Should nominating people because of their beliefs not be allowed anymore?
 

I think so. It pisses me off when people do that, its really scraping the barrell

Reasons should be like - i don't get on with them in the house..we argued..whatever but when its just about beliefs, especially when the person doesn't air their beliefs (like Dave with same sex marriage, he never airs them) and they nom him for it, its really, really pathetic

is jesus a gay man?

But if religion is all he talks about, and it irriates them, its a valid reason. Mario just nominated Corin for not being stimulating. I find that less of a reason.

well im going to create my own religion which hates black people and no one can say anything about it because its what i believe

now that pathetic

Think we have done this before but good topic.

Well, if you think religion is moronic in the same way Mario thinks Corin is dumb then I guess there is no difference. And if you are gay and someone says you can't have same rights again that might be annoying.

But i don't honestly know but my own opinion is yes. For example if one of the housemates i.e ben doesn't like gay people he could give that as a reason as far as i'm concerned and he would have to deal with the consequences.

And in fairness to Shabby (who i don't like) she made a good point that he is not representative of christians he has essentially made up his own religion.

ps - he did air his views about gay marriage, it is on film.

You cannot have a legally recognised "gay marriage". You can have a civil partnership, which isn't the same thing.

I totally get your point Nate!
I myself am not religious!...In fact 'god-botherers' are a total cause of wonderment and mirth to me!....But to each their own!

However!....If the same 'sensitive easily offended' housemates, used the same excuse that they used to nominate Dave for eviction....to...say... 'A Muslim'!....Then, would big brother allow this as a valid reason??:nono::spin:

But if all that Muslim said all day 'I am drunk on Mohamad' then nominating him would be valid. There have been other religious people in the BB house, but they had OTHER interesting things to talk about rather than being Drunk on Jesus. Dave is a one trick pony and his horse is lame. :D

Good comments,

I don't know where I stand on this.

Exactly. Dave didn't exactly say he was against same sex marriage, he just said he wasn't willing to be a minister for one as he doesn't believe in it himself.. going on to say 'God still loves everyone'.

There are many biblical arguements for/against same sex marriage, but the church has made it clear they do not back it. Hardly surprising a follower is against it. If someone on BB complained about Burkahs, all hell would break loose.

Look Dave can believe in whoever he wants.... but who wants to be preached to.If someone wants to learn about God then they will go to church.Who does he think he is forcing his beliefs on others... I am glad John said what he did tonight... At least he had the balls to say what most of the others wanted to but didnt have the guts to.

When has dave EVER forced his beliefs? Some asked him if he would be a minister for Mario's wedding and he said he was against same sex marriage. Thats the only religeous comment I have seen him make tbh.

I think someones beliefs are a perfectly acceptable reason to nominate them if they are the opposite of your beliefs... I'd nominate Dave for his views on gay marriage too...

when dave gets high on the lords love is this code for "the bible gets him hard"

are there any erotic parts in the bible? if there are, maybe he reads the same bit each time

This is a good topic, firstly regarding Shabbys comment about Dave not representing Christianity, how can you say that a single person does represent a religion? This seems like madness, its like judging a car by the driver if you know what I mean. Secondly I don't really think that Dave forces his opinions down anyone's throat the way some people are making it out, HMs tend to bring up a topic regarding his religion to him and when he responds he gets accused of preaching. Back to the post topic though, I think its not fair to nominate someone based on their beliefs up to a point, everyone's got a different tolerance for others beliefs but unless its an extreme belief like all of a certain race should be murdered for example them shouldn't it be acceptable? I think the issue is what people define as extreme is their personal belief and it varies.

Of course your right bansheewails!....If Dave did ..persistantly grind on about his religious beliefs all the time ....then he would be a fair target!!

But IMO,...He does'nt!....they're just using the religion-pushing and sexual tolerance card to disguise their nervousness of Dave's reading their transparent gameplaying like an open book!!:xyxwave:

Nope, I didn't even think this was a valid reason.

No this is not a valid reason to nominate someone and neither is the fact that someone made you wait a bit for crisps.

Well he has started spouting his beliefs in the house so it makes them fair game.

Religion should be a private thing IMHO. When you drag it out and make it public on TV then dont cry when its used against you.

And too many religious folk use it to excuse bigoted and narrow minded attitudes.

Well hey come on, each housemate has to nominate two housemates each week. Some housemates sometimes do not want to nominate anyone but they have to, and they have to give a reason. Big Brother can't turn down a nomination. They have to accept it.

well if he was around today the star would probably have head lines like "he wears a dress and hangs round with 12 other men"

Not necassarily the Religion thing really, I was on more about his views on same sex marriage, cause I'm pretty sure he hasnt harped on about that, he just told them when he was asked, yet they continue to hold it against him even if he doesn't go on about it

But for some that equates to prejudiced opinion. For some its a genuinely crucial issue. Especially gay people.

And compared to many reasons that are given its a fairly substantial.

After telling Steve yesterday that he believes someday god will give him the power to lay his hands on an amputee and their limbs will grow back, I think he pretty much deserves any nominations or backlash thrown his way. Ive seen some pretty wild pentacostals in my day, but he either has mild delusions of granduer or hes acting the whole god thing out. Even people in his own church cant be that ignorant to take him seriously unless its a cult.

I agree.

I would be nice if people weren't discriminated because of beliefs but religion is one of those things where people put themselves in a group that does discriminate. most religions (probably all) discriminate against other peoples beliefs that don't agree with their own. Most believers I know avoid this by just not talking about there beliefs to those they know won't like it. I think this shows with Dave not wanting to talk about gay marriage but finally gave an honest answer when directly asked.

