The Gay Agenda.- Exposed!!

[djoser-xyyman]

You guys are missing the point. I am not saying gayism DO/DID not exist in Africa. The question is, is it tolerated/accepted/legal/promoted as it is in todays Western Media. There is clearly an agenda to push it as being acceptable. In African societies…it never was or is.

The article is clearly trying to equate less testestorone (feminism/gayism) with progress/evolution. “it is natural”. Which is BS.


Quote by TruthTeacher
Since no one is holding heterosexuals to living by Biblical standards, it's hypocritical to expect homosexuals to do so. Any idea that they are somehow more intellectual is pure garbage. Some of the dumbest most intollerant ultraconservative people I've ever had the displeasure of meeting were gay.

(Anansi)I am sure gay sex existed even in Egypt.

The 42 Divine Principles of Maat in Budge's native English follows.

[anansi]

Xyyman

The 42 Divine Principles of Maat in Budge's native English follows.

11.I have not committed adultery, I have not lain with men.

And yet Seth buggered his Horus,like I said earlier the ideals of a society almost never matches with the reality, to be sure it was frown upon but not unknown or foreign

A Ramesside period ostracon, depicting a homosexual couple in coitus (two men having sex together)
But frown upon or celebrated both ancient and modern is part of what some humans do in all societies.

[djoser-xyyman]

I never said it never existed. Some men are born with female tendencies(ie may be less testetrone-thus they cannot help themsleves being Drag or girly). But today it is being forced down our throats as being “normal” . IT IS NOT!!. It is an evolutionary dead end. It is against the Laws of Maat. It is unAfrican!

That is…I am curious. Is that picture authentic? Source? It is unusual to have a picture of men penetrating each other if it is against the Laws of Maat. And it was frowned upon by AEians.

Is that pic part of the Gay Agenda? ? Just saying. Source?

Jul 21, 2014 10:27:29 GMT -5 anansi said:

Xyyman

The 42 Divine Principles of Maat in Budge's native English follows.

11.I have not committed adultery, I have not lain with men.

And yet Seth buggered his Horus,like I said earlier the ideals of a society almost never matches with the reality, to be sure it was frown upon but not unknown or foreign

A Ramesside period ostracon, depicting a homosexual couple in coitus (two men having sex together)
But frown upon or celebrated both ancient and modern is part of what some humans do in all societies.

[djoser-xyyman]

Are they posting phony pictures on the Web of AEian men penetrating each other? Are they projecting their modern western social ills on our ancestors?

[djoser-xyyman]

Craniofacial Feminization and the Origin of Behavioral Modernity

The title says it all.


Translated. Feminine face(women faces) and lack of testerone(in the paper) leads to modern ie evolutionary progress.

ie Gay is the way to go….

[truthteacher2007]

Jul 21, 2014 12:45:51 GMT -5 djoser-xyyman said:

Are they posting phony pictures on the Web of AEian men penetrating each other? Are they projecting their modern western social ills on our ancestors?

Do you know what an ostracon is? It's basically a piece of grafiti or informal message written on broken pieces of pottery or stone. That's what this is. It's not a formal depiction in a tomb or a temple. You're going to tell me you didn't draw pictures of tits in your notebook or pieces of paper in school when you were a kid? As for whether or not certain behaviors were tolerated or not...... What the hell does that have to do with anything? Once again, I ask you, did you loose your virginity to your wife? Is premarital sex condoned in most traditional African societies, or is such behavior a result of Western cultural influence? However, something tells me that you don't mind violating that very African principle. A principle that African take so seriously that they cut off their daughter's clitoris and in some cases go so far as to cut of the vaginal lips and sew the vagina shut only leaving a space for urine and menstruation. So, can you answer the question instead of avioding it?

As for is it normal? If a behavior is engaged in in every culture around the world in every period of time, then it is normal. Is it tolerated? Well, actually, in most societies, as I said, as long as it didn't interfere with society and the social rolls, it was tolerated. Nobody cared if a grown man liked to get his rocks off with young men as long as it didn't interfere with him taking care of his home and his children. That has been the historical reality and is still the norm in most parts of the world including many places in Africa.

Is premarital sex advocated and tolerated in the Bible, or any of the Abrahamic religions, (Judaism, Islam, or Christianity)? In Nigeria and Sudan they're stoning women to death for adultery and premarital sex. Hell, they even wanted to stone a woman in Sudan because according to them she married a man of the wrong religion. Do you stone the women you sleep with after your finished with her? In traditional African societies, it's the family who chooses the person you marry. Are you down for letting your parents choose the person you will spend the rest of your life with? If not, why not? Why are you turning your back on your African heritage and traditions?

Look, I'm not telling you to like or aprove of anything you find impropper. But what I am saying, is don't be a hypocrite. If you are going to call homosexuals out for moral slackness, go ahead, do that, but at the same time, come correct and speak out against all the fukery that heterosexuals do that is against the principles of Maat, The Bible, Torah, Koran, traditional African customs also. If you can't do that and most of all, if you can't LIVE in accordance with these principles, you have no right to criticize anyone else. As Jesus said, judge not lest ye be judged and take the log out of your eye before you try to take the log out of mine.

As for homosexuality being an evolutionary dead end..... You are joking right? Are you going to tell me that every time you tried to get a piece of snatch you were trying to have a child? I don't know about you, but me and the rest of the world spen 99.9% of the time trying to NOT have no kids when we have sex. We not trying to have no kids, we trying to bust a nut, plain and simple and you know it. If we want to have kids, we have the option of doing so. And in antiquity and many places in the world today, men who enjoy sex with men found a solution for having kids by getting MARRIED! Just like straight men get married and have a wife at home to have kids and have a mistress or a prostitute on the side for fun, gay men had a wife at home to have kids and a boy or young man, or 2, or 3 or 4 on the side for fun.

The reality of human sexuality for most of recorded history is that love and marriage had nothing to do with each other. A ma didn't get married because he loved someone, he got married to have children and a family. Men would have a mistress or kept woman on the side that they shared love with. Gay men, or men who had those feelings did the exact same thing. That's the way it was. If you fell in love with your wife eventually, great, but it wasn't considered neccessary.

The idea that people could only have sex exclusively with one sex, or only be attracted or fall in love with one sex is a very modern idea that was created in the early 20th century by European psychiatrists.
Whether the powers that be, the status quo outwardly approves or not is besides the point. People do exactly what they feel like doing. So to be bent out of shape over homosexuals is foolish. The fact of the matter is that our societywas based on the principles of Biblical laws and teachings. Premarital sex, adultry, having children out of wedlock were all frowned upon by society. Guess what? People did it any way. People even went so far as to pay the Bible no mind and do what they wanted, to the point where scientists worked day and night to find a way to keep women from getting pregnant as a result of having sex. So if straight people are in society flauting social and religious conventions and having sex, in as many ways and with as many partners as they can think of, throwing it in our faces and craming it down our throats, how can you tell gay people to be celibate? If you yourself can't live a celibate life or even just wait till you get married, what do you expect from a gay man? You think you can do whatever the hell you want and folks are going to be fine with that? Get real! They're going to say, if they doin they're thing, we have the right to do our thing. If they can violate scripture, then why the hell should we follow it? So if you are bent out of shape by the gay agenda, you have no one to blame but the heterosexual sexual revolution. When the heterosexual community starts practicing abstenence and women once again start guarding their virginity, then and only then will you have a justified leg to stand on and tell them to get back in the closet.

[djoser-xyyman]

On the virginity issue what does it matter. I am not a saint and don't pretend to be. Who loses their virginity to the one they marry?
But I do have certin moral code of ethics I live by.

I addtion. I am not Christian...anymore. Grew up Catholic but I am aReligious right now.

But most of the Laws of Maat are good principles to live by. Especially No. 11. I have not laid with a man.

[truthteacher2007]

Jul 21, 2014 15:30:33 GMT -5 djoser-xyyman said:

On the virginity issue what does it matter. I am not a saint and don't pretend to be. Who loses their virginity to the one they marry?

