[Livia]

Originally Posted by toby843

Hi, see this is what I like, this is what these forums are all about, healthy debate on relevant subjects. not mindless childish slagging for no real reason. Thanks you Livia.

So....Like I said before, I'm not religous, I'm not arguing for or against the bible, I'm arguing for Dave's right to have a religous view, and one that should by all rights be shared by the majority of the coutry as it is christian coutry by foundation.

When I talked about society 60 years ago my point was that if we could take their values we would be better off, not their laws. Would you not rather live in a world where the dustman would take your bin even if the lid wasn't shut slightly? Or, not worry about sending your child on a school sports event in case they bang their head against another child and the other parents sue you? Would you rather not be surrounded by health and safety signs everywhere yo go telling you not to do what you quite clearly wouldn't do anyway? And so on and so forth!

Now I'm not homophobic in any way but in my opinion, and it is my opinion and I'm allowed it, I don't agree that same sex couples should be allowed to adopt children, and I am happy to think that knowing that I am allowed an opinion, ergo, Dave should be allowed his religous views, after all, without national identity and the great and triumphant history of our country what would we be left with in todays society of immigration and assylum??

There’s quite a lot of healthy debate here, amongst a lot of mindless drivel of course. Some of my favourite posters on here I hardly agree with at all, but they don’t resort to name-calling and can agree to either see the alternate view, or to disagree.

Dave has a right to his religious view. We both agree on that. But the laws that he chooses to follow have been carefully chosen and discriminate expressly against one section of society. I’m not referring exclusively to Dave here, but to religious people generally, but as Dave is the point of this thread… He does not agree with homosexuality because it says so in the Bible. But he allowed Ben to cut his hair short, around his temples, which is also expressly forbidden in the Bible. So why is one held up as God’s word, and the other isn’t? It’s not a pick-and-mix, it’s supposed to be the Word of God. If one God-given law is archaic enough to be ignored, who chooses?

I will not argue that Health and Safety legislation is over-zealous. Yes there are elements of the bygone that are looked on with nostalgia… but to think everything was rosy back then would be erroneous. Sixty years ago food was still rationed, National Service (love it or hate it) was non-negotiable, inner cities, many destroyed by war, would remain virtual ghettos for at least another two decades. The “Darling Buds of May” view of the 1950s is, I think, a mistake.

You say that this is a Christian country, and although well over fifty eight percent of the country listed their religion as “Christian”, a visit to any church on any Sunday will show that attendance has been declining year on year over a long period. More people go to football matches on Saturdays than go to church on Sundays. Interestingly sixteen percent of people stated they had “no religion”, the highest proportion of non-believers in the country ever. While it would be nice to think the Christian doctrine of “Love thy Neighbour” would be a nice ethos, I’m afraid that’s not the reality of it. And as a side note, interestingly, during the last Census, seven people in every thousand in England and Wales listed their religion as “Jedi”.

Everyone has a right to believe what they want. But that doesn’t mean it is right or even legal to discriminate against someone on the grounds of their race, gender, disability or religious view. So how does it make it right to be able to discriminate against members of our society purely on the grounds of the sexual orientation? This is not an unter-class we’re talking about; gay people work, contribute and pay taxes and they should have the right to live their lives with the same rights as anyone else.

Finally, and slightly off-topic I know, you talk about the triumphant history and national identity of this country and ask what it would be in today’s society of immigration and asylum. Offering shelter to people IS a part of this country’s triumphant history and national identity. This country went to war for the downtrodden in 1939, and many people, including members of my own family, found shelter here. This country’s crowning glory in my view, is the willingness of the majority of British people to stand up for the underdog, to raise their fist against the bully even when it is outnumbered and to offer sanctuary to the downtrodden as it has done for hundreds of years.

[stonedape]

Originally Posted by ElProximo

And if you think homosexual behavior is helpful, mentally healthy then YOU don't know a damn thing and haven't read the literature and don't know what you are talking about.

You may think your helping gays by encouraging and condoning them but you are hurting them.
Your 'righteous intentions' don't mean jack. You hurt people.



There is a massive suicide, drug overdose rate among homosexuals.
Because they have twisted their minds and physiology and become confused and upset from what they are doing which is unnatural.
Then,
Because people like you keep telling them they 'ought to feel good about it' and they don't - they feel even MORE despair.
People like you are what cause gay kids to kill themselves.

