stern talking to at the police station, and it scares them straight. Most of the time anyway, obviously there are some who will just start using even if it's illegal and it'll fry their brains.
But when you legalize weed and remove the taboo, those same rebellious teenagers won't stop being rebellious, they'll just replace weed with something way more dangerous, like meth.
Same thing applies to sodomy. Noone gives a shit if two degenerates want to stick it up each others' poopers, but when it was taboo, a larger number than today stopped there. Now it's not taboo at all, it's even promoted, just like weed, and instead of just fucking in private they do it in the streets, and instead of fucking one dude they fuck dozens at a time.
Weed laws are basically the "how to find a to find a gun" law. If a guy is blatantly smoking it in his car while driving it gave cops reason to pull him over and usually the dude was breaking a more serious law at the same time or had open warrants for serious crimes.
The real purpose of these laws is to make something relatively harmless "illegal" and therefore taboo, so that rebelious teenagers focus on that
The problem with this idea is that those "rebellious teens" are now in contact with a guy willing to commit major crimes just to sell it to them.
Which isn't a problem in those uber white areas where its just a dreadlocked stoner running the operation from his little farm, but it is in places with diverse populations wherein the same potdealer also runs numerous other illegal operations. The "gateway drug" idea wasn't out of some pure slippery slope, but because the same black gangbanger will sell you pot, pot mixed with shit, and crack all on the same table in his living room. Which takes away taboos from harder drugs because you end up having to trust this guy who will absolutely try to sell you stuff. And you can't just "nah I'm good" him for long. Both the threat of physical violence and being cut off are always on the table.
I'm not pro-legalization, but the idea of trying to false bait them into "just pot" only works in a Leave it to Beaver type America. Not one with ghetto trash actively dragging those same teens into the pit.
Right, that's fair. I grew up in a homogenously white society so the pot dealers were just harmless stoners - it's probably different in, as you say, diverse ones.
But when you legalize weed and remove the taboo, those same rebellious teenagers won't stop being rebellious, they'll just replace weed with something way more dangerous, like meth.
Is this actually true? That would suggest that weed use would decline where it is regulated. And I think the meth problem came up long before weed was legalized.
Bear in mind that I in no way favor the legalization of weed.
Now it's not taboo at all, it's even promoted, just like weed, and instead of just fucking in private they do it in the streets, and instead of fucking one dude they fuck dozens at a time.
I think the problem is not as much what 'people' do, and what the left starts pushing. As long as the left has a legitimate cause to push, it'll do that. When it's fresh out of legitimate causes, it starts pushing something illegitimate to downright evil. It is always pushing the envelope.
So imagining for a moment that complete equality between homosexuals and normal people is desirable: the legitimate cause would be same-sex marriage. But when that happened, it became Drag Queen story hour, castrating your kids, and all sorts of other nonsense.
Same for blacks. It's unquestionably correct to not have people be disadvantaged based on their color and race. But when that happened, they started advocating for riots, special preferences, busing, and God knows what.
It seems that even in cases where we think the left is correct, we should stop just short of 'remedying' the situation completely, to make the leftists stuck on the thing that is actually just - rather than moving on to the truly heinous stuff.
Is this actually true? That would suggest that weed use would decline where it is regulated. And I think the meth problem came up long before weed was legalized.
Bear in mind that I in no way favor the legalization of weed.
Well, the point is really the taboo. It hasn't been taboo in western mainstream for decades.
I think the problem is not as much what 'people' do, and what the left starts pushing. As long as the left has a legitimate cause to push, it'll do that. When it's fresh out of legitimate causes, it starts pushing something illegitimate to downright evil. It is always pushing the envelope.
So imagining for a moment that complete equality between homosexuals and normal people is desirable: the legitimate cause would be same-sex marriage. But when that happened, it became Drag Queen story hour, castrating your kids, and all sorts of other nonsense.
Same for blacks. It's unquestionably correct to not have people be disadvantaged based on their color and race. But when that happened, they started advocating for riots, special preferences, busing, and God knows what.
It seems that even in cases where we think the left is correct, we should stop just short of 'remedying' the situation completely, to make the leftists stuck on the thing that is actually just - rather than moving on to the truly heinous stuff.
