What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The world's gayest nation

salivor

First Grade
Messages
9,804
Being gay is not a belief moffo. If it was so easy then I would be able to just choose one day to be sexually attracted to men. Sorry but I don't have that choice (not that I would take it if I did 8) ).

How do you know that Roberts has ever slept with a female? I've never read that, I think but his comments that the thought is repulsive, it implies that he hasn't slept with a female. You originally made the comment that he’s been sleeping with women for 30 odd years, care to back that up? I've given you information from an actual source straight out of the mouth of a close friend of Roberts.

As for the religious bit. I think terminator has summed it up nicely. The Catholic Church is VERY strong on their stance against homosexuality. The Pope has come out and said that homosexuals are deviants, not the comments of an organisation that takes their stance lightly. If you don't agree with some of their main beliefs maybe you shouldn't align yourself with them.

I don't care if there’s a link. Being feminine is not a pre-requisite to being homosexual so what does it have to do with the argument? Your using the exact same logic as goangod with his paedophilia link which means you must agree with him on that. You’re both using the same logic, sorry moffo but you don't have the luxury of using it for one thing and saying it doesn't prove a thing on another. So therefore you think homosexuals are dangerous because they are over-represented in paedophile statistics. Yet you don't even want to address this do you? Pick and chose what you wish to reply to from my posts but your not doing your own stand any good.
 

Terminator

First Grade
Messages
6,303
[quote="Moffo
Im not a card carrying fan of homosexuals, don't get me wrong. But there is no way i would persecute them. I believe in people having a choice to do as they please

Cheers,
Moffo[/quote]


Not in church mate, or on church grounds, if I saw anyone of the same sex touching each other in a queer manner I would throw them out without hesitation.
I wouldnt care who they were.
 

Moffo

Referee
Messages
23,986
salivor said:
Being gay is not a belief moffo. If it was so easy then I would be able to just choose one day to be sexually attracted to men. Sorry but I don't have that choice (not that I would take it if I did 8) ).

How do you know that Roberts has ever slept with a female? I've never read that, I think but his comments that the thought is repulsive, it implies that he hasn't slept with a female. You originally made the comment that he’s been sleeping with women for 30 odd years, care to back that up? I've given you information from an actual source straight out of the mouth of a close friend of Roberts.

As for the religious bit. I think terminator has summed it up nicely. The Catholic Church is VERY strong on their stance against homosexuality. The Pope has come out and said that homosexuals are deviants, not the comments of an organisation that takes their stance lightly. If you don't agree with some of their main beliefs maybe you shouldn't align yourself with them.

I don't care if there’s a link. Being feminine is not a pre-requisite to being homosexual so what does it have to do with the argument? Your using the exact same logic as goangod with his paedophilia link which means you must agree with him on that. You’re both using the same logic, sorry moffo but you don't have the luxury of using it for one thing and saying it doesn't prove a thing on another. So therefore you think homosexuals are dangerous because they are over-represented in paedophile statistics. Yet you don't even want to address this do you? Pick and chose what you wish to reply to from my posts but your not doing your own stand any good.

The Paedophilia argument is a separate kettle of fish salivor and i've steered clear of that one, it hasn't been the focus of my argument. This is really going no where fast, wouldn't you say?

I have no proof that Roberts never slept with any girls, but ummm...i think its safe to assume that he would've

Ask me what you want me to reply to and i will. I haven't avoided any issue apart from the paedophilia one, and that is because i don't want this discussion to head down that path

Cheers,
Moffo
 

Terminator

First Grade
Messages
6,303
Ian Roberts did go out with girls to cover his homosexuality during his football career, chances are he probably slept with them, if he enjoyed the experience or not is anyones guess.
 

millersnose

Post Whore
Messages
65,223
terminator007 said:
Not in church mate, or on church grounds, if I saw anyone of the same sex touching each other in a queer manner I would throw them out without hesitation.
I wouldnt care who they were.

wow this is getting exciting

(thinks millers picturing termy grabbing ian roberts by the scruff of the neck and tossing him.........out)
 

wittyfan

Immortal
Messages
30,006
terminator007 said:
Ian Roberts did go out with girls to cover his homosexuality during his football career, chances are he probably slept with them, if he enjoyed the experience or not is anyones guess.

Not necessarily. They could be women "hired" to pose as his girlfriend at functions etc. to keep the rumours at bay. It's a well worn practice by gay celebs and sportsmen.
 

salivor

First Grade
Messages
9,804
Moffo on the paedophilia thing. You are using the exact same logic as goangod and that’s why you don't want to go there. Sorry but using that logic you either think both links (feminine and homosexuality and paedophilia and homosexuality) are correct or the both links are wrong and the logic is rubbish. Which is it moffo? I can see why you don't want to go there because you face being made a fool of.

This is going nowhere fast though because you've chosen to ignore parts of my posts which makes me wonder why I bothered writing them in the first place. I'm not going to bother picking parts out for you to reply to, if you didn't answer them in the first place I can only assume it would damage your argument to try and answer them now. I'll let you sleep soundly in your delusional world thinking homosexuality is a choice.

On Ian Roberts. I've given you a quote from the horse’s mouth that he finds heterosexual sex repulsive. I'm also the one who brought up the fake girlfriends and the whole issue part. Now if you connect the dots your more likely to assume he hasn't slept with a female or has once and found the whole experience repulsive as I'd assume most heterosexuals would find if they tried homosexual sex. This is probably directed more at terminator by the way.

What I'm really interested in is the absence of goangod as I've seen him posting in other threads so he’s around. Fighting a losing battle goangod?

Also termy, I hope Ian Roberts stops by your church sometime. Seeing him kicking your arse would be quite a sight :lol: .
 

millersnose

Post Whore
Messages
65,223
goangod said:
So?
The outcome is still the same. An overrepresentation of Muslims in terrorism statistics prompts you to engage in a prolonged campaign to expose the flaw of Islam and educate people about its dangers

Ditto for me and homosexuality.

lets forget for the moment that homosexuals dont control entire countries have their own completely seperate laws and dont have bands of homosexual extremists blowing up nightclubs in bali......

oh so its the pedophilia that you are worried about rather than the actual act of homosexuality?

so if homosexuals had no link to pedophilia and aids you woul have a moe charitable view of these people?
the same way that i wouldnt have any real problem with islam without the human rights abuses for example - seeing you bought it up

Millers, I think you're way out of your depth here

do you you personally become preoccupied with homosexuality the same way i do about islam (yes compulsive im afraid)

you argue very passionately about this subject

[/quote]
 

cheese

Bench
Messages
4,013
Goangod ....although i agree to an extent with many of the points you make ........your double standards regarding the church are a bit concerning

goangod said:
Why was the Matthew Shepard's death given so much coverage? But the death of a 13yr old boy at the hands of two gay pedophiles ignored?

Yet then you applied this approach when questioned about sexual abuse within the church

goangod said:
However, the majority of the cases do not qualify as pedophilia - because they do not involve pre pubescent children. They involve overwhelmingly males ages between 12 - 16.

Joe, a man (priest) having sex with a 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 yr old male child is homosexual sex


Sounds to me like you're afraid to over associate the word pedophilia with the church .......

Or do you retract your pedophilia statement regarding the vicious rape of the 13yr old boy?!
 

ozcrusader

Bench
Messages
4,915
cheese said:
Goangod ....although i agree to an extent with many of the points you make ........your double standards regarding the church are a bit concerning

goangod said:
Why was the Matthew Shepard's death given so much coverage? But the death of a 13yr old boy at the hands of two gay pedophiles ignored?

Yet then you applied this approach when questioned about sexual abuse within the church

goangod said:
However, the majority of the cases do not qualify as pedophilia - because they do not involve pre pubescent children. They involve overwhelmingly males ages between 12 - 16.

Joe, a man (priest) having sex with a 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 yr old male child is homosexual sex


Sounds to me like you're afraid to over associate the word pedophilia with the church .......

Or do you retract your pedophilia statement regarding the vicious rape of the 13yr old boy?!

Salivor, Millers & e2w - I'll get you shortly :lol:

Cheese - not at all.

Let me state now for the record that what happened in the Church was an abomination - not just the abuse eithe r- but the wilful covering up of the abuse by Bishops etc etc. IMO, anyone and everyone connected with this scandal should be arrested and key chucked away.

