Increasingly they are the most obtuse and blatantly hypocritical cluster of schizophrenia-minded ass clowns in the known universe.
Maybe (as some claim) it's a generational thing. After all most people under the age of 55 have grown up in a society saturated in Marxism. They have been indoctrinated in it all their lived and from every direction; public schools, television, movies, music and yes, the churches themselves.
However, there are those over the age of 55 who grew up fairly unscathed by Marxist indoctrination and yet have still conformed to the new paradigm.
As a fellow once said, those who build their house upon the sand will see it crumble due to its poor foundation. (nothing condemns Jesus quite like his own words)
Likewise, those who have built their philosophical and moral foundations upon Christian text are doomed to become liars and hypocrites, endlessly contradicting one thought with all those that came prior.
For a brief example, many Christians talk of "free will", insisting that God doesn't want a bunch of mindless robots to worship him. Yet the post-Judgment believers in paradise would be just that if "sin" and the eternal possibility of rejecting God is done away with.
Which brings the point to this fellow in Britain,
A Christian street preacher has been arrested and charged with a public-order offence after saying that homosexuality was sinful.
...
"I felt deeply shocked and humiliated that I had been arrested in my own town and treated like a common criminal in front of people I know," he said.
...
He said he was not homophobic and has gay friends...
...
"If you are preaching hate and calling on people to harm others, it is right that is against the law," he said.
-source
Of course the problem is that not everybody agrees on what the definition of "preaching hate" is.
Essentially this fellow is on the side of the multi-CULTed police state, yet is now shocked to find that that which he supports has come round and bit him in the ass.
The root of all of this is the post 1970's tolerance for miscegenation. Once people began to accept the idea that it was normal for people of different races to marry, homosexuality had its foot in the door.
That is because we all know that interracial mixing is inherently wrong on every level. It is repugnant to our senses and revolting to our core notions of right and wrong.
This is true for everyone. EVERYONE!
Those who claim otherwise are liars.
And since it takes a concerted effort to repress this natural disgust with what our inherent nature tells us is abnormal, it works to deconstruct all natural guidelines which allow us to differentiate between right and wrong, good and evil, beauty and ugliness, love and hate and natural and unnatural.
Just twenty years ago most churches were still uncomfortable with interracial mixing. Today most all (rhetorically) embrace it and, sure enough, are well on their way to embracing gay marriage as well.
THE ONE LEADS TO THE OTHER.
Those who deny that or feign ignorance as to the reasons are being dishonest and hypocritical.
Which leads to the adjoining commentary (at the same linked article above) by Peter Hitchens.
He writes,
Revolutions do not always involve guillotines or mobs storming palaces. Sometimes they are made by middle-aged gentlemen in wigs, sitting in somnolent chambers of the High Court.
Sometimes they are made by police officers and bureaucrats deciding they have powers nobody knew they had, or meant them to have.
And Britain is undergoing such a revolution--quiet, step-by-step, but destined to have a mighty effect on the lives and future of us all.
The Public Order Act of 1986 was not meant to permit the arrest of Christian preachers in English towns for quoting from the Bible. But it has. The Civil Partnerships Act 2004 was not meant to force public servants to approve of homosexuality. But it has.
The Sexual Offences Act of 1967 was not meant to lead to a state of affairs where it is increasingly dangerous to say anything critical about homosexuality. But it did.
And the laws of Britain, being entirely based upon the Christian Bible, were not meant to be used by a sneering judge to declare that Christianity had no higher status in this ancient Christian civilisation than Islam, Buddhism or Hinduism.
But it has come to that this week.
How did it happen that in the course of less than 50 years we moved so rapidly from one wrong to another?
Until 1967, homosexuals could be--and were--arrested and prosecuted for their private, consenting, adult acts.
This was a cruel, bad law that should never have been made. It led to blackmail and misery of all kinds.
Those who repealed it did so out of humanity and an acceptance that we need to live in peace alongside others whose views and habits we do not share. No such generous tolerance is available from the sexual revolutionaries.
Now, as the case of Dale Macalpine shows, we are close to the point where a person can be prosecuted for saying in public that homosexual acts are wrong.
Yeah, gee, who would have thought that the SAME people who legalized and promoted homosexuality in the 60's would continue on with the evolution of their agenda up to this day.
But Hitchens is a perfect example of how Christians are inherently hypocritical and thus compelled to lie to themselves and others.
Just read this article he wrote on the BNP and then compare it to his lament of the treatment of Christians in Britain today.
What about other religions?
The problem isn't so much other faiths but monotheism (Christianity, Islam and Judaism) in general. The Old Testament is literally peopled with despicable and degenerate psychopaths who are held up as hero's (Joseph, Abraham, Esther, David, Solomon etc...).
They all have something in common. They all lie and deceive to gain power over others, and then use that power to terrorize and murder those they've enslaved.
And these are the people upon whose (purported) written works Judaism is founded.
Islam. Nuff said.
Zoroastrianism. Huh?
And the central figure of Christianity went sheepishly to his own death, while his followers went forth to impose a philosophy of surrender (talk about a contradiction) upon as many as they could.
Is this then an advocacy for paganism?
Nope.
It's about using those inherent instincts to make a judgment call and differentiate between good and bad.
Or between bad and worse...
.
