Deppo Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 I resent that, given I am not religious. I'm pointing out, that this is a Christian society, supposedly with Christian values. Homosexuality is immoral, regardless of how we have been forced to accept certain things, a large proportion of this population would agree with me. All on here are entitled to their views on this, alas, this is my view. Outdated you may think, but that's my age group I'm afraid. 18.6% church attendance in 2007 - 3rd lowest figure in Eurpoe. Hardly a Christian society. http://www.whychurch.org.uk/trends.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joensuu Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 I resent that, given I am not religious. I'm pointing out, that this is a Christian society, supposedly with Christian values. Homosexuality is immoral, regardless of how we have been forced to accept certain things, a large proportion of this population would agree with me. All on here are entitled to their views on this, alas, this is my view. Outdated you may think, but that's my age group I'm afraid. While there is still officially a link between church and state, we really should repeal this and abandon the faith to the believers. Science, equality and religious freedom all round I say. Morality as such would be defined by society, and not by oft translated and interepreted old texts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 As a rule of thumb I'd agree with that. Trouble is its unenforceable and not always desirable. I think giving fertility treatment to women in their 50s and 60s is wrong, I think it is wrong to conceive a baby from your dead husbands sperm, I think surrogacy for money is wrong and, when it happens in the future, I think cloning a baby from your own stem cells is wrong. But some people will always do what they want, regardless of what is arguably best for the child and I dont think it helps any to try to 'ban' someone from bringing up the child after the fact. But we can surely criticise Elton for this in the hope that negative publicity dissuades a similar situation from occurring in future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joensuu Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 As a rule of thumb I'd agree with that. Trouble is its unenforceable and not always desirable. I think giving fertility treatment to women in their 50s and 60s is wrong, I think it is wrong to conceive a baby from your dead husbands sperm, I think surrogacy for money is wrong and, when it happens in the future, I think cloning a baby from your own stem cells is wrong. But some people will always do what they want, regardless of what is arguably best for the child and I dont think it helps any to try to 'ban' someone from bringing up the child after the fact. Absolutely agree. Also, perish the thought of 'banning' anyone from bringing up their own children (unless they are damaging them by so doing). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notnowcato Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 As a rule of thumb I'd agree with that. Trouble is its unenforceable and not always desirable. I think giving fertility treatment to women in their 50s and 60s is wrong, I think it is wrong to conceive a baby from your dead husbands sperm, I think surrogacy for money is wrong and, when it happens in the future, I think cloning a baby from your own stem cells is wrong. But some people will always do what they want, regardless of what is arguably best for the child and I dont think it helps any to try to 'ban' someone from bringing up the child after the fact. Do you think it is wrong to meddle with the way of nature? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 But we can surely criticise Elton for this in the hope that negative publicity dissuades a similar situation from occurring in future. Imo the primary concern should be what is best for a child - not what is best for putative parents. Trouble is the whole issue is a thousand shades of grey and I dont feel equipped to 'judge' every case. There was a case in the US a while ago of a woman in her 20s dying of cancer trying to bear a baby before she died. Whilst you can utterly sympathise with her position it still leaves me deeply uncomfortable. Science will increasingly make more things possible which 'society' thinks are undesirable. I have no idea where personal rights and liberty stops and where society takes over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 10 February, 2011 Author Share Posted 10 February, 2011 Hypo, get a life of your own and stop trying to lives of others. Sloping along in the wake of the wafer-thin mind of Turkish makes you look even worse than usual. Such righteous indignation sits not so well with that fundamental Christian value expressed in 'he who casts the first stone...' Wouldn't you think? And are you so absolutely sure that your own life lives up to the morally and ethnically cleansed standards of those two almighty paragons of high virtue, dune and turkish? Surely the same applies to yourself. Who are you to critise me based on your live and let live ethics? Or is that live and let live as long as they agree with the mainstream view? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 (edited) Do you think it is wrong to meddle with the way of nature? Treating people for disease is meddling with nature. Growing selective crops is meddling with nature. Keeping alive 100 year old deaf and blind stroke victims is meddling with nature. The whole area is a minefield. Edited 10 February, 2011 by buctootim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 10 February, 2011 Author Share Posted 10 February, 2011 According to the bible, homosexual acts are immoral. I'd like to think that as a society we have moved on from that, maybe some knuckles still being dragged in certain places. ahh, so now the bible and the fundemental values of western society is written by knucle draggers? Thou shall not steal, thou shall not murder, thou shall only apply the bits that suit me??? I hope you wont be celebrating Christmas or buying any easter eggs, we wouldn't want you celebrating the festivals of knuckle dragger now would we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deppo Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 Thous shall not adopt if you're a 63 year homo Is that one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 10 February, 2011 Author Share Posted 10 February, 2011 That's fine, so long as you recognise your view is worth jack**** - even 'fundamental' jack****. I love the 'knowing what he's done in the past' bit. Pontificating and taking the moral high ground is reserved for Saints (in the spiritual sense, not the football one) - rather than morally compromised posters on here. sounds like you are contradicting yourself to me.