To ‘go gay for pay’ is a saying whose origins stem largely from the world of bodybuilding, which behind the veneer of muscled men in their (veritable) underwear selling supplements and flexing their wares is an entire industry of gay pornography and perversions of sodom. There is much information available about the connection between homosexuality and the bodybuilding industry, the sodomite lifestyle of Joe Weider (one of the “godfathers” of modern bodybuilding), as well as the monumental word by Randy Roach, Muscle, Smoke, & Mirrors that gives a detailed historical analysis of this phenomenon. However, no matter what avenue one chooses to employ for research, one will find the conclusion is all the same, and that is, a significant amount of money that many bodybuilders earn as well as those who become famous often have done homosexual activities or even worked as sodomite prostitutes for the wealthy and often elderly sodomites who subsidize this industry.
However, ‘gay for pay’ has also become an unspoken tenant of the corporate world, especially in the west, where being a sodomite is open grounds for promotion and fast advancement, supporting sodomite behavior makes one accepted in the workplace, and any opposition to sodom, even if it is small, results in at the very least mild ostracism leading to future work problems (possibly harassment without mentioning that criticism of sodomite behavior is the root of it, being “selected” as one of the first go be fired during layoff times, etc.) and possibly immediate termination from work. The power of the sodomite movement has made it very difficult for people who oppose sodom, and really who want to be Christians living a normal life, to civilly exercise their faith or just have a conversation with people. Likewise, Christians have found themselves with decreasing legal options, as few want to take a case that puts one against, as I have estimated based on current projections, about 93% of the population.
However, an interesting turn of events, there is hope coming from a case in Canada where a normal man won a case in Canadian courts that is forcing the infamous Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) to re-assess his case in which he said that his employer refused to promote him unless he was ‘gay or bisexual’, thus attempting to compel him to ‘go gay for pay’ in order to keep his job.
The Canadian Human Rights Commission was ordered to properly assess a discrimination complaint by a former employee of a major bank who claims his boss told him he had “no hope” for promotion unless he joined their “group” of gay and bisexual men.
He was told only males who were gay or bisexual were promoted in the office, he claims.
The commission had improperly dismissed the employee’s discrimination complaint based on sexual orientation, in this case for being straight, the Federal Court of Canada ruled.
A new investigation and reassessment was ordered.
Aaren Jagadeesh worked as a financial services representative for the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce in Toronto. He was repeatedly turned down for promotions.
At a one-on-one meeting with his manager on Sept. 15, 2015, Jagadeesh said he was told that every male manager in the office was gay or bisexual, and, unless he joined this “group” there was “no hope” for him, court heard.
Jagadeesh claims the manager said this was why young male employees with little or no qualifications were promoted; told him to “be smart and learn”; and then allegedly asked Jagadeesh what he thought of him.
Jagadeesh said he replied that he thought of him as just his manager. He claims he told his boss he was willing to work with anyone but he was not gay or bisexual.
Jagadeesh was fired on May 10, 2016. He filed a human rights complaint the following April alleging discrimination by CIBC because of disability and sexual orientation. He alleged that young employees received promotions, awards, and favours because they were sexually exploited.
An investigator with the human rights commission was assigned to look into the complaint.
CIBC officials were interviewed — but not the manager who allegedly made the remarks about only gay and bisexual men being promoted. That manager, the investigator was told, was on “extended leave of absence.”
The investigator declined to proceed further on the complaint of sexual orientation discrimination, but did assess his disability complaint and found that CIBC had adequately accommodated him.
Last November, the commission dismissed the complaints.
Representing himself, Jagadeesh appealed to the Federal Court, seeking a review of the commission’s decision. He complained the investigator had selectively ignored evidence to avoid dealing with the sexual orientation complaint.
CIBC, however, agreed with the investigator’s conclusions. The bank argued it was a thorough probe and that nothing linked the negative treatment Jagadeesh allegedly experienced to his sexual orientation. CIBC argued he was simply unqualified.
Fuhrer, in a decision released in September, ruled that the commission’s investigation and decisions were not procedurally fair to Jagadeesh. Fuhrer said the lack of thoroughness in reviewing the grounds of the complaint meant the decision must be set aside.
She ordered the commission to try again with a different investigator.
Hanna Lange-Chenier, a spokeswoman for the commission, said she could not discuss the case or reveal its status. (source)
The CHRC has developed an infamous reputation for discrimination against Christians on many issues, especially that of sodomite activity.
The case does not directly mention Christianity, but this is not the point. Rather, we have here a potential legal fight developing where the power of the CHRC is being tested by the government, even partially, against the near invincibility it had before.
If the CHRC does rule against the sodomites, then it is possible that in the future, they may be forced to make other rulings against them in potentially similar or other cases. Likewise, one might be able to work towards establishing a precedent to attempt to oppose the sodomites on some legal front. This will take time, however, because support for sodom has been so cultivated, and so deeply within the minds of many people in the west, especially the “white” people, that it will be very difficult to dig out of, and will be a long journey.
Perhaps one of the greatest scandals that has taken place, especially in the anglosphere, is how the support of sodom was permitted in exchange for worldly power, for while the latter is not necessarily a bad thing, it becomes bad when it comes at the cost of one’s morality, because morality always is more important that power. Power fades, just like physical beauty, but doing what is morally right never fades because it is a quality of the soul, being thus intangible and at the same time, fully tangible.
There is a morality play from the 15th century called Everyman that illustrates this, where a man- Everyman -attempts to take his friends with him at his deathbed, and nobody can go with him except for one friend, whose name is Good-Deeds.
How the Western world became enmeshed in the sodomitic sewer pipes is a discussion for historians and those interested in the topic to study. What matters now is that the society is in the sewer pipe, is for people of good will to work their way through the filth and back out of the sewer.
While it is far from any end, this case in Canada will be interesting to watch to see what possible legal changes it may signal for the future regarding the sodomite movement in the western world.