Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhat does it matter? The Great Tribulation is coming and soon you'll be living in a paradise, i don't see why you're bothered?
no its not brilliant, its an epic fail and reflective of the depths that idiotic posters will go
to in order to justify a morality that is clearly destructive, based upon empirically
established facts. HIV is now at its highest level in the UK, due in no small part to the
very practice which these idiots are advocating, indeed the who cares bl ...[text shortened]... reside in mental darkness. Sorry to be so preachy johnny, but they really are
reprehensible.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI agree with most of what you say.
no its not brilliant, its an epic fail and reflective of the depths that idiotic posters will go
to in order to justify a morality that is clearly destructive, based upon empirically
established facts. HIV is now at its highest level in the UK, due in no small part to the
very practice which these idiots are advocating, indeed the who cares bl ...[text shortened]... reside in mental darkness. Sorry to be so preachy johnny, but they really are
reprehensible.
Personally speaking I am not gay and I don't think
I could ever be gay. I don't know if it is a choice people make
or whether they are born that way. But coming from a spiritual
perspective is not the way forward. There is no religion on this earth
that has a practical answer to sexual promiscuity other than abstention.
Proper personal practices in your lifestyle and in your healthcare are
the correct way forward when acting properly in society. Human rights
should always apply and people should not be stigmatised.
Having said that I do not have the answer as to how such a problem
can be dealt with. Legal rights of succession should be observed if one
man willingly leaves his estate to another. Sensitivity should be observed
at all times.
But it is my opinion that religion has no answer to this problem.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYep, godda watch out for those married women, married to each other, a total threat to society. Next thing you know, peace might break out and we have to avoid that at any cost.
The Pope is entirely correct, it is unnatural as anyone who looks at the physiology of
the human body will tell you. To state that his stance is unloving or hypocritical is quite
wrong, the Catholic church has quite been consistent on the matter. If gays want to
legalise their relationship they can enter a civil partnership which conveys upon ...[text shortened]... and should
be able to voice those opinions without being termed haters, as is often the case.
Originally posted by sonhouseNot sure about that.......
Yep, godda watch out for those married women, married to each other, a total threat to society. Next thing you know, peace might break out and we have to avoid that at any cost.
A couple of Lesbians I know would mop the floor
with Mike Tyson in his heyday.
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieNo, we have only finished the consulation phase. We haven't even seen a draft bill yet.
yes but the legislation only came into effect like last week......As to your
question as to whether one or two might slip through, hard to say, although what is
clear that if they do it will set a precedent.
This bill will then have to go through both houses of parliament before it becomes law. I suspect it won't be in force for at least a year or two.
I think you are referring to a case where someone employed by a Housing Trust was demoted for voicing private opposition to same sex marriage. That was a shocking decision and was rightly overturned by a tribunal.
You presumably are aware that one of the most vocal opponents of the demotion was Peter Tatchell, someone who has steadfastly defended the right of people to express their opposition to same sex marriage, despite being a gay rights activist and supporter of same sex marriage.
Originally posted by Rank outsidersure i was unaware only partly catching the details while skimming BBC/news. There
No, we have only finished the consulation phase. We haven't even seen a draft bill yet.
This bill will then have to go through both houses of parliament before it becomes law. I suspect it won't be in force for at least a year or two.
I think you are referring to a case where someone employed by a Housing Trust was demoted for voicing private o ...[text shortened]... to same sex marriage, despite being a gay rights activist and supporter of same sex marriage.
are not a few instances where persons have lost their jobs and proprietors of
establishments have been prosecuted.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo anal sex is unnatural.
... it is clear that the anus is physiologically not designed for penetration
regardless of whether people engage in it or not, ...
by the same argument so is oral sex,
and hand jobs are out,
axillary sex? (much employed by the staid Victorians)
frottage?
Everything taboo.
French kissing?
(Surely our tongues are not designed to go into someone elses mouth!?!?)
What do you and the missus do? 😉
Originally posted by wolfgang59The missionary positions, of course.
So anal sex is unnatural.
by the same argument so is oral sex,
and hand jobs are out,
axillary sex? (much employed by the staid Victorians)
frottage?
Everything taboo.
French kissing?
(Surely our tongues are not designed to go into someone elses mouth!?!?)
What do you and the missus do? 😉
1 edit
Originally posted by Hand of HecateIt's no good unless everything is allowed.
Sheet with a hole in it or not? Reach around finger in the bum okay?
When I am on the job it's like the last 5 minutes
of the Kentucky Derby.
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeehaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!
Go at it like a rabbit Robbie.
Let your inhibitions gooooooooooooo...........