Secondly, what I am saying about the abuse scandals is that media is ignoring the homosexuality angle in all this. Yes - there definitely were cases that qualified as pedophilia (abuse of children) - but there were many more cases - the vast majority in fact, which qualify as homosexual sex.

For example, a priest having sex with a 14 or 15 year old boy is legally classified as homosexual sex - this is what happened in the vast majority of cases.

When you add this up with estimates that over 40% of priests are gay - the Church has a serious problem with both homosexuality and pedophilia - yet how many times have heard that the abusers were homosexual?

Paul Shanley is the most prominent example of this.
 

ozcrusader

Bench
Messages
4,915
salivor said:
Goangod - Without getting too graphic, the basics of lesbian sex aren't too different to what a lot of heterosexual couples do behind closed doors. So why should a Lesbian lifestyle be considered any less healthy than a heterosexual lifestyle?

Salivor - that is the most ludicrous statement you have ever made.

Without getting to graphic, the basics of incest, bestiality and pedophilia arent too different to what a lot of heterosexual couples do behind closed doors - does this mean we should consider them normal?
 

salivor

First Grade
Messages
9,804
goangod said:
salivor said:
Goangod - Without getting too graphic, the basics of lesbian sex aren't too different to what a lot of heterosexual couples do behind closed doors. So why should a Lesbian lifestyle be considered any less healthy than a heterosexual lifestyle?

Salivor - that is the most ludicrous statement you have ever made.

Without getting to graphic, the basics of incest, bestiality and pedophilia arent too different to what a lot of heterosexual couples do behind closed doors - does this mean we should consider them normal?

Goangod do you enjoy looking stupid or do you just have a simple inability to read and understand other peoples posts? I'm guessing a combination of both.

I wasn't using that example to prove that homosexuality is normal. I was using it to show how lesbian sex can't be seen as any unhealthier than heterosexual sex as most of what lesbian couples practice is also practiced by heterosexual couples. Heterosexual sex can be considered a lot unhealthier than lesbian sex because it goes one step further and involves intercourse and the exchange of bodily fluids.

It’s just a shame I had to point that out to you. Next time you try to twist my words, use all of them. You changed the last line and made yourself look like an idiot.
 

ozcrusader

Bench
Messages
4,915
eels2win said:
yeah, millers, you should no better than using the law as reasoning in a debate about ethics and truth. after all, women and blacks had laws against them too. but i know that's not good enough for goangod.

One of the successful strategies of the homosexual community, has been to liken their cause to feminism or civil rights movement. This is crap. The reason is simple - homosexuality is a behaviour.

However, let's assume for the moment that homosexuals are born that way (despite absolutely no proof of this whatsoever), and we should give them all the rights that heterosexuals have. If pedophiles are born that way as well - naturally attracted to children - shouldnt this natural behaviour also entitle them to rights and protctions as well?

so i ask you goangod, to consider this. my parents (who are possibly around your age) watched their Soviet classmates being forced to use their right hands because it was believed that being left handed was a choice and was evil. it is not so clear cut with homosexuality because apart from being born with a homosexual preference, heterosexuals, bisexuals and trisexuals (they'll "try" anything) choose to engage in homosexual acts as well.

So what?


polygamy, in my view, can be ok (i might not engage in it myself, but who am i to stop others?). on the other hand, even though the adults in polygamy may appear to be consenting, they may be suffering from whatever it is that makes people join doomsday cults and I suggest this is why it is illegal. one difference between polygamy and homosexuality is that polygomy is always a choice whereas for homosexuals, they are homosexual even though they might prefer not to be.

I never said polygamy wasnt 'ok' - Islamic countries all over world have recognised polygamy. The issue is - we havent in the West. By allowing homosexual marriage - we are therefore fundamentally changing the way we view marriage in our society.

Homosexual marriages do not result in procreation - therefore, they should be considered equal with heterosexual marriages which have this avenue.

incest between parents (grandparents) and children is wrong because the child relies on their parents to teach them what is right or wrong and can be influenced into consenting incest (even when they reach adulthood) even though they don't really want to.

Sorry - this only your moral opinion - a value judgement. Dont impose your backward morals on me or others. Where do you get off on that? Incestous relationships can be just as loving and fulfilling as normal relationships.


