The Tightest Big Bang

The Big Bang for the name of Bangism can often be forgotten as "gay."  The gayness of reverence of a once-naked now barely clad man being displayed suffering in front of a crowd--Jesus having a passion--has been here much discussed, but in light of all the naked-little-boy cherub fantasies (that the exclusively male priesthood were said to have been just about praising Jesus' divine body not about anything gay) and the many other sickening precursors to the Catholic sexual abuse scandals, the blatant focus of holy men on maleness can make Jesusianism's gayness seem so massive as to downplay Bangism's.  

Jesina note: what God-fearing man wouldn't want to be in Heaven with Jesus?!  As opposed to some pagan demoness like Artemis, that wicked heathen goddess of the hunt?  I mean, obviously all good men want the divine love of Jesus.  

OK, back to the Ists again:

As we were saying, it can seem like Jesusianisn Christianity is so gay that it must be moreso than Bangist Christianity.  It is not so.  Bangism is actually even gayer.  To see it, ask yourself these questions: 

1) Do you think anything about men who tell stories about a creationary burst after a very tight tightness?  

2) What do you think a man who calls himself straight for dating transwomen is doing in private to his one of those people dressed as women?  

3) Is there any relationship between knowing you will die without children and being fine with there being no society in which those children live?  

...Now, the cosmigasm story in Genesis is ridiculous, along with the six days' creation of man.  Even if you say it was a metaphor meaning 6000 years, then that's still a big gap between story and reality.  Jesusianism does seem more stupid than the Bangism we have now, but the childish refusal of many astronomers and pop culture to acknowledge the very many galactic clusters and superclusters observed by the team headed by Tully show that the story of The Beginning via male cosmigasm is the same sort of thing.  Encouraging the most literate people in Europe to take a vow to never reproduce was effective at slowing advancement of the achievement of Europe, but far more effective was feminism and gay rights.  Men inspired to give genetic coding into certain fecal places, like men inspired to give genetic coding to light poles, raccoons, etc., is the same thing: zero babies.  

The Great Gayitude of Bangism

Presented for your consideration some pictures of poppers:

Poppers are the slang term for the "gay aphrodisiac" that is amyl nitrite.  They got the nickname "poppers" because they were once sold to gay men as a bunch of little capsules, in which gay men's hands amyl nitrite portions would make popping sounds when rolled about, which said men eager to spasm with pleasure via friction given from another man's body would do to break them open and sniff them.  Why they were called a gay aphrodisiac is of course gross: they would loosen the muscles when sniffed, facilitating the introduction of one man's primary frictive part into another man's fecal orifice, which orifice is otherwise tightly closed.  

(It's almost as though the mean lady Mother Nature, so criticized by Father God who wished to save all men and also some women from nature by sending down His Son the Savior, didn't design the male fecal orifice for being penetrated by phalluses.  The strong divide between "actions that support life" and "actions that don't support life" is here shown.  Christian priests spent so long calling men feeling a physical attraction to women a sin, and of course being man-only goes along with that.  One of the many sad ironies of today's Jesusian is that s/he is much more likely to be against evil/antilife "gay" agendas while unknowingly supporting a very pro-gay philosophy.)  

One of the downsides of amyl nitrite usage is it damages the immune system.  There's a whole thing there about how A.I.D.S. used to be called G.R.I.D. (starting with "Gay-Related") because only gay men got it, but then they warned, climate-change-esquely, that it was caused by a contagious disease, not by home-ohs taking extremely powerful immunosuppressants--when they made sure people knew it was acquired--then they got a lot of tax-funding.  

GRID to AIDS

Can you think of any connection between fricative bursts caused by forcing something into a tight spot and male priests sexually abusing male children?  Take that connection as help so you can figure out what the popular The Beginning stories really are: homoerotic orgasm-fantasies.  The repeated emphasis on tightness in the Big Bang story, and the hesitancy of advocates for that story to give it up, is explained better by them responding to desire for creative bursts coming from tight places than from a commitment to evidence.  

The Inevitability of Trains No Eye

It is a great likelihood that the fantasy of a man creating things via a tight burst with other men would lead to trains no eye nonsense.  Think of the way Jahweh/Jesus were initially a divine male relationship, akin to Allah/Muhammad, before the conflicts dealing with the Trinity led to Jesus being conceived of as being Jahweh.  

These notions are fundamentally antilife.  Human (meiotic) life comes from a couple, and advocating for it not being seen that there is a difference between attitudes toward "things which produce life" and "things which do not produce life" is literally antilife.  The distaste you may feel at man/man couples presenting themselves as the same as male/female couples are akin to males presenting themselves as females, females using pets as substitutes for nurturing drives, and so forth.  These eerie similarities are there; they are you recognizing antilife.  You want to live, and Decay wants to bolster non-living things, such as advocating for the non-life-producing orgasmic naked friction partnership of "gay marriage" as opposed to the life-producing orgasmic naked friction partnership of marriage.  Meiosis makes humans driven to pursue pleasure and relief, and directing those drives into non-life-producing activities which distract from life-producing activities, is--and proved to be in this instance--against life: antilife.  

That kind of connection is illustrative.  It shows what Jesusianism is really doing when it destroys/hides/slurs European meritocracy and wealth as "pagan" and not properly committed to the divine single man.  

Athena being a lot more appealing to men is a very pro-life thing, whereas Jesus being more appealing to men is a very anti-life thing.  

If you are a man, which option do you choose?  Facing whatever pagan goddesses and the forever-single "love the idea of a man taking off almost all of his clothes and writhing in pain in front of a crowd" Christianity; which one do you like more?  

Again, Islam is not gay.  It has a huge amount of other problems, including the very close divine relationship of two men (Allah and Prophet), and the Qur'an says it's not a religion, but men are told they'll get a lotta virgin girls if they subscribe, and that tends to pair with cultures where male home-ohs caught at buggery get thrown off high buildings.