The Obama Administration foreign policy : Exporting moral nihilism and sexual anarchy to the World.



The USA describes itself as a secular country with separation of church and state.
The end result of this status is that the USA forms public policy as though the nation were atheist and this atheism has produced bizarre and crooked thinking.
Because of atheism a dominant philosophical framework for social organisation in the USA is now moral nihilism i.e everything is permissible.
Moral nihilism translates into sexual anarchy and “sexual and reproductive rights”.
“Sexual rights” is a claim to autonomy (the right to do whatever one wishes being answerable only to oneself) and permissiveness.
“Reproductive rights” includes a claim to abortion if one’s autonomy and permissiveness leads to pregnancy.
The above is the philosophical framework for the USA’s foreign policy cultural imperatives. So although data from the Centres for Disease Control (CDC) in the USA indicates that HIV and STIs among MSM have been increasing for the last two decades – see below – the ideological commitment to moral nihilism and sexual anarchy overrides good sense resulting in the Obama administration recently appointing the first US LGBT rights envoy in order to take moral nihilism and sexual anarchy….to the WORLD.


xxxxxx E N D S xxxxxx


AIDS Behav. 2011 Apr;15 Suppl 1:S9-17.
Sexual health, HIV, and sexually transmitted infections among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men in the United States.
Wolitski RJ, Fenton KA.
Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention, National Center for HIV, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton RD NE (E-35), Atlanta, GA 30333, USA.
The sexual health of gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) in the United States is not getting better despite considerable social, political and human rights advances. Instead of improving, HIV and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) remain disproportionately high among MSM and have been increasing for almost two decades. The disproportionate and worsening burden of HIV and other STIs among MSM requires an urgent re-assessment of what we have been doing as a nation to reduce these infections, how we have been doing it, and the scale of our efforts. A sexual health approach has the potential to improve our understanding of MSM’s sexual behavior and relationships, reduce HIV and STI incidence, and improve the health and well-being of MSM.



xxxxx  E N D S xxxxx


A senior diplomat has been appointed as the United States’ first envoy for LGBT rights.
Randy W Berry, who is gay, has been appointed to the senior role within the US State Department by President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry.
He has previously served as Consul General in Amsterdam, and has also had postings for the State Department in Bangladesh, Egypt, Uganda, South Africa, and Washington DC.
John Kerry said: “Randy’s a leader, he’s a motivator. But most importantly for this effort, he’s got vision.
“Wherever he’s served — from Nepal to New Zealand, from Uganda to Bangladesh, from Egypt to South Africa, and most recently as consul general in Amsterdam — Randy has excelled.
“He’s a voice of clarity and conviction on human rights. And I’m confident that Randy’s leadership as our new special envoy will significantly advance efforts underway to move towards a world free from violence and discrimination against LGBT persons.”
Chad Griffin of Human Rights Campaign said: “At a moment when many LGBT people around the world are facing persecution and daily violence, this unprecedented appointment shows a historic commitment to the principle that LGBT rights are human rights.
“President Obama and Secretary Kerry have shown tremendous leadership in championing the rights of LGBT people abroad.
“Now, working closely with this new envoy, we’ve got to work harder than ever to create new allies, push back on human rights violators, and support the brave leaders and organizations that fight for LGBT rights around the world.”
Jessica Stern of the International Lesbian and Gay Human Rights Commission: “The U.S. envoy can contribute to a new era in which the conscience of governments everywhere can be focused on the destabilizing impact of prejudice and abuse that inflicts suffering on millions worldwide.
“Human rights should be a priority for every government in both domestic and foreign policy.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Fighting back against secular – atheist moral nihilism and sexual anarchy


The fool  has said  in his  heart… there  is  no  God”

…… Psalm 14:1……


Having declared  themselves  gods  and  the  only intellects  of  relevance  in  the universe  the arrogant and  foolish  secularists /  atheists  have  declared homosexuality  the  new  black.  It  is not .  

Race conforms  with  design and  purpose  in the universe  and  is a true  aspect  of  diversity. The anatomy, physiology  and  social arrangements  in the  universe are  geared to producing  life.  Race  does  not in anyway  frustrate  this  reality.    

Same  sex behaviour  is pathology  and  does not  conform with design and  purpose  in the universe .  Consistent  with its pathological  status is  that it is  a true  dead  end  and  frustrates the  objectives  of  design and  purpose  in the universe.

Nevertheless  the moral  nihilist  and  sexual  anarchist  among  the  athesists / secularists   fraternity are  seeking  to impose so-called  ” same  sex  marriage” as  normal.

Smart  people  are  fighting  back  against  the nonsense.


xxxxxx E N D S xxxxxx



It’s too late to stop Indiana’s new “turn-away-the-gays” legislation. Governor Mike Pence has signed it into law. But nearly half of the states are considering similar bills, some of which go even further.

If there’s any encouraging news, it’s that passage of Indiana’s bill has generated a significant outrage that could translate into public pressure in other states to water down their discriminatory bills. This year, Georgia lawmakers, for example, seemed poised to pass their own license to discriminate bill, but the bill got tied up in committee last week.

More importantly, Indiana’s example might also apply pressure on businesses to speak out against such legislation, which proved an effective tool in the arsenal against these antigay bills in Arizona last year.

Arizona’s Republican governor Jan Brewer faced enormous backlash from the business community and others when considering signing a similar piece of legislation last year. Apple threatened to reconsider plans for expanding to the state and the NFL publicly worried about effects on the Super Bowl, for example, and Brewer vetoed it. Then a number of states backed away from their own plans.

But the proposals never disappeared entirely, just getting put on the back burner. The states considering “religious refusal” legislation span the country, from Maine to Hawaii. Here’s a full list, according to the Human Rights Campaign:

Western: Hawaii, Nevada, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado

Midwest: South Dakota, Kansas, Missouri, Indiana, Michigan

South: Oklahoma, Texas, Arkansas, Missouri, Tennessee, Alabama

East Coast: Maine, West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida

None of these bills actually come out and identify LGBTs as the target of discrimination. Most are far more subtle: they restrict the state from enforcing laws that “substantially burden” religious expression.

And a handful of states are going even further by removing the “substantially.” A bill in Texas would allow anyone to sue who considers their religious freedom impeded in any way.

Many of the bills are advancing swiftly, with little organized opposition beyond public outcry and press releases. Although the bill failed in Georgia last week, for example, another passed the Arkansas Senate. And after Arizona faced huge backlash last year, Mississippi went ahead with passing its own bill anyway.

Where they’re made law, it’s likely to spark federal constitutional challenges. But that will be a slow and expensive process: first, civil rights groups have to find a compelling plaintiff who has been injured by discrimination. Then the case would need to work its way through the federal court system, likely over the course of years.

And there’s no guarantee of an entirely favorable ruling from the Supreme Court, which recently ruled that Hobby Lobby is exempt from certain laws on the basis of the owners’ religions beliefs.

The “Religious Freedom” bills are part of a larger backlash against the advances of marriage equality. A bill in Oklahoma would promote “ex-gay” camps, and bills would invalidate local nondiscrimination laws in Texas, Mississippi, and West Virginia.

In addition, 12 states are considering legislation that would subject trans people to increased discrimination: Nevada, Colorado, South Dakota, Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Minnesota, Kentucky, Florida, South Carolina, Connecticut, and Massachusetts. Kentucky, for example, was considering a “bathroom vigilante” measure that would issue $2,500 bounties to residents who reported trans people for using bathrooms. That measure was voted down last week.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

RUFF TIMES !!!! $20.00 for Chicken Back Fat.




Chicken Back Fat






Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

UK moving into Gaystapo totalitarianism : Judge tells preacher which bible verses are permitted.



Secular  /  atheist regimes  are  intolerant  of  freedom  of  speech, conscience  and  religion.  

This  is  so regardless  of  the  emphasis  of their  political  agenda.

In communist  countries the  emphasis was  the economy;  in Gaystapo  countries like  the  UK its  “sexual rights”.

The church inevitably comes  into  conflict with  these   anti-free  speech, thought – policing  states.  The  process  has  begun in the now secular  /  atheist  UK  where  a  judge  has  determined  that  certain parts  of  the  bible  may  not  be  used for  preaching.

