Fixing Christendom’s degenerate sexual culture, part 3

The church has an honesty problem. No, that’s too gentle. The church is suffering a deep-seated, pathological dishonesty that is ruining the West. And by this I don’t mean “everybody with a different doctrine than me is an unbelieving serpent destined for Hell”, which was probably your first reaction—I imagine your cortisol spiking a little in preparation for a fight. I mean something much more fundamental: the church belongs the poor in spirit, the poor in spirit are what we call “normies”, and normies have a deep-seated honesty problem. It would be the work of several lifetimes to even get tiny fractions of the church to admit it has a problem, which is part of why I’m building a little army. I’ll demonstrate this briefly for those of you with ears to hear.

I went to a group for singles in their thirties the other day, and I’ll be damned if I ever saw a sadder sight. The men ranged from Omega to low Delta and the women ranged from obese to single mothers to road-worn to married (?).

That began to change with the 2009 publication of a study in the Journal of Sexual Medicine. Using data from the National Survey of Family Growth, the researchers tracked sexual abstinence among 2,469 men and 5,120 women age 25 to 45, and found that 122 of the men (5 percent) and 104 of the women (2 percent) said they’d never had partner sex. Now some abstinence might be voluntary, Catholic priests and nuns, or others who affirmatively opt for celibacy. But it’s safe to say that most–probably the vast majority–of older virginity is involuntary. I interviewed one 47-year-old virgin man who called it “my shame, my terrible handicap.”

The study found two significant associations with older virginity: regular attendance at religious services and abstinence from alcohol. However, in my interviews with older virgins and with the therapists who counsel them, those factors appear much less important than profound shyness, social awkwardness, and general discomfort with the opposite sex and the whole idea of physical intimacy with another person.

Are There Really 40-Year-Old Virgins?
Psychology Today

Now, the people in this singles group are there specifically to find love and marriage and have kids, in a Christ-approved way. They’re very forthright about this in private. Many of them are salvageable. Fat girls can lose weight and become very pretty (often retaining enlarged breasts), which is most of the reason why an HB5 in the 1950s would be considered an HB8 today. Repentant Omegas can be sent to the gym, fed paleo, and trained out of their disqualifying behaviors to become high Deltas. (There are of course a couple of exceptions—there’s a very gentle older guy who’s clearly dealing with some serious baggage. He will patiently but firmly push away people trying to hug him, smile, and offer a fist bump instead.)

One of the fat girls, whom I’d met before, clearly has a thing for me. Now, I have a strong desire to say the most loving thing anyone has ever told this gal: the price of a first date is to lose twenty pounds, and the price of a third date is another ten pounds. It would be possible, if not PC, to say this to her at a restaurant/bar, online, or through friends. But if I pulled that stunt in church? Forget excommunication, they might literally crucify me. You’d get an attenuated response for suggesting single men, already praying for godly women to waltz into their lives, ought to lift weights so they aren’t disgusting to their future wives. HOW DARE YOU suggest Christians should even notice such worldly values as slimness and muscles, much less use?

In private, I find girls and women are more amenable to harsh realities. As an experiment, I just handed a printed version of the other most important graph in the world to a multi-generational group of women at the coffee shop I’m sitting in now. The grandma, mother, and daughter all said they’re churchgoing Christians, and they all agreed it’s very sad and mentioned that their church is also dying because “it’s all old people now”. Men, on the other hand, respond on a spectrum from fascinated silence to combative denial. I showed this to my Bible study leader during a discussion about how frustrating it is to meet girls in the church, and he immediately dismissed it as lies by nonbelievers. The only guy in the group with a girlfriend (a very sweet fiancee who’s a drop-dead HB8, btw) had to talk him down from his sanctimonious perch.

The libertarian-leaning Christians who are too cool for church are even worse. Their only response to anything is to ragequit and find a new church. Fools and hypocrites, how are you different from the 3rd-world immigrants and Californian refugees you denounce? Clean up the planks littering the pews of your own church before you go looking for spotless churches to poison with your weakness. Even worse are those I think of as the “three percenters”, who’d rather cull the Deltas and restrict all reproduction to high-functioning, right-wing, polygamous SMV 10 Alphas. What a bunch of worthless cucks! No wonder right-wing politics is all chiefs and no indians, their policy of genociding an entire generation of brainwashed normies who “just don’t get it” is not even a shade removed from the Jews. Yes, I agree they’re brainwashed. So brainwash them again, with the truth this time! The enemy has shown you that’s what works on them, and yet you’re sitting on your thumbs diddling your prostate waiting for Jesus to bring Armegeddon on your nation. You useless fucking cucks! Get your heart in order before God blots your name out of the Book of Life.

The church has an honesty problem, and that’s why the West has a sex problem. Have we become too holy to take a reality check? I believe the answer is no, there will be a remnant, and that’s why I act like I’m on a mission from God. DO NOT get in my way.

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

76 Responses to Fixing Christendom’s degenerate sexual culture, part 3

  1. Koanic says:

    > He will patiently but firmly push away people trying to hug him, smile, and offer a fist bump instead.

    That is a great idea. Or one hand checks the shoulder while the other does a double-wrist-grip handshake.

    But how to stop girls from hugging you?

    My favorite is the “Namaste” defense. It means “I bow to you”. And it cracks me up just to say it, much less to a girl I’m faking out of a hug, with a gesture of ironic respect from a joke religion. She’ll see the smirk. And if she does it back, that’s even funnier.

  2. Patrick says:

    You’re a winner my friend. I always pick winners. You’re going to be a big winner.

  3. bicebicebice says:

    If people are allowed the means to be mean, they will be mean, and thats me being generous. The NEET, he can’t afford to break a single commandment. No, really, he doesn’t have the means to.

    “This is my seventh year at the singles convention hosted by the church” yeah we have that too over here. Dig your grave deep, make it comfortable, then wait for the rain to fill it up, thats what my Rabbi always used to say.

  4. crazy tm says:

    Not just your country all over Anglosphere, churches full of old people, single mothers who are mostly fat, a few young fat chicks, delta’s who are ugly on the hansom scale, who don’t want to shake up with fat single mothers. One delta I knew was a 40 + virgin, I use to try to encourage him to lose weight and improve himself for years, never happened though,he resorted to living life through his career in teaching, for his extended family fix, so MGHOW. Really he was ugly as a an old thong(the ones you put on your feet). Then there was this pastor who use to brag about his single daughter who at 45 years also childless and living it up in careers, presently working on cruise ships.

    I actually stuck it to this Anglican pastor through his wife, as he was bragging about muh feminism, I told his wife I would rather have grandchildren one day, looking at my 4 kids… she sadly nodded at me. Man did I get ostracized after that, it was worth it as soon the pastor left town, being some other social organisations wouldn’t show me the door. Now that I left town pastor is back like cancer till he passes…

    Though in the mix are some healthy families they average about 1 per church here, and basically lead in showing how it should be done. They help, but never lead the church.

    Can you blame some of us who would rather the polygamous route being the delta’s don’t even want to help themselves little alone the fat single mothers? Not that’s going to happen, white men get charged with bigamy, if they follow through with such fantasies.

    Yet Muslims get paid welfare from the state to have 4 wives, each additional wife after the first gets a single mothers pension… Which makes the submission scenario quiet likely.

    We really are in a FUBAR situation IMO.

    That’s why I can’t stand cucky de cuckety cuck churches, they really suck. The really cuck ones import Muslims refugees and immigrants, one down the road the uniting church has built a huge Mosque on it’s own land for all these Muslims…

    FUBAR I tell ya

    Apologies for black pills it really is that bad down under. Is it any wonder the Omega’s fantasize about the growing East Asian, predominately Chinese conversation to Christianity?

    Funny thing I know a partly Jewish guy who bred down this route, even though he divorced from one Asian he still chasing more Christian Asians… ugh Another I know married the ugliest of ugly southern Indian, the dot variety, he’s a pastor. ugh…


    It’s why I find alt white and paganism so much more attractive.

    My suggestion for new churches would be to start from scratch, impromptu ones, that live on donations from community and do not go for tax free status, where federal government can place demands to diversify… for more fiat dollars…

  5. Tom Kratman says:

    A suggestion:

    Noting that Christendom’s degenerate sexual culture is a fact, and from several different perspectives, it still sounds like when you say “fixing” there’s an unaspirated word in there – or perhaps you haven’t thought of it yet: “universally.”

    That’s not going to happen. It wouldn’t happen even if the problem were not close enough to universal as makes no difference.

    So I would _strongly_ suggest thinking about “saving what can be saved,” along with the strategic value in making use of what cannot be saved to save what can be. For example, the 20 dollar whore, who can serve, so to speak, as a relief valve, has her part to play (assuming we check regularly for disease) in sparing the virtue of “sweet young maiden,” hereinafter SYM (marca registrada).

    Moreover, the whore can present a nicely frightful illustration to SYM of why she should keep her legs together, but only if the alternative means of support of young, not so sweet, knocked up chick are eliminated.

    Lastly, sex is compelling at levels that mere moral argument cannot compete with anymore. This is true both coming from society and directed at the young as well as coming from the female directed at the so desperate he’s barely human male. _She_ needs another line of defense.

    I suggest closing down the various welfare arrangements for unwed mothers and putting the money, rather, some of it, into virginity bonuses. Works a bit like this: Marriage is contracted and the banns are posted. Six months before the date, the prospective bride presents herself at the (state, not private) doctor’s office and is checked for intactness. Assuming she is “neat, sweet, and complete, both outside and within,” her name is entered on the rolls. On marriage date she receives, as a gift from the state, her virginity bonus, enough for a down payment on a house, and a not large fraction of what it would have cost to rear her bastard at the public expense.

    Now there are limits here. There is no hymen at the back of the throat. (But then, if storks bring white babies, and blackbirds bring black babies, swallows bring no babies.) Neither is there one in the rear.

    Yes, they may well decide to screw like rabbits following her exam and certification (though the possibility of being left at the altar, losing the bonus and having no welfare state to support her and the brat mitigates against it). However, if so, it’s more or less the human rule since forever; “Once you are engaged and the banns are posted, we know you’re only human, hence weak and sinful. So were we at your age. Hence, we shall avert our eyes to what you may do. You had best be prepared, however, to move up the wedding date if she comes up preggers.”

    No, it isn’t perfect, either morally or fiscally. It better than what we have though, as well as more plausible than any other approach I’ve seen on offer.

    • Tom Kratman says:

      Why don’t you address the gravamen of the thing? One supposes that it’s inability that’s to blame, but one wouldn’t mind being wrong, could it but be demonstrated.

      • Koanic says:

        Because your idea was dumb, wrong, and dominated by a superior system, designed by Jehovah Himself.

        • Mycroft Jones says:

          Amen. These Catholics will twist and turn and try to do anything BUT what Jehovah has already spelled out.

          • Tom Kratman says:

            And you’re doing so marvelously well, MJ, at restoring what the Lord has already spelled out? Who knew?

          • Tom Kratman says:

            By the way, speaking of systems designed by Jehovah, and speaking of people who twist and turn and try to do anything but what Jehovah has already spelled out, is there some biblically permissible or mandatory penalty other than the seducer or rapist paying perhaps as much as 500 USD worth of silver ((current dollars)? Do you have, perchance, a cite?

        • Tom Kratman says:

          If you say something is dumb, this is the clearest possible proof that it is brilliant. I had hoped for “adequate, under the circumstances,” but since you impliedly insist that it is more than that…

          Here’s your utterly predictable problem: we don’t have that system. Saying it is superior gets us nowhere, moves us not one inch closer to re-establishing it. The statement is, in fact, as ineffectual as you are. (Hence, of _course_ you prefer the precatory bullshit to actually improving matters.)

          • Koanic says:

            We already played the ad hominem game. I won, remember? If not, take your Alzheimer’s meds.

            The way to move closer to Jehovah’s system is one man, one murder at a time. Just like in the Godfather.

            Caesar’s justice has grown old and impotent. Let the old and impotent observe it.

          • Tom Kratman says:

            And more pious but ultimately meaningless platitudes. And where not platitudes, calls for action from one who apparently lacks both skill and courage to act.

            You’ve never won, Koanic; you lack enough 9s for it. Worse, you lack enough 9s even to understand when you’re outclassed and beaten.

            (By the way, dummie, that actually was not an ad hominem. I know, I know; you lack enough 9s to understand that, too. Poor you.)

          • Koanic says:

            I’ve got Triple 9’s; you’ve got cognitive decline.

          • Tom Kratman says:

            I am, as mentioned, as completely unimpressed by three 9s as I am by you, and as I am by your pitiful attempts at portraying profundity.

            I’d have to decline quite a bit before I’d hear you straining to catch up. You will not live that long.

          • Tom Kratman says:

            (Oh, and, quite unsurprisingly, this Hebrew phrase you are using? Ah dunno thin’ i’ means wha’ you thin’ i’ means.)

          • Koanic says:

            You should double-check that decline graph.

            You are commenting on the Internet and can’t figure out that Catholicism is wrong, something people could do since before the printing press.

            It’s like being flat Earth, except less observant.

          • Tom Kratman says:

            And that’s just more nonsense, imported nonsense, at that, since I haven’t mentioned Catholicism and am fairly sure the church would be horrified at the prospect I present. Isn’t this just another case of you presuming to understand something you haven’t even a tiny clue to? You know it is. So does everyone else.

            (Pssst: Clue for you; as far as Catholicism goes, I’m a heretic.)

            And, tsk. Nay, double tsk. Caught in your fraudulent attempt to rewrite biblical law, you have no defense. Not that I expected one from you; you lack the gnads for it.

            As for IQ decline, I know this will shock your poor 3 9s to the very fiber of their 8-hood, but a graph is not a law, an average is not a specific, and you are a dummie.

          • Koanic says:

            I certainly hope that back when you had your fluid intelligence you didn’t make mistakes like failing to evaluate my comments in light of the OP as well as your own post. Youngsters these days just don’t make any sense, darn it! Why in my day…

            And the record goes round.

          • Tom Kratman says:

            And you are still incapable of understanding a graph, averages, specifics. Nice, at least, that you can toss out terms like fluid; perhaps you even know terms like crystallized.

            Evaluating your comment in light of the original post – not that you referenced it – would be meaningless, because I am speaking past the original post to the – well, come to think of it – to a fluid and original solution to the problem. Or can you cite to someone else who’s come up with the idea of virginity bonuses, in contrast to the whoring about bonus of the modern welfare state, to mitigate the problem of, well, whoring about? No? Didn’t think so.

            Here’s the problem with IQ tests and why I sneer; sneer at yours, as a matter of fact, and sneer even at my own, though it is higher than yours. (If you were a not-very-wide pubic hair from four nines, you would have said so; your self image, distorted and fraudulent as it is, is still so inextricably tied up in your delusion of adequacy that you could not have avoided it.) There is a difference between the somewhat limited intelligence that can _apply_ formulae, for math, say, and the intelligence of the one who doesn’t know the formulae, and doesn’t care about them, never studied them, but figures them out on his own, sua sponte, as needed, quickly, and applies them to find the correct result. The latter is so much superior, in terms of intelligence, that it is…why, it is a Newton or a Gauss compared to a mere Koanic.* And yet IQ tests are simply unable to tell the difference. There is no little block there for “did you figure this out entirely on your own without having learned it in school?” nor, if there were, could the self reporting be trusted. Hence, they inevitably measure a sort of second rate intelligence, an unoriginal intelligence. They measure an intelligence neither crystallzed nor fluid, but merely bureaucratic, the intelligence of a drone or a drudge…or a Koanic.

            *The latter is what I do and what I have been doing since I was a small child, what I have been doing since I taught myself to read at an adult level by age 2.5. Compared to Newton or Gauss, I suppose I am somewhat mathematically retarded, but that still places me far, oh, very far, above you.

          • Koanic says:

            Brevity is the soul of wit;
            senility the end of it.

          • Tom Kratman says:

            Brevity is relative. Perhaps were you not second rate you could grasp easy things like this.

          • Tom Kratman says:

            One minor thing; I joke about premature senility all the time. Why? Because it isn’t in the offing. It’s a measure of your lack of both intelligence and insight that you think these old age jibes would bother me.

            Nah, you’re just someone fun to shit on…and so very deserving.

    • glosoli says:

      Highly plausible.
      Where do I vote for this idea?

  6. everlastingphelps says:

    HOW DARE YOU suggest Christians should even notice such worldly values as slimness and muscles, much less use?

    You’re couching it wrong. You’re not noticing that they are fat and undesirable. You are noticing that they are gluttonous and that they abuse the temple of their body. You aren’t noticing that the guys are flabby lardasses, you are noticing that they are overcome with sloth, and are failing to become what they need to be to protect their family as Christ protects his church.

    Sure, we’re all sinners, but we should be striving to sin less. “I can’t be with you when you look like walking sin.”

    • Koanic says:

      The fat girl speech:

      “If that’s the way you treat yourself, how will you treat my children? Assuming you don’t literally smother them. That happens in the Bible. A whore did it.

      Fat girls have unhealthy babies. I’d be a bad father if I married you. And I’m an excellent father.”

      • bicebicebice says:

        The Greatest Commandment
        28 One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?”

        29 “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.[a] 30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’[b] 31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[c] There is no commandment greater than these.”

        Love is caring and thus always telling the truth is surely love, ultimate form of caring. This is why all the bad gay-apples normons will get zapped. The love on earth isn’t unconditional, nor is it ever expressed in the bible that way it is interpreted in the west namelely love the sin AND the sinner…. that never happened. This is why we are ruled by pedos and devil worshippers, not enough heads being severed.

        • glosoli says:

          It’s good to also hate the same things God hates:

          ’16These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:

          17A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,

          18An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,

          19A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.’

          • Koanic says:

            Yeah, it depends on context. Vs Churchians you can just crush them, because their hearts are hard, their ears closed, and their necks stiff. Vs someone of tender heart, you don’t want to break them, but encourage them.

  7. Ingulf says:

    Hello Aeoli and readers,

    I am attaching a translation of a history of Judaism from the perspective of a believer in Christ composed by a Russian priest in 1946. Having found it beyond enlightening, I believe that it may help you in your quest to restore the West. God bless.

  8. Tom Kratman says:

    Tsk, Aeoli, and I was having fun, too.

    • Tom Kratman says:

      Apparently you will have to learn to live with it. Take solace in your…ha…hahahahahahaha…”MENSA level IQ.”

      • glosoli says:

        You sound like a child.

        My disappointment is that your trolling presence detracts from Aeoli’s efforts here.
        You ought to be ashamed and go away. I doubt you will though.

      • Tom Kratman says:

        I don’t “sound” like anything, G-spot; that’s what is called “writing.”

        Is this the kind of mistake someone makes with a “MENSA level IQ”? Hahahahahahaha.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      I may not know as much about the world as you, but I know I could make a place for you guys to fight to your hearts’ content, and you wouldn’t use it.

      • Tom Kratman says:

        As Larry Correia says, “Internet argument is a spectator sport.”

        Did you ever wonder why Koanic and Glosoli feel compelled to attack me? They’re both roughly midwits. They’re frightfully easy to slap the intellectual shit out of. And yet they cannot let a comment go without a) an attack and b) an attempt to silence me. Perhaps they don’t want you to be able to see the world as it is?

      • Koanic says:

        I don’t go to Kratman’s blog; he came to mine. I have no interest in reading a blog where the un-Biblical goes unchallenged. If Kratman wants to pick a fight, he can always come do it at Vox Populi, where standards of debate are intelligently enforced. Whatever misguided crusade Aeoli is on is obviously impervious to my criticism anyway, and represents a phase I know well, born of frustration and cognitive overload, which can only be healed through years of reflective and expansionary exomind use. The teacup is full and already overflowing.

  9. Patrick says:

    It’s sad that we’re talking about how to reduce degeneracy in Christianity and certain people can’t avoid getting embroiled in chimpanzee poo poo fights. The point of turning the other cheek is to allow space to focus on real problems and killing the real bad guys. The real problems are not the problems that you have with each other. My late grandmother, a special forces colonel’s wife, used to say ‘If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all.’ And if we’re talking tough she was made out of 9 inch think armour plating.

    And if I’d behaved like you two do with my brother I’d get a swift clip round the ear and sent to my room for an hour to contemplate my behaviour.

