PRIDE in sexuality?

[Bread.]

Everyone loves enjoying the fruits of their labor. Being proud of your work, and being succesful about achievements youve made can be associated with building confidence. It makes us want to feel good about ourselves. However, being prideful about one's sexuality can have negative consequences that far outweigh the benefits.

When someone is overtly proud of their sexuality, they will come across as arrogant or entitled. This will create a false sense of superiority that is off-putting to those around them. Pride in one's sexuality can lead to judgment/discrimination, harboring hatred towards those who do not fit into their labels. This leads to alienation that can deprive different perspectives that can open opportunities for growth and success of ideas. Having this type of pride will tell you that the other people dont deserve to be forgiven, or that you could never be in the wrong.

In contrast, being humble about one's sexuality allows for a more genuine and authentic connection with others. Expressing humility about anything, especially one's sexuality, is a virtue that promotes modesty, respect for others, and adherence to moral values. Humility encourages individuals to focus on communal values and ideals rather than emphasizing personal identity or desires. It puts others above yourself, just like GOD.

Thats why people who are normal dont flaunt their sexuality.

The pride that blinds is the thief of PEACE. It is the father of jealousy and the constant need to compare.
Pride without merit is the seed of insecurity and the wound to those that need healing.

 

[Deleted member 263960]

may I ask what the debate is?

 

[Bread.]

PRIDE belonging in sexuality

 

[Deleted member 303751]

I agree, sexuality is not an achievement, it shouldn't be celebrated nor should there be a "pride" month celebrating people for just "being who they are"

 

[Deleted member 303751]

Unfortunately for many people their narcissism and demand for validation means they are incapable of keeping their sexuality private

 

[Deleted member 263960]

PRIDE belonging in sexuality

so its basically a yes or no proposition? I would say no- and the best reason Ill quote the Late RT Honourable Pierre Trudeau, who has justice Minister said "The view we take is, there's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation" but then

He would later say that the affairs of the bedroom also do not belong on the streets. < ---this is the part I offer on this debate and I agree with.

I do think some sort of remembrance is in order, as at the time homosexuality (and acts) was a crime in Canada, although I never understood why "pride" was the chosen terminology.

 

[Deleted member 303751]

I laugh when gays say "they hate us for existing " the reason they exist is because of straight people. If it wasn't for straight people they wouldn't exist. They should thank us.

 

[Inkandtatts]

Everyone loves enjoying the fruits of their labor. Being proud of your work, and being succesful about achievements youve made can be associated with building confidence. It makes us want to feel good about ourselves. However, being prideful about one's sexuality can have negative consequences that far outweigh the benefits.

When someone is overtly proud of their sexuality, they will come across as arrogant or entitled. This will create a false sense of superiority that is off-putting to those around them. Pride in one's sexuality can lead to judgment/discrimination, harboring hatred towards those who do not fit into their labels. This leads to alienation that can deprive different perspectives that can open opportunities for growth and success of ideas. Having this type of pride will tell you that the other people dont deserve to be forgiven, or that you could never be in the wrong.

In contrast, being humble about one's sexuality allows for a more genuine and authentic connection with others. Expressing humility about anything, especially one's sexuality, is a virtue that promotes modesty, respect for others, and adherence to moral values. Humility encourages individuals to focus on communal values and ideals rather than emphasizing personal identity or desires. It puts others above yourself, just like GOD.

Thats why people who are normal dont flaunt their sexuality.

The pride that blinds is the thief of PEACE. It is the father of jealousy and the constant need to compare.
Pