The Gayness of Chad Elliott

Well, well, well!! It has come to my attention that The Atheist Killa (AKA Chad Elliott) has put up a blog post about how the BIG, BAD, SKY-DADDY just HATES those Gay-boys – or at least, what they do in bed with each other; how interesting that this looooong diatribe appeared within days of my post to his Blue House Apologetic group on FB where I hinted ever so subtly that he might secretly want some man-on-man action himself. Talk about obvious!! I mean, the silly little bitch doesn’t even realise that he’s just run up a great, big, Rainbow flag about how scared he is of his own attraction to THE DICK!!

(Sigh) – the poor, wee lad has been so far discombobulated that he has felt the need to post not one, but two tracts outlining what “The Go(o)d Book” says about how very nasty Homosexual sex is (apparently, we’re not allowed to call them ‘Gay’, ‘cause little fish like that word). What’s interesting about that wee fact is that all the other subjects on the blog only get ONE mention – at all. Really, children, it’s just too funny/sad/obscenely pathetic. I put some salt in the wounds, just to see if the little fish will bite. Here they are.

1

Now then, little fish; it seems like Auntie Hellen has gotten up your firm, pert ass with that comment about liking the Gay boys – otherwise, why this completely over-the-top diatribe about how much the God-squad’s rule-book says nasty things about them? C’mon, little fish; you’re not fooling anyone but yourself – HONESTLY.

Take it from Auntie Hellen, sugar-buns; we ALL know what you really want. Every study ever made of those boys who say they just can’t abide the Men of the Rainbow has shown without a skerrick of doubt that their level of antipathy is in direct proportion to their doubts about their own sexual desires – and you are no exception. Judging by this lot, you’re a raving Flamer from way back – and you know it! I guess all those hot, naked bods in the showers gave you a REALLY hard time, huh?

And all those über-macho expressions of male stereotyping? The muscles? The tattoos? The sports jock behaviour? Even the way you flash that beeatch of yours around like some kind of trophy-wife (who you have kids with out of wedlock, which is something your sky-daddy’s rule-book REALLY condemns – I mean, we’re talking the BIG TEN here) – all of that shit just SCREAMS how desperate you are to show that you are NOT Gay; the point being that, if you are REALLY not Gay, why make such a big deal out of it? You’re running scared, little fish, and everyone knows it.

Well don’t sweat it, sweetie; nobody but you gives a rat’s rectum who you hanker after. Just be honest about it, stop trying to make out that your BIG, BAD, DUMMY-SPITTING, SKY-DADDY gives you a reason to deny your true desires, get that tight little, man-craving bubble-butt of yours down to the nearest Gay-bar and get some action – mano-e-mano. We’ll all be a lot happier and so will you.

2

Goodness me! TWO posts about the "evils" of homosexuality - where all the other stuff on here only merits one? You're signalling again, little fish!

Keep this up and even those dumb-ass hetero boys you hang out with will start to put two-and-two together; I mean, for someone who is so dead-set against mixing with the Gay-boys, you certainly spend a great deal of time talking about them. It's looking a little TOO obvious, sweet cheeks.

Now .... about these scribblings from God's word you’ve posted here in your increasingly transparent attempt to hide your true nature. Gen 19: 1-11: the old "Sodom-and-Gomorrah" story is always first cab off the rank; sadly, as an admonition against the actions of man-on-man men it doesn’t hold up. The story does make the point that homosexual rape is a bad thing (after all, that’s what the town-folk where talking about), but it doesn’t specifically mention Gay sex – at all.

The actual attempted offense at Sodom was homosexual rape, probably not precipitated by sexual preference but by the desire to humiliate the visitors, to bring them into submission (a common practice in the ancient world; still present, e.g., among prison populations). The text itself says nothing about a given homosexual orientation or about non-violent sexual behavior; it does condemn homosexual violence in the harshest terms. (Gaiser 1990; wordandworld.luthersem.edu/content/pdfs/10-2_Sex.../10-2_Gaiser.pdf‎)

On the other hand, it should also be noted that Lot – this “good man” God was happy to save – offered his two virgin daughters to the crowd to “do to them as you wish” (Gen. 19:8, same version you use), if they would just leave him and his guests in peace. Tell me, little fish, would you offer up you kids for sex to anyone? For any reason? I guess so, since it seems to be OK with your God.

I’ll get back to you on the other “proofs” you’ve presented here later; right now I’m off to the football ground to hang out with those big, beefy, muscled, masculine boys you so clearly desire. Jealous, little fish?