Also, you are assuming here that incest involved children. It may not - a brother and sister who are 20 or 21 may want to marry. Incest has been around in all societies since the beginning of time. It is observable inthe animal kingdom. Just because they cant have normal kids doesntmean anything. How dare you judge these loving and committed relationships with your backward morals?

similar story for brothers/sisters, etc. another issue with incest is that it has medically been proven that inbreeding causes birth defects.

Ok then - so what? They just dont have kids. Its funny how you want to ban incestous marriages on the basis that they can have kids, yet you are willing to tolerate homosexual marriages which have exactly the same issue.

just as a point of interest, there are very few values that are universal to all religions and cultures.

e2w - you absolutely 150% incorrect on this count.

Every religion has injunctions against stealing, every religion has injunctions against murder, every religion has injunctions against lying, suicide, incest, bestiality, adultery and homosexuality.

How is it that every culture and every race has developed these exactly the same rules?

The reason is simple - natural law. Ie - the existence of an unwritten moral code, that is common across religions and cultures and exists merely because of our humanity.

Additionally, does anyone know of a homosexual culture? Or any culture in the history of the human race that given homosexual marriage the same significance as heterosexual marriages?


in terms of the link between homosexuality and pedophilia, you have not proven any causal relationship. you have just provided circumstantial evidence (always wanted to say that). the only place you have tried to establish a causal link was when you said something about homosexuals having a preference for younger partners. if this is correct, does that mean that the younger partner in a homosexual relationship is generally a loser because they didn't get what they wanted?

The evidence that I have presented still stands - that homosexual men molest boys at rates grossly disproportionate to the rates at which heterosexual men molest girls


A study in Archives of Sexual Behavior found that homosexual men are attracted to young males. The study compared the sexual age preferences of heterosexual men, heterosexual women, homosexual men, and lesbians. The results showed that, in marked contrast to the other three categories, "all but 9 of the 48 homosexual men preferred the youngest two male age categories," which included males as young as age fifteen.

· In The Gay Report, by homosexual researchers Karla Jay and Allen Young, the authors report data showing that 73 percent of homosexuals surveyed had at some time had sex with boys sixteen to nineteen years of age or younger."[37]

David Thorstad is a homosexual activist and historian of the gay rights movement.[48] He is a former president of New York's Gay Activists Alliance (GAA), a prototype activist group founded in December 1969. The GAA at its inception opposed age of consent laws, which prohibited adults from having sex with children.[49] Thorstad is also a pedophile and founding member of the North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA).

Thorstad argues that there is a natural and undeniable connection between homosexuality and pedophilia. He expresses bitterness that the gay rights movement has, in his view, abandoned pedophilia. Thorstad writes: "Boy-lovers were involved in the gay movement from the beginning, and their presence was tolerated. Gay youth groups encouraged adults to attend their dances. . . . There was a mood of tolerance, even joy at discovering the myriad of lifestyles within the gay and lesbian subculture."[50]


in terms of the title of this thread, I think something along the lines of "the world's most tolerant nation" would be more appropriate.

Excellent- then let us 'tolerate' pedophilia and incest too.
 

Anonymous

Juniors
Messages
46
goangod said:
For example, a priest having sex with a 14 or 15 year old boy is legally classified as homosexual sex - this is what happened in the vast majority of cases.
No.. thats having sex with kids under the legal age of consent. Its interesting watching you crash and burn in this debate.
 

ozcrusader

Bench
Messages
4,915
salivor said:
Heterosexual sex can be considered a lot unhealthier than lesbian sex because it goes one step further and involves intercourse and the exchange of bodily fluids.

Mate - you truly are a dimwit.

Here have the homosexual aplogist on the forum arguing that heterosexual sex - the foundation and basis of humanity - is not as healthy as homosexual sex. :roll:

Give it up fool - you have completely lost it.
 

ozcrusader

Bench
Messages
4,915
Salivor - you are a complete and utter hypocrite.

When asked about your stance on viewing child pornography - you say this:

salivor said:
Yes it is essentially a moral viewpoint.

When asked about your stance on bestiality, you say this:

salivor said:
Anyway why do I find it unnatural? Well as before, its a moral viewpoint.

