"A sick way of life is now revealed..."

[Slaver123]

(The title is a lyric from a song by Death)


I'm sorry, I simply cannot contain myself and have to rant about this....


Those sick F-s who bombed the Marathon embraced (among other things) the teachings of a sick deluded F- known as Sheikh Feiz Mohammed. In one of his lectures he said:

"A victim of rape every minute somewhere in the world. Why? No one to blame but herself. She displayed her beauty to the entire world...Strapless, backless, sleeveless, showing their legs, nothing but satanic skirts, slit skirts, translucent blouses, miniskirts, tight jeans: all this to tease man and appeal to his carnal nature.”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/1...otter-hating-australian-sheikh/#ixzz2Qx9A3yti


This is what we're up against. This philosophy is EVIL incarnate. There is no possible circumstance under which a woman deserves to be raped- it is not even conceivable, period!

I used to think American immodesty was a terrible vice, back when I was a fundamentalist Christian- but no more! Since 9/11 I take it as a badge of honor that women in the Free World are safe from rape no matter how provocatively they dress (except from the few sickos who would commit rape anyway even if women wore burlap sacks) Men in our Civilization are protectors of women, not predators. And guess what- women are our equals to boot! (Many of us like to worship them as well-try to wrap your poisoned brain around that one Feiz, you deluded Islamo-fascist bigot!)


I take actual pride in our collective lusts! I am delighted when women prance in front of me half-covered, showing off shoulders, legs, feet, and whatnot- fueling my filthy desires (and keeping life interesting) and giving me something to fantasize about during the day's dull stretches. Every thong, every bikini, every short skirt that walks by is like the Civilized World thumbing its nose at the barbarian tyrants who would strip our human dignity away!


So I'm ranting about this here because this is a site devoted to the sublime beauty of lust, the divine gift that our shared fetish truly is...


I really feel for our LGBT brothers and sisters as well. A coworker had a sex change a few years ago- this concept was almost impossible for me to reconcile back in the day- it would have been repulsive to me back then. But now I can see him (formerly her) as one of the most human souls I've ever met, in part thanks to the horrors I've seen committed around the world by diabolical bigots like Feiz Mohammed and his ilk!

 

[Mash]

I take no more pride in my lust than I do my hair color.

It simply is. It's neither good nor evil. It's simply a means of pleasure/relaxation and an incentive to keep our species alive.

Rape is never excusable. Ever. Ever ever. And by rape of course I mean a man or woman forcing themselves on another man or woman. I do not mean having consensual sex and then deciding the next morning that it was rape. If it was consensual at the time, it simply cannot be called rape in any sense of the word.
(DUIs are tangible proof that even under the influence of alcohol, you're still responsible for your own actions.)

Another thing that is not excusable is using a man or woman's lust to your own benefit. Obviously due to the male tendency to be... easily distracted by things like cleavage, I would think it happens a lot more to us men... but I'm not actually sure about that. Do you think that's mostly a man-woman thing? Maybe women are similarly affected by other women if they're bisexual/lesbian, but I've never seen it happen, myself.
I don't know. I'll have to think on it. Anyways, we know it happens. It's wrong.

 

[Slaver123]

Women use it to their advantage constantly in the business world, and in sales. Don't know if it gives men as much advantage or not.

 

[Tom Tickle]

''No one to blame but herself. She displayed her beauty to the entire world...Strapless, backless, sleeveless, showing their legs, nothing but satanic skirts, slit skirts, translucent blouses, miniskirts, tight jeans''

All through the lascivious smacking of lips. Nothing changes in the warped mind of the repressed lunatic. They're justifying rape because their mindset had entered that domain a while ago as a result of doctrinal repression.

 

[Rox_My_Sox1]

As a rape victim, a proud lesbian, and a woman who loves to celebrate her femininity by dressing in sexy clothing I cannot BE any LESS insulted by what that Islamic CESSPOOL said than I am RIGHT NOW. This is why I have a problem with Islam people. It hates women. It's a religion against women and the feminine side of humanity. It's also against gay and lesbian people [which I'm one of] as well as the scientific progress of our species but I'll get to that another day. Right now, I have to blow off some steam by fragging some newbs in team fortress. (stomps off in an absolute HUFF)

 

[Regal]

As a rape victim, a proud lesbian, and a woman who loves to celebrate her femininity by dressing in sexy clothing I cannot BE any LESS insulted by what that Islamic CESSPOOL said than I am RIGHT NOW. This is why I have a problem with Islam people. It hates women. It's a religion against women and the feminine side of humanity. It's also against gay and lesbian people [which I'm one of] as well as the scientific progress of our species but I'll get to that another day. Right now, I have to blow off some steam by fragging some newbs in team fortress. (stomps off in an absolute HUFF)

Those devils!!

 

[Slaver123]

As a rape victim, a proud lesbian, and a woman who loves to celebrate her femininity by dressing in sexy clothing I cannot BE any LESS insulted by what that Islamic CESSPOOL said than I am RIGHT NOW. This is why I have a problem with Islam people. It hates women. It's a religion against women and the feminine side of humanity. It's also against gay and lesbian people [which I'm one of] as well as the scientific progress of our species but I'll get to that another day. Right now, I have to blow off some steam by fragging some newbs in team fortress. (stomps off in an absolute HUFF)

At the risk of getting "political"- I wish the Left/Right wings in this country could get their respective acts together. One thing that infuriates me about the Left is they're extremely tolerant of the Islamic world's bigotry against women and LGBT.

Really, it's only the Right wingers who'll take a strong stance against Muslim extremism (not against all Muslims of course, just against the extremists and "moderate" countries like Saudi Arabia which is actually one of the worst places on earth for Women's rights and LGBT rights)

Old fuddy-duddy conservatives like Rush and Michael Medved will rail against the deplorable human rights abuses against women/LGBT in the Muslim world, but the Left is pretty much silent on this- even though the Left is supposed to be the individual-rights-faction(!)

But the Right wing contains a huge constituency of people who are against gay marriage(!) even though they're for every other LGBT equal right.

How do thinking, independent people sort through all this mess?!?

 

[Rox_My_Sox1]

How do thinking, independent people sort through all this mess?!?

All I can tell you is what I believe (aka my point of view or personal truth) and that is that I believe following ANY ORGANIZED RELIGION consisting of a LARGE amount of PEOPLE all BELIEVING THE SAME THING is an utter waste of your time (or at least my time).

Whenever someone tells me they have a telephone straight to the omnipotent creator of all existence I just back away slowly and pretend I never met the unfortunate twat. The ONLY organized religion I have ANY respect for is Buddhism but even that religion only goes so far with me.

I basically follow one mantra, "don't cause pain and suffering to those who don't deserve it". That's my personal little religion. No doctrine. No special rules or regulations. No rituals. No priests. Just don't cause pain or suffering (either physical or mental) to those who don't deserve it.

That's my mantra and personal believe (aka personal truth). Feel free to share yours. Also, about being hard on the Islamic-ruled nations. It's kinda hard to do so with two ICBM wielding super powers backing them up as allies (aka China and Russia).

 

[Mash]

This isn't going to be received popularly, but whatever those countries choose to do within their borders are far beyond our jurisdiction, so long as they're not so inhumane as to be declared an act of war. It's simply not our business. If we start deciding who gets to believe what, or how some other countries gets to live, then we're no better than them.

Hell, even within our own country, religions are protected by the Constitution. And let the record show that protecting the freedoms of the constitution is a libertarian stance more than left or right.

 

[Rox_My_Sox1]

This isn't going to be received popularly, but whatever those countries choose to do within their borders are far beyond our jurisdiction, so long as they're not so inhumane as to be declared an act of war. It's simply not our business. If we start deciding who gets to believe what, or how some other countries gets to live, then we're no better than them.

That's true but the problem is citizens from those countries then come over to our country and pull shit like 9/11 or the Boston Marathon Bombing. It's certainly none of our business what other countries do to their own citizens (as long as it's relatively humane treatment) but if their citizens start coming over here and bombing shit then they shouldn't be surprised when we land a couple of 20 ton bombs on their terrorist camp training grounds or a cruise missile into their bedroom windows.

Hell, even within our own country, religions are protected by the Constitution. And let the record show that protecting the freedoms of the constitution is a libertarian stance more than left or right.

Religion may be protected but it's secondary to the rights of every single citizen (both man AND WOMEN). When it comes to state and federal law religion will and must take a very large step backward. You may be free to worship Islam (or any other religion) in this country but your still breaking the law by beating a woman or sexually assaulting her. Religion should have no place in our government and the laws it's creates. Separation of church and state. PERIOD.

 

[Mash]

That's true but the problem is citizens from those countries then come over to our country and pull shit like 9/11 or the Boston Marathon Bombing. It's certainly none of our business what other countries do to their own citizens (as long as it's relatively humane treatment) but if their citizens start coming over here and bombing shit then they shouldn't be surprised when we land a couple of 20 ton bombs on their terrorist camp training grounds or a cruise missile into their bedroom windows.

Question: If a pair of American radicals with no known ties to any section of our government bombed London, would that be cause for retaliation against American cities?

Of course not. The only ties they'd likely even have to the country is that they were citizens there. The country certainly isn't liable for their actions at that point. They're tried as individuals, not as a country.

Religion may be protected but it's secondary to the rights of every single citizen (both man AND WOMEN). When it comes to state and federal law religion will and must take a very large step backward. You may be free to worship Islam (or any other religion) in this country but your still breaking the law by beating a woman or sexually assaulting her. Religion should have no place in our government and the laws it's creates. Separation of church and state. PERIOD.

You're right. It is secondary to basic human rights. But, I've never heard of a case of an Islamic man beating his wife on American soil, having the case brought to court, and then have it dismissed because it's protected by the constitution.

Even still, if an Islamic man wants to believe that women are inferior, we can't really stop him, so long as he doesn't do anything that violates those basic human rights. Honestly, I'm not even sure if we could stop him from having his wife wear a burqa.

Either way, we simply cannot stop people from practicing certain religious actions.

 

[Uglyhobo]

Dont act as if it doesnt matter how a woman dresses. I bet yoga pants cause traffic accidents all time.

But as far as being raped in a dark alley... Its all about walking too close to that dark alley - wrong time of day, wrong side of town, whatever. What the woman was wearing isn't that important. Only in a turd world Moslem country would it be relevant.

 

[Lee47]

OK; having read the thread and having given lifelong thought to the whole issue-

Islam is not the problem.
Christianity is not the problem.
Organized religion is not the problem.
How women dress is not the problem.
Apologies, Hobo, but the problem is not where a woman walks, either, because she has the absolute right to walk where she chooses, as does anyone.

The problem is that there is a tiny subset of males (I will not dignify them with the title MEN, I am a man and they have nothing in common with me except for some body parts and chromosomes) who cannot relate to women in the healthy, normal way- or who have discovered that they prefer to relate in the violent, abnormal way. I don't know offhand what scholar defined it this way, but he/she/they was/were absolutely right- "Rape is not a sex crime; rape is a crime of violence." It matters not a whit what a woman wears or how she acts, there are documented incidents of nuns and small girls (and small boys for that matter) being the victims of this crime.

The only thing that speakers like the one quoted in the OP are doing is rationalizing the behavior of those sick sods by blaming the victim; a tradition of not only the Muslim faith, but also the Jewish and Christian (not surprisingly, since all come of the same root in the Judaic mythology). After all, when Yahweh destroyed the world by flood, He wasn't the one to blame- it was all the human beings who had it coming, due to their sinful actions (including the children and infants; I refuse to get how even an Almighty God has the right to drown babies, so it's a good thing that was all mythological and never happened).

Now, WHY this individual and so many like him felt the need to chide women for being raped, I also refuse to understand.

I also refuse to understand why or how any human being, male or female, could be offended by the female body. I find the nude female the most beautiful sight in the world, with a few exceptions (Roseanne Barr for instance [JOKE!])- especially if I compare the female body to what I look at in the mirror every day. Sometimes I wish I was a woman, just so I would have a woman to look at whenever I wanted🙂.

The REAL problem is this- there is about 1 man out of 50,000 who is a rapist. If society had the ability to identify him before he struck, then they could notify me and send me round to his house, where I would beat him with a steel pipe and crush certain body parts until they were no longer operative. End of problem.
I think there are also a further 10 or 20 men out of every 10,000 who fantasize about taking a woman against her will- I'm not talking about seducing her, changing a "no" to a "yes", but using violence. And if you put them in a situation where they have an opportunity to bring that fantasy to reality (for example- girl has passed out at party, I don't know how many scenarios there might be but you read it in the papers about once a month), then they may not have the self-control or moral fortitude not to try to bring that to life.

And I think the "justifiers" are also the ones who secretly would like to be out there committing heinous acts. How they get into power mystifies me, but it is in accordance with Parkinson's Law- "Life is like a septic tank; the really big chunks always rise to the top."

 

[Regal]

How people conduct themselves does not concern me. So long as your actions do not negatively affect me I could not care less what you do.

 

[desk]

Separation of church and state is in the Russian constitution.

 

[Lee47]

Separation of church and state is in the Russian constitution.

And the American as well, look how that has worked out for us in some eras.....

 

[Mash]

Separation of church and state is absolutely essential for maintaining a stable government infrastructure.

Silly ideals like men being superior to women or cows being sacred simply do not belong in a government.

 

[Regal]

Separation of church and state is absolutely essential for maintaining a stable government infrastructure.

Silly ideals like men being superior to women or cows being sacred simply do not belong in a government.

Let's not forget the worst one: the belief that some invisible absent deity in Neverland randomly farts out the universe and everything in it. Sorry, but there is actual scientific evidence that says humans evolved from apes. Where is your garden of Eden? Where is your tree & its forbidden fruit or its talking snake?

Yeah. I thought so.

 

[desk]

Separation of Church and State is NOT in the US Constitution. At best the bill of rights, the first amendment, neither excludes religion, nor embraces, establishes (specifically a state religion). This implied neutrality is far from a distinct separation of chruch and state. At best activitist liberal judges have made the line of separation more distinct.

 

[Slaver123]

This isn't going to be received popularly, but whatever those countries choose to do within their borders are far beyond our jurisdiction, so long as they're not so inhumane as to be declared an act of war. It's simply not our business. If we start deciding who gets to believe what, or how some other countries gets to live, then we're no better than them.

Hell, even within our own country, religions are protected by the Constitution. And let the record show that protecting the freedoms of the constitution is a libertarian stance more than left or right.

Please don't take this as coming down hard on you or an attack or anything, but I hear this same thing from Liberals all the time. (Don't know whether you're Lib or Con or something else).

It does matter what happens in other countries cause these people are our brother/sister human beings! Human rights abuses should not be tolerated anywhere. I'm so sick of hearing how these are "sovereign nations" etc and we should butt out of their affairs- NO! These are nations ruled by tyrants, and all tyrants should be toppled.

Democracy is the only system which supports human rights and dignity. You can't "force" Democracy on someone any more that you can force Liberty or Free Will on them. If someone really chooses to be dominated and exploited, well they'll be free to choose that once Democracy is "imposed" on their nation.

Extremist Islam is a religion which violent tyrants seek to impose on others- Democracy is not.

It also matters to us because democracies are much less likely to invade other countries- History has shown that the "little" people when given the choice are always reluctant to wage war. If Iran, Syria, or even non-Islamic places like North Korea were true democracies with free speech, fair courts, and guaranteed individual rights I doubt we'd be in any danger at all from those nations.

 

[Mash]

I understand what you're saying, but I also hope you understand that we're not the world police.

Not only will forcing policies like that bankrupt us even further as a country, but it will ultimately lead to us being wiped off the face of the planet. We do not have the resources nor the moral authority to govern the entire world.

 

[Regal]

Not only that but what other nations do within their own borders is no ones business. If North Korea decided to throw a hundred people into a firery pit and have themselves an oriental barbecue that is up to them.

 

[Lee47]

Not coming down on you either, but here's a sort of point-by-point reply from an historian and observer of human nature-

Democracy is the only system which supports human rights and dignity. You can't "force" Democracy on someone any more that you can force Liberty or Free Will on them. If someone really chooses to be dominated and exploited, well they'll be free to choose that once Democracy is "imposed" on their nation..

Well, quite- and yet the last 200 years is a quite dreary history (on and off) of the USA "forcing" democracy on smaller nations- provided thay democratically choose to be governed by the party we want them to be governed by. Cf. the history of the "Banana Republics" in Central America, planted there by us. In South Viet Nam, the CIA systematically assasinated presidents until we got one who would "invite" us in to militarily intervene in their country. And we invaded Iraq to free them from a leader who many of their people still idolize.

Extremist Islam is a religion which violent tyrants seek to impose on others- Democracy is not..

Again, to some, Democracy is every bit as much a religion as Islam is, and they are prepared to impose it violently. (Cf. G.W. Bush, K. Rove, and the Neo-Conservative movement.)

It also matters to us because democracies are much less likely to invade other countries- History has shown that the "little" people when given the choice are always reluctant to wage war. If Iran, Syria, or even non-Islamic places like North Korea were true democracies with free speech, fair courts, and guaranteed individual rights I doubt we'd be in any danger at all from those nations.

You make a big assumption. The "little people" are just as eager to go to war as their leaders when they are misled and not in possession of all the facts, and especially when they are given a big emotional appeal to go and "fight against evil." 99% of all people everywhere, whatever their creed, are just trying to get through the day, feed the family, and want tomorrow to be pretty much like today. It is the 1% in charge who f*ck everything up.

In my educated opinion.

You are, of course, free to disagree, because of democracy.

 

[RangerLoki]

Please don't take this as coming down hard on you or an attack or anything, but I hear this same thing from Liberals all the time. (Don't know whether you're Lib or Con or something else).

In Canadian politics, there is no conservative party in the spirit of the American party. Even American Liberals are considered too conservative when compared to their conservative party. Why do you think that is? If the answer is "I don't know," maybe you're not ready for a global stage.
Disregard if you're savvy.

