Cultural lobotomy
09 Nov 2011, 5:16 am
Back in the 1950-s one of the ways of treating mental illness was a lobotomy. Since they didn't know how to cure the brain, and they wanted to "get rid" of the problem, they decided to destroy the brain instead. While lobotomy itself is no longer legal, other treatments of mental illness that still exist today can be viewed as "much smaller versions" of lobotomy. The first psychiatric drug, Thorazine, was officially termed "chemical lobotomy". The reason being is that it was blocking the nerve endings in the same area of the brain that the lobotomy was targetting! In today's psychiatric language, the "politically correct" term for this is "neuroleptic". But if we care enough to look at what the words say we see the concept is sill the same: "lept" stands for "block", so "neuroleptic" blocks the nerve endings. Now, neuroleptic is not "smart", so it can't selectively only block "bad" nerves; it blocks all nerves good and bad, indiscriminately. In other words, the real goal is the same as the one of lobotomy. In today's society, the psychiatrists call the negative effects as "side effects". But in reality these are not side effects at all, but sought-for effects. If you look at the early accounts of the drug, the doctors were openly describing their patients became docile as evidence of a "success" of the drug! Only later on did anyone started vieweing it as "side effect"!
Even worse and far more damaging than psychiatric drugs is "shock therapy". In this case it seems quite clear that there is no way simply shocking a brain can cure a person at all. The purpose is, again, a deliberate brain damage. Yet regardless of how obvous this might seem, they call it a "side effect". And they even claim that today's versions of ECT machine are somehow "safer". Well my question to them is this: if today's ECT machines are "safe", what is the purpose of ECT at all? The one and only effect ECT can do is brain damage. So if it doesn't damage the brain (as doctors claim it doesn't) why are they insisting so hard on continuing the practice? By the mere fact that they do it they acknowledge that whatever they do is enough to cause brain damage! And the very fact that they stop after enough sessions are administered is a proof that they think a patient in question is so hopelessly damaged that htere is no reason to damage them any more.
Similar concept to "lobotomy" is seen in culture as well. When one culture disapproves of another culture, the former deliberately tries to create some negative influences upon the latter in order to get rid of it. For example, Jews do not approve of Christianity because they see the worship of Jesus as idolatry. As a result, they attempt to promote gay rights, liberalism, and so forth, in order to corrupt the Christian faith. Now, don't forget: Jews DO believe in Old Testament, and that is where most of Chrisian morals come from. So Jews know, for example, that homosexuality is wrong; but they "pretend" to think that homoseuality is okay while speaking to a Christian in order to weaken the faith of the latter. On the one hand, Jews attempt to influence public education in such a way that it promotes homosexuality. On the other hand, they cleverly take their kids to privite schools, which oppose homosexuality. What makes it even more ironic is that most of the verses against homosexuality come from the Old Testament rather than New Testament. This means that Jews are probaby far stronger opposers to homosexuality than Christians would ever be. Yet, this very "awareness" among Jews of the true evil of homosexuality is what allows them to view "gay rights" as a "weapon" and, thus, use it against Christians.
Likewise, Jews attempt to promote multiculturalism in public schools and among other things they try to build schools in mixed neighborhoods so that kids of different cultures and races learn to live among each other and downplay the cultural values of their own race. At the same time, Jews take their own kids to privite schools; a lot of such privite schools are so expensive, that blacks can't afford to go there. Thus, they own kids don't get a chance to learn to tolerate blacks. Interestingly enough, Jewish parents don't encourage their own kids to be among blacks either. Why not? I thought, based on what Jews do to Christians, Jews were all for multiculturalism? Well they aren't! They only use "multiculturalism" as a form of "lobotomy". In fact, among all the other groups of people, Jews are probably the ones who value cultural segregation the most -- as evidenced by the fact that the Jewish preference to marry other Jews is much stronger than, say, a Frenchman's preference to marry another Frenchman. That is probably why Jews are the only ones to realize that "multiculturalism" is "bad enough" to be a weapon -- and, consequently, they use it as such!
To summarize what I just said, it seems like
a) Jews have more awarenness of evils of homosexuality than Christians are, since most of the verses against homosexuality come from the Old Testament
b) Jews have far stronger drive AGAINST assimilations than Christians are (as evidenced by the fact that Christians are far more likely to intermarry
c) Jews are the ones who try to preach gay rights the most
d) Jews are the ones who try to preach multiculturalism the most
Now don't you see the obvious contradiction between parts a,b and parts c,d? Well, the reason for this is that Jews don't approve of Christianity. Since they don't know how to "cure" Christianity, they try to lobotomize it instead by doing something that they know is detrimental.
