It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.



page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 5 2002 @ 04:28 AM
After much debate with homosexuals//communists//super democrats//and over the edge conspiracy nuts! I have come to a startling conclusion.

First let me state a few things, I am not racist, nor do I care what someone's sexual preference is. The reason I stated homosexuals is because where I've been conversing for a bit is full of homosexuals among the others listed, and they constantly use their sexuality as a basis for supporting their revolutionary ideas.

If I'm not mistaken Revolutionary ideas ARE the supreme left. Good this stuff said.

I have discovered America's SUPREME PROBLEM, it has been "INVADED" by SUPER REVOLUTIONARIES.

These people are deadly to our Democracy for two reasons....

1) They don't realize how evil their views are to democracy.

2) They will stop at nothing to ENFORCE their views.

Let's begin with the sexual preference, sexual preferences ARE NOT A CONCERN, do what you will. But this place the revolutionary homosexuals want to impose their extremist views and tear down democratically upheld laws.

I have no problem if the law is overturned throug a majority vote (what law you ask? Laws such as the "gays can't marry law" like in Nevada), if the majority want a law then it MUST be upheld or else democracy is compromised.

The people I've talked with might as well be al qaeda...they are very fanatical about seeing it done THEIR way even though they still are the minority, they are even the minority within their own sexual preference and their supporters (heteros other homos what ever). They repeatedly threaten anyone that suggests (IE me and others who agree with majority vote) that the majority is correct, and that the government does have the right to make laws upholding moral views seen by the majority.

Now moving on to political Revolutionaries. These are also the more fanatical psychos of the socialist movements. They believe Bush is Satan no matter what, that America deserved 9-11 and that we should be paying the Muslims for damages and that we are Dictators in Afghanistan. Other ideals are that we shouldn't have fought in WW2 and that the Soviet Union was not bad!

These people ALSO think that majority rules should be abolished so that their EXTREMELY minority views can be upheld. They are as fanatical as any ISLAM FUNDAMENTALIST IN MY OPINION!

And conspiracy nuts, they have no power per-say within this Revolutionary "congregation" but they fuel both extreme reactionists and insane supportive ideas for their extremist views.

Now to go over a few things, these revolutionaries do not fully or even minorly represent their respective ideals (sexual preferences//political standpoints//and views on what's going on in the world)

They are the worst of the worst, the Revolutionaries, super extremists.

They are not bad people or evil, they are like all of us, but their fanaticism for their view compromises ALL FREEDOMS!

They would rather see political correctness upheld at the expense of majority rule, than see any morality upheld by a law!

It is now my COMPLETE belief that MORALS ARE FREEDOMS!!! And these Revolutionaries are the EPITOMY OF THIS ONE FALSITY!

Morals are contradictory to freedoms!

posted on Dec, 5 2002 @ 07:51 AM

First, let me be the first person to welcome you to the 21st century. I'm happy you've finally become aware of these issues unscathed.


Now... it's not so bad. Every society needs change, and change does not come from the moderate centrists, it evolves from the radical poles.

Consider applying your views to women a few decades ago. They were a minority, they were "second class" and if left to the voting majority, would not have the right to vote and participate in democracy. But, for a compassionate society the right thing was to begin transformations toward equality. The same can be said of blacks some years later.

Every society, at every point in history, has had what you call "Super Revolutionaries" (no need to shout in all caps, you're beginning to look like Rumor Mill News). In some cases as with fascist states, they've been suppressed, but they're still there.

The construct of this country aspires to provide two things; basic freedoms, and the will of the people (conspiracy mythology of controlling societies aside for now). These aren't balanced, they're combined and equally important. You seem to be suggesting that basic freedom is less important than the will of the people. Amongst this august group of alternate thinkers, you would like the opinion of the (so-called controlled) masses to dictate our freedoms?

The ability to allow basic freedoms is the ability to embrace that which you abhor. Pornography (for example) serves one and only one purpose for the public good, it tests the limits of the freedom of speech.

I would suggest that a democracy should not be judged by how well it bends to the will of the majority, but instead, how well it offers basic freedoms to all citizens. I would much rather have your super revolutionaries spitting their extremist drivel in the city square than the alternative, a disturbing silence.

Now, how does that apply to your recent essay?

posted on Dec, 5 2002 @ 09:46 AM
Yes, William has right. Wellcome to the 21th century.

What you wrote in your post, I know it since more than 10 years.

I'm happy that you are aware now. When you'll have a good idea who will help us to stop this madness, feel free to post it.

These things are promoted by the left and the far left. And it's not new.Also, they don't hide their idea. Just read their political programs, and you will understand E.V.E.R.Y.T.H.I.N.G. I did it. I have read the belgian socialist political program ( also, the communist one and the ecologist one ). You will see that they share the same POV on almost everything. And you know, a socialist, like a commie or an ecolo,is a socialist. They are all internationalists. Pick up a program ( a Belgian, a French, a Spanish, an American ), and READ IT !

But I'm surprised. Are you sure that you are a FM ?

FM are deeply involved in this situation and they are responsible ( in part ) of what's happened now.

posted on Dec, 5 2002 @ 12:25 PM
Freemason, why don't you take a look at the history of your Secret Society. As Pike wrote "....Freemasonry hatches no premature revolutions." Look at the French Revolution, the American Revolution, in fact every revolution in European history has had the Masonic institution behind it. 'Our Order out of Chaos'. I also think it is funny when the Bertrand Russell Society and the Freemasonic Lodge of Hamilton host Noam Chomsky lectures, one of which is called 'The Emerging Framework of World Order' and througout it Noam repeatedly says, you must exert your will on the government, as people in other countries do, it doesn't matter if you are a minority, be a vocal minority, be more vocal than the minority that rules today, when I go to other countries people don't ask me what to do, they tell me what they are doing, etc.etc.
Freemason, welcome to a world your membership fee helps make. LOLOLOLOL

posted on Dec, 5 2002 @ 05:41 PM
FM, to put it in a nutshell, were you saying that the counter-culturalists are attempting to create a "Freedom from morality" zone out of the U.S.?

posted on Dec, 5 2002 @ 08:08 PM
No the real issue should be several things, one why is it not brought up in schools? and two what can be done about it now?

I posted it and thought I'd seem very racist, we are all looking over our shoulders to watch out for the mighty R word. That in itself is anti-democratic!

Yes it IS a revelation to me, as a VICTIM of public schooling, I had no ideas of the dangers of all these minorities.

Now that I do it seems no alternatives remain, that the damage is too sever!

Another revelation today, which probably you all figured out years ago, is the "sliding scale democracy" of America.

Again as a victim of Public Schooling I always thought America was fairly moderate, and that you had nuts on both sides that were tugging at the scale, trying to lean it their ways.

In actuality looking at history, America is even BETTER than I previously thought, because it is a sliding scale democracy! The balance shifts towards left or right depending on what is needed at the time, that is comonsense enough but we are lied to in high school.

Moving off that idea DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA! is even further in jeapordy, because these Revolutionaries (not supported by masonry ma-ha-bone
) are forcing the scale to the extreme left to support their anti-cultural views when the scale wants to go right for our very own safety.

In wartime the scale must ALWAYS shift right, look at WW2, Roosevelt himself went from a near communist to get us out of the depresion, to a super capitalist and nationalist hmm "american 'fuher'?"
to get us to when the War that we needed to fight.

Now we need that same type of moderate conservatism, with consumerism (capitalism) running at full speed and we have these Revolutionary "Anchors" holding us back.

Holding protests against Bush and fighting Saddam (See 1.5 BILLION IRAQIS KILLED! to learn why we MUST get rid of saddam), holding "anti-capitalist" protests, protesting buying goods which help our economy and therefore help the war!

This Anchor is not taught in high school even a fraction, in fact they teach just the opposite of the truth, and that is wretched. Which is (little ol' young me) had to have these revelations!

So surely something can be done about these "dangers to democracy". As I've said before, nothing wrong with someone's views, but when they try to change a majority vote on the pretense of descremination (thereby passing popular opinion) they are the anchor pulling us towards MINORITY RULE!

no signature

posted on Dec, 5 2002 @ 08:14 PM
And Thomas not all counter-culture and revolutionary wants "Freedom from Moralities" but from what I've seen now, they definately believe that Morals are a restriction of personal freedom, and that many should be "removed".

As my grandma just said today, "There's a reason marriage was forced as a social MUST for nearly 8000 years, and the next generation is going to learn why!"

Meaning that this new found support of divorce and single parenthood will have TREMENDOUS impacts on society for the worst, and I believe her. But I wouldn't dare tell that to a "REVOLUTIONARY!" because they'll imediately percieve it as an attack against their way of life. Damn slut bags! It's one thing when the husband leaves like an a$s and you do your best, versus when you just both agreed you should never have gotten married in the first place and go your own ways.

