‘Approve legislation that prohibits sharing with minors any content portraying homosexuality or sex reassignment, something supporters said would help fight pedophilia but which human rights groups denounced as anti-LGBT discrimination.’
This is the sort of measure that you’d expect sodomites and their fellow walking abortions to be all for precisely because it would provide evidence for what the psychologist Glenn Wilson wrote about in regard to the origins of homosexuality in his epoch-making book ‘The Great Sex Divide’. In other words, the fact that there is probably some kind of ‘gay gene’ (or rather combination(s) of genotypes that allow a ‘gay phenotype’ to be expressed in certain situations) and sodomites are less the product of issues of hormone imbalance, socio-cultural homosexuality and sexual abuse but rather nature.
Yet the fudge nudgers aren’t too keen on the idea – in truth the anthropologist Roger Pearson described in his 1997 book ‘Race, Intelligence and Bias in Academe’ how homosexuals have long been rather… well… confused about whether they should be pro the idea of a ‘gay gene’ (because it could be eliminated via selective breeding aka eugenics) or opposed to it (which renders homosexuality purely into the realm of choice and thus proves Christian anti-sodomite arguments correct) since at least the mid-1990s – probably because they realise that the natural level of homosexuality in human societies is very low (Wilson estimated it around 2-5% of current homosexuals) and without societal pressure to be homosexual or to have homosexuality as a viable ‘alternative lifestyle’ for economic reasons (no kids, no wife, lots of random sex potential and more time and resources for your career) then you’d eliminate most current homosexuals as… well… homosexuals.
This then makes sense of both why homosexuals are so strangely adverse to the idea that they shouldn’t be trying to ‘normalise’ – which is code for ‘promote’ as ‘normalisation’ would just be putting it out there as a choice and not actively ‘discriminating’ against it not having men in drag forcibly read stories to little children – homosexuality to young children or teenagers precisely because if homosexuality is more innate than a ‘lifestyle choice’ (which is the mainstay of nearly all pro-homosexual arguments) then that would naturally come out anyway if you simply don’t discriminate against it. In much the same way as there has always been a natural level of homosexuality in human societies regardless of it being actively repressed.
The irony in the sodomites shrieking about Hungary – which included the jews over at the so-called ‘Hungarian Free Press’ getting histrionic about Hungary having a ‘QAnon Government’ (= ‘Far Right’ = ‘Nazi’) as well as the jew Abraham Vass claiming there were ‘loud protests’ (one wonders by whom given it was voted into law 157 to 1 although Voice of America all but admitted the only ‘Hungarian’ who protested was the Mayor of Budapest Gergely Karácsony as all the others listed weren’t Hungarians or even in Hungary) while ‘Portfolio’ claimed that sodomites are the ‘new migrants’ as a ‘victim group to blame’ for Hungary’s problems – is precisely that they actually admit that the critics of the homosexual lobby and those who argue that homosexuality should be reclassified as a mental illness are right precisely because the sodomites themselves act like if they don’t promote homosexuality then it will largely disappear in societies around the world.
Naturally the ‘Los Angeles Times’ has two Hungarians named Balazs Pivarnyik and Bela Szandelsky claim in an opinion piece that:
‘All other opposition parties boycotted the voting session in protest. Human rights groups had denounced the measure strongly, saying it was wrong to conflate LGBT people with pedophilia. They argued that the law could be used to stigmatize and harass residents because of their sexual orientations and gender identities.’
In other words, according to Pivarnyik and Szandelsky the ‘Hungarian Opposition’ (read jews, gypsies, non-Hungarians, leftists and horny sodomites) didn’t want to engage in a democratic vote in the Hungarian National Assembly – probably because they knew they would lose – in a parliamentary democracy proceeded to ‘boycott the vote in protest’ – isn’t that rather anti-democratic? – then claim the vote was ‘illegitimate’ and the law ipso facto ‘illegal’ because they didn’t participate in the parliamentary vote?
Put another way: the ‘Hungarian Opposition’ are trying to gull the Hungarian public as well as non-Hungarians around the world into believing that the only legitimate ‘democratic’ position is to be pro-homosexuality and spread peace, love and globalhomo around the world.
We are smarter than that though: aren’t we?