Christopher Hitchens — Speaking Honestly About Hillary Clinton

HITCHENS: As for Mrs. Clinton… Look! After all she’s done for us, and all she’s
suffered on our behalf she feels she’s owed the Presidency and
you know Who could possibly disagree? Her life is meaningless if she doesn’t get
a least a shot! And — one can only sympathize. Unless you think, as I do, that people should be distrusted who are running
for therapeutic reasons. Because the Presidency doesn’t calm those
demons as her husband has already proved. But look — the reason we have to think about it, and the reason why your question is a good one is this: What else can the democrats do? And if thats the case, what the hell shape
are we in? It still divides us as between those of us
who think that a job must be found for Hillary Clinton, That the country would be somehow disgraced if she wasn’t in an important position, and those of us who could do without her. And neither answer to that question is gonna make any difference at all to the way the market performs. If there were some foreign policy
experience or brilliance Hillary Clinton had ever shown maybe we overlook the fact that she and her husband have never met a foreign political donor they don’t like and haven’t taken from. Look, this is the woman who played the race
card on Barack Obama. This is the woman who if you for “Change that you can believe in” whatever change it was you were voting against. This is the woman whose foreign policy experience
consists of making a fool of herself and fabricating a
story about Bosnia. This is the woman who, with her husband, have
so many connections fundraising connections overseas: Indonesia,
China. Just look at today’s and yesterday’s New
York Times at the list of people with whom the former President Clinton has
acquired a tremendous burden of debt. These are people who pay him all
the time. From odd parts of the Middle East to strange
donors all over the place. My colleague at Vanity Fair Todd Purdum, anyone can google this, just put in “Purdum
Clinton.” See if you can bear to read the sort of friendships
that a former President is having. Its undignified to think about it! From the Riady Family in Indonesia to numerous
Chinese donors who left this country rather than show up
for the hearings on it. But I don’t know of any such expertise on
her part except her pretense to have been under fire
in Bosnia when she had not. Actually when there was pressure on the Clinton
Administration Lez Aspen was Secretary of Defense, you remember? To do something about Sarajevo, to stop the
killing, to prevent the ethnic cleansing Hillary Clinton moved in — hard on her husband
and said “Don’t you do a thing about Bosnia, It’ll
spoil my wonderful healthcare plan.” At least on Healthcare, she knows enough about
the subject to have really… changed American Healthcare for the worse
in her time but foreign policy about foreign policy, she doesn’t even know
that much! MATTHEWS: But I am very suspicious when John
Kyle, a major supporter of the war in Iraq and complete
hawk and neocon in many ways, complete hawk supports her for this. Henry Kissinger has come out of the woodwork, he supports her for this! (HITCHENS: Yes!) Why do these establishmentist conservatives
want her? What are they up to? Why do they want her? I don’t know what they want. HITCHENS: Kissinger… Don’t compare Kissinger
to Kyle I mean, Kissinger is a critic of the war and
a so called realist and someone who likes MATTHEWS: But why do they want her? They’re
both Republicans. Why do they want her? HITCHENS: Because, she’s a status quo type
and They know they can, so to speak, trust her She’s a member of their club. To remind people at this point of the lowest
stage of the Clinton Administration when… Eric Holder signed off at the Justice Department
on the pardon of this fugitive… shall we call him financier? Who’d also given, rather a large loan that
didn’t seem to have been repaid to one of Hillary Clinton’s brothers, who in turn with the other brother
had gone for a Walnut monopoly or was it a hazelnut monopoly
in the Republic of Georgia? Odd bits of the Caucasus involved in American
foreign policy here. Plus donations to the Clinton library. It builds up and it goes on. Is this how the
President elect really wants to start? The amazing brothers of her’s who nearly
got the — was it the — nut monopoly in Kazakstan or something farcical
like that? Just look it up! It’s a ludicrous embarrassment for the President
and for the country. JOURNALIST: You were asked and talked about
the qualifications of now your nominee for Secretary of State. And you belittled her travels around the world equating it to having teas with foreign leaders. And your new White House Council said that her resume was grossly exaggerated when it came to foreign policy. OBAMA: Look, I mean, I think this is fun for
the press to try to stir up whatever quotes were generated during
the course of the campaign. No, I understand! And, you’re having fun. If you look at the the statements that Hillary
Clinton and I have made outside of the heat of the campaign… W We share a view. HITCHENS: Can I just add though that I thought
Obama’s answer there was incredibly cheap and evasive? I mean he was right the first time to say:
This woman doesn’t in fact have any foreign policy experience and he could have added, which also came up in the campaign that the
experience she has claimed such as in Bosnia was fake, was fabricated and he could also have added that she, like
his other nominee (for the Attorney Generalship) main qualification
in politics is being a friend of Marc Rich, which I don’t think is “change.” As I say, if it hadn’t involved her too,
the campaign finance scandals. We’re not talking about the ongoing stuff,
Mr. Clinton’s huge speaking fees in the Gulf and elsewhere. We’re talking about previous convictions:
In the Clinton fundraising scandal If it wasn’t for the fact that she couldn’t
refuse her brothers everything or sorry anything. Couldn’t refuse them anything. Anything they wanted they seemed to have got,
including some kind of deal for Marc Rich. All of this might be forgivable, or it might
assume a different proportion David if it wasn’t for the fact that This woman doesn’t really have any foreign
policy experience worth mentioning. And what is memorable about it, is pretty
bad! Remember Kissinger had to decline the honor that Bush wanted to give him of being Chair of the 9/11 Commission because
it would have involved mentioning the names of all the people who he had business
dealings around the world. And he wasn’t willing to do that with Kissinger
Associates. He didn’t want to expose his clientele. The same thing, believe you me The same thing, believe you me, is gonna come up with the She’s been very very very uncritically pro-Israel
though. At all times. It’s true that she’s got a major name
on the World stage, that’s true by definition It’s only true that she’s respected in
the Pentagon if people go around saying so, I’ve never heard that before I must say. On some things she’s more hawkish than the
President elect, yes. But, she tends to have a quietless reputation
in what I’d call an opportunist matter I mean, who really thinks she felt that strongly
about Iraq? She just didn’t want to cast her vote the
other way. WALSH: He’s not worried about that! I genuinely think that if he’s got an eye toward politics it’s global politics and he wants the strength
of the Clinton name the Clinton brand. HITCHENS: Well thats what thats what the Secretary
of State is for and what you want as President is to know Your secretary of state spends all her working
to make sure your policies stick. With this woman that can’t be said she’s
always thinking first about herself, second about her husband. And third about ?, that’s never changed
and it’s never going to WALSH: That’s your opinion, Christopher. HITCHENS: … Nor will anyone. Guess what, guess who’s saying it? That’s a very clever thing to say. Shall I ask? Would you prefer I uttered your opinion? what a fatuous remark! MATTHEWS: Christopher!

Why Doesn’t the U.S. Have a Multi-Party Political System? | Sean Wilentz

The two party system is inevitable in America. The framers designed a constitution that they
thought would be without political parties. They didn’t like political parties. They thought political parties were divisive. They thought political parties would ruin
the commonwealth as they saw it. They didn’t like them, and yet they designed
a system in which parties very quickly arose and we’re never going to go away. And the reason is simple that in a country
as large, as diverse with so many clashing interests as the United States it’s going
to become necessary to find a focus, to find a focus for your political actions. Parties have become that focus. They very quickly became that focus. Now, the question is why don’t we have a multiparty
system? Why aren’t we more like Italy say or even
France or a European parliamentary system? Well that’s the answer is that we’re not a
parliamentary system. Because we have a system that we do and because
it’s based on the idea of first past the post, in other words the person who gets the most
amount of votes will win the election, they’re not going to have proportional representation. If you get ten percent of the votes you’re
not going to get ten percent of the power you’re going to get nothing. On that account then the pressure is very,
very strong for there to be eventually a two party system. Third parties can come in and they can have
a tremendous amount of influence in shaping the major parties, but as a great historian
once said third parties are like bees, they sting and then they die. So they make their sting, but because a third-party
will always almost inevitably help the party they’re most unlike, as you saw with say the
Nader campaign in 2000 who got elected, they have their effect but then they very quickly
disappear. So I think the two parties, it’s not so much
that I have some metaphysical or ontological love for two parties as a thing, it’s rather
that’s the way the American constitutional system works. Now, if you change the constitutional system,
of course, that would change as well, but it’s embedded in the way that our government
was set up in 1787/’88 and it continues that way to this day.

Three main political parties’ reaction about presidential meeting

Let’s head over to the National Assembly…
Our parliamentary correspondent Park Jiwon is standing by.
Ji won, how do the three main political parties feel about their meeting with the president? “Well, Conn-young.
The overall consensus here at the assembly is that today’s meeting went pretty smoothly.
Although opposition parties said they weren’t quite satisfied with today’s results solely,…
they at least rated highly President Park’s willingness to cooperate respect the parliament
more by holding regular meetings.” During a press briefing held at the parliament,…
ruling Saenuri Party’s floor leader Chung Jin-suk said President Park and political
leaders talked frankly over diverse issues ranging from the economy and the people’s
livelihoods to national security,… confirming the participants’ willingness to communicate
on a regular basis. “Personally, I am very satisfied with the
meeting. We were assured that there will be a possibility of cooperation among parties.” The main opposition Minjoo Party of Korea
said it did its best to deliver its view on various matters to the President,… from
how the government should handle the deaths caused by a toxic humidifier sterilizer,…
and the chronic budget problems of the nation’s free childcare services,… to the matter
of revising a special law on the 2014 Sewol-ho ferry disaster.
The liberal party said,… the recent election results that stripped the ruling party from
parliamentary majority show that the public is not content with the government’s current
policies. But the party’s new floor leader Woo Sang-ho
took a rather smoother approach,… expecting next meetings. “We couldn’t agree on issues like inter-Korean
relations, nor the special law on the Sewol-ho ferry,… but I didn’t expect to get satisfactory
results in the first meeting. We will continue to voice our opinions through the next regular
meetings.” Meanwhile, the minor opposition People’s Party
floor leader, Park Jie-won, evaluated the meeting positively. “President Park laughed when I told her that
it was me who criticized the President the most for not being communicative enough. And
she told us she will better communicate and cooperate with the parliament, and respect
the will of the public. I think it is a considerable achievement.” “While the People’s Party appreciates President
Park’s more open-minded approach to the parliament,… the centrist party pointed out that there
are some issues that the party considers as its future tasks,…but that the president
didn’t quite specify her stance over them yet.
Conn-young.” Like the president said… this is just the
first step in many more ahead… and we’ll have to wait and see whether a healthy relationship
and better collaboration can be established between the nation’s top office and the parliament.
Thanks, Ji-won for the report.

