I can go out and get fucked in the ass by all sorts of people and then go home and call myself a catholic. I can go to church every Sunday and then every Monday I can rape and murder a handful of children while denying the holy spirit.

Hell I can turn to Islam, garments and all, and then when no one's looking I can fuck and eat a live pig while loudly proclaiming my penis to be the reincarnation of Mohammed.

Do you see where I'm going with this?

>>19
It seems thoroughly counterintuitive, but bear with me. If identity is secondary to their personal outlook, intelligent homosexuals make for indispensable allies. The lack of a family unit encourages investment into sociopolitical topics and structuring of personal philosophy. Accumulated equity could potentially benefit the cause since they're likely to will their wealth towards a cause.

Since homosexuals have grown to be a disproportionately strong political force (enabled by our political enemies, of course), turning a blind eye to their plights enables our enemies to exploit their grievances (no matter how petty) and reap all the benefits of their support and productivity. I wouldn't suggest championing the sexualization of children which has its roots in that political menace known as LGBT (for the record, homosexuality ≠ LGBT) to garner support. Treating them fairly and allowing them to take root in the movement will only help.

> turning a blind eye to their plights enables our enemies to exploit their grievances (no matter how petty) and reap all the benefits of their support and productivity.

This, I totally agree with. I'm gay myself, but it doesn't consume me like it does so many others. I'm concerned with the common good, not the public projection of my sexual identity.

>>20
I'm just saying that, by definition, you can't. It'd be like being a nazi jew. Goes against the very idea of National Socialism, at least in the classic sense of the term.

>>22
You probably couldn't be a Nazi Jew, the Nazi Party was specific to Germany and fairly anti jewish influence. You could very well be a Jew National Socialist though as it goes very well inline with the fundamental ideas of National Socialism- an alike people living together under a state built exclusively to advance themselves. This more or less what Zionism is, just with the added aspect of doing it at the disadvantage of everyone else.


And yeah, gays are fine. The problem that much of the homosexual community has is the very fact that it has a community. For whatever reasons, many homosexuals turn something as small and personal as their own sexual preferences into their defining characteristic as a human being. They quit being people who just happen to be homosexual, and turn into this strange sub-culture that can be said to be a form of nationalism in itself. The LGBT Nation. This is of course a natural conflict with real nationalist ideals, and they become like oil and water for anyone trying to mix them.

>20
>I wouldn't suggest championing the sexualization of children which has its roots in that political menace known as LGBT (for the record, homosexuality ≠ LGBT) to garner support.

>NAMBLA [The North American Man-Boy Love Association] is by no means on the fringe of the "gay rights" movement. For years, it was a member in good standing of the International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA), and was only jettisoned by ILGA when the parent organization applied for United Nations consultative status in 1993. Years earlier, the ILGA itself had resolved that "Young people have the right to sexual and social self-determination and that age of consent laws often operate to oppress and not to protect." "

From:
http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/clo/clo_09homosexuality.html

And here are just two of a number of quotes from prominent "LGBT" activists that are found in the article:

"Shame on us if our lesbian/gay voices remain silent while our NAMBLA brothers are persecuted once again, and shame on those lesbians and gay men who will raise their voices to condemn NAMBLA, insisting that boy lovers (and presumably the boys they love and who love them) are not part of this thing called the lesbian/gay community."
- Steve Hanson, "Shame on Us.", Bay Area Reporter, January 23, 1992

A 1992 editorial in the pro-gay San Francisco Sentinel stated,
"The love between men and boys is at the foundation of homosexuality. For the gay community to imply that boy-love is not homosexual love is ridiculous."
("No Place for Homo-Homophobia.", March 26, 1992)

rude

Homosexuality is a net negative for any natsoc society. For a healthy people, there must be healthy people. Homosexuality is based on sexual deviance, it has no goals or advancements like children, homosexuality is 100% based on hedonistic pleasure and pursuit of something they consider love, which is antecedent to national socialism. Sexual sublimination and celibacy is the only correct answer to homosexuality, full stop.

Hey! Works for Israel! Over Half of the IDF are Queer Ass Fucks
(the other half are Blood Fetischists)

Hitler would be Damned Proud of His Chosen Ones!

Without homosexuals it would have been much harder for Hitler to rise to power.

I don't mind homosexuals. They keep to themselves, and I don't see why society should act with disgust towards them.

You see, I see homosexuality as akin to being into bondage and BDSM; It really only matters how far you're willing to take it.

If, after everyone else in the world has fallen asleep, my missus likes to be tied up and gagged, and I like really fucking rough sex and that feeling of dominance, then I don't see how that's hurting anyone, really. If a prominent politician was ousted as heavily into BDSM, I don't see why that should affect how he reacts politically to anything. Maybe you could call me immoral, but seriously, it's a sexual kink. Sex in the missionary position with the lights off doesn't always do it for me. So what's the big whoop?

Same thing with homosexuality. So what Jonathan likes taking Harry's cock down his throat, and likes to cuddle with him and watch movies together and go hiking? It's a sexual kink, mates. You could go out on a limb and say, yeah, maybe some part of their brain or personality is a little queer or off and that causes them to like their own sex. And that'd be absolutely true. It doesn't make them mentally ill; That award goes to some (but not all) transexuals, i.e. the bundle of stickss on tumblr proposing a new gender every other week. Fuck that shit, man, gas those fucks. At least deport them. We don't need that shit in our society.

Now I'm not saying that homosexuality be celebrated, that it is something to be necessarily proud of. I'm not saying AT ALL that we should encourage it; Only heterosexuality should be encouragesd, as it is the norm. However, I would like to think that it should at least be accepted.

Again, the BDSM metaphor comes into play:
I don't think we should be encouraging BDSM, but that doesn't mean that we should exclude kinky bastards from being proud National Socialists. And I'm not even going to bring up the retarded numbers argument, saying that we need every man we can get because we are a dying breed; That thinking is nihilistic, and National Socialism should bring hope for the future. No, I believe we as National Socialists should accept Homosexuals and Kinky people simply because they are our fellow countrymen, and if they have come to embrace National Socialism, then who are we to turn them away?