Bandt alarmed at anti-gay marriage hate mail received


AUSTRALIAN Greens MP Adam Bandt says he's worried and alarmed by the hate mail he has received over his support for same-sex marriage.


Mr Bandt was commenting on reports that several Federal MPs had received a barrage of angry responses regarding their support for gay marriage.

Fairfax papers said politicians from all sides, including Finance Minister Penny Wong, NSW Liberal MP Catherine Cusack and Mr Bandt, had received the hate mail.

Mr Bandt said the Greens had received dozens of "vitriolic emails".

"Certainly, the most vitriolic emails I've received have been about this issue," he told the Ten Network.

"I think people tend to think it's pretty easy to sit down and send an email off into the ether."

He said he was alarmed by the emails.

"I think that there's concern that the closer we get to equality, the more vitriolic these attacks are going to become.

"People feel like they've got a bit of a licence to talk about these personal things in very offensive ways.


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/bandt-alarmed-at-anti-gay-marriage-hate-mail-received/story-fn7x8me2-1226390325750

People need to have more care on this issue.

Homosexuals in this country are very loud and they also can be very rude.

I have seen a demonstration in Sydney center and the signs and things they say are rude and offensive to religion and people who follow the Church.

In my experience homosexual people in Australia can also be much less rude than they are.

If they behave this way in Jerusalem let me tell you there would be a riot.

Yet it is the homophobes and not the gays who are posting offensive mail to MPs.

Me think homophobes should step back and take a long hard look at themselves.

____ wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 3:02pm:

Yet it is the homophobes and not the gays who are posting offensive mail to MPs. Me think homophobes should step back and take a long hard look at themselves.

Tell me - have you seen some of the demonstrations of gay people and what they shout and write on signs about the Church and religious people?

You do think it is rude?

It is offensive to people who are religious?
You do not care about their feelings?

Avram Horowitz wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 3:04pm:

____ wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 3:02pm: Yet it is the homophobes and not the gays who are posting offensive mail to MPs. Me think homophobes should step back and take a long hard look at themselves. Tell me - have you seen some of the demonstrations of gay people and what they shout and write on signs about the Church and religious people? You do think it is rude? It is offensive to people who are religious? You do not care about their feelings?

I don't believe he supports gays anymore than he supports any Greens ideology.

He's trying to get into Parliament via posting on forums then Tweeting it

Homophobia, just another phobia, in this case the fear of homosexuals. People with phobia's behave in strange ways.

Have you ever seen a person who is scared of getting a needle? you'd think the doctor was coming at them with an axe to chop their arm off.

Fear overtakes them to the point where they act irrationally, vitriolic emails to an MP is just one example.

Avram Horowitz wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 3:04pm:

____ wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 3:02pm: Yet it is the homophobes and not the gays who are posting offensive mail to MPs. Me think homophobes should step back and take a long hard look at themselves. Tell me - have you seen some of the demonstrations of gay people and what they shout and write on signs about the Church and religious people? You do think it is rude? It is offensive to people who are religious? You do not care about their feelings?

Well @ least gays are real.

SOB

Christ!
More bloody Gays and Rednecks !!

Why can't we focus on better things like people who undertake Celibacy for a greater cause and people in mixed-race relationships who have to put up with more than what Gays do.

The anus was never meant for sex. Full stop.

Maqqa wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 3:20pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 3:04pm: ____ wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 3:02pm: Yet it is the homophobes and not the gays who are posting offensive mail to MPs. Me think homophobes should step back and take a long hard look at themselves. Tell me - have you seen some of the demonstrations of gay people and what they shout and write on signs about the Church and religious people? You do think it is rude? It is offensive to people who are religious? You do not care about their feelings? I don't believe he supports gays anymore than he supports any Greens ideology. He's trying to get into Parliament via posting on forums then Tweeting it

Is that how you get into parliament in Australia?

Avram Horowitz wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 2:54pm:

People need to have more care on this issue. Homosexuals in this country are very loud and they also can be very rude. I have seen a demonstration in Sydney center and the signs and things they say are rude and offensive to religion and people who follow the Church. In my experience homosexual people in Australia can also be much less rude than they are. If they behave this way in Jerusalem let me tell you there would be a riot.

This post enforces your point to the thread, greens_win.

Adam Bandt is a pretentious pig. And thats his good points. the ALP despises him openly and you only have to listen to him (or worse, talk with him) to know why. To talk with him is to feel like you need a shower afterwards.

its nothing about homophobia. the man is a slimeball representing an unpopular party who barely gives lipserve to the idea of democracy.

____ wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 2:48pm:

Bandt alarmed at anti-gay marriage hate mail received AUSTRALIAN Greens MP Adam Bandt says he's worried and alarmed by the hate mail he has received over his support for same-sex marriage. Mr Bandt was commenting on reports that several Federal MPs had received a barrage of angry responses regarding their support for gay marriage. Fairfax papers said politicians from all sides, including Finance Minister Penny Wong, NSW Liberal MP Catherine Cusack and Mr Bandt, had received the hate mail. Mr Bandt said the Greens had received dozens of "vitriolic emails". "Certainly, the most vitriolic emails I've received have been about this issue," he told the Ten Network. "I think people tend to think it's pretty easy to sit down and send an email off into the ether." He said he was alarmed by the emails. "I think that there's concern that the closer we get to equality, the more vitriolic these attacks are going to become. "People feel like they've got a bit of a licence to talk about these personal things in very offensive ways. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/bandt-alarmed-at-anti-gay-marriage-hate-mail-received/story-fn7x8me2-1226390325750

The notion that two men fooking each other in the arse and sucking each other's d!cks is in any way equivalent to marriage is an affront to not only decency but good taste, too. So people, naturally, express themselves forcefully.

It is amazing, to say the least, that sodomites, cocksvckers, arse bandits and muff divers - if I may speak like Barry Mackenzie for a moment -  have the grotesque temerity to pretend otherwise. The whole 'gay marriage' push is what's supremely insensitive.

Soren wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 6:35pm:

____ wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 2:48pm: Bandt alarmed at anti-gay marriage hate mail received AUSTRALIAN Greens MP Adam Bandt says he's worried and alarmed by the hate mail he has received over his support for same-sex marriage. Mr Bandt was commenting on reports that several Federal MPs had received a barrage of angry responses regarding their support for gay marriage. Fairfax papers said politicians from all sides, including Finance Minister Penny Wong, NSW Liberal MP Catherine Cusack and Mr Bandt, had received the hate mail. Mr Bandt said the Greens had received dozens of "vitriolic emails". "Certainly, the most vitriolic emails I've received have been about this issue," he told the Ten Network. "I think people tend to think it's pretty easy to sit down and send an email off into the ether." He said he was alarmed by the emails. "I think that there's concern that the closer we get to equality, the more vitriolic these attacks are going to become. "People feel like they've got a bit of a licence to talk about these personal things in very offensive ways. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/bandt-alarmed-at-anti-gay-marriage-hate-mail-received/story-fn7x8me2-1226390325750 The notion that two men fooking each other in the arse and sucking each other's d!cks is in any way equivalent to marriage is an affront to not only decency but good taste, too. So people, naturally, express themselves forcefully. It is amazing, to say the least, that sodomites, cocksvckers, arse bandits and muff divers - if I may speak like Barry Mackenzie for a moment -  have the grotesque temerity to pretend otherwise. The whole 'gay marriage' push is what's supremely insensitive.

How very tolerant of you soren. And theres gay women too you know. They want to get married too. In fact some of the gays want to have children either adopting to ivf etc. Its happening mate. You might as well get used to it. You dont have to do it though. They wont effect you or your marriage. It will be okay. No need to fear.

SOB

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 6:22pm:

Adam Bandt is a pretentious pig. And thats his good points. the ALP despises him openly and you only have to listen to him (or sorse talk with him) to know why. To talek with him is to feel like you need a shower afterwards. its nothing about homophobia. the man is a slimeball representing an unpopular party who barely gives lipserve to the idea of democracy.

Think we may have discovered one of the unsigned authors.

skippy. wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 5:56pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 2:54pm: People need to have more care on this issue. Homosexuals in this country are very loud and they also can be very rude. I have seen a demonstration in Sydney center and the signs and things they say are rude and offensive to religion and people who follow the Church. In my experience homosexual people in Australia can also be much less rude than they are. If they behave this way in Jerusalem let me tell you there would be a riot. This post enforces your point to the thread, greens_win.

You are a working class cockfancying prole of the first order so you would say that. Even Danish pastry reminds you of cock suckin' and swallowing. It's the custard, innit.

Pathetic.

But I suppose, being a conflicted invert as you are, the best cover up you have is to get all militant and diversionary.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 6:40pm:

Soren wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 6:35pm: ____ wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 2:48pm: Bandt alarmed at anti-gay marriage hate mail received AUSTRALIAN Greens MP Adam Bandt says he's worried and alarmed by the hate mail he has received over his support for same-sex marriage. Mr Bandt was commenting on reports that several Federal MPs had received a barrage of angry responses regarding their support for gay marriage. Fairfax papers said politicians from all sides, including Finance Minister Penny Wong, NSW Liberal MP Catherine Cusack and Mr Bandt, had received the hate mail. Mr Bandt said the Greens had received dozens of "vitriolic emails". "Certainly, the most vitriolic emails I've received have been about this issue," he told the Ten Network. "I think people tend to think it's pretty easy to sit down and send an email off into the ether." He said he was alarmed by the emails. "I think that there's concern that the closer we get to equality, the more vitriolic these attacks are going to become. "People feel like they've got a bit of a licence to talk about these personal things in very offensive ways. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/bandt-alarmed-at-anti-gay-marriage-hate-mail-received/story-fn7x8me2-1226390325750 The notion that two men fooking each other in the arse and sucking each other's d!cks is in any way equivalent to marriage is an affront to not only decency but good taste, too. So people, naturally, express themselves forcefully. It is amazing, to say the least, that sodomites, cocksvckers, arse bandits and muff divers - if I may speak like Barry Mackenzie for a moment -  have the grotesque temerity to pretend otherwise. The whole 'gay marriage' push is what's supremely insensitive. How very tolerant of you soren. And theres gay women too you know. They want to get married too. In fact some of the gays want to have children either adopting to ivf etc. Its happening mate. You might as well get used to it. You dont have to do it though. They wont effect you or your marriage. It will be okay. No need to fear. SOB

:D


I am not calling you a totally unmoored and oblivious doofus because FD told me not to.

I am a good citizen.  :o

Get this, oh-she-who-is-no-different-from-any-normal-person: marriage is NOT JUST about the two people who marry.

I know you don't understand but one tries to educate you. Hope, you see, it's all about hope.

.

.

'Homophobes' - two guys smacking and sucking each other  - what's to like??

Soren wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 6:58pm:

'Homophobes' - two guys smacking and sucking each other  - what's to like??

How do you know what same sex couples get up to ... been there, been done like a dinner?

Soren wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 6:58pm:

'Homophobes' - two guys smacking and sucking each other  - what's to like??

I thought you LOVED sucking? It's right there as your avatar. It should be your signature:

"bySoren.
I suck"

tell Mr Bandt to toughen up a tad.. he chose politics it goes with the job..

does this silly goose think he is the only one to receive stuff like this..

get a life.or get out..boo hoo.

Soren wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 6:58pm:

'Homophobes' - two guys smacking and sucking each other  - what's to like??

lololol and you call me stupid?

SOB

cods wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 7:02pm:

tell Mr Bandt to toughen up a tad.. he chose politics it goes with the job.. does this silly goose think he is the only one to receive stuff like this.. get a life.or get out..boo hoo.

Says the one who was crying today over being called a

HYPOCRITE

Quote:

Get this, oh-she-who-is-no-different-from-any-normal-person: marriage is NOT JUST about the two people who marry.

Sure it is girl. What else would it be about?

SOB

Is this another so called respectable scientists who got death threat emails type of BS.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 7:05pm:

Quote: Get this, oh-she-who-is-no-different-from-any-normal-person: marriage is NOT JUST about the two people who marry. Sure it is girl. What else would it be about? SOB

are you greens_lose's brother/sister? You demonstrate the same intransigence. Or are you pansi's demented half-brother. You demonstrate her low IQ.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 7:12pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 7:05pm: Quote: Get this, oh-she-who-is-no-different-from-any-normal-person: marriage is NOT JUST about the two people who marry. Sure it is girl. What else would it be about? SOB are you greens_lose's brother/sister? You demonstrate the same intransigence. Or are you pansi's demented half-brother. You demonstrate her low IQ.

lol you cant answer the question either huh?

SOB

____ wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 2:48pm:

Bandt alarmed at anti-gay marriage hate mail received AUSTRALIAN Greens MP Adam Bandt says he's worried and alarmed by the hate mail he has received over his support for same-sex marriage. Mr Bandt was commenting on reports that several Federal MPs had received a barrage of angry responses regarding their support for gay marriage. Fairfax papers said politicians from all sides, including Finance Minister Penny Wong, NSW Liberal MP Catherine Cusack and Mr Bandt, had received the hate mail. Mr Bandt said the Greens had received dozens of "vitriolic emails". "Certainly, the most vitriolic emails I've received have been about this issue," he told the Ten Network. "I think people tend to think it's pretty easy to sit down and send an email off into the ether." He said he was alarmed by the emails. "I think that there's concern that the closer we get to equality, the more vitriolic these attacks are going to become. "People feel like they've got a bit of a licence to talk about these personal things in very offensive ways. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/bandt-alarmed-at-anti-gay-marriage-hate-mail-received/story-fn7x8me2-1226390325750

It's called dissent, and a very mild form of it at that.  So if you haven't already, cross "writing a letter to your local MP" as a way to have your voice heard - they're not listening.  Worse, they cry to the media if their constituents dare express their opinion.  Who are these MP's representing?

So what else is there?  When even writing a letter to your local MP expressing your views is off limits, how do you get make your vote count?  Do we have to take matters into our own hands?  Will rioting in the streets make you happy?

... wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 7:39pm:

____ wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 2:48pm: Bandt alarmed at anti-gay marriage hate mail received AUSTRALIAN Greens MP Adam Bandt says he's worried and alarmed by the hate mail he has received over his support for same-sex marriage. Mr Bandt was commenting on reports that several Federal MPs had received a barrage of angry responses regarding their support for gay marriage. Fairfax papers said politicians from all sides, including Finance Minister Penny Wong, NSW Liberal MP Catherine Cusack and Mr Bandt, had received the hate mail. Mr Bandt said the Greens had received dozens of "vitriolic emails". "Certainly, the most vitriolic emails I've received have been about this issue," he told the Ten Network. "I think people tend to think it's pretty easy to sit down and send an email off into the ether." He said he was alarmed by the emails. "I think that there's concern that the closer we get to equality, the more vitriolic these attacks are going to become. "People feel like they've got a bit of a licence to talk about these personal things in very offensive ways. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/bandt-alarmed-at-anti-gay-marriage-hate-mail-received/story-fn7x8me2-1226390325750 It's called dissent, and a very mild form of it at that.  So if you haven't already, cross "writing a letter to your local MP" as a way to have your voice heard - they're not listening.  Worse, they cry to the media if their constituents dare express their opinion.  Who are these MP's representing? So what else is there?  When even writing a letter to your local MP expressing your views is off limits, how do you get make your vote count?  Do we have to take matters into our own hands?  Will rioting in the streets make you happy?

bandt doesnt get 'it'. He's okay with fighting for his version of equality as long as only his side fights. Maybe he hasnt thought about what 'fight' actually means.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 7:05pm:

Quote: Get this, oh-she-who-is-no-different-from-any-normal-person: marriage is NOT JUST about the two people who marry. Sure it is girl. What else would it be about? SOB

I know you don't understand any of it.

Marriage, as a social institution, is about being a bridge between the dead, the living and the not-yet-born.

But as I say, this is too hard a concept for the likes of you, living in your 8 second attention span world.

Soren wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 7:59pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 7:05pm: Quote: Get this, oh-she-who-is-no-different-from-any-normal-person: marriage is NOT JUST about the two people who marry. Sure it is girl. What else would it be about? SOB I know you don't understand any of it. Marriage, as a social institution, is about being a bridge between the dead, the living and the not-yet-born. But as I say, this is too hard a concept for the likes of you, living in your 8 second attention span world.

8 seconds? Im only willing to give him 3 seconds.

____ wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 7:01pm:

Soren wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 6:58pm: 'Homophobes' - two guys smacking and sucking each other  - what's to like?? How do you know what same sex couples get up to ... been there, been done like a dinner?

Are you telling me that you guys are not just smacking and svcking and wanking each other?

Soren wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 8:17pm:

____ wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 7:01pm: Soren wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 6:58pm: 'Homophobes' - two guys smacking and sucking each other  - what's to like?? How do you know what same sex couples get up to ... been there, been done like a dinner? Are you telling me that you guys are not just smacking and svcking and wanking each other?

No, am pointing out that you are speaking from a prospective of experience.

Like the studies show, difference between gay and homophobe ... gays know how to open the closet door. 

____ wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 8:44pm:

Soren wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 8:17pm: ____ wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 7:01pm: Soren wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 6:58pm: 'Homophobes' - two guys smacking and sucking each other  - what's to like?? How do you know what same sex couples get up to ... been there, been done like a dinner? Are you telling me that you guys are not just smacking and svcking and wanking each other? No, am pointing out that you are speaking from a prospective of experience. Like the studies show, difference between gay and homophobe ... gays know how to open the closet door.

And get splinters on their d1(k

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 7:47pm:

... wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 7:39pm: ____ wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 2:48pm: Bandt alarmed at anti-gay marriage hate mail received AUSTRALIAN Greens MP Adam Bandt says he's worried and alarmed by the hate mail he has received over his support for same-sex marriage. Mr Bandt was commenting on reports that several Federal MPs had received a barrage of angry responses regarding their support for gay marriage. Fairfax papers said politicians from all sides, including Finance Minister Penny Wong, NSW Liberal MP Catherine Cusack and Mr Bandt, had received the hate mail. Mr Bandt said the Greens had received dozens of "vitriolic emails". "Certainly, the most vitriolic emails I've received have been about this issue," he told the Ten Network. "I think people tend to think it's pretty easy to sit down and send an email off into the ether." He said he was alarmed by the emails. "I think that there's concern that the closer we get to equality, the more vitriolic these attacks are going to become. "People feel like they've got a bit of a licence to talk about these personal things in very offensive ways. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/bandt-alarmed-at-anti-gay-marriage-hate-mail-received/story-fn7x8me2-1226390325750 It's called dissent, and a very mild form of it at that.  So if you haven't already, cross "writing a letter to your local MP" as a way to have your voice heard - they're not listening.  Worse, they cry to the media if their constituents dare express their opinion.  Who are these MP's representing? So what else is there?  When even writing a letter to your local MP expressing your views is off limits, how do you get make your vote count?  Do we have to take matters into our own hands?  Will rioting in the streets make you happy? bandt doesnt get 'it'. He's okay with fighting for his version of equality as long as only his side fights. Maybe he hasnt thought about what 'fight' actually means.

Its called being grown up. Only immature people use personal abuse in communications.

If these abusers were serious about swaying opinions then they would forward their opinions in constructive ways.

Their methods are more a revelation of defeat.

Maqqa wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 8:51pm:

____ wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 8:44pm: Soren wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 8:17pm: ____ wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 7:01pm: Soren wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 6:58pm: 'Homophobes' - two guys smacking and sucking each other  - what's to like?? How do you know what same sex couples get up to ... been there, been done like a dinner? Are you telling me that you guys are not just smacking and svcking and wanking each other? No, am pointing out that you are speaking from a prospective of experience. Like the studies show, difference between gay and homophobe ... gays know how to open the closet door.  And get splinters on their d1(k

and on cue, an example of my previous post.

Soren wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 6:35pm:

____ wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 2:48pm: Bandt alarmed at anti-gay marriage hate mail received AUSTRALIAN Greens MP Adam Bandt says he's worried and alarmed by the hate mail he has received over his support for same-sex marriage. Mr Bandt was commenting on reports that several Federal MPs had received a barrage of angry responses regarding their support for gay marriage. Fairfax papers said politicians from all sides, including Finance Minister Penny Wong, NSW Liberal MP Catherine Cusack and Mr Bandt, had received the hate mail. Mr Bandt said the Greens had received dozens of "vitriolic emails". "Certainly, the most vitriolic emails I've received have been about this issue," he told the Ten Network. "I think people tend to think it's pretty easy to sit down and send an email off into the ether." He said he was alarmed by the emails. "I think that there's concern that the closer we get to equality, the more vitriolic these attacks are going to become. "People feel like they've got a bit of a licence to talk about these personal things in very offensive ways. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/bandt-alarmed-at-anti-gay-marriage-hate-mail-received/story-fn7x8me2-1226390325750 The notion that two men fooking each other in the arse and sucking each other's d!cks is in any way equivalent to marriage is an affront to not only decency but good taste, too. So people, naturally, express themselves forcefully. It is amazing, to say the least, that sodomites, cocksvckers, arse bandits and muff divers - if I may speak like Barry Mackenzie for a moment -  have the grotesque temerity to pretend otherwise. The whole 'gay marriage' push is what's supremely insensitive.

"Muff diver"
lmao.

Morality police are a huge part of the reason people despise religion.
These nits truly and passionately believe that they know what is and isn't morally right, and want everyone else to conform to the standards that they believe are right.

I was tremendously promiscuous when I was young, and it is a very happy and comforting memory for any old bastard to have.
So to hear people say what sexual practices they believe are acceptable, and what are perversions, is pretty funny.
If they are not hurting anyone, and they are not forcing you to watch, then what the hell business is it of anyone else to even dream they have the right to condemn it?