Your African ancestors in the past, traditional Africans today who still follow their culture and the Egyptians who lived according to the principles of Maat, that's who.

But I do have certin moral code of ethics I live by.

And so do most law abiding peaceful citizens of the world who just happen to be emotionally and psychologically attracted to people o the same sex or who fell in love with someone of the same sex

I addtion. I am not Christian...anymore. Grew up Catholic but I am aReligious right now.

Well..... I guess that is something.....

But most of the Laws of Maat are good principles to live by. Especially No. 11. I have not laid with a man.

You can't pick and choose what you like and don't like. You either follow all of it or none at all. Or at the very least, be real and not criticize anyone because they don't follow the bits and pieces that suited you. Be perfectly honest and admit that your objection has nothing to do with Maat or African culture. Truth be told, you have absolutely no idea what it means to live according to a traditional African culture. You are a westerner whose ancestors came from Africa, but culturally, spiritually, socially and nationally, you are a westerner with a western world view. You objection to homosexuality is derived from the religious attitudes of Christianity, which the mainsteram society has hypocritically bought into. Everyone wants to hold onto a denunciation of homosexuality in the Bible, yet ignore the fact that the overwhelming majority of scriptures against sexual immorality actually deal with heterosexual behavior. My objection to all of this, be real and stop being a hypocrite. If you are not religious, then you have no right to use religious based attitudes to condemn anyone. If you are not "a saint", you have no right to expect anyone else to be one. My advise to you young man, MIND YOUR DAMN BUSINESS. You do your thing and let them do their's

Moving on.....

So I decided, just for shits and giggles, to look up the 42 negative confessions and see what they actually say and guess what? Nothing about sleeping with men.