My aunt had the first happen to her, she lives in LA and even that was not enough to save her children from the worst habbits in society! She's extremely smart and wise, but without the father figure the kids just want to do their own thing. This I know because when the "dirt-bag dad" does come to visit, they shapen up and stop doing all their vices in order to present themselves decently. He may be a "dirt-bag" dad but he's not a man of many vices, just his vice is one of the worse ones and my cousins don't see it, or don't want to.

no signature

posted on Dec, 5 2002 @ 08:22 PM
And it seems a lot of you are under the misconception this is "Freemasonry's" fault. No it is not, George Washington would not approve of what is going on today.

Nor would Albert pike, or Abraham Lincoln (was to be initiated but then assassinated).

Freemasonry has had no voluntary efforts to support MINORITY RULE!....but as I've said, no one really supports this.

MINORITY RULE! is just a side effect of politically correctness, and it is not the "Agenda" of anyone. I'm not talking globalists, or internationalists. I'm talking about people who say certain laws are discriminating (when they are just "moral laws" by the majority) and that they should be removed. For instance, look what would happen if a state banned abortions....ok?

You'd have every damn extremist pro-choicer come and demand that this law is a descrimination of their rights and such.

No it is not, the bill of rights is all the rights we have, it is so perfect because it allows moral laws to be made by majority votes. If the majority of a state does not want abortions to be allowed, SO BE IT. But this is compromised by Minority Rule, when political correctness and any veiws are tried to be upheld under the pretense of descrimination.

no signature

posted on Dec, 5 2002 @ 08:38 PM
And finally william, you are not comparable to the way these people behave. You call yourself August thinkers, you are "just" thinkers, everyone here has exhibited excellent observation in their environment, but none of you have exhibited the know-nothing must-have-everything-be-a-right type of mentality of these weirdos!

I understand the need for "change"//progress, but not why minority rule is permitted. For the previous 200 years changes in society, were made through gradual acceptance of something, for example women being equal to men.

Also that was mainly on a voting scale, in some instances women are not considered equal to men by certain peoples, and in others women were always equal to men by some other peoples opinions. Voting was descriminating against the only RIGHT in the universe that has never been fully fulfilled until recently, which was voting.

Everyone in a democracy has a right to vote, women, blacks, you name it. But what rights do we not have? We don't have the right to be homosexuals, nor do we have the right to be heterosexuals. We don't have the right to have abortions, nor do we have the right to NOT have abortions. And so on.

Minority Rule is becomming a serious problem, because people feel they have rights to those issues. They do not have bad intent, or malicious intents, they just don't understand (Like I never understood) the important roll that "morality laws" voted in by a majority vote, plays.

These morality laws, which are very many of the laws, such as "don't murder" kind of laws. Are being compromised by the minority not wanting to wait for the society they are in to accept such views.

Homosexuals want to be flamming gays in public now, women want abortions now, even if every person in the state does not want it. Those that practice those ideas want it to be their "rights". Those are not rights, they are views by all of society.

If 900,000 people did not want to see gays marry, but 100 did, should gays be allowed to marry?

I don't think so, because homosexuality, like heterosexuality is not supposed to be an issue in public. When you walk down the street, do you say "he's a homo, she isn't, he isn't, she is"...? I sure don't, now if we were saying to people, you can't be gay, then that probably is more of an invasion of their rights than the marriage//sodomy acts issues.

The only thing protecting marriage is religion, perhaps if gays want to marry they should just have a gay religion to marry them with.

Anyways...Political Correctness I suppose one would call it? Not the change in society, but they way it is changing is what is harmful to us all as a democracy.

When you think of this, please don't cloud the issues with if they should be allowed this, or shouldn't do that...that's what your vote would be for.

The only issue here, is what is happening to our democracy, by a minority point of view, dictating what is "moral" and what isn't. And the way they dictate that is deadly to a democracy that has such access to information and media sources.

no signature

posted on Dec, 6 2002 @ 12:02 PM
Well... I can address a few things:

Meaning that this new found support of divorce and single parenthood will have TREMENDOUS impacts on society for the worst, and I believe her. But I wouldn't dare tell that to a "REVOLUTIONARY!" because they'll imediately percieve it as an attack against their way of life. Damn slut bags! It's one thing when the husband leaves like an a$s and you do your best, versus when you just both agreed you should never have gotten married in the first place and go your own ways

So what you're saying is that it's better for women to be locked into abusive marriages than it is to have a high divorce rate?