I guess hijacking my argument is flattering, but try something a little more creative than a metaphoric "I know you are but what am I?". As I've already said, the "massive" suicide and drug rate is caused by people like you, and you don't even need the righteous intentions. All empirical evidence in psychology and psychiatry points to this. In societies with less stigma, there is less mental disease. If your claims were true, you'd see more. You hurt people, and you're so willfully ignorant you've twisted positive affirmation into moral harm. It makes me worry for the future of humanity

[toby843]

Originally Posted by Livia

So why is one held up as God’s word, and the other isn’t? It’s not a pick-and-mix, it’s supposed to be the Word of God. If one God-given law is archaic enough to be ignored, who chooses?

A point I whole heartedly agree with, hence me not being religious.
I will not argue that Health and Safety legislation is over-zealous. Yes there are elements of the bygone that are looked on with nostalgia… but to think everything was rosy back then would be erroneous. Sixty years ago food was still rationed, National Service (love it or hate it) was non-negotiable, inner cities, many destroyed by war, would remain virtual ghettos for at least another two decades. The “Darling Buds of May” view of the 1950s is, I think, a mistake.

Again, good points, but again, I was refferring to the values of society back then, the feeling of mucking in together, family values, hard work, clean living, community spirit, national pride etc. When was the last time we had a good old street party with union flags flying everywhere? I'm sorry to say it, I doubt it would be allowed in todays climate as we may offend. Agreed?
You say that this is a Christian country, and although well over fifty eight percent of the country listed their religion as “Christian”, a visit to any church on any Sunday will show that attendance has been declining year on year over a long period. More people go to football matches on Saturdays than go to church on Sundays. Interestingly sixteen percent of people stated they had “no religion”, the highest proportion of non-believers in the country ever. While it would be nice to think the Christian doctrine of “Love thy Neighbour” would be a nice ethos, I’m afraid that’s not the reality of it. And as a side note, interestingly, during the last Census, seven people in every thousand in England and Wales listed their religion as “Jedi”.

very good point. Perhaps we should take a step back and have a look at the benefits of returning to the way we used to be.

Everyone has a right to believe what they want. But that doesn’t mean it is right or even legal to discriminate against someone on the grounds of their race, gender, disability or religious view. So how does it make it right to be able to discriminate against members of our society purely on the grounds of the sexual orientation? This is not an unter-class we’re talking about; gay people work, contribute and pay taxes and they should have the right to live their lives with the same rights as anyone else.

I guess this depends on how you take the term "discriminate" in any given situation. I wouldn't say in this case Dave is discriminating in the nasty sense that we would perceive rascism or sexism. I would say its more a case of womens only nights at swimming pools, men only on the front line (for now), adults only in certain pubs. The kind of "discrimination" we tend to accept as ok. If its our belief that a murderer is bad and we should lock them away we are in effect discriminating against murderers in the true definition of the word. It is Dave's belief homosexuality is wrong but he is not treating anyone differently within his relationship with them.
Finally, and slightly off-topic I know, you talk about the triumphant history and national identity of this country and ask what it would be in today’s society of immigration and asylum. Offering shelter to people IS a part of this country’s triumphant history and national identity. This country went to war for the downtrodden in 1939, and many people, including members of my own family, found shelter here. This country’s crowning glory in my view, is the willingness of the majority of British people to stand up for the underdog, to raise their fist against the bully even when it is outnumbered and to offer sanctuary to the downtrodden as it has done for hundreds of years.

What my point was, is that, as we, quite rightly, accept a steady incoming stream of asylum seekers we constantly integrate other cultures and religions and different ways of life into our own, we must make sure we don't forget our own national identity. Thats what I meant. As a serving member of HM forces I agree 100% with you on our countries crowning glory.

(Thanks for the nice intro too)

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by toby843

So there is no harm in two consenting adults having sex? Well the worldwide statistic on AIDS that clearly state homosexual males are in a higher risk category would argue your point I think. But yes you are right to a degree, any adults that choose to indulge in homosexuality have the right to do so.


Animals lick their own anus, would that mean its acceptable for you to in public?

What worldwide statistics are you using?

I would say currently the highest risk group to be black, uneducated, poor, promiscuous, Africans. Whilst it is true in the 80's AIDS spread rapidly through homosexual communities that had more to do with being promiscuous and not using protection.

As for the animal licking anus thing, no I wouldnt do it to myself or anyone else in public, in private however I might try it if only i could reach

[ElProximo]

Originally Posted by stonedape

I guess hijacking my argument is flattering, but try something a little more creative than a metaphoric "I know you are but what am I?".

I introduced the idea of what belief harms homosexuals and what helps them and first suggested that your presumption hurts gays.
You took my lead and countered and got it back in more detail.

As I've already said, the "massive" suicide and drug rate is caused by people like you, and you don't even need the righteous intentions. All empirical evidence in psychology and psychiatry points to this.

No it doesn't and it's sociology and not psychiatry. It is statistics. We know (mainly from police and hospital reports) that there is a horrifically disproportionate amount of suicide and drug abuse (and then overdose) depression and murder among those who enter the homosexual lifestyles and circles.

