1
lapalapa 1 point ago +1 / -0

I've also read something related to motherhood.

2
lapalapa 2 points ago +2 / -0

either a man is straight or he's gay, and either way there is no changing it.

I don't know. Maybe gay people who step outside of a coomer mindset would find themselves more sexually normal. Your assertions that sexuality can't change are your own.

2
lapalapa 2 points ago +2 / -0

Homosexuality is not "normal," but it is in the interest of community and social cohesion that their sexual habits be tolerated

Most credible hypothesis on male homosexuality is that it originates and multiplies through molestation. If true, you can't tolerate homosexual behaviors without the children suffering for it.

1
lapalapa 1 point ago +1 / -0

You seem Catholic enough to warrant a reply. I'd argue that denouncing the Pope is bowing to the temporary modern (political) world.

0
lapalapa 0 points ago +1 / -1

To specify, you can't call the Pope illegitimate while considering yourself Catholic without falling into heresy.

7
lapalapa 7 points ago +7 / -0

Always remember the bugs go in whole, including their intestines and their contents. If you eat bugs, you also eat bug excrement.

1
lapalapa 1 point ago +1 / -0

Psychology was the first institution that was taken over, back when they caved to the gay lobby to consider homosexual behavior as perfectly healthy.

1
lapalapa 1 point ago +1 / -0

Because modern therapy is based off methods designed to treat women by talking about something face to face. Men don't do this.

If you are a guy and one of your friends is going through shit the second best thing you can do is not ask about it.

This is stereotyped nonsense. Masculinity isn't about being a macho caricature. Putting thought into words and untangling it through conversation is how I solve my issues and I'm not unmasculine.

16
lapalapa 16 points ago +17 / -1

Masculinity is the CURE, not the poison.

Some people need therapy to be told that, though many therapists today might do more harm that good.

4
lapalapa 4 points ago +4 / -0

Vanilla Sky wouldn't get accolades today. Something about virtual sex bots of your crush and whatnot.

2
lapalapa 2 points ago +2 / -0

When I said "conflicting interests", I meant many groups of people, some coordinating amongst themselves, making alliances with others, and so on. However, the rope can be pulled in many directions. "Coordination" makes it sound like there's a single general agenda. That is not true, unless you're referring to the devil whose agenda is to render asunder.

3
lapalapa 3 points ago +3 / -0

by some faceless leadership behind the scenes

People acting on an ideology, consciously or unconsciously, will make it appear as if there was somebody in charge, but that isn't necessary for the impression. It's much more likely that the world is a chaos of conflicting interests at many different scales and that nobody's in charge. Thinking otherwise sounds way too childishly comforting to me, since then you could solve the problem of evil by chopping the right heads off. Reality is much more dire than that.

9
lapalapa 9 points ago +9 / -0

Why did you decide to upload in this manner? Why not put the link in the title? The Bee is solid.

2
lapalapa 2 points ago +2 / -0

It's as simple as raiding a house, and copying from a usb into the hard drive while the owner is detained outside.

8
lapalapa 8 points ago +8 / -0

"Identity attack"? What does that mean?

Is saying homosexual sex a sin an identity attack? How about transsexuals are mentally ill?

13
lapalapa 13 points ago +13 / -0

I'm surprised they don't do the CP planting tactic more often. It sounds to me like a sure-fire way to get rid of people, even in public opinion, and it's not like they're above doing that. I guess they must worry about some individual leaking the truth. Makes no sense otherwise.

10
lapalapa 10 points ago +10 / -0

At least tell me you didn't pay for it nor added to its viewership statistics.

1
lapalapa 1 point ago +1 / -0

Parents would have known if they had wanted to. Trusting their government not to groom their children at this point can only be willful blindness. What's unreasonable about that?

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›