But don't get me wrong, Jews DO have a "good" alternative, which is Noahide laws. You see, according to Judaism, a person who was born a Jew is bound by 613 laws in the Torah; on the other hand, a person who is not a Jew is bound by 7 Noahide laws. So if a non-Jew follows these 7 laws, he is "righteous" and he has a share in the world to come without the need to convert. Now, prohibition against homosexuality is part of these 7 laws, which again leads to a question why do Jews preach violation of that specific law? Well, if the non-Jews were to follow the rest of the 7 laws, then the Jews would NEVER preach gay rights for this exact reason. But the issue is that Jews don't believe that the non-Jews are following the rest of the laws. In particular, one of the other Noahide laws prohibits idolatry; and Jews view worship of Jesus as idolatry. Thus, Jews say "since Christians break Noahide laws anyway (idolatry) it makes it okay to enourage them to break one more law (prohibition of homosexuality". This is strikingly similar to the way lobotomists think: "since the patients are screwed up anyway (with schizophrenia) it makes it okay to screw them up some more (with lobotomy)".
It is possible, however, that Jews have bigger plan. Probably their plan is something along the following lines:
(i) Destroy Christianity by preaching gay rights
(ii) Once Christianity is destroyed, preach Noahide Laws, EXCEPT for the one law that touches upon homosexuality (in order to avoid obvious contradiction)
(iii) Once people have been conversted to SIX noahide laws (part (ii)) and had enough time to forget about gay rights issues (part (i)), PREACH the law AGAINST Homosexuality.
(iv) If by any chance people still remember (i), just claim that (i) was taught "by someone else" and isn't true. This should be very easy to do since "officially" the public education program is American rather than "Jewish" and Jews are only there "behind the scenes", which makes it very easy for them to deny their own involvement in it. It is true that some individuals who identify themselves as Jews are promoting gay rights; but in this case they can just claim that these "individuals" happened to be "secular" and thus deny any affiliation with them.
Perhaps if a lobotomist had an option of "having everything his way" he won't "stop" at a lobotomy either. After the lobotomy (analogue of part (i)) is done, he will then proceed to "replacing" the "broken" brain with a "healthy" one (analogue of parts (ii), (iii) and (iv)), so that at the end of the day a person will be fully functioning. But since a lobotomist doesn't know "how" to carry out that second step, he is forced to only do the first step (lobotomy) and then leaving their patient disabled (and in lobotomist's eyes being disabled is "not as bad" as mentally ill which is precicely why he is doing lobotomy to begin with). Similarly, a Jews might not succeed in carrying out (ii), (iii), and (iv). In this case, they would carry out (i) and leave a "lobotomized culture" that neither follows Christian morals NOR Noahide laws. Just like "lobotomized patient" is not the perfect scenario in the doctor's eyes, the "lobotomized culture" is not perfect in Jewish eyes either. But in both cases, the lobotomy is viewed "not as bad" as the original problem. Perhaps Jews think that the prohibition against homosexuality in 7 noahide laws is somehow "not as bad" as prohibition against idolatry (which they view Christianity to be an example of); hence they view the former to be a legitimate weapon of fighting the latter.
By the way, Jews are not the only ones who use the "cultural lobotomy" as a way of fighting the cultural war. In fact, that same weapon is being used AGAINST the Jews, by Europe. In case of Israeli Palestinian conflict, Europeans never openly say they dislike Israel. Instead, they "claim" that they are "promoting tolerance" towards Palestinians. Now, when Islamic terrorism takes place in their own land, they are not nearly as "tolerant" as they want Israel to be. This tells us that Europeans are simply using "tolerance" as a tool to "lobotomize" Israel. This, in fact, is very similar to Jews preaching "tolerance" in order to "lobotomize" Christian culture. Both sides are wrong in this respect. Europe should openly acknowledge that Palestinians are at fault when it comes to Israel. If they have issues with the Jews (some of which are legitimate, as described in this post) they should try to address them directly, OUTSIDE of the context of Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Likewise, if Jews have an issue with Christianity (as a Christian I don't agree with them, but still a lot of their arguments are worth trying to adress and shouldn't just be dismissed) they should discuss these issues directly (validity of Jesus' claims to be messiah, definition of idolatry, and so forth), instead of trying to go behind the scenes and preach gay rights. I think open communication will always help.