    Tom and Koanic you are more similar than you realise. You’re like bickering siblings. Please direct this energy outwards instead of at each other. Turn the other cheek, show some mutual respect, and if you can’t say nothin nice, just don’t say nothin at all. Like the stoic flint-eyed killers we know you really are.

    • Tom Kratman says:

      Patrick, you may have missed it; Koanic attacked my post, and in a form that was actually an attack on me. I am far more sinned against than sinning in this joint (which may have something to do with Aeoli’s continuing disappointment of G-spot). That said, yes, I admit that, clearly, once we’re in the sinning stakes, I sin, oh, much better. Now, am I angry about this? Nah; it’s just recreation for me to the extent it doesn’t go all the way to therapy.

      • Mycroft Jones says:

        If you’re actually not a Papist, I apologize for calling you one.

      • Tom Kratman says:

        I don’t want your apology. I am a Catholic, but a somewhat heretical one. It’s the church I am comfortable in, at least when they’re not spouting social justice and pro-barbarian migration nonsense. If you try, you can probably find where I walked out over just these issues. But I am still Catholic.

        If you want to apologize, why not apologize for accusing me of twisting something, when the actual twist was yours and koanic’s? Or have you found something biblical that calls for more punishment for seduction or rape than a fine of X-shekels? Koanic seemed to have, but never did produce a cite.

    • glosoli says:

      That’s nonsense Patrick.
      Koanic critiqued Kratman’s idea, as non-biblical and unworkable.
      He had a dig at Mycroft too.
      It’s his style, he enjoys it, he’s evil.
      Kratman responded with his usual boomer spite and adhoms.
      It’s not possible to respect him because he’s evil.
      You’re not a Christian, God says some things that are not nice to evil.
      We should do the same.

      • Patrick says:

        Let’s not go throwing the e-word around willy nilly. I know what evil is no one here is evil. We’re misguided, we’re sinners, we’re all wrong in some way and seeking redemption in some way. Koanic and Kratman both have worthwhile things to say but unless they’re prepared to organise a pistol duel at ten paces and sort the thing our in a clean and honourable way they should just not be pushing each other’s buttons like that and always trying to get the last word in. It’s just undisciplined behaviour and unbecoming of warriors and leaders, full stop.

        • Koanic says:

          Nobody here is a warrior. Warriors exist in primitive tribal societies. The actual soldier and leader is the main instigator.

          I have no interest in fighting a duel with anyone. There is no culture of honor which would compensate for discarding the tactical advantages of hunting and ambush.

          I appreciate hearing from my critics. Either they are right, and I am chastised, or they are wrong, and lie to their detriment. Many psychological insights can be derived from a sustained conflict. Some lessons can only be learned in a full contact fight. Those who never engage in one practice bullshido.

          The persona Koanic does not seek to be a congenial leader for incompatible types. I have other personas for that, just as a man constricts his neck with a tie for work. I do not consent to be led by someone resembling Patrick Stewart from the Starship Enterprise, and I expect others to feel similarly regarding me.

          I will give you the tools to lead yourselves. Let there be no king but Christ, and every man do what is right in his own eyes.

          • Patrick says:

            If you want to do business you have to abide by certain rules. You’re not impressing anyone or gaining any advantage by flame warring with Kratman. Kratman’s a good guy, you’re a good guy, Mycroft is a good guy. Sometimes good guys don’t get along with each other. That’s fine too just ignore each other. But to accept guest invitations you have to abide by the ancient laws of hospitality, and they are true Edenic laws, ancient laws. That means no ambushes, leave your guns at the door and if things really get too foul then sort it out in the yard and clean up the mess when you’re done. Ambushes are fine on your space but this isn’t your space. You’re here on the good will and hospitality of others.

            • glosoli says:

              Don’t claim to speak for everyone.
              I like to see Kratman exposed for what he is by Koanic.

              Your kind of accommodating of evil is why the world is where it is.
              It is black and white. It is not difficult to see who is good and who is evil, if you don’t see it, it’s because you don’t have the moral compass of Gods word, so your judgement errs.
              Persistent unrepentant sinners are best cast out of ones life.

              It’s not time to do business with unbelievers, it’s time to point out their lies.
              Otherwise, it’s all just BS words.

              As Jesus said to the adulteress: go and sin no more. He did not go and have lunch with her in the midst of her continuing sinning, and write how sweet she was.

            • Tom Kratman says:

              Do you write your own Satanic speeches or does your boss provide you with a speechwriter?

            • Tom Kratman says:

              Or, conversely, does he have so much respect for your “MENSA-level IQ” (snort…snicker) that he lets you write your own?

            • Patrick says:

              As far as any of you are concerned, glosoli, I do speak for everyone. I’m doing my best not to get you banned, if you don’t appreciate that then you will get banned and it’s no skin off my back.

            • Patrick says:

              The most evil reality is that’s we’re all replaceable. No man, no problem. If you don’t accept the fair justice, then the realities only get worse.

    • Tom Kratman says:

      The actual problem here, Patrick, is that while Koranic (sic) is somewhat delusional, G-spot really is evil. Satan is his guru, his teacher, leader, hero, mentor, and guide. He wouldn’t know Christianity if it bit him in the ass, as, post mortem, I expect it to. The reason he wants me silenced is because a) I can see what he is, and b) don’t mind announcing it.

      • Patrick says:

        Evil is a strong word and it doesn’t really have a place here. Anyone who has seen real calculating evil before knows that this is not that. What we have a disagreement. Disagreements are fine. Let’s hear you all out constructively. If anyone comes along and pisses on your pint then be the bigger man, walk away and let Aeoli deal with it.

        I want you all here. You all add a lot to the thing but at this rate you’re all going to get banned and no one wants that outcome.

      • Tom Kratman says:

        My observations of G-spot, both here and, formerly, on Vox Pop, is that he is, in fact, evil. There aren’t that many people I’d say that of – I could, if pressed, come up with a good word or two for Stalin or Hitler – but Gary-boy strikes me as the Platonic essence of sanctimonious hypocrite, liar, fool, and not mere asshole, but egregious and offensive asshole, false Christian (his theology is unsound; he seems to think there is a fourth person in the Trinity), and all around piece of animate turd. Most of that only makes him unlikeable or despicable, but his suborning of religion to serve his own dark ends pushed him right over into evil.

        I rather regret that my Sinn Fein terrorist grandfather didn’t manage to place a bomb under the arse of one of Gary’s forbears, that the world might not be burdened with his existence.

    • Koanic says:

      I don’t care.

  10. Tom Kratman says:

    Anyway, Aeoli, the problem you face is not merely religious. We are so bad, in so many synergistically reinforcing ways, so many complex ways, so many hidden ways, that no single approach can hope to work. Personally, I don’t think anything short of civil war is going to work, but I can hardly criticize you for trying some less destructive means. God could do it with a word; He choses not to. Glosoli seems to imagine himself in God’s place. Lots of luck following that approach.

    That leaves us in good part on our own and in better part using our own means. But that is ALL OF OUR MEANS.

    I counsel you, earnestly, not to see the issue as simpler than it is and not to see it as more local than it is. It is all of the west….and, frankly, much of the rest, too. it is religious, moral, legal, political. It is memetic and cultural. It seems to me to have acquired a genetic component, as well. It springs from men and women. It is twisted and knotted, maybe hopelessly so.

  11. Tom Kratman says:

    A more pointed issue:

    One has noted, over the course of the decades, a certain amusing libertarian horror at the prospect of using state power to achieve their ends. They’re children, thoughtless children, living in a fantasy. All effective modern revolutions and counterrevolutions use the power of the state to achieve their ends. You want the state reduced or even dismantled? You want society chanegd or changed back? You must capture the state first.

    I sometimes post things that, if one will only think, carry some developmental meanings. That’s underlying my original comment in this thread, though, somewhat unsurprisingly, none of the critics could quite grasp it. You want sexual virtue in society? You must capture the state, for it is the state, more than anything, that has undermined marriage, courtship, the broader relationship between the sexes. Nothing lesser will do. You may do it by war or you may do it by the form of war we call “politics,” but until you do it nothing will work. Once you have done it, however, things like virginity bonuses, using the state’s power, can be made to work.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s