Over the Rainbow Revisited Chapter III: The Great Divide

I. Under the Influence

 

On June 26, 2015, a divided Supreme Court ruled that states cannot ban gay marriage. As the result, The United States of America became the 21st country to legalize gay marriage nationwide. From now on, married homosexual couples will enjoy the same benefits and legal rights as married heterosexual couples and will be recognized on official documents such as birth and death certificates. It can be argued that such an important social issue should have been put to vote instead of having five none-elected judges to impose their opinion and personal interpretation of the Constitution on an entire nation, but let’s put aside the argument over the validity of the Supreme Court’s decision and instead focus on the political and social environment in which this decision was made. The ruling happened at a time when America is greatly divided over the issue of gay rights. The latest polls indicate that 61% of Americans support gay people’s right to marriage while 39% oppose it. A decade ago, these numbers were reversed, at that time, 39% of Americans were in favor of gay marriage while 59% were against it. It’s important to note that since 2005, among those under the age of 30 also known as the millennial generation, support for gay rights has grown from 57% to 78%. It’s suffice to say that if it wasn’t for millennials’ fierce support, gay marriage campaign could not succeed, and that leads us to an essential question: Why the millennial generation were so adamant in their support for gay marriage, was their support a result of their free will, or were their perception and emotions manipulated by an ever- expansive, ever-intrusive government, public education system, social network, corporate media, etc?

To understand millennial generations’ support for gay marriage in particular and LGBT rights in general, we need to take a look back at the last decade and consider what has changed in the period of 2005-15. So much technological advancements had been achieved, but one particular invention stands out: The social network, an essential and inseparable component of millennials’ lives. According to a study published by Pew Research Center in March 2015, FaceBook and Twitter are increasingly being used as sources of news. The research found that 63% of FaceBook and Twitter users use the social media web sites as news sources, an increase from 50% in 2013. Across demographics, percentage of millennials who get their news from FaceBook and Twitter has increased from 55% in 2013 to 67% in 2015. Let’s take a closer look, here are some FaceBook user statistics as of June 2015, courtesy of DMR (Digital Marketing Stats/ Strategy/ Gadgets):

 

– Percentage of millennials that Use FaceBook: 91%

– Percentage of all U.S social media users that use FaceBook: 90%

– Daily active users in the U.S and Canada: 161 million

– Time spent on FaceBook per user per day: 21 minutes

– Percentage of U.S internet users that clicked a FaceBook share bottom on blog posts they enjoyed: 26.7%

These numbers demonstrate how vast FaceBook’s digital empire has become in the decade since its inception. With this level of influence and power, not only they can monitor users’ lives on a day to day basis, but they can also collect data and information on each individual, each age group, each race, each social class, each sexual orientation, etc. In an era where information is power, corporations such as FaceBook can and will use their ever-expanding power to manipulate personal emotions and ultimately shape, redefine and redirect public opinions on any and all issues including the LGBT rights.

FaceBook has a long established history of conducting psychological studies on its users. Here are a few examples:

– In 2012, FaceBook researchers, in collaboration with two American universities, carried out an experiment in which they manipulated the news feeds of more than 700,000 randomly selected users to study the impact of “emotional contagion”, or how emotional states are transferred among a group of people, from one person to another. The researchers said the evidence showed that emotional contagion occurs without direct interaction between people and “in the complete absence of nonverbal cues.”

– In March 2013, FaceBook conducted a study and analyzed the factors that predicted support for gay marriage among its users. The research looked at what might influence users to change their profile photo to the red equals sign as the symbol of support for gay marriage. It was revealed that people with more “FaceBook friends” changing their profile photo to a red equals sign were more likely to go through with the change to their profile photo. Eventually, three million people changed their profile photo to a red equals sign.

– In June 2015, FaceBook released a new tool that allowed its users to show support for gay marriage. Founder Mark Zuckerberg announced “The Celebrate Pride Tool” on his personal page following the U.S Supreme Court’s ruling. The tool lets users put a rainbow-colored filter over their profile photo. Within the first few hours, more than one million people changed their profile.

These FaceBook experiments, along with similar experiments carried out by Twitter and other social net work web sites, illustrate how beliefs, behaviors and emotions are being influenced in the digital cyber village of the 21st century and how people, especially the youth generation, are being manipulated like cattle, all the while being under the illusion of having a free will. The once democratic West has become a prison with invisible bars, and the grip is tightening.

 

II. Children of the Rainbow

 

The difference between various forms of dictatorships is how they present themselves. For example the former Soviet Union regime was an overt tyranny that for nearly 7 decades crushed any opposition with an iron fist and never disguised its brutality as something else. What we see in the West today is a covert form of tyranny, the iron fist is covered in velvet gloves, and crimes are being committed under the pretense of preserving human rights (i.e. distributing social justice, providing equality, making progress, etc.) However, dictatorships have many similarities, one of which is their obsession with education system. Any tyrannical regime seeks to guarantee its continuation and survival by investing in children, the future generation, and teach them how to be compliant with the system and how to be obedient and faithful to the regime’s ideology and way of life. They know if they succeed in this endeavor, they will face less challenge and resistance in the future when today’s children are grown up and are entering the work field. That’s why such intrusive programs are being enforced in America’s public schools and children are being subjected to brain washing, couching and sexual initiation. For instance one of the topics studied in public elementary schools is “The Genderbread Person”. The following is an excerpt of this text book:

“Gender is one of those things everyone thinks they understand, but most people don’t, like inception. Gender isn’t binary. It’s not either / or. In many cases it’s both / and. A bit of this, a dash of that. This tasty little guide is meant to be an appetizer for gender understanding. It’s okay if you’re hungry for more. In fact, that’s the idea.”    

This is what they are teaching to children in public schools, this is being done under the pretense of gender equality while the true goal is grooming children for bi-sexuality, queerness and transgenderism and planting seeds of identity crisis and chemical drug dependency in them. Here is an example of what kind of a child “genderbread sexual initiation” will educate: On June 20, 2015, at the New York City Gay Pride Parade, 8 year old Desmond Napoles, dressed in a rainbow skirt and gold sequined cap, danced and twirled alongside half naked gay cross-dressing men, and the crowd cheered for him. The child has turned into an overnight sensation in the LGBT community, and was praised by gay activist, blogger and TV personality Perez Hilton. Here is how Mr. Hilton describes the child:

“There were all kinds of lavish and extravagant costumes and people dancing in the street [on Gay Parade], but perhaps the most adorable and courageous dancing of them all was a little 8 year old boy who came out for the event and strutted his stuff. He captivated and won the hearts of anyone watching all while just being himself and feeling comfortable in his own skin, this boy and his courage to be himself reminds us of what Pride is really about.”

Pay attention to the words this adult gay man uses while speaking about an 8 year old child: strutting his stuff [shaking his ass], winning the hearts, being himself. The assumption that an 8 year old child can choose to be “himself” suggests that he has a good understanding of his gender, sexuality and identity. Although such assumption is neither plausible nor rational, but let’s go along with it and see where it’ll take us. If an 8 year old child can have a good understanding of his gender, sexuality and identity, it can then be interpreted that he is capable of giving consent to sex. One might ask: What if a gay man whose heart is “won” by watching this child in a dress desires to have sex with him? What if the child, “being himself”, submits to that man’s desire? What are the checks and balances to stop things of that nature from happening? This is the reality of the LGBT movement, strip it from its propaganda, take away its grandiose, self-righteous slogans and taglines of social justice and equality, and it’ll come down to power, profit and pursuit of the most destructive, evil and perverse desires. Love is a weakness, lust conquers all, including children, one rainbow skirt dressing, stuff strutting 8 year old at a time.

 

III. Unforeseen Consequences

 

On July 12, 2015, about 1000 parents gathered in a town in Germany to protest the implementation of pro-gay “sexual diversity” curriculum in public schools, and came face to face with an angry, violent group of homosexuals and LGBT supporters who viciously attacked the parents by throwing feces on them. Gays and their supporters then wiped their anuses with pages of the Bible, and threw those pages at the parents as well.

These parents became under such inhuman, shameful and vile attack only because they were concerned about the well being and fair education of their children, because they tended to stop the process of sexual initiation of their children, because they tended to prevent their children from becoming targets of conditioning, collective mind control and pedophilia. In Germany gay people have access to the same benefits as straight people, the right to marriage, partnership and adopting children, joint tax filing benefits, etc. However, that’s not enough, what they truly want is to be recognized not as an equal class of citizens, but as a privileged class, a special class with influence over various aspects of society including education. It is crucial for them to couch, initiate and indoctrinate children into bi-sexuality, homosexuality and transgenderism since an early age in an effort to increase their numbers and expand their reach, and the powers that be support such agenda because the LGBT movement has been beneficial for them in every aspect from increasing their consumer market and profit to opening doors and paving the way for other abnormal perversions from transhumanism to incest, pedophilia and beyond. Allow me to explain:

The first step is the hardest. Centuries of history, tradition and values need to be overthrown and subverted so that out of chaos a new order can be created. For centuries, marriage had been defined as the union between a man and a woman, and homosexuality had been defined as a form of mental illness and biological/social disorder that some were born with and some had adopted through the environment and life experiences, nature or nurture or in some cases both were considered contributing factors in determining sexual orientation. In the mid 20th century, a new movement started in the West and escalated in the late 1960’s/ early 1970’s with the attempt to redefine homosexuality as normal and remove it from the list of mental illnesses. The motive beyond this movement had little to do with regards for human rights and science and was mainly economical and political. The Liberal class realized that by redefining homosexuality as normal, they can argue that seeking equal rights for gay people is some form of pursuit of happiness and social justice, ideas that the majority of people identify and sympathize with. Hence, people will rally behind the aforementioned ideas and will support the Liberal class who promotes such ideas and will vote for them and give them power and control.

Homosexuality was listed as a mental disorder in the journal of the APA (American Psychological Association) until 1973 when a resolution was made which declassified it as a mental disorder and removed it from the APA journal. Since then, ever-expanding Liberal influence among the global scientific academics has blocked and prevented any unbiased, through and scientific research into causes and possible treatments of homosexuality. Instead, the scientific community has resorted to falsifying data, publishing biased studies, discrediting independent reports and downright lying to support and advance the gay agenda, and here comes the next move: Implementation of sexual diversity curriculum under the pretense of gender equality throughout the public schools in Western countries, feeding children lies and suggesting them that they can choose to be whatever gender they want, and if their parents don’t agree with the child’s decision, the government officials will take the child away from the parents, because in any tyrannical regime, children belong to the state, not their family. The rule of parents is to feed children and provide shelter for them, they have no right to supervise the child’s education, that right falls into the government’s jurisdiction.

The first step that was the hardest has been taken successfully, among most people, homosexuality has been accepted not as a form of mental illness and biological/social disorder, but as another form of normal. Hence, it’s time for the powers that be to enforce other variations of “normal” such as bi-sexual children and cross-dressing senior citizens. After all, the assumption is that everybody has the right to pursuit happiness, and the tyrannical government, with help from pharmaceutical corporations, will ensure its citizens will pursuit such right as long as they remain faithful to the system and obedient and don’t question the government’s authority. National sovereignty, family bonds, traditional values, critical thinking, rationale and conscience belong to an embarrassing past and must be abandoned and forgotten, and normal is whatever the powers that be dictate to you. Yesterday homosexuality became normal, today transgenderism is normal, tomorrow it will other things, people must and will have the right to maim themselves, take out functioning and normal organs and replace them with computer chips and mechanical parts, a man can deflower his teenage daughter, and adults can have sex with “consenting minors”. If you think any of these scenarios is implausible and outrageous, take a look around you and ask yourself: A decade ago, could you imagine a private owned business owner would be penalized for refusing to bake a cake for a gay wedding? Could you imagine seeing the picture of Bruce Jenner, an Olympic champion, a father, a grandfather, in a dress on the cover of a fashion magazine, demanding you to recognize him as a woman? Could you imagine public school instructors to couch a male child into believing he’s a girl and threaten his parents to either put a dress on their child and submit him to hormonal therapy or the government will take his custody away from them?

Let’s focus on a disturbing aspect of this discussion: If you think normalizing pedophilia in a society where gay marriage and cross-dressing senior citizens are represented as normal is far-fetched, think again. Today, homosexuality and transgenderism are defined as “sexual orientations”, a step forward from when they were classified as mental illness and/or biological and social disorder. At the time of this writing, there are efforts on the way to classify and redefine pedophilia as a sexual orientation instead of a crime caused by mental illness and/or biological and social disorder, and perpetrators of such efforts are among the same Liberal activists, academics and politicians who support the LGBT movement, and use similar arguments that were used to change the classification and definition of homosexuality and transgenderism. Most of such arguments are built upon the studies of Dr. Alfred Kinsey, a psychopathic sex criminal who is considered a prominent figure among the Liberal class and is credited for revolutionizing human sexuality in the 20th century. In the 1940’s, Kinsey conducted a research into various sexual activities including bi-sexuality, homosexuality and pedophilia. For the pedophilia aspect of his research, he corresponded with a pedophile who reported to Kinsey how he sexually molested a vast number of children including a two months old infant. According to Kinsey, child’s traumatic responses such as crying, shaking and screaming during molestation were indications of orgasm and sexual gratification. Therefore, he concluded that humans are sexual beings from the moment of birth. In 2012, Alfred Kinsey was inducted into the Legacy Walk, an outdoor public display which celebrates LGBT history and pride.

Here are some examples of attempts at redefining and normalizing pedophilia:

-In 2010, Harvard Health Publications announced: “Pedophilia is a sexual orientation and unlikely to change.”

– In 2011, a group of psychiatrists with B4U-Act proposed a new definition of pedophilia in “The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders of the APA”. B4U-Act refers to pedophiles as “minor-attracted people.” The organization’s website describes its purpose “to help mental health professionals learn more about attraction to minors and to consider the effects of stereotyping, stigma and fear.”

– In 2011,Milton Diamond, a University of Hawaii professor and director of the Pacific Center for Sex and Society, stated in a lecture: “Child pornography could be beneficial to society because potential sex offenders use child pornography as a substitute for sex against children.” Diamond is a well known lecturer for the IASHS (The Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality) which is based in San Francisco. The IASHS has close ties with the LGBT lobby groups, and had fiercely advocated for the repeal of the Revolutionary war ban on gays serving in the military.

– In 2013, California Congresswoman Rep. Jackie Speier (Democrat) and a passionate advocate of LGBT rights proposed federalizing a state law prohibiting counseling to change a person’s sexual orientation. The bill defines pedophilia as a sexual orientation that would afford the same rights granted to gays.

– In 2014, the Liberal news paper New York Times published an article arguing in favor of civil rights for pedophiles. The author of the article is Margo Kaplan, an entrepreneurial assistant law professor at Rutgers University and a former lawyer for the ACLU (The American Civil Liberties Union), an organization that has close relationships with the LGBT lobby groups. Kaplan wrote that around 1% of people are sexually attracted to children and they must hide their disorder from everyone they know, or risk losing educational and job opportunities, and face the prospect of harassment and even violence.”

As you see, not only the argument in favor of pedophilia is similar to that of homosexuality and transgenderism, but also the people and organizations that advocate pedophile’s civil rights are the same people and organizations who advocate and support the LGBT movement. As Linda Harvey of Mission America notes, it all ties up:

“The push for pedophiles to have equal rights will become more and more common as LGBT groups continue to assert themselves. It’s all part of a plan to introduce sex to children at younger and younger ages, to convince them that normal friendship is actually a sexual attraction.”

That leads us to a critical question:

Once pedophilia becomes redefined as a sexual orientation and become normalized, what does that mean for the society? Does that mean the pedophiles, like gays and transgender people, are considered a “minority” whose civil rights and liberties are to be protected against the majority? If so, what are civil rights and liberties of a pedophile, and what does that mean for your child?

