Gay Marriage

[Born Hunter 17,751]

the law is generally black and white,so any confirmed homosexual should go to prison imo.

 

that doesn't mean we need to hunt them down,it just means that they won't be able to openly force their progressive and deviant agenda onto us.

 

if it makes us stronger and defends our traditions it's acceptable,if not it isn't.

 

and being tolerant of things like this certainly doesn't do either.

 

 

The law is black and white, yeah. I didn't think we were talking about law anymore though, more the morality that attempts to govern it.

[neems 2,406]

Morality is subjective the laws of nature aren't.

 

the moral code of a person or an entire country should only be considered as long as it abides by the natural order of things.

 

tolerance = degeneracy = weakness = death.

 

that's all we need to know,there is no point whatsoever in progressing beyond that line of thought.

[walshie 2,804]

 

surley it is a more damgerous assumption to not link gays with peadophillia, especially if vulnerable young children are being placed in their care. we live in a marxist state people are being brainwashed to accept thjngs from childhood that a generation or 2 would be seen as abhorant. no wonder young muslims turn to islamism when they see the decadent politically correct society we have to offer them.

 

90% of paedos might be gay (a stat I'm taking in good faith)

 

 

 

Well I wouldn't take that figure in good faith at all. That would mean that as the majority of paedos are male and 90% of them are gay that nearly all the victims would be male, which they aren't.

 

I don't think that sexual orientation has any effect on the dirty b*****ds.

[Quarter bull 240]

Imo, the church is Gods, end of, there was many digusting thing committed by supposed men of God, the church has come into disrepute because of these vile b.....ds, but it was the men that done it not God....

 

The church belongs to God, an God says no to homosexuality, end of, so why should these liberal lobbyists an gays, try an force the goverment to change the law to force the church to let them marry, why do they want to marry in the church anyway, they know God says no on the matter, i thinks its hypocritical, an imo theyre trying to make a mockery of the God

 

They have civil partnership there recognised already, there reasons for this needs to come out, an i think its to make a mockery of God.

 

My brother is gay, an i will tell him the same if an when it comes up, i love my brother, but i dont support his position...

 

Another thing this bring the topic of evoloution back up again, people who dont beleive in God, so they say anyway, an beleive evo is true, they can not tell gay people there wrong for there ways an doings, after all they evolved that way, theres no absolute, rights an wrongs in evoloution,each individual deceides for themself, so i think the evo men, need to explain there reasons, for saying being gay, or gay marriage or, gay people adopting children is wrong or whatever...

 

This is one one of the fine examples that evo is f****d up an wrong in itself...

 

Gods authority is the absolute, as i said before, anything else leads to these things were debating in soceity..

Edited May 1, 2015 by Quarter bull

[neems 2,406]

QB imo a lot of the people pushing for this take pleasure in annoying people with your type of religious belief.

 

a better argument than trying to convert people would be talking about your right follow your religion and its rules without state interference.

[Quarter bull 240]

Yeah they do, but im going to the root not the sympton, all this old carryon has to come to pass anyway, part of satans plan, plus whatever rule they make up, il still be steadfast in the lord.

[Quarter bull 240]

An im not trying to convert anyone neems, im stating facts just.

[gnasher16 30,024]

 

Reading that again Gnasher I think I'm the div. You're more likely to find a paedo in the homosexual community. I'm getting tied up with my thinking. There is clearly a correlation between the two but not necessarily causation. It's a dangerous assumption.

 

 

Well now im totally bolloxed .....if the stat is 90% of paedos are queer.......meaning only 10% of paedos are straight........then paedos are more likely to be queer and thats all she wrote.......no ?...............................................you could turn 2 + 2 into a perplexing unfathomable cryptic puzzle

Edited May 1, 2015 by gnasher16

[mushroom 12,827]

OK gnash maybe hypothetically

 

1% of gay men are paedos

 

90℅ of paedos are gay

 

Meaning a very small minority of gays are paedos but a large majority of paedos are gay

[Truther 1,579]

 

 

 

 

So for the gay marriage supporters here,you presumably would have no problem with incestuous relationships?

 

it's a choice and it doesn't hurt anyone else....allegedly.

 

and as for animals and children not being able to consent some young kids are a lot more switched on than most adults (i'm sure this could be tested somehow) and in some countries apes and dolphins have human rights,so surely those can consent.

 

let the whole practice go back to what it should be,a shady secret people keep to themselves.

 

Do I really need to explain why incest is harmful?

 

Animals have human rights.... What sort of logic did you follow to go from animals having human rights means that they then must be sentient enough to understand the human language and give consent? I could give a rock the same rights that I have, that doesn't make it a fecking human, that makes me bat crap crazy! This is becoming ridiculous.