FM, what you're seeing can be laid at the door of culture -- the culture that shows us how great it is to be young and hormonal, how beautiful girls should be available to every man no matter how ugly, how guys really NEED to get that sex experience.

Not much of our media today tells stories of HOW to be a good family (Simpsons and Malcom certainly don't... you'd hate living with kids like that and a spouse like that would be stressful.) We learn from what we see.

If you want to lower divorce rates, encourage the media to stop focusing on women as cheap entertainment for men and start focusing on families and bonding and staying together and finding the right person instead of the convenient sexual satisfaction.

Yeah, I was divorced (thank heavens. I shudder to think what my life would be like now.) This marriage was a better choice -- we'll celebrate our 30th anniversary next October.

Morality is something decided by groups, and questioned by the minority. Remember, before 1860 it was considered "moral" by most Americans to enslave any non-whites and to sell into bondage anyone with debts. In the 1950's it was considered "moral" to murder your wife (a relative of mine did) if you thought she was having an affair and it could be called "justifiable homicide." In the 1940's it was "moral" to lynch any black man who spoke to a white woman.

"Moral" is a constantly moving target.

If minorities didn't question the morality of selling children to factories and making them work 12 hour days, we'd still see parents selling their children to factories and see photos of little 8 year olds chained to machines so they couldn't go running off.

Be thankful that we do question and we do move forward. Otherwise (unless you're a "landed homeowner" like I am) you would not be counted as a full citizen in America (according to the Constitutional laws at the time of the founding of America.)

posted on Dec, 6 2002 @ 12:28 PM

Originally posted by Byrd

If minorities didn't question the morality of selling children to factories and making them work 12 hour days, we'd still see parents selling their children to factories and see photos of little 8 year olds chained to machines so they couldn't go running off.

WHAT ???? Where did you see such pics ????????

Wich country ???

posted on Dec, 6 2002 @ 12:47 PM
UP - This happened in America. Kids were sold/forced to work in the factories in the late 1800's/early 1900's and chained to the machines. Can't remember if this was also true in England, but it was one of the things that started labor unions and work reform movements.

It honestly would not surprise me that it occurred elsewhere. And slave children as young as 3 had duties (and were whipped when they didn't do them) like tending their masters' babies and picking cotton in the fields.

Children historically have not been treated well. One of the things I read in an anthropological book was that an early way of making sure treaties were remembered (in Europe) was to take two young children, one from each side, and whip and beat them until they remembered every detail of that treaty (this was before the days of written languages. )

There's things done to kids in many cultures (historically) that would just make today's parents livid with rage.

posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 02:59 PM
Should any of you wish to see these ultra-liberal monsters, here we are at I don't wish to spam you over and over, but I feel that FreeMason has... misrepresented us somewhat. There is actually quite a mix across the political spectrum, and we're not really the child-abusing junkies that have anal sex in public that certain individuals seem to think we are.
We're mainly just random.

posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 03:11 PM

Originally posted by witchfinder general
Should any of you wish to see these ultra-liberal monsters, here we are at I don't wish to spam you over and over, but I feel that FreeMason has... misrepresented us somewhat. There is actually quite a mix across the political spectrum, and we're not really the child-abusing junkies that have anal sex in public that certain individuals seem to think we are.
We're mainly just random.

Yesh, I concur. Whereas I don't believe witchfinder here could give 2 hoots less about American politics, I on the other hand, am quite the scandalous lil' revolutionary. Militia is stupid, bombing the goverment is stupid. Hurting people is stupid. It gets us nowhere, but I agree with Thomas Jefferson, American needs a revolution every 100 years or so to keep the government in check. Beyond that, I say we just give all the damn land back to the indians, it belongs to them anyways.

Besides all that, it's time for the American people to stand up and demand our rights back.

One more thing, I personally am not liberal, I'm conservative the vast majority of the time. Don't always agree with everything, but you know. As freemason said I'm a dumbass, so I apparently don't have the right to an opinion.

[Edited on 12-12-2002 by rabidsheika]

[Edited on 14-12-2002 by Thomas Crowne]

posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 11:17 AM
We really aren't concerned. If any of us are curious we'll go over and see for ourselves what your site is all about.

posted on Dec, 15 2002 @ 11:18 AM
Byrd, I was aware that kids had and still have horribles treatments, but I didn't know what you wrote.

