Hey, I don't like 'em, but...

[Scouse]

If you believe in freedom of speech then you've gotta let the f*ckers in.

And, although I don't condone their views, I also am puzzled by this:

(The church's views) are such a gross abuse of Christianity and a gross misreading

Really? For the best part of the last 2000 years Christian churches have been solidly anti-gay.

The only reason the Christianity now loves the cock is that most people don't mind when a man smokes another man's monkey pole. No church likes its patrons to think that it's wrong about something, otherwise it might *just* be wrong about something else, so most have changed their tune.

Lets face it, if we ban people from the country for hating gays then we should be deporting large sections of our population for holding the same view.

Or maybe Nazi Germany*, sorry, Britain is right and this man:

poses a real threat to the safety of UK citizens....?

I don't know about you, but I reckon I'd sleep safe knowing he's out there?



*Yes, I know, Nazi Germany hated gays too.

 

[mr.Blacky]

oh this guy I think it was last year that he focussed on Ireland. Saying it was doomed.

mmmm looking at the economy he might have been right

also this guy is not the only one. A Dutch MP was refused entry last week (?) dispite being invited by a member of the house of lords to show his movie about islam (which was such an utter crappy movie even the Arab nations laughed about it)

 

[TdC]

Cannot play media. Sorry, this media is not available in your territory.

iz it because I iz Euro?

 

[old.user4556]

The only reason the Christianity now loves the cock is that most people don't mind when a man smokes another man's monkey pole.

lawl !

 

[Turamber]

Really? For the best part of the last 2000 years Christian churches have been solidly anti-gay.

Arguable. There is a fine dividing line between hating a person and hating a practice. Of course it is not politically correct to hate anything but religion so people posting venemous messages in 3,2,1...

 

[old.Tohtori]

I could argue on the non-gay nazi germany thing, but i dno't think it'll lead to anything good, so let's not

 

[nath]

Arguable. There is a fine dividing line between hating a person and hating a practice. Of course it is not politically correct to hate anything but religion so people posting venemous messages in 3,2,1...

Well, it's all well and good to claim don't hate the sinner hate the sin, but in practice I think an awful lot of religious people forget that.

And besides - hating the sin in this case is just stupid. There are loads of things that are strictly forbidden in the bible that anti-gay religious folk don't give a shit about. I'm betting that in most cases it's just an excuse to legitimise bog standard bigotry. But hey, it's not surprising from people who genuinely believe in a magical being that created the earth and humans in their current form.

 

[Turamber]

Well, it's all well and good to claim don't hate the sinner hate the sin, but in practice I think an awful lot of religious people forget that.

Very true. Good job, then, that all the individuals who believe we evolved from amoebas are such deep, balanced, intelligent individuals with no trace of xenophobia, irrationality or hatred for their fellow evolved individual.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Very true. Good job, then, that all the individuals who believe we evolved from amoebas are such deep, balanced, intelligent individuals with no trace of xenophobia, irrationality or hatred for their fellow evolved individual.

Amoebas are f*cking racist to the nucleus though

 

[nath]

Very true. Good job, then, that all the individuals who believe we evolved from amoebas are such deep, balanced, intelligent individuals with no trace of xenophobia, irrationality or hatred for their fellow evolved individual.

I never implied that. I was just pointing out that it's religious beliefs are silly, nothing beyond that.

 

[Scouse]

Arguable

You could argue it. But you'd lose. Sodomy has been used and abused by the church down the ages to burn gays to death. (just before appropriating any wealth that they had).

Of course, you could always bring up the Catholic Church in Ireland, who's priests have a much more bum (and child) friendly "bent" nowadays

 

[old.Tohtori]

Scouse, WITHOUT getting too much into it, would you agree that nazi germany "hating gays" was more towards the time-period and people in general being anti-gay/hiding more?

40s weren't THAT pro-gay to start with.

 

[Turamber]

You could argue it. But you'd lose.

Not really. I wouldn't say the actions of the Churches are very good indicators of how individual Christians think or behave, as with all walks of life it tends to be power hungry individuals who gravitate to leading such bodies.

