The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Some newspaper editors quite careless

Some newspaper editors quite careless

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. All
Not sex obssessed Ginx.
Just worried about tomorrows children.
And not frightened of the gay community.
Think about it. A deadly disease and people willingly spreading it through their sexual behaviour.
What is that?
Not a form of manslaughter? Not culpable sex crime?
Behave.
Its criminal act.
Posted by Gibo, Wednesday, 16 April 2008 1:05:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dont lose sight of the fact TurnRightThenLeft that my heart is for the children born today... though not corrupted tomorrow because we step in and thwarted the growth of gay.
Posted by Gibo, Wednesday, 16 April 2008 1:09:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Any valid points that you MAY make are completely lost with your High Church piety approach.

And you ARE obsessive and quite bizarre Giborish.
Posted by Ginx, Wednesday, 16 April 2008 1:18:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Gibo, it's patently clear that your first comment "what a wonderful thing freedom of speech is" is a lie.

You don't believe that at all.

You wouldn't say that, then baulk at allowing it. There's no such thing as "free speech... but only free when I want it to be."

That, I'm afraid, is the 'idiot's guide to censorship'.

I guess you can argue that free speech shouldn't exist when there is vilification involved, because that might cause violence.

But to argue it shouldn't be there, just because you don't like gays?

Hell, I don't like conservative idiots who incite hatred against gays just because they need some two thousand year old book to figure out how to live their life.

But I'm not so narrow minded as to censor them.

P.S. your disease argument is dumb. For the umpteenth time, unprotected sex, be it hetero or homosexual intercourse, is what spreads disease. Gay people are less likely to wear rubbers because there's no risk of pregnancy, but that doesn't mean that 'gay sex' is spreading it.

By the same token then, you should be damning the Catholic church's opposition to condoms as being just as bad, when it comes to spreading STDs.

But I suppose that would only be the case if your concerns were actually about STDs, instead of just hating homosexuality because your fables and prophecies tell you to.
Posted by TurnRightThenLeft, Wednesday, 16 April 2008 1:21:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Like CJ and TRTL, Gibo, I find *your* views immoral. Nevertheless, I'd fight for your right to have them and express them.

Freedom of speech means that you believe in the right of people that you disagree with to speak in public and be published. In saying you don't think gay people should be allowed to speak, you are not saying, "I believe in free speech, with exceptions" because free speech cannot have exceptions. You are saying, "I believe public discourse should reflect my own prejudices."

Gibo: "Theres no doubt that many in the homosexual community are 'quiet manslaughterers'."

If there are, they aren't very good at it, because rates of infection in Australia are very low. It's true that rates of infection have risen since the late 90s, but they're still around half of the rates Australia saw in the late 80s. For all the sensationalist articles you read in the tabloids about "barebacking" (i.e. gay sex without condoms), the real problem is complacency — rates of infection were so long people forgot they could even get HIV.

(See here: http://www.avert.org/ausstatg.htm)

To find high rates of HIV and AIDS infection, you need to look at far more Christian countries — the USA, and some African countries.

Of course, if we take the global perspective, HIV AIDS is a heterosexual disease, not a homosexual disease. Most people with AIDS live in Sub-Saharan Africa. People living in Christian countries are more likely to get AIDS than people living in Muslim countries.

Is god trying to tell you something? Should we put the African Christians on trial for spreading disease?

Look, Christians are obsessed with homosexuality, I know. (Far more that the bible is, I note. It's like a fever, with you guys, huh?) Enjoy your obsession — think and think and think about how gay people are "promoting" their lifestyle in your face, imagine them thrusting their bottoms at each other in their private bedrooms, see if you can catch them, in public toilets, adopting a "wide stance".

But you'll never get them to shut up.
Posted by Vanilla, Wednesday, 16 April 2008 1:40:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It doesn't really matter. Both sides of politics changed the Constitution of Australia to actively discriminate against gay people and deny them their rights. Made my stomach turn with disgust.
Posted by Steel, Wednesday, 16 April 2008 2:56:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy