Wednesday, December 10, 2008

i um, oh fuck it....

we are entering the final days.

for years i thought the religious zealots were just a bunch of loonies, and well, that view hasn`t changed.....but when i hear people taking this shit seriously i think the fundies might have a point.


Vincent said...

I'm not sure what you are saying, but if it's what I think you are implying, I do agree with you!

dr.alistair said...

i`m saying a bunch of things here, people being given special consideration because of how they choose to pleaseure themselves and eachother......people creating civil disturbances because of what they believe they have "right" to getting.

we have a series of perfectly good laws that protect us from insult and injustice that have served us for centuries, yet special interests want to hold society hostage for thier "bit" of what they believe is a pie to be divvied.....

and to sort for how one engages one`s genital apparatus.


but yeah, the critic will say that the hetero white male has had all the rights by default.


dr.alistair said...

and also that society in general is becoming bored and playing with it`s food, like domesticated predators such as the house cat, still equipped to hunt, but kept in domestic comfort.

we are indeed strange animals.

Vincent said...

Good, that is what I thought you were saying. I too find myself surprised to agree with the religious zealots on this.

I have argued with many stateside friends on this proposition 8 business, about which they have allowed themselves to be brainwashed into liberal partisan loyalties. Explaining that it wasn't as they seemed to suggest an attack on gay behaviour, but a restatement of a definition of marriage that has always been the case until special-interest lobbying distorted it.

I don't know how it is in Canada, but here in England these things are done low-key, diplomatically, avoiding confrontations and splits on party lines. There is now a law which allows "civil partnerships" which are broadly equivalent to marriage, without using the word: a compromise which is apparently acceptable to all.

But in the States and I don't know where else, I think it is now the white female feminist who wants the rights—to domesticate the male. It is the wild outlaw behaviour of sex between men that they want to dress up in pink, and make it into men in aprons, just another married couple.

Blacks, religious or not, understand perfectly well that homosexual behaviour needs to be kept underground. Gay rights people protest loudly at the severe punishments and social opprobrium applied in places as diverse as Jamaica, Afghanistan and Malaysia. What they don't understand is that there is plenty of tolerance of such behaviour in those countries, so long as it isn't allowed to weaken traditional culture, which (of course!) supports the extended family based around reproductive couples.

dr.alistair said...

yeah, if people really care about eachother they do it quietly and without the grandstanding of "rights" attendant some within the gay community.

i have no right to judge or otherwise interfere in the behaviour of people`s sexuality or otherwhich.....part of my "minding my own business" ethic i feel, but when some decide to parade it down my high-street i feel the discomfort and begin to ask questions.

a friend of mine`s young daughters were invited to a transvestive party by some cute "women" recently and i suggested that it was a teddybear`s picnic and that they shoud really understand the game a little more before they be so trusting of being offered alcohol and drugs by men in dresses.

"they seem so nice, and, well kinda interesting" the young girl said.......

speaking of liberal thinking.

they wouldn`thave dreamed of accepting the same invitation from the hockey team.