We're told that Jesus had plenty to do with "sinners", eating at their table, attending their parties and such like -- he was clearly able to differentiate between the sin and the sinner.

I doubt he'd be too happy at the way some people behave who associate themselves with his name.

 

[Scouse]

We're told that Jesus had plenty to do with "sinners", eating at their table, attending their parties and such like -- he was clearly able to differentiate between the sin and the sinner.

Don't try to use blind faith to make a rational argument. Followers of the Christian faith have been persecuting homosexuals right from the get go. Call it "misinterpretation of the message" if you like, it makes no difference to the reality of what's been going on for 2000 years.

Quick n' dirty google pulls up loads. Have a glance at this bijou book review. To pull a quick passage from it (partly to shut Toht up too):

In the end it was the revolt against Catholicism-in a very Catholic country, France-that seems to have freed Europe from its murderous scapegoating of homosexuals. It was the Code Napoléon of 1810 that abolished penalties for sodomy-leaving Protestant England and its colonies with laws that were not wiped out until (in our case) the overturning of Bowers v. Hardwick. In England, homosexuality was not decriminalized until the Wolfenden Report in 1967. In Protestant Germany, Article 175-which the Nazis used to imprison 50,000 homosexuals in death camps (an estimated 15,000 did not survive)-was not abolished until 1969. In Paris the subdivision of the police department assigned to controlling homosexuals was eliminated in 1981. In Israel, the Knesset did not decriminalize sodomy till 1988.

All this constitutes a deeply depressing record that makes the present moment of assimilation all the more bizarre. (But some things never change: although priests in previous centuries were often accused of sodomy, only rarely did the Church hand them over to civil authorities, since, when they did, they were burned too.) Homosexuals have been so recently reprieved that their release from ostracism, torture, and death resembles, in relation to the span of Western history, the one-minute-to-midnight analogy that scientists use to explain geologic time-yet we still have with us the Islamic crazies and the African Episcopalians disgusted by the English and American acceptance of a gay bishop.

I used to be quite the devout little Christian myself (directly-descended as I am from John Wesley, founder of the Methodist church). I woke up as soon as I was free of familial clutches tho. Religion, in all it's forms, is hateful, spiteful and controlling and has twisted the lives of every single man, woman and child alive on this planet today for the worse.

Gays are some of the most unfortunate sufferers. They've been getting it in the ass for two millennia.

Fnar fnar


Edit: But we should still let the fucking nutbar in to preach his hate, because we, as a nation, believe in personal responsibility. Or rather we used to.

 

[Turamber]

Religion, in all it's forms, is hateful, spiteful and controlling and has twisted the lives of every single man, woman and child alive on this planet today for the worse.

I don't agree. At all. I have my own problems with religion and organised religion and admit that it has caused problems down the centuries. But then I don't think there is a branch of human endeavour that does otherwise.

We are imperfect and all that we do is imperfect.

Religion has moved individuals to create masterpieces - in art and in music. Religion has moved people to create majestic buildings. Religion has unified peoples and nations.

You can't argue that the reforms in Britain during the 19th century were bad, and the majority of those were by religious people.

Religion can be a great force for good, as can politics. But both can be dragged into the gutter.

 

[Scouse]

Religion has moved individuals to create masterpieces - in art and in music. Religion has moved people to create majestic buildings.

The Christian religion has stifled artistic expression down through the centuries. You only have to visit the Uffizi in Florence to see the repressive effect of religious dogma. Madonna col Bambino's as far as the eyes can see. Fucking hundreds of them, painted over hundreds of years. People have been killed for art that "offended" the Church and religious censorship is still prevalent today. That's just what you get when you oppress using a "standard morality". Who the fuck is the Church when it comes to what I can see?

Yes, cathedrals can be most impressive (I grew up with a fantastic view of the Anglican cathedral in Liverpool) but over the centuries we've wasted huge amounts of resources building ever more impressive expressions of our love and devotion to a non-existent deity whilst ignoring more pressing and relevant problems.

Religion has unified peoples and nations.

To what end? War upon war upon war against the "heathens". Hundreds of millions have died because of religious dogma and the Christian religion is the lowest of the low when it comes to this.