The peoples who are doing such things are all monsters and evils peoples.

When I think to my 6 years old daughters and what you wrote, I want to take a gun, find these peoples, and shoot them all !

posted on Dec, 15 2002 @ 04:24 PM
hey freemason, i'm one of those CRAZZZY radical liberals and here's the crazy thing i believe in: social libertarianism.

you are very very disillusioned

posted on Feb, 4 2003 @ 12:22 PM
I agree with some of your ideas FM. But not all. Things have been spinning out of control for a long time. I am not a revolutionist, but I do believe this country needs some serious change.

The people need to stop being ignorant, and stop breeding ignorance into others. Everyone thinks "someone is out to get them". They, or their race/religion/political group, are being persecuted.

This is true, but it happens to everybody. It is part of culteral evolution. New ideas need to be allowed to spring up, so that there can be better ones. If all ideas, or indeed any, are supressed, than you can kiss our country goodbye.

I happen to live with a far right conservative/aethiest. My parents were racist when I was young. They bred ignorance into me, unwittingly. And up until a few years ago, I was out-of-control. I was racist, hated most everybody, antisocial, far left liberal, and aethiest.

Now I am just me. I accept all views equally. I (try not to) discriminate against anybody. I am however still antisocial(partly because I cannot stand ignorance) and aethiest(because of personal beliefs, and the effects of religion).

My mind evolved. I came to a better way of thinking, with out the help of another person. I hope the rest of society can do this, so we don't have problems like revolutionaries, communists, aethiests, homo/hetero sexuals, religion.

posted on Feb, 4 2003 @ 01:28 PM
And yet again FM, let this humble personage also welcome you to the 21st century...

Originally posted by FreeMason
This Anchor is not taught in high school even a fraction, in fact they teach just the opposite of the truth, and that is wretched.

I know that you've made some commentatries in (Deliberate Dumbing Down) but it's still a good indicator of what's been happening for too long in this country. The American Petition & it's nearly complete lack of momentum is another indicator...All too often, it seems that you've got so many people shouting at you from all sides that you're having trouble staying focused on the discussion that you're having right in front of you. After so much time has gone by with so many "radical factions" shouting from the sides, a person tends to wind up numbed by it all & even forget to lose sight of the issues that are important...People stop listening & paying attention, so the government winds up *legalizing the BS* above & beyond what common sense requires: It's the US Government's *job* to listen to everybody, but the people with common sense (ie: the majority) tend to shut up when all of those radical minorities shout loud enough & long enough...Hence, the government winds up hearing *only* the minority groups. This problem has gone on for so long that the majority are too numbed by all of the "background noise" to even keep an ear tuned to the actual events.

Originally posted by FreeMason ...they definately believe that Morals are a restriction of personal freedom, and that many should be "removed".

Perhaps Morals *are* a restriction to Freedom, perhaps not...IMO, Freedom imposes Responsibility more than it imposes Morals. To truly be free, a person must accept responsibility for what he/she does with that freedom: Including which Morals that person chooses to adopt. In my observation, it seems that the "majority rule" that doesn't get enough support from the majority are the people who've been "numbed" by the side-issues: They've been numbed to the point of apathy where the Responsibility of Freedom is concerned & don't seem to *want* it any more. This is what's been grinding at my gears for quite a number of years...

This is what I'm thinking has happened to the American Petition...Even if it could be edited for better clarity & short enough to keep attention focused on it (I'm always open for suggestions about this point) long enough to collect some signatures, there's so many side-issues being screamed at us from the sidelines that people seem to be too numbed to *do anything* about it.

However, in the case of the American Petition (An attempt to get this country back on the track that was intended for it, without all of the political back-stabbing power-mongering that we've been steered into), I've finally gotten *one* positive indication that it might actually get going on track...Once I've gotten more details about it, I'll let you know: But the point is this: If you keep plugging away at it something will happen, but if you can't win the fight if you give up before you climb into the ring.

posted on Feb, 6 2003 @ 10:53 AM
A while ago the majority didn't want to give blacks the right to vote. Before that the Majority didn't want women doing it either.

History is full of cases whre the majority has simply been moraly wrong and needed to be told what to do in order to free them from preconcieved ideals and social indoctrination.

one remembers the aphorism

"a person is smart, people are stupid"

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in