Persecution of Gays

Frightful Boar · 12 Feb 2014 at 11:14

Tuppy_Glossop said:
Think of it as a pre-internet emoticon or font style. The construct is intended to convey something over and above the words used. I suspect you know that. I only speak like that when I feel someone is overlooking an obvious point. I'm glad you love it

I do know that. I was just saying that I love it and asking if you actually speak like that. It reminds me of those histrionic people you see on TV where they have to make everything utterly obvious so the not-so-bright audiences get the point.

topshot said:
Then they shouldn't make such a public show about it and try to force people to accept it.

Haha well said!

Skull · 12 Feb 2014 at 11:15

Trig said:
I don't mind gays in the slightest, people can do what they like as long as it doesn't effect me and mine, same as with religious people and so on..

However, what I dont get is all the jumping up and down we are gay we ar gay we are gay stuff, and the channel 4 advert for sochii, whats with all the publicist for it, I'm 37 bald and awesome, you dont see me shouting about it...

No one has ever been ostracised, beaten, imprisoned or murdered for being a winning slaphead.

Schlong&Stable · 12 Feb 2014 at 11:15

Zethor said:
Homosexuality isn't an evolutionary dead end, quite the opposite. Given it has been observed throughout the animal kingdom at rates that start at 5% and go as high as 20-30%, it is probably an adaptation that has yet to be understood advantages for survival.

Of course it's a dead end. If you do not procreate, your DNA will not be passed on to another generation. That is not a very difficult concept to understand.

If there is any benefit, that benefit is not for the homosexual who as noted above, will not procreate. They are at a massive disadvantage.

Also, please provide sources for your absurd claims regarding animals.

KingOfTheDaves · 12 Feb 2014 at 11:15

robgmun said:
+1 to this

And to those that rolled there eyes at the propaganda, it's mostly the BBC i noticed it at, they parade gay stereotypes all the time and have been doing it for donkeys years. At the moment Graham Norton is placed on the pedestal. Don't get me started on Tourchwood and when RTD was writing for Dr Who, there were so many gay characters at one point it seemed like the Dr was the only that wasn't! (and he was asexual). And that was a programme aimed at kids, tell me that wasn't appropriate?

It's been way better since Moffat took over as head writer

What??!!??

Just because a TV presenter or a character in a TV show is gay doesn't mean it is propaganda in favour of homosexuality. Do you even understand the concept of propaganda or what the word actually means?

deuse · 12 Feb 2014 at 11:16

regulus said:
Who says God hates who?

What has an imaginary sky god have to do with anything?

So you never read the bible or even heard about it? strange.

So if it's an imaginary sky god why do they want to get married? why not just live together?

topshot · 12 Feb 2014 at 11:17

regulus said:
Who says God hates who?

What has an imaginary sky god have to do with anything?

Then why do gays want the same rights to marriage? even though most if not all religious texts clearly are against homosexuality.

Woden · 12 Feb 2014 at 11:18

deuse said:
But why would they get married knowing that god(so they say) hates them?(I have no evidence of this)

And then we will have to think about these polygamists that want the same rights. Where does it all end?

Marriage isn't a religious institution, no matter what the church may like to tell you. My brother's wedding didnt mention god at all, nor was it done in a church.

robgmun · 12 Feb 2014 at 11:19

KingOfTheDaves said:
What??!!??

Just because a TV presenter or a character in a TV show is gay doesn't mean it is propaganda in favour of homosexuality. Do you even understand the concept of propaganda or what the word actually means?

Tell me what purpose does a kids show have of characters even mentioning there sexuality? Let alone showing gay couples? If that's not propaganda i don't know what is

schnoodles · 12 Feb 2014 at 11:19

topshot said:
Then why do gays want the same rights to marriage? even though most if not all religious texts clearly are against homosexuality.

The Bible isn't too keen on women wearing trousers, so maybe they shouldn't want to get married either.

deuse · 12 Feb 2014 at 11:42

Woden said:
Marriage isn't a religious institution, no matter what the church may like to tell you. My brother's wedding didnt mention god at all, nor was it done in a church.

So they had a civil marriage. I know one couple that did that but for tax reasons.

Zethor · 12 Feb 2014 at 11:43

Thompson_NCL said:
Of course it's a dead end. If you do not procreate, your DNA will not be passed on to another generation. That is not a very difficult concept to understand.

If there is any benefit, that benefit is not for the homosexual who as noted above, will not procreate. They are at a massive disadvantage.

Also, please provide sources for your absurd claims regarding animals.