Religion is fair game for nominations in my book.

Dave should be allowed to disagree with gay marridge, thats his belief, thats free speech. He didn't force his belief on anyone, and he trood on eggshells when explaining it to Josie beside the pool. Josie used it as a tool to attack Dave, that was wrong, but because we live in a society where any disagreement on a minority is deemed 'wrong', Josie got away with it, and those ignorant HM's who nominated Dave were wrong, oh the irony.

They're gonna nominate who they want out regardless, so it makes little difference what their reasoning is imo.

Completely agree, its not based on that, it should be how they act within the house...

Sometimes belief-nominations can be petty, but I think those for Dave are valid, at least in these earlier rounds. It's as stupid a belief as not supporting interracial marriage (once justified with the Bible too). Even hearing that opinion once, it would be enough for me to continually nominate them until someone else pissed me off more. And the 2000-year old opinion on homosexual ethics matched with the lovey new-age garbage (legitimate or fake) would piss me off too. If you're going to hold such a ridiculous opinion, at least have the balls to defend it.

And there were plenty of other reasons people nominated Dave, like general lack of trust, "bitchy" comments and such. If he weren't so cliquey, he'd be avoiding a lot more of these nominations.

I totally agree with the OP. It also pi**ses me off when I hear the claptrap reasons why the likes of Nathan doesn't like Dave. 'It's because he's against same sex marriage.'

As if Nathan lies awake all night worrying about same sex marriages. I mean, give me a bloody break. Dave has his beliefs, full stop. You either agree or disagree. But don't hold it against him for a reason to vote him out. Especially that idiot Nathan. When does the rights or wrongs of same sex marriage affect his life? What a complete a**hole.

Yep i'd have nom'd him for that alone. Dudes lucky that shizzle was left out in the edit. As offensive as when he said he layed hands on someones tumour and it dissapeared.

Then there's his views on civil partnerships...

"Oooo, i can't oversee the marriage of the gayers, the Big Book of Fairytales says i can't'

Twat. :rolleyes:

I've just posted on another thread about this and I agree with you.

I don't understand why HMs are allowed to use this reason, since it is clearly religious discrimination and bigotry which seems to be condoned by BB. Some of them continue to nominate Ben and Sunshine on class grounds as well. What if Dave nominated Scabby and Mario on the grounds of being gay? Or JJ on the grounds that he was Australian? Or Ben and Sunshine because they are posh? There would be an uproar, yet these thick, ignorant HMs can think of no other reason to nominate him, other than they are against his religious convictions, and seem to think they are gaining brownie points with the public because they are seen to be PC, instead of the bigoted idiots they actually are.

Sounds like you've only ever watched half of one episode.

Disagreement is not discrimination.

I did a thread on this a couple of weeks or so ago, and my opinion was that people should not nominated people because of beliefs unless it directly relates to them being an irritant in the house in some way.

Same here - people love to exaggerate for their own ends! No way can he be accused of trying to force it on others - he is entitled to talk about it though!

So the people for equal rights are the bigots....making Dave what, open-minded? :laugh: Hilariously twisted. Being anti-anti gay is not of comparable bigotry to being even a little anti-gay. And this has nothing to do with religious bigotry, it has to do with the specific ideas Dave holds on homosexual marriage. Dave could have got his views on gay marriage from Harry Potter, they'd still be just as irrational and unfounded. The only part that's annoying about the opinion being based on the Bible is that almost no one takes the Bible even close to 100% literally/seriously, yet this is the issue they've decided not to settle on. This especially applies to Dave, who is basically Unitarian Universalisty in every other respect.

And there were plenty of other reasons stated for nominating Dave. Like most nominations, the reasons are mostly petty/forced and it mainly comes down to who you get along with. This religion issue is a red herring. Dave's annoying, Dave doesn't spend time with people outside his circle. He's like an inverse Shabby.

I haven't once heard Dave nominate anyone on the grounds of being gay (which, according to you and other haters on here would be logical since you perceive Dave as being homophobic) whereas plenty of other HMs have continuously nominated him for his religious beliefs. Nor have I seen him treat Mario or Shabby any differently from the other HMs. If they wish to nominate Dave for reasons other than his religious convictions, why then do they not do so? It seems some are allowed THEIR beliefs whilst he is not being allowed his. You can't have one rule for some and another for others.

"I haven't once heard Dave nominate anyone on the grounds of being gay (which, according to you and other haters on here would be logical since you perceive Dave as being homophobic) whereas plenty of other HMs have continuously nominated him for his religious beliefs. Nor have I seen him treat Mario or Shabby any differently from the other HMs. If they wish to nominate Dave for reasons other than his religious convictions, why then do they not do so? It seems some are allowed THEIR beliefs whilst he is not being allowed his. You can't have one rule for some and another for others."


I don't "percieve" Dave as being homophobic. Dave holds an opinion that consenting adults shouldn't be married to the same sex. I don't care where he got the idea from...The Koran, the Bible, his parents (the real answer), it's stupid. And you're clearly not reading, because my points have had nothing to do with Dave being bad because he actively hates or treats gays differently. And you aren't reading doubly because I don't want Dave to shut up about his (very stupid) opinions...I'd like for him to discuss his reasons for this conclusion at greater length. I understand why he wouldn't: the public, and specifically the typical BB viewer, doesn't agree with him.