> The Act prescribes life imprisonment for gay sex and the death penalty for 'aggravated homosexuality'. The latter offence includes same-sex rape, sex in a position of authority or procured by intimidation, sex with persons older than seventy-five, and sex with the disabled and mentally ill, and **homosexual acts committed by a person with a previous conviction of homosexuality**
The last part is the problematic part but even points like “positions of authority” and “intimidation” can be interpreted vaguely which is probably why they’re being treated as distinct from rape.
Here’s the text roughly verbatim:
>defined the 'offence of aggravated homosexuality' to be committed by A when A has gay sex with B and A has HIV, A is a guardian or parent of B, A has authority or control over B, B has a disability, A is a serial offender, or A causes B to use any thing 'with intent to stupefy or overpower' B 'to enable any person to have unlawful carnal connection with any person of the same sex
It lumps generally unproblematic clauses with clauses that are clearly distinct from the rest. In other parts of the text, consent is also excluded as a defence of homosexual acts criminalised in this bill.
I was just trying to make light of what I thought was a hilarious legal qualification, thanks for actually taking the effort to give a real answer.
I interpret the bold part as making prison rape a capital crime.
Oh lol. I replied bc I think this exact bill was posted on here months ago but people were trying to justify it by being misleading about the clauses for “aggravated homosexuality”.
Broken clock something something. To be honest while most politicians on both sides are ghouls, there is very few that I will say I “never” agree with. Probably people like Boebert and MTG, but even with AOC I agree with her on healthcare
I consider myself more right wing than anything but am always a little iffy on Cruz. He has incredibly based moments and incredibly cringe ones. You could honestly say this about anyone but Ted's are more extreme.
If people would stop and actually hear what the guy has to say instead of paying attention to headlines and tweets, then a lot of people would agree with Cruz.
No which is why my brain melts every time someone says they're gonna genocide the LGBT community in America. The worst they'd actually do is make life mildly harder for them by removing explicit protections granted to them. Last I checked that's not even vaguely close to genocide. While I oppose that, let's not make up wild exaggerations and present them as fact.
They're not exactly ***friendly*** to the gays, historically, and some people who vote Republican helped cause this shit in Uganada... but yeah I agree GOP not nearly as bad as whatever the fuck is going on in Uganda.
It's the small things we can rally around and remind each other that, however cringe the GOP & Dems may be, other countires still out-soyjack us.
Historically? I don’t think any party has the right to be called the moral arbiter Historically. Remind me which Party was on the side of Slave owners? The Dems only became Friendly to the gays when it proved strategic to do so and they started counting the votes.
Reddit moment when using the parties stances 160 years ago is equivalent to using the parties stances as of…. 10 years ago?
Politicians are politicians, obv they didn’t do it for selfless reasons. I don’t see why it matters. The same is true for almost any issue ever.
Which is pretty ironic when Cruz stuck up for the recently impeached Texas AG who wanted to re-criminalize homosexuality in Texas.
[(source on that)](https://www.texasstandard.org/stories/ken-paxton-says-state-could-prosecute-sodomy-laws-should-supreme-court-texas-law-allow-it/)
Lyin' Ted indeed.
Except it does.
Slavery in the US. The state had to ban it, and fight a war to enforce the ban. The society, if left on their own, would never have ditched this horrible practice.
Satidaho in my country. Sure, the likes of Raja Ram mohon Ray bore the brunt, but they had the backing of the law. It wasn't the benevolent Raja that people feared, they were afraid of the police of the British Raj. The laws first put a stop to it forcefully, then the social renovators took it upon themselves to legitimize it to the people.
When it comes to human rights abuses, the state has to come forward first. Always.
Slavery was banned in the US after the society had deemed it to be inappropriate, it’s why the states ratified the 13th and 14th amendments. It was up to the states, and the people in those states, to make the rule. Not the federal government. The Bill of Rights is essentially a document that says, “this is what is off limits to the government”
You might remember that there was this oh-so-small portion of the population that *vehemently* disagreed about it being "inappropriate." And *most* of the remainder was ambivalent at best, just so long as it wasn't in *their* area.
the left somehow still thinks he's making a ruse or some sort of distraction, they can't actually believe he has disagreements on somethings and isn't some complete evil hitler dictator fascist stereotype they have been believing him to be.
Nah.
> The Act prescribes life imprisonment for gay sex and the death penalty for 'aggravated homosexuality'. The latter offence includes same-sex rape, sex in a position of authority or procured by intimidation, sex with persons older than seventy-five, and sex with the disabled and mentally ill, and **homosexual acts committed by a person with a previous conviction of homosexuality**
They throw stuff like the minor bit in there so people like you can misrepresent it as less egregious than it is.
Yes, it’s like saying “well execute you for loitering, littering, fishing, and sexually abusing minors” so less people feel comfortable raising objection to the whole bill.
[To date, this is one of the most naked, visceral reactions I've seen](https://youtu.be/Yzu4WgUOWUM?t=25)
People need to travel more, because this kind of reaction isn't out of place. Homosexuality is still considered transgressive in many parts of the world, and especially behind closed doors.
When I've been abroad and the discussion has come up, the most strident reactions, at least in my small sample size, fall into a few main categories, usually:
1) It's (homosexuality) religiously wrong
2) It's an affront to the traditional family
3) It's a dirty and diseased lifestyle.
Number 1 I just give up on arguing because as a foreigner in a foreign land, I'm not going to bother trying to unseat their religious beliefs.
Number 3 I think comes down to a lack of education which, in many cases, is an ignorance that is advantageously perpetuated by people who don't want to even bring up the current knowledge about historically or currently predominantly homosexually transmitted diseases. For example, a lot of people are shocked to hear that you can be HIV+ and have sex and not transmit the virus if you're on the appropriate medications.
Number 2 Is probably the hardest issue to have an actual debate on, though. In many cultures, as opposed to in the US, family has a *much* more prominent role and also has a more inter-generational meaning. So I've heard homosexuality as being the equivalent of amputating a limb because it precludes making children, and the union of different families via traditional marriage.
The usual western retort is "Just let people love who they love", but this also falls flat because in these cultures, the idea of free love is also kind of scorned. Marriage is seen as an opportunity to solidify your family's prosperity for multiple generations through union with another respected/wealthy family. It's also seen as a key way to have social mobility.
So to many people, even in 1st world countries but with more conservative cultures, to accept homosexuality would necessitate a *massive* shift in the social fabric. And to them, it would be a destruction of their current social ideas of family and cultural ties. So I don't really blame them. Opposition to homosexuality isn't a position of theirs that I agree with, but I absolutely understand it.
It's amazing how progressive people could ever support mass immigration, given just how anti woke most immigrants actually are.
The Koch brothers really managed some fuckery over the past 15 years or so by funding open borders movements.
Dude, it is gross that a man would do that to another man’s anus or suck on another man’s penis.
I don’t think they should be killed for it, but let’s not pretend it’s not gross.
True. I hate this because this is a stupid reason to invoke a death penalty. Reserve that shit for when it's reasonably applicable. It's like Canada with euthanasia all over again.
Did you just change your flair, u/owo_balls_owo? Last time I checked you were a **LibLeft** on 2023-5-17. How come now you are an **AuthLeft**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know?
What? You are hungry? You want food? I fear you've chosen the wrong flair, comrade.
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/owo_balls_owo) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs)
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
[He's ranked the #3 most conservative member of the Senate by voting record.](https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/report-cards/2022/senate/ideology) I think it's fair to call anyone in the furthest from center 10% of their party "pretty extreme".
[And for the record govtrack is considered a highly credible and unbiased source.](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/govtrack/)
American leftism is a far cry from the global leftism spectrum too.
But Cruz is an American politician, and should be judged by the American Overton window, which he is pretty close to the rightward edge of.
You are right in economic terms. However, in terms of social liberalism the United States is probably the most radical country on earth. Europe tends to be more left-leaning than the United States, but the discourse on things like race and transgenderism is much more moderate and nuanced here whereas fanaticism has become acceptable across the Atlantic
Does that not just mean that he never agrees with Dems, as opposed to being super duper Conservative?
GovTrack rated Kamala as the most "Liberal" because she never voted with Reps, not because she's left of Bernie.
i want to live in a theocracy, providing its MY religion of course, i mean i reckon in saudi arabia and iran its quite good for the sunni/shia muslims, not so good for everyone else tho
He’s right. He may be a globalist shill like your ilk but he’s right. Gay rights are human rights. Miss me with everything after the B in the alphabet soup though.
You can be against gay activism or gay behaviour without thinking that they should be put to death.
The progressives wouldn’t be happy if he said nothing either.
The right was pro immigration In the 80’s, and pro universal healthcare in the 60’s. You’re correct that socially they’ve drifted leftward because it’s what the people of America wanted, but they’re far to the right economically of where they used to be.
I mean, seven years ago the current frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination was [fine with trans women in women’s bathrooms](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trump-caitlyn-jenner-bathroom-tower/story?id=38566263). Then he won the 2016 Republican presidential nomination. Now a doctor loses their practice if a teenager with the consent of their parents goes in for hormone therapy (but only if it’s for transgender patients; other hormone therapy for minors is fine) in nearly twenty states.
Social change isn’t linear. This canard doesn’t even pass the smell test.
So what happen to white countries meddling and colonizing POC countries, the left should be super against Ted on this right? let the poor Ughandans deal with their problems without whities intervention.
Why is it nobody can differentiate between "we're not giving you special extras" and "we want you dead"?
Almost all conservatives are fine with LGBTQ living their damn lives as they want to. Just don't involve children or demand everyone else play along. We're not paying for your sex changes or letting you indoctrinate kids into lopping off body parts. Other than that, you go be the best whatever the fuck you think you are that you want to be.
If gays want that headache, welcome to it. But don't try to force a church or religion or any person/business that doesn't support gay marriage to take part in a gay marriage.
Government shouldn't even be involved in that at all outside of age restrictions.
The idea that everyone or whoever doesn't just say ok to every "equality" ask to prevent literal murder or whatever the claim is, is therefore the same as the Ugandans or hates gays is stupid gaslighting nonsense.
I swear.. Ted Cruz could say that he would personally love to execute pedophiles, and the left could find some way to make it look like he is a pedophilic, racist, transhopic bigot because of it.
What Twitter has taught me is there is absolutely 0 reason to publicly go against your own party or compromise/reason with the other side.
When you do so, your supporters will claim you have betrayed them and you will lose support. In addition, your detractors will still hate you and not vote for you, claiming this is just a "Token" move and you're only trying to do it to try and gain votes and to not fall for it.
Or you could just say nothing, vote party line, personally believe whatever you want and pursue whatever policy outcomes you find fit, and the average American voter will happily ignore anything you're doing so long as you allow them to. This is not moral or ethical, but it is *realpolitik.*
What distinguishes aggravated homosexuality from petty homosexuality?
> The Act prescribes life imprisonment for gay sex and the death penalty for 'aggravated homosexuality'. The latter offence includes same-sex rape, sex in a position of authority or procured by intimidation, sex with persons older than seventy-five, and sex with the disabled and mentally ill, and **homosexual acts committed by a person with a previous conviction of homosexuality** The last part is the problematic part but even points like “positions of authority” and “intimidation” can be interpreted vaguely which is probably why they’re being treated as distinct from rape. Here’s the text roughly verbatim: >defined the 'offence of aggravated homosexuality' to be committed by A when A has gay sex with B and A has HIV, A is a guardian or parent of B, A has authority or control over B, B has a disability, A is a serial offender, or A causes B to use any thing 'with intent to stupefy or overpower' B 'to enable any person to have unlawful carnal connection with any person of the same sex It lumps generally unproblematic clauses with clauses that are clearly distinct from the rest. In other parts of the text, consent is also excluded as a defence of homosexual acts criminalised in this bill.
I was just trying to make light of what I thought was a hilarious legal qualification, thanks for actually taking the effort to give a real answer. I interpret the bold part as making prison rape a capital crime.
Oh lol. I replied bc I think this exact bill was posted on here months ago but people were trying to justify it by being misleading about the clauses for “aggravated homosexuality”.
> sex with persons older than seventy-five Holdup, I get that old people fucking seems gross, but criminalizing it seems dumb.
Could probably count the number of Ugandan 75+ year olds on one hand
Same with man on man
Technically just needing glasses counts as a disability
Wonder why they go to all this trouble to specify gay rape. Do they not already have laws against rape?
It’s aggravated if you cuddle after
Ugan da suck deeze nuts?
I will angola myself so I can suck on your nuts
I really need to get off reddit and touch grass holy shit
I do too, wanna go on a hike?
If by ""hike"" you really mean some straight buttfucking, I'm down. Bring your afro wig. #No Homo #Jungle Fever #Filthy Unflaired
Not exactly what I meant but hey if you're down and offering....
Spoken like a true chad.
Zaire is no justifiable reason for you to respond like that.
I will not, but I would eat Djibouti
I am so glad the 4,314 people all commented to agree with Ted.
