View Single Post
Old 14-04-2025, 05:49 PM #63
BBXX BBXX is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,629

Favourites (more):
BB2024: Ali
BB2023: Jordan
BBXX BBXX is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,629

Favourites (more):
BB2024: Ali
BB2023: Jordan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vesavius View Post
My wise old nan used to say that when someone says a thing everything before the 'but' should be disregarded.
It's called a nuanced POV.

Quote:
I agree, I would not cry about free speech if someone was voted out. I object to people being removed because they *might* offend someone. That's the whole point of my post in this thread.

You say you are not authoritarian, but you are arguing an extremely authoritarian position here so I am not sure how to reconcile that. Do I take you as what you show you are or what you say you are?
I don't think someone should be removed for maybe offending someone, I think people should be removed for threatening behaviour. You said it has to come to physical violence and I was making a point that in some cases, it wouldn't need to get to physical violence in the house to reflect physical violence outside.

I have said that Mickey shouldn't have been removed for his lesbian jokes. I said that is someone was hatefully homophobic then they shouldn't be rewarded for their views that actively hate on someone who is just existing as they were born.

Quote:
But, and it's not my view at all, why shouldn't someone have the view that being gay is immoral?
I am not saying people shouldn't be allowed this view, I am saying they shouldn't expect it to go unchallenged.

Think about it like this: Religion hates me because I am me. I hate religion because they hate me. For religion to stop hating me, I would need to be someone else, born differently, live differently, act differently, lie. For me to stop hating religion, all they need to do is not hate me.

Would you say that it's wrong that homophobic abuse is considered a crime? Because I don't see how anyone can claim to support gay people yet let abuse of them go unpunished. Perhaps you will say words aren't abuse, but you are wrong because they are and moreover, they help inspire physical abuse, too.

Moreover, where does that kind of attitude end, all in the name of anti-authoritarianism? What about those against capitalism, those who believe everything should be shared amongst us all. Let's make theft legal, a truly free society.

Quote:
I mean, more than half of British Muslims (52%) think homosexuality should not even be legal, let alone is moral, and nearly half (47%) think it is not appropriate for gay people to teach in schools, according to a survey of British Muslims, but no one on the Left ever comes at Islam for it. If Mickey had said that in the house he would be strung up... The outrage is so selective and fake.
Please stop lumping one whole political lean into the same group. It is my opinion religion is a choice (where being gay is not), and someone's choice to follow teachings who inspire hate should not have any bearing on my existence as a human. Someone else's beliefs should not negatively impact someone's right to live how they were born. I don't believe in God or Allah or any other prophet, but that doesn't mean I expect everyone to live by my own beliefs, or lack of. It doesn't mean I want to restrict their way of living. In the same way someone's diet shouldn't impact what I eat, someone else's religion shouldn't impact my life. When it does, that's when I have a problem.

Quote:
It doesn't, and if you honestly think that then you haven't been reading my words at all. It's a gross mischaracterization of every point that I have made and, frankly, you are better than that.
Yes, ending a post with a mischaracterisation is annoying isn't it.
BBXX is online now