You can guess some 'secret twist' must be happening but the stats are the stats. Your 'secret blame twist' is just your own mind working on ways to hurt more gays.

In societies with less stigma, there is less mental disease.

Nope. Where there are large open and freely and even promoted gay communities is found these statistics. Some of the worst stats came from San Franciscos gay communities.
That is about as 'free and non-stigmata' a place for gays as it gets.

If your claims were true, you'd see more. You hurt people, and you're so willfully ignorant you've twisted positive affirmation into moral harm. It makes me worry for the future of humanity

No, you think promoting homosexuality will help you hurt Christianity and the traditional family.
you don't care about gays or whether your advice leads to their deaths and pain and suffering as long as it serves your hateful intents and purposes.
Right?

[Livia]

Originally Posted by toby843

What my point was, is that, as we, quite rightly, accept a steady incoming stream of asylum seekers we constantly integrate other cultures and religions and different ways of life into our own, we must make sure we don't forget our own national identity. Thats what I meant. As a serving member of HM forces I agree 100% with you on our countries crowning glory.

(Thanks for the nice intro too)

Dave is discriminating because the Bible tells him to. He's following a set of rules. It is the rules that are wrong, and it's the lawmakers and the Church (and I don't mean just Christians) itself that needs to think deeply about it.

It'll be two weeks on Saturday since I was at a village fair that was decked out with flags. I realise that it's not the same in the inner city (I come from east London) but I do think that the Union Flag is being reclaimed from the BNP and other far-right fanatics. Slowly, but it's happening.

The arrival of newcomers to Britain has been going on since people invented the boat. The Vikings, the bloody Romans, the Huguenots, Jews, Muslims, Moors... this country is ever-changing. Even the language owes it beauty to the fact that it's made up of the best of other languages... every word that ends 'able' or 'ible' or 'tion' is a French word. We're a patchwork quilt of a country and we always have been really. Ever changing and ever the same.

Always nice to talk to someone serving in the Forces.

[flamingGalah!]

Originally Posted by ElProximo

Some people will say that it harms both of the men. They are perverting their natural physiology and sexuality.
This causes imbalance, psychological problems, mental problems but maybe the worst thing is that they don't learn how to correct their thinking/bodies to their natural heterosexual states and sadly miss out on potentially finding the woman of their dreams and enjoying a life together with her.

This may be where Dave or others stand and they believe they are the ones who truly love 'gays'.
They could even argue that people like you HURT them by actually encouraging them to continue perverting themselves.

Friends who love friends want them to quit smoking. They certainly don't try and encourage the bad habit.
Enemies would encourage it and even buy their opponent cigarettes and congratulate them for bravely smoking them saying 'nothing will go wrong' and 'its who you are' and 'see.. you are happy!'.

The problem with people like you (meaning our views) is that you presume that homosexuality is good.
At no point do you even consider the possibility it may be bad.
So for you the only explanations (in your mind) is that anyone who disagrees must be uninformed or must be trying to 'hurt gays'.
No.
In fact people like Dave (in his mind, in his intentions) believes he is doing something to love and help homosexuals.

Originally Posted by ElProximo

And if you think homosexual behavior is helpful, mentally healthy then YOU don't know a damn thing and haven't read the literature and don't know what you are talking about.

You may think your helping gays by encouraging and condoning them but you are hurting them.
Your 'righteous intentions' don't mean jack. You hurt people.



There is a massive suicide, drug overdose rate among homosexuals.
Because they have twisted their minds and physiology and become confused and upset from what they are doing which is unnatural.
Then,
Because people like you keep telling them they 'ought to feel good about it' and they don't - they feel even MORE despair.
People like you are what cause gay kids to kill themselves.

I thought I had read some bullsh*t from you but this load of homophobic & extremely ignorant drivel really takes the biscuit, even for you...

And stop beating around the bush by keep stating "some people" when you actually mean that YOU have these beliefs, at least have the guts & grow some in stead of trying to speak for others when you are simply getting your own disgusting & twisted beliefs off your chest...

You have to be the most offensive person I have ever encountered on a forum... I didn't think there were still people about as ignorant & ill informed as you are. So congratulations for letting me realise that people with such narrow minds still exist...

[Livia]

Originally Posted by stonedape

I guess hijacking my argument is flattering, but try something a little more creative than a metaphoric "I know you are but what am I?". As I've already said, the "massive" suicide and drug rate is caused by people like you, and you don't even need the righteous intentions. All empirical evidence in psychology and psychiatry points to this. In societies with less stigma, there is less mental disease. If your claims were true, you'd see more. You hurt people, and you're so willfully ignorant you've twisted positive affirmation into moral harm. It makes me worry for the future of humanity

I agree with this post entirely so won't bother adding to the conversation.

