More religious lunacy
Discussion
Jasandjules said:
It is interesting that many who want the freedom to undertake their religion freely, seem rather obsessed with stopping others living their lives freely.
The pilgrim fathers left this country not, as suggested by the USA, because of religious persecution but because everyone was allowed to believe what they wanted to. They, on the other hand, wanted to impose theirs on everyone else. No wonder the USA is such a religious f
k up.Everyone should be allowed to believe what they want to. However, they should keep it to themselves.
It is, to an extent, the fault of society that this bloke thinks his beliefs are real. If we treated such people not with 'respect' but with irritation, perhaps they'd keep their knives to themselves.
FredClogs said:
Someone seems to be having a hard time accepting he wants cock.
It would be interesting to see some real world figures on sexual orientation Vs tolerance towards people with a different sexual persuasion to the subject.In life, as well as the odd third hand observation, I have noted that those who are apparently the least tolerant are also those who are the most likely to be 'living a lie'. Both in the case of bisexuals who are 'aggressively' gay and heterosexuals who are aggressively anti gay.
I do know an exception who proves the rule, but their intellectual capacity is rather limited - nice enough bloke to be aquatinted with (so long as you are not a member of a grouping he dislikes, and certainly helpful if there is ever any trouble about, but not likely to be troubling the top of a Key Stage 3 test, let alone MENSA
While we're on the subject of extremist lunatics I just noticed this on the BBC News homepage too.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-337292...
An arson attack by Jewish settlers in the West Bank has claimed the life of an 18-month-old Palestinian child.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-337292...
An arson attack by Jewish settlers in the West Bank has claimed the life of an 18-month-old Palestinian child.
esxste said:
MiniMan64 said:
Why do so many religions have such an issue with which bits the person you fall in love with has?
Because for them, everything is about sex and power. rohrl said:
While we're on the subject of extremist lunatics I just noticed this on the BBC News homepage too.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-337292...
An arson attack by Jewish settlers in the West Bank has claimed the life of an 18-month-old Palestinian child.
It's the story of David and Goliath. Except this time Goliath has the American senate and Fox News on their side.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-337292...
An arson attack by Jewish settlers in the West Bank has claimed the life of an 18-month-old Palestinian child.
TurboHatchback said:
It's fascinating that the left wing hand-wringers rabidly defend religion and decry right-wingers as bigoted fascists yet the literal interpretation of most Abrahamic religions makes Hitler look positively moderate, caring and open-minded.
Sorry but religion is a cult of the right not the left and is defended to death by them. All religions hate communism.
See the southern United States for details.
I'd add that most lefties are Atheist.
mudflaps said:
Sorry but religion is a cult of the right not the left and is defended to death by them. All religions hate communism.
The latter does not imply the first. If you treat Marxism (leftism in it's most extreme form) as a religion then naturally it will detest other religions. If you look at the death count of the 20th century, it was one of the most destructive religions.fido said:
mudflaps said:
Sorry but religion is a cult of the right not the left and is defended to death by them. All religions hate communism.
The latter does not imply the first. If you treat Marxism (leftism in it's most extreme form) as a religion then naturally it will detest other religions. If you look at the death count of the 20th century, it was one of the most destructive religions.What's that supposed to prove.
plus, israel is f
king mental.Hackney said:
So you're suggesting taking something that isn't a religion, and then treat it as a religion?
What's that supposed to prove.
plus, israel is fking mental.
That's my point - it is a 'religion' to some people. I don't see much difference between 'fighting for the cause of the proletarian revolution' or fighting for your own choice of Sky Fairy. At the end of the day they both have the potential to kill alot of people.What's that supposed to prove.
plus, israel is f
king mental.fido said:
Hackney said:
So you're suggesting taking something that isn't a religion, and then treat it as a religion?
What's that supposed to prove.
plus, israel is fking mental.
That's my point - it is a 'religion' to some people. I don't see much difference between 'fighting for the cause of the proletarian revolution' or fighting for your own choice of Sky Fairy. At the end of the day they both have the potential to kill alot of people.What's that supposed to prove.
plus, israel is f
king mental.The communist party of GB say "all Communists are committed to secularism (we argue religious institutions shouldn't play a role in the state and vice versa) we're not anti-religious. Many of our members today and historically hold a wide variety of beliefs and practice a wide range of religions".
I was chatting to a victim of what is euphemistically called gay bashing, but in fact was a serious attack, resulting in grievous bodily harm on a chap who was outweighed by about 8 stone by his attacker. The victim was overtly gay and hence the assumption that it was homophobic.
The chap said that his attacker was gay. This threw me a bit and I asked him if he was saying this to get back at the bloke. He was adamant that the offender was gay, but latent and having trouble coping.
Once I saw the bloke, I had the same suspicion and chatted through this strange development with the custody officer. He reckoned that he'd had other offenders for homophobic attacks who were apparently gay, or perhaps effeminate. They were a small minority, but even one seemed a bit odd to me. There was the famous one in my area where a bloke had picked up a gay bloke, had sex, and then beat him almost to death in the morning. His most defining characteristic was that he was a nutter but he did, reportedly, enjoy the sex.
I talked this over with a rep of the gay 'community' and he reckoned that it had been noticed before and that the assumption was that such people were, because of social pressure, trying to deny their tendencies. He, strangely, felt sorry for them, odd given some of the injuries, but he reckoned they were victims of society's sexual repression.
Tell people they are inferior, that gods hate them, that they will go to hell (perhaps a bottomless pit, and they won't like that) and it will warp their attitudes.
This offender was a product of pills and gyms. It seemed odd that in his attempt to reject his nature he'd turned himself into something that gays might swoon over. Deliberate or unintended consequence?
No robbery, just a violent and prolonged attack on a bloke. No reason apart from the suggestion that he'd been made to feel ashamed for how he'd been born. It is no excuse for his actions, of course. They were outrageous. He wasn't even drunk - not that that is an excuse either. But it was in cold blood so to speak.
As I say, a minority. I've been involved in the investigation of a number of homophobic attacks and this was, I think, unique in my experience.
The chap said that his attacker was gay. This threw me a bit and I asked him if he was saying this to get back at the bloke. He was adamant that the offender was gay, but latent and having trouble coping.
Once I saw the bloke, I had the same suspicion and chatted through this strange development with the custody officer. He reckoned that he'd had other offenders for homophobic attacks who were apparently gay, or perhaps effeminate. They were a small minority, but even one seemed a bit odd to me. There was the famous one in my area where a bloke had picked up a gay bloke, had sex, and then beat him almost to death in the morning. His most defining characteristic was that he was a nutter but he did, reportedly, enjoy the sex.
I talked this over with a rep of the gay 'community' and he reckoned that it had been noticed before and that the assumption was that such people were, because of social pressure, trying to deny their tendencies. He, strangely, felt sorry for them, odd given some of the injuries, but he reckoned they were victims of society's sexual repression.
Tell people they are inferior, that gods hate them, that they will go to hell (perhaps a bottomless pit, and they won't like that) and it will warp their attitudes.
This offender was a product of pills and gyms. It seemed odd that in his attempt to reject his nature he'd turned himself into something that gays might swoon over. Deliberate or unintended consequence?
No robbery, just a violent and prolonged attack on a bloke. No reason apart from the suggestion that he'd been made to feel ashamed for how he'd been born. It is no excuse for his actions, of course. They were outrageous. He wasn't even drunk - not that that is an excuse either. But it was in cold blood so to speak.
As I say, a minority. I've been involved in the investigation of a number of homophobic attacks and this was, I think, unique in my experience.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff