7 Jun 2023 7:40 am
Well, you have used racist and bigotry language in your reply. Congratulations.Cannonpointer » 06 Jun 2023, 9:12 pm » wrote: ↑ Since I wouldn't let you keep ducking it, you decided to lie about it, eh, Sodomite Chaser? Okay, go ahead - tell your lies, and then I willl quote your leader in the United Anti-Sodomy Brigade, fruitcake.
Huh. Isn't that fraudulently intersting. Say more about that, pants of fire homophobe.
We now know who you are.
So, you praise FDR, then attack him for a policy that was the prevailing attitude at the time, which is presentism, then accuse me of it? You wouldn't have even mentioned it but for my not bringing it up. What, you are such a mental midget that you can't find your own thoughts?
One thing is clear, you are anything but coherent. Your reply is full of contradictions.
What the ****? Your response is all over the damn place, like a squirrel on crack. You accuse me of presentism, but you're the one living in la-la land, thinking your silly ideas are modern and opposition to them is old-fashioned. Well, let me burst your bubble, genius. Libertines and their opponents have been around for ages, way before your precious "mod" era. It's not just some chronological game, it's a timeless battle that's been going on for centuries, and guess what? It's happening right now, in this oh-so-"tony" and "modern" era you love so much.[ truncated due to the 4k character limit:]
No, presentist. You don't get away with dismissing your leader's anti-homo positions as the fault of his ERA, when his ERA followed the Roarin' 20s and coexisted with the Weimar Republic. Men were not more naive in those days. They saw as clearly as we do today the issues that confront humanity and society. FDR was not a victim of his time. He did not have quaint ideas. His anti-homo stance was no tic of his time period. He viewed *** as a danger to society. And you agree with him to some precise extent. Let me remember what you said... Oh, yeah. 100%.
Homophobe.
Now, you bring up the Weimar Republic, thinking it proves your point. Well, guess what? The Weimar Republic was a hotbed of libertinism, pal. They had gay periodicals, political action committees for the LGBTQ+ community, and a swinging sexual liberation that would make your head spin. But what happened next? Oh yeah, Adolf Hitler and his party-crashing buddies ruined the party for everyone.
Now, let's talk about FDR, your beloved leader. You claim his anti-homosexual positions were just a product of his time, a victim of the era. Well, let me tell you something, sunshine. FDR wasn't some clueless fool swept up by the tides of his time. No, he had his own damn principles, and he saw gays as a threat to society. And guess what? You, my friend, seem to agree with him to some extent.
But don't you dare dismiss your leader's views as just a result of his era. No, no, no. His era coexisted with the Roarin' 20s and the Weimar Republic, so don't go blaming the times for his stance. Men back then weren't naive idiots. They saw the same damn issues we see today, and they had the same clarity of mind. FDR's anti-homosexual stance was his own damn choice, based on his own damn beliefs.
So, before you go spouting off about presentism and gaslighting, get your facts straight, buddy. Presentism? That's on you. Gaslighting? That's what you're trying to do right now, twisting the narrative and making baseless accusations. Stick to the damn point and come at me with some real arguments if you want a proper discussion.
I get it now, You're rant, and word choices, clearly mark you as a gaslighter, a liar, a homophobe, a bigot, a racist and a troll.
I got your covers pulled, and you are a text book phony.
Now go pester someone else who has confused you with intelligence.