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deppo Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 Thou shall not change a couple of lyrics from a song about one person and make it into a song about another Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deppo Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 Thou shall not wear big sliver boots and silly glasses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deppo Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 Thou shall not have tantrums or talk publicly about anal dildos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deppo Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 The man shouldn't be allowed to adopt simply because he's going to hell when he dies. What sort of role model is that for a small boy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deppo Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 Only devout Christians should be allowed to adopt. Preferably they would have dedicated their lives to God. Maybe a priest or something like that? What could go wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 Just f*ck off deppo. Idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notnowcato Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 ahh, so now the bible and the fundemental values of western society is written by knucle draggers? Thou shall not steal, thou shall not murder, thou shall only apply the bits that suit me??? I hope you wont be celebrating Christmas or buying any easter eggs, we wouldn't want you celebrating the festivals of knuckle dragger now would we. Correct me if I am wrong but homosexual acts are not deemed immoral by western society. Or are homophobic people the only ones fit to celebrate christmas? Thou shall not probably answer my question... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deppo Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 That was a very Eltonesque tantrum you've just had there, Hypo. Are you trying to tell us something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notnowcato Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 Just f*ck off deppo. Idiot. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour. Naughty, naughty!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour. Naughty, naughty!! I'm not religious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joensuu Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 ahh, so now the bible and the fundemental values of western society is written by knucle draggers? Thou shall not steal, thou shall not murder, thou shall only apply the bits that suit me??? I hope you wont be celebrating Christmas or buying any easter eggs, we wouldn't want you celebrating the festivals of knuckle dragger now would we. For the record (not that I agree with notnowcato's 'knuckle dragging' statement), but as an Atheist I still follow 7 or 8 of the 10 commandments (depending upon which 10 you use) - but I can't agree to follow the first 2 (or 3 if you use the Catholic/Lutheran commandments). The remaining 7/8 are all perfectly sensible for everyone to follow, even an Atheist like me. Oh, and happy to enjoy the festive spirit (for the sake of kids) - no reason to make them feel excluded when all they see is presents and fun. And hey, it's only really the Winter Solstice rebranded a couple of milenia ago and celebrated a couple of days late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 10 February, 2011 Author Share Posted 10 February, 2011 Correct me if I am wrong but homosexual acts are not deemed immoral by western society. Or are homophobic people the only ones fit to celebrate christmas? Thou shall not probably answer my question... Not anymore they aren't they used to be, when people were more religious, but you brought up the bible. Christmas and easter celebrates the birth and death of the the king of "knuckle draggers" Surely it would be hypocritical of you to celebrate it given your last comment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deppo Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 I'm not religious. Good job because God would reject you after your aggressive outbursts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 10 February, 2011 Author Share Posted 10 February, 2011 For the record (not that I agree with notnowcato's 'knuckle dragging' statement), but as an Atheist I still follow 7 or 8 of the 10 commandments (depending upon which 10 you use) - but I can't agree to follow the first 2 (or 3 if you use the Catholic/Lutheran commandments). The remaining 7/8 are all perfectly sensible for everyone to follow, even an Atheist like me. Oh, and happy to enjoy the festive spirit (for the sake of kids) - no reason to make them feel excluded when all they see is presents and fun. And hey, it's only really the Winter Solstice rebranded a couple of milenia ago and celebrated a couple of days late. So the bits that suit you then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notnowcato Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 (edited) Not anymore they aren't they used to be, when people were more religious, but you brought up the bible. Christmas and easter celebrates the birth and death of the the king of "knuckle draggers" Surely it would be hypocritical of you to celebrate it given your last comment? Gingeletiss brought up the bible. Thou didn't answer my question as was prophicised. Edited 10 February, 2011 by notnowcato Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 If I was trying to adopt a child then your argument would be relevant. I am not so it is not. Okay, so you're not trying to commit the awful offence of adopting a child. Please list all of your other transgressions so that we may pass judgement on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 10 February, 2011 Author Share Posted 10 February, 2011 Gingeletiss brought up the bible. Thou didn't answer my question