Yeah, that's why this shit needs to be nipped in the bud. Every time they were given a mile they took the entire planet, so it's time to go back.
Well, the point is really the taboo. It hasn't been taboo in western mainstream for decades.
That suggests that it being a crime wasn't doing much.
Every time they were given a mile they took the entire planet, so it's time to go back.
Since there is no logic nor limiting principle, they'll eventually just spin out of control with their quest for novelty, destroying themselves and possibly their country in the process.
Bear in mind that the original gay rights movement openly included pedo shit. See Harry Hay. They only dropped that stuff later on. As I've said before, I think AIDS forced them to drop the pedo shit because they needed help from the normies to deal with it.
Actually, I believe they were pushing pedophilia long after AIDS. In the 1990s, there was a homosexual organization called ILGA, which was a federation of different organizations, and they included... pro-pedophilia organizations.
Thats literally every law that exists. Or are you a retarded anarchist who thinks "laws are oppressive man, if there weren't any laws there wouldn't be any criminals!"
Sodomy laws by definition include oral between heterosexual couples. With how infested many legal institutions are by woke at this point any attempts to go full on anti sodomy will likely be met by a spiteful scorched earth response by woke infiltrators and allies who already abuse and misuse legal proceedings against specific groups.
Something like this could only pass after a thorough purge anyway, so it's kind of a moot point. But even if it wasn't: Same as with homos, just keep the oral to your home and noone will know.
Probably like 95% of sodomy laws were used to prosecute gay men who were doing bad shit like fucking in public restrooms, "rest stops" or other public "cruising" locations. Gay men were a plague with this shit, and it was still happening as of 10-15 years ago afaik based on what a prosecutor told me. Idk if it happens now but I don't see why it would have stopped. It's just harder to prosecute now.
Even in the case that got the laws all overturned, which was based on private sex, the only consequence was a fine:
In 1998, John Geddes Lawrence Jr., an older white man, was arrested along with Tyron Garner, a younger black man, at Lawrence's apartment in Harris County, Texas. Garner's former boyfriend had called the police, claiming that there was a man with a weapon in the apartment. Sheriff's deputies said they found the men engaging in sexual intercourse. Lawrence and Garner were charged with a misdemeanor under Texas' anti-sodomy law; both pleaded no contest and received a fine.
There are some public locations where faggotry is a serious nuisance that drives away families. Parents don't want to take their kids to a beach or a park if the kid is going to get exposed to seeing buttfucking. So what happens is faggots effectively take over these locations and turn them into "cruising" spots, and feel very proud of themselves for having taken the spot over. We need cops and laws to drive them out and force them to keep their shit behind closed doors where it belongs.
While lewd conduct complaints have dropped dramatically in recent years, Neiman said stings have been used to shut down persistent hotspots for gay cruising and lewd acts 11 times since 2014. Complaints often come from people concerned about sex acts in public places, namely libraries and residential streets, where children could stumble upon people engaged in a lewd act, Neiman said.
Last month, a Los Angeles County judge threw out the charges in one case stemming from Long Beach's 2014 operation, saying police were discriminating against gay men. Many law enforcement agencies have stopped in response to lawsuits or after political backlash. The Times contacted police officials in San Jose, Anaheim, Glendale, San Francisco, Bakersfield, Beverly Hills and Laguna Beach, among other agencies. Representatives for each said their departments had not used such undercover stings in years.
The focus on children is a mistake. Why should ANYONE have to see people having sex in public? I’m not a child, but that doesn’t magically make it okay for two dudes to buttfuck each other outside my local library. You can get fired for giving a female coworker a confused compliment. You can be arrested for offensive tweets in some western countries. But randomly encountering a literal gay piss orgy is just part and parcel?
Yeah I often point that out myself. I do not care to see you having sex. Just like I'll tell people irl life that I do not care to hear explicit details of their sex lives
I edited with an article explaining that gay takeovers of public places for sexual purposes is still going on. Police are just not enforcing the law anymore because of gay activism fighting for their "right" to fuck each other in public.
You can view homosexuality as abnormal, while also acknowledging that there are homosexuals who, in all other respects, are normal and live respectable lives.
Gays are a fraction of the population, and the "normal respectable" ones are likely a fraction of that. How are they supposed to just magically find each other? Every "gay meet" event is crawling with the worst types, as is every dating vector.
By sheer math, they will always be exposed constantly to the degenerate side and most will have to compromise on it simply to not be alone. Heck that's such a common thing Key and Peele were mocking it a decade ago.
When I mean 'this sort of thing', I mean the sexual perversion this creature talks about, not being homosexual per se. Folks like Glenn Greenwald should not have to hide that they live with a man.
You know, I'm not enthusiastic about sodomy laws, because it could be used as an excuse to discriminate against normal homosexual men just living their lives like normal human beings - but at least they kept this sort of thing in the closet. Or possibly made it impossible.
They closed schools for 2 years, locked you up in your home, but asking a homosexual not to drink the piss of 30 random strangers every week, is too much. I mean, I'd be shocked if I did not already know how awful the regime is.
"Going to church during the weekend is nasty and yucky and lets unpack that, sweaty.
Piss drinking gay orgies? Lovely people to meet, UWU."
I swear to god.
Sodomy laws work like weed laws. Weed is a regulated substance but people smoke regardless and they have been for ages, and as long as they don't flaunt it too much, noone cares. (No, gorillions of negroes aren't in prison for decades "for a little plant", it's always "a little plant oh and also a murder" because weed is like ghetto rat catnip and they always have some on them when they get busted.)
The real purpose of these laws is to make something relatively harmless "illegal" and therefore taboo, so that rebelious teenagers focus on that. Either they just smoke and move on, or they get caught, get a stern talking to at the police station, and it scares them straight. Most of the time anyway, obviously there are some who will just start using even if it's illegal and it'll fry their brains.
But when you legalize weed and remove the taboo, those same rebellious teenagers won't stop being rebellious, they'll just replace weed with something way more dangerous, like meth.
Same thing applies to sodomy. Noone gives a shit if two degenerates want to stick it up each others' poopers, but when it was taboo, a larger number than today stopped there. Now it's not taboo at all, it's even promoted, just like weed, and instead of just fucking in private they do it in the streets, and instead of fucking one dude they fuck dozens at a time.
So yeah, bring back sodomy laws.
Weed laws are basically the "how to find a to find a gun" law. If a guy is blatantly smoking it in his car while driving it gave cops reason to pull him over and usually the dude was breaking a more serious law at the same time or had open warrants for serious crimes.
The problem with this idea is that those "rebellious teens" are now in contact with a guy willing to commit major crimes just to sell it to them.
Which isn't a problem in those uber white areas where its just a dreadlocked stoner running the operation from his little farm, but it is in places with diverse populations wherein the same potdealer also runs numerous other illegal operations. The "gateway drug" idea wasn't out of some pure slippery slope, but because the same black gangbanger will sell you pot, pot mixed with shit, and crack all on the same table in his living room. Which takes away taboos from harder drugs because you end up having to trust this guy who will absolutely try to sell you stuff. And you can't just "nah I'm good" him for long. Both the threat of physical violence and being cut off are always on the table.
I'm not pro-legalization, but the idea of trying to false bait them into "just pot" only works in a Leave it to Beaver type America. Not one with ghetto trash actively dragging those same teens into the pit.
Right, that's fair. I grew up in a homogenously white society so the pot dealers were just harmless stoners - it's probably different in, as you say, diverse ones.
Is this actually true? That would suggest that weed use would decline where it is regulated. And I think the meth problem came up long before weed was legalized.
Bear in mind that I in no way favor the legalization of weed.
I think the problem is not as much what 'people' do, and what the left starts pushing. As long as the left has a legitimate cause to push, it'll do that. When it's fresh out of legitimate causes, it starts pushing something illegitimate to downright evil. It is always pushing the envelope.
So imagining for a moment that complete equality between homosexuals and normal people is desirable: the legitimate cause would be same-sex marriage. But when that happened, it became Drag Queen story hour, castrating your kids, and all sorts of other nonsense.
Same for blacks. It's unquestionably correct to not have people be disadvantaged based on their color and race. But when that happened, they started advocating for riots, special preferences, busing, and God knows what.
It seems that even in cases where we think the left is correct, we should stop just short of 'remedying' the situation completely, to make the leftists stuck on the thing that is actually just - rather than moving on to the truly heinous stuff.
Well, the point is really the taboo. It hasn't been taboo in western mainstream for decades.
Yeah, that's why this shit needs to be nipped in the bud. Every time they were given a mile they took the entire planet, so it's time to go back.
That suggests that it being a crime wasn't doing much.
Since there is no logic nor limiting principle, they'll eventually just spin out of control with their quest for novelty, destroying themselves and possibly their country in the process.
Bear in mind that the original gay rights movement openly included pedo shit. See Harry Hay. They only dropped that stuff later on. As I've said before, I think AIDS forced them to drop the pedo shit because they needed help from the normies to deal with it.
Actually, I believe they were pushing pedophilia long after AIDS. In the 1990s, there was a homosexual organization called ILGA, which was a federation of different organizations, and they included... pro-pedophilia organizations.
Only dropped it when it became a PR nightmare.
It's still subjective enforcement. You're always gonna have a lunatic that tries to wield that as cudgel against anyone they don't like.
Thats literally every law that exists. Or are you a retarded anarchist who thinks "laws are oppressive man, if there weren't any laws there wouldn't be any criminals!"
Sodomy laws by definition include oral between heterosexual couples. With how infested many legal institutions are by woke at this point any attempts to go full on anti sodomy will likely be met by a spiteful scorched earth response by woke infiltrators and allies who already abuse and misuse legal proceedings against specific groups.
Something like this could only pass after a thorough purge anyway, so it's kind of a moot point. But even if it wasn't: Same as with homos, just keep the oral to your home and noone will know.
Probably like 95% of sodomy laws were used to prosecute gay men who were doing bad shit like fucking in public restrooms, "rest stops" or other public "cruising" locations. Gay men were a plague with this shit, and it was still happening as of 10-15 years ago afaik based on what a prosecutor told me. Idk if it happens now but I don't see why it would have stopped. It's just harder to prosecute now.
Even in the case that got the laws all overturned, which was based on private sex, the only consequence was a fine:
There are some public locations where faggotry is a serious nuisance that drives away families. Parents don't want to take their kids to a beach or a park if the kid is going to get exposed to seeing buttfucking. So what happens is faggots effectively take over these locations and turn them into "cruising" spots, and feel very proud of themselves for having taken the spot over. We need cops and laws to drive them out and force them to keep their shit behind closed doors where it belongs.
Yeah I looked it up, 2016 article: https://archive.ph/LBR60
The focus on children is a mistake. Why should ANYONE have to see people having sex in public? I’m not a child, but that doesn’t magically make it okay for two dudes to buttfuck each other outside my local library. You can get fired for giving a female coworker a confused compliment. You can be arrested for offensive tweets in some western countries. But randomly encountering a literal gay piss orgy is just part and parcel?
Yeah I often point that out myself. I do not care to see you having sex. Just like I'll tell people irl life that I do not care to hear explicit details of their sex lives
Other states had more severe punishments, like Georgia's law which was correctly upheld in Bowers vs. Hardwick:
But the consequence is also a criminal record, possible loss of jobs, housing, etc.
Preferably keep not just the sexual activity, but also the talk, promotion and recrutiing of it.
I edited with an article explaining that gay takeovers of public places for sexual purposes is still going on. Police are just not enforcing the law anymore because of gay activism fighting for their "right" to fuck each other in public.
You can view homosexuality as abnormal, while also acknowledging that there are homosexuals who, in all other respects, are normal and live respectable lives.
Huh, didn't know you were a crazy person.
Gays are a fraction of the population, and the "normal respectable" ones are likely a fraction of that. How are they supposed to just magically find each other? Every "gay meet" event is crawling with the worst types, as is every dating vector.
By sheer math, they will always be exposed constantly to the degenerate side and most will have to compromise on it simply to not be alone. Heck that's such a common thing Key and Peele were mocking it a decade ago.
It's the closet that allowed AIDS to spread so fast and so easily.
I think it had more to do with ejaculating into fissured rectal tissues.
When I mean 'this sort of thing', I mean the sexual perversion this creature talks about, not being homosexual per se. Folks like Glenn Greenwald should not have to hide that they live with a man.
I'm not sure this creature exists outside some fetish film and this pervert's imagination.