1. I have not sinned against Men.

2. I have not oppressed(or wronged) [my] kinsfolk.

3 I have not committed evil in the place of truth.

4. I have not known worthless men.

5. I have not committed act of abomination.

6. I have not done daily works of supererogation(?)

7. I have not caused my name to appear for honours.

8. I have not domineered over slaves.

9. I have not thought scorn of the god(or, God)

10. I have not defrauded the poor man of his goods.

11. I have not done the things which the gods abominate.

12. I have not caused harm to be done to the slave by his master.

13. I have not caused no man to suffer

14. I have allowed no man to go hungry.

15. I have made no man weep.

16. I have slain no man.

17. I have not given the order for any man to be slain.

18. I have not caused pain to the multitude.

19. I have not filched the offerings in the the temples.

20. I have not purloined the cakes of the gods.

21. I have not stolen the offerings of the spirits.

22. I have had no dealing with the paederast.

23. I have not defiled myself in the pure places of the god of my city.

24. I have not cheated in measuring of grain.

25. I have not filched land or added thereto.

26. I have not encroached upon the field of others.

27. I have not added to the weight of the balance.

28. I have not cheated with the pointer of the scales.

29. I have not taken away milk from the mouths of babes.

30. I have not driven beasts away from their pastures.

31. I have not netted the geese of the preserves of the gods.

32. I have not caught fish with the bait of their bodies.

33. I have not obstructed water when it should run.

34. I have not cut a cutting in a canal of running water.

35. I have not extinguished a flame when it ought to burn.

36. I have not abrogated the days of offering the chosen offering.

37. I have not turned off the cattle from the property of the gods.

38. I have not repulsed the god in his manifestations.

I got this translation from Assata Shakur's blog site

1. I have not done iniquity.
2. I have not robbed with violence.
3. I have not stolen.
4. I have done no murder; I have done no harm.
5. I have not defrauded offerings.
6. I have not diminished obligations.
7. I have not plundered the neteru.
8. I have not spoken lies.
9. I have not uttered evil words.
10. I have not caused pain.
11. I have not committed fornication.
12. I have not caused shedding of tears.
13. I have not dealt deceitfully.
14. I have not transgressed.
15. I have not acted guilefully.
16. I have not laid waste the ploughed land.
17. I have not been an eavesdropper.
18. I have not set my lips in motion (against any man).
19. I have not been angry and wrathful except for a just cause.
20. I have not defiled the wife of any man.
21. I have not been a man of anger.
22. I have not polluted myself.
23. I have not caused terror.
24. I have not burned with rage.
25. I have not stopped my ears against the words of Right and Truth. (Ma-at)
26. I have not worked grief.
27. I have not acted with insolence.
28. I have not stirred up strife.
29. I have not judged hastily.
30. I have not sought for distinctions.
31. I have not multiplied words exceedingly.
32. I have not done neither harm nor ill.
33. I have not cursed the King. (i.e. violation of laws)
34. I have not fouled the water.
35. I have not spoken scornfully.
36. I have never cursed the neteru.
37. I have not stolen.
38. I have not defrauded the offerings of the neteru.
39. I have not plundered the offerings of the blessed dead.
40. I have not filched the food of the infant.
41. I have not sinned against the neter of my native town.
42. I have not slaughtered with evil intent the cattle of the neter.

In the first translation #11 says I have not done the things the god's abominate. In the second it says I have not commited fornication. So, lets see what the definition of fornication is.

Merriam Webster's dictionary:
Late Latin fornicatus, past participle of fornicare to have intercourse with prostitutes, from Latin fornic-, fornix arch, vault, brothel
First Known Use: 1552

This from Wikipidia:

Fornication is generally consensual sexual intercourse between two people not married to each other.[1][2] For many people, the term carries an overtone of moral or religious disapproval, but the significance of sexual acts to which the term is applied varies between religions, societies and cultures. The definition is often disputed. In modern usage, the term is often replaced with a more judgment-neutral term like extramarital sex........

According to the New Testament Greek Lexicon, it is defined "illicit sexual intercourse", which is then further defined as "adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc.", "sexual intercourse with close relatives", "sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman" and "metaph. the worship of idols".[10]

So guess what? It looks like you are in the exact same boat as homosexuals, only on different decks, going to the same destination, Hell and damnation. Hope you remembered to pact a fire extinguisher.

[djoser-xyyman]

This was probably "discovered" by a gay archeologist. (wink). Is it authentic. Where is it on display? What musuem?

@tt- I also said Biological dead end. I am aReligious.

Jul 21, 2014 12:42:07 GMT -5 djoser-xyyman said:

I never said it never existed. Some men are born with female tendencies(ie may be less testetrone-thus they cannot help themsleves being Drag or girly).

[/quote]

[djoser-xyyman]

there are several tarnslation for the 11 Negative confession..

a. I have not laid with men.
b. WILL NOT ABUSE MY SEXUALITY


Variant: and homosexuality.

(20) " I have not committed any sin against my own purity."

(21) " I have not violated sacred times and seasons."
(22) " I have not done that which is abominable."
27) " I have not lusted or committed fornication nor have I lain with others of my same sex

====

different sources give different translation. I can't read glyphs so...

[truthteacher2007]

Jul 21, 2014 20:27:07 GMT -5 djoser-xyyman said:

there are several tarnslation for the 11 Negative confession..

a. I have not laid with men.

Considering the fact that this scroll was translated at a time when homosexual activity was a criminal offense in just about every European nation, why didn't they translate it to say, I haven't laid with men? The reason is because it doesn't say that at all. Whoever gave that translation most likely had their own agenda. In other words, they're lying, which is a violation of one of the laws of Maat

b. WILL NOT ABUSE MY SEXUALITY

Again, another mistranslation. And what does it mean? Does it mean I have not masterbated? Fuck, everyone's going to hell in that case! Does it mean I have not prostituted myself? Here's another reason why I think this translation is bullshit. It makes the assumption that women don't exist. Don't women go to the after life as well? So if a woman never laid with a man, how could she have children? Also, what about lesbians? Was it okay for women to lay with each other?


Variant: and homosexuality.

(20) " I have not committed any sin against my own purity."