On the contrary Mozza I don't think people are questioning what goes on in the bedroom and behind closed doors.

In fact in the Western world we permit and tolerate homosexuals a damn sight better than elsewhere.

Slightly off the point a minute, but that's what strikes me as so funny that Buzz and Greens will defend and support the rights of Muslims in Australia when those very people think they are an abomination - something that I think they just haven't thought through...

Anyway back to my point.
I too enjoyed my time in my 20s as you and racked up a decent score at the crease.

I don't deny the rights of homosexuals to exist, have a relationship and if they so wish, to register this relationship to equate their legal rights as the same as a long term de-facto couple.

However is it really a bridge too far to keeping marriage to be between a man and a woman?

I just think homosexuals should be bloody grateful what they have in Australia and the western world, they just don't know when to stop.
They end up offending middle of the roaders like myself with this pushing.

I too enjoyed my time in my 20s as you and racked up a decent score at the crease.


Never heard it called that before.

angeleyes wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 9:49pm:

I too enjoyed my time in my 20s as you and racked up a decent score at the crease. Never heard it called that before.

Quite common in England.
Though occasionally I will admit the quality could have been better.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 9:45pm:

On the contrary Mozza I don't think people are questioning what goes on in the bedroom and behind closed doors. In fact in the Western world we permit and tolerate homosexuals a damn sight better than elsewhere. Slightly off the point a minute, but that's what strikes me as so funny that Buzz and Greens will defend and support the rights of Muslims in Australia when those very people think they are an abomination - something that I think they just haven't thought through... Anyway back to my point. I too enjoyed my time in my 20s as you and racked up a decent score at the crease. I don't deny the rights of homosexuals to exist, have a relationship and if they so wish, to register this relationship to equate their legal rights as the same as a long term de-facto couple. However is it really a bridge too far to keeping marriage to be between a man and a woman? I just think homosexuals should be bloody grateful what they have in Australia and the western world, they just don't know when to stop. They end up offending middle of the roaders like myself with this pushing.

I do not support homosexual "Marriage", though I absolutely support fully equal recognition of homosexual unions, I just want them to stop wanting everyone to redefine words to suit them.
Be proud of who they are, and celebrate their individuality, rather than promote blurring the lines for an unknown agenda.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVQuf05U1Jo

mozzaok wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 9:28pm:

Soren wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 6:35pm: ____ wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 2:48pm: Bandt alarmed at anti-gay marriage hate mail received AUSTRALIAN Greens MP Adam Bandt says he's worried and alarmed by the hate mail he has received over his support for same-sex marriage. Mr Bandt was commenting on reports that several Federal MPs had received a barrage of angry responses regarding their support for gay marriage. Fairfax papers said politicians from all sides, including Finance Minister Penny Wong, NSW Liberal MP Catherine Cusack and Mr Bandt, had received the hate mail. Mr Bandt said the Greens had received dozens of "vitriolic emails". "Certainly, the most vitriolic emails I've received have been about this issue," he told the Ten Network. "I think people tend to think it's pretty easy to sit down and send an email off into the ether." He said he was alarmed by the emails. "I think that there's concern that the closer we get to equality, the more vitriolic these attacks are going to become. "People feel like they've got a bit of a licence to talk about these personal things in very offensive ways. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/bandt-alarmed-at-anti-gay-marriage-hate-mail-received/story-fn7x8me2-1226390325750 The notion that two men fooking each other in the arse and sucking each other's d!cks is in any way equivalent to marriage is an affront to not only decency but good taste, too. So people, naturally, express themselves forcefully. It is amazing, to say the least, that sodomites, cocksvckers, arse bandits and muff divers - if I may speak like Barry Mackenzie for a moment -  have the grotesque temerity to pretend otherwise. The whole 'gay marriage' push is what's supremely insensitive. "Muff diver" lmao. Morality police are a huge part of the reason people despise religion. These nits truly and passionately believe that they know what is and isn't morally right, and want everyone else to conform to the standards that they believe are right. I was tremendously promiscuous when I was young, and it is a very happy and comforting memory for any old bastard to have. So to hear people say what sexual practices they believe are acceptable, and what are perversions, is pretty funny. If they are not hurting anyone, and they are not forcing you to watch, then what the hell business is it of anyone else to even dream they have the right to condemn it?

It's nobody's business. Be as perverted as you like.
Just don't pretend that perverse is normal. And if you pretend it in your own head, don't expect everyone else to also pretend likewise. And most of all, don't get all fooking gay and shrill when people don't agree with your 'arse smacking and cock sucking and muff diving is normal' wheeze.

That's 'all we are saying' as the poets of Liverpool used to croon. Is that so difficult?

mozzaok wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 9:55pm:

I do not support homosexual "Marriage", though I absolutely support fully equal recognition of homosexual unions.

I think you area a schizophrenic.

Quite common among people who are,  or in any case are desperate to be seen as,  'noice'. They - you -  feel the social pressure on the back of the neck to be so. They - you - are sacrificing clear thinking and  personal integrity and they  - you - come out with a totally bizarre thing like you have just come out with.

Your stance is: I didn't sh!t in it, I just sh@t next to it - and then scraped it in. BIG difference'.



Laughable.

yeah like i dont really care about gay marriage eitherway but i never got when people say ' i dont support gay marriage but i do support civil unions' -  there's utterly no difference besides words.

JC Denton wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 10:05pm:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVQuf05U1Jo

RamZ for Sex Discrimination Commissioner!!


Kenneth Pinyan (1960 – 2005) was a divorced father and Boeing engineer - remember that when you fly next, kids.

mozzaok wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 9:55pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 9:45pm: On the contrary Mozza I don't think people are questioning what goes on in the bedroom and behind closed doors. In fact in the Western world we permit and tolerate homosexuals a damn sight better than elsewhere. Slightly off the point a minute, but that's what strikes me as so funny that Buzz and Greens will defend and support the rights of Muslims in Australia when those very people think they are an abomination - something that I think they just haven't thought through... Anyway back to my point. I too enjoyed my time in my 20s as you and racked up a decent score at the crease. I don't deny the rights of homosexuals to exist, have a relationship and if they so wish, to register this relationship to equate their legal rights as the same as a long term de-facto couple. However is it really a bridge too far to keeping marriage to be between a man and a woman? I just think homosexuals should be bloody grateful what they have in Australia and the western world, they just don't know when to stop. They end up offending middle of the roaders like myself with this pushing. I do not support homosexual "Marriage", though I absolutely support fully equal recognition of homosexual unions, I just want them to stop wanting everyone to redefine words to suit them. Be proud of who they are, and celebrate their individuality, rather than promote blurring the lines for an unknown agenda.

Amen

Firstly, I am not, nor have I ever been, a homosexual.

But nor am I a homophobe.

At least, several of my mates who ARE gay don't think so, and I guess they'd know.

They know that I don't give a bugger (oops!) what they get up to in their bedrooms, and
they're good with that. They know that I have no interest in participating, so they don't
ask. While several are quite open about being gay, others prefer to keep it on a 'need-
to-know' level for whatever reason, but they know that I'm not going to turn round and
'out' them, or similar.

I'm quite comfortable stirring them about all the pu$$y they've been missing out on, or
pointing out blatantly gay men ('There's one for ya, mate...nudge nudge,wink wink!'...)
and they're likewise equally at ease pointing out the biggest 'bush-pig' in the place to me
('I used to go out with her brother, I can line you up....') or what a hassle and expense it
must be having a g/f or missus and kids to lug around. And so on.

All friendly banter, words like poofter or poof aren't out-of-order, and are used quite
freely by all, with no offense given or take. If I hear a good 'poofter joke' I tell them
knowing that, rather than take offense, they'll often tell me the latest one THEY'VE
heard.

They also know that I support equality, and they know that I support 'civil unions', for
want (need?) of a better name, but not gay 'marriage' as such.

And they're good with that. Some don't agree, a couple don't care either way. But
no-one gets offended, or throws a hissy-fit.

Basically, it's mutual respect. I respect their right to their lifestyle and their privacy, and
they respect my right to not approve of every single thing that lifestyle entails.

And none of them regard me as a homophobe.

So I'm not really worried if a stranger on a message-board thinks I am.

Those who promote the homosexual gender are the most bigoted in our nation. They try to force their views onto others, and can't accept those with a differing view. They are also one of the biggest threats that we have, because they're going after young children, and are trying to brainwash and indoctrinate it into them that these evil sins of the flesh are okay and acceptable ways to live. It's the left-wing to blame for this, and they're also trying to brainwash and indoctrinate our young children that the unproven and false science of global warming exists. In actual fact, they've changed the name to the generic climate change, because it's such a fallacious joke and blatant lie.

Matty, it is the right who pushed the "climate change" terminology.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqMunulJU7w&sns=em


Quote:

Switching the words "climate change", for global warming, -- is it a devious, Orwellian perversion of the language, a mind controlling neurolinguistic word play engineered by psychological manipulators of the New World Order?. Climate deniers realize that only they can see through the evil plans of the global thought police. What mysterious and secretive conspiracy is behind this monstrous mind game?

Soren wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 7:59pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 7:05pm: Quote: Get this, oh-she-who-is-no-different-from-any-normal-person: marriage is NOT JUST about the two people who marry. Sure it is girl. What else would it be about? SOB I know you don't understand any of it. Marriage, as a social institution, is about being a bridge between the dead, the living and the not-yet-born. But as I say, this is too hard a concept for the likes of you, living in your 8 second attention span world.

That doesnt answer the question. what else would a marriage be about?

SOB

matty wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 12:54am:

Those who promote the homosexual gender are the most bigoted in our nation. They try to force their views onto others, and can't accept those with a differing view. They are also one of the biggest threats that we have, because they're going after young children, and are trying to brainwash and indoctrinate it into them that these evil sins of the flesh are okay and acceptable ways to live. It's the left-wing to blame for this, and they're also trying to brainwash and indoctrinate our young children that the unproven and false science of global warming exists. In actual fact, they've changed the name to the generic climate change, because it's such a fallacious joke and blatant lie.

what gender is the homosexual? lol

I get the feeling you dont know the meaning of the word bigot. Go look it up. you will be glad you did because you can avoid misusing the word in future.

SOB

It is always funny to see fundamentalist Christians warn others of brainwashing, totally oblivious to the irony.

MOTR wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 7:29am:

It is always funny to see fundamentalist Christians warn others of brainwashing, totally oblivious to the irony.

What are you trying to say "There is no God"?
Even with science you still need creation.

No, I wasn't saying that. God's existence does not depend on my acceptance of your beliefs, irrespective of how absolutely you hold them to be true.

MOTR wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 8:15am:

No, I wasn't saying that. God's existence does not depend on my acceptance of your beliefs, irrespective of how absolutely you hold them to be true.

It is likewise true that Gods existence does not depend on anyones belief for it so be so. The argument is usually circular because when asked for a standard of proof that the atheist would accept it is usually ridiculously high. EG if you prayed for a billion dollars and the next day Bill Gates drove up and gave you a cheque for $100million would you than claim that God doesnt answer prayer?

Ive asked atheists in the past for a statement of their minimum level of proof that God exists, Its amazing how they can never seem to really find an answer beyond 'world peace' and other motherhood statements.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 11:47am:

MOTR wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 8:15am: No, I wasn't saying that. God's existence does not depend on my acceptance of your beliefs, irrespective of how absolutely you hold them to be true. It is likewise true that Gods existence does not depend on anyones belief for it so be so. The argument is usually circular because when asked for a standard of proof that the atheist would accept it is usually ridiculously high. EG if you prayed for a billion dollars and the next day Bill Gates drove up and gave you a cheque for $100million would you than claim that God doesnt answer prayer? Ive asked atheists in the past for a statement of their minimum level of proof that God exists, Its amazing how they can never seem to really find an answer beyond 'world peace' and other motherhood statements.

What is a "motherhood" statement and why is the concept of "world peace" one? Just curious.

SOB

JC Denton wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 11:11pm:

yeah like i dont really care about gay marriage eitherway but i never got when people say ' i dont support gay marriage but i do support civil unions' -  there's utterly no difference besides words.

In itself, I don't really care either - but it is a symbolic issue, and it's what this fight represents that I care strongly about.
We've already been sold the sh!t sandwich of cultural marxism - if we then specifically recognise homosexual unions as "equal", to me thats akin to telling them it tastes good.  They can break my body, but they will never break my spirit. 

... wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 12:05pm:

JC Denton wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 11:11pm: yeah like i dont really care about gay marriage eitherway but i never got when people say ' i dont support gay marriage but i do support civil unions' -  there's utterly no difference besides words. In itself, I don't really care either - but it is a symbolic issue, and it's what this fight represents that I care strongly about. We've already been sold the sh!t sandwich of cultural marxism - if we then specifically recognise homosexual unions as "equal", to me thats akin to telling them it tastes good.  They can break my body, but they will never break my spirit.

Heh. they will. It will eventually happen. Just like interracial marriages finally happened. Weren't ppl suggesting they have "civil unions" instead back when it was a hot topic?

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 12:12pm:

... wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 12:05pm: JC Denton wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 11:11pm: yeah like i dont really care about gay marriage eitherway but i never got when people say ' i dont support gay marriage but i do support civil unions' -  there's utterly no difference besides words. In itself, I don't really care either - but it is a symbolic issue, and it's what this fight represents that I care strongly about. We've already been sold the sh!t sandwich of cultural marxism - if we then specifically recognise homosexual unions as "equal", to me thats akin to telling them it tastes good.  They can break my body, but they will never break my spirit.  Heh. they will. It will eventually happen. Just like interracial marriages finally happened. Weren't ppl suggesting they have "civil unions" instead back when it was a hot topic? SOB

No, they were not suggesting anything of the sort. You are again talking about your misunderstanding of half-remembered conversations you overheard in your dreams.
There was never a suggestion for civil unions for different races.

Soren wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 12:16pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 12:12pm: ... wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 12:05pm: JC Denton wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 11:11pm: yeah like i dont really care about gay marriage eitherway but i never got when people say ' i dont support gay marriage but i do support civil unions' -  there's utterly no difference besides words. In itself, I don't really care either - but it is a symbolic issue, and it's what this fight represents that I care strongly about. We've already been sold the sh!t sandwich of cultural marxism - if we then specifically recognise homosexual unions as "equal", to me thats akin to telling them it tastes good.  They can break my body, but they will never break my spirit.  Heh. they will. It will eventually happen. Just like interracial marriages finally happened. Weren't ppl suggesting they have "civil unions" instead back when it was a hot topic? SOB No, they were not suggesting anything of the sort. You are again talking about your misunderstanding of half-remembered conversations you overheard in your dreams. There was never a suggestion for civil unions for different races.

It was a question and it was just a demonstration of how silly the argument against gay marriage is. Go take your meds and remember its the RED pill not the BLUE one.

SOB

Pretty very abominably poor demonstration.

I am sorry but I speak myself of what I see.

Unlike some on this forum, i do not pretend to know things which i have not see myself.

I saw a demonstration in Sydney with gay people about the gay rights.

They shout very obscene things about religion and about people who follow the Church.

If they want to be accepted by normal people they can not behave so in this way and think it is acceptable.

Avram Horowitz wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 1:00pm:

I am sorry but I speak myself of what I see. Unlike some on this forum, i do not pretend to know things which i have not see myself. I saw a demonstration in Sydney with gay people about the gay rights. They shout very obscene things about religion and about people who follow the Church. If they want to be accepted by normal people they can not behave so in this way and think it is acceptable.

As i said before @ least the gays exist. Religion is just fiction.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 1:03pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 1:00pm: I am sorry but I speak myself of what I see. Unlike some on this forum, i do not pretend to know things which i have not see myself. I saw a demonstration in Sydney with gay people about the gay rights. They shout very obscene things about religion and about people who follow the Church. If they want to be accepted by normal people they can not behave so in this way and think it is acceptable. As i said before @ least the gays exist. Religion is just fiction. SOB

The Muslims you defend put gay people to death in the Arab world.
Just for you to remember.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 1:03pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 1:00pm: I am sorry but I speak myself of what I see. Unlike some on this forum, i do not pretend to know things which i have not see myself. I saw a demonstration in Sydney with gay people about the gay rights. They shout very obscene things about religion and about people who follow the Church. If they want to be accepted by normal people they can not behave so in this way and think it is acceptable. As i said before @ least the gays exist. Religion is just fiction. SOB

And so is star trek. 

Avram Horowitz wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 1:04pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 1:03pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 1:00pm: I am sorry but I speak myself of what I see. Unlike some on this forum, i do not pretend to know things which i have not see myself. I saw a demonstration in Sydney with gay people about the gay rights. They shout very obscene things about religion and about people who follow the Church. If they want to be accepted by normal people they can not behave so in this way and think it is acceptable. As i said before @ least the gays exist. Religion is just fiction. SOB The Muslims you defend put gay people to death in the Arab world. Just for you to remember.

And the christian world

Uganda's "Kill the Gays" Bill Must Be Stopped

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bishop-gene-robinson/ugandas-kill-the-gays-bil_b_861150.html

Avram Horowitz wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 1:04pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 1:03pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 1:00pm: I am sorry but I speak myself of what I see. Unlike some on this forum, i do not pretend to know things which i have not see myself. I saw a demonstration in Sydney with gay people about the gay rights. They shout very obscene things about religion and about people who follow the Church. If they want to be accepted by normal people they can not behave so in this way and think it is acceptable. As i said before @ least the gays exist. Religion is just fiction. SOB The Muslims you defend put gay people to death in the Arab world. Just for you to remember.

Uhh so you were complaining about gays being against muslims? lol well thats fiction too. Its all fiction.

SOB

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 11:47am:

MOTR wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 8:15am: No, I wasn't saying that. God's existence does not depend on my acceptance of your beliefs, irrespective of how absolutely you hold them to be true. It is likewise true that Gods existence does not depend on anyones belief for it so be so. The argument is usually circular because when asked for a standard of proof that the atheist would accept it is usually ridiculously high. EG if you prayed for a billion dollars and the next day Bill Gates drove up and gave you a cheque for $100million would you than claim that God doesnt answer prayer? Ive asked atheists in the past for a statement of their minimum level of proof that God exists, Its amazing how they can never seem to really find an answer beyond 'world peace' and other motherhood statements.

Rubbish longy, I can think up dozens of "god" theories, far more believable than any that I know that organised religions believe, because they cannot help but anthropomorphise their gods, to ridiculous degrees, that make them farcical to non-believers.

minimum level of proof: god made my daughters spine grow back, believe me i say it happened

evolution etc though WHO BELIEVES THAT

Wow the homophobes are still rude

SOB

Avram<< Unlike some on this forum, i do not pretend to know things which i have not see myself.>>
....................................................................

So if you were born blind, you would know nothing.

JC Denton wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 1:56pm:

minimum level of proof: god made my daughters spine grow back, believe me i say it happened evolution etc though WHO BELIEVES THAT

You say it was god, but it could just as easily been the spine fairy.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 2:00pm:

JC Denton wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 1:56pm: minimum level of proof: god made my daughters spine grow back, believe me i say it happened evolution etc though WHO BELIEVES THAT You say it was god, but it could just as easily been the spine fairy.

...

The spine fairy sure hasn't been doing her job, as evinced by the growth in numbers of leftwing weenies. 

the comprehension fairy must have missed pansi

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 1:57pm:

Wow the homophobes are still rude SOB

What do you like about homosexual practice?

Soren wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 2:16pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 1:57pm: Wow the homophobes are still rude SOB What do you like about homosexual practice?

lololol.

I just dont care if ppl are homosexual. Its their life and they should be allowed to live it. I dont have to "like" it or "dislike" it. Not my business what they do.

SOB

JC Denton wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 2:13pm:

the comprehension fairy must have missed pansi

Yes, yes terrible business that inter-racial marriage thing. Not so bad in black and white photo's where they both look rather grey, but very noticeable in the coloured wedding photo's of old.

Not quite so bad now they can do all sorts of wondrous things with the photo's. The bride can look almost as pretty as any pin up girl with a little touch up. Colour is no longer a problem, darken the skin, lighten the skin, a touch of green under the eyes, I wouldn't recommend it though.

JC Denton wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 2:13pm:

the comprehension fairy must have missed pansi

As did every other fairy.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 2:19pm:

Soren wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 2:16pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 1:57pm: Wow the homophobes are still rude SOB What do you like about homosexual practice? lololol. I just dont care if ppl are homosexual. Its their life and they should be allowed to live it. I dont have to "like" it or "dislike" it. Not my business what they do. SOB

Exactly right - until they make it your business.

Homo activist of 1980 - "get out of our bedrooms!"

Homo activists of today - "come back into our bedrooms and validate our relationships!"

Fuggem.

... wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 2:22pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 2:19pm: Soren wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 2:16pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 1:57pm: Wow the homophobes are still rude SOB What do you like about homosexual practice? lololol. I just dont care if ppl are homosexual. Its their life and they should be allowed to live it. I dont have to "like" it or "dislike" it. Not my business what they do. SOB Exactly right - until they make it your business. Homo activist of 1980 - "get out of our bedrooms!" Homo activists of today - "come back into our bedrooms and validate our relationships!" Fuggem.

yep. whatever i think about gay marriage as an issue, i know the push for it isn't actually about the utility of the institution at all for the people who would 'benefit' from it - it's a thin edge of the wedge issue.

i actually have some sympathy for the gay marriage arguments - i don't particularly see much reason to oppose gay marriage. but that doesn't mean that i dont see endless discussion of the issue for the vehicle that it is.

... wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 2:22pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 2:19pm: Soren wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 2:16pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 1:57pm: Wow the homophobes are still rude SOB What do you like about homosexual practice? lololol. I just dont care if ppl are homosexual. Its their life and they should be allowed to live it. I dont have to "like" it or "dislike" it. Not my business what they do. SOB Exactly right - until they make it your business. Homo activist of 1980 - "get out of our bedrooms!" Homo activists of today - "come back into our bedrooms and validate our relationships!" Fuggem.

So they hassle you do they? I wonder why?

Seriously they are just trying to get accepted. If they get equal marriage rights and there are still "activists" then theres a reason to complain. Most gays dont bother anyone though.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 2:27pm:

... wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 2:22pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 2:19pm: Soren wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 2:16pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 1:57pm: Wow the homophobes are still rude SOB What do you like about homosexual practice? lololol. I just dont care if ppl are homosexual. Its their life and they should be allowed to live it. I dont have to "like" it or "dislike" it. Not my business what they do. SOB Exactly right - until they make it your business. Homo activist of 1980 - "get out of our bedrooms!" Homo activists of today - "come back into our bedrooms and validate our relationships!" Fuggem. So they hassle you do they? I wonder why? Seriously they are just trying to get accepted. If they get equal marriage rights and there are still "activists" then theres a reason to complain. Most gays dont bother anyone though.SOB

Right again.  However, liberal ideologues and the media do more than enough bothering on their behalf. 

Soren wrote on Jun 10^th, 2012 at 6:42pm:

skippy. wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 5:56pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 2:54pm: People need to have more care on this issue. Homosexuals in this country are very loud and they also can be very rude. I have seen a demonstration in Sydney center and the signs and things they say are rude and offensive to religion and people who follow the Church. In my experience homosexual people in Australia can also be much less rude than they are. If they behave this way in Jerusalem let me tell you there would be a riot. This post enforces your point to the thread, greens_win. You are a working class cockfancying prole of the first order so you would say that. Even Danish pastry reminds you of cock suckin' and swallowing. It's the custard, innit. Pathetic. But I suppose, being a conflicted invert as you are, the best cover up you have is to get all militant and diversionary.

LOL note to new posters here,soren used to have the words, "I like to swallow" in his signature, until I made fun of him. He;s hated me ever since. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Thats why I call him swallow, he hate it. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

skippy. wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 2:37pm:

Soren wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 6:42pm: skippy. wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 5:56pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 2:54pm: People need to have more care on this issue. Homosexuals in this country are very loud and they also can be very rude. I have seen a demonstration in Sydney center and the signs and things they say are rude and offensive to religion and people who follow the Church. In my experience homosexual people in Australia can also be much less rude than they are. If they behave this way in Jerusalem let me tell you there would be a riot. This post enforces your point to the thread, greens_win. You are a working class cockfancying prole of the first order so you would say that. Even Danish pastry reminds you of cock suckin' and swallowing. It's the custard, innit. Pathetic. But I suppose, being a conflicted invert as you are, the best cover up you have is to get all militant and diversionary. LOL note to knew posters here,soren used to have the words, I like to swallow in his signature, until I made fun of him. He;s hated me ever since. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

lolololololol

SOB

skippy. wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 2:37pm:

Soren wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 6:42pm: skippy. wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 5:56pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 2:54pm: People need to have more care on this issue. Homosexuals in this country are very loud and they also can be very rude. I have seen a demonstration in Sydney center and the signs and things they say are rude and offensive to religion and people who follow the Church. In my experience homosexual people in Australia can also be much less rude than they are. If they behave this way in Jerusalem let me tell you there would be a riot. This post enforces your point to the thread, greens_win. You are a working class cockfancying prole of the first order so you would say that. Even Danish pastry reminds you of cock suckin' and swallowing. It's the custard, innit. Pathetic. But I suppose, being a conflicted invert as you are, the best cover up you have is to get all militant and diversionary. LOL note to knew posters here,soren used to have the words, "I like to swallow" in his signature, until I made fun of him. He;s hated me ever since. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Thats why I call him swallow, he hate it. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

And he changed his pic too. Well Done Skippy.

____ wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 2:40pm:

skippy. wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 2:37pm: Soren wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 6:42pm: skippy. wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 5:56pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on Jun 10th, 2012 at 2:54pm: People need to have more care on this issue. Homosexuals in this country are very loud and they also can be very rude. I have seen a demonstration in Sydney center and the signs and things they say are rude and offensive to religion and people who follow the Church. In my experience homosexual people in Australia can also be much less rude than they are. If they behave this way in Jerusalem let me tell you there would be a riot. This post enforces your point to the thread, greens_win. You are a working class cockfancying prole of the first order so you would say that. Even Danish pastry reminds you of cock suckin' and swallowing. It's the custard, innit. Pathetic. But I suppose, being a conflicted invert as you are, the best cover up you have is to get all militant and diversionary. LOL note to knew posters here,soren used to have the words, "I like to swallow" in his signature, until I made fun of him. He;s hated me ever since. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Thats why I call him swallow, he hate it. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D And he changed his pic too. Well Done Skippy.

It said 'Danish', skuppy. Which made you think of cocksvcking.

Soren the swanky swallow....cute

Wow you guys are just soooooo cool.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 11:50am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 11:47am: MOTR wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 8:15am: No, I wasn't saying that. God's existence does not depend on my acceptance of your beliefs, irrespective of how absolutely you hold them to be true. It is likewise true that Gods existence does not depend on anyones belief for it so be so. The argument is usually circular because when asked for a standard of proof that the atheist would accept it is usually ridiculously high. EG if you prayed for a billion dollars and the next day Bill Gates drove up and gave you a cheque for $100million would you than claim that God doesnt answer prayer? Ive asked atheists in the past for a statement of their minimum level of proof that God exists, Its amazing how they can never seem to really find an answer beyond 'world peace' and other motherhood statements. What is a "motherhood" statement and why is the concept of "world peace" one? Just curious. SOB

this is why it is so hard to discuss things with you. You seem to have little more than an imbeciles education and a childs experience. Youve never heard of a 'motherhood statement'? And obviously you've never heard of (or understood) a metaphor.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 4:03pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 11:50am: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 11:47am: MOTR wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 8:15am: No, I wasn't saying that. God's existence does not depend on my acceptance of your beliefs, irrespective of how absolutely you hold them to be true. It is likewise true that Gods existence does not depend on anyones belief for it so be so. The argument is usually circular because when asked for a standard of proof that the atheist would accept it is usually ridiculously high. EG if you prayed for a billion dollars and the next day Bill Gates drove up and gave you a cheque for $100million would you than claim that God doesnt answer prayer? Ive asked atheists in the past for a statement of their minimum level of proof that God exists, Its amazing how they can never seem to really find an answer beyond 'world peace' and other motherhood statements. What is a "motherhood" statement and why is the concept of "world peace" one? Just curious. SOB this is why it is so hard to discuss things with you. You seem to have little more than an imbeciles education and a childs experience. Youve never heard of a 'motherhood statement'? And obviously you've never heard of (or understood) a metaphor.

So you cant explain it?

SOB

it's very rude of you to call anyone a homophobe

i am insulted

<<What is a "motherhood" statement and why is the concept of "world peace" one? Just curious.

SOB >>
............................................................

We say 'sweeping statement', the other is more likely American political gibberish.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 4:28pm:

it's very rude of you to call anyone a homophobe i am insulted

Did someone call you a homophobe?

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 4:06pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:03pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 11:50am: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 11:47am: MOTR wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 8:15am: No, I wasn't saying that. God's existence does not depend on my acceptance of your beliefs, irrespective of how absolutely you hold them to be true. It is likewise true that Gods existence does not depend on anyones belief for it so be so. The argument is usually circular because when asked for a standard of proof that the atheist would accept it is usually ridiculously high. EG if you prayed for a billion dollars and the next day Bill Gates drove up and gave you a cheque for $100million would you than claim that God doesnt answer prayer? Ive asked atheists in the past for a statement of their minimum level of proof that God exists, Its amazing how they can never seem to really find an answer beyond 'world peace' and other motherhood statements. What is a "motherhood" statement and why is the concept of "world peace" one? Just curious. SOB this is why it is so hard to discuss things with you. You seem to have little more than an imbeciles education and a childs experience. Youve never heard of a 'motherhood statement'? And obviously you've never heard of (or understood) a metaphor. So you cant explain it? SOB

I couldnt explain it to my 5yo grandson either. His excuse is he is 5yos. What's yours?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 4:40pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:06pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:03pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 11:50am: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 11:47am: MOTR wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 8:15am: No, I wasn't saying that. God's existence does not depend on my acceptance of your beliefs, irrespective of how absolutely you hold them to be true. It is likewise true that Gods existence does not depend on anyones belief for it so be so. The argument is usually circular because when asked for a standard of proof that the atheist would accept it is usually ridiculously high. EG if you prayed for a billion dollars and the next day Bill Gates drove up and gave you a cheque for $100million would you than claim that God doesnt answer prayer? Ive asked atheists in the past for a statement of their minimum level of proof that God exists, Its amazing how they can never seem to really find an answer beyond 'world peace' and other motherhood statements. What is a "motherhood" statement and why is the concept of "world peace" one? Just curious. SOB this is why it is so hard to discuss things with you. You seem to have little more than an imbeciles education and a childs experience. Youve never heard of a 'motherhood statement'? And obviously you've never heard of (or understood) a metaphor. So you cant explain it? SOB I couldnt explain it to my 5yo grandson either. His excuse is he is 5yos. What's yours?

Im aussie not yank. What is your problem? You expect me to answer your questions but you wont answer mine. Hypocritical fairy tale believer i suppose.

lol i get it. you are defensive because you are a rude homophobe maybe?

SOB

FFS a mothehood statement is a feel good platitude.  A statement that noone could disagree with, but is of no substance. 

... wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 4:50pm:

FFS a mothehood statement is a feel good platitude.  A statement that noone could disagree with, but is of no substance.

Yeah i know - i googled it. He should have answered my question though instead of trying to insult.

SOB

Maybe you shouldn't ask inane, childish questions. 

The whole world doesn't revolve around trying to educate you.

... wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 4:56pm:

Maybe you shouldn't ask inane, childish questions.  The whole world doesn't revolve around trying to educate you.

Dont be a dick. He has been doing it to me for weeks. It would have been easier to just tell me than making me google it. He wont google stuff when he asks me stupid questions. He made the claim. He needs to back it up. Why are you defending him?

SOB

I'm not defending him so much as I am tired of you asking inane, childish questions over and over again.

Will someone explain these two to Borg please.

I think he missed them...........................deliberately.


angeleyes   Offline
Gold Member
Australian Politics


Posts: 512
    
Borg, you do know that women have testosterone and men have estrogen.

You don't?