This  ruling not only indicates  that  separation of  church and  state  is  not  a  reality  in  the  UK    but  also  preachers  may soon have to have  their  sermons  vetted  by  the  UK state


xxxxx  E N D S xxxxx

A Christian street preacher has been convicted of a Public Order offence for using the wrong Bible verse in a public conversation with a man who identifies as homosexual.
But the preacher was acquitted of two other Public Order charges.

Unusual judgment
In a highly unusual judgment, Michael Overd, who regularly preaches on the streets of Taunton, was told by the Judge that he should not have referred to Leviticus chapter 20 to make his point but clearly indicated that he could have used chapter 18 of the book.
District Judge Shamim Ahmed Qureshi found that Mr Overd could have pointed to Leviticus 18:22 which describes homosexual practice as an ‘abomination’ but that reference to Leviticus 20:13 was inappropriate because the chapter refers to the death penalty.
Mr Overd points out that in his use of Leviticus 20 he never referred to the death penalty. “I am being punished for words that never passed my lips,” he commented.

He went on to express his shock that a Judge should adopt the role of Biblical censor, effectively dictating which parts of the Bible are fit for public preaching.
“I am amazed that the Judge sees it as his role to dictate which parts of the Bible can and can’t be preached. I did not quote the full text of Leviticus 20 or make reference to the death penalty but the Judge is telling me that I should use other parts of the Bible. This is not free speech but censorship. The Judge is redacting the Bible.
“I have been ordered to pay compensation for causing ‘emotional pain’ to someone who approached me aggressively demanding to debate the issue. There was no harm, injury or theft, just a simple disagreement over theology which I have now been fined for.
“My motivation for preaching the gospel is my love for Jesus Christ and my deep concern for people who do not know His great love and are heading towards an eternity separated from God.”

‘Unable to recall’
In another highly unusual aspect of the case, a Somerset newspaper reported the Police accusing Mr Overd of “being hostile” to people and encouraged members of the public to record Mr Overd if they felt that he was making “offensive remarks”.
However, a number of the witnesses interviewed in connection with Mr Overd’s case said they cannot remember what was said or when it was said. One of the eyewitnesses, Nigel Marley, said in a statement that he was “unable to recall exactly what phrases he was using, but it was clear to me that it was homophobic.”

Fine, compensation and costs
Judge Qureshi imposed a fine of £200 on Mr Overd and told him to pay a total of £1,200 in costs and compensation.
Mr Overd is supported by the Christian Legal Centre and was represented in Court by Paul Diamond and Michael Phillips.

‘Defending the freedom to preach’
Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, commented:
“Mike is clear that he is motivated by love, not hate. Indeed, this is in line with the message of the Bible.
“It’s clear from the evidence that he has consistently dealt with people’s objections in a balanced and reasonable way. He has explained his beliefs. He hasn’t been aggressive or targeted anybody in particular. The evidence bears all this out.
“Mike’s boldness and his witness to Jesus is remarkably similar to that of the apostles in the early years of the church.

“They were also hauled before the courts to defend themselves for preaching a message of love and truth. They also faced trumped up accusations in an attempt to portray them as ‘disruptive’.

“Now, as then, the disruptive ones appear to be the people who bring accusations, on the flimsiest of evidence, against a man who loves Jesus and loves people. This is why Mike gets up and preaches in Taunton town centre.

“There will always be those who disagree with the Bible’s teaching. But we should defend to the hilt the freedom to proclaim it in a loving way, which is what Mike Overd always seeks to do.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

JE SUIS MIKE OVERD and THE GOSPEL : Restrictions on preaching in Gaystapoland








xxxxxx E N D S xxxxxx

25-03-2015 Archbishop Cranmer356 Comments




There is much to be mocked about street preachers. The world has become intolerant of compact megaphones in the market place, boorishly denouncing sin and declaring the coming judgment of God. And sandwich boards proclaiming that the end is nigh scarcely fit any modern (or postmodern) model of missiological engagement. You certainly won’t find it as a validated mission module in any theological college, except perhaps in the context of the historic inducements and origins of revival.

Street preachers are offensive. They purposely set out to be, for to preach the cross of Christ in the public square is to offend against man-made moral codes and the norms of civil society. To confront the sinner with the spiritual poverty of his petty existence is to invite scorn and insult, if not physical harm. You don’t expect to have your feelings hurt while you’re minding your own business walking through Leicester Square munching on a McDonald’s. But the evangelical irritants persist because they believe they have been called by God to proclaim the Day of Salvation to a lost generation. And time is short.

How successful this model of mission may be is unknown, if not unknowable. It isn’t concerned with numbers of converts or depths of discipleship, but with measurements of sermon duration and literature distribution. If you can last two hours of preaching and hand out a hundred gospel tracts, the Lord has blessed your ministry. If you can engage three people in a conversation and talk about accepting Jesus as their personal Lord and Saviour, the Lord has seriously blessed your ministry. Who knows what seeds have been sown on fertile soil?

The case of Regina v Michael Overd heard in the Taunton Magistrates’ Court on 11th March 2015 is a curious one. Mr Overd had been accused of, inter alia, using threatening language in his preaching against homosexuality on the streets of Taunton, and was reported to the police by a homosexual Christian whose feelings, it seems, had been hurt (he felt “belittled” and “ashamed”). Another passing witness, a Mr Nigel Marley who “was visiting UNISION HQ.. (and) had just done diversity training”, said Mr Overd was “belligerent and angry”, though Mr Marley “did not remember the exact words being used”.

All of which makes the Crown Court Judgment, issued by Judge Shamim Ahmed Qureshi on 23rd March, even more than curious. Indeed, it is an offence against freedom of speech, if not a fundamental denial of religious liberty.

No one will dispute that the Bible says some nasty things about certain aspects of human behaviour. And since, in this pluralised postmodern era, so much of minority identity is bound up with deeply-held feelings of nature and assertions of ‘rights’, to criticise an attitude or behavioural ethic is to offend against someone’s subjective norm or to commit a crime against the spiritual PC zeitgeist. It just isn’t very nice to be told that your weekly binge-drinking leads to damnation; or that having sex with your girlfriend is sin; or that exaggerating your expenses claim is a sure path to hell. Nor is it particularly convenient for homosexual men (or, presumably, women, and undoubtedly, the bisexual) to be told that ‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads‘ (Lev 20:13). Unless, of course, you say it lovingly.

Which is (more or less, though some may demur) what Mr Overd did, for he purposely omitted the second sentence in his preaching, preferring instead to focus on the offence that the behaviour is to God. It is not, it must be noted, his personal opinion on the matter: he is quoting verbatim from the Bible, adhering to a literal, universal and enduring interpretation of the Levitical holiness code. You may not agree with that hermeneutic, but that is for you to take up face-to-face with Mr Overd (or via the comment thread below). As the Judge notes, “As far as (Mr Overd) is concerned, he is preaching the Gospel.” He adds later: “He has clearly not studied religion deeply enough to comprehend it fully but has accepted whatever others taught him about his religion.. He is clearly selective in his arguments and is blind to any negative points in his own religion.” And there is much evidence of this in Mr Overd’s sometimes painfully injudicious and inconsistent responses to cross examination by the prosecution.

But biblical ignorance and theological superficiality are not crimes. Nor is proclaiming that ignorance or superficiality in the public square.

Yet Judge Qureshi insists that if Mr Overd wishes to preach against homosexuality, he may use Leviticus 18:22 (which is identical to the first sentence of Leviticus 20:13), but he may not use Leviticus 20:13 even if he omits the second sentence (ie Leviticus 18:22). This is a bizarre ruling. It seems that the omission of the second sentence does not mitigate the allegation of ‘threatening’ language, because, the Judge says, “the words he did use have to be put into context with his behaviour which the prosecution allege is threatening”. Ergo, to say that God detests a man having sexual relations with another man may be permissible, except when it is broadcast loudly via megaphone such that he may “upset other Christians” (which Judge Qureshi says is the issue). “Informing people of their fate in the Hereafter is not a criminal offence but threatening them in this world is,” he says. The fact that Leviticus 20:13 has additional ‘context’, and that context is threatening “in this world”, appears to transgress the acceptable boundaries of freedom of speech.

This is not a blog apologetic in support of Mr Overd’s preferred model of doing mission. Nor is it any kind of affirmation of his (poor) grasp of the purpose of Old Testament law, or of his (superficial) grasp of eschatological significance of the irruption of God into the world 2000 years ago. Why Christians persist in preaching this bit of Leviticus while (conveniently) ignoring so much more of the holiness code is the 64,000-treasure-in-heaven question.

This blog is, however, a categorical assertion of Mr Overd’s freedom to quote in public from whichever parts of the Bible he wishes, and if people are offended by the jots and tittles of the Word of God, well, that’s just tough. If you believe Mr Overd to be a crank, by all means tell him. But it was the judgment of Lord Justice Sedley in 1999 that people should be free to express such views, and he quoted Socrates and two famous Quakers in his defence of that freedom. He said: “Free speech includes not only the offensive, but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative, providing it does not tend to provoke violence.”

Mr Overd was not inciting anyone to violence, and yet Judge Qureshi has challenged Lord Justice Sedley’s ruling head-on by effectively finding Mr Overd guilty of using threatening words despite the contextual earthly judgment never having passed his lips. Judge Qureshi ruled:

If Leviticus 20:13 is not to be considered as threatening or abusive words, that will be a licence to all and sundry, from the drunkard to the violent extremist of any faith, to use it as a code word without being convicted of a homophobic crime..

Leviticus 20:13 was never quoted in its entirety. But even if had been, it ought not to constitute a public order offence.

And before any readers or communicants speculate on the ethnic influence or possible religious motivations of Judge Shamim Ahmed Qureshi, it is worth noting that he found Mr Overd not guilty of any offence by calling Mohammed a paedophile.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

HIV rates in MSM in New York




HIV MSM New York 2012

HIV MSM prevalence New York

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Bill Whatcott , a hero in the resistance against the “utterly fascist, utterly Stalinist” anti-free speech, thought policing Gaystapo, secularists and atheists.


Bill Whatcott, Anti-Abortion And Anti-Gay Crusader, Has Finished His ‘Ministry’ In Canada
The Huffington Post Canada | By Emma Prestwich

Bill Whatcott


Anti-abortion and anti-gay crusader Bill Whatcott is giving up on Canada.

In a March 10 blog post on the socially conservative site Free North America, the activist writes that his “ministry” in this country is finished and he’s moving to the Philippines with his wife.

“I have pretty much given the last quarter-century of my life to fighting for a Judeo-Christian vision for Canada, especially in the areas of life, sexuality and family. I also fought very hard for free speech and religious freedom for social conservative Christians.”

And Whatcott’s very public activism has literally cost him.

In 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that two pamphlets he distributed in Saskatchewan condemning homosexuals violated that province’s human rights code. He was ordered to pay one complainant $5,000 and another $2,500.

A decade earlier, he was ordered to pay $15,000 and suspended as a nurse for picketing a Planned Parenthood clinic in Regina. However, the fine was overturned by a Saskatchewan appeals court, which found Whatcott was protected by the right of free speech, according to Reuters.

Whatcott converted to Christianity many years ago after living on the street as a drug addict, he told Postmedia’s Tobi Cohen in 2011. He also said he was raped while living at a halfway house and paid his drug dealer in sexual favours.

“It’s a little inaccurate to say I was gay,” he said. “It’s just, if you have no moral boundaries, you can try anything.”

He brought his anti-gay message to the streets of Vancouver last summer by marching in the city’s Pride parade. Registered as the fictional “Calgary Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster,” he and four other evangelical Christians handed out homophobic literature disguised as condoms.

“Seeing as all the pagans were having fun while rebelling against God, we would have fun too, while evangelizing the parade route and winning souls for the Lord,” Whatcott wrote in a post on Free North America at the time.

In his recent blog post, he expressed mixed feelings about the results of his efforts in Canada.

He said he distributed more than 500,000 flyers from 2002 to 2013 but still “failed spectacularly” to prevent gays and lesbians from expressing themselves.

However, he feels more optimistic about his fight for free expression. He writes that he won multiple court cases against the University of Regina and Calgary over the right to preach against homosexuality and abortion on campuses, and appeared at several other universities to challenge “attempts at censorship.”

“On a nationwide level I have certainly had an impact on the course of free speech in Canada.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment