AFA Upset that McDonald's Sponors SF Pride July 29, 2008Posted by truthspew in AFA, Gay Pride, Gay rights, objectionable material, prudes, puritanical, religion, secular society, stupidity.
Oh this is great. The AFA has their nads in a lather again. This time its over McDonald’s being a sponsor in the San Francisco Gay Pride parade and festival.
McDonald’s sponsors gay pride parade
McDonald’s says they “stand by and support our people to live and work in a society free of discrimination and harassment,” here is what they ! won’t tell you. McDonald’s helped sponsor the San Francisco Gay Pride Parade. Want to see what McDonald’s considers worthy of support? Click here. (Warning: These photos are extremely offensive and graphic.)
AFA asked McDonald’s to remain neutral in the culture war. The company refused, stating they will continue to support the gay agenda including same-sex marriage. AFA has called for a boycott of McDonald’s restaurants.
McDonald’s spokesman Bill Whitman told the Washington Post that those (even Christians) who oppose homosexual marriage are motivated by hate, saying that “… hatred has no place in our culture.”
This boycott is not about hiring homosexuals or how homosexual employees are treated. It is about McDonald’s choosing to put the full resources of their corporation behind promoting the homosexual agenda.
To help promote the gay agenda, McDonald’s paid $20,000 to become an official “organizational ally and corporate partner” of the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce and secure a seat on the group’s board of directors. The NGLCC lobbies against laws protecting marriage as between a man and a woman.
Get ready for the link to the images they find so shocking. First of all, in only one picture do I see a gent with it all hanging out. The rest of the pix have genitalia covered. It’s just they object to showing so much skin I suppose.
They even put up this warning:
WARNING: The images below contain male full-frontal nudity. Please be aware and exercise caution before viewing these images. If you are under 18, please leave this page!
Ok, you’ve been warned. Prepare to be scandalized.
Note that at the very bottom of the pix is one of a little girl with a balloon and the caption reads “And, sadly, yes. This little girl was exposed to everything you see above. Thanks, McDonald’s.”
Yes, thank you McDonald’s for not caving in to the demands of a bunch of religious fuckwits. Because that is precisely what the people at the AFA are, they are the people who would like to force their religious world view on the rest of us.
Christianity has had a roughly two millennium chance to get things right and they’ve failed miserably at the task. It is time for us to move past the religious bullshit and embrace a concept called personal responsibility.
Move toward spirituality and that spirit tells you to love one another, not start angry pogroms because a man has sex with a man, or a woman with a woman, or even a man with a woman. You’d be surprised, some of the more mentally unbalanced in the AFA think that even straight people shouldn’t have sex, or at least not sex that they’ve put the AFA stamp of approval upon.
I think we still need Gay Pride (Yes, I know, LGBTQ….) because every day we’re surrounded by straight pride, including the asinine blabbering of the people at the AFA. We see PDA’s, we see it in the majority of literature, television, movies, etc.
And then there is the homophobic attitude of the AFA. I guarantee you there’s more than one closeted homo in that organization. Look at the track record of others who were vociferously anti-gay. I’ll use Ted Haggard as an example. Yep, don’t piss off a gay hustler is the only advice I could give to Teddy Boy. Look at the most homophobic congressmen who’ve been caught with pants down and worshiping at the altar of the cock.
We’re EVERYWHERE. And we need to make it clear that we won’t take second class citizenship. And this gay man will not stand for it any longer. I’m politically active too.
Today's "If God meant us to be naked we'd have been born that way!" Idiot! September 21, 2007Posted by truthspew in Idiots, prudes.
First off I’m not sure how to categorize this one. Wait, wait, prudes. There we go. I’ve been told I’m a bit prudish but what they really don’t know is my public persona and private persona are two different things.
Anyhow this guy rambles on about the fact that more than 80% of a womans skin is exposed while wearing a bikini. He’s like the Taliban in the United States. And what about we men. Should we wish we can though not all of us should, wear the tiniest little thong and hit the beach. There’s definitely more than 80% skin showing there. But Mr. Blais doesn’t see that side of the argument.
I think we ought to give Mr. Blais the Ludovico treatment from A Clockwork Orange for Mr. Blais but with a slight twist. Just expose him to hours and hours of lesbian porn while propping his eyes open so he doesn’t miss a second and shooting him up with drugs that make him euphoric. Maybe check for tumescence because I get the feeling that Mr. Blais is probably suffering from ED which would explain his attitude that he has to police the beaches and be the enforcer of morality.
But wait for it, the answer comes at the end of the letter. Seems Mr. Blais has drunk the kool-aid.
Anyhow you can now peruse the Letter to the Editor that he wrote. I’d link it but the local rag, the Providence Journal requires registration and the BugMeNot extension doesn’t work with it.
The bikini should be considered indecent exposure: They are more than 80 percent nudity.
My wife and I recently returned from Narragansett, where we camp during the summer, and we usually walk on one of several beaches daily. We usually go after 4 p.m., when people begin to leave because the beach facilities prepare to close at 6 p.m. Even at that time of day we are exposed to the multitude of women of a variety of sizes in their bikinis.
What is the purpose of a bikini? The bikini apparently legally covers the essentials, while every thing else hangs; the bikini apparently allows some of the women to express their sexuality. The beaches and their bikinis have become a nudist colony.
The bikini in today’s culture is probably rated PG-13, and should be rated R.
I believe that many women like expressing their sexuality — like the attention, like being exploited, like seducing, like to be provocative and to cause lust. The bottom line of this is low self-esteem. The bikini gives them a sense of power and control.
The bikini is the front-runner; there are other everyday styles that are morally unacceptable. These cultural styles are infiltrating the church; it is shameful and disrespectful. We have become “de-sen-si-tized” (dead in conscience and scruples). We should be dressing appropriately in a church context!
We no longer seem to know the difference between moral and immoral, shameful and shameless, decent and indecent; we are becoming a Sodom and Gomorrah society! We are doomed for physical and spiritual disaster unless our state governments start implementing moral changes in public places, and we as a society begin to repent.