lest we forget

this all started as a reply to a flame
[to quote..the intro of the article in question]

quote...''A so-called conservative writer..[flame]..
parroted some silly arguments[opinion]
for same-sex marriage in the Sunday Age recently.

He finishes by saying that marriage ..is a good thing (which it is),
so it should be available for homosexuals as well.

He is wrong big time here.''

end quote]
ok i havnt read further

but its clear he was pushed..into defending..the traditional vieuw..[hardly unique]..of a marrage being between one man....and one woman...

[im reasonably sure he would reply to any flame that made this classic duality ..into a trinity etc..[ie more than one wife/husband]

this poor guy
was only responding
he hasnt just decided to make this up ..out of nothing

much like all of us try to correct error whenever...
wherever we think to see it

i know i should be building to a point
but the whole thing is absurd

like this comment

quote jon j..'..sympathy for OLO
but this dwindled over time..as I came to realise that the editorial bar for publication..was set much lower for religious apologists and AGW alarmists than for their opponents''

as a religeous appoligist..
recently banned for one month ..i find this laughable

[as silly as abc/bbc/nbc.. [or any media being called leftwing]

the left is dead..its now only a lable..those of the extreemists right wing use to rebut arguments they cant refute...there is no proof of global warming...but plenty that economists ned a new tax

as for religeon..thats a matter of faith..not opinion

faith without works is faithlessness...
[i know there is a god who is only good]

what ..im expected to be quiet
while fools who think everyone should be godless
rule the roost by annon complaint?...and out and out lies/distorions?

what is it to allow the clever
to decieve the foolish or ignorant]

that evolution is fact
when its theory at best..

that any marrage is true faithfull till you die marrage

that the godless take on faith ..from sharlitons..[science..
that has sold out the people many times..that those in monogomous relations have their value poluted by those wanting it all..

..go ahead call me on any of that

you cant claim marrage..one to one
then go to the boys club and have hundreds of others

let those putting in the efforts to be faithfull
keep their sacred trust scared..or at least allow them to defend offence[to them]..he was..RESPONDING>..

[that anz overeacted to lawfull faithfullness
to ONE partner is a shame on them]

but lets egsamine the works of the sciebnce elites

bird flue sars swine flue ..cooling..warming...
everything from assuring us the earth is flat..
to going over 15 miles per hour..in a car should disolve the human body...or the moon was coverd in meteres of dust

science gets it wrong first time everytime..!

if you dont 'get ' the science..
its because its doing its game playing...again*

cure for cancer...allways next year
or the next ten years
been hearing that since 1928

stop flaming jon

the clever flames go unoticed
because those who complain..are the same group that flame
then hope to complain..again and again..what does the flame gain?

their godless..adgenda
shutting down dissent..[then getting their latest scam in]

fool me once shame on you
fool me twice shame on you..again
fool me again and again..shame on both of us

if we cant defend the things we believe in
who neds an opinion to be heard privledge/site

sham on anz
shame on ibm

they stand revealed
by their own works

hung on their own petard
by their deeds shall we know them
their values are obvious to all..for all to see

This comment from Ulis seems to sum up the general slant of the commentary so far:

'What ANZ and IBM are doing to ONO is plain and simple censorship and should not be tolerated by anyone.'

Frankly, I would call the last 5 words of that quote a form of censorship - i.e. blanket declarations of what should or should not be tolerated.

This is not 'plain and simple censorship', it's part of the overall checks and balances of how thought and opinion ebbs and flow through the culture. Withdrawing one's business as a form of protest or to take a stand on a moral or political issue is an age-old method of protest in all democratic cultures.

The website is not being shut down. The firms simply withdrew their advertising - as was their right. Some other websites affected, such as Larvatus Prodeo and En Passant, have either praised the firms' actions overall or are, at least, unconcerned by it.

Those who would, on the grounds of 'censorship', deny the right of people to take an active stand against behaviour or speech they find offensive, corrupting or dangerous are practising their own censorship - only they're too self-righteous see it.

I'd like to thank Graham for all he has done over the years.
He has always put forward balanced argument, even if I don't agree with some of his beliefs, I definitely respect his right to have his say.

As for the two banks that have pulled their advertising, they are doing so to punish Graham for not going far enough to shut down any discussion about this blight on our society that is Homosexuality.
This abhorrent form of human depravity is destroying our family structures and our society, just as Abortion is and worst still, as Feminism has.

We must all stand up and fight for free speech and free expression of our beliefs and not be frightened off by criminals who push their own evil agendas by threatening us, and who try to shut down anyone who criticises them.

I hope this site keeps going, it would be a tragedy if it closes!

>> This abhorrent form of human depravity is destroying our family structures and our society, just as Abortion is and worst still, as Feminism has.

We must all stand up and fight for free speech and free expression of our beliefs and not be frightened off by criminals who push their own evil agendas by threatening us, and who try to shut down anyone who criticises them.<<

Riiight, "we must all stand up and fight for free speech" so long as the speeches are not from gays, feminists, pro-choice and other apparent 'criminals'.

I geddit.

Killarney <" This is not 'plain and simple censorship', it's part of the overall checks and balances of how thought and opinion ebbs and flow through the culture. Withdrawing one's business as a form of protest or to take a stand on a moral or political issue is an age-old method of protest in all democratic cultures."

Well said Killarney, and absolutely true.
I would go further and say that some of those bleating about the 'censorship' of such an anti-homosexual article are not at all upset about the companies pulling out their business from OLO by taking a stand against such bigoted articles.

Many are actually upset that ANYONE does not agree with the rubbish the article advocates.
They look at this 'protest' as a stand against gay marriage and homosexuality in general.

OLO needs to just cut their losses, find other financial backers, and learn from this mistake. We can't be seen to be promoting such hate-inspiring articles.

There is nothing wrong with spirited debates on homosexuality, or any other divisive issue, but when it turns into something ugly and bigoted, like discussing homosexuality as an 'abomination' or a 'perversion' etc, then those comments need to be deleted.