and was prophicised. and you dismissed it the mutters of knuckle draggers. If society has moved on are you going to be throwing away the christmas tree this year? Or are you going to be a hypocrite and join in the celebration of the festival of the birth of christianity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 and you dismissed it the mutters of knuckle draggers. If society has moved on are you going to be throwing away the christmas tree this year? Or are you going to be a hypocrite and join in the celebration of the festival of the birth of christianity? no one knows what day Jesus Christ was born on. From the biblical description, most historians believe that his birth probably occurred in September, approximately six months after Passover. One thing they agree on is that it is very unlikely that Jesus was born in December, since the bible records shepherds tending their sheep in the fields on that night. This is quite unlikely to have happened during a cold Judean winter. So why do we celebrate Christ’s birthday as Christmas, on December the 25th? The answer lies in the pagan origins of Christmas. In ancient Babylon, the feast of the Son of Isis (Goddess of Nature) was celebrated on December 25. Raucous partying, gluttonous eating and drinking, and gift-giving were traditions of this feast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notnowcato Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 Are you disputing that society has moved on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deppo Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 and you dismissed it the mutters of knuckle draggers. If society has moved on are you going to be throwing away the christmas tree this year? Or are you going to be a hypocrite and join in the celebration of the festival of the birth of christianity? The three wise men brought Gold, Frankincense and a Christmas tree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 10 February, 2011 Author Share Posted 10 February, 2011 no one knows what day Jesus Christ was born on. From the biblical description, most historians believe that his birth probably occurred in September, approximately six months after Passover. One thing they agree on is that it is very unlikely that Jesus was born in December, since the bible records shepherds tending their sheep in the fields on that night. This is quite unlikely to have happened during a cold Judean winter. So why do we celebrate Christ’s birthday as Christmas, on December the 25th? The answer lies in the pagan origins of Christmas. In ancient Babylon, the feast of the Son of Isis (Goddess of Nature) was celebrated on December 25. Raucous partying, gluttonous eating and drinking, and gift-giving were traditions of this feast. Thanks, but i already know this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 The three wise men brought Gold, Frankincense and a Christmas tree. and he wanted an ipod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 Okay, so you're not trying to commit the awful offence of adopting a child. Please list all of your other transgressions so that we may pass judgement on them. You make no sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 10 February, 2011 Author Share Posted 10 February, 2011 (edited) Are you disputing that society has moved on? Depends on your definition of "moving on" our society is more tolerant these days, (as long as you agree with the mainstream) no bad thing. On the negaitive side however there is more crime, violence, teenage pregenancy, drug abuse, family and marriage breakdown etc. If that is "moving on" then i suppose it has. Anyway, what are you going to be doing 25th of December this year? Have you volenteered to work over easter bank holiday as you wont be celebrating it this year? Edited 10 February, 2011 by Turkish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joensuu Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 So the bits that suit you then? The bits that agree with my understanding of the world (not to be confused with the bits that I agree with, I didn't restrict myself to one source when I developed my personal worldview). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notnowcato Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 Depends on your definition of "moving on" our society is more tolerant these days, (as long as you agree with the mainstream) no bad thing. On the negaitive side however there is more crime, violence, teenage pregenancy, drug abuse, family and marriage breakdown etc. If that is "moving on" then i suppose it has. Anyway, what are you going to be doing 25th of December this year? Have you volenteered to work over easter bank holiday as you wont be celebrating it this year? Does tolerance = more crime, violence, teenage pregnancy etc etc? What is your point? My relationship with God is personal to me. I do have a faith but a faith that I question. I see that as healthy and why I am comfortable with believing that religion and faith need to progress with society. My faith is not a set or rules but a set of values. As you brought it up, last Christmas and the previous four christmas' I have volunteered at a local soup kitchen which is run by a multi faith organisation. I hope to do the same again this year. I have no need to "work" this Easter, last Easter I disappeared to Munich for the weekend and thoroughly enjoyed my time there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 10 February, 2011 Author Share Posted 10 February, 2011 Does tolerance = more crime, violence, teenage pregnancy etc etc? What is your point? My relationship with God is personal to me. I do have a faith but a faith that I question. I see that as healthy and why I am comfortable with believing that religion and faith need to progress with society. My faith is not a set or rules but a set of values. As you brought it up, last Christmas and the previous four christmas' I have volunteered at a local soup kitchen which is run by a multi faith organisation. I hope to do the same again this year. I have no need to "work" this Easter, last Easter I disappeared to Munich for the weekend and thoroughly enjoyed my time there. You asked me a question and i answered it, not making a point. As i said it depends on what you mean by moving on. Would you rather live in a safer society with less crime but was less tolerant of certain