1. XDel

    XDel Author of Alien Breed: Projekt Odamex

    Jul 25, 2012
    United States
    Here is my stance on the whole subject. What you
    do in your private life should be your business. I​
    live in the states and it pisses me off that our​
    grandparents here were lied to and issued a Social​
    Security card on the good faith that it was only a​
    temporary means to help them out of the (seemly​
    premeditated) economical collapse and promised​
    that it would never be used as a means of public​
    identification or for keeping tabs on your person,​
    wealth, health, activities and what not. Now we​
    live under the eye of an empire who has it's nose​
    is every aspect of your life and who's media is​
    constantly present to bombard your sense with​
    propaganda, double think, and persuasions of all​
    manner, and most of those are not necessarily in​
    place for the benefit of the individual, or by the​
    will of the various social collective that make up​
    the whole. We are offered brand A, B, or C, and​
    the rest are dismissed, thrown out the window,​
    ignored, and forgotten.​
    That being said, this whole issue with "sexual​
    freedoms". America, like any other conquered land,​
    may not have the brightest and most cheerful​
    history. Being part Shawnee and Cherokee, and I​
    can say that I had a keen interest growing up in​
    regards to what both (actually there are usually​
    more than two sides, but anyhow) sides of the​
    story are. A great deal of American history, and​
    the history of European Colonization (the spread​
    of the proverbial Rome) in general, has to do with​
    controlling the mind set of the masses, getting​
    everyone on the same general philosophical page​
    and moving together with the same general vision,​
    towards the same general goal. Hence the reason​
    nearly all of the pure blooded natives of this​
    land, Mexico, South America, and Canada are now​
    extinct, along with their various social,​
    cultural, and spiritual spirit. What ever stands​
    in the way of progress must be either assimilated,​
    and if that is not possible, then destroyed and​
    made a new.​
    Mind you, not everyone is a mindless drone​
    subservient to state and media influences, and​
    there are many cases (most untold) in regards to​
    fellowship found between the natives, the​
    Africans, and those who moved here to the Americas​
    to start a new life (for better or worse). One of​
    face of those bonds was found in each culture's​
    deeper spiritual beliefs, values, and practices.​
    Mind you I am not talking about a specific system​
    of religion but am referring to the individuals​
    personal religious experience and how it worked in​
    a synergetic manner with their new found friends.​
    Something many of these folk found they had in​
    common was their humbleness before their Creator​
    (the mystery of mystery), a respect for The​
    Creation, family/tribe, society, and our selves as​
    individual gods (Psalm 82:6). Mind you, not​
    everyone is so noble or as true on the inside as​
    they are in the public eye, but for now I am​
    referring to those cases who were noble and did​
    rise above racism, cultural stereo typing, ego,​
    and so forth.​
    It is in fact many people of this or a like​
    manner (well in regards to protecting the sovereignty of family/tribal unit and it's personal values anyhow) who the media began to cater to when it first began to become wide spread. In the early days, I.E. the 19th century, most Americans of all age and sex were very literate and celebrated their most well known authors as we do rock stars​
    or TV celebs.​
    In fact it was the likes of Charles​
    Dickens who helped remold Christmas into what it​
    is today (after it's dark sexual history, and it's​
    many years of being banned by Christians them​
    selves). The public generally gravitated towards​
    media that reflected their aspirations. When radio​
    shows became all the rage, again the majority of​
    the radio shows reflected the personal desires and​
    aspirations the public at large. The same goes for​
    Tell-lie-Vision in its early years. The media​
    giants had to play it safe in those days, if they​
    did not cater to the public, then they would have​
    no audience, no one to listen, no one to read, no​
    one to watch.​
    The thing is though that the media is very​
    subversive, just as any movement can be,​
    Communism, Socialism, Democracy, Totalitarianism,​
    Technocracy, and so on. They have a way of​
    convincing the public that they stand for​
    everything other than what their actions say of​
    them, and have a way of creating false boogie men,​
    false impressions, etc. They can take a totally​
    isolated incident and the next day have half the​
    world convinced that it is happening everyone, in​
    the same context, for the same reasons, and with​
    the same mental/emotional attitudes. It has the​
    subversive power of turning brother against​
    brother, sister against sister, and wife against​
    husband and so forth.​
    One technique the media, or anyone who is in the​
    business of generational conditioning and social​
    engineering uses, is the taking of people's baser desires, and amplifying them. Desire, Anger, Lonliness, Confusion, etc., amplifying them and injecting them with a boost. At first subtly, then gradually, bit by tiny bit, in larger proportions.​
    This is in fact the very methods used by the Communist party to incite anger and a competative slant in women against their male counter parts. They women were harolded as being equal (which we all are in our own different ways), but not in a loving, compassionate, tolerant way, but with more vice and guile. This in turn turned wife against husband, and husband in against wife. This newly developed friction was then used to encourage the woman into the work place with them men and left the children left in the hands of the state educators and state media who in the end raised them.​
    The same thing took place in the early 20th century. As economical changes were put into place within the States, many women had no choice but to abandon the home/nest and assume a role in the work force in order to make ends meet. In fact children were used for this purpose to, but we outlawed that making child labor only acceptable when conducted across seas (out of sight out of mind).​
    Later in the mid 20th century the likes of Gloria Steinman and others arose to inject a false indoctrination into women's literature and provide them with a largely distorted history, and a sense that the healthy family unit as it existed was now a threat to their personal ambition and desires.​
    Free sex (without responsibility or consideration for the welfare of the offspring) was injected into the social consciousness with the hippie movement, then became a philisophical point in our modern Darwinian House Hold Programs like Oprah, Ellen, and Dr. Phil.​
    I have seen all three shows run programs stating that it is every male's "natural" urge to mate with as many women as possible. That it is part of our animalistic drive and part of what makes us who we are ultimately. They then went on to point out that in most relationships, the male eventually cheats that that the woman would be ahead to find a close female friend to bring home to their husband in order to bring stability to the family unit and keep her man at her side.​
    This of course is suggestive of homosexual activity, and encourages the male to want his cake and eat it to, regardless of the emotional and mental impact it may have on him, his children, or his wife.​
    Then of course the whole homosexual within the media seems to chant the phrase that everyone is merely coming out of the closet now so late in time because we are socially evolved enough that they finally feel safe enough to do so.​
    Well if you watch any movie, nearly any TV program, or listen to today's music, especially that within the world of pop which used to be considered safe and neutral, merely for fun and dancing; you find many provocative and often times contradicting songs in relation to sex, passion, love, marriage, devotion, promiscuity, and of course, homosexual experimentation, especially with the girls. Young teen girls can't seem to get enough of Katie Perry's I Kissed a Girl...​
    Again this movement if based upon an exaggerated history, smoke and mirrors, making islated incidents apply to all, and so on and so forth all in the name of creating a martyr, an underdog, a victim incapable of malice or mischief for everyone to feel sorry for whilst feeling guilty them selves.​
    The funny thing about history though is that if you look at humans and their vices, vices being what ever is socially taboo at the time and place; humans will do what ever it necessary to get their way, and they have no shame when it comes down to it. Take prohibition for instance. Alcohol was put in a very bad light in the early 20th century and people were looked down on for drinking as pot smokers generally are today, but regardless, people rose up and fought for their right to drink. The same goes for opium, slavery, public orgies (read Greek, Roman and the Catholic/Christian history that stemmed from that), and so forth. Yet, ironically, there was no homosexual revolution ever.​
    Not till the mid 20th century. There were no slave homosexuals, they were not segrigated, and in fact, it was not a thought on many people's minds. I know the thought never dawned on me till I saw it reflected in the outter (not inner) world. Granted, not everyone is the same, some people are led to different original thoughts than others before they are exposed and therefore influenced by the outside world (which happens too quickly anymore), but still, this was a very small group and generally it stems from people who were raised in a broken home, were molseted, etc. etc. As psychologists were once at liberty to make note of, the compassionate, non-biased ones of course, not those who tended more to create a philosophy that conformed to their personal views.​
    Either way, it don't matter now, the world of Psychology was forced to alter its books for the sake of not offending someone by suggesting that their homosexual tendencies may have roots in events that transpired sometime after their birth.​
    Anyhow, my point to all this is is that while I do not agree with this video, these people should let others live how they want to live and just learn to be brothers and sisters to them as best they can....​
    ... I also see a culture that was once predominantly courteous when it came to dealing with sexual powers and relations between the two sexes, and who also valued the sanctity of the family unit as well as it's privacy...​
    ...invaded by a media whose motives have been subvserive, and who's intentions have noting to do with the culture, needs, or desires of the majority who they broadcast to. War time amongst other things have divided us, shaken us up, caused us to doubt, fluster, and desperately seek solace in everywhere but where our family or tribal ancestors saw best fit for use to seek in regards to mental/emotiona/spiritual equilibrium. Is it any wonder that everyone is at odds with everyone else anymore, that no one knows what they are talking about but all assume to know it all, or that no one can hold a marriage together or raise healthy happy kids? Well amost anyone, there are still a few who shine in the darkness.​
    I dunno, I'm tired of typing so this ends my rant for the day. Peace! ;)
    The media's selling you more than just products apparently, they are selling you a mind frame.​
    Engert and geoflcl like this.
  2. Lilith Valentine

    Lilith Valentine GBATemp's Concubus™ The Moody Enby

    Sep 13, 2009
    That has actually been tried and really no side wants that. It goes under the idea of "separate but equal," which doesn't even sound that promising on paper.
    If anything marriage not only predates Christianity, but really isn't just exclusive to them. So allowing them to have it is only a slap in the face of all those who aren't part of the Christian faith.
    In reality the Church really only acts the middle man between the marriage contract with the state and two people getting married, but people can get married outside of the Church. Most chose not to because most churches only recognize marriages not done by them.
    The state allowing homosexuals to marry doesn't mean the churches are forced to do them nor forced to recognize them, why? Because of separation of Church and state.
  3. ShadowSoldier

    ShadowSoldier GBAtemp Guru

    Oct 8, 2009
    Dammit Ga...wtf how do you come up with a nickname for you? Gah-ey? Makes me think of Ben Chang saying GAAAYYY

    Anyways, there's no video showing on that url. I love Colbert, but damn, no video. Could be because of Comedy Centrals hate towards our awesome bacon and beer and free health care though.
  4. Gahars

    Gahars Bakayaro Banzai

    Aug 5, 2011
    United States
    Ga-horse could work. Gay-hars also. Ga-hard, if you're into that sort of thing.

    I think that's the reason. Your bandwidth just can't handle our freedom, fireworks, and fried food.
  5. J-Machine

    OP J-Machine Self proclaimed Pog champion

    Aug 25, 2011
    True enough. I'm probably just biased since I don't believe in marriage as I feel organizing a celebration for a declaration of love seems a little too extravagant an act for such a humble and pure emotion.

    I don't care if others do want marriage and will support their cause if asked to but unless my significant other (Whomever that may be) wants to get married, I wont pursue it myself.

    I also apologize in advance if I upset anyone with my comments. that is not my aim.
  6. dj4uk6cjm

    dj4uk6cjm GBAtemp Fan

    Nov 23, 2012
    United States
  7. yuyuyup

    yuyuyup GBAtemp Psycho!

    Apr 30, 2006
    United States
    These ads exist because of our corrupt campaign financing rules. The money to air those commercials is gathered from a PAC (Political Action Committee.) These "PACs" act as a middleman between corporations and campaigns in order to skirt the little amount of regulations that exist. If you don't like seeing ads like this, then fight for campaign finance reform.

    Which corporations would be anti-gay anyways ? How about the Cr*stian Church profiting off of the word of God ? OOPS can't offend the dear blessed Cr*stian Church aka GBATEMP.NET report this
    dj4uk6cjm likes this.
  8. marcus134

    marcus134 GBAtemp Advanced Fan

    May 7, 2011
    What you're describing is just a difference in culture between the US and Canada.

    The idea that "somebody's freedom stops where others freedom starts" (french proverb) is part of Canadian culture and that is why we don't see the same kind of message this side of the border. People just don't go out and say ugly stuff in public because it would be offensive to others and the last thing we want to do is hurt somebody when expressing our opinions.

    See what I mean:
    the backside of that mindset is that some thing don't debated in public in full depth because of the ugly things that may be said like the ethnic minorities rights debate
  9. I propose that to solve this homosexuality problem, we create a separate "Gay America" so the rest of us folks can live in peace without to having to witness such vile sins.

  10. Alexrose

    Alexrose Untitled

    Jan 20, 2009
    @XDel: Wtf is up with your post, what resolution is your browser running at, 640x480? Why would you hit return at the end of every line? It already loops. Derp.
  11. pyromaniac123

    pyromaniac123 ส็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็(ಠ益ಠส็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็

    Sep 24, 2011
    I first thought by the thread title that you meant you hate ads on national television.
  12. Coltonamore

    Coltonamore Time to stop Tron Bonne!

    Sep 22, 2011
    United States
    I hate ads. They piss me off.
  13. Eerpow

    Eerpow *swoosh*

    Sep 14, 2009
    ^ thought you were prowler for a second there
  14. Guild McCommunist

    Guild McCommunist (not on boat)

    May 6, 2009
    United States
    TBH this is what I thought the whole topic was about.
    koimayeul likes this.
  15. Fishaman P

    Fishaman P Speedrunner

    Jan 2, 2010
    United States
    This definitely isn't normal for American TV.
    The only time I've seen this type of thing before is when Rick Santorum was running campaign ads.
  16. alex_0706

    alex_0706 darknessblade

    May 8, 2010
    everybody does hate them
    even on sites there are those anoying tabbs ( a biiiiiiiiig friendly download button this is spam, scam, virus, malware.)
  17. willebug

    willebug Member

    Jan 12, 2013
    United States
    I wonder how big the argument would be if getting married didn't afford any benefits? That aspect is part of the DOMA lawsuit. If getting married just meant you now have to be miserable with your spouse I'm not sure that everyone would be rushing to the courthouse to sue so they could get married. Tax breaks and things of that nature are used to control the masses and their behavior here in the states. I'm sure elsewhere as well. They encourage people to pump out kids regardless of the circumstances. They encourage you to buy a house regardless of whether you can afford it or not. They encourage you to incur college loan debt. Simplify the tax code and stop making us fight each other over stupid shit.
  18. narutofan777

    narutofan777 GBAtemp Advanced Fan

    Mar 27, 2010
    this wat happenz wen u live in a country w/ a bunch of christians.

    but hey at least people can do it in a safe way. as in...at least no1 is gonna get death by stones like dem crazy pplz in the middle east for speakin' their opinions.
  19. smile72

    smile72 NewsBot

    Sep 23, 2010
    Nope, National Organization For Marriage is basically a hate group, they don't want marriage, civil unions or really anything legal for same sex couples.
  20. dickfour

    dickfour Banned

    Jun 20, 2011
    United States
    The purpose of marriage is to perpetuate the human race. The notion that marriage is for any two people who wish to get the government's stamp of approval is less than 20 years old. Lets face it homosexual marriage is not the same and it's not equal. Yeah I know it's all about love and you can't deny people love but yes you can.A big fat government that can pick my lightbulb, the car I drive, the size soda I drink all for the good of the collective can absolutely decide this is the type of marriage they recognize and sanction. In fact they've been doing it since the founding of the nation. Besides if we don't put a special emphasis on the perpetuation of the species who's going to pay for all the big fat government entitlements? Who's going to take care of the aging population? I guess we can put them down when the time comes or maybe gays will be able to clone offspring putting them on equal footing with hetero couples
Draft saved Draft deleted

Hide similar threads Similar threads with keywords - television, national,