Once again, this could be anything. Does it mean the person hasn't eaten unclean foods? What were the things that rendered an individual unclean in Egyptian society?

(21) " I have not violated sacred times and seasons."
(22) " I have not done that which is abominable."

And exactly what is that? Is it disrespecting your parents or elders? Is it killing innocent people? Is it doing something considered insulting to the gods? What is it?

27) " I have not lusted or committed fornication nor have I lain with others of my same sex

I have not lusted? Are you kidding me? Everybody experiences lust. How the hell can a man get it up to have sex with his wife and produce children if he has no capacity for lust. Ramses had how many wives? Something like a gazillion? That was one lusty bastard right there, so, this part is bullshit. "Or commited fornication", so right there my friend, you are in violation of Maat because you are a fornicator. The last part is made up bullshit

====

different sources give different translation. I can't read glyphs so...

That's right, you can't read glyphs, therefore, you can't really speak on what they say or don't say. But given the fact that only one, out of dozens of translations says anything about homosexuality, I would say that this is a fabrication made in the late 20th centry to early 21st century by someone who had an anti gay agenda. I'm sorry, but your arguments are just full of holes

[truthteacher2007]

Jul 21, 2014 20:11:54 GMT -5 djoser-xyyman said:

This was probably "discovered" by a gay archeologist. (wink). Is it authentic. Where is it on display? What musuem?

@tt- I also said Biological dead end. I am aReligious.

And so is wearing a rubber, using a diaphram and taking the pill. So perhaps, one could make the argument that the practice of having male lovers was a form of birth control. You have sex with your wife for kids and sex with young men to bust a nut because you don't want any more kids.... Whose to say. Like I keep pointing out to you, but you keep ignoring, most men who have sex with other males are and have been perfectly capable of fathering children and that's why even in societies that condoned forms of same sex activity, the population did not die out.

Jul 21, 2014 12:42:07 GMT -5 djoser-xyyman said:

I never said it never existed. Some men are born with female tendencies(ie may be less testetrone-thus they cannot help themsleves being Drag or girly).

[/quote]

And once again, you just don't get it. Most men who are attracted to other males are not girly, nor do they dress in drag. They are very masculine and no different from you or me in the way they act or look. The only way you would know they're gay is if they tell you, so this statement makes no sense whatsoever.

But let me ask you 2 questions and hopefully you can answer them without beating around the bush or ignoring them. #1: How old are you? #2: Why the hell do you care what 2 people do in their own private sex lives. If 2 lumber jacks want to log jamb each other what the hell effect does it have on your life? Don't you have something more important to worry about?

[zarahan]

TT said:
. Since no one is holding heterosexuals to living by Biblical standards, it's hypocritical to expect homosexuals to do so. Any idea that they are somehow more intellectual is pure garbage.

Actually they are. Heterosexuals get no special moral exemptions under
Biblical standards. They are condemned for adultery, prostitution, bestiality
etc. Hence many ask, why should homosexual acts be given a special deal or exemption?

Some of the dumbest most intollerant ultraconservative people I've ever had the displeasure of meeting were gay.

I would agree there is that in every population. A number of "heriditarian"
types embrace the "superior gay intellect" argument. Others hold that gays
are smarter following HBD favorite Satoshi Kanazawa 2010, but attribute this
to a "gay germ" theory- a pathogen -some sort of virus or microorganism being
is responsible for homosexual behavior. Evolutionary theorist Gregory Cochran,
an HBD apologist, is one of the leading Gay Germ proponents.

The gay germ theory has the advantage of combining racism as well as
"distancing" HBDers from any taint about being gay. For one thing, the "gay germ"
can be attributed to Africa. As one racialist blog (evo-proud)- insinuates AIDS
evolved in Africa, and there are high prevalences of certain STDs. Yup, you can see where
this is going.. So then pilgrims, - thus there is a link with pathogens on Africa and gayism.
Neat! The culluds can be blamed once again! And "plausible denial" can be
maintained in the usual way disavowing racism- after all this is only
a "theory" - plausible denial and the insinuation game agin!