And how does religion "unify"? By destroying and repressing it's dissenters. Aside from the obvious (the Inquisition) there's artistic, sexual, intellectual repression. Christianity has held us back for two thousand years and vilified the enlightened for daring to question it's validity.

Religion even has it's own word for people who challenge it: Blasphemers!!!! This was often followed by "KILL THEM".

Darwin himself held back publishing On the Origin of Species for twenty years because of his intense fear of the predictable religious uproar that his theory would predicate. God didn't create life? It evolves? For two hundred years Christianity has vehemently renounced his work. Now, in the face of a more enlightened population, the Catholic church has reneged and says it is "compatible" with the Bible.

Fuck religion. Fuck it to death and shit on it. It exists only to exploit the ignorant, the weak, the vulnerable. It makes retards out of perfectly normal citizens (see picture of old hate-monger at beginning of thread). It represses, violates and destroys. Any good that comes of it is by far outweighed by the utter evil that it facilitates.

 

[Dukat]

All I know is that these people have brainwashed kids and protested at the funerals of troops killed in the middle east with signs saying "thank god for dead soldiers". If allowing people to do that means "free speech" then I'm not sure I'm such a big fan of it.

Hold on, before you bite my head off, I dont think these people should stopped from saying what they're saying as much as I think that they should be stopped from saying it in that way.

Most people know that freedom of speech hasn't really meant freedom of speech at all for a good long time now, and if things like racial slurs can be made illegal then so should things like protests at a soldier's funeral.

I know I've sort of gone off on a tangent here but I think that the fact that these people are being denied entry to the uk is a good thing.

 

[Scouse]

How about if you dislike the notion of a soldier? Lets face it, these people sign up to kill people. The possibility of taking life is an integral part of a soldiers job description and war isn't possible without people who think that's OK.

How about this?

[youtubevid]Np6_b-72H3E[/youtubevid]

People should be able to say whatever the fuck they like. Period. It's up to the people who hear them to ignore them.

 

[Dukat]

People should be able to say whatever the fuck they like. Period. It's up to the people who hear them to ignore them.

And what of the mourning family? What of thier rights?

 

[Scouse]

And what of the mourning family? What of thier rights?

In school a group of kids come up to me and ripped the piss out of me because they'd learned my dad had been killed in a car accident. It was gutting. I had no idea people could be such cocks.

However, there was pretty much nothing I could do about it apart from understand that the world has more than it's fair share of retarded idiot spawn in it - and learn to not care what other people said.

Any other reaction would have been the incorrect one.

 

[chipper]

How about if you dislike the notion of a soldier? Lets face it, these people sign up to kill people. The possibility of taking life is an integral part of a soldiers job description and war isn't possible without people who think that's OK.

How about this?

[youtubevid]Np6_b-72H3E[/youtubevid]

People should be able to say whatever the fuck they like. Period. It's up to the people who hear them to ignore them.

thats a very narrow minded view of the military scouse, im not gonna get into an argument over it because its not relevant to this thread, not everyone who goes in the military has a raging blood lust you know. im not havin a go m8 cos frankly im not sure if your for or against the military, just think its unfair to paint the armed forces in such a light.

if people should be able to say what they like and in the case of interrupting a funeral, i should be able to go over and kick the shit out of these hippy bastards.


freedom of speech is not a black and white area there is a time and a place for people to voice there oppinions, laughing at a family who have just lost there son or daughter in war would frankly make me lose it and i would swing for the *****.

back to the man in the focus of this thread hes a prick plain and simple, most people will merely laugh at him and ignore him, anyone who listens to what he has to say probably shares his views anyway so really there no harm done.

if he turned up and held a rally next to a funeral of a homosexual would that still be acceptable too? no it would not and he would get the shit kicked out of him.

have your freedom of speech but be prepared to face the consequences of what you say.

 

[Scouse]

have your freedom of speech but be prepared to face the consequences of what you say.

Not in disagreement with that. But we don't actually have freedom of speech, which is a worse evil than a guy picketing a funeral...

 

[chipper]

yes scouse believe me m8 i know ive got first hand knowledge of it. i am all for freedom of speech cos theres plenty ive got to say to mr brown lol

if people want to say something they should be allowed to but at the same time they should realise not everyone is going to agree and they should not antagonise such people at sensitive times.

