Here's an excellent book that was recently compiled by an Islamic publisher; but it's primarily a repudiation of homosexualist propaganda from a scientific and political perspective, especially the new theory of being "born Gay". The book also does a wonderful job in exposing the connection between the homosexualist movement and its connection with pedophile groups like NAMBLA, and their devious agenda to legalize deviant sexual behavior which as present is criminalized. This book has helped me a lot in debating with homosexualists. It's a treasure trove of debating material on a very high academic and intellectual level. https://archive.org/stream/islam-homosexuality-book#page/n1/mode/2up
I'm more of a classical liberal (libertarian) than a progressive. When it really comes down to it, I'm actually apolitical http://www.politicalforum.com/political-science/493124-apoliticism.html
Well a person that adheres to thay backward doctrine isn't really a giant among intellectuals. Btw "homosexualist" isn't a word.
Nice escape. I've never seen a homosexualist run so fast when confronted by someone who has the goods to expose things like the reality of anal cancer caused by rectum abuse, the gay gene hoax, and the homosexualist fostering of pederasty. I've got the goods to expose you guys real bad. Homosexualist is a word https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/homosexualist J[ohn] A. Simpson and E[dward] S. C. Weiner, editors (1989) The Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd edition, Oxford: Clarendon Press, ISBN 978-0-19-861186-8. "Thay", however, is not a word.
Yeah, Goods sure. Than bring the whole thing down. I'm really scared. No it isn't. Btw, islam was founded by a pedophile murderous sociopath. Who cares what that nonsense bans? Need I bring up bacha bazi?
Homosexualist is a word; I already cited my source. A quote from the book: Homosexuals suffer from anorectal problems after repeated rectum abuse. Since, the internal sphincter is damaged, the anal opening no longer seals completely leading to anal incontinence. S. E. Goldstone mentions a study in which 25% of homosexuals engaging in this practice suffer from rectal incontinence. This problem is addressed through a range of products including plugs and a variety of pads to prevent the soiling of clothes with feces. The term “gay bowel syndrome” has been used in the medical literature since the 1980s to refer to a string of infections and diseases that infect the gut due to the disgusting practice of ingesting feces. (p. 78 ) Like I said, I have the goods to expose homosexualists really badly
A (*)(*)(*)(*)ty source. Ingesting feces? Never done that. Never heard of this anal issue aside from religous whackos griping about gay people. Wow how will I recover. You brought some goods, bull(*)(*)(*)(*) and the idea that eating feces is not healthy. Wow.
From Wikipedia: " . . .The term "gay bowel syndrome" is considered obsolete and derogatory by some. The McGraw-Hill Manual of Colorectal Surgery says:Coined in the pre-HIV era, the term "gay bowel syndrome" comprised a rather unselective potpourri of unusual anorectal and GI symptoms experienced by homosexual males... with better understanding of the underlying causes, this term is outdated: the derogatory terminology should be abandoned and more specific entities and terms recognized and used.[SUP][5][/SUP] A 1997 article in the Journal of Homosexuality concluded: It is apparent that Gay Bowel Syndrome is an essentialized category of difference that is neither gay-specific, confined to the bowel, nor a syndrome. The use and diagnosis of Gay Bowel Syndrome must be abandoned.[SUP][6][/SUP] Gut, a well-respected, peer-reviewed journal of gastroenterology published by the BMJ, said in 1985 that:[SUP][7][/SUP] The "gay bowel syndrome" was first used to describe not a syndrome, but a list of conditions. The term hides the problems facing the gastroenterologist. Firstly, the sexual orientation of a patient may not be easily ascertainable in the setting of a general outpatient clinic. Secondly, many infections of the gay bowel are asymptomatic and are missed without full microbiological screening. Thirdly, coinfection is common and the organism isolated may not be causing the symptoms and signs. Finally, the bowel has limited and non-specific clinical and histopathological responses to many infections.[SUP][7][/SUP] The term "gay bowel syndrome" was withdrawn as "outdated" by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterologists in 2004,[SUP][8][/SUP] and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control described the term as informal and no longer in use in 2005.[SUP][9][/SUP] The gay activist and author Michael Scarce criticized the concept of "gay bowel syndrome" in his book Smearing the Queer: Medical Bias in the Health Care of Gay Men (1999), saying that "gay bowel syndrome has been, and remains today, a powerful tool for the specific surveillance, regulation, definition, medicalization, identification, and fragmentation of gay men's bodies."[SUP][10][/SUP] Scarce's work has been cited in theJournal of the American Medical Association with a positive review.[SUP][11] . . .| [/SUP]
Do you know how homosexualists ingest feces? Not through the mouth (although some are very depraved and do that also; transmitting fecal matter and bacteria through the tongue) Every homosexualist ingests feces through anal intercourse: "In a controlled study, 67.5% of 200 homosexual men and only 16% of 100 heterosexual men had parasitic intestinal infections indicating the detrimental effects of rectum abuse."
As for "Homosexualist:" [h=3]Etymology[edit][/h]homosexual +‎ -ist [h=3]Noun[edit][/h]homosexualist (plural homosexualists) (rare, often pejorative) Alternative form of homosexual   [h=3]References[edit][/h] J[ohn] A. Simpson and E[dward] S. C. Weiner, editors (1989) The Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd edition, Oxford: Clarendon Press, ISBN 978-0-19-861186-8.
Perhaps the same way a poleesibop ingests gropialala berries."homosexualists" isn't a word. If that's what trips your trigger, go ahead. Cited in your book about why backward ideology founded by a child molester is against homosexuality? They'll say anything to give credence to their backward ideology. Including denial of evolution. Your sorce isn't credible.
I already cited this reference. But when I and other religious people use the term "homosexualist" we mean it with a slightly different connotation than "homosexual". Homosexualist in our view is a person who promotes homosexuality, especially if it is politically. For example, in this video a Jewish rabbi refers to another rabbi (Shmuley Boteach) as a "homosexualist", because the latter promotes tolerance of homosexuals, even though he personally is not a homosexual [video=youtube;KwArkV0SXsM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwArkV0SXsM[/video]
"Sorce" is a word but "homosexualist" isn't? And the study I cited is from the Canadian Medical Association Journal, see the footnote 131 of the book on page 78. A controlled experiment where 67.5% of 200 homosexual men were revealed to be suffering from parasitic intestinal infection as a result of anal sex.
There are homosexual couples that dont have anal sex, and heterosexual couples that do have it. In fact, there are probably more heterosexuals having anal sex than homosexuals , just because heterosexuals vastly outnumber homosexuals. Im tempted to apologize for potentially grossing you out with that revelation, but actually I think that would be pretty funny.
I don't care what religious idiots say about things. Islam is notorious for denying science. A bearded terrorist is no authority sorry.
When you say creation you mean a preposterous fairy tale. When you say something is morally wrong it's because you read about it from a book about a child molesting sociopath. You have no credibility.
What's your point? Exceptions don't break the rule. Proportionately homosexualists engage in anal intercourse way more than heterosexuals. But all three religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) forbid sodomy even with a woman. Hetero sodomists are the younger brothers of homos.
So what? All three of those religons say a magical genie crapped out the universe in one day a week before that genie magiced man into existence. They all claim there are talking snakes. When you argue from that stand point you have no science.