Christina here…

I discovered this message board, THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY, which at first glance appears to be a badly-designed little corner of neoconservatism. Appearances deceive, however, as the board boasts over 250,ooo posts.

Here, have some of their more telling forum names:






AYN RAND/JOHN GALT & Ayn Rand’s Ideas: An Introduction


I found quite a few rather interesting posts about the “homosexual agenda“.

1. Obama directs State Department and US agencies to force foreign countries to support international homosexual agendaual agenda!

The Obama administration has announced that it is taking the unbelievable role of pushing the homosexual agenda around the world and punishing countries that don’t comply.

Back in July, MassResistance reported how the Pakistanis angrily denounced the US Embassy’s open homosexual parties as “cultural terrorism.” Well, that was just the beginning.

The White House website announces Obama’s new worldwide LGBT directive.

Now, foreign countries which seek to protect their citizens against homosexuality and the homosexual movement will be actively confronted by America’s State Department, foreign service, and other federal departments, according to a Presidential Memorandum released by the Obama Administration announced on Dec. 6.

Mirroring the homosexual lobby’s (and the Left’s) traditional tactics, Obama is characterizing this as a “civil rights” quest for homosexuality and transgenderism.

Take another look the list of federal agencies involved, and the vehemence of the Obama administration on this. Make no mistake about it. This will lead to increasingly brutal oppression against people with traditional values both in America and around the world.

Not wanting to be killed for being queer is “an agenda”?

The author actually frames a policy of not wanting countries to kill gays for being gay as “brutal oppression against people with traditional values”.  My brain hurts now.

Anyway, I thought you guys might like to check out this message board, maybe head over there and offer a differing perspective?

Learn more about Christina and follow her @ziztur.

About christinastephens
  • fastlane

    Boards like that are known to be quick to ban people with dissenting views (read: Functional brains).

  •!/Erulora Erulóra Maikalambe

    The author actually frames a policy of not wanting countries to kill gays for being gay as ”brutal oppression against people with traditional values”.

    Killing people they don’t like is a traditional value for theocrats.

    • JT Eberhard

      Oh….that was good. :)

      •!/Erulora Erulóra Maikalambe

        Why thank you! I just wish I was wrong.

  • ILA

    Fundies definition of persecution: When you try to take away the stick that they are using to bang someone on the head with………Makes sense.

  • Rory

    On the contrary, seeing things like this convinces me that people with traditional values aren’t being oppressed nearly enough. Maybe if they experienced some actual hardship they’d make more of an effort to pull their heads out of their asses.

  • smrnda

    I’d also like to know how these people reconcile their religious beliefs, based on the Bible and Jesus, with the me-first philosophy of Ayn Rand. I tend to find most of these folks aren’t smart enough to experience the cognitive dissonance that should cause. Jesus says “love your neighbor” and Rand says “fuck your neighbor” and somehow they think both say the same thing.

    Also, if these people trust in God so much, why do they need all the guns? Won’t God help them?

  • carpenterman

    Is it my imagination, or has “homosexual agenda” become something of a catch-phrase for the far right to describe any social policy they don’t like? (That is, any thing post-dating 1950 and to the left of Lester Maddox.)

  • Aliasalpha


    Well that’s my new word learned for the day. What in the name of Christopher Lee’s third nipple does it mean?

    • John Horstman

      Based on usage and the close-to-standard use of a standard English derivational morpheme (/-al/, I’m not sure where the “u” came from; standard usage just prescribes the use of the noun form as an adjective unchanged, as any English noun can be used as an adjective – for example, in the phrase “agenda item”, often used instead of the Latin singular “agendum”), I’d say it’s intended to convey, “of or relating to agenda”. Of course, that’s also pretty redundant, like saying “windy wind”.