Yanis Varoufakis on the state of Europe and the Euro

Thank you darling. Good morning ladies and gentlemen then don’t worry about pronouncing my name I’ve had worse when when I got my first job at Cambridge I remember the master of the college introduced me as like the greek with a dirty name, so Well, there is a may What a week she’s had two days before the General election [I] Got a glimpse of one of her interviews in which you she was asked by BBC journalist Why should the British voters go for her and she said because I had a plan and then I was immediately reminded of Mike Tyson His fame was saying everybody has a plan until I punched him in the nose I Don’t want to be disparaging because I had the plan when I went to brussels in January 2015 the result was not too different, but [let’s] move Beyond plans and punches that are delivered with such accuracy and venom by reality because this is what we are facing and Let’s talk about reality itself We live in a strange world remember the 1980s Ron Reagan [I] was Elected in order to bring. What was it morning in America and The way in which he was going to do it was through unfettered markets and a small state that knows its place it knows how to wither out of Sight now I have done a drum about carnage in America in his inauguration and [builds] a whole narrative of what is going to bring the United states out of its liturgy and make it great again on the basis of Precisely office of moving away from unfettered markets of Moving in some direction of some kind of Trumpian Protectionism at the same time since I spoke about there is a may recall that there is a may Also made a break from Margaret thatcher Ronald Reagan’s soulmate on the other side of the Pond She repeatedly – both of course the left irresponsibility fiscally, but also the Libertarian rights other belief in unfettered markets Meanwhile on the other side of the British Channel we have the complete collapse of the political center? You saw what happened last Sunday in France the two major political parties disappeared just completely [other] disappeared I come from a party Where almost every political party has disappeared? We have you know if abstention? Could take seats in parliament. We would have a crushing majority of Empty Seats similarly in France last Sunday. I Want to put forward the hypothesis that? all these phenomenon From trump to Europe to development in China this Nexus which binds our fates together combining development in Europe and I include [briefly] that It not don’t let’s not confuse the Eu Europe the United States or China those developments Can only be understood in the context of what I shall refer to as a major major radical coordination failure? of a planetary magnitude and Allow me to make this the point that What lies behind in my estimation the uncertainty that you face on your daily base? the political turmoil in Europe and elsewhere [is] A very simple fact and it being an economist. I can’t stop being economically deterministic, so allow me to Put forward. What is fundamentally economic hypothesis? Ladies and gentlemen do you realize that I’m sure you realize but I need to state it Just once more just to hear it because it is such a startling fact Since 1960 we have the largest saving ratio globally and the lowest Investment Ratio Well, we can all go home now. This is it This is the real cause of the turmoil the real cause of [the] trouble that we find ourselves in globally when you have a mountain of Savings and a trickle of investment funding on investment indle Physical capital any cause capital formation You realize that capitalism is not working the Tamils that we experience everywhere [is] the result of the fact that the money markets are not equilibrating savings and investment Now the question is why it is happening? What does it mean and what can can be done to fix it? well as briefly as I can This is this rober of equilibrating savings and investment has always been with us Because let’s face it the money market is not like the market for potatoes or for cars In any market for physical products of services in every micro Economic market to put it this way excess supply leads to a reduction in price which then Shrinks Supply boost demand equilibrates excess supply problem solved so when they’re unsold potatoes the price goes [down] and They get solved simultaneously production potatoes comes down, but in the money market This doesn’t happen Because when you’ve got excess supplies supply of savings what is the price of investment funding well the rate of Interest if The rate of Fitness comes down that of course reduces the costs of borrowing to invest, but that is not what investments are all about Investors do not care about money. They do not want they do not Express demand for investment funding for its own sake and like potatoes that you purchase because somebody wants [written] Money is not edible money is only useful to the extent that it can be invested into products productive processes that yield goods and services that can be solved so if you’re tossing and turning in the middle of the night Wondering whether you should invest in some new product in some new production Lines and your service of course you care about the cost of borrowing of course you care about the cost of labor But this is not what? Determines your decision to invest what the terms your decision to invest is some optimism that at the end of the [production] line When your new good or service is produced [there’s] going to be demand for it But that depends on what others like you tossing and turning in the middle of the night also decide Because what you need in order sufficient aggregate demand is sufficient aggregate [divine] investment, [so] it is a genuine coordination problem I always [tried] before I got into politics I would try to explain this to [to] my students MBA students graduate [fitness] [on] phone in Economics um by means of a very simple Little trick I would say to them now For the next assignment. I have to tell you that I really can’t be bothered to market [it] [is] truly There is nothing worse than marking scripts. It’s even worse than sitting in [eurogroup] meetings So let me just give you a grade now Take out a piece of paper write your student your name and your student number and I want an integer between one and nine including one and I and Your grade [will] be determined by a very simple formula. We’ll pick up all those pieces of [paper] I will choose the number the integer that is the minimum the minimum integer chosen amongst You that would be a common factor follow all of you I will multiply it by 11 That’s common [for] [all] of you minimum times 11 and from that common factor I shall subtract subtract your choice, and that’s your percentage So if everybody chooses the maximum number which is [nine] the minimum is nine nine times in 1199. Mine is yours Which is nine ninety percent everybody gets 90 percent everybody gets an a-Plus everybody passes everybody goes home right now But of course you say where everybody chooses a two they get 80%? Take Choose [4] To get 40% [110] percent now here the beauty of this little example. Is that this is not a free riding Opportunity it is not a prisoner’s dilemma You do not have an incentive to choose a low number while others are choosing a high number You do not have an incentive to cheat It’s a coordination [problem]. Everybody would love everybody else to choose a high [number] Just like investors every investor would love everybody to invest So they invest so everybody makes money and they make money And if you think that others are going to invest it is not in your interest not to invest [yourself]. You’ll be left behind similarly in this example with the little Grading game as I call it if you think others will choose mine. What’s your point? What why would you choose one if you choose one the minimum is one you fail the others fail, but you fail, too so The Optimal strategy in this grading game is to choose the number that you think will be the minimum amongst everybody else similarly not the same But similarly in investment everybody would like to imagine what others would be investing The extent to which others would be investing and they will invest more or less the same But not more so pessimism Reproduces and reconfirms itself because if enough people believe that enough people will be [pessimistic] and therefore will invest very little Then everybody has an incentive to invest very little and then you know what Lo and Behold Investment is low as I said you see we were right but not because the equilibrium the right [answer] is low investment if They were all optimistic or enough of them were optimistic that we thing are Investing will be high so let’s invest it with all invest and then we say outlook we were right Investment is high so we were right to invest, so This is the conundrum that we find ourselves in I imagine We’re in the middle of the night, and you are tossing and turning in bed, and you are wondering shall I invest or not high investment low investment strategies and You can’t sleep so you switch on your smart phone, and you hear that janet yellen is thinking Against all odds of reversing her interest rate policy and actually reducing interest [rate] the United States today or indulging in more qe You think what do you think oh great? The costs of investing are going to be reduced because the rate of interest coming down old is it more likely that you think oh? No For janet Yellen to be reducing interest [rate] things must be bad You see this is a tragedy with money markets when things are bad and savings are high investment is low the price of money comes down and instead of Having a calibration we have this equilibration so tax cuts interest rate reductions in the middle of a crisis may reduce the costs of production or the cost of investment they may Allow those with greater savings to keep more of it rather than to pay to the taxman [a] woman But they do not create more investment. They can actually have the the opposite effect now if you combine this with the most buying difficulty and incongruity since the beginnings of Capitalism which [is] the fact that we have two contradictory Forces Two contradictory tendencies since the inception of capitalism on the one hand to create a common currency To fix exchange [rate] I heard the introduction You’re particularly worried and concerned that the pound is going up So it down this. I’m still stacking you in 2015 territory and So the party’s coming down the here is going up the dollar is going up and down Volatility you’re concerned about that’s quite natural So there is a tendency to try to create political mechanism by which to dampen these this volatility to fix exchange rates to To reduce the volatility in the fluctuations of exchange rate It’s kind of quite natural but they’re not if you think about it. The natural limit of this is the Gold Standard Bretton Woods the [Euro] the Us dollar Mexican peso peg the Chinese peg this is the natural conclusion of this limit the moment you peg Currencies together of surplus and deficit regions of the [world] what you are doing effectively in the interests of Doing away with volatility and uncertainty You are causing a massive tsunami of capital that will flow with probability one from the surplus from from the banks of the Central region to the deficit regions why is this because whenever you have a chronic current let me give you a Random exact example take Germany [and] Greece totally randomly every Mercedes-Benz that gets sold or Volkswagen That gets sold in greece means that there’s a wad of money going from a Greek bank Through the [Target] [so] to system of the European Central bank to a bank in front cars go one way money comes the other way so that immediately creates a glut of money in Frankfurt and the shortage of liquidity in a place like this that immediately means that the real rate of interest in a place like Frankfurt is going to be dampened and the real rate of interest in place I greece is going to go up [immediately] the bankers of Frankfurt have a cause have an incentive to Shift very large parts of that Lake of Liquidity from Frankfurt to a place like Greece by which to extract the higher rate of Interest now this causes a period of Exuberant Growth both in Greece, and in Germany remember the 2000s. This is what happened after the creation of the year? Greece was growing at 55.5% 8% in nominal GDP terms, [we] where the miracle of Europe. Do you remember that no? you don’t remember that because lots of things have [happened] since that, but we where Greece and Ireland had the highest growth rates between 1998 and 2008 This is why German Bankers and French bankers even celia were rushing to greece to [lend] as if there was no tomorrow? Yeah, the greek debt did not happen repetitiously there was a Mechanism and an Act dynamic behind okay, so this is what happens. It’s not just greece in Germany think of us and Mexico [u.s.] And Argentina during the peg, Era 1920s the gold Exchange standard, Era, and it happened they European exchange rate mechanism period That ill-fated awful design still had that effect it happens every time that you try to Respond to the investors and to the business persons Demand for less volatility in in exchange rates by means of fixing exchange rate. This is what you get and of course Upon the skin it’s like me going into a car dealer and saying [I’ll] I want your card and I want the money to buy it with So [its] vendor financing Which is exponential? This kind of growth [can] only continue when debt private that that? Public that doesn’t really matter these people say I look at [Ireland] and greece. They’re very different They’re not different. The only difference was that in Ireland. It was the private sector that became hugely invested and Indebted in greece it was the public sector the result was exactly the same bankruptcy of the state in both case either directly as in greece or indirectly through Anglo, Irish and so on in Ireland and then of course the bubble bursts because [this] is what happens when you build pyramids and Clueless politicians who couldn’t see this coming even though it happens every time [try] to fix it and how [do] they try to fix it? With [a] extremely short term agenda so in the case of greece in the games of Spain Violent of italy as they dealt with it as if this was a greek problem or an Irish problem or an Italian problem? Never did the European union sit down and treat a systemic crisis systematically Similarly think of latin America and Central America by the time Brady bonds came to clear up the mess a whole [generation] had been depleted Think of Argentina were still mopping up after that disaster so there is On the one hand the tendency to fix exchange rate is on the other hand reality punching your plan in the nose and causing Massive social deprivation as a result of politicians who are in power when the bubbles burst? firstly Analytically incapable of understanding what happened and secondly morally and politically not strong enough in order to say you know what we cannot deal with this problem by means of a combination of more loans and Austerity which saps the incomes of those in deficit and in debt Call me Greece so what really happened in 2008 Between the 1970s and 2008 we had a very interesting Global flow of capital and commodities think about the Bretton woods system Which had fixed exchange rates was predicated on the iDea that? the United States was a surplus country that would be recycling in surpluses to equilibrate and coordinate these problems between Surpluses and deficits that’s what the marshall plan was that was what American policy visible? Opening its markets to Japan was it was a hegemonic attempt to politically manage the flow of goods and of capital in a global regime of fixed exchange rates that died in 1971 with an excellent show why did he die because America lost his services and then we had a second period Between the MiD-1970s let’s say and 2008 During Which the Global financial flows and good flows and trade flows were effectively managed by America’s twin deficits the American deficits operated like a huge vacuum cleaner that fact into the territory of the United states the net exports of giant of Germany of the Netherlands of Japan Later China, and closing the circle by sucking in towards 370 percent of global profits so [that] was recycling but 2008 With the Meltdown of the financial sector even though the financial sector was reflate at a year later by the actions of A Central Banks the Fed primarily But not just the fed and be china that inflated its current credit bubble in order to give Western Capitalism The Europeans and the Americans an opportunity to get their act together even though it was inflated it never managed to play again the role of closing the loop and Using America’s deficits or anybody’s deficits in order to provide the requisite demand to german-dutch? Chinese and Japanese factories so as to maintain The level of aggregate investment where it was so if we have failed to provide to produce coordination after 2008 if this crisis is continuing if Macron managed to win not just the presidency, but the National assembly elections at the Expense of the main parties if breaks will prevail if Donald trump is coming This is all underpinned by the punch of reality which has to do It’s a kind of nemesis following the Hubris of us collectively Failing to come to terms with a major coordination failures part of by 2008 which we have never managed to deal with even to discuss sensibly so populist Xenophobes racists and tumult in general is the price we pay globally For our failure politically to come to terms with our economic reality. Thank you very much That’s it Great. Thanks for your comments Be honest [you] managed to explain the euro crisis and the trump trade all in one being framework, and it’s one I’m sympathetic to the idea that we have this global, but as savings are not enough investment [I] Want to start off by talking about that actually so when I talk to policymakers about investing more particularly in this country And say it will drive GDP growth the response I get a few cares about GDP growth you’re such an anglo-Saxon [we] have a high [standard] of living and low unemployment So why should we care and I understand you’re saying as a coordination problem But what would your answer to them? Beyond that why should they care in Japan or in germany where unemployment is really low standard of living is really high Well since we’re in German you might as well pay respect to this nation and address Germany Well Germany has what is it? What was the last? Figure eight point seven percent [kind] [of] come suppose something like that moving up yeah now What does this mean it means that the [hard-working] germans have to send their savings to [the] spendthrift? That’s what it means This is not something that hard-working Germans like to do But this is what they have to do because if you have a chronic current account surplus then If you have constantly saving more than we invest Saving more than you spend you’re going to have to take this your savings since you cannot lend them to anyone in this country because there isn’t enough demand for it you’re going to have to give it to the Greeks and If not to the greeks you have to give it to somebody that you mistrust so the hard-working German Investors are forced to effectively hand over their future [to] jurisdictions and To companies and to peoples that they have no control over [I] don’t think the hard-working German like that And it is not confused to equilibrium in the long term dynamic equilibrium. Let’s face it What is keeping Germany [going]? It’s China It’s really very simple [and] what is keeping China in a position to perform this role for Germany a credit bubble [do] the Germans really want to have their future rely on a credit bubble? [I] do not believe that You know knowing having many many friends in this country that they can go to sleep at night? safe in the thoughts that their future nest egg depends on a credit bubble and welcome so it was very clear [she] said quite recently that he disparages the very low interest rates of the European central bank because they are the ones that are [feed] feeding the monster of Xenophobia at the NDI today this country and she’s right now of course he’s shooting the messenger Do you think the German investors will have a long enough time for him to think about what might happen when that credit bubble bursts? Or they’re just going for [this] they probably don’t and this is a tragedy that we all face and this is not a criticism of German investors is a criticism of All over [netting] you know we are we are like the grasshopper not the end Globally we are thinking of today We’re not thinking of the future you cannot continue along the path We cannot continue along the path that we are yeah, it’s simply not sustainable So to talk a little bit about the future in Europe Your experience going from athens to brussels [it] was a big shock a big change things are done [differently] in brussels I think everyone can agree actually I’m no no oh, well. They’re mostly Competence and brussels it is you know so Olympic gold star, but in terms of processes [to] tell us. How you really feel yes In terms of processes though things are done a little bit differently So knowing what you know now about processes and negotiating style What would you have done differently and what would you tell Teresa may to do? Given that she’s in theory going to have to go to brussels and try to negotiate breakfast I remember in a discussion had larry summers um Sometime in April when I was still [minister]. He said to me young [is] he made a very big mistake me He didn’t say mate. I’m adding that Gladys assad used the word mate. He said you made a very big mistake. I thought oh my God. [I’m] latin So what was my mistake like said you won the election So the thing that I greatest mistake, but no look The greatest mistake was to trust That our team had an agreement amongst ourselves that we would stick to because between between you and I don’t tell anyone ah [things] were really very simple at the beginning of 2015 yes. We were a part of the hard left But what we went to brussels with was not a leftist agenda You remember as megan it was a very simple agenda It was indeed when I when I put it to several friends of mine, the United States Finances they said to me well that is the poly that that is what the wall street? Bankruptcy lawyer would have come up with this set of proposals. We we said with one Yeah, [a] debtor structure that will allow us to have a and a modest But the reachable primary service Target, so that we could reduce Tax rates for business V18 and so on in order to stimulate the economy have an investment bank to create some kind of homegrown Investment and a bad [bank] to deal with NPL now How left-wing is that but it took a hard left finance minister to come up with what would be a bankruptcy lawyers Proposals so this is I don’t regret going to them with this what I do regret doing was I I I regret trusting that Reason would prevail in the eurogroup at some point they would see that this would be in their own benefit that they would get more of their money back if we Went down this Road? Rather than the road that they followed in the end so that wasn’t Yeah, maybe I was maybe this and I was [naive] [in] believing that my own team my primary study in particular and I would stick together through Hell or high water and say no to more [loan] tranches that add to our unsustainable debt on conditions of shrinking our incomes And I so what would have done differently I would have brought on a crack a clash with the troika of Lenders Within the first month I would not have waited [until] June so you see I’m just Beyond Salvation Okay, and put on that basis. What’s your advice [to] Theresa may who now has to go in and arguably the Europeans Don’t don’t understand what the risks are for them of brexit Well, let me just say that The narrative not has changed completely as a result of the hung parliament by the way I think that this hunk parliament is the best thing that could have happened for Britain and for the European union it Is an amazingly good outcome? Because now it may. Be there is a possibility that some sense is going to be knocked into Mrs.. Mays head and That we are now going to go for what is the only possible long-term? Sustainable solution which is six year period Let’s say five six years of an interim Norway Style European economic area agreement, so what you do is you say, you can’t say to the british people You vote for brexit. We are going to ignore it. We’re democrats we have to respect it, but at the same time let’s remember that the Referendum is a binary choice The [choice] [breaks] but they didn’t choose. What kind of breaks and What was a big and what was the strongest argument in favor of brexit from a political philosophy? Liberal Perspective burke in perspective to restore Sovereignty to the house of Commons well looks for it let the house of commons beside what? long-term future The United Kingdom wants with a you but that takes five years to decide the two-year period of supposed Negotiations is not going to give them any such answer there will be no negotiations. So there’s only one year now exactly sighs so my Advice to her even written [Op] [eds] about this [is] very very simple don’t negotiate Because you cannot negotiate you spend you will waste the next year negotiating for the high to negotiate which is not going to be granted and In the end the only thing that Mr.. Burhan, Mr.. Juncker [it] is merkel fear the most is a mutually advantageous agreement Coming out of negotiations. They do not want a mutually advantageous agreement They want one that teaches any other [recalcitrant] in Europe that if you challenge brussels you get a bloody nose even if the peoples of Europe end up suffering as well So the only way of not negotiating is either you you pick up something you leave which it would be catastrophic or you table for an off-the-shelf a Table you table request for an off-the-shelf agreements We switch them like or [norway’s] style now if she had won a landslide victory She could not have gone that way because he’s already proclaimed that she wants a [heartbreak] suit Why would you want to say this? I don’t know but anyway um Well now with the bloody nose permanently featuring on her face She get an opportunity to escape the trap [that] [she] set up [for] yourself. Yeah interesting [I’m] and though it could go horribly horribly wrong if But with a hand philemon, there’s a better chance that won’t go horribly wrong Small [atcha] small chance, but we had the zero jump before that right yeah And what about the rest of Europe because you spent a lot of time traveling around Europe talking to policymakers? We have any president in France who looks like he’s going to have an absolute majority in Parliament We’ve got the german elections coming up. Do you think do you see anything shifting of the basis of this new leadership? Well the the developments in France are major because [this] fake [France] is the battleground [foody] you you’ve written on both sides on my car. You’ve written to support him and entered a napkin so well Allow me to explain this firstly. I consider him to be a friend We have a very good personal relationship I personally like the guy. I think he’s a very he’s a splendid chap And he and he understands the problems the architectural problems of the eurozone However, I disagree with his policies, and I disagree with how [he’s] trying to get to what I think is right Aim The right destination, so we agree on what needs to be done, but I disagree severely with the way He’s [thinking] of achieving His views very simply and nothing you know that we haven’t had a chance to discuss it before but I think we know the same Story his view is [that] okay for about in a year? He is going to pass through the French national assembly Legislation especially for the labor markets that germany passed 15 years ago the hard sphere reforms the shredder Agenda and So on Which is too late to do in [Germany] [in] [Germany] in France now these kinds of micro economic reforms work only? during a period of rising investment if Investment is falling and you give companies the [opportunity] to fire and uber eyes workers you are not going to create more jobs during periods of increasing investment if you give more opportunities [to] large companies [to] To have more control over whom they [file] and whom we hire they will create good jobs, but because investment is rising so he’s going to Expand his political capital and popularity took to pass through parliament Measures that will not work in a direction that he wants so as to go to Berlin Welcome to Berlin. I should say and say to American in a Year’s time look I’ve [germanized] France now. We have a german france Yield on federation We want a common budget. We want comment on climate insurance who are the proper banking union all the things that we really need You know what she’s going to say to him Nope, not doing it And then where is McCrum going to be he will have expanded his political capital And he will not get a meaningful federation a macro economically significant federation Why do you say that she’ll say [no] so she will have no reason to say yes? So institutional change for Europe is reckoning I? have I hold Angela merkel in the highest regard I’m actually quite this terrible, but I’m quite. Happy that she’s going to be reelected because I distrust Martin Schultz and esther day immensely I dealt with them They were my comrades They [talked] to me as if we were friends we were going to have evolution together and then five minutes later They were worse than cycling. I preferred soy blend any day this place [Espa] the kind of policy you know languages. Just appalled some glad Americans and especially given her Splendid and Outstanding model leadership on the refugee [issue] Which of course then was snuffed out by her party, but nevertheless. I hold it in the highest esteem, but I think she’s Mr. Chance her chance of leading Europe down the path of federation was 2010 2010 2011 She had to do it. It would have been fantastic for Germany to do it it You know would have been a different place now, but now I think she’s winning her last term in office Already her control over the tadeo has diminished I Can’t she deliver that which Micron is asking No, I don’t think she can even if she wants to anymore, and she can certainly not deliver anything. Which is something more than cosmetic Okay, and that uplifting thought [and] sadly we’ve run out of time, but I will point out [that]. There’s a session later But with [yanis] that all of you can fire Rapid-fire questions at him during so let’s all give him. Thanks again. If you have Megan Sorry about the community Go down

Hidden Meaning in Forrest Gump – Earthling Cinema

Greetings, and welcome to Earthling
Cinema. I am your host, Garyx Wormuloid. This week’s artifact is Forrest Gump,
starring Earth’s own Tom Hanks, widely considered to be
the poor man’s Jason Biggs. Forrest Gump tells the story of a
feather-collector named Forrest Forrest Gump, “I’m Forrest, Forrest Gump.” who likes to bombard people with his life
story for no apparent reason, often not even noticing
when his audience changes. Although he is born a cyborg, his robotic implants soon fall apart, and he is able to pass as a human. At human school, he meets a
miniature female named Jenny. He plays football, which is really easy and doesn’t require anything but running in a straight line. After that, Forrest joins the Army on a whim.
He saves everyone from getting exploded, but his friend Bubba dies of shrimp poisoning.
For his trouble, Forrest gets a shiny new necklace. He plays ping pong and becomes a national celebrity. “All I did was play ping pong.” because ping pong was America’s most popular and widely-discussed sport, other than flasketball. Forrest coincidentally reconnects
with his old sergeant, Lieutenant Dan, “Lieutenant Dan!”
“Imbecile!” right around the time they start
a chain of restaurants together. “We got more money than Davy Crockett.” Jenny comes back for a quickie
and runs away again just kicks. Forrest goes for a jog to think things over, then meets his son, marries Jenny, and buries Jenny. Finally, we get one last look at the true
hero of this film, that goddamn feather. Aside from the Martin Luther King assassination
and the Abraham Lincoln assassination, Forrest Gump features nearly every significant social or political event of the 60s and 70s. But whereas everyone around Forrest is engrossed by all that political mumbo jumbo, Forrest is oblivious, “Sorry I had a fight in the middle
of your Black Panther party.” singularly focused on the thing
he best understands: love. “Forrest, you don’t know what love is.” Yes he does, Jenny! The defining characteristic of the
film is its perspective. Through the eyes of an innocent simpleton,
we see an idealized vision of Earth that ignores grim social realities,
like a pair of cinematic beer goggles. When Forrest talks about the Vietnam War,
he’s all sunshine and lollipops. “The good thing about Vietnam, there
was always something to do.” With Jenny, he sees a pretty, pretty princess, even though in reality, she’s a pretty, pretty big mess. Young Forrest runs through
picturesque Southern landscapes, and moments later, breezes past a
prison chain gang like it ain’t no nevermind. He has an entire conversation with Lieutenant Dan “Lieutenant Dan! Ice cream!” before the camera reveals he lost his legs. Forrest still sees him as a whole man, apparently unaware that human beings can’t regrow their limbs. “Magic legs.” What’s more, Forrest may be raising a kid that isn’t his. Jenny has a history of emotional manipulation, and could have just decided to call
him once she got sick and needed help. “I’ll take care of you, if you’re sick.” Her “get out of parenthood free” card, if you will. Yet Forrest sees it as high
romance, as does the audience. In fact, it is entirely possible that
Forrest is an unreliable narrator, “That tops em all!” something I find utterly deplorable. Much of the story depends on his memory, which is idealized and perhaps a bit faulty. “You know it’s funny what a young man recollects.” In both instances where Jenny tells Forrest to “run, Forrest, run,” everyone is wearing the same clothes, except Jenny, who only buys designer shit. Either this is magical realism, or
Forrest’s mind is conflating the two memories While with his platoon in Vietnam,
he recalls unnatural weather shifts, made all the more suspect when immediately punctuated by an enemy attack. And if we can’t trust a man to accurately report meteorological activity, we can’t trust him for anything. In any case, as the great philosopher
Forrest Gump’s mom says, Life is like a box of chocolates.
“You never know what you’re gonna get.” But if you look at the world through Forrest Gump’s eyes, you can bet it’s going to be sweet. And knowing my luck, it’ll
probably have fucking coconut. For Earthling Cinema,
I’m Garyx Wormuloid. To replace your legs with titanium rods,
click the subscribe button.

The Dystopian World of 1984 Explained

In the 1940s, George Orwell published a novel that illustrated a dystopian future. Well, future at the time. (wouldn’t be near future?) In the year 1984, the world has taken an unrecognizable shape. (You mean the world is now a cube?) All remnants of what used to be now destroyed as the 20th century took a horrendous turn. Orwell imagined a world where totalitarianism reigned, (ok) individualism was dead, and reality and history was simply a matter of opinion. (So that means I can change history with my own opinion?) Of course, this never happened, as it was just fiction. (Thank god) But the novel 1984 has resurged in popular culture, because many have made connections between this dark society and our own. (Don’t all governments do this?) Orwell never saw the rise of the internet or the policies of the 21st century, But his novel has been treated by some as almost a foreshadowing. Constant surveillance of every citizen by INGSOC – Constant surveillance by every government against its own citizens – Those sort of connections. ( But don’t all governments do this?) And this has only gotten more popular as more compare this dystopian society and our own. This video isn’t meant to compare our society and Orwell’s – This video is simply a summary of the politics, history, and world in the scenario Orwell crafted. (We’re listening) Unsurprisingly this is going to have some spoilers as this video fully flushes out the world and society of 1984. (Spoiler Alert!) Let’s start off with some history (So I’m in school now?) How does the world become THIS? In Orwell’s novel, the 20th Century is one long tragedy. The potential of humanity and its great path of civilization is entirely squandered in just a few decades. (Wow person who did this must be powerful) Since the novel was published in 1949, it’s not surprising this is where the future begins to go downhill. It all started after World War II and the dawn of the Cold War. (Soviet Union vs USA right?) The precursor division of the world already has begun to be seen. (So people predict the future?) For us, in the 21st century, we know how it ends. Soviet Union falls, nuclear war never happens, etc. But in Orwell’s timeline, there is no decades-long tension of the Cold War between America and Russia. Instead sometime in the early 1950s, World War III breaks out. (Is there a Soviet Union version of Hitler?) Nuclear bombs were used on major cities around the world. (Why wouldn’t Japan be affected? They got nuked, why not again?) Including cole custer, but not London. (Is that a county? City? State?) All we know is Britain was nuked multiple times. (LONDON BRIDGE IS FALLING DOWN!) This was probably around 1954. During the bombings, the Soviet Union invaded all of mainland Europe, (You see why you don’t invade Russia now Hitler?) as its army swept even into the Iberian Peninsula. (Where is that?) The British Iles became the last bastion on the continent. In the aftermath of the war, the West unified (Does the USA become even stronger?) as the United States and the British Commonwealth united into a single country. (Yep) The United States, Canada, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand and Britain formed to create (Sorry for no pictures :P) Oceania. Oceania then went on to Annex Latin America. (That’s Mexico down to South America right?) After this, history gets a little bit fuzzy. (So there is bears everywhere? Or something furry?) What we do know is that because of the traumatic events of the war, unrest occurred in Oceania and the Soviet Union. (REVOLUTION… I think) Sometime after 1954, Oceania fell into Civil War, between capitalism and a new homegrown ideology. This war, by 1984, is referred to as The Revolution. This new ideology won, and under this victory formed itself into a single party, INGSOC. We’ll talk about this in a second, (But I want to now!) but first let’s discuss the rest of the world. (Fine) Sometime in the 1950s and 60s, simultaneous revolutions occurred in the USSR and China. Neo-Bolshevikism united Europe in Russia (What is Neo-Bolshevikism? ) into Eurasia; while China, after fighting amongst itself for a decade, finally formed into Eastasia. (A decade long civil war?) under the nicely named ideology called, Obliteration of the Self. (Sounds like a suicide party) This history that you just learned is something that no citizen in Oceania would know about it, which is a good way to introduce you to this dystopian world. By 1984, the world is divided between these three nations. Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia. All in a state of perpetual war over an area called, the Equatorial Front. North Africa through the Middle East, India, and Southeast Asia is constantly fought and interchanged between the three superpowers. We’ll get back to that later. Even though the history of the early 20th Century, by 1948, would only be decades ago. They might as well have been thousand. The nations, history, people before INGSOC are simply myths, and what exists is a society that is totalitarianism to its extreme. First, welcome to Britain. Except if you’re a citizen, you’ve never known it as Britain. You know it as Airstrip 1. For many, Britain is a distant memory. The party’s grip on the mind is so powerful What’s once was an unquestionable fact, like a name, is similar to a faint dream you question if it even happened, if it was ever real at all, then you forget about it. This is the most prominent attribute of Oceania: the control of information to such an extent that Facts are not Reality. and reality, can be changed simply on the whim of Big Brother, and the party, INGSOC. INGSOC controls all. INGSOC seizes all. To say it changes society is an understatement, INGSOC destroyed society, and remade it into something where only IT can thrive. Western Civilization is basically dead. Now is only a civilization that exists purely for the party to rule without question. How exactly it did this? We don’t know. Now when I say “party”, INGSOC isn’t a party like the Democrats, Republicans or even Nazis. It’s more like a society within a society as its own separate culture and rules from the majority of the population. Oceania is split between three main classes: the Inner Party, basically the secretive heads of the state, is only 2% of the population; followed by the Outer Party, the bureaucratic, but still devoted educated people, which is 13%; and then everyone else, the Proles, the uneducated, easy-to-manipulate simpletons who live in poverty, never knowing any better. Think of it like the ruling classes of Westeros, they have their own issues and culture, while the masses are simply the mundane peasants nobody really cares about. The Inner and Outer Party is divided between four main sections: the Ministry of Peace, who wages war against Eurasia or Eastasia, depending on who it is at the time; the Ministry of Love which shuts down opposition and close descents; the Ministry of Truth, the propaganda arm of the party, “propaganda” is to put it lightly. This purpose of the party is to rewrite, invent, or destroy any conflicting bit of news and history that goes against the party. News stories tell of war heroes who in actuality don’t exist, that sort of thing; the Ministry of Plenty, deals with economics and rations, it decides who gets what, and what resources must be cut back. Every ministry is housed in pyramids that tower over the London Skyline, 300 metres in the air, or roughly a thousand feet tall. And Oceania, the only one thing that matters, is INGSOC. Since the Proles are too uneducated to matter and are easy to manipulate by either nationalistic pandering, or to create a fake crisis. The party only really has to worry about its own stability to survive, so it doesn’t really monitor or care about the majority of the population. The party only has to worry about its own stability to survive, like a human body, it remains healthy by purging out the harmful educated elements, and those not entirely loyal to the ideology. Decades ago, there were mass purges in the 50s and 60s inside the party. INGSOC removed every threat of the old world to solidify itself among fanatic new supporters by cutting off the population of both the Party and masses from history. INGSOC is able to have a monopoly on facts, for example, the party says it invented the airplane. This is simply fact now, and everyone believes it. The Ministry of Truth rewrites or destroys any evidence of this not being the case. Those in the party who openly questioned this simply disappear or are sent to the Ministry of Love for re-education. Continue in mass until for the most part, it’s a fact amongst the population, that the party did invent the airplane. This is a process, how Orwell describes this, is that simply through the progression of decades, INGSOC was able to normalize attributes that haven’t existed in the West for centuries. Class divided, Ueducation, Mass attrocities Censorship these are allowed to be commonplace because anyone who didn’t agree with it, is either to unimportant or dead to care, then solidify this base with youthful and nationalistic young adults, and you’ve got a healthy future for your ideology. INGSOC ideology runs so deep, children are more likely to openly report their own parents for thought crimes. INGSOC recreated culture, crafted new terms to allow only IT to exist. A “Thought Crime” is anything that goes against the policy of the party If you commit a “Thought Crime”, you can be vaporized by the thought police, simply disappeared. And when I mean disappear, I mean it is now a fact, that you are never a person, an Unperson. This isn’t like kids giving Jimmy the silent treatment. This is everyone simply forgetting there ever was a Jimmy, and forgetting that they forgot. The mention of your existence somehow by your family, coworkers, is now a thought crime in itself. Documents are changed or destroyed, so that there is no evidence you ever did exist. Not that you did, Jimmy. This is how INGSOC is able to quell the sense This term comes from the official language of the party “Newspeak”. It’s technically just short in English, but it’s entirely designed to control the use of words that may be threatening to the party simplistic terms like “duckspeak”, “crime think”, “black white”, by limiting language to small bits, it makes debate controllable, or refutable. INGSOC simply has a monopoly on political discourse because it made the words up. In 1984, this goes deeper than a weird language. Brainwashing is a cultural manifestation that goes down to the personal level Reality and history itself can be changed with the bureaucratic stroke of a pen, and nobody thinks that that stroke ever happened. This is “Doublethink”, a Newspeak term to hold two conflicting beliefs, and hold both as equal, neither are canceled out, both are believed. This is best emulated by the ongoing war in the book . The Party tells the public that Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia, even if just a few years ago the enemy was Eastasia. East Asian bombs rained on the city, but everyone believes it was Eurasia because big brother and the party said so. Eurasia was always the enemy. East Asia was always the ally. This can change on a whim. History and information would be rewritten by the party to reflect any new change. It’s not a debate to the people. It was just always this way. It would be like changing colors. The sky is blue, but the party says the sky is now red, so you believe it’s red, not say or pretend. You with all your heart know for certain that the sky has always been red. Never even considered the change happened. This is another Newspeak term called “black white”. There are a lot of terms. Why does this happen? Is everyone stupid? Well if you go by demographics, yeah. It’s not this simple though This world is all these people have ever known. Think of North Korea, actually, just apply all this to North Korea. Kim Jong-Il must have got inspired somehow. You can say whatever you want when you raise generations to worship you. so what is INGSOC even? Is it fascist? Socialist? Totalitarian? Green party? Does it have specific policies? What’s its views on states rights? INGSOC in itself is a conundrum, a product of “Double think”. Officially, INGSOC is socialist. It teaches that the days before the revolution were horrendous, as the average citizen literally bowed to the capitalist, even going so far to say Capitalists could choose any woman to sleep with and nobody could do anything, then INGSOC came and forever made the world better. But at the same time INGSOC hate socialist, despises socialist policies, and this is openly admitted by everyone. Yet, nobody sees anything wrong with it because that’s the power of “Double think”. INGSOC ideology, if you can call it that, isn’t different at all than Eurasian Bolshevikism, or Eastasian Obliteration of the Self They’re basically the same society. Technological and social differences aren’t that far apart between the three. This is something that may be recognized by all of them, or, simply ignored. We don’t know. The relationship that continues between all of them is perpetual war. War is what runs this world. It’s what allows all three nations to survive. It’s a distraction it can rile up the uneducated masses. It’s a constant overshadowing force that Big Brother uses. INGSOC is the protector against the Eurasian Hordes or Eastasia, whichever. What are they fighting over? Resources? Well, they have all the resources they need since they control so much territory. Power? No one can really overtake the other, this is already established. Well, then what? Nothing, they’re fighting over nothing. The Equatorial Front and Polar Front, as mentioned earlier, was never anybody’s territory. It’s simply a giant fighting arena, where the economic waste from overloaded military buildup from all the countries is shipped to. Almost like venting out steam, borders constantly shift, countless soldiers died from territory which nobody wants, and the native people are enslaved and transferred between the three countries to work for the war machine which continues the cycle again. All the nations have nukes, they could easily destroy each other invade Britain or Europe, start wars, and Russia and China actually attacking the homelands. But that disrupts everything. It destroys the balance of power, and these heads of state like their power. So they constantly fight over the jungle and desert to keep what they have, to keep nationalistic fervor up. 1984 is a twisted world. Whether it’s realistic or not, doesn’t really matter. The consistent theme is information is important, and the control of that information is most important. That’s the biggest thing to take away from Orwell’s world. Everything INGSOC did was to make sure the population was loyal and too stupid to realize its manipulation. Going so far to make those who did manipulate believe they weren’t even manipulating in the first place. Does this tie in to our world? I’m not even touching that subject. Like and subscribe if you have not done so. This is Cody, of Alternate History Hub.


Thanks for coming Mr. Zuckerberg. How are you? Just a sec. Mom? Could you get me my Frodo ring? I want it here Okay, now that we got the ring sorted out we can move on to the topic at hand, which
is the concerns that have been raised– You need water, okay… Now as I was saying, there’s been a lot of
concern about peoples’ private information and how– Okay, how ’bout you just chug the water? I want you to cut it off Are you blowing bubbles? I”m gonna have to spank you Okay now, are you good? I swear, it’s like he’s got a mask on Listen kid, blink if you’re not a lamp We’d like you to make a little smile just to show that you can Oh, good heavens, that’s just horrible. Stop that son! For the rest of the day, will you not do that
please? Umm, so, I have to admit that all of this
is just boring as beans And I’m – what are we talking about? And what am I gonna ask? It was about… oh yeah
So, when I have the Facebook then do I also have the internet? Umm, yeah, you do
Mmm-hhhh I’d just like everyone to know that my van
is for sale Great
I mean, I don’t know how you feel about that But if you got to kinda like drive it and
stuff, then You know I’m pretty sure you’d want to buy
it Nope
Wait, cuz this van, I mean, it’s special Nope
No, hey, I’ll send you a picture and you’ll say “I want this in my driveway” No, please don’t send anything Okay, well I guess you’re stupid It’s just a van I told you it’s a special van! Do you think that I might need to shave my
head for a Frenchman? Because some people have said to me “you should
shave your head” What do you think? Just say “No, I will not do that? Okay Mr. Zuckerman World War I was awful, do you agree? Uh, yes Well, why are we even here then? Senator Graham? [singing] “Judy you were meant to be only with me”
“La da da da – Judy you were born in moonlight” Senator Graham? Huh? Do you got any questions for me, or…? Shoot, see, what happened there is you guys
caught me singing “Judy Moonlight” Because I really like it. It’s a really great song. Because of, Judy Moonlight is the one the
song is about Hey, ask me something Do you like your heart rate? I’ll get back to you about that My turn! Can we be friends later? No, I mean, we probably shouldn’t Would you say that if I lived in a treehouse? I doubt it Have you ever smelled a girl’s feet? Cuz I imagine you and me could be doing that
at some point No WHat’s the problem, little friend? Don’t try to get in my Porsche again But I really like yoU! MISTER FACEBOOK MAN
Lift your hand out like this, boy, swing it out like this
You think it’s hard? Believe me, I could hold a hand in the air
all DAY You see it? I see it It’s tradition where I’m from to stare at the outstretched hand! That’s for having your hair like that Hey, I’ll go bro Do you worry about those little weenies you
get from Barb from downstairs? I do not want that to be a thing Hey really, man, I think people will find you more fun if you open your mind about the
little weenies I doubt that Over here Sorry kid, I forget your name Uh, Bojang Bugami Bugami, that’s weird! Say, what is that? Flemish, or French, or Japanese, or Anglo?
Yep Okay Good hang, buddy Cool hang You have a bean head Wow, really? That’s great That kind of reminds me of how I knew Einstein back when I was just a kid
And I would go to his apartment and dude had a green bean bag I wish that was right And he had this deal where you could also
make all the chocolate milk you liked You know, I can tell you what Einstein would
have said about Facebook: HORSE MANURE PILE Umm, that’s cool Turd satchel — remember, those are Einstein’s words Hey Mark Do you have a painful scrote? Uh, no I do not Well you will in time Judy you were meant to be only with me, la
da da da Judy you were born in moonlight Judy you were meant to be only with me, la da da da Judy you were born in moonlight

Mold, Water Leaks, And Politics In Dolton


5 Creepy Cartoon Network Characters | Darkology #20

Imagine you’re headed into the dentist’s
office. Your old dentist has retired and this is your
first time seeing this new one. You never cared much for the dentist’s but
at least they’re playing Cartoon Network in the waiting room. Your name is called. The nurse leads you to the chair and tells
you to wait for him, leaving the room. A few minutes later, a tall man opens the
door, eyes locked on you. His hair is stringy and he smells funny. He greets you with a cold, deep and steady
voice. Something about him makes you uncomfortable. He’s smiling, but something’s not right. He hasn’t broken eye contact a single time
since he’s entered. You never did like yellow eyes. In that deep, unnerving voice, he tells you
that he’ll be putting you to sleep now. You realize with horror that his mouth wasn’t
moving. The gas mask is pulled over your face. The subject of creepy characters is a rather
interesting topic in pop culture. Cartoon Network has been home to some of the
most memorable and nostalgic shows on television. One of the things that made these shows so
memorable, was their tendency to feature at least one character that could be seen as
a creepy villain of sorts. When we think of creepy, these characters
tend to have a few traits in common. The way they speak is strange and unnatural. The way they behave, with a perpetual stare
or an unending smile, is unnerving. In today’s Darkology, we’ll be exploring 5
characters from 5 different and beloved Cartoon Network originals- some glaringly obvious-
others more obscure, and just what makes them so creepy. Kicking off this list is a character from The Marvelous Misadventures of Flapjack. The very cartoon itself had many creepy undertones. It was notorious for being a wacky hybrid
of Spongebob Squarepants, Courage The Cowardly Dog, and Ren and Stimpy. Frequent use of hyper-realistic close ups
blended with an overall macabre tone that could well be described as… unsettling. How this scene got approved as kid-friendly
is beyond me… “Hey there cutie! Aren’t you beautiful?” “I think I know what you waaaaant…” “STRING!” The show was packed full of some of the creepiest
characters to ever grace the network. “I see you’re not yellow, fellow” “But I don’t wanna make ya blue, so get a clue…” “You need to grow up!” “Grow up? I’m 38-years old!” Take Peppermint Larry for example. His obsession with his Candy Wife raised some
serious questions: was this inanimate object made of candy really moving and telling him
to do things when we weren’t looking, or was Peppermint Larry suffering from some serious
delusions? We’ll return to this idea with a similar
character from another cartoon later, but for me, when it comes to Flapjack, no character
captured creepy quite as best as Dr. Barber. “Ah… customers… What can I do for you?” As his name suggests, his occupation was that
of a barber and a doctor, with an obsessive proclivity for surgery. He could also be considered a mad scientist
of sorts. His unusual tendency to say “yes” and
“hmmm” between sentences was rather discomforting. He also collected fish heads and the hair
of his customers, feeding them through a hole in the floor to the creatures living in his
basement. And then there was surgery. “Do you have any stories?” “Surgery?” “Nope, just stories.” “Ah! So there’s these two guys, and they think they want… a story- but what they really want… is surgery.” “They drink some of Dr. Barber’s tea, and fall asleep, and when they wake up… SURGERY.” “Would you like some tea?” So it’s pretty obvious why we would find his
obsession with subduing patrons for surgery creepy, but what else is there? Dr. Barber shares a certain facial feature
that is common with the characters in Flapjack: a wide, gummy smile. Why are too many gums and teeth creepy? According to Laura Murcko, spokesperson for
the Academy of General Dentistry, “A smile serves as an individual’s most
powerful tool. A great smile can make a great lasting impression,
boost a person’s self-esteem and confidence, as well as improve their overall health.” A gummy smile can be caused by a range of
factors including small teeth, excess gum tissue, and a short upper lip, all of which
are genetic. Studies that assess smiles have surveyed dentists,
plastic surgeons, dermatologists, and the general public. In general, people find that a smile with
two millimeters of exposed gum is largely deemed as a “normal smile”, whereas four
millimeters is “noticeable”, with anything more than that being considered “too much”. The presence of too many gums in a smile may
indicate to some that a person is smiling “too much”, which is usually an unsettling
sign to most. There are some who have even gone so far as
to have SURGERY on their smile to reduce this effect. A surgical procedure known as a gingivectomy
works to remove extra gum tissue. Recently, some have taken a step away from
surgery, opting for a lighter, more temporary procedure in the form of botox. Injections of botox into the upper lip effectively
paralyze it and keep it from rising when the patient smiles, leaving the gums covered. However, some people might go overboard with
botox and end up with a crooked smile. How about teeth? A study from the University of Minnesota found
that smiles that were too wide, too highly angled, and that showed a lot of teeth were
not the best at creating a positive impression, falling more on the scale of creepy and fake. Also, we’re generally able to discern between
a genuine smile and a fake one, especially by looking at the eyes. Hyperdontia is the condition of having additional
teeth to the regular amount. But perhaps simply exposing too many teeth
alone, creates an unsettling effect. Perhaps the true psychology behind what makes
a smile creepy stems from the context and situation it’s presented in. Take for example a surgeon smiling after the
death of a patient. Or a politician smiling in response to being
called a liar. Francis McAndrew and Sara Koehnke, authors
of “On the nature of creepiness” an empirical study in “New Ideas in Psychology” from
2016, say that creepiness is “what we feel when we think someone might
be a threat, but we’re not sure – the ambiguity leaves us “frozen in place, wallowing in
unease” Remind you of anyone? Dr. Barber is often shown smiling, even when
there isn’t an apparent reason to be doing so. This is one of the biggest reasons why he
is seen as so creepy. Especially since we assume that he’s secretly
thinking about performing nonconsensual surgery or collecting hair and feeding it to the strange
creatures living in his basement. Dr. Barber’s monotonous speech pattern is
also a trait that is rather unsettling, one that he shares with the next feature on our
list: Typically, when someone is speaking calmly
and clearly, and doesn’t change their tone too much, we find it very reassuring. However, this isn’t exactly the case if
the speaker is talking too monotonously. HAL: I know that you and Frank were planning to disconnect me. And I am afraid that’s something I cannot allow to happen. But what is it about talking monotonously
that’s so creepy? Perfectly monotone speakers who lack any variation
and don’t stress any words or syllables sound unnatural. It could indicate that the speaker is either
crazy, being mind-controlled, is an impostor, or is being threatened against their will. The cartoon Kids Next Door featured a villain
that talked exactly like this: The Delightful Children From Down The Lane. …even the name sounds creepy. “Well. If it isn’t The Kids Next Door. Have you arrived to abscond with my birthday cake like you do every year?” Like Dr. Barber, the Delightful Children From
Down The Lane spoke in a very monotonous tone, as if they were dead inside or masking an
insidious agenda. And what’s worse, they all spoke as one
being- like a hivemind. They were the antithesis of the Kids Next
Door, succumbing to the pressures of their perceived society and striving to grow up
as fast as possible to become “boring adults”. Indeed, it wasn’t just the monotonous way
they spoke, but the idea that they were being controlled by something far more sinister. What most people find haunting about a hivemind
is the idea of the loss of individuality and freedom for control. Independence and individuality are highly
valued concepts in our culture- especially in western culture. We strive to live our own lives and be in
control of ourselves. There’s something both sad and concerning
about seeing a person you know change into a shell of their former selves in pursuit
of becoming part of “the hive”. And in the case of The Delightful Children
From Down The Lane, this unified mentality was the result of *SPOILER ALERT* delightfulization-
or brainwashing. In the KND film Operation Z.E.R.O, it’s
revealed that they were the former members of the missing “Sector Z”. They were so irreversibly mentally damaged,
that even being “cured” of their brainwashing only had a temporary effect. But perhaps it isn’t so much the mind-controlling
influence of their evil boss, known in the show as “Father”, that torments The Delightful
Children From Down The Lane. Perhaps it’s a much deeper condition of mental
illness connected to a fragmented perception of reality, as with our next case. Ed, Edd, and Eddy was one of Cartoon Network’s
original Cartoon Cartoon lineups that featured a slice-of-life format. It followed a group of kids living in a cul
de sac and their wild adventures in pursuit of typical childlike desires like candy and
quarters. And for the most part, this show didn’t have
too much in the realm of creepy. However there was one character who I thought
had a strange attachment to a certain piece of wood. A certain 2×4 with a happy face drawn on its
surface. That’s right. I’m talking about Plank. PLANK?! He’s a friggin’ piece of wood for crying out loud! Uaaaggh… it’s just stupid! What do you think Dill-Joe? I know. It sounds ridiculous. This one doesn’t exactly scream creepy on
the surface. But hear me out: Jonny often talked about Plank like he was
a real person. He would get upset whenever Plank wasn’t acknowledged
by the rest of the cul de sac kids and they would usually roll with it, leaving skeptics
like Eddy in bewilderment. “Jonny’s cracked!” He’d even claim that Plank told him things
and often talked to the 2×4 as if it were a loved one. “That’s lunch? Whaddya mean you special ordered?” Plank is implied by Jonny to be a bit of a
prankster and a wiseguy. Jonny’s so immersed in the world of his
best friend, that he even created parents and a friend for Plank out of other pieces
of wood that were lying around. “DUCK!” “Look at what you did to Plank’s mommy and daddy!” “Who knows what this will do to Jonny when he sees this Eddy!” “His ties to reality are already tenuous at best!” What’s rather chilling about this are the
questions it poses: Was Jonny suffering from serious delusions? Or was “Plank” really speaking to him? I think it was both. But to better understand where this goes,
we’ll first need to take a look at hypnotherapy. The mind is like an iceberg: most of it is
below the surface. We each have many experiences after we’re
born, and over time, a lot of them become buried out of sight. Memories that we ourselves can’t remember
because they’re buried so far deep down in our unconscious mind. Hypnosis is looked at by some as a method
for unlocking the subconscious mind, and in some cases, the unconscious mind. This’ll be relevant in a second I promise. So back to Plank: Like dolls and mannequins, inanimate objects
with faces have a tendency to make us think, “am I being watched?” Danny Antonucci, creator of Ed, Edd, and Eddy,
has confirmed that Plank is nothing more than an inanimate block of wood, though in the
episode “All Eds Are Off”, Plank is seen moving throughout the school campus without
Jonny’s assistance. In the same episode, Jonny is shown to have
a hard time making decisions without Plank nearby, and couldn’t even last a day separated
from him. “Without Plank, melon-head’s falling apart!” “Beggin’ to get bossed around!” “THINK JONNY THINK!” “Just make up your mind!” Eddy: “What’s that, Plank?” “You wanna boss ME around instead?” “Nobody takes orders from this chunk of termite food EXCEPT ME!” This indicates that Plank may have some direct
influence over Jonny. One rather peculiar and telling instance from
the show was an episode where Eddy acquired a hypnotizing wheel from one of Double D’s
psychology books and went around the neighborhood hypnotizing the kids of the cul de sac. Almost everyone fell victim to Eddy’s scam,
but when they got to Jonny, he wasn’t affected. More interestingly, Jonny ran away in horror
exclaiming that they’d turned Plank into a mindless zombie. Why would Jonny perceive that Plank was hypnotized
while Jonny wasn’t? Well what if Jonny and Plank are both parts
of the same person? What if they’re two very distinguished personalities
living in the same body? Could it possibly be that Jonny suffers from
a form of dissociative identity disorder, a condition formerly known as multiple personality
disorder? Perhaps the “Plank” personality was the
one watching the hypnosis ring during the encounter with Eddy? While we’ve all seen the theatrical stage
version of hypnosis performed on an audience member, hypnotherapy in real life is more
like a state of heightened suggestibility. The most frequent clinical uses of hypnotherapy
include: breaking bad habits, overcoming insomnia, recalling forgotten experiences, and as an
anesthetic for managing pain. Some even believe that hypnosis can be used
to help those who suffer from dissociative identity disorder or D.I.D., though this has
become a controversial subject. Some have argued that hypnosis might actually
trigger situations similar to clinical DID in a healthy individual rather than “cure”
D.I.D. in those who have it. What I found creepy in this revelation was
the mystery surrounding this unseen “Plank” personality. Just WHO is Plank? We’ve seen similar mysteries in other places
throughout pop culture. Minor spoilers ahead: Teddy Daniels from Shutter
Island, Malcolm rivers from Identity, Mort Rainey from Secret Window, Gollum from Lord
of the Rings, Tyler Durden from Fight Club, Norman Bates from Psycho, and most recently,
Kevin from Split. These “other” personalities are often
portrayed as mischievous and looking to cause trouble. In real life, D.I.D. has been used as a controversial
reasoning for a handful of criminals in court. These include the likes of Billy Milligan
who under another personality, kidnapped, robbed, and raped three women in 1977, and
Juanita Maxwell who also under another personality, murdered a 72-year old woman in 1979, and
later robbed two banks in 1988. Psychiatrists believe that D.I.D. might be a
sign and the result of childhood abuse. A splintering in personality might be a way
of coping with a severe trauma and a way to protect the “main personality”. And what’s most concerning about Plank is
that since he isn’t ever seen taking full control of Jonny’s body, we don’t really
get to hear what mischief he might be whispering to the “Jonny personality”. “Plank” and other real life situations
like him, continue to remain an enigma. From subtly creepy with Plank, to the profoundly
creepy with our next character, we continue on with our list this time delving into the
world of The Powerpuff Girls. Some of us will remember the distinct feeling
of dread that washed over us as children, watching the debut of this villain, as the
announcer himself cowered in fear at the very sight of him. Narrator: “Oh no! Not- I- I- I- can’t say it!” “This is a villain so evil! So sinister! So horribly vile!” “That even the utterance of his name strikes fear into the hearts of men!” “The only safe way to refer to this king of darkness is simply…” “HIM” According to creator Craig McCracken’s scale
of The Powerpuff Girls villains, HIM is at the top simply because he’s the most evil. And that’s pretty apparent from his appearance
alone. The guy looks like The Devil himself- and
while this wasn’t the first time a devil-like character appeared on Cartoon Network, he was memorable for being especially creepy and
sinister. With HIM it wasn’t necessarily his evil deeds
that made him creepy. The powerpuff girls had tons of villains like Mojo Jojo and Fuzzy Lumpkins that were up to no good- but they weren’t really “creepy”. “You see, I’ve taken all of their love for you…” “And tuuuuuuurned it into….” “HATE” What made HIM particularly unnerving, was
the way in which he talked and behaved. He spoke in a very polite, falsetto voice
that echoed- and depending on what he’d be saying, would abruptly switch back and
forth between that and an enraged masculine voice. Another thing was his seemingly perpetual
smile. Even in the face of defeat or being wailed
on, he often eerily smiled back, maintaining that freaky falsetto pitch. And what really brought it home was despite
this overly false positive demeanor, the content of his speech was often dark and violent. It was the complete opposite of his cheery
facial expression, twisting the whole message being conveyed to the viewer. As we’ve learned before, an out-of-place smile
raises a couple of eyebrows. Just like an evil clown masking its true agenda
behind a misplaced smile, HIM was unpredictable- and it’s that uncertainty with him that
made him creepy. You never really knew when he was gonna pop,
and so his presence on and off screen was felt with utmost dread. His method of attack was often psychological,
preying on weaknesses like fear and trying to get the Powerpuff Girls to fight amongst
themselves. And what’s more, unlike the other villains
who all wanted something in return for their evil deeds- be it fortune, fame, or power,
HIM didn’t have an apparent reason for why he did bad things. He just seemed to enjoy chaos. “I’ll be baaaaaaaaaack…” Deeper Voice: “Gahahahahahahaha” But it doesn’t stop there. One of the prime characteristics for HIM is
a trait that he shares with our final feature… There was no way I was going to make a video
about creepy cartoon characters on Cartoon Network and NOT talk about it’s creepiest
show. “We interrupt this program to bring you…” “Courage the Cowardly Dog Show!” “Starring Courage, the cowardly dog!” Creepy happenings are integral to the premise
of Courage the Cowardly Dog. The intro literally phrases the words, “Creepy
stuff happens in nowhere”, and boy did they ever. Our unlikely hero had to encounter some of
the most nightmare-fuel villains the likes of which many horror movie villains wish they
compared to. And to be fair, there were too many great
choices to choose from. So here are some honorable mentions: Kitty (The Mask) – “All dogs are evil.” King Ramses – “Return the slab.” The Blue Thing – “You’re not perfect.” Katz – “I wish you hadn’t done that.” The Violin Girl – “AAAAAAAH.” Fred: “…furry furrage. Which I say, did encourage me to be quite… NAUGHTY” “Courage….” That’s right. Muriel’s estranged nephew and perhaps a
relative of Dr. Barber too, Freaky Fred. From a creepy and perpetual smile, to that
chillingly deep voice, to those terrible yellows eyes and questionable sanity, Freaky Fred
encapsulates the creepy elements of all the other characters in this list. What fascinated me most about this episode
was how endearing Fred’s character was, despite his eerie narration throughout. Fred: “That’s when my tired eyes beheld, a doggy-dog, like “dog” he smelled.” “D-O-G is what he spelled. And that’s how I spell, NAUGHTY…” The way he rhymed every sentence made his
story even more interesting. It was like listening to a serial killer talk
about his past and how he began killing. There’s even a subtle hint of remorse as
he reflects on his most recent victim, that is until he turns towards his current one. Not longer after his arrival, we learn that
he’s not just visiting, but has actually escaped from the mental hospital. Seeing Courage notice that tag on Fred’s
wrist gave me a surge of goosebumps. So what can we learn about Freaky Fred’s
appearance? What trait does he have in common with HIM? Well a perpetual smile for one- but what can
we gather from looking at his eyes? They say that the eyes are the windows to
the soul after all. In Darkology #14, we learned about the psychological
properties of the colors blue and red. That is to say, how certain types of the electromagnetic
radiation of light can affect our mood and behavior. Where red is physical and blue is intellectual,
yellow is emotional. The yellow wavelength is relatively long and
essentially stimulating. And since this stimulus is emotional, it’s
the strongest color, psychologically. Yellow in a positive light can be seen as
representative of optimism, confidence, self-esteem, extraversion, emotional strength, friendliness,
and even creativity. But Fred’s eyes aren’t quite yellow- they’re
more of a sickly off-yellow-green. And his whole color pallet seems to be tinged
with this color. The wrong tone of yellow or too much of it,
can symbolize irrationality, emotional fragility, and depression. Most of all, it can give rise to fear and
anxiety. And what about green? The psychological property of this color is
balance. Green is supposed to represent harmony, equilibrium,
and peace. So perhaps, an off-coloration of green might
represent unbalance. If we look at fiction, a yellow sclera usually hints that a character might have a rather unscrupulous
nature, that is to say- they aren’t very honest and probably shouldn’t be trusted. It gives us a sense of uncertainty- uncertainty
itself being a prime contributor to why we find things “creepy” But what else is it about yellow eyes? This thought may have been inspired historically
by canines, felines, reptiles and birds of prey, which often have very large irises in
shades of amber, yellow and orange- irises so large, they’re sometimes mistaken for
scleras. These species are known for being conniving,
clever, and wise. And when we look at reptiles especially, they
are often seen as villainous. Perhaps there’s some biblical influence? In real life, a yellow or brown sclerae in
humans is unhealthy and usually a symptom of allergies or jaundice, and could also be
a sign of alcoholism. So what’s my point here? How does Freaky Fred having yellow eyes have
any different of an effect than say, Katz having yellow eyes? Well- the truth is, it doesn’t. This uncertainty around characters with yellow
eyes isn’t unique to Freaky Fred. The effect is the same. He just creeped me out the most. It’s a trait prevalent in many villains
scattered throughout cartoon network as well as in other facets of pop culture. And it isn’t just unnatural eyes. Certain details can go a long way in changing
how we perceive a character. From a smile, to a voice, to a splintered
perception of reality. So now viewers, I ask you: Who’s a cartoon character you found creepy? And why did you find them so? Let me know in the comments below. If you’d like more nostalgic cartoon content,
be sure to checkout 11 Banned or Forgotten Cartoon Characters over on Blameitonjorge’s
channel. I’ll be presenting some of them over there. Oh and special thanks to my friend Snuffbomb
for agreeing to make a short cameo here. Both of their channels are in the description-
it would mean a lot to me if you showed them some love! And as always, thanks for watching. Wanna see more? Click here to checkout the official Darkology playlist!