[toby843]

Originally Posted by Shasown

What worldwide statistics are you using?

I would say currently the highest risk group to be black, uneducated, poor, promiscuous, Africans. Whilst it is true in the 80's AIDS spread rapidly through homosexual communities that had more to do with being promiscuous and not using protection.

As for the animal licking anus thing, no I wouldnt do it to myself or anyone else in public, in private however I might try it if only i could reach

hahahah I laughed proper hard at that. I got my missus in to look at it too. Good one.

Anyway, I never said the highest risk group. I just said homosexual men are in a higher risk group. Any research on any AIDS site will confirm that. Cool?

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by toby843

hahahah I laughed proper hard at that. I got my missus in to look at it too. Good one.

Anyway, I never said the highest risk group. I just said homosexual men are in a higher risk group. Any research on any AIDS site will confirm that. Cool?

Course its cool mate, nice to meet you by the way.

[flamingGalah!]

Originally Posted by toby843

hahahah I laughed proper hard at that. I got my missus in to look at it too. Good one.

Anyway, I never said the highest risk group. I just said homosexual men are in a higher risk group. Any research on any AIDS site will confirm that. Cool?

Anyone who sleeps around without using protection is at a high risk of HIV/AIDS, as well as many other STD's... As are drug users...

And not all gay men are like the stereotype & sleep with dozens of different men each week...

[toby843]

Originally Posted by Livia

It'll be two weeks on Saturday since I was at a village fair that was decked out with flags. I realise that it's not the same in the inner city (I come from east London) but I do think that the Union Flag is being reclaimed from the BNP and other far-right fanatics. Slowly, but it's happening.

.

Good. Thats something we should be pushing for slightly more I think. lets get our own flag back. Well said.

[toby843]

Originally Posted by flamingGalah!

Anyone who sleeps around without using protection is at a high risk of HIV/AIDS, as well as many other STD's... As are drug users...

And not all gay men are like the stereotype & sleep with dozens of different men each week...

This I understand. Please will people stop thinking these are my personal views. I'm just having a lively debate.

[toby843]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Course its cool mate, nice to meet you by the way.

And you, and Livia, and anyone else I've had a constructive conversation with on this thread. Thank you all.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by toby843

Good. Thats something we should be pushing for slightly more I think. lets get our own flag back. Well said.

Now we just have to teach everyone to fly it the right way up. Freaks me out when I see it upside down!

[WOMBAI]

Originally Posted by Shasown

What worldwide statistics are you using?

I would say currently the highest risk group to be black, uneducated, poor, promiscuous, Africans. Whilst it is true in the 80's AIDS spread rapidly through homosexual communities that had more to do with being promiscuous and not using protection.

As for the animal licking anus thing, no I wouldnt do it to myself or anyone else in public, in private however I might try it if only i could reach

What an image that has put in my mind!

[flamingGalah!]

Originally Posted by toby843

This I understand. Please will people stop thinking these are my personal views. I'm just having a lively debate.

Well forgive me, but you could have mentioned the other high risk groups as well...

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by Livia

Now we just have to teach everyone to fly it the right way up. Freaks me out when I see it upside down!

Its also a crime.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by WOMBAI

[/B]


What an image that has put in my mind!

I have a theory that if Shasown could do that, he'd never leave the house. Show of hands?

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Its also a crime.

I didn't know that. Is it actually a crime? I know it's a signal of distress... didn't know it was against the law. I feel even more self-rightous about it now!

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by Livia

I have a theory that if Shasown could do that, he'd never leave the house. Show of hands?

Quite wrong, I would do all the chat shows that would be interested, like Mssr's Norton and Carr's, would make a few shillings I bet!

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Quite wrong, I would do all the chat shows that would be interested, like Mssr's Norton and Carr's, would make a few shillings I bet!

In that case I'd volunteer myself to be your agent. 20%.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by Livia

I didn't know that. Is it actually a crime? I know it's a signal of distress... didn't know it was against the law. I feel even more self-rightous about it now!

Nope the Union Jack flown upside down is a sign of distress, to fly the Union Flag upside down is "lese Majeste" an insult to the Crown, which is still on the statute books.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Nope the Union Jack flown upside down is a sign of distress, to fly the Union Flag upside down is "lese Majeste" an insult to the Crown, which is still on the statute books.

That's my one new thing for today then. Thanks for that.

[toby843]

Originally Posted by flamingGalah!

Well forgive me, but you could have mentioned the other high risk groups as well...

Sorry, its just we were talking about homosexuals, but you are quite right yes.