Gay Marriage and the NWO Agenda

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

But wait, I thought the OP's premise was that people were going to get "fake gay married" in order to ruin marriage??? So, younger people are not getting married, except when they are getting fake gay married? This thread makes my head hurt.

a reply to: kaylaluv

Perhaps you should read it again.

This threads opening post:

TPTB have already gone a long way in the last 60 years to destroy sexual morality, marriage, and families anyway. This new “Gay civil right” will accelerate the process even more.

The NWO slave does not need to have his loyalties divided; he does not need a family. His loyalties should be solely for the corporation who employs/owns him.

It’s coming.

The hated Fundamentalist Christians will be destroyed or forced to go underground, along with their “outmoded” traditional values.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

Maybe YOU should read it again:

What this does is open the door to a plethora of FAKE GAY marriages (as well as other variations on marriage). People will marry just to get the material benefits of marriage. Marriage will be a joke. The abuse of marriage will be so widespread that eventually the “benefits” will be withdrawn. (Corporations are always looking for ways to cut HR costs.)

a reply to: kaylaluv

Arguing for the sake of arguing is stupid.

There are a few of you that have been attacking my comments on various threads recently, guaranteed.

You asked a question about the relevance of talking about young people, I answered it. Stop goading.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

You implied I didn't read the OP. You were wrong. I pointed it out.

Relax. Not everything is about you.

a reply to: kaylaluv

You asked a question about relevance suggesting you are confused, obviously goading because you ran out of goading ideas. If you don't want answers to questions don't ask them.

a reply to: AuranVector

You clearly get it, but don't expect much praise for that. The deniers and label-makers will be here full force, because you stated the truth. Hang on to your hat!

Can someone explain to me exactly how the Gay Agenda got mixed up with the NWO?

a reply to: Darth_Prime

Can someone explain to me exactly how the Gay Agenda got mixed up with the NWO?

Well...

It all began about 8 years ago when Barack Obama awoke at 3am craving a bologna sandwich.

He threw on his silk robe, went downstairs to the kitchen and asked his personal assistant to "make me a sammich". When the assistant opened the fridge to grab the Grey Poupon mustard, he noticed that the milk sitting next to it was 2% instead of the dietary 1% that they normally have in the royal kitchen.

Which of course, set things into motion...

And the rest, as they say, is history.

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: tothetenthpower

Few people appreciate where the so-called "New World Order" is leading us: Nations, families, genders, physical bodies and eventually your own personal mind is due to be of no great importance. The eventual goal.

That would be difficult to explain and even more more difficult to understand and accept in a few short sentences. The best explanation I can offer on short notice is to review or read for the first time Arthur C. Clarke's Childhood's End. Most people won't get it however. To far out from what they know about consensus reality and the unknown that isn't reality.

Interesting reference. That is what they want to believe, but what he proposes isn't what will happen. Yes, I have read that one. Good writing, for certain, but seriously twisted from a theological standpoint. His other little "game" in that, the reveal (and I am sure you know what I mean) was meant to convince you what he proposes in a novel is real. Same as all of the half-human movie "heroes" these days.

a reply to: CranialSponge

Well, that actually makes more sense then some of the other things I've read so.... it all started with a Sandwich.. and thus the NWO

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

What is it that makes people strong and self-sufficient individuals able to live their lives without needing to depend on government or those in power to give and take and make all the important decisions for them?

Strong neighborhood communities. Strong faith communities. Strong families.

When people have one or more of those three, they turn to each other in their times of need. When you remove or break down those three, they have no one except the power structure you put in place for them.

a reply to: AuranVector

We were the first country in the world here in Ireland to legalise same sex marriage by popular vote on May 22nd of this year.

Sure there’s an agenda it’s called secular humanism…
And there’s a globalist agenda as well…
and a religious agenda

What’s the problem?

Whether the globalist agenda has its paws on the Gay movement is the question


Fair question


We all don’t have to be so mutually exclusive


This is all, of course, separate from ones belief in the validity of gay marriage

a reply to: Darth_Prime

so.... it all started with a Sandwich.. and thus the NWO

Exactly !

Your welcome.

Nothing is forever it could be that marriage is going the way of polygamy.


Maybe humankind is evolving to a non marriage arrangement where the state will care for the children


Sure the parents can come by a few days a week and hug their kids but at least the state want likely produce Charles Mansions, and Dylann Roofs…
What did Hillary say: It takes a village

originally posted by: Willtell
Nothing is forever it could be that marriage is going the way of polygamy.


Maybe humankind is evolving to a non marriage arrangement where the state will care for the children


Sure the parents can come by a few days a week and hug their kids but at least the state want likely produce Charles Mansions, and Dylann Roofs…
What did Hillary say: It takes a village

What's your rationale for the state not producing Masons or Roofs?

Speaking from South Africa where we've had same-sex marriage equality since 2006, it's been a mixed bag.
Obviously I'm celebrating for my USA lgtbi "family" across the pond.
However, I also feel that marriage equality has been the last unified attempt at pride and activism, and since then the fissures of wider society (concerning intersections of race, class and gender) have also become glaringly obvious.
We've turned into a lame-duck movement, when our continent needs a lot of work on human rights, including minority and lgbti rights.

The Janus-faced media would at first celebrate or convey the news, but quickly it focused on two or three cases of same-sex shotgun weddings that didn't work out (as in "We told you so").
The gay community can expect to be under extra media scrutiny initially.
Only in books will one read that many people struggled with Home Affairs, and official attitudes did not immediately translate into less homophobia.

Then gay pride events in urban areas were boycotted or even protested for being elitist, commercial, too white and too "privileged".
Organizers would claim the opposite, and that their attempts to be more inclusive of radical organizations were spurned.

Maybe it's been a little resolved this year, and urban pride marches did concede to demands to honor the victims of homophobia with a minute of silence.
The main protest was from black lesbians and bisexual women who suffer continued attacks and "curative rape" especially in the black townships.
Then there's the minority communities (whites, but also coloreds and Indians) who feel attacked by larger political discourses and issues, who feel their experiences are now marginalized, and don't feel sure what they can do against homophobia in other communities.
There's a whole bunch of smaller pride marches now, in a way that seems segregated between communities.
Only a very middle to upper class community seems truly racially integrated, which also reflects wider society (including the churches).
A major complaint is that pride events end up in commercial after-parties, that the poor cannot afford, which is why I don't attend either.
There's the gay spaces that pander to international identities and tourism, while the outlying areas (I'd argue both white and black) still have a lot of homophobia.

Apart from that even long-term couples don't seem to be getting married much.
I''m going to attend my second heterosexual marriage where the guy is around forty and the woman in her early thirties, and even they lived together a long time before getting married.
My only gay "married" friends are now in New Zealand and Canada.
I'm not sure marriage in general is that popular.

However, I'm glad the right exists for two adults to get married.
At least in my community it has made people feel more valued as equal citizens.
And who knows ... maybe one day?

Apart from that I cannot say it's empowered the lgbti movement in SA as a political entity.
Was it the ultimate act of assimilation and co-option into a wider divisive discourse (a few lgbti spokes-people warned against it).
Quite the opposite, but I guess it will have to find a new voice and grow again.
At least I hope so.

So far to me though, if there is a conspiracy, then legal same-sex marriage has hardly led to destroying civilization or making society queer.
It's generally very quiet about lgtbi issues in SA since 2006, and I feel we are divided as a community.
It's like progressiveness has been turned into a headless chicken.
But then again, every country is different.

a reply to: halfoldman

I hate to say it, but that's been observed in European countries where gay marriage has been legal. Less people get married.

The theory is that the idea of what a marriage is has been eroded. Marriage used to be something more than just a formal contract between two people in romantic love. It was life-long partnership for child-rearing and family. But allowing marriage to be redefined to allow any two people in love changed that, and if you are in romantic love, why do you need to trap yourself into such a painful to dissolve contract as marriage? Ergo, marriage doesn't mean anything, more children are born out wedlock, there are fewer families.

This is why I argued against redefining marriage. I don't think in the long run we will find it to be a good move. Not because I have anything against two people making each other happy, but because I think it erodes what marriage's purpose is and brings it into a more personally selfish incarnation for everyone. Ultimately, society erodes as a result.

Exactly what the NWO wants - isolated people, not strong families.

a reply to: AuranVector

The "Gay Gestapo" have now been further empowered.

Amazing...

A reference to the Nazi's... Who knew that was coming.