types or a tolerant society where crime is rife? As society has become more tolerant it has also become more violent, more criminal, people have become more selfish and materialistic, is this just coincidence? Who knows, but it may have something to so with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 Gingeletiss is actually incorrect. Same sex couples have been able to apply to the adoption authorities in this country since 2005. I know that...jeez. I think his past track record may preclude him though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 You are not religious but quote the bible. Homosexuality is deemed immoral but not illegal. It is not your age group, I'm afraid, it's your ignorance. So, I'm ignorant, because I don't agree with Homosexuality, give it a rest. I suspect there are many things you disagree with, are you also to be classed as ignorant. What a world we live in, when we all have to conform to some liberal thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 In the face of this overwhelming evidence, it is surely now "case closed". Lock this thread up. Still trying to be the funny man, not working I'm afraid. You actually come across as a bit sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 Thous shall not adopt if you're a 63 year homo Is that one? Still not working, you need to try some new material imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 10 February, 2011 Author Share Posted 10 February, 2011 So, I'm ignorant, because I don't agree with Homosexuality, give it a rest. I suspect there are many things you disagree with, are you also to be classed as ignorant. What a world we live in, when we all have to conform to some liberal thinking. I find it amusing that this liberal types who are all for live and let live are quick to critise anyone that doesn't agree with their way of thinking. It seems you can only "live and let live" if they way you want to live your life confirms to their beliefs, making their liberal beliefs worthless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 I like deppos replies... if it disagrees, it just floods a thread with unfunny drivel... I thought this was the lounge, not the deppo muppet show Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 I find it amusing that this liberal types who are all for live and let live are quick to critise anyone that doesn't agree with their way of thinking. It seems you can only "live and let live" if they way you want to live your life confirms to their beliefs, making their liberal beliefs worthless. You've hit the nail on the head. As far as the liberal types are concerned it's a case of do as i say, not as i do. That is typical of control freak nanny state Socialism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 I find it amusing that this liberal types who are all for live and let live are quick to critise anyone that doesn't agree with their way of thinking. It seems you can only "live and let live" if they way you want to live your life confirms to their beliefs, making their liberal beliefs worthless. Utterly, freakishly even by your standards, meaningless. The only thing I complain about is your consistent inability to follow a simple argument. It's depressing but nonetheless true that any debate on here involving you is nothing more than an attempt by you to rant and wail about something you expect - demand - everyone to either wave their collective pitchforks at, or declare their supposedly morally bankrupt colours by disagreeing with you. As I've said before, it's just the lazy, undeveloped mind of an immature bully. All of your arguments - to grant them a status they don't deserve - consist simply of an invitation to condemn someone or a group of people who fall outside your curious and 1950s-grey view of life. Who the hell would want to be in your gang? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 Utterly, freakishly even by your standards, meaningless. The only thing I complain about is your consistent inability to follow a simple argument. It's depressing but nonetheless true that any debate on here involving you is nothing more than an attempt by you to rant and wail about something you expect - demand - everyone to either wave their collective pitchforks at, or declare their supposedly morally bankrupt colours by disagreeing with you. As I've said before, it's just the lazy, undeveloped mind of an immature bully. All of your arguments - to grant them a status they don't deserve - consist simply of an invitation to condemn someone or a group of people who fall outside your curious and 1950s-grey view of life. Who the hell would want to be in your gang? you are such a boring pr1ck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 10 February, 2011 Author Share Posted 10 February, 2011 you are such a boring pr1ck this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joensuu Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 I find it amusing that this liberal types who are all for live and let live are quick to critise anyone that doesn't agree with their way of thinking. It seems you can only "live and let live" if they way you want to live your life confirms to their beliefs, making their liberal beliefs worthless. Us 'liberal types' are perfectly happy to live and let live - that's what it's all about. The only things that get a rise from us our: When anyone or anything is negatively affected by the excesses of another. Intolerance. Let's face it, if you support either of those things, you're an @rse anyhow. If you don't then you won't have any problems from us sandal-wearing beardy people (sic). You've hit the nail on the head. As far as the liberal types are concerned it's a case of do as i say, not as i do. That is typical of control freak nanny state Socialism. Wish there was some form of gameshow 'fail' sound effect I could reply with; the Family Fortunes 'duh-duh' would be perfect for your above post. Liberals aren't Socialists by any stretch of the imagination, they also tend to stick by their moral position - unlike many others. I for example don't drive, and don't eat meat. Doing what I say, and doing what I do are very much one in the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 10 February, 2011 Share Posted 10 February, 2011 do the liberals support the EDLs right to free speech..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now