Homosexuality and the Campaign for Immorality (Selected Scriptures)

Earlier in the service I read from the first
chapter of Romans what is really a very, very shocking portion of Scripture. Just to remind you that Romans chapter 1,
verses 18 to 32, describes the wrath of God that is unleashed in the world. The wrath of God is divided into a number
of elements. There is eschatological wrath. That is the wrath that will fall on the earth
at the end of human history in a time called the time of Tribulation. There is sowing and reaping wrath. That is the wrath of God that comes consequent
on sin–whatever a man sows, he reaps. There is cataclysmic wrath. That is the wrath of God that He sets on man
from miraculous use of the natural order, such as the Flood, or any other massive disaster
that catapults souls into eternity. So there is that wrath of God which is eschatological
and which is consequential and which is cataclysmic. And then there is that wrath of God which
is eternal wrath, and that would be the wrath of God unleashed on the ungodly forever in
the punishments of eternal hell. But the wrath that is being referred to in
Romans 1 isn’t any of those. It is the wrath of abandonment. The wrath described here is the wrath that
is executed when, according to verses 24, 26 and 28, God gives them over–gives them
over, gives them over. In other words, it’s when God abandons a nation. It’s when God abandons a society and gives
them over to the consequences of their behavior, which is escalating iniquity and disaster
leading to judgment. This wrath of God is released from heaven,
“revealed from heaven,” verse 18 says, “against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men
who suppress the truth.” And he goes on to say they all have the truth;
the truth is visible from creation. You can know something of God and His nature
and from the heart, Romans 2 says, the law of God is written in the heart. But when man abandons God, as revealed in
creation, when man abandons God, as revealed in conscience, when man abandons God, as revealed
in Holy Scripture, suppressing the truth, God judges that society. And though that society may consider itself
to be wise, it is in reality the ultimate ship of fools. The heart becomes darkened when God is abandoned
and then God abandons the darkened heart. What you see in Romans chapter 1 is the sequence
of what happens when God abandons a nation. First, verse 24 says, He gives them over to
“the lust of their hearts to impurity,” sexual sin, the dishonoring of their bodies among
them. When God abandons a society, the first thing
that happens is it becomes pornographic. It becomes obsessed with sex, obsessed with
fornication, adultery, every kind of sexual behavior. We have gone through that already in the sexual
revolution a couple of decades ago. The second thing that happens when God abandons
a culture is found in verse 26, “God gave them over to degrading passions…their women
exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural…in the same way also the men
abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another,
men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty
of their error.” At the end of that verse, “Receiving in their
persons the due penalty” is the diseases that come consequent to homosexual behavior. And as you know, they unleashed on the world
the horror of AIDS. But what it’s saying here is that when God
abandons a nation or a culture under His wrath, there will be a sexual revolution followed
by a homosexual revolution. And we are living in this very condition. There’s a third step, verse 28, “God gave
them over to a depraved mind,” that’s a mind that doesn’t function, that can’t think right. So life becomes filled with unrighteousness,
wickedness, greed, evil, envy, murder, and we talked about that last week, the massive
murder of millions and millions of unborn infants in the womb that is carried on in
our country and around the world. Also characteristic of this depraved mind
is they become haters of God, haters of God. We’re living in the outpouring of the wrath
of God in the category of His abandoning a culture, and we’re living in the sequence
that is here–a sexual revolution, a homosexual revolution, a reprobate mind that unleashes
everything, including murder on a massive scale, and hate toward God. It was shocking to me a few weeks ago, as
I said last Sunday, to see that these very things that God hates and that bring down
God’s judgment were affirmed as part of the Democratic Party platform. Open sex with government-provided contraception,
murder of babies in wombs, God left out of the platform, and homosexual behavior even,
advocating homosexual marriage–an oxymoron, since that’s impossible. Now, all of a sudden, not only is this characteristic
of our nation, but we now promote it. One of the parties, the Democratic Party,
has now made Romans 1, the sins of Romans 1, their agenda. What God condemns, they affirm. What God punishes, they exalt. Shocking, really. The Democratic Party has become the anti-God
party, the sin-promoting party. By the way, there are seventy-two million
registered Democrats in this country who have identified themselves with that party and
maybe they need to rethink that identification. I know from last week’s message that there
was some response from people who said, “Why are you getting political?” Romans 1 is not politics. The Bible is not politics. This has nothing to do with politics. This has to do with speaking the Word of God
through the culture in which we live. It has nothing to do with politics. It’s not about personalities; it’s about iniquity
and judgment. And why do we say this? Because this must be recognized for what it
is–sin, serious sin, damning sin, destructive sin. You say, “Well, our society cultivates tolerance
and you’re giving hate speech.” What I’m saying is not hate speech. What the Democratic Party is saying is hate
speech because they must hate the homosexuals if they will allow them to go the direction
they’re going, affirm that knowing that it will take them to hell. That’s hate speech. This is love speech. You either warn them or you affirm them. And Romans 1 warns them and any faithful Christian
warns this is dangerous, this is deadly. It’s better to warn them than to affirm them. You might be the nice guy to affirm them,
but that’s not love speech, that’s hate speech. I want you to look at 1 Corinthians chapter
6, 1 Corinthians chapter 6. And what I’m going to do is just put you in
touch with what the Word of God says so you’ll know the truth. The news is very bad, but the news can also
be very good. Listen to this, 1 Corinthians 6:9, “Do you
not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God?” Do not be deceived by the propaganda by the
media, by the films, the television programs–everything you’re exposed to–educators. “Do not be deceived; neither fornicators”…That’s
people who engage in heterosexual sin…”nor idolaters”…And sexual sin and idolatry always
historically have been connected…”nor adulterers”…That’s people who have relationships with other than
their spouse…”nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards,
nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the Kingdom of God.” We exist as a church to proclaim the Kingdom
of God, is that true? We have been given the keys to the Kingdom
of God. Jesus declared that to His apostles: “I give
you the keys to the kingdom of God.” Our responsibility is to tell people about
the Kingdom of God and who can be in the Kingdom of God and who is excluded from the Kingdom
of God. That’s the ministry of the church; that’s
what we do; that’s what every preacher must do. And I’m not the one who makes the terms. I am only the one responsible to God to proclaim
what God has revealed. And I’m here to tell you that if you advocate
a life of sexual sin, adultery, fornication, effeminateness, or homosexuality, you will
not inherit the Kingdom of God. What that means is, you’re on your way to
hell, not heaven. This is the spiritual kingdom of those who
are in Christ. The church is made up of people who were like
this. Please notice, here’s the good news, verse
11, “Such were some of you.” That’s right, this is the church in Corinth. And what is the church made up of, all righteous
people who have been righteous since they were born? No, there aren’t any–all sinners. The church is a collection of former fornicators,
former idolaters, former adulterers, former effeminates, former thieves, former coveters,
former extortioners, and former homosexuals. “Such were some of you.” That statement alone indicates this is not
some genetic defect. You were this way. You aren’t anymore, any more than every other
thing is to be genetically blamed. Do people fornicate because of some kind of
genetic defect? Is that why they’re idolaters? Is that why they steal? Is that why they covet? Is that why they’re drunkards? Is that why they’re revilers and swindlers? If so, then we better have equal rights for
all of them and let them all start lobby groups so that they can get us all to recognize that
this is a genetic issue. “Such were some of you; but”…This is key…”you
were…sanctified.” You know what that means?–separated from
that sin, separated from that sin. People say, “Well, you know, if you’re homosexual,
you know, you can’t really ever be changed.” That’s not what Scripture says. You were like this, but you are sanctified,
you are separated from that behavior. It doesn’t just say you were justified, that’s
forensic. I’m glad it doesn’t just say you were justified
’cause then people would say, “Yes, I am forgiven; the righteousness of Christ is imputed to
me; I’m justified, but I still have the same sort of tendency.” No, you were justified, but you were also
washed and sanctified, changed, separated in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and
that work is done by the Spirit of our God. This is the message that we want to give to
the world: these are sins that send people to hell, and people who advocate these things
and live these lifestyles will not inherit the Kingdom of God, and hell is forever. And we’re here in love to speak love speech
and say you must escape the wrath to come by repenting and fleeing these sins, and you
can be washed and transformed and justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Through the years at Grace Church–and I’ve
been here a long time, since 1969–this church has existed in a hotbed of homosexual activity
in Southern California. And I’ve had my share of personal opportunity
to meet people who have been washed and sanctified and justified. And some of them are sitting among you and
you don’t even know that because they were saved from that, just as there are adulterers
and swindlers and the rest that make up a redeemed congregation. I’ve had some incredible experiences. I can remember going down to a local hospital–a
young man dying of AIDS; raised in a Christian family; rejected the gospel; lived twenty-plus
years in a blatant, outrageous, homosexual lifestyle. The L.A. Police Department told me some years ago that
the numbers of partners that active homosexuals have would be an average of about 500, some
as many as a thousand–that kind of lifestyle. This young man in his room was surrounded
by these kinds of friends. He had called the church to say, “Could someone
come?” He was dying and he was afraid to die. And he held my hand, and squeezed my hand,
and I prayed that God would forgive him and save him, and he cried out to God and repented
of his sin and pled with God to be merciful and gracious and save him. The same as David. And I prayed, and he was squeezing the life
out of my hand. And then when the prayer was over, he just
looked still and he looked at the clock on the wall. And I said, “What are you looking at?” He said, “I want to remember the time of my
salvation.” And he lived for a few more weeks and all
those people shunned him. I’ve seen that and not just once. And that’s why we’re here, to preach the message
of deliverance to the people who are trapped in that horrible sin. I can’t imagine that somehow it could be illegal
in the United States of America to speak in love to those people, and that some party
in this country would adapt the tolerance of homosexuality as something they affirm. Unbelievable. Well, you know, it’s being taught in public
schools from the time children arrive there and through every form of media. Sinners coming together around a certain sin
and demanding to have rights. I wonder why the murderers don’t do that,
and the drug dealers, and the thieves, and the rapists. This kind of behavior is nothing more than
the expression of sexual lust, twisted and uncontained. People who want to talk about why do people
have this tendency and that. Simple–wretched heart, debased heart, evil
heart taken down a path of destruction. Best we can tell, there are about one percent
of the population that are homosexual in their conduct. It’s not a genetic defect. But there are about one percent or maybe a
little more who behave that way. You would think it was a lot more, wouldn’t
you? There was a study of 518 mass murderers, mutilating
kind of murderers–350 of them are homosexuals. One percent of the population and maybe seventy
percent of those kinds of people–it unleashes a horrendous passion. It’s a deadly sin. And that’s just the physical part, to say
nothing of the eternal reality. How could we not speak to this? Go with me back now to 1 Corinthians 6 for
just a minute. In 1 Corinthians 6 we see these words that
I just want to draw to your attention. You know the word “fornicator.” That’s porneia, from which the word “pornography”
comes–idolaters. Because sexual sin was connected to idolatry,
all the idol temples had priestesses that were nothing but prostitutes, and it was all
mingled together. And you know what adultery is, having sex
with someone other than your spouse. But take the word “effeminate” there. That’s the word malakos, malakos in the Greek. And it’s a technical word for a passive partner
in a homosexual relationship. Effeminate doesn’t mean that you walk funny. It means you’re the passive partner in a homosexual
relationship. In fact, the lexicons–and by the way, homosexuality
has been around since the start. I mean, Genesis 19, a whole city of people
in this sin, that God incinerated, and I’ll get to that in a minute. So it’s been around a long time; so there’s
plenty of words to deal with this in the Old Testament and the New Testament. Malakos is a technical term for the passive
partner in homosexual relationships. It actually came to refer to the male prostitute
who offered himself anonymously for homosexual vice. “Such were some of you,” but you’re washed,
sanctified, justified. The word “homosexual” is arsenokoites. Koites is the word for “bed”; arseno is a
term for “man,” going to bed with a man. That’s what it means. It means going to bed with a man. People who do that don’t inherit the Kingdom
of God. They do not. First Timothy 1:9, realizing the fact that
the law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious,
ungodly sinners; unholy, profane people who kill their fathers or mothers–murderers,
immoral men, and homosexuals. The law of God, the law of God, is made to
expose the lawless, rebellious, ungodly sinners; unholy, profane killers of their parents;
murderers, immoral men, and homosexuals–that’s not a nice group to belong to. And they will not inherit the Kingdom of God
because you have to turn from your sin, repent, confess, and beg for mercy. How perverse is it that the major denominations,
so-called Christian denominations in our country, affirm homosexuality, ordain homosexuals,
ordain lesbians, marry men to men, and women to women. Even the Quakers, and I quote, say, “Homosexuality
is no more deplorable than left-handedness.” The Episcopalians have led the parade with
a well-known bishop for the whole of the United States of America, who is a sodomite. A local Methodist church not far from here,
the pastor says, “A homosexual is welcome in this congregation, and will have all the
rights and privileges.” That’s hate speech. If you love that man, you’ll confront his
sin and tell him about the gospel so his soul can be saved. There’s strong lobby against this teaching
of Scripture. In fact, liberal theologians have suggested
that Paul himself was a repressed homosexual, struggling with his sexual yearnings that
never were resolved. He was a kind of a self-hating guy, and there’s
even a denomination called The Metropolitan Community Church. At one time there were a hundred and ten of
them, it’s a homosexual denomination and the leader, the guy that started it, a man named
Troy Perry. I know Troy Perry. Some years ago I was invited by a national
magazine to do an interview and a debate with Troy Perry. We went to an office building down in the
Los Angeles area, and I was there to confront him and to discuss the idea of whether or
not you could be a Christian and a practicing advocate of homosexuality as he is. We got into the room, it was a very heated
kind of environment, you can image. He had a few of his associates with him. I had a great big huge lineman from the USC
football team because I didn’t know what might happen. That’s the truth. And we sat across from each other, and he
started to talk about being a devoted homosexual to one person that he loved, that God had
brought in his life, and he was talking about the fact that you could be a holy homosexual
in that sense. That, you know, you could be a Christian,
and he was parading himself as if he was some pure person, and before he went I made sure
that he heard the message of repentance and grace and forgiveness in Christ, which to
my knowledge, even to this day, he has not believed. The Metropolitan Community Church and the
people who advocate this, teach that homosexuality is a gift from God, that Jesus was not hostile
to lesbians and homosexuals. David and Jonathan were homosexuals. Ruth and Naomi were lesbians. Sodom was destroyed for a lack of hospitality. And the
false church aids and abets all of this. Writers about ancient history say this is
one of the major contributors to the decline of the Roman Empire–that Nero, by the way,
was emperor when Paul wrote 1 Corinthians–and Nero had a little boy that he had castrated
and he had a full wedding and married this little boy and took him as his wife. The little boy’s name is Sporus. He was blatant. It was advocated. Paul’s world wasn’t any different than ours,
and he confronted it as sin because that’s the only hope the homosexual has–to see the
sin for what it is and to find grace in Christ. Looking back into the Old Testament, go back
to Deuteronomy 22, we just need to get the clear picture here of what God has said. And we’ll just try to cover a few things. Deuteronomy 22:5, “A woman shall not wear
man’s clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman’s clothing; for whoever does these things is
an abomination to the Lord your God.” That would be called transvestitism in my
day. In this modern day it’s called cross-dressing. It’s an abomination to God. And actually in the Hebrew, the statement
would read this way, “A woman shall not use that which pertains to a man.” It’s a broad statement, “That which pertains
to a man.” Clothing, obviously–style of life, implements,
weapons, tools, anything that blurs the distinctiveness between a woman and a man. Some old preachers used to say, “This is why
women shouldn’t wear pants.” That doesn’t work because the men didn’t wear
pants in those days, they wore dresses. We know that. They all wore robes, so get over that. Just be masculine and be feminine, that’s
the point. It’s an abomination to try to look like the
opposite sex. It’s an abomination to try to act like the
