LBGTFUCKOFFANDDIE

International Asymmetric Biowarfare Correspondent – NOT GAY

Sir Oliver Klosov

We are coming to get you you faggot bastard school teachers messing with our kids minds to transition to god knows what. We know how you did this

The gay-rights movement exists to destroy the First Amendment without having to repeal it. It is the gay-rights movement that has created, and popularized, the following distortions of political speech:

1) The invention of "hate speech." There is no such thing as "hate speech." The very term is a truncation of the term "hateful speech"---and the truncation is significant. Nobody denies that some speech can be "hateful," or express hateful ideas, but the traditional response to "hateful" speech has always been more speech---i.e., engaging with the hateful ideas expressed to show how and why they are hateful, to defeat them in the marketplace of ideas.

"Hate speech," by contrast, is a term used to place ideas outside the realm of engagement---to avoid engagement instead of confronting the offending idea. While the terms appear superficially similar, "hateful speech" is an invitation to engagement, debate, and free thought; "hate speech" is a term used to disengage and suppress opposing viewpoints. The gay-rights movement has used and popularized the term "hate speech" for over 40 years.

2) The false equation of speech with violence. "Baiting," as in "red-baiting," was a common term fifty years ago. It referred to the practice of accusing someone (often accurately) of being a Leftist. "Gay-baiting," derived from "red-baiting," was the similar practice of accusing someone of being homosexual. The gay-rights movement used to decry "gay-bashing"---the once-common practice of people (often gangs of teens) randomly physically attacking persons they believed to be homosexual. About 40 years ago, however, the gay-rights movement began to conflate "-baiting" and "-bashing"---i.e., the movement began to refer to those who verbally disagreed with its political goals of the moment as "bashing" the movement. This subtle substitution of a term denoting physical violence for a term denoting political opposition has since become widespread across the political spectrum, so much so that it is now routine to hear people in the news describe someone who disagrees as "bashing" the person they disagree with.

3) The invention of the "-ophobia" locution. The "-ophobia" locution, as in "homophobia," was invented by the gay-rights movement as an "I'm-rubber-you're-glue" retort to the psychiatric establishment; "You say we're "sick?" You're sick!" It is ironic that the Islamists have adopted this locution ("Islamophobia") along with much of the rest of the gay-rights movement playbook, without objection by the gay-rights movement---even though the Islamists would surely slay the adherents of the gay-rights movement were they to gain sufficient political power.

4) Blurring the distinction between civil rights and "human rights." The gay-rights movement has never been a civil-rights movement; it has always been a "human rights" movement. Civil rights under the Constitution are rights held by the individual against the government, to prevent or provide redress against government overreach; "human rights" are invariably demands by an aggrieved group for some form of government preference or largesse on the basis of membership in the aggrieved group.

The gay-rights movement has been actively working to blur the distinction between civil rights and "human rights" since at least the Anita Bryant controversy of the late 1970s. The reason the movement fought so hard to obtain same-sex marriage is that this provided the movement with its first toehold in civil rights law---and therefore provided the movement with a siege platform from which it could attack other elements of the First Amendment.

5) Distortion of the concept of "discrimination." "Discrimination" is not illegal---indeed, discrimination, the making of distinctions, is a necessary element of day-to-day existence. Invidious discrimination is something that the law addresses---e.g., distinctions that are based solely on race, religion, or national origin. Even these distinctions may be permissible, if it can be shown that they are done to further a "compelling state interest," but that is a very high bar of proof to meet.

Current discourse, however, has degraded "invidious discrimination" to the point where the mere invocation of "discrimination" is considered proof of evil. This is a linguistic and legal distortion akin to the distortion of "hateful speech" to "hate speech." This debasement of the political language may also be laid at the doorstep of the gay-rights movement.

All this has been put in place to codify pedophilia under color of law and it is reaching into our children's minds with LBGT grooming at the public schools/indoctrination centers out of view of parents. Out of view to the point where one such common practice is that educators are told not to refer to students as boys and girls or other gendered terms, and the values of "gender identity" were taught in the curriculum at an age-appropriate level because in 2017, a "transgender and gender-expansive nondiscrimination policy" has been instituted throughout the American schools system.

It is so insidious that schools have "point teams" in which a team of school officials would create a customized gender plan for students in each grade. In fact students are being secretly transitioned while at school without the knowledge or consent of their parents. Schools start by social transitioning then complete a six-page plan behind closed doors, with school officials that included the vice principal, the guidance counselor, and a social worker - all, unsurprisingly, are LGBT. In those six pages were questions about which restroom her daughter preferred to use, which sex she preferred to room with on overnight trips, and even asked which name the school should use when they spoke to her parents and even referring to these groomed children by a different name while at the same time deceiving parents by continuing to use the child's birth name in their communications with the school.

In California the state pays for experimental transgender medical services, such as cross-sex hormones at Children's Hospital – Los Angeles, the location for one of the largest pediatric gender clinics in the country. You miserable fuckers.

You LGBT assholes are fucked up and you can't fix your fucked-upness by fucking up our kids. You can fuck up the rainbow but keep your filthy hands off my kid.

Rest assured that when the revolution starts, you will be the first to be dealt with...the LGBT are enemies of the state.