Oh ok than.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1339301018/30

angeleyes   Offline
Gold Member
Australian Politics


Posts: 512
    

 
Are women that play mens sport androgynous?

Are men that play womens sport androgynous?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1339301018/45

... wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 5:01pm:

I'm not defending him so much as I am tired of you asking inane, childish questions over and over again.

What questions would those be?

SOB

angeleyes wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 5:06pm:

Will someone explain these two to Borg please. I think he missed them...........................deliberately. angeleyes   Offline Gold Member Australian Politics Posts: 512      Borg, you do know that women have testosterone and men have estrogen. You don't? Oh ok than. http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1339301018/30 angeleyes   Offline Gold Member Australian Politics Posts: 512        Are women that play mens sport androgynous? Are men that play womens sport androgynous? http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1339301018/45

They had nothing to do with the topic and didnt make sense. Perhaps you should rephrase them so they made sense?

SOB

Most people simply choose to ignore you waterboy, it's not worth wasting the time answering your inane questions.

angeleyes is a troll, best ignore like FD said.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 5:09pm:

angeleyes wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:06pm: Will someone explain these two to Borg please. I think he missed them...........................deliberately. angeleyes   Offline Gold Member Australian Politics Posts: 512      Borg, you do know that women have testosterone and men have estrogen. You don't? Oh ok than. http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1339301018/30 angeleyes   Offline Gold Member Australian Politics Posts: 512        Are women that play mens sport androgynous? Are men that play womens sport androgynous? http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1339301018/45 They had nothing to do with the topic and didnt make sense. Perhaps you should rephrase them so they made sense? SOB

You think?

Trouble is you have no idea what they mean.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 4:31pm:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:28pm: it's very rude of you to call anyone a homophobe i am insulted Did someone call you a homophobe? SOB

close enough,

angeleyes wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 5:11pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:09pm: angeleyes wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:06pm: Will someone explain these two to Borg please. I think he missed them...........................deliberately. angeleyes   Offline Gold Member Australian Politics Posts: 512      Borg, you do know that women have testosterone and men have estrogen. You don't? Oh ok than. http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1339301018/30 angeleyes   Offline Gold Member Australian Politics Posts: 512        Are women that play mens sport androgynous? Are men that play womens sport androgynous? http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1339301018/45 They had nothing to do with the topic and didnt make sense. Perhaps you should rephrase them so they made sense? SOB You think? Trouble is you have no idea what they mean.

No the problem is they have nothing to do with the topic.

SOB

You are telling me my two posts have nothing to do with this post....................................................


Grandmaster   Online
Gold Member
Australian Politics
WA

Gender: male
Posts: 8214
*****

Spot of Borg wrote Today at 11:42am:
then why do girls get it?

SOB



You're trying my patience already with this obstinate idiocy borg.

Girls "get it" at a much lower rate than boys, becasue they have a much lower representation of masculine traits tnat are likly to gte them referred, such as aggression.  I didn't say there has never been an aggressive girl, the proportion of agrresive boys is far greater than the rate of aggressive girls. "


Like I said you have no idea.

angeleyes wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 5:27pm:

You are telling me my two posts have nothing to do with this post.................................................... Grandmaster   Online Gold Member Australian Politics WA Gender: male Posts: 8214 ***** Spot of Borg wrote Today at 11:42am: then why do girls get it? SOB You're trying my patience already with this obstinate idiocy borg. Girls "get it" at a much lower rate than boys, becasue they have a much lower representation of masculine traits tnat are likly to gte them referred, such as aggression.  I didn't say there has never been an aggressive girl, the proportion of agrresive boys is far greater than the rate of aggressive girls. " Like I said you have no idea.

Prove that ADHD is caused by testosterone.

SOB

Oh for crying out loud....

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 4:59pm:

... wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:56pm: Maybe you shouldn't ask inane, childish questions.  The whole world doesn't revolve around trying to educate you. Dont be a dick. He has been doing it to me for weeks. It would have been easier to just tell me than making me google it. He wont google stuff when he asks me stupid questions. He made the claim. He needs to back it up. Why are you defending him? SOB

thats because almost every time you post you make a fool of yourself by mentioning things you THINK YOU HEARD POSSIBLY SOMETIME A FEW YERS AGO when you were piloting John Hopward into space or similar garbage.

you rarely make any sense and exaclty WHO doesnt know what a motherhood statement is???

... wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 5:38pm:

Oh for crying out loud....

you just discovered that debating with Borg makes Greens_lose look topical and relevant. He'd be lost in a discussion among 5 yos.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 5:38pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:59pm: ... wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:56pm: Maybe you shouldn't ask inane, childish questions.  The whole world doesn't revolve around trying to educate you. Dont be a dick. He has been doing it to me for weeks. It would have been easier to just tell me than making me google it. He wont google stuff when he asks me stupid questions. He made the claim. He needs to back it up. Why are you defending him? SOB thats because almost every time you post you make a fool of yourself by mentioning things you THINK YOU HEARD POSSIBLY SOMETIME A FEW YERS AGO when you were piloting John Hopward into space or similar garbage. you rarely make any sense and exaclty WHO doesnt know what a motherhood statement is???

If you werent such a dick you would just google stuff and know im right. I cant help it if you have a bad memory. All you do is insult. You dont ever actually put a case forward for anything. Just insults - usually aimed @ "lefties". Obviously uneducated.

SOB

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 5:40pm:

... wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:38pm: Oh for crying out loud.... you just discovered that debating with Borg makes Greens_lose look topical and relevant. He'd be lost in a discussion among 5 yos.

Well theres your problem. Everything has to be an argument. What is wrong with a discussion? Not in your vocabulary?

SOB

Oh.

My.

God.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 4:59pm:

... wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:56pm: Maybe you shouldn't ask inane, childish questions.  The whole world doesn't revolve around trying to educate you. Dont be a dick. He has been doing it to me for weeks. It would have been easier to just tell me than making me google it. He wont google stuff when he asks me stupid questions. He made the claim. He needs to back it up. Why are you defending him? SOB

While this thread is degrading in to a competition of who can ask the stupidest question, allow me to contribute.

In what universe does posting;

"What is a "motherhood" statement and why is the concept of "world peace" one? Just curious.

And then expecting an answer, easier than just typing "motherhood statement" in a search engine? Seriously, it just messes the flow of the thread for no other reason than total laziness.

... wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 5:44pm:

Oh. My. God.

it

is

truly

amazing.


It is like debating with a single-celled organism.

Quantum wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 5:48pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:59pm: ... wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:56pm: Maybe you shouldn't ask inane, childish questions.  The whole world doesn't revolve around trying to educate you. Dont be a dick. He has been doing it to me for weeks. It would have been easier to just tell me than making me google it. He wont google stuff when he asks me stupid questions. He made the claim. He needs to back it up. Why are you defending him? SOB While this thread is degrading in to a competition of who can ask the stupidest question, allow me to contribute. In what universe does posting; "What is a "motherhood" statement and why is the concept of "world peace" one? Just curious. And then expecting an answer, easier than just typing "motherhood statement" in a search engine? Seriously, it just messes the flow of the thread for no other reason than total laziness.

So its okay for you assholes to do it to me but i cant do it to you? Thats the way it is? well you know where you can shove that idea.

SOB

Quantum wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 5:48pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:59pm: ... wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:56pm: Maybe you shouldn't ask inane, childish questions.  The whole world doesn't revolve around trying to educate you. Dont be a dick. He has been doing it to me for weeks. It would have been easier to just tell me than making me google it. He wont google stuff when he asks me stupid questions. He made the claim. He needs to back it up. Why are you defending him? SOB While this thread is degrading in to a competition of who can ask the stupidest question, allow me to contribute. In what universe does posting; "What is a "motherhood" statement and why is the concept of "world peace" one? Just curious. And then expecting an answer, easier than just typing "motherhood statement" in a search engine? Seriously, it just messes the flow of the thread for no other reason than total laziness.

yes you would think so. However, it is difficult to realise just how illiteratea and uneducated some posters are. They dont know what a metaphor is nor what principles are. And if you get onto ethics or more complex literary devices like satire and irony, they are lost altogether.

The big problem is that if our discussion was reduced to the lowest common denominator we would be discussing Dick and Dora, Nip and Fluff.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 5:52pm:

Quantum wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:48pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:59pm: ... wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:56pm: Maybe you shouldn't ask inane, childish questions.  The whole world doesn't revolve around trying to educate you. Dont be a dick. He has been doing it to me for weeks. It would have been easier to just tell me than making me google it. He wont google stuff when he asks me stupid questions. He made the claim. He needs to back it up. Why are you defending him? SOB While this thread is degrading in to a competition of who can ask the stupidest question, allow me to contribute. In what universe does posting; "What is a "motherhood" statement and why is the concept of "world peace" one? Just curious. And then expecting an answer, easier than just typing "motherhood statement" in a search engine? Seriously, it just messes the flow of the thread for no other reason than total laziness. So its okay for you assholes to do it to me but i cant do it to you? Thats the way it is? well you know where you can shove that idea. SOB

all we are asking is for you to apply a little logic and a little commonsense to your posts. And just occasionally, try and understand what people are saying. life isnt an endless succession of OPINIONS. There are actual facts, you know!

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 5:54pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:52pm: Quantum wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:48pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:59pm: ... wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:56pm: Maybe you shouldn't ask inane, childish questions.  The whole world doesn't revolve around trying to educate you. Dont be a dick. He has been doing it to me for weeks. It would have been easier to just tell me than making me google it. He wont google stuff when he asks me stupid questions. He made the claim. He needs to back it up. Why are you defending him? SOB While this thread is degrading in to a competition of who can ask the stupidest question, allow me to contribute. In what universe does posting; "What is a "motherhood" statement and why is the concept of "world peace" one? Just curious. And then expecting an answer, easier than just typing "motherhood statement" in a search engine? Seriously, it just messes the flow of the thread for no other reason than total laziness. So its okay for you assholes to do it to me but i cant do it to you? Thats the way it is? well you know where you can shove that idea. SOB all we are asking is for you to apply a little logic and a little commonsense to your posts. And just occasionally, try and understand what people are saying. life isnt an endless succession of OPINIONS. There are actual facts, you know!

I have yet to see you supply a "fact" here and i have been a member for a few months now. When will it happen?

Anyway back to the topic you homophobes certainly are rude!

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 5:57pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:54pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:52pm: Quantum wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:48pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:59pm: ... wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:56pm: Maybe you shouldn't ask inane, childish questions.  The whole world doesn't revolve around trying to educate you. Dont be a dick. He has been doing it to me for weeks. It would have been easier to just tell me than making me google it. He wont google stuff when he asks me stupid questions. He made the claim. He needs to back it up. Why are you defending him? SOB While this thread is degrading in to a competition of who can ask the stupidest question, allow me to contribute. In what universe does posting; "What is a "motherhood" statement and why is the concept of "world peace" one? Just curious. And then expecting an answer, easier than just typing "motherhood statement" in a search engine? Seriously, it just messes the flow of the thread for no other reason than total laziness. So its okay for you assholes to do it to me but i cant do it to you? Thats the way it is? well you know where you can shove that idea. SOB all we are asking is for you to apply a little logic and a little commonsense to your posts. And just occasionally, try and understand what people are saying. life isnt an endless succession of OPINIONS. There are actual facts, you know! I have yet to see you supply a "fact" here and i have been a member for a few months now. When will it happen? Anyway back to the topic you homophobes certainly are rude! SOB

remember the private schools thread? both FD and I provided documented proof that private schools received LESS funding than public schools  but you said that was wrong. When you were asked to explain what to do with all the extra students that would be needed to be housed in the public sector if private school funding was ended you replied with 'there will be plenty of money around' in a complete denieal of both fact and logic.

Perhaps the problem is that you dont see facts like the rest of us do. Either way, try listening and ansorbing another persons argument occasionally. You dont have to agree but you do need to show some logice when dismissing it.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 6:02pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:57pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:54pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:52pm: Quantum wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:48pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:59pm: ... wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:56pm: Maybe you shouldn't ask inane, childish questions.  The whole world doesn't revolve around trying to educate you. Dont be a dick. He has been doing it to me for weeks. It would have been easier to just tell me than making me google it. He wont google stuff when he asks me stupid questions. He made the claim. He needs to back it up. Why are you defending him? SOB While this thread is degrading in to a competition of who can ask the stupidest question, allow me to contribute. In what universe does posting; "What is a "motherhood" statement and why is the concept of "world peace" one? Just curious. And then expecting an answer, easier than just typing "motherhood statement" in a search engine? Seriously, it just messes the flow of the thread for no other reason than total laziness. So its okay for you assholes to do it to me but i cant do it to you? Thats the way it is? well you know where you can shove that idea. SOB all we are asking is for you to apply a little logic and a little commonsense to your posts. And just occasionally, try and understand what people are saying. life isnt an endless succession of OPINIONS. There are actual facts, you know! I have yet to see you supply a "fact" here and i have been a member for a few months now. When will it happen? Anyway back to the topic you homophobes certainly are rude! SOB remember the private schools thread? both FD and I provided documented proof that private schools received LESS funding than public schools  but you said that was wrong. When you were asked to explain what to do with all the extra students that would be needed to be housed in the public sector if private school funding was ended you replied with 'there will be plenty of money around' in a complete denieal of both fact and logic. Perhaps the problem is that you dont see facts like the rest of us do. Either way, try listening and ansorbing another persons argument occasionally. You dont have to agree but you do need to show some logice when dismissing it.

you proved nothing. We disagree. You seem to think that if i dont agree with you i must not understand what you are saying. Private schools shouldn't receive any funding. If they didnt then the stats would be different anyway. The whole policy would be different. Private schools havent always been funded.

You are denying logic in refusing to consider my opinion. It goes 2 ways. I have "absorbed" other ppls argument occasionally but you dont see that because you dont want to. I bet you dont "absorb" anyone elses argument ever..you just resort to insults.

FD is a liar and quotes ppl out of context and misrepresents them. That is cheating.

you self-proclaimed "righties" gang up on ppl and insult them instead of offering any kind of logic. you dont seem to want to discuss anything either. Just "argue" and you nitpick lil things and harp on them instead of addressing issues.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 6:15pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:02pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:57pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:54pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:52pm: Quantum wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:48pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:59pm: ... wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:56pm: Maybe you shouldn't ask inane, childish questions.  The whole world doesn't revolve around trying to educate you. Dont be a dick. He has been doing it to me for weeks. It would have been easier to just tell me than making me google it. He wont google stuff when he asks me stupid questions. He made the claim. He needs to back it up. Why are you defending him? SOB While this thread is degrading in to a competition of who can ask the stupidest question, allow me to contribute. In what universe does posting; "What is a "motherhood" statement and why is the concept of "world peace" one? Just curious. And then expecting an answer, easier than just typing "motherhood statement" in a search engine? Seriously, it just messes the flow of the thread for no other reason than total laziness. So its okay for you assholes to do it to me but i cant do it to you? Thats the way it is? well you know where you can shove that idea. SOB all we are asking is for you to apply a little logic and a little commonsense to your posts. And just occasionally, try and understand what people are saying. life isnt an endless succession of OPINIONS. There are actual facts, you know! I have yet to see you supply a "fact" here and i have been a member for a few months now. When will it happen? Anyway back to the topic you homophobes certainly are rude! SOB remember the private schools thread? both FD and I provided documented proof that private schools received LESS funding than public schools  but you said that was wrong. When you were asked to explain what to do with all the extra students that would be needed to be housed in the public sector if private school funding was ended you replied with 'there will be plenty of money around' in a complete denieal of both fact and logic. Perhaps the problem is that you dont see facts like the rest of us do. Either way, try listening and ansorbing another persons argument occasionally. You dont have to agree but you do need to show some logice when dismissing it. you proved nothing. We disagree. You seem to think that if i dont agree with you i must not understand what you are saying. Private schools shouldn't receive any funding. If they didnt then the stats would be different anyway. The whole policy would be different. Private schools havent always been funded. You are denying logic in refusing to consider my opinion. It goes 2 ways. I have "absorbed" other ppls argument occasionally but you dont see that because you dont want to. I bet you dont "absorb" anyone elses argument ever..you just resort to insults. FD is a liar and quotes ppl out of context and misrepresents them. That is cheating. you self-proclaimed "righties" gang up on ppl and insult them instead of offering any kind of logic. you dont seem to want to discuss anything either. Just "argue" and you nitpick lil things and harp on them instead of addressing issues. SOB

liar because he tried to explain to you how taking private school funding awy was going to COST the govt many billions? It wasnt a difficult argument and even the education union - which are left of the Greens - understand that, even if begrugingly.

You need to try and see past your own opinions and see some of the points of view expressed by others and accept and reject them based on their merits not because you dont like (or understand) them.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 6:19pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:15pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:02pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:57pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:54pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:52pm: Quantum wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:48pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:59pm: ... wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:56pm: Maybe you shouldn't ask inane, childish questions.  The whole world doesn't revolve around trying to educate you. Dont be a dick. He has been doing it to me for weeks. It would have been easier to just tell me than making me google it. He wont google stuff when he asks me stupid questions. He made the claim. He needs to back it up. Why are you defending him? SOB While this thread is degrading in to a competition of who can ask the stupidest question, allow me to contribute. In what universe does posting; "What is a "motherhood" statement and why is the concept of "world peace" one? Just curious. And then expecting an answer, easier than just typing "motherhood statement" in a search engine? Seriously, it just messes the flow of the thread for no other reason than total laziness. So its okay for you assholes to do it to me but i cant do it to you? Thats the way it is? well you know where you can shove that idea. SOB all we are asking is for you to apply a little logic and a little commonsense to your posts. And just occasionally, try and understand what people are saying. life isnt an endless succession of OPINIONS. There are actual facts, you know! I have yet to see you supply a "fact" here and i have been a member for a few months now. When will it happen? Anyway back to the topic you homophobes certainly are rude! SOB remember the private schools thread? both FD and I provided documented proof that private schools received LESS funding than public schools  but you said that was wrong. When you were asked to explain what to do with all the extra students that would be needed to be housed in the public sector if private school funding was ended you replied with 'there will be plenty of money around' in a complete denieal of both fact and logic. Perhaps the problem is that you dont see facts like the rest of us do. Either way, try listening and ansorbing another persons argument occasionally. You dont have to agree but you do need to show some logice when dismissing it. you proved nothing. We disagree. You seem to think that if i dont agree with you i must not understand what you are saying. Private schools shouldn't receive any funding. If they didnt then the stats would be different anyway. The whole policy would be different. Private schools havent always been funded. You are denying logic in refusing to consider my opinion. It goes 2 ways. I have "absorbed" other ppls argument occasionally but you dont see that because you dont want to. I bet you dont "absorb" anyone elses argument ever..you just resort to insults. FD is a liar and quotes ppl out of context and misrepresents them. That is cheating. you self-proclaimed "righties" gang up on ppl and insult them instead of offering any kind of logic. you dont seem to want to discuss anything either. Just "argue" and you nitpick lil things and harp on them instead of addressing issues. SOB liar because he tried to explain to you how taking private school funding awy was going to COST the govt many billions? It wasnt a difficult argument and even the education union - which are left of the Greens - understand that, even if begrugingly. You need to try and see past your own opinions and see some of the points of view expressed by others and accept and reject them based on their merits not because you dont like (or understand) them.

No a liar because he quotes ppl out of context and misrepresents them (as i already said). Obviously you have some comprehension problems.

As for the schools you are entitled to your opinion but I am entitled to mine. As I said in the thread it doesnt matter what it costs - we should spend the money to make the education system better. We have the money. Theres supposedly a "mining boom".

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 6:28pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:19pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:15pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:02pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:57pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:54pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:52pm: Quantum wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:48pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:59pm: ... wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:56pm: Maybe you shouldn't ask inane, childish questions.  The whole world doesn't revolve around trying to educate you. Dont be a dick. He has been doing it to me for weeks. It would have been easier to just tell me than making me google it. He wont google stuff when he asks me stupid questions. He made the claim. He needs to back it up. Why are you defending him? SOB While this thread is degrading in to a competition of who can ask the stupidest question, allow me to contribute. In what universe does posting; "What is a "motherhood" statement and why is the concept of "world peace" one? Just curious. And then expecting an answer, easier than just typing "motherhood statement" in a search engine? Seriously, it just messes the flow of the thread for no other reason than total laziness. So its okay for you assholes to do it to me but i cant do it to you? Thats the way it is? well you know where you can shove that idea. SOB all we are asking is for you to apply a little logic and a little commonsense to your posts. And just occasionally, try and understand what people are saying. life isnt an endless succession of OPINIONS. There are actual facts, you know! I have yet to see you supply a "fact" here and i have been a member for a few months now. When will it happen? Anyway back to the topic you homophobes certainly are rude! SOB remember the private schools thread? both FD and I provided documented proof that private schools received LESS funding than public schools  but you said that was wrong. When you were asked to explain what to do with all the extra students that would be needed to be housed in the public sector if private school funding was ended you replied with 'there will be plenty of money around' in a complete denieal of both fact and logic. Perhaps the problem is that you dont see facts like the rest of us do. Either way, try listening and ansorbing another persons argument occasionally. You dont have to agree but you do need to show some logice when dismissing it. you proved nothing. We disagree. You seem to think that if i dont agree with you i must not understand what you are saying. Private schools shouldn't receive any funding. If they didnt then the stats would be different anyway. The whole policy would be different. Private schools havent always been funded. You are denying logic in refusing to consider my opinion. It goes 2 ways. I have "absorbed" other ppls argument occasionally but you dont see that because you dont want to. I bet you dont "absorb" anyone elses argument ever..you just resort to insults. FD is a liar and quotes ppl out of context and misrepresents them. That is cheating. you self-proclaimed "righties" gang up on ppl and insult them instead of offering any kind of logic. you dont seem to want to discuss anything either. Just "argue" and you nitpick lil things and harp on them instead of addressing issues. SOB liar because he tried to explain to you how taking private school funding awy was going to COST the govt many billions? It wasnt a difficult argument and even the education union - which are left of the Greens - understand that, even if begrugingly. You need to try and see past your own opinions and see some of the points of view expressed by others and accept and reject them based on their merits not because you dont like (or understand) them. No a liar because he quotes ppl out of context and misrepresents them (as i already said). Obviously you have some comprehension problems. As for the schools you are entitled to your opinion but I am entitled to mine. As I said in the thread it doesnt matter what it costs - we should spend the money to make the education system better. We have the money. Theres supposedly a "mining boom". SOB