But when I, or some other Christian takes the view that homosexuality is morally wrong, you have the hide to say this:

salivor said:
under Christian and other religious morals it is "morally" wrong. Not under mine and a lot of other peoples morals. So shove your morally wrong crap where you know where.

Therefore, you hypocrite, if you think my rejection of homosexuality as morally wrong is 'crap', then your rejection of the viewing of child pornography and your rejection of bestiality is also 'crap' - you can shove your moral viewpoints you know where.

Hence you have proved my point.

Once we dispense with the moral injunctions against homosexuality, we must also accept incest, pedophilia, the viewing of child pornogpraphy and polygamy.
 

ozcrusader

Bench
Messages
4,915
Willow said:
goangod said:
For example, a priest having sex with a 14 or 15 year old boy is legally classified as homosexual sex - this is what happened in the vast majority of cases.
No.. thats having sex with kids under the legal age of consent. Its interesting watching you crash and burn in this debate.

So explain something to me please Willow.
Lets take NSW with gay age of consent as 16 and ther Netherlands, with aoc of 12


A bloke is in NSW and sex with a 15 yr old boy, who does consent -that according to you, is having sex with a child under the legal age of consent - ie that is pedophilia.

But when this bloke goes to Holland, and has sex with a 15 yr old boy, who consents, then that is homosexual sex?
 

salivor

First Grade
Messages
9,804
goangod said:
salivor said:
Heterosexual sex can be considered a lot unhealthier than lesbian sex because it goes one step further and involves intercourse and the exchange of bodily fluids.

Mate - you truly are a dimwit.

Here have the homosexual aplogist on the forum arguing that heterosexual sex - the foundation and basis of humanity - is not as healthy as homosexual sex. :roll:

Give it up fool - you have completely lost it.

Its ok to admit your wrong goangod. Your the one who brought up the unhealty nature of homosexual sex. Well as I've proven to you heterosexual sex is just as unhealthy and dangerous as lesbian sex. Sorry you can't see through your own agenda, ignorance is bliss.
 

salivor

First Grade
Messages
9,804
goangod said:
Salivor - you are a complete and utter hypocrite.

When asked about your stance on viewing child pornography - you say this:

salivor said:
Yes it is essentially a moral viewpoint.

When asked about your stance on bestiality, you say this:

salivor said:
Anyway why do I find it unnatural? Well as before, its a moral viewpoint.

But when I, or some other Christian takes the view that homosexuality is morally wrong, you have the hide to say this:

salivor said:
under Christian and other religious morals it is "morally" wrong. Not under mine and a lot of other peoples morals. So shove your morally wrong crap where you know where.

Therefore, you hypocrite, if you think my rejection of homosexuality as morally wrong is 'crap', then your rejection of the viewing of child pornography and your rejection of bestiality is also 'crap' - you can shove your moral viewpoints you know where.

Hence you have proved my point.

Once we dispense with the moral injunctions against homosexuality, we must also accept incest, pedophilia, the viewing of child pornogpraphy and polygamy.

Yes your right. Lets just ban all sexuality. Once we start allowing heterosexuality we open the door for homosexuality, incest, paedophilia, the viewing of child pornography and polygamy.
 

Anonymous

Juniors
Messages
46
goangod said:
Willow said:
goangod said:
For example, a priest having sex with a 14 or 15 year old boy is legally classified as homosexual sex - this is what happened in the vast majority of cases.
No.. thats having sex with kids under the legal age of consent. Its interesting watching you crash and burn in this debate.

So explain something to me please Willow.
Lets take NSW with gay age of consent as 16 and ther Netherlands, with aoc of 12


A bloke is in NSW and sex with a 15 yr old boy, who does consent -that according to you, is having sex with a child under the legal age of consent - ie that is pedophilia.

But when this bloke goes to Holland, and has sex with a 15 yr old boy, who consents, then that is homosexual sex?
I'm talking about where we live goangod. I think 12 is way too young.

I never said anything there about 'a bloke having sex with a 15 year old boy'.

You're the one who seems to have a fixation with male-male sex.

I was referring to sex with kids, male or female. The legal aspect has nothing to do with with homosexuality but plenty to do with an adult taking advantage of a minor.
 
Top