Some guy who attempted to be President a few decades ago, and was allegedly a devout Baptist, believes Jesus would be okay with fags pretending to be married, mainly on the grounds of an old and discredited meme.
What meme legitimizes queers to play house in the head of this regrettably prestigious and senile man you ask?
Oh nothing that important really, other than the whole appeal to what could be called “degeneracy’s expedient social atomism” or, my favorite, “selective absence of negative externalities”.
You see, the only things are can be super bad and mean are the super bad and mean things based on traditional, patriarchal, or biblical values. Things such as defining marriage between a potentially reproductive couple, male spiritual and SOCIAL leadership (yes that rights complementarcucks, the Bible does not envision women, in general, being social/political leaders; patriarchy isn’t the lame ceremonial role simply for dinner or bedtime prayers), or, even worse, possibly even THE worse according to the modern apostle Albert Mohler, believing white people are a biologically defined group that have the right to political self-determination.
These invisible ideas in the invisible minds of certain people, and many others like them, are the only things that can really have very real, very dangerous negative social externalities. Mainly, it would offend the bourgeois sensibilities of the self-styled faggots who pose as the institutional leaders of modern Evangelicalism and Western Catholicism. The problem is that these people make the very real, very dangerous mistake of confusing their socially imputed egalitarian ideology for serious textual exegesis, actual theology, philosophy, or even basic scientific research in the field of genetics.
It would make their anuses pucker up with sorrow; and as we all know, since the 1960’s the Bible is very clear on the hamartiological position of those that are the causal agents in their anal contraction.
H-E-double hockey sticks for these suckas.
With this vague inquiry into the psychology of the modern egalitarian Left, enter Jimmy Carter; peanut farmer, Sunday school teacher, Georgia politician, Sunday school teacher, one term President of the US, Sunday school teacher, humanitarian, fag advocate.
DID WE MENTION HE LITERALLY TAUGHT, IN A CHURCH, TO HUMANS MOST LIKELY UNDER THE AGE OF 12, SCHOOL TO THEM, ON A COCK-SUCKING SUNDAY?
DO YOU EVEN KNOW THIS? ARE YOU INTELLIGENT TO EVEN UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS MEANS?
IT MEANS SOME GUY WHO ACTUALLY BELIEVES (OR USED TO BELIEVE) ENOUGH OF THE WORDS IN THAT ONE BOOK THAT MAKES ANUSES FURROW WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT FAGS, SAYS THAT THOSE VERY PEOPLE CAN ACTUALLY STOP PRETENDING THEY’RE MARRIED, AND ACTUALLY BE MARRIED.
Can you even image? A Sunday school teacher. One SS instructor. Operational decades ago. Sodomites, marriage. Association. Relying upon desperate appeals to a failed authority figure to legitimize heresy.
Can it be true? Let’s let the noted ethicist and theologian, and retied SS officer JC (the second most important one) take it away for us.
Former U.S. President, Jimmy Carter, said that Jesus would approve of gay marriage on Sunday. Speaking on HuffPost Live, Carter explained that the Son of God would approve of such marriages on the grounds that “it doesn’t damage anyone else.” Carter is known for his self-professed deeply-held religious convictions, and has been a Sunday School teacher in his Baptist church for many years. Carter left the Southern Baptist Convention in the year 2000 after that year’s revision of the Baptist Faith and Message (BF&M) because he believed that it treated men and women unequally. The 2000 revision of the BF&M also notated that marriage was between one man and one woman (Chapter 18), something that Carter did not complain about at the time.
Southern Baptists. The Bible. marriage. man and woman. one penis. one vagina? Who the hell invents this irrational genitalia hate? How in the hell did this slip through ALL of church history? Thank God for his hidden purpose in History in sending us this JC to inform us (one could say even “correct”) the first on the definition of such an important institution.
Carter said on Sunday:
I think Jesus would encourage any love affair if it was honest and sincere and was not damaging to anyone else and I don’t see that gay marriage damages anyone else.
Oh rrrly? So you don’t think that the overwhelming association of homosexuality with pedophilia as their means of reproducing, plus their obvious desire to adopt kids to turn them into sex slaves for themselves and other fags, plus the pathological desire and demand to teach those Sunday school age children the process and benefits of sodomy, aren’t really negative externalities? Or, as you put it, “not damaging”?
Can someone tell JC2 that this Jewish meme worked in the 1980’s-2000’s, but it’s done now. No one believes it, either Left or Right. The Left is currently in the process of expanding their blasphemy laws by memeing the new prohibited speech category of “hate speech” into existence because of the cognitive agitation invisible inegalitarian terminology causes them. Presumably, these means words are less substantive than openly practicing sodomites and the aggregation of externalities they have on society.
One probably can’t presume much with these anal types.
Our SS teacher continued.
Carter also said that Jesus would approve of some abortions:
I have a hard time believing that Jesus would approve abortions unless it was because of rape or incest or if the mother’s life was in danger. So I’ve had that struggle. I’ve had that struggle, but my oath of office was to obey the Constitution and the laws of this country as interpreted as the Supreme Court, so I went along with that.
P&P goes on to offer the obvious yet needed basic critique against these startling theological revelations by this decaying stimulus receptor. The main point of this article is to understand the psychology that causes goys to say such deranged things. These retards simply confuse their socially conditioned sentiments for sound theological conclusions, and the main logical tool they use to rationalize this is conflating the approximate soteriological egalitarianism of the New Testament (although there is clearly a patriarchy in the church, dominated by mostly older men) with what is now social egalitarianism.
God’s Word does not change because senile fag-lovers or bourgeois anti-white crusaders don’t like its social themes of hierarchy and exclusivity. Whenever you hear clamorings like this from anyone, take note of the rationalization process they are exhibiting, and simply laugh it off.
Because it simply all it is, the psyche trying to avoid experiencing severe cognitive dissonance. A defense mechanism. Nothing more.