GaryMabbuttsLeftKnee
Well-Known Member
I think any decent human would have a problem with calling being gay 'shameful'
Man beheaded in Paris (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter clint van damme
- Start date
fatso
Well-Known Member
Well I can assure you there are millions of decent humans who have issues with it.
But no doubt they themselves will get shouted down and called names and abused by the so called tolerant and anti-hate brigade, it's actualy ironic how hate filled the "tolerant" become when they come across anyone with a differing opinion to theirs.
In today's society it would appear you can have any opinion you want, as long as it conforms to the leftist agenda. Any other and you immediately become, racist, bigoted or homophobic etc etc.
Antisemitism is ok though aparently.
It sure is a bizarre world.
Skybluefaz
Well-Known Member
For what its worth. I hear where your coming from. Is there any easy answer? No. Without some minority report style tech you can't predict which nutters are going to turn to terrorism in the name of Islam.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
You’re not listening. The issue is saying all Muslims are intolerant and liable to terrorism. There are obvious issues in Muslim countries, not least with Sunni and Shia civil wars. There are obvious issues with literal understandings of ancient texts. Not one person on here doesn’t acknowledge the clear issue that there is
GaryMabbuttsLeftKnee
Well-Known Member
Name calling isn't the way forward. Trying to educate people is probably the best method. The issue is, many people with these views don't want to be educated, so it's a complex situation. How do you get through to people who don't want to be got through to? Being called racist or homophobic isn't name calling, it's a statement of fact. Ironically, no one is born homophobic, it's a learned or chosen trait through experience and influence of key figures. Being gay isn't a choice. I personally wouldn't classify anyone who judges someone as shameful for something they don't have a choice in, decent.
fatso
Well-Known Member
I think you'll find they dont want to be educated in your beliefs, probably in much the same way as you have no desire to be educated in theirs.
But it's interesting that you appear to believe that they are uneducated, or have a NEED to be educated, it's the thought that your way (not you personally ) is the correct way and others are automatically wrong that is a problem. Surely others are entitled to their beliefs, even if you both disagree.
As a side note, its also interesting that the biggest religion that opposes homosexuality is currently the fastest growing religion in the world.
And should Muslims, Jews and Christian's come together and agree there is more that unites them than divides them, then the future world could be much different.
And we are seeing the start of this now in the middle east.
Never thought we'd see this on a footy forum.
But it's interesting that you appear to believe that they are uneducated, or have a NEED to be educated, it's the thought that your way (not you personally ) is the correct way and others are automatically wrong that is a problem. Surely others are entitled to their beliefs, even if you both disagree.
As a side note, its also interesting that the biggest religion that opposes homosexuality is currently the fastest growing religion in the world.
And should Muslims, Jews and Christian's come together and agree there is more that unites them than divides them, then the future world could be much different.
And we are seeing the start of this now in the middle east.
Never thought we'd see this on a footy forum.
GaryMabbuttsLeftKnee
Well-Known Member
Yes. They are uneducated. There is no scientific evidence or otherwise suggesting being straight is less or more shameful than being gay, or that being black is lesser than being white and vice versa. It's based on hatred, anxiety and lack of understanding. To insist otherwise is absolutely insane and shows just how far we still have to go. Society will never progress and we will fall into the same rabbit holes until the minority catch up with civilized society and learn that humans regardless of sexual orientation, race, skin colour etc are all equal.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
There probably aren’t moral absolutes I agree. As a Christian the commandments are great as is most of Jesus teaching but literal reading of a lot of the bible would be very very dangerous
Gods people understanding god wanted them to destroy men women children and livestock when winning battles being one. I personally don’t believe God told them to do that I think that was gods peoples interpretation of god at the time
Evos point is that is fundamentally evil and violent and he’s wrong. It’s no more evil or violent than many previous atheistic or religious regimes that use power to suppress and rules and laws to dehumanise
fatso
Well-Known Member
Im not talking about race or colour, I'm talking specifically about homosexuality.
I agree 100% about the acceptance of race or colour, and even religion and politics. It's what separates us that gives us diversity.
In terms of homosexuality the issue becomes somewhat confused, many religions class it as wrong, some countries outlaw it.
although scientists say it's a natural urge not a choice, the same is said of paedophiles in courts of law.
I agree 100% about the acceptance of race or colour, and even religion and politics. It's what separates us that gives us diversity.
In terms of homosexuality the issue becomes somewhat confused, many religions class it as wrong, some countries outlaw it.
although scientists say it's a natural urge not a choice, the same is said of paedophiles in courts of law.
GaryMabbuttsLeftKnee
Well-Known Member
Homosexuality is between two consenting adults, paedophilia is abusing a child. Not really sure how they have been brought up in the same conversation to be honest.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Think it was both being natural urges. Consenting adults is a good explanation
This is what people fear isn’t it? Moral relativism. Without moral absolutes who decides what’s morally ok or not? It’s not been resolved till now and will only get more challenging I’m sure
fatso
Well-Known Member
It's because the paedophiles claim they cant help the urge, that they are born to be attracted to young kids and it's not a choice they consciously make. Necrophiliacs say the same.
So my point is, just because they cant help being that way, it doesnt automatically mean that their practices should be tolerated.
The fact that two (or more) homosexuals are consenting doesnt mean its universally ok.
If they are not causing anyone harm I personally haven't got an issue, but religious leaders and followers of many denominations do have issues as sin is sin, even when it's not witnessed. Hence the animosity in religious teachings.
The wests tolerance of homosexuality and drugs are two of the issues the Muslim fundamentalists use to radicalise their youth against us, they use the teachings of the Koran as proof, and even claim the west is godless as we even defy our own Bible.
Evo1883
Well-Known Member
Well I'm all for people thinking what they want, but I'm not entirely sure that's in line with modern values, whether you agree or not... I wouldn't crucify you for your opinion... Because its yours.. I don't agree with it
fatso
Well-Known Member
That's fair enough, your quite entitled to disagree. I wont behead you for it
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Who knew this thread'd take a turn where we all pile on with the likes to your posts
Earlsdon_Skyblue1
Well-Known Member
That's a great film. Had completely forgotten about it. Might smoke a doobie and watch that tonight.
Evo1883
Well-Known Member
I'm not all bad, I promise
Who knew this thread'd take a turn where we all pile on with the likes to your posts
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
Tile Hill.
It was probably Fatso firing at him
Spent 3 months in a hole with a gay sergeant in afghan and 2 other lads, after the shite we had to put up with I hope he went home and rattled his fellas back doors inexcuse my humour
It was probably Fatso firing at him
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
I have an issue with the highlighted statement.
We've lived through a long time where church teachings (many of which have similar origins to Islamic teachings) were taken as read and in our society we've looked at those and said "why?" and that question comes back with totally unsatisfactory answers. We try to understand the reasoning of those beliefs but nothing other than bigotry and attempts of those in power to enforce their will on people provides an explanation.
On the other hand, when you attempt to debate or explain these reasons to hardline religious people (esp Muslims) there is a total refusal to listen because the word of God is all they need to know and anything you say is worthless as you're just a person (even though you try and explain the word of God itself is just things written down by people as well, often with a clear selfish potential reasons for it).
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Yep. According to that you could interpret it as raping a woman is perfectly acceptable as that would be a 'natural urge'. Meanwhile two men or women consentingly having sex with each other is an abomination.
fatso
Well-Known Member
A few rounds fired at the back door never hurt anyone!
Evo1883
Well-Known Member
Yes tile hill
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
Yes tile hill
That wasn't supposed to be on there . I typed out another 'joke deleted it, but Tile Hill stayed in the post.
Just think how bad the joke that didn't make the cut must have been considering the one that got posted!!
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
What’s the moral difference between me eating my missus’ ass and some dudes? Ass is ass my man.
Also I doubt there’s a single country on Earth where the AoC has been lowered rather than raised in recent history. The most you’ve had is people saying 14-16 should be allowed to fuck each other. And as long as they’re safe why not? I was fucking a 15 year old at 16, should I have gone to prison?
fatso
Well-Known Member
Dudes arses tend to be smaller, spotty, and slightly more hairy than your Mrs, (So I hear )
If you want to know what the moral issue is, go ask your Mrs, I’d be interested in her response! I’m sure she won’t say ass is ass!
The Age of convent for homosexuals was reduced as recently as 2003
There are people actively seeking to reduce it further. I’ve no idea why, and I doubt if they will succeed.
Should you of gone to prison? Maybe her dad would be better qualified to answer that!
)If you want to know what the moral issue is, go ask your Mrs, I’d be interested in her response! I’m sure she won’t say ass is ass!
The Age of convent for homosexuals was reduced as recently as 2003
There are people actively seeking to reduce it further. I’ve no idea why, and I doubt if they will succeed.
Should you of gone to prison? Maybe her dad would be better qualified to answer that!
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Technically you were committing an offence as your were of legal age and they weren't, which is statutory rape. Had you been 15 as well no issue.
It's far more nuanced than the law can make it out to be with arbitrary ages. For example a 14yo genius could be having sex with a rather stupid, naive 30yo and be the person with control in that relationship. In the eyes of the law the 30yo is the one committing the offence even though they're the ones being exploited.
Of course I understand and back the rules as most kids don't have the emotional maturity even if they're physically mature, but I could argue I knew plenty of people in my 20's and 30's who I'd argue didn't have the emotional maturity to have a sexual relationship.
Last edited:
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Oh I know I was breaking the law. Her family fell out with me once and used it as a threat, my question was what’s wrong with it?
Given a free rein I think I’d institute the “half your age plus 7” AoC rule until the younger person is 21.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Dudes arses tend to be smaller, spotty, and slightly more hairy than your Mrs, (So I hear
If you want to know what the moral issue is, go ask your Mrs, I’d be interested in her response! I’m sure she won’t say ass is ass!
The Age of convent for homosexuals was reduced as recently as 2003
There are people actively seeking to reduce it further. I’ve no idea why, and I doubt if they will succeed.
Should you of gone to prison? Maybe her dad would be better qualified to answer that!
Her dad was dead.
AoC for homosexual sex was normalised to be the same as heterosexual sex. The overall AoC wasn’t lowered.
The stereotypes tell me gay men work quite hard to keep their ass small and hair/spot free. I assume I’m OK to eat metrosexual ass? But not radical feminist ass?
I don’t get the issue. The ass isn’t a sex organ. Women’s asses are functionally identical to men’s asses.
What’s your stance on pegging?
fatso
Well-Known Member
Give me half an hour and I’ll get back to you!
hill83
Well-Known Member