Procreation only benefits the species, it comes with significant costs for the individual (particularly females), with little and often no return. An individual that doesn't pass on their genes suffers no disadvantages whatsoever compared to one that does.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

krooton · 12 Feb 2014 at 11:53

Thompson_NCL said:
Of course it's a dead end. If you do not procreate, your DNA will not be passed on to another generation. That is not a very difficult concept to understand.

If there is any benefit, that benefit is not for the homosexual who as noted above, will not procreate. They are at a massive disadvantage.

Also, please provide sources for your absurd claims regarding animals.

Erm, just because you are in a gay relationship, that doesn't mean that you cannot father a child, be it through surrugacy, or indeed just donating sperm.

Then your DNA is passed on, and whether or not you are involved in it's upbringing is irrelevant.

KingOfTheDaves · 12 Feb 2014 at 12:12

robgmun said:
Tell me what purpose does a kids show have of characters even mentioning there sexuality? Let alone showing gay couples? If that's not propaganda i don't know what is

Have you ever watched a kids TV show? Maybe they wanted to put across well rounded characters where their personal relationships exist as a subplot within the main plot line.

This is not new, it has always happened. I remember 20 odd years ago there was a teenage pregnancy in grange hill. Do you consider this to be propaganda in favour of underage pregnancy? Or promoting single mums?

Maybe the real reason is the fact that watching gay characters on TV makes you feel uncomfortable and that you (and a disturbing number of other people in this thread) would rather wheel out a weak propaganda argument (think of the poor children) than face that reality?

Trig · 12 Feb 2014 at 12:13

Frightful Boar said:
What next? The right to pick my nose in public.

It's not so much the picking than the eating I find puts people off..

Trig · 12 Feb 2014 at 12:16

deuse said:
But why would they get married knowing that god(so they say) hates them?(I have no evidence of this)

And then we will have to think about these polygamists that want the same rights. Where does it all end?

Marriage is a fundimentally religious thing though is it not, as such there are certain "rules" attached to said religions.
I'm not a religious person in the slightest and would be quite happy for my relationship with the other half (a woman in this case but its not for all) to be called a civil partnership, we are both, mostly, civil and most things that we do are done in partnership, gays want to be married, not because of what it means but because its a case of being told that they cant be, as far as I can see partnerships and marriage are both the same thing, one is religious one is not, as long as they are happy together what you call it has nothing to do with it unless its a case of they have why cant we have...

Trig · 12 Feb 2014 at 12:17

regulus said:
Who says God hates who?

What has an imaginary sky god have to do with anything?

And this is the best bit, they are physically gay, they can demonstrate the fact they are gay in one way or another, yet seem to care what an imaginary sky god thinks of them and what they do..

Strange lol

robgmun · 12 Feb 2014 at 12:18

KingOfTheDaves said:
Have you ever watched a kids TV show? Maybe they wanted to put across well rounded characters where their personal relationships exist as a subplot within the main plot line.

Being gay has never been a subplot in Dr Who. It's just, "oh here i am being a space janitor, oh look i happen to be in a gay relationship with my co-worker" errr. What the Burnsy2023 has that got to do with anything? Nothing!

This is not new, it has always happened. I remember 20 odd years ago there was a teenage pregnancy in grange hill. Do you consider this to be propaganda in favour of underage pregnancy? Or promoting single mums?

And look whats happened to our underage pregnancy since

Trig · 12 Feb 2014 at 12:19

Skull said:
No one has ever been ostracised, beaten, imprisoned or murdered for being a winning slaphead.

awesome

IMHO Gays shouldnt be either, but the fact that they are says more about the fact I should be in charge of the planet rather than it being ran by groups of powerhungry selfish morons or religious power hungryr selfish morons...

Elixir · 12 Feb 2014 at 12:22

Some of your opinions are on a par with the alcoholic, probably homeless guy who decided to tell me all of his views on how homosexuality isn't "natural" in the pub the other night. Get a grip and let people do what they want.

Trig · 12 Feb 2014 at 12:22

Thompson_NCL said:
Of course it's a dead end. If you do not procreate, your DNA will not be passed on to another generation. That is not a very difficult concept to understand.

If there is any benefit, that benefit is not for the homosexual who as noted above, will not procreate. They are at a massive disadvantage.

Also, please provide sources for your absurd claims regarding animals.

Yeah I'm with you on this one, if you dont reproduce then you and your gene's are gone, unless of course that this sugegstion about it not being a dead end is in some way suggesting that the gays are in some way genetically deficient and them not reproducing is strengthening the genepool somehow by them not being part of it..
Somehow I'm guessing thats not what the point is though and imagine that a large dollop of offense would be taken if that were the suggestion...