As a matter of fact, all three lobotomy practices (doctor-on-patient, Jew-on-Christian and Christian-on-Jew) are detrimental to the cause. If a doctor administers neuroleptic drugs to a patient, the patient will no longer remember what the "issues" were that "bothered" him. Thus, a rational discussion about these issues (with the goal of logically explaining to a patient why he approached them the wrong way) would no longer be effective. Likewise, if a Jew "lobotomizes" Christianity by convincing them that homosexuality is okay, it would no longer be possible to explain why Jesus is "not okay" because of some "fine points" that Jesus "misses". If something like homosexuality is "okay" why care about "finer points" altogether? And, finally, if Christian lobotomy upon the Jew "works", then a Christian would convince the Jews that "muslims worship the same God" (after all this claim has always been a part of pro-Palestinian propaganda). Since that claim runs counter to True Gospel, this would, in fact, create one more problem of converting a Jew to Christianity if/when other barriers would be dealt with. In light of this, I think the right solution is for doctors to stop using psychiatric drugs, for Jews to stop preach gay rights, and for Christian to stop preaching Palestinian rights. All three groups should simply be honest: a doctor should try to explain to the patient a "healthy" way of dealing with things in drug-free psychotherapy sessions; a Jew should explain to the Christian his arguments against Messiahship of Jesus (and also give Christian an apportunity to respond to them so that they can have a rational discussion with a rational conclusion), and a Christian should try to explain to a Jew why he believes Jesus IS a messiah (without resorting to "Palestinian rights" when he gets frustrated of a Jew not wanting to listen to him).
09 Nov 2011, 10:24 am
Even worse and far more damaging than psychiatric drugs is "shock therapy". In this case it seems quite clear that there is no way simply shocking a brain can cure a person at all. The purpose is, again, a deliberate brain damage. Yet regardless of how obvous this might seem, they call it a "side effect". And they even claim that today's versions of ECT machine are somehow "safer". Well my question to them is this: if today's ECT machines are "safe", what is the purpose of ECT at all? The one and only effect ECT can do is brain damage. So if it doesn't damage the brain (as doctors claim it doesn't) why are they insisting so hard on continuing the practice? By the mere fact that they do it they acknowledge that whatever they do is enough to cause brain damage! And the very fact that they stop after enough sessions are administered is a proof that they think a patient in question is so hopelessly damaged that htere is no reason to damage them any more.
Similar concept to "lobotomy" is seen in culture as well. When one culture disapproves of another culture, the former deliberately tries to create some negative influences upon the latter in order to get rid of it. For example, Jews do not approve of Christianity because they see the worship of Jesus as idolatry. As a result, they attempt to promote gay rights, liberalism, and so forth, in order to corrupt the Christian faith. Now, don't forget: Jews DO believe in Old Testament, and that is where most of Chrisian morals come from. So Jews know, for example, that homosexuality is wrong; but they "pretend" to think that homoseuality is okay while speaking to a Christian in order to weaken the faith of the latter. On the one hand, Jews attempt to influence public education in such a way that it promotes homosexuality. On the other hand, they cleverly take their kids to privite schools, which oppose homosexuality. What makes it even more ironic is that most of the verses against homosexuality come from the Old Testament rather than New Testament. This means that Jews are probaby far stronger opposers to homosexuality than Christians would ever be. Yet, this very "awareness" among Jews of the true evil of homosexuality is what allows them to view "gay rights" as a "weapon" and, thus, use it against Christians.
Likewise, Jews attempt to promote multiculturalism in public schools and among other things they try to build schools in mixed neighborhoods so that kids of different cultures and races learn to live among each other and downplay the cultural values of their own race. At the same time, Jews take their own kids to privite schools; a lot of such privite schools are so expensive, that blacks can't afford to go there. Thus, they own kids don't get a chance to learn to tolerate blacks. Interestingly enough, Jewish parents don't encourage their own kids to be among blacks either. Why not? I thought, based on what Jews do to Christians, Jews were all for multiculturalism? Well they aren't! They only use "multiculturalism" as a form of "lobotomy". In fact, among all the other groups of people, Jews are probably the ones who value cultural segregation the most -- as evidenced by the fact that the Jewish preference to marry other Jews is much stronger than, say, a Frenchman's preference to marry another Frenchman. That is probably why Jews are the only ones to realize that "multiculturalism" is "bad enough" to be a weapon -- and, consequently, they use it as such!
To summarize what I just said, it seems like
a) Jews have more awarenness of evils of homosexuality than Christians are, since most of the verses against homosexuality come from the Old Testament
b) Jews have far stronger drive AGAINST assimilations than Christians are (as evidenced by the fact that Christians are far more likely to intermarry
c) Jews are the ones who try to preach gay rights the most
d) Jews are the ones who try to preach multiculturalism the most
Now don't you see the obvious contradiction between parts a,b and parts c,d? Well, the reason for this is that Jews don't approve of Christianity. Since they don't know how to "cure" Christianity, they try to lobotomize it instead by doing something that they know is detrimental.
But don't get me wrong, Jews DO have a "good" alternative, which is Noahide laws. You see, according to Judaism, a person who was born a Jew is bound by 613 laws in the Torah; on the other hand, a person who is not a Jew is bound by 7 Noahide laws. So if a non-Jew follows these 7 laws, he is "righteous" and he has a share in the world to come without the need to convert. Now, prohibition against homosexuality is part of these 7 laws, which again leads to a question why do Jews preach violation of that specific law? Well, if the non-Jews were to follow the rest of the 7 laws, then the Jews would NEVER preach gay rights for this exact reason. But the issue is that Jews don't believe that the non-Jews are following the rest of the laws. In particular, one of the other Noahide laws prohibits idolatry; and Jews view worship of Jesus as idolatry. Thus, Jews say "since Christians break Noahide laws anyway (idolatry) it makes it okay to enourage them to break one more law (prohibition of homosexuality". This is strikingly similar to the way lobotomists think: "since the patients are screwed up anyway (with schizophrenia) it makes it okay to screw them up some more (with lobotomy)".
It is possible, however, that Jews have bigger plan. Probably their plan is something along the following lines:
(i) Destroy Christianity by preaching gay rights
(ii) Once Christianity is destroyed, preach Noahide Laws, EXCEPT for the one law that touches upon homosexuality (in order to avoid obvious contradiction)
(iii) Once people have been conversted to SIX noahide laws (part (ii)) and had enough time to forget about gay rights issues (part (i)), PREACH the law AGAINST Homosexuality.
(iv) If by any chance people still remember (i), just claim that (i) was taught "by someone else" and isn't true. This should be very easy to do since "officially" the public education program is American rather than "Jewish" and Jews are only there "behind the scenes", which makes it very easy for them to deny their own involvement in it. It is true that some individuals who identify themselves as Jews are promoting gay rights; but in this case they can just claim that these "individuals" happened to be "secular" and thus deny any affiliation with them.
Perhaps if a lobotomist had an option of "having everything his way" he won't "stop" at a lobotomy either. After the lobotomy (analogue of part (i)) is done, he will then proceed to "replacing" the "broken" brain with a "healthy" one (analogue of parts (ii), (iii) and (iv)), so that at the end of the day a person will be fully functioning. But since a lobotomist doesn't know "how" to carry out that second step, he is forced to only do the first step (lobotomy) and then leaving their patient disabled (and in lobotomist's eyes being disabled is "not as bad" as mentally ill which is precicely why he is doing lobotomy to begin with). Similarly, a Jews might not succeed in carrying out (ii), (iii), and (iv). In this case, they would carry out (i) and leave a "lobotomized culture" that neither follows Christian morals NOR Noahide laws. Just like "lobotomized patient" is not the perfect scenario in the doctor's eyes, the "lobotomized culture" is not perfect in Jewish eyes either. But in both cases, the lobotomy is viewed "not as bad" as the original problem. Perhaps Jews think that the prohibition against homosexuality in 7 noahide laws is somehow "not as bad" as prohibition against idolatry (which they view Christianity to be an example of); hence they view the former to be a legitimate weapon of fighting the latter.
By the way, Jews are not the only ones who use the "cultural lobotomy" as a way of fighting the cultural war. In fact, that same weapon is being used AGAINST the Jews, by Europe. In case of Israeli Palestinian conflict, Europeans never openly say they dislike Israel. Instead, they "claim" that they are "promoting tolerance" towards Palestinians. Now, when Islamic terrorism takes place in their own land, they are not nearly as "tolerant" as they want Israel to be. This tells us that Europeans are simply using "tolerance" as a tool to "lobotomize" Israel. This, in fact, is very similar to Jews preaching "tolerance" in order to "lobotomize" Christian culture. Both sides are wrong in this respect. Europe should openly acknowledge that Palestinians are at fault when it comes to Israel. If they have issues with the Jews (some of which are legitimate, as described in this post) they should try to address them directly, OUTSIDE of the context of Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Likewise, if Jews have an issue with Christianity (as a Christian I don't agree with them, but still a lot of their arguments are worth trying to adress and shouldn't just be dismissed) they should discuss these issues directly (validity of Jesus' claims to be messiah, definition of idolatry, and so forth), instead of trying to go behind the scenes and preach gay rights. I think open communication will always help.
As a matter of fact, all three lobotomy practices (doctor-on-patient, Jew-on-Christian and Christian-on-Jew) are detrimental to the cause. If a doctor administers neuroleptic drugs to a patient, the patient will no longer remember what the "issues" were that "bothered" him. Thus, a rational discussion about these issues (with the goal of logically explaining to a patient why he approached them the wrong way) would no longer be effective. Likewise, if a Jew "lobotomizes" Christianity by convincing them that homosexuality is okay, it would no longer be possible to explain why Jesus is "not okay" because of some "fine points" that Jesus "misses". If something like homosexuality is "okay" why care about "finer points" altogether? And, finally, if Christian lobotomy upon the Jew "works", then a Christian would convince the Jews that "muslims worship the same God" (after all this claim has always been a part of pro-Palestinian propaganda). Since that claim runs counter to True Gospel, this would, in fact, create one more problem of converting a Jew to Christianity if/when other barriers would be dealt with. In light of this, I think the right solution is for doctors to stop using psychiatric drugs, for Jews to stop preach gay rights, and for Christian to stop preaching Palestinian rights. All three groups should simply be honest: a doctor should try to explain to the patient a "healthy" way of dealing with things in drug-free psychotherapy sessions; a Jew should explain to the Christian his arguments against Messiahship of Jesus (and also give Christian an apportunity to respond to them so that they can have a rational discussion with a rational conclusion), and a Christian should try to explain to a Jew why he believes Jesus IS a messiah (without resorting to "Palestinian rights" when he gets frustrated of a Jew not wanting to listen to him).
you would make a proper National Socialist.
ruveyn
Mack27
Deinonychus
Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 382
Location: near Boston Massachusetts USA
09 Nov 2011, 11:50 am
Individual Jews don't have master plan (I myself was born Jewish and neither of my parents have master plan). But the specific Jewish organizations, such as ADL, do have a "plan". In this post I was referring to the latter; so I really meant "Jewish activists".
09 Nov 2011, 12:05 pm
Individual Jews don't have master plan (I myself was born Jewish and neither of my parents have master plan). But the specific Jewish organizations, such as ADL, do have a "plan". In this post I was referring to the latter; so I really meant "Jewish activists".
From where did you copy your article?
09 Nov 2011, 12:30 pm
Individual Jews don't have master plan (I myself was born Jewish and neither of my parents have master plan). But the specific Jewish organizations, such as ADL, do have a "plan". In this post I was referring to the latter; so I really meant "Jewish activists".
From where did you copy your article?
SOME of the ideas in this article I borrowed from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=176RASLgzIQ . Other ideas were my own elaboration. Let me spell it out what I borrowed and what I thoght of myself:
THINGS I BORROWED FROM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=176RASLgzIQ :
1) That Jews promote gay rights and infiltrate public education
2) That Jews take their own kids to privite schools in order not to let their kids be influenced by the public education and thus make sure that public education only affects non-Jews that they target
3) Items 1 and 2 implies that Jews target specifically gentiles and use gay rights as a weapon
THINGS I LEARNED FROM JEWISH SITES (SUCH AS JEWS FOR JUDAISM AND SO FORTH):
4) Judaism is opposed to Christianity because they view it as idolatry (and I know specific reasons why they do from Jews for Judaism and other anti-missionary websites)
5) Judaism views that gentiles who follow Noahide laws are righteous and, therefore, have share in the world to come without converting to Judaism (again I found it on Jewish websites)
6) Jews don't consider Christians to be "righteous gentiles" because they view worship of Jesus as a form of idolartry (again I saw it in Jews for Judaism)
THINGS I CAME UP WITH MYSELF:
7) Point 3 can be further strengthened by pointing out that most of anti-gay teachings come from Old Testament and, therefore, Jews are even fiercer opponents of homosexuality than Christians are. Now, contrast it to part 1 and that will support part 3.
8 ) If you combine "3" with "6", then you might conclude that "3" is a way of "curing" 6.
9 ) The analogy between part 8 and lobotomy
10) The analogy between 7 and 8 with the way Europe treats Israeli Palestinian conflict when they attempt to pretend to worry about "Palestinian rights" when in fact they simpy hate Jews
11) A conclusion that all three items (the way doctors treat patients, the way Jews treat Christians and the way Christians treat Jews) have one fallacy in common. They try to "destroy" what they don't like instead of addressing it. And in the process of destroying it they are not honest about it.
However, I changed
09 Nov 2011, 1:28 pm
hmm i'm not even sure where to start.
multiculturalism is used as a tool by jews (and the wording suggests every jew is complicit) to "culturally lobotomise" christians. and jews apparently have to "learn to tolerate blacks". that's about as far as i got.
do you get out much?
_________________
?Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.?
Adam Smith
09 Nov 2011, 1:58 pm
multiculturalism is used as a tool by jews (and the wording suggests every jew is complicit) to "culturally lobotomise" christians.
This is part of what I said, yes.
I never said that they should, nor have I said that they shouldn't. I simply pointed out an obvious contradiction:
(i) Jews want non-Jewish kids to tolerate blacks
(ii) Jews don't want their own (i.e. Jewish) kids to do the same
I never said whether tolerating blacks is a good or bad thing. All I said was that Jewish attitude should be more consistent in the way they deal with Jews and non-Jews, and unfortunately it isn't.
Okay maybe it is the length of my post that confused you. Let me summarize. Basically I started off by pointing out that Jews have double standard in the way they treat non-Jews and their fellow Jews (that part is quite a common claim that I seen a lot of people make on the internet). Then after that I pointed out that, actually, Jews DO have a notion that non-Jew can be righteous -- in particular the non-Jew who follows noahide laws. Then I put these two things together to conclude that the "double standard" that the Jews have between themselves and non-Jews can be viewed as "a punishment towards non-Jews for failing to follow noahide laws". Now, if viewed in this light, it becomes quite ironic that part of their "punishment towards non-Jews" includes making them violate EVEN MORE noahide laws (namely the one against homosexuality). That kind of irony is what points to the lobotomy analogy. Because a patient is "screwed up", just lobotomize them and screw them up some more. Similarly, if a non-Jew is "messed up" by violating some of the noahide laws, well just mess them up some more by making them violate more of such laws.
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
09 Nov 2011, 2:21 pm
However, an actual form of cultural lobotomy is called public education.
Yes, and in my original post I DID mention "public education". I never said Jews knock on the doors of non-Jews and try to convince them to tolerate homosexuality. What I said is that Jews try to influence public education (through lobying) in such a way that it promotes gay rights.
09 Nov 2011, 2:23 pm
However, an actual form of cultural lobotomy is called public education.
Yes, and in my original post I DID mention "public education". I never said Jews knock on the doors of non-Jews and try to convince them to tolerate homosexuality. What I said is that Jews try to influence public education (through lobying) in such a way that it promotes gay rights.
As do some non-Jews. Which means some Jews are doing what some Americans do. Why? Because these Jews ARE Americans.
Sieg Heil, national socialist.
ruveyn
09 Nov 2011, 2:26 pm
However, an actual form of cultural lobotomy is called public education.
Yes, and in my original post I DID mention "public education". I never said Jews knock on the doors of non-Jews and try to convince them to tolerate homosexuality. What I said is that Jews try to influence public education (through lobying) in such a way that it promotes gay rights.
As do some non-Jews. Which means some Jews are doing what some Americans do. Why? Because these Jews ARE Americans.
Sieg Heil, national socialist.
ruveyn
And I mentioned that non-Jews do that, as well. In particular, I mentioned it in the second paragraph from the end of my original post. This paragraph is quoted below for your convenience:
09 Nov 2011, 3:11 pm
I never said that they should, nor have I said that they shouldn't. I simply pointed out an obvious contradiction:
(i) Jews want non-Jewish kids to tolerate blacks
(ii) Jews don't want their own (i.e. Jewish) kids to do the same
I never said whether tolerating blacks is a good or bad thing. All I said was that Jewish attitude should be more consistent in the way they deal with Jews and non-Jews, and unfortunately it isn't.
you seem to have missed the point. why do "blacks", in particular, need to be "tolerated"??
_________________
?Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.?
Adam Smith
09 Nov 2011, 3:13 pm
do jews, in particular, preach "gay rights" a lot? this is the first i've heard of it.
_________________
?Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.?
Adam Smith