 

 

So you're in favour of enforced Eugenics too?

 

I'm no biologist but i'm fairly sure there are people with definite hereditary illnesses that will likely cause more suffering than an average inbred child go through.

 

what about homosexual incest?

 

an animal may not be able to give formal consent like a human,but there will be ways of testing whether or not it's agreeable.

 

 

Am I in favour of Eugenics...... it's debateable. It really comes down to what society is willing to accept. If I was to take 100 members of the human species to another world to start a new colony for the survival of the species, then yeah I would be very careful with that populations genetics. Is that an answer? LOL. As things are on Earth I think we do what society will accept for the good of man and let nature take care of what our conscience can't deal with. I don't think there is a single right answer, even incest is subjective, how far removed from your blood does someone have to be? It's not black and white.

 

You know what, if you can prove that an animal likes being f****d then crack on. LOL. There are much more important problems to waste our time discussing.

 

 

 

 

 

So for the gay marriage supporters here,you presumably would have no problem with incestuous relationships?

 

it's a choice and it doesn't hurt anyone else....allegedly.

 

and as for animals and children not being able to consent some young kids are a lot more switched on than most adults (i'm sure this could be tested somehow) and in some countries apes and dolphins have human rights,so surely those can consent.

 

let the whole practice go back to what it should be,a shady secret people keep to themselves.

 

Do I really need to explain why incest is harmful?

 

Animals have human rights.... What sort of logic did you follow to go from animals having human rights means that they then must be sentient enough to understand the human language and give consent? I could give a rock the same rights that I have, that doesn't make it a fecking human, that makes me bat crap crazy! This is becoming ridiculous.

 

 

So you're in favour of enforced Eugenics too?

 

I'm no biologist but i'm fairly sure there are people with definite hereditary illnesses that will likely cause more suffering than an average inbred child go through.

 

what about homosexual incest?

 

an animal may not be able to give formal consent like a human,but there will be ways of testing whether or not it's agreeable.

 

 

Am I in favour of Eugenics...... it's debateable. It really comes down to what society is willing to accept. If I was to take 100 members of the human species to another world to start a new colony for the survival of the species, then yeah I would be very careful with that populations genetics. Is that an answer? LOL. As things are on Earth I think we do what society will accept for the good of man and let nature take care of what our conscience can't deal with. I don't think there is a single right answer, even incest is subjective, how far removed from your blood does someone have to be? It's not black and white.

 

You know what, if you can prove that an animal likes being f****d then crack on. LOL. There are much more important problems to waste our time discussing.

 

 

well personally mate i have no agenda to make beastiality legal,i'm certain there are people out there who do.

 

They're probably made up that gays are being more accepted and praying they're deviancy gets legitimised (in law) within their life time.

 

making heterosexual incest (for our purposes,sibling,parent and grandparent relationships) illegal is a form of Eugenics,so you are in favour of it being enforced,aren't you?

 

and you didn't mention the homosexual incest part,should that be legal?

it doesn't hurt anyone after all.

 

These are the next taboos to fall imo.

 

Then children.

 

 

Its not illegal to marry your grandparent now mate, as mad as that sounds, a weirdo married his grandmother some years back, saw them on TV. And another deviant married his horse in the US, sure he's on a video on YT.

[mushroom 12,827]

Pussys' pussy

[Astanley 11,563]

I,m old enough to remember when it was illegal to be a turd burglar , so in my lifetime they have made it legal , then they made it a crime to disciminate against them , then they passed a law that makes you a criminal if you are bad mouth them , then civil ceromonies were allowed, then proper marriage in churches , I fully expect it to be made compulsary before I pop my clogs .

[gnasher16 30,024]

OK gnash maybe hypothetically

 

1% of gay men are paedos

 

90℅ of paedos are gay

 

Meaning a very small minority of gays are paedos but a large majority of paedos are gay

Now im not a clever person admittedly...........but if 90% of paedos are queer...... whether 1% of queers are paedos is neither here nor there.......it doesnt change the fact that most paedos are queer ?........or am i not understanding a very straightforward statistic ?

[lurcherman 887 13,077]

Just skimmed this. So are all queers nonses ?

[mushroom 12,827]

 

 

OK gnash maybe hypothetically

 

1% of gay men are paedos

 

90℅ of paedos are gay

 

Meaning a very small minority of gays are paedos but a large majority of paedos are gay

Now im not a clever person admittedly...........but if 90% of paedos are queer...... whether 1% of queers are paedos is neither here nor there.......it doesnt change the fact that most paedos are queer ?........or am i not understanding a very straightforward statistic ?

Nope you've got it bang on mate, in a peverse sort of way