Draw your own conclusion, but bear in mind that children are the most impressionable and vulnerable members of society, and we are responsible to not just provide food and shelter for them, but also to guide them, protect them from those who seek to mislead them and take advantage of them, and grant them the opportunity to thrive and find their true self on their own, freely, without the adult indoctrinations. This responsibility must be fulfilled by any and all means necessary.

 

 

4 Replies to “Over the Rainbow Revisited Chapter III: The Great Divide”

  1. joeschmoe

    Too much here to even waste energy commenting, but it is amazing we are in 2015 and people are still throwing pedophilia into essays about homosexuality and gay rights. The numbers of men that abuse under age girls is astronomical so it shatters anything you say when you still bring the “gay conditioning = pedo” mindset.

    At the end of it all, people with christian brainwashed thinking believe they should continue to deny people equal rights because 2 or three lines in an ancient text might be interpreted as condemning it. Were it not for the Catholic Church making this one of their mantras 1700 years ago this would never have been an issue. Gay couplings have been around in written human history just as long as hetro couplings; so this notion of “tradition” is nonsense because both are tradition. One group has decided to deny rights to another group; and did so because they were a vast majority and as we know in human history, vast majorities love to push around small groups who are different… whether that be race, religion, sexual orientation, or anything.

    People like this writer, go on about brainwashing and conditioning, without realizing the very reason people in society deny gay rights and freedoms; BECAUSE OF CONDITIONING THAT CAME FROM A RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION. I am only focusing on Catholic as we are in a nation where it is Christians who are fighting it. There are plenty of other religions in the world that do this too.

    And before all you “Protestant” Christians somehow say you have nothing to do with Catholics, the bible you read came from them, the laws and rules were all rooted and preserved by them until people started to splinter off.

    Check your history. Two or three verses written by an unknown author thousands of years ago has been the basis to condition centuries of people to deny rights.

  2. spawn777

    I agree with joeschmoe that there is too much to even bother commenting on, but I will say two things:
    1. The constitution is what it is. If you don’t get how 5 non-elected officials can vote on interpreting the law, then read it, and it will tell you.
    2. What the hell do the millennials have to do with the price of beer? They didn’t vote on the issue. And since you start off complaining about the justices voting without the will of the people, its hard to understand why the will of the millennials has any bearing whatsoever and why you claim its so important.
    I lied, one last thing: “Why the millennial generation were so adamant in their support for gay marriage, was their support a result of their free will, or were their perception and emotions manipulated by an ever- expansive, ever-intrusive government, public education system, social network, corporate media, etc?” This doesn’t have to be a big conspiracy, it can simply be complementary conditioning like we’ve seen with women’s rights, civil rights, etc. I’m sure there was a document like this decades ago, wondering where all of the good will toward slavery had disappeared to, or wondering who was giving these women all these crazy ideas that they needed their own vote. You can cast them as dark forces warping our thinking, but its just as likely people getting on board with an idea long overdue.

  3. LurkingReader

    “At the end of it all, people with christian brainwashed thinking believe they should continue to deny people equal rights because 2 or three lines in an ancient text might be interpreted as condemning it. Were it not for the Catholic Church making this one of their mantras 1700 years ago this would never have been an issue.”

    Lol…way to validate what you’re trying to refute.
    If as you propose the Catholic Church were responsible for denying equal rights via brainwashing then the social media premise is validated.
    Second the USA is the only country where ‘equal rights’ is the ideal and of course a Judeochristian mindset.
    Third long before the ancient text which was accepted three hundred years prior to your assertion there was the Judeo creed which still to this day denies women equal rights.

    As for the post it is too long for this site’s general readers. It’s also shaping up well as chapters to a well researched book that will sell well in religious circles. My experience with the Catholic Church is that the conference organizers where books of this nature gain foothold will reject it as a feature option because the author isn’t a good speaker candidate. On the other hand the book will make its through the smaller denominations where charismatic preachers will pitch it via their pulpits and social media followings.

Leave a Reply