I have my own issues with FD but he rarely quotes out of context. perhaps your problem is that you REALLY dont undrstand most of his (or my) arguments and so you say he is a liar.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 7:11pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:28pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:19pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:15pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 6:02pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:57pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:54pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:52pm: Quantum wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 5:48pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:59pm: ... wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 4:56pm: Maybe you shouldn't ask inane, childish questions.  The whole world doesn't revolve around trying to educate you. Dont be a dick. He has been doing it to me for weeks. It would have been easier to just tell me than making me google it. He wont google stuff when he asks me stupid questions. He made the claim. He needs to back it up. Why are you defending him? SOB While this thread is degrading in to a competition of who can ask the stupidest question, allow me to contribute. In what universe does posting; "What is a "motherhood" statement and why is the concept of "world peace" one? Just curious. And then expecting an answer, easier than just typing "motherhood statement" in a search engine? Seriously, it just messes the flow of the thread for no other reason than total laziness. So its okay for you assholes to do it to me but i cant do it to you? Thats the way it is? well you know where you can shove that idea. SOB all we are asking is for you to apply a little logic and a little commonsense to your posts. And just occasionally, try and understand what people are saying. life isnt an endless succession of OPINIONS. There are actual facts, you know! I have yet to see you supply a "fact" here and i have been a member for a few months now. When will it happen? Anyway back to the topic you homophobes certainly are rude! SOB remember the private schools thread? both FD and I provided documented proof that private schools received LESS funding than public schools  but you said that was wrong. When you were asked to explain what to do with all the extra students that would be needed to be housed in the public sector if private school funding was ended you replied with 'there will be plenty of money around' in a complete denieal of both fact and logic. Perhaps the problem is that you dont see facts like the rest of us do. Either way, try listening and ansorbing another persons argument occasionally. You dont have to agree but you do need to show some logice when dismissing it. you proved nothing. We disagree. You seem to think that if i dont agree with you i must not understand what you are saying. Private schools shouldn't receive any funding. If they didnt then the stats would be different anyway. The whole policy would be different. Private schools havent always been funded. You are denying logic in refusing to consider my opinion. It goes 2 ways. I have "absorbed" other ppls argument occasionally but you dont see that because you dont want to. I bet you dont "absorb" anyone elses argument ever..you just resort to insults. FD is a liar and quotes ppl out of context and misrepresents them. That is cheating. you self-proclaimed "righties" gang up on ppl and insult them instead of offering any kind of logic. you dont seem to want to discuss anything either. Just "argue" and you nitpick lil things and harp on them instead of addressing issues. SOB liar because he tried to explain to you how taking private school funding awy was going to COST the govt many billions? It wasnt a difficult argument and even the education union - which are left of the Greens - understand that, even if begrugingly. You need to try and see past your own opinions and see some of the points of view expressed by others and accept and reject them based on their merits not because you dont like (or understand) them. No a liar because he quotes ppl out of context and misrepresents them (as i already said). Obviously you have some comprehension problems. As for the schools you are entitled to your opinion but I am entitled to mine. As I said in the thread it doesnt matter what it costs - we should spend the money to make the education system better. We have the money. Theres supposedly a "mining boom". SOB I have my own issues with FD but he rarely quotes out of context. perhaps your problem is that you REALLY dont undrstand most of his (or my) arguments and so you say he is a liar.

lol. Perhaps my problem is that he quotes me out of context and misrepresents me.

SOB

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11^th, 2012 at 11:47am:

MOTR wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 8:15am: No, I wasn't saying that. God's existence does not depend on my acceptance of your beliefs, irrespective of how absolutely you hold them to be true. It is likewise true that Gods existence does not depend on anyones belief for it so be so. The argument is usually circular because when asked for a standard of proof that the atheist would accept it is usually ridiculously high. EG if you prayed for a billion dollars and the next day Bill Gates drove up and gave you a cheque for $100million would you than claim that God doesnt answer prayer? Ive asked atheists in the past for a statement of their minimum level of proof that God exists, Its amazing how they can never seem to really find an answer beyond 'world peace' and other motherhood statements.

What has the existence of God got to do with brainwashed fundamentalists?

MOTR wrote on Jun 12^th, 2012 at 7:20am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 11:47am: MOTR wrote on Jun 11th, 2012 at 8:15am: No, I wasn't saying that. God's existence does not depend on my acceptance of your beliefs, irrespective of how absolutely you hold them to be true. It is likewise true that Gods existence does not depend on anyones belief for it so be so. The argument is usually circular because when asked for a standard of proof that the atheist would accept it is usually ridiculously high. EG if you prayed for a billion dollars and the next day Bill Gates drove up and gave you a cheque for $100million would you than claim that God doesnt answer prayer? Ive asked atheists in the past for a statement of their minimum level of proof that God exists, Its amazing how they can never seem to really find an answer beyond 'world peace' and other motherhood statements. What has the existence of God got to do with brainwashed fundamentalists?

The existence of gravity does not require belief in it either

The effect of gravity can be measured ... have you any measurements of godivity maqqa?

Church of England attacks gay marriage plan

The Church of England has attacked the British government's plan to allow gay couples to marry, saying it risked creating the biggest rift between the state and the church for centuries.

Prime minister David Cameron's government wants to extend the full legal status of marriage to homosexual people, who since 2005 have been able to contract unions known as civil partnerships.

The plan has provoked anger from church leaders including the head of the Roman Catholic Church in England and some within Mr Cameron's own Conservative party, who accuse the government of interfering in religious matters.

In its formal response to the proposals, the Church of England said the move would change the "intrinsic nature of marriage as the union of a man and a woman".

"Several major elements of the government's proposals have not been thought through properly and are not legally sound," the church said in its official response.

"The consultation overlooks the implication of what is proposed for the position of the established church.

"We also believe that imposing for essentially ideological reasons a new meaning on a term as familiar and fundamental as marriage would be deeply unwise."

Twice as many Britons marry in secular, civil ceremonies as in religious rites.

About a quarter of weddings in England take place in Church of England ceremonies.

Ministers have been adamant that a new law would be brought in before the next election in 2015.

They say that under their proposals, churches and other religious establishments would not be obliged to modify their marriage rules.

But the Church of England said it was doubtful that a refusal to let same sex couples marry in their churches would withstand a challenge in the European Court of Human Rights.

It said changing the way marriage was defined by the state would change the definition for everyone and impact the nature of marriages solemnised in churches or other places of worship.

The row comes at a difficult time for the Church of England, which is grappling with the deeply divisive issue of whether to allow women bishops, which has put traditionalists and liberals at odds.

It is also in the process of choosing a new Archbishop of Canterbury, the spiritual leader of the Anglican Communion, to replace the outgoing Rowan Williams next year.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-13/church-of-england-attacks-gay-marriage-plan/4067334



Will homophobes oppose Australia's head of state, if in the near future, he/she can marry a person of the same sex?

Gay royal OK with UK

More than four out of five people would have no problem if Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge's first child - potentially a future monarch - were gay, according to a new survey.

Eighty-three per cent of people said they would be 'very comfortable', 'comfortable' or 'neutral' if the first child of William and Kate grew up to be lesbian, gay or bisexual, according to British gay rights group Stonewall.

The child, if born during the Queen's reign, would become the third in line to the throne behind Prince Charles and William.

Almost three out of five people (58 per cent) with religious beliefs surveyed supported extending the right to marry to same-sex couples, the survey of more than 2000 people for the 2012 Living Together report on attitudes also found.

That figure rose to 71 per cent among all people polled.

Stonewall chief executive Ben Summerskill said: 'Recently we've heard senior clerics distressingly compare marriage for gay people to polygamy, bestiality and child abuse.

'This polling holes below the waterline the suggestion that they speak for the majority of Britain's faith communities and vindicates years of campaigning by Stonewall to change public attitudes.'

The poll asked people with and without religious beliefs the extent to which they supported government plans to extend the legal form and name of civil marriage to same-sex couples.

They were then asked their view on a future royal child's sexuality using a five-point scale ranging from very comfortable to very uncomfortable.

The report also found that in the five years since it was last produced, 2.4 million people of working age have witnessed verbal homophobic bullying at work and 800,000 have witnessed physical homophobic bullying at work.

Two thirds of people aged 18 to 29 said there had been homophobic bullying in their school.

http://www.skynews.com.au/offbeat/article.aspx?id=760460&vId=

Quote:

The Church of England has attacked the British government's plan to allow gay couples to marry, saying it risked creating the biggest rift between the state and the church for centuries.

Good. The last thing we need is a theocracy.

SOB

More vicious Government propaganda and abuse.

THE Salvation Army's declaration that homosexuality is an unacceptable urge


Homophobic ... Yes?

Anti Christian ... Yes. Since Jesus is Gay

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/national/salvos-homosexuality-slur-anger/story-e6frea8c-1226398058216

Anglican Mainstream: Gays marrying will lead to children being taught about ‘eating human faeces’

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2012/06/17/anglican-mainstream-allowing-gays-to-marry-will-lead-to-children-being-taught-about-eating-human-faeces/

____ wrote on Jun 18^th, 2012 at 3:52am:

Anti Christian ... Yes. Since Jesus is Gay

Well, let's look at Jesus nd see where that line of thought leads...

Item 1: Jewish male that didn't have any real relationships with women other than his mother (The "Virgin" Mary) and a reformed prostitute (Mary Magdalene if Pope Greg the Great is to be believed).

Item 2: Preached a "gospel" that included such phrases as "love thy brother" and "turn the other cheek".

Item 3: Hung out with a LOT of dudes.  Seriously, the guy roamed around with a traveling sausage fest of "apostles" that included two sailors (Simon Peter and Andrew), a cop (Matthew, well technically he was a tax collector, but that's close enough for government work), and Jesus himself knew a construction trade (His temporal step-dad was a carpenter, sure he taught the boy to swing a hammer).  All they were lacking was an Indian Chief and a biker and they could've done the YMCA dance up and down the holy land.

Conclusion: Jesus was FAAAAAAAAABULOUS! QED.

SOB

---