The latest example comes courtesy of Marxist and feminist Naomi Wolf. The thesis of her latest book is that Occidental Culture has a history of violently censoring differing forms of love in order to preserve the supposedly oppressive patriarchy. (When reading differing forms of love, understand that this is feminist double-speak, meaning fornication, adultery, homosexuality and other forms of sexual deviancy.) There’s just one problem: it’s all based on a gross misreading of history.Continue reading
The reader may or may not know the name Israel Folau. I certainly didn’t until a few days ago. He’s a professional rugby player who’s suddenly been deemed unfit for employment. His violation? He posted a message for adulterers, homosexuals, thieves, atheists and the like through his Instagram account: repent, believe in Christ and be saved from Hellfire. If the reader is well versed in the modern socio-political scene, he will accurately presume that such a message wasn’t well received by the militant-homo-lobby and its vanguard. However, what if I were to tell you, dear reader, that another unexpected group also proceeded to rebuke Folau for simply communicating Biblical Truth – namely, conservatives – would you believe me?Continue reading
During a segment on NBC’s Meet the Fake Press with Chuck Todd, militant sodomite, mayor of South Bend, Indiana and, unbeknownst to me until now, Bible teacher Pete Buttigieg pontificated on why Biblical Christians ought to wear dunce hats for supporting Donald Trump during the 2016 election. It was a perfect display of absolute charlatanism, exceeded only by Satan’s failed attempt to tempt Christ. An explanation is in order.Continue reading
Important Note: After we finished the livestream, we were informed by YouTube that the second half of the video version of the podcast has been blocked due to a copyright claim by iTV, the network that transmits Good Morning Britain. We believe this claim to be suspicious in nature, due to the fact that we are not making money from the clip and only used it for the purposes of commentary – a right reserved according to copyright law. We are disputing the block and are hoping that the video will be made available to the public soon. In the meantime, the audio version of the podcast is still available above, through the iTunes Store and through our account on SoundCloud.
Description: In this edition, we continue to examine how militant homosexuals achieved widespread acceptance of their depraved practices and how Christians can combat said tactics in order to protect their hearts and minds from such a subversive propaganda.
Historically, toleration has been understood to mean different things within two particular contexts – one personal and one political. In a personal sense, a tolerating person is said to be an individual that valiantly resists bad times and evil influences. In a political sense, toleration has meant that society as a whole permits ideological differences within itself with the implicit understanding that no harm should come to those that express differences of opinion. Both definitions have been contorted into a newfangled and pernicious notion that reeks of malicious intent. Continue reading
At the outset, let’s address the caged cat: Ms. Lahren is heretically wrong on abortion and in contradicting her own statements on the matter proves she’s either a publicity-seeking opportunist or genuinely had a fascinatingly quick, Trump-like change of heart. I highly doubt the latter and I’ll explain why. But let’s scrutinize her recently announced posture on abortion first. Continue reading
Can anyone explain what a right is? I suggest we disallow any further activism ensuring any other special interest groups achieve the “rights” they continue to demand, until someone properly defines the meaning of the word.
Why does the reader think that most will not bother to ask the question or to define the term? Please remember that groups such as militant homosexuals and abortion-crazy feminists have used the expression inaccurately in order to achieve special privileges and consideration, not true equality (which they already had, under the law, to begin with). The very reason these demagogues do not bother to explain the term is because the definition contradicts the ends they seek. Continue reading