 

[nath]

Clearly they shouldn't, chipper. The question is whether there should be laws about it.

I remember there was a biker gang in the states that used to follow Westboro Baptist Church around and get infront of them when there was a funeral. The aim being to stop the mourners from seeing the nutters. I thought that was a great way - free speech beating free speech.

 

[Turamber]

Scouse you do talk a lot of utter fucking bollocks sometimes.

Do you think if there was no such concept as religion then there would be no problems in the world? There would be no such thing as murder? Disagreement over ownership and resources? That people wouldn't have conflicting ideologies?

You don't like religion I get it. But even if you could magically make all the people in the world who believe in God (and there are a lot of them) suddenly not believe in him and abandon all religion people would still be people. People will always find an excuse to dislike and hate others.

It is my opinion that true religion is something in the heart, not all people who are in religions are actually all that religious. This is also rather off-topic.

 

[nath]

You don't like religion I get it. But even if you could magically make all the people in the world who believe in God (and there are a lot of them) suddenly not believe in him and abandon all religion people would still be people. People will always find an excuse to dislike and hate others.

Perhaps not, the human race is full of fuckwits regardless of their beliefs.

The problem with religion though is that it demonstrates a person is willing to completely ignore solid scientific evidence and genuinely place faith in make-believe fairy tales. I think this is a dangerous trait and as a species we really should try and move away from it. I'm not saying science is the answer to all, but knowledge/understanding/a willingness to look at the facts is greater than ignorance/blind faith.

 

[Turamber]

The problem with religion though is that it demonstrates a person is willing to completely ignore solid scientific evidence

But there is no proof that we evolved. Since this subject was last raised here I got romantically involved with a girl with a doctorate in chemistry ... she is a Christian and meets with a number of scientists who are Christians. Saying it is only idiots that believe in God and that there is some overwhelming proof that there isn't one is just bollocks, with respect.

I stopped using this forum before partly because of people banging on about this before and partly because of the verbatim repetition of that shit that Dawkins spouts endlessly, lets just say I strongly disagree. And I'll go back to lurking on the DAoC off-topic section

 

[nath]

But there is no proof that we evolved. Since this subject was last raised here I got romantically involved with a girl with a doctorate in chemistry ... she is a Christian and meets with a number of scientists who are Christians. Saying it is only idiots that believe in God and that there is some overwhelming proof that there isn't one is just bollocks, with respect.

I stopped using this forum before partly because of people banging on about this before and partly because of the verbatim repetition of that shit that Dawkins spouts endlessly, lets just say I strongly disagree. And I'll go back to lurking on the DAoC off-topic section

Evolution hasn't been proven but there's evidence. There's no proof that God doesn't exist, but there never can be proof that God doesn't exist. Anything that contradicts dogma could simply be put here "to test us".

Clearly it's not only idiots that believe in God, but that doesn't mean it's not idiotic to believe in God, as there's simply no evidence FOR God. As Richard Dawkins said in an interview with the anti-christ (sorry, Bill O'Reilly) - why don't you believe in Zeus or Apollo or Ganesh? You believe God exists despite the fact that there's absolutely no evidence for it. In my view, that makes that belief as idiotic as me believing that my wireless mouse is self-aware, but lacks the ability to display it. It's impossible to disprove, but clearly it's bullshit.

 

[Dukat]

However, there was pretty much nothing I could do about it apart from understand that the world has more than it's fair share of retarded idiot spawn in it - and learn to not care what other people said.

Any other reaction would have been the incorrect one.

So we nurture 'retarded idiot spawn'? Let them do what they want? Is that really the only 'correct' way to react in your opinion?

Because in my opinion you're wrong - people like that need to be taught that hurting other people's feelings when they're grieving like that for no other reason than to air your extremist views is fucking wrong.

If everyone acts like that the world would be a pretty shit place to live in.

 

[nath]

Because in my opinion you're wrong - people like that need to be taught that hurting other people's feelings when they're grieving like that for no other reason than to air your extremist views is fucking wrong.

Of course it's wrong, but we don't make laws for everything that's wrong, nor should we.