The only thing wrong with such theories" are that they are nonsense. Not only
has the claimed "gay germ" unable to be found, but people prone to infection
would have been discouraged by "selection" as one conservative analyst, Ron Unz, notes.
www.theamericanconservative.com/gay-gene-vs-gay-germ/



Assorted proponents certainly can play the "plausible denial" game well, but they
are much less impressive at producing any credible evidence re the alleged "gay germ."

[truthteacher2007]

Jul 22, 2014 15:20:05 GMT -5 zarahan said:

TT said:
. Since no one is holding heterosexuals to living by Biblical standards, it's hypocritical to expect homosexuals to do so. Any idea that they are somehow more intellectual is pure garbage.

Actually they are. Heterosexuals get no special moral exemptions under
Biblical standards. They are condemned for adultery, prostitution, bestiality
etc. Hence many ask, why should homosexual acts be given a special deal or exemption?

Both you nd I and anyone who has actually studied the Bible know that there are actually more prohibitions on heterosexual sexual activity and the penalties are quite sever. However, the average joe in the streets always ignores this fact completely and only focuses on the one or two passages that speak against homosexual behavior. Modern society has moved away from the Bible, yet when the issue of homosexuality is raised, all of a sudden, they site it as being against god. I'm saying, be fair. If mainstream society sees no need to conform their sexuality to Biblical standards, then how can the hold others to it or expect them to follow it? All I'm saying is come correct or don't come at all. Fair is fair.

Some of the dumbest most intollerant ultraconservative people I've ever had the displeasure of meeting were gay.

I would agree there is that in every population. A number of "heriditarian"
types embrace the "superior gay intellect" argument. Others hold that gays
are smarter following HBD favorite Satoshi Kanazawa 2010, but attribute this
to a "gay germ" theory- a pathogen -some sort of virus or microorganism being
is responsible for homosexual behavior. Evolutionary theorist Gregory Cochran,
an HBD apologist, is one of the leading Gay Germ proponents.

Whaaat?

The gay germ theory has the advantage of combining racism as well as
"distancing" HBDers from any taint about being gay. For one thing, the "gay germ"
can be attributed to Africa. As one racialist blog (evo-proud)- insinuates AIDS
evolved in Africa, and there are high prevalences of certain STDs. Yup, you can see where
this is going.. So then pilgrims, - thus there is a link with pathogens on Africa and gayism.
Neat! The culluds can be blamed once again! And "plausible denial" can be
maintained in the usual way disavowing racism- after all this is only
a "theory" - plausible denial and the insinuation game agin!

If somebody actually got paid to write this horse shit i'll be so mad!

The only thing wrong with such theories" are that they are nonsense. Not only
has the claimed "gay germ" unable to be found, but people prone to infection
would have been discouraged by "selection" as one conservative analyst, Ron Unz, notes.
www.theamericanconservative.com/gay-gene-vs-gay-germ/

I don't even know where to begin with this. Funny how Africans have been painted as being hypersexual, yet Europe, the Americas and Asia are the ones with the multibillion dollar porn industries.


Assorted proponents certainly can play the "plausible denial" game well, but they
are much less impressive at producing any credible evidence re the alleged "gay germ."

Proof? Who needs proof when you got your degree from MSU, (make shit up)? I guess prisons are full of these gay germs. Funny how they manage to only affect a very select few. I guess they'll be looking for the anti gat germ T cells next! Better take your vitamines and bundle up this winter. Don't want to catch any gay germs.

[asante]

Black homophobes and their arguments (really nothing more than baseless statements) sound just as stupid as white supremacist(just look at this discussion). Do you know anything about Zulu oral history or the countless other groups of Africans who had "boy wives" or the butch lesbians of certain West African groups? Europeans were the original homophobes who imposed it on us and even wrote lengthy text on the "rampant" homosexuality among the black peoples of what is now homophobic MUSLIM (hence non African) Senegal. The sooner that black people realize that "homoPHOBIA" is what is truly UNafrican the sooner our black family can come together to fix this shit that we're in. Stop being so divisive.