It does matter what happens in other countries cause these people are our brother/sister human beings! Human rights abuses should not be tolerated anywhere. I'm so sick of hearing how these are "sovereign nations" etc and we should butt out of their affairs- NO! These are nations ruled by tyrants, and all tyrants should be toppled.

I agree. But it's not feasible for us as a single country to just go after other countries because we feel we have a duty to stomp out human rights violations abroad wherever they are at any time. This is why we have the UN. While they aren't as popular as they once were; I suggest you stop squabbling with internal political parties and start appealing to other countries.

Democracy is the only system which supports human rights and dignity. You can't "force" Democracy on someone any more that you can force Liberty or Free Will on them. If someone really chooses to be dominated and exploited, well they'll be free to choose that once Democracy is "imposed" on their nation.

Extremist Islam is a religion which violent tyrants seek to impose on others- Democracy is not.

That's true too. While democracy has it's fair share of criticisms stretching from corruption to property violations and mob rule, it's pretty good to live under.
I take issue with the word force being synonymous with impose; you're forced to obey the law and operate within the system of democracy "or else."
Thanks to legal precedence this basically means it's illegal to be a criminal, but the definition is being rewritten and stretched day-to-day.

It also matters to us because democracies are much less likely to invade other countries- History has shown that the "little" people when given the choice are always reluctant to wage war. If Iran, Syria, or even non-Islamic places like North Korea were true democracies with free speech, fair courts, and guaranteed individual rights I doubt we'd be in any danger at all from those nations.

It depends on what your definition of democracy is. If it's a cookie cutter american dream, we've invaded other countries plenty of times throughout history. Sometimes we've even lied about it.
Globally, democracies have gone to war with each other all the time. Here's an interesting document I've gone over during my first years of grad school pertaining to this particular topic.
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/demowar.htm

You are, of course, free to disagree, because of democracy.

 

[Lee47]

RangerLoki, I am in 90% agreement except that the Liberal/Conservative tag is a regional thing. Depending on where you are in the nation, the definition is highly variable. I am a wierd mix of slightly conservative/moderate/libertarian (pro-military, anti-crime, pro-gun rights, pro-background checks, anti-organized religion, pro-choice, pro-free speech, pro-equal rights for race/gender/sexual preference, pro-social programs for the poor so they can become middle class, pro-helping the middle class stay middle class, pro-taxing the useless rich).

I happen to believe that 90% of the country believes most of the things I do, once they get past the knee-jerk labels of "Democrat" or "Republican", "liberal" and "conservative" and are asked- why should wages that you worked to earn be taxed at twice the rate of stock dividends, which is money making more money with no actual work involved? Or- why should I be able to buy handguns at a gun show in another state, without a background check, from a private individual, when I can't buy one from my licensed dealer at his store without passing one? Or- what would be the point of stopping me, a law-abiding gun owner, from buying a 30-round magazine at the gun store, when there are over 3,000,000 of them for sale now on the internet anonymously for criminals to buy?

So as you can see, I'm all over the map here. In my home city (pop. 35,000 and smack in the middle of 3 big rural farm counties) I am considered a flaming liberal, and people are surprised when I tell them that I not only own guns, but served in the Army. But a 45-minute drive away is a college city so "liberal" that they think I must have voted for both Bushes and Reagan too, because I let it be known that anyone who breaks in to my home is risking their life; and while all life is sacred to me in a way that is not expressible by any religion- since I do not subscribe to a religion- if my family is behind me, and an intruder is in front of me, that intruder is NOT, repeat NOT, going to walk out again. (Sorry if that offends anyone here, but if it's him or my family- I like them better, so it's going to be him. And an experienced police officer once told me that if I ever had to shoot an intruder in my home, it was best to shoot him dead; that way, in court, it would be my word against his.)

So what was my point?

I guess it was that the entire system of "labels" is broken and inadequate to describe any real human being. EVERY SINGLE PERSON (even Bill O'Reilly, who only barely counts as a "person") has some views that are "conservative", some that are "liberal", and some that are "moderate". Even self-described conservatives have some liberal opinions, thouh they will never admit that that is the correct label.

It is the history of our two-party system- which is very useful in that it allows debate to crystallize around two easily identifiable positions, but less useful lately in that those positions have become so very very polarized- that makes us more inclined to characterize each other as right-left, liberal-conservative, and so forth.

I posted a speech a lot like this on a 2nd Amendment discussion on one of the gun forums I belong to, and a few members even wrote back that they agreed with me. Which was a tiny percentage of those who blazed the living snot out of me. 🙂

Some days you get the bear- some days the bear gets you.