HIS latest act of executive overreach lends fuel to the theory that Obama has a history of homosexual activity. The man is a fag. For who but a pervert would order schools across the country to accommodate “transgenderism” by creating unisex bathrooms? It’s true that this is a recommendation from Obama and Attorney General Loretta Lynch, but it comes with the implicit threat of federal denial of funding.

The bathroom war is deadly serious. It is an attempt to sow confusion and doubt in a place where anatomical differences make the natural order of male and female irrefutable. It is an attempt to corrupt children. It’s motivated by hatred. Sodomites are never satisfied. They must wage war against God.

We are the laughingstock of the world. With all our sophistication and advanced technology, we can’t handle the ABC’s of everyday hygiene. This country is sick, disgusting, lost. Remember that Obama’s perversion is widely supported by corporate America. The choice to be male or female is just one more private want, one more extension of capitalistic consumerism. This decision, this child abuse, has everything to do with profit.

— Comments —

Josh F. writes:

Almost all you have written is true…

Liberalism is the homosexual “nature.”

And then you subvert it all with this inexplicable claim…

“The man is a fag.”

Please think about it.

Laura writes:

If you mean that it doesn’t matter what his own history is, fine. But I think the energy he has devoted to the homosexual agenda suggests a personal commitment to it. In any event, he is ideologically a fag.

Josh F. replies:

The phrase “The man is a fag” is supposed to offend Obama supporters, but it is, in fact, an affirmation of their most deepest desire…

The Man is a fag!

This is wrong because WHAT makes Obama a “man” in the first place?

It would be better to say, “Obama is a fag” and leave the men out of it.

Tim writes:

You are the only presence on the Internet that has called Obongo for what he is, a pervert. Good for you. While everyone else is wringing their hands, you nailed it. I especially like the previous pieces that explain what this is all really about – the sexlessness of society, and thus, more immorality and greater control of the masses. As E. Michael Jones has written, whoever maintains (or destroys) the morality of a culture also controls the culture. When the Church was doing its job, such as the League of Decency, movies were moral and the culture was more or less moral. The Church has abdicated that authority.

Please follow and like us: