[Robodog]

Originally Posted by Livia

No, religion shouldn't be rammed down people's throats. But neither should people's beliefs be used as a stick with which to beat them.

Ann has been questioned time and time again in the house in the hopes that she will say something that people can latch on to. She is entitled to her beliefs... unless we're going to deny people that. We have hundreds of thousands, millions even, of people who adhere to a religion that regards homosexuality as wrong. My problem with this is twofold... 1) it seems like it's only ever Christians who are castigated for this, and, 2) if you ask someone the same question in a thousand different ways, you will eventually hear something you can pin your self-righteousness to. And that's exactly what people in the house have done.

Voice of reason

[Christmas Dynasnow]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Really,I think you maybe need to research her a bit more.

It wasn't in response to gay marriage last night,the question was THEY KNEW she didn't like gay marriage but did she like their love/attraction with each other.

She called that disgusting,nothing to do with gay marriage as you try to cloud it with now.

I love Ann as a housemate she will even get my votes to win.
You have in the past advocated religion shouldn't be be ramned down others throats.
Yet you try to likely justify her comment of disgusting to a possible,only possible gay affection relationship down to her religious views and the bigotry contained in said religion.
Which actually is the faith I was born into but which zi have challenged many times,on many issues in it.
As I would Ann for expressing such bigoted views publicly too.

She is either right to think 2 men loving each other is disgusting or wrong to.
I know which side I come down on.

I say again,the gay marriage bit was discounted by the questioner last night to her.
They accepted she was already against it.
This was as another member has repeatedly stated,a question about gay love.
Which Ann described as disgusting.

This is BB at its best,when people get tripped up to reveal their real thinking on issues as Ann was,I'm my view,clearly likely not yours since you are possibly justifying her stance she holds and why.

Religious orientated bigotry causes masses of problems,not religions themselves, just the extreme bigotry arising from same.

Either you are deliberately ignoring the situation last night to get another tiresome political dig in or you were somehow oblivious to it (or you did not watch it -and bearing in mind Wayne said the same as Ann it seems this is the most likely reason)?

It was not a debate, it wasnt in parliament, she want being interviewed by paxman - it was larking around as a joke, Shane J was goading her to get a response and in character she gave them what they wanted to hear (Lumpkin had already been goading her saying they were coming into her bed)

They came into the kitchen after wrestling on the ground and laughing

Shane J "you might not support our marriage Ann"

Clearly as they are not getting married and clearly as Andrew is not gay this was a joke and said as a wind up

Shane J: "but you have to recognise our love"

both arm in arm, slightly intoxicated and exaggerating their "love" in a sitcom like fashion to goad Ann and her religious views.


To try and take ann's one word reply, said in the spirit of the question as in any way serious is either:

1. to have not seen the ep
   
2. to exercise an agenda against Ann based on personal hate

which one is it?

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Either you are deliberately ignoring the situation last night to get another tiresome political dig in or you were somehow oblivious to it (or you did not watch it -and bearing in mind Wayne said the same as Ann it seems this is the most likely reason)?

It was not a debate, it wasnt in parliament, she want being interviewed by paxman - it was larking around as a joke, Shane J was goading her to get a response and in character she gave them what they wanted to hear (Lumpkin had already been goading her saying they were coming into her bed)

They came into the kitchen after wrestling on the ground and laughing

Shane J "you might not support our marriage Ann"

Clearly as they are not getting married and clearly as Andrew is not gay this was a joke and said as a wind up

Shane J: "but you have to recognise our love"

both arm in arm, slightly intoxicated and exaggerating their "love" in a sitcom like fashion to goad Ann and her religious views.


To try and take ann's one word reply, said in the spirit of the question as in any way serious is either:

1. to have not seen the ep
   
2. to exercise an agenda against Ann based on personal hate

which one is it?

Post of the day

[Lilac hills]

Shandrewphobic tea