opposite sex. Satan wants to obliterate that. The ancient writer Maimonides mentions that
a man dressed in fancy women’s clothes would come and worship Venus and Ashtoreth, and
women dressed in men’s armor would come to honor the god of war, Mars. This kind of crossing over has been going
on in all of human history, and it’s all over the place in false mystery religions in ancient
times. Chapter 23 of Deuteronomy, verse 1, “No one
who is emasculated or has his male organ cut off shall enter the assembly of the Lord.” This is a transsexual, somebody who has surgical
sex change. People say, “This releases me from being a
captive in the wrong body. Let me tell you something, you’re in the right
body, you might not like it, but it is the one God gave you. By the way, the word “emasculated,” interesting
word; it’s the word crushing. That’s scary. People would even go to that extreme to have
that done. People were castrated for their deities. Parents would do it to boys at the age of
ten. This is paganism, paganism. Leviticus chapter 18, just further understanding
of this, verse 22, “You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it’s an
abomination.” It’s an abomination to dress like the opposite
sex. It’s an abomination to have some kind of sex
change, altering of your body. It’s an abomination to have a relationship
with someone of the same sex. “You shall not lie with a male as one lies
with a female; it is an abomination.” And it’s right alongside having intercourse
with an animal, with an animal–bestiality. “Nor shall any woman stand before an animal
to mate with it; it is perversion.” That’s the level of this perversion. Just like a woman having a relationship with
an animal. And the land, he says, will be defiled. Don’t defile yourself, verse 24. “For by all these the nations which I’m casting
out before you have become defiled.” There’s Romans 1. That’s why that judgment comes, because of
these kinds of perversions. God abandons and then judges nations. I don’t know how much time America has left,
I really don’t. But we’re on a course described here as God
casting us out. The land has become defiled. “I’ve brought its punishment upon it,” verse
25, “so the land has spewed out its inhabitants.” We get all caught up in the politics of this
election. That isn’t the issue. There are things vastly more important than
that, than personalities. It’s about whether this society exists in
the future at all, as we know it. The land is so defiled, God will spew it out. First He abandons it, and then He destroys
it. Verse 30 ends this section, “You keep My charge,”
keep My commands. “Don’t practice any of the abominable customs
which have been practiced before you, so as not to defile yourselves with them.” Why? “I am the Lord,” and verse 2, “You shall be
holy, for I the Lord your God am holy.” He’s saying to His people, you have to stand
against this. It’s a shocking thing when this becomes the
agenda to support. Chapter 20 of Leviticus, chapter 20 and verse
13, and there are just–this is a hard section to read because it talks about so many ugly
things: incest, adultery, all kinds of horrible things. Verse 13, “If there’s a man who lies with
a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they
shall surely be put to death, their bloodguiltiness is upon them.” Remember, we said last week the murder of
babies makes this land bloodguilty? Their blood cries out for punishment. Homosexuality makes this land bloodguilty. “Their blood guiltiness is on them.” They “have committed a detestable act; they
surely shall be put to death.” Well, you say, “That’s such a terrifying message.” And I say again, there’s still hope for them. Turn to Isaiah 56, and the only hope is in
the Lord. Isaiah 56, verse 3, “Let not the foreigner
who has joined himself to the Lord say, ‘The Lord will surely separate me from His people.'” In other words, I don’t have a chance. I’m an outsider. “Nor let the eunuch…the eunuch…say, ‘Behold,
I’m a dry tree.'” In other words, I have no hope. Listen to this, “For thus says the Lord, ‘To
the eunuchs who keep My Sabbaths, and choose what pleases Me, and hold fast My covenant,
to them I will give in My house and within My walls a memorial…a name better than that
of sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that will not be cut off.'” What grace is that? This is the homosexual, who says–and maybe
he’s even been castrated–“I’m a dry tree, I can’t ever have a future. I can’t have children.” Horrible. I don’t have a family. And the Lord says, “Hold My covenant fast,
choose what pleases Me, and I’ll give you a place in My house, and in My walls I’ll
raise a memorial to you and a name better than that of sons and daughters and give you
an everlasting name which will never be cut off.” Play on words. That’s the grace that God offers to those
who turn from this sin. It’s important for you to know the dramatic
account if you aren’t familiar with it already, in Genesis 19. So turn to it. God’s law is unchanging. God’s law is unchangeable. God’s attitude toward sin is the same. And if you want to see a picture of God’s
attitude toward homosexuality and what’s going to happen when Romans 1 reaches its ultimate
culmination and judgment comes, or when God does what He said He was going to do in the
writings of Moses, to nations that are defiled, that He would bring about their spewing out,
here’s an illustration. Genesis 19, way back in the beginning of human
history, there’s a city called Sodom. By then homosexuality has spread everywhere. It didn’t take long. You had the Fall in chapter 3, and then you
have the story of sexual sin that just goes raging through the rest of the book of Genesis. You have adultery, incest, rape, prostitution,
homosexuality, and it just comes like crazy early on. And by the time you get to the nineteenth
chapter of Genesis, you’ve got a city, Sodom; another city, Gomorrah–cites of the plain
that are basically, literally defined by homosexuality so that the word Sodomite means homosexual. It’s that fast that this sin has taken off. Two angels come to Sodom in the evening in
human form, which angels can do and did in the Old Testament frequently. And Lot is sitting at the gate of Sodom. Lot’s living there. He chose to live there. So these angels show up, he rose to meet them,
bowed down with his face to the ground. And he said, “Now behold, my lords, please
turn aside into your servant’s house. Spend the night, wash your feet, then you
may rise early and go on your way.” You’ve got to get in my house, get cleaned
up, get up in the morning and get out of here. “No, we shall spend the night in the square,”
the angels say.” We’re just going to stay here in the square. “He urged them strongly,” verse 3, so they
turned aside and entered his house; and he prepared a feast for them, and baked unleavened
bread, and they ate. They were real physical bodies that these
angels had taken on, and he showed them this kindness. And he was really trying to protect them. “Before they lay down,” verse 4 “the men of
the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young and old, all the people
from every quarter.” The whole place is caught up in sodomy–the
whole place, young and old, from every part of town. They have just seen two beautiful men show
up in town, and the word is going around town, and they’re ready for a mass rape. And they show up at Lot’s house. And they said, “Where,” verse 5, “are the
men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have relations
with them.” But they wanted to rape them, gang rape them. Lot went out to them at the doorway and shut
the door behind him and said, “Please, my brothers, do not act wickedly”–“do not act
wickedly.” And then he makes probably what he thought
was a safe suggestion. “I have two daughters who haven’t had relationships
with man; please let me bring them out to you, and do to them whatever you like; only
do nothing to these men, insomuch as they have come under the shelter of my roof.” This is kind of a stupid thing to do, but
this is a kind of perversion that has no interest in what is normal. That’s how far it’s gone. Maybe he felt safe. It’s still a stupid thing to do. They said, “Stand aside”–out of the way. Furthermore they said, “This one came in as
an alien, and already he is acting like a judge; now we will treat you worse than them.” You get out of our way or we will do worse
to you than we’re about to do to them.” Nice group. “So they pressed hard against Lot and came
near to break the door.” And the men, the angels “reached out their
hands and brought Lot into the house…and shut the door.” Then “they struck the men who were at the
doorway of the house with blindness, both small and great.” They all went stone blind, supernaturally. And listen to this, “So they wearied themselves
trying to find the doorway.” What? If I had just gone blind, I think I’d be thinking
about what happened? How did I get blind? I’d be running like a madman. They’re all blind, and it doesn’t change anything. In their blindness they’re wearying themselves
to find the door. Then the two men said to Lot, Well “whom else
have you here? Your son-in-law, and your sons, and your daughters,
and whomever you have in the city, bring them out of the place; for we are about to destroy
this place, because their outcry has become so great before the Lord that the Lord has
sent us to destroy it.” That’s the message, folks. You live like this and God will send His destroying
angels. And you know the rest of the story. That is precisely what happened. Verse 24, “The Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah
brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven, and He overthrew those cities, and all the
valley, and all the inhabitants of the cities and what grew on the ground”–destroyed the
whole thing. That’s an illustration of how God feels about
a society that affirms homosexuality and people that conduct themselves this way. From this time on, from Genesis 19 on, the
word for homosexual is the word sodomy, sodomy, sodomy . A homosexual was a sodomite. It is the Old Testament term for homosexual
used in 1 Kings 14:24, and also used in Deuteronomy 23:17 and 18. And there in Deuteronomy 23:17 and 18, it
calls homosexuals sodomites and dogs, dogs. A very graphic description of their conduct. It is preposterous to call them gay. Homosexual is clinical. Sodomite is biblical. But sinner is theological. It’s a horrible thing, this thing, and it’s
a horrible thing for people to advocate it as normal. Tragic, tragic. Isaiah has another comment that I want to
point you out to–point out to you–Isaiah 3. Here Isaiah is talking about God’s judgment
coming. God’s judgment is coming and–on Judah, southern
kingdom–and they’re very sinful. Verse 8 might be a place to start; well, verse
9; let’s start there, “The expression of their faces bears witness against them that they
display their sin like Sodom.” In other words, they’re sinners and they’re
blatantly sinners. Sodomites that assaulted Lot’s house were
blatant in their sin. They do not even conceal it, he says, about
Judah. It’s the same. Look at this nation, the same thing. “Woe to them! They brought evil on themselves. Say to the righteous…it will go well with
them, for they’ll eat the fruit of their actions. Woe to the wicked! It will go badly with them, for what he deserves
will be done to him. O My people! Their oppressors are children.” In other words, even a child could overpower
you, you’re so weak. Why? “Women rule over them.” Women rule over them? In the culture of the Old Testament, it could
well be a sodomite. Sodomites in the government, homosexuals in
rule. I read an article two days ago on the rapidly
growing number of homosexuals–open homosexuals–populating the United States Supreme Court. Not the judges, but the surrounding masses
of people. In a book called The Gay Invasion, the reports
are that, of course, we’ve had homosexuals in every presidential cabinet since Franklin
Roosevelt, but never to the degree we do now, and being appointed as judges. In some cities they are the majority of leaders,
by the way. Isaiah knew sodomy was all around them, a
part of life in Assyria, a part of life in Babylon, a part of life in Egypt. In fact there was much about homosexuality
among the pharaohs. It took a while, it took about 150 years,
but all of this kind of seeped in and what destroyed Sodom would destroy Judah. And later it would destroy Greece, and later
it would destroy Rome. This is always a deadly sin, and always a
defining sin, and always a damning sin. In 1881 it was Sigmund Freud who came along
and said, “Well, I’ve studied homosexual behavior and I’ve concluded it’s a psychological disorder
that comes from a domineering mother.” The 1930s there was a man named Harlock Ellis
who published a manual on this, bringing sodomy into the open, and he said, “It is a genius
gene.” In other words, it’s a genetic gift that homosexuals
are uniquely geniuses. And then he had a whole litany of supposed
homosexuals from Erasmus, the Dutch humanist; and Christopher Marlowe, the English poet;
Michelangelo; Lord Byron; Francis Bacon; Oscar Wilde; Walt Whitman, on and on and on. So for him it was an elevated human being
in another level of genius. It was in the forties and the fifties, [Alfred]
Kinsey came along and fabricated lies saying one out of ten people in America were genetically
homosexual. American Psychiatric Association declassified
sodomy as a sickness, and now it’s not only acceptable, but it’s advocated. This is where we are and this is on the brink
of judgment. This is on the brink of judgment. Now go back to Romans 1, verse 32, the end
of all of this in this section is that although they know the ordinance of God–Is there anybody
in doubt about what the Bible says? It’s clear. In this country we all know that, in the Western
world. Although they know the ordinance of God that
those who practice such things are worthy of death. I’ve just read that all to you, haven’t I? “They not only do the same, but also give
hearty approval to those who practice them.” That’s the issue, folks. Why am I doing this now? Because an entire party in the United States
has given hearty approval ( suneudokeo ). Eudokeo means “to agree with, to consent to,
to be well-pleased, to think it is good.” Sun means “together with others.” Collectively this group has decided that this
is good and they give hearty approval. No wonder they didn’t want God in their original
platform. We have to speak the truth to rescue the perishing. Turn to Psalm 107, and I’m going to close
there–Psalm 107. Some years ago I was standing here at the
beginning of the service, and I got up to read the Scripture, and this is what I read, starting
at verse 4, “They wandered in the wilderness in a desert region; they didn’t find a way
to an inhabited city. They were hungry and thirsty; their soul fainted
within them. Then they cried out to the Lord in their trouble;
He delivered them out of their distresses. He led them also by a straight way, to …an
inhabited city. Let them give thanks to the Lord for His lovingkindness,
and for His wonders to the sons of men! For He has satisfied the thirsty soul, and
the hungry soul He has filled with what is good. There were those who dwelt in darkness and
in the shadow of death, prisoners in misery and chains, because they had rebelled against
the words of God and spurned the counsel of the Most High. Therefore He humbled their heart with labor;
they stumbled there was none to help. Then they cried out to the Lord in their trouble;
He saved them out of their distresses. He brought them out of darkness and the shadow
of death…broke their bands apart. Let them give thanks to the Lord for His lovingkindness,
and for His wonders to the sons of men! For He has shattered gates of bronze and cut
bars of iron asunder.” I read that. After the service was over, a handsome, tall
man, 6’ 3″ or so, walked up to me. He’d been sitting right back there. His name was Robert Logerstrum. He was one of the directors of the gay pride
parade in Los Angeles, lived completely consumed in a world of homosexuals, and was dying of
AIDS. He said, “I have to talk to you; I have to
talk to you.” I said, “Absolutely.” So we sat and talked and he said, “I just
have to tell you, you preach a long time.” I said, “Well, why are you saying that?” He said, “Because when you read that Scripture,
I knew I was in the right place, and I just wanted to get wherever I needed to get, to
whoever I needed to talk to, to tell how the Lord could break the bands of iron and bondage
that holds me. And then you kept talking, and talking, and
talking, and talking.” Later when I talked to him on a couple occasions,
he couldn’t remember the sermon. All he remembered was the Scripture. But, he gave his life to Christ. He was dying of AIDS, and he went to some
of his friends and he said, “I don’t want to die. I’m terrified to die. Where can I get help?” And the homosexual friends that he had said
go to Grace Community Church. They sent him here. These are unconverted people who know the
reputation of the church. He came that one Sunday. He came, gave his life to Christ. I baptized him right here a few weeks later. He was totally transformed. He went back and the gay pride parade, went
down Hollywood Boulevard, right by his apartment, and all his friends came by to see him in
his dying days, and he gave the gospel to all of them. And he went to glory. And his baptism testimony was recorded and
played at his funeral to the whole homosexual community. That’s not politics. That’s the gospel at work and if you don’t
have the right view of sin then you’re going to get caught up in aiding and abetting people’s
destruction. Now with that in mind, listen to the words
of that psalm. “They wandered in the wilderness in a desert
region; they didn’t find a way to an inhabited city. They were hungry and thirsty; their soul fainted
within them. Then they cried out to the Lord in their trouble;
He delivered them out of their distresses.” I love this, “He led them also by a straight
way.” They talk about going straight. “Let them give thanks….There were those
who dwelt in darkness and in the shadow of death, prisoners in misery and chains….they
cried out to the Lord and He saved them out of their distress.” These are tragic people–sad, sad, people. Profoundly guilty, empty. You can’t affirm them. Romans 1 ends this way in verse 32, “although
they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death,
they not only do them, but they give hearty approval to those who practice them.” Really? You’re gonna give “hearty approval” to that. “Hearty approval,” suneudokeo in the Greek,
suneudokeo . The word eudokeo means “to be pleased with,
to think something is good, to give consent to,” and suneudokeo means “to give collective
consent.” It’s an intense word, to join in being well-pleased. Unimaginable that American leadership and
people would join together in giving hearty approval to the destructive, deadly, damning
sin of homosexuality. May the Lord help us to bring the gospel to
thousands of people like Robert and see them delivered by its power. Father, we are so grateful that You have not
left us in doubt about these things which are part of life for us. I pray that You’ll use us to bring the glorious
gospel of Jesus Christ to people in these horrible chains of homosexual behavior, who
have no future, no family, no hope, who live with massive guilt, pain, agony, driving unleashed
passions. That You would come powerfully through the
instrumentation of Your people to bring the gospel–it alone can save them. Be glorified, Lord. Turn the tide with Your truth and with Your
gospel. Save people caught in not only this sin, but
in all kinds of sins that are so popular in this culture. Give the gospel a fresh hearing, we ask for
Your glory, in Christ’s name. Amen.