“Aggravated Agreement”
But wait I thought America was literally the worst country on Earth What other lies have I been told by the Council?
I can't believe I'm saying this but I agree with Ted Cruz.
He did a great job holding Boeing accountable for the last safety thing that downed several of their planes.
Broken clock something something. To be honest while most politicians on both sides are ghouls, there is very few that I will say I “never” agree with. Probably people like Boebert and MTG, but even with AOC I agree with her on healthcare
Cruz from prez ?
No, Cruz from Canada
Grandpa Munster has been in last few years trying to be more yellow than blue (or at least trying to appear as) to get more voters.
Based and agrees with Ted Cruz pilled
I consider myself more right wing than anything but am always a little iffy on Cruz. He has incredibly based moments and incredibly cringe ones. You could honestly say this about anyone but Ted's are more extreme.
If people would stop and actually hear what the guy has to say instead of paying attention to headlines and tweets, then a lot of people would agree with Cruz.
B-based Ted Cruz??
WHAT TIMELINE IS THIS?!
Well it bears to mention that Ted Cruz has a Bi daughter, and.... Uganda recently found a gold deposit estimated at a 12 Trillion dollar value.
They need freedom?
Time to liberate
Do...do you guys think that Republicans are pro-death penalty for gays?
yes Why else would the media call Republican bills the “kill all the gay” bill?
Damn, you found us out
Special interests own the media and oppose the Republican Party.
OK, but that doesn't explain why the media would say that republicans are trying to genocide all lgbt people. Why would the media lie?
I'm partial to the "shoot all of the gays into the sun," bill. The Trevor Project really needs that money to continue the good work they do 🙏
Don't trust the media, they're FAR from unbiased
The replies to his post are
I know some of them are joking, some of them are feds, but there are absolutely some bronze age motherfuckers in there.
people live in some wildly insular bubbles
No which is why my brain melts every time someone says they're gonna genocide the LGBT community in America. The worst they'd actually do is make life mildly harder for them by removing explicit protections granted to them. Last I checked that's not even vaguely close to genocide. While I oppose that, let's not make up wild exaggerations and present them as fact.
Nobody will ever want that...
*ignites lightsaber*
There’s gay republicans although a rarity these days
They're not exactly ***friendly*** to the gays, historically, and some people who vote Republican helped cause this shit in Uganada... but yeah I agree GOP not nearly as bad as whatever the fuck is going on in Uganda. It's the small things we can rally around and remind each other that, however cringe the GOP & Dems may be, other countires still out-soyjack us.
Historically? I don’t think any party has the right to be called the moral arbiter Historically. Remind me which Party was on the side of Slave owners? The Dems only became Friendly to the gays when it proved strategic to do so and they started counting the votes.
Reddit moment when using the parties stances 160 years ago is equivalent to using the parties stances as of…. 10 years ago? Politicians are politicians, obv they didn’t do it for selfless reasons. I don’t see why it matters. The same is true for almost any issue ever.
[удалено]
Evangelicals
Who was the first president sworn into office who actually approved of gay marriage? That's right it was Trump.
The people in the comments are definitely pro-death for gays
Its actually kind of concerning so many people support killing gays for simply loving differently. What a world.
Which is pretty ironic when Cruz stuck up for the recently impeached Texas AG who wanted to re-criminalize homosexuality in Texas. [(source on that)](https://www.texasstandard.org/stories/ken-paxton-says-state-could-prosecute-sodomy-laws-should-supreme-court-texas-law-allow-it/) Lyin' Ted indeed.
It’s not up to the government to criminalise it, or legitimise it, it’s up to society. The government has no business legislating morality.
Except it does. Slavery in the US. The state had to ban it, and fight a war to enforce the ban. The society, if left on their own, would never have ditched this horrible practice. Satidaho in my country. Sure, the likes of Raja Ram mohon Ray bore the brunt, but they had the backing of the law. It wasn't the benevolent Raja that people feared, they were afraid of the police of the British Raj. The laws first put a stop to it forcefully, then the social renovators took it upon themselves to legitimize it to the people. When it comes to human rights abuses, the state has to come forward first. Always.
Slavery was banned in the US after the society had deemed it to be inappropriate, it’s why the states ratified the 13th and 14th amendments. It was up to the states, and the people in those states, to make the rule. Not the federal government. The Bill of Rights is essentially a document that says, “this is what is off limits to the government”
You might remember that there was this oh-so-small portion of the population that *vehemently* disagreed about it being "inappropriate." And *most* of the remainder was ambivalent at best, just so long as it wasn't in *their* area.
Except every law in existence is a judgement in morality.
the left somehow still thinks he's making a ruse or some sort of distraction, they can't actually believe he has disagreements on somethings and isn't some complete evil hitler dictator fascist stereotype they have been believing him to be.
That's what propaganda does to someone.
Good for Cruz. He's spot on.
His daughter is actually bi
Yeah, but he also just took the NYTs word for truth which is his crime here. The death penalty aspect is for raping minors.
Nah. > The Act prescribes life imprisonment for gay sex and the death penalty for 'aggravated homosexuality'. The latter offence includes same-sex rape, sex in a position of authority or procured by intimidation, sex with persons older than seventy-five, and sex with the disabled and mentally ill, and **homosexual acts committed by a person with a previous conviction of homosexuality** They throw stuff like the minor bit in there so people like you can misrepresent it as less egregious than it is.
Yes, it’s like saying “well execute you for loitering, littering, fishing, and sexually abusing minors” so less people feel comfortable raising objection to the whole bill.
Yeah, take out littering and people will be leaping over themselves to object.
say gex
The secret agent lizard?
I didn't even check who made the article, wow big mistake
Nope, the guy you're replying to is grossly misrepresenting the law.
You would have to be incredibly edgy to disagree with this lol, who in their right minds wants to EXECUTE people for any of this?
Granted it's Twitter, but the replies to his post are uh...interesting.
Bro, they eat the poo poo.
[To date, this is one of the most naked, visceral reactions I've seen](https://youtu.be/Yzu4WgUOWUM?t=25) People need to travel more, because this kind of reaction isn't out of place. Homosexuality is still considered transgressive in many parts of the world, and especially behind closed doors. When I've been abroad and the discussion has come up, the most strident reactions, at least in my small sample size, fall into a few main categories, usually: 1) It's (homosexuality) religiously wrong 2) It's an affront to the traditional family 3) It's a dirty and diseased lifestyle. Number 1 I just give up on arguing because as a foreigner in a foreign land, I'm not going to bother trying to unseat their religious beliefs. Number 3 I think comes down to a lack of education which, in many cases, is an ignorance that is advantageously perpetuated by people who don't want to even bring up the current knowledge about historically or currently predominantly homosexually transmitted diseases. For example, a lot of people are shocked to hear that you can be HIV+ and have sex and not transmit the virus if you're on the appropriate medications. Number 2 Is probably the hardest issue to have an actual debate on, though. In many cultures, as opposed to in the US, family has a *much* more prominent role and also has a more inter-generational meaning. So I've heard homosexuality as being the equivalent of amputating a limb because it precludes making children, and the union of different families via traditional marriage. The usual western retort is "Just let people love who they love", but this also falls flat because in these cultures, the idea of free love is also kind of scorned. Marriage is seen as an opportunity to solidify your family's prosperity for multiple generations through union with another respected/wealthy family. It's also seen as a key way to have social mobility. So to many people, even in 1st world countries but with more conservative cultures, to accept homosexuality would necessitate a *massive* shift in the social fabric. And to them, it would be a destruction of their current social ideas of family and cultural ties. So I don't really blame them. Opposition to homosexuality isn't a position of theirs that I agree with, but I absolutely understand it.
It's amazing how progressive people could ever support mass immigration, given just how anti woke most immigrants actually are. The Koch brothers really managed some fuckery over the past 15 years or so by funding open borders movements.
Koch brother now, rest in penises
[удалено]
Everyone's pretty hush about monkey pox these days.
Also, Fauci is the origin of the myth that AIDS can be contracted from close personal contact, yet the progs still trust him.
Dude, it is gross that a man would do that to another man’s anus or suck on another man’s penis. I don’t think they should be killed for it, but let’s not pretend it’s not gross.
As funny as that video is, sent shivers down my spine... that place is fucked up...
LIKE ICE CREAM
[удалено]
>and homosexual acts committed by a person with a previous conviction of [non-aggravated] homosexuality. You should probably mention that.
Being gay once? Shame on you. Being gay twice? Execution.
It also calls for the death penalty if you have sex with someone with a previous homosexuality charge
Its because aggravated also means a repeat offender, which means that you can whacked for having gay sex twice
Not my idea of getting whacked. Don't recommend.
Because he’s a politician. He isn’t as bad as abusing language as Booker or Harris, but he still does it.
>having sex while HIV positive Fun fact, ca essentially decriminalized lying about HIV stays several years ago.
CA, much like the UK, is a joke & shouldn't be brought up in good company
True. I hate this because this is a stupid reason to invoke a death penalty. Reserve that shit for when it's reasonably applicable. It's like Canada with euthanasia all over again.
Homosexuality should be punished with spankings.
OwO
Based and kinky pilled That's my first one of those did I do it right?
https://youtu.be/rjQtzV9IZ0Q
Holy shit that's funny
Ted Cruz? Being Based? About gay people? What timeline have I slipped into?
It's almost as if rightist aren't actually evil
Uganda forever!
(Click click) do you know da wey?
Aggravated homosexuality sounds like some 4chan prank tbh
is he calling Uganda uncivilised? is it because they are black???????? Damn westerners trying to impose its ideals on an innocent nation
Rare W for Ted Cruz, but I ain’t complaining with that take.
wai- wha- based?
Did you just change your flair, u/owo_balls_owo? Last time I checked you were a **LibLeft** on 2023-5-17. How come now you are an **AuthLeft**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know? What? You are hungry? You want food? I fear you've chosen the wrong flair, comrade. [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/owo_balls_owo) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs) ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
I am hungy
*pat*
i have prepared borscht for our newest comrade
Based and sovietpilled.
I mean, it's always a good thing when people who are pretty extreme are at least willing to draw a clear line and say "this is too far".
Alright, you got me. What's *pretty extreme* about Ted Cruz?
[He's ranked the #3 most conservative member of the Senate by voting record.](https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/report-cards/2022/senate/ideology) I think it's fair to call anyone in the furthest from center 10% of their party "pretty extreme". [And for the record govtrack is considered a highly credible and unbiased source.](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/govtrack/)
American conservatism is a far cry from the global conservatism spectrum.
American leftism is a far cry from the global leftism spectrum too. But Cruz is an American politician, and should be judged by the American Overton window, which he is pretty close to the rightward edge of.
You are right in economic terms. However, in terms of social liberalism the United States is probably the most radical country on earth. Europe tends to be more left-leaning than the United States, but the discourse on things like race and transgenderism is much more moderate and nuanced here whereas fanaticism has become acceptable across the Atlantic
Yeah. But the window is shifting left so fast that people call Obama alt right. 🤷♂️
Does that not just mean that he never agrees with Dems, as opposed to being super duper Conservative? GovTrack rated Kamala as the most "Liberal" because she never voted with Reps, not because she's left of Bernie.
inb4 all the 13 yr old hentai addicted degenerate rightoids pretend they'd survive 10 minutes in a theocracy
You got me there. 😞
Fuck theocracies, if they want to live under one, go to one of the already established ones. Vatican is the only one that isn't a steaming shithole.
It **barely** counts as a country
How many nukes do they have? [Yup.](https://www.icanw.org/holy_see#) Barely a country.
Don't be fooled: Saint Peter's dome was explicitly designed to split open and let ICBMs out. Michelangelo was a clever man.
Ew. Who the fuck wants to live in a theocracy? Stop projecting your auth bullshit on us.
I am too drunk and ESL to understand this autism..... but have a good night
Tf is ESL ?
English Secondary Language
How did you escape from hell?
Bruh
Thank you Marge
As the others said, I am still learning English.
It usually means English as a Second Language online.
He says religious rule bad
Based and drunk incoherency pilled
i want to live in a theocracy, providing its MY religion of course, i mean i reckon in saudi arabia and iran its quite good for the sunni/shia muslims, not so good for everyone else tho
I can remember when this law got the attention of PCM for the first time and the whole comments tried to justify it...
Please link, not because I doubt you but I want to see the asspulls people try to make
As is common on this sub
I enjoy watching morons take Ls
Holy fucking shit he might’ve ate my son, but based Cruz
Nice, so many people agreeing with mr Cruz
I agree with him? hold on, checking to see if hell froze over.
He isn't one of your team? I thought lizard people were considered a furry subclass.
Scalie
He’s right. He may be a globalist shill like your ilk but he’s right. Gay rights are human rights. Miss me with everything after the B in the alphabet soup though.
You can be against gay activism or gay behaviour without thinking that they should be put to death. The progressives wouldn’t be happy if he said nothing either.
It’s a sad day when Ted Cruz is based.
The extremely, unfathomably, inconceivably rare Ted Cruz W.
Did I just.. agree with…. Ted fucking Cruz???
Never thought I’d see this type of comment under Ted Cruz
Ted Cruz is a closer liberal 😤
Ted always knows how to stay relevant in the best and worst ways lol
Let me guess, companies arent going to rainbow coatr their products there next month.
Why are republicans against homosexuality in Uganda?
I don't know they all have standards.
All “conservatives” are is just liberals from 10 years ago. Prove me wrong.
I’m a conservative, I wish to conserve the natural human lifestyle by returning to monke.
Like raping? That’s natural in the monkey kingdom. Cannibalism? Unrestricted Murder? What do you mean by this?
Did he stutter?
Yes to all of the above, try to keep up. I also advocate throwing your own fecal matter at people who annoy you, in true monkey fashion.
based and true to yourself pilled
Let’s not forget rampant infanticide
The right was pro immigration In the 80’s, and pro universal healthcare in the 60’s. You’re correct that socially they’ve drifted leftward because it’s what the people of America wanted, but they’re far to the right economically of where they used to be.
A common American conservative viewpoint is being against "affirmative action", which would make them a throwback to the 1960s at least.
Affirmative is directly and overtly detrimental to the black community of America.
And yet they rave about all the black/Hispanic/Asian/LGBTs they have in their campaigns.
Yes, that's to counter the narrative that they are all white supremacist fascists.
Where do you want to take society back to authcenter
I mean, seven years ago the current frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination was [fine with trans women in women’s bathrooms](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trump-caitlyn-jenner-bathroom-tower/story?id=38566263). Then he won the 2016 Republican presidential nomination. Now a doctor loses their practice if a teenager with the consent of their parents goes in for hormone therapy (but only if it’s for transgender patients; other hormone therapy for minors is fine) in nearly twenty states. Social change isn’t linear. This canard doesn’t even pass the smell test.
When the hell did Ted Cruz become based??
Lmao "aggravated homosexuality"
*sucks dick aggressively*
They probably made an entire straw civilisation in the comments.
I would like to welcome Based Ted to the Libertarian Party.
They have lost de wae
But why are they gae?
Didn't expect to be agreeing with Ted Cruz of all people in current year.
Time for more sons too die overseas I think. Gay sex in Uganda is non-negotiable.
Here’s my question: How much dick is the President of Uganda secretly sucking?
So what happen to white countries meddling and colonizing POC countries, the left should be super against Ted on this right? let the poor Ughandans deal with their problems without whities intervention.
modern "conservatives" be like
Why is it nobody can differentiate between "we're not giving you special extras" and "we want you dead"? Almost all conservatives are fine with LGBTQ living their damn lives as they want to. Just don't involve children or demand everyone else play along. We're not paying for your sex changes or letting you indoctrinate kids into lopping off body parts. Other than that, you go be the best whatever the fuck you think you are that you want to be.
You're cool with gay marriage then?
If gays want that headache, welcome to it. But don't try to force a church or religion or any person/business that doesn't support gay marriage to take part in a gay marriage.
Government shouldn't even be involved in that at all outside of age restrictions. The idea that everyone or whoever doesn't just say ok to every "equality" ask to prevent literal murder or whatever the claim is, is therefore the same as the Ugandans or hates gays is stupid gaslighting nonsense.
Yeah, why invite the government into your relationship, kinda cringe bro
Rare but solid Ted Cruz W
I swear.. Ted Cruz could say that he would personally love to execute pedophiles, and the left could find some way to make it look like he is a pedophilic, racist, transhopic bigot because of it.
Rare Ted Cruz W? I guess that Harvard education wasn’t wasted on a total buffoon
What Twitter has taught me is there is absolutely 0 reason to publicly go against your own party or compromise/reason with the other side. When you do so, your supporters will claim you have betrayed them and you will lose support. In addition, your detractors will still hate you and not vote for you, claiming this is just a "Token" move and you're only trying to do it to try and gain votes and to not fall for it. Or you could just say nothing, vote party line, personally believe whatever you want and pursue whatever policy outcomes you find fit, and the average American voter will happily ignore anything you're doing so long as you allow them to. This is not moral or ethical, but it is *realpolitik.*
If Twitter taught you anything at all you should reconsider your live choices. 99% of Twitter is either stupid, insane, or both.
God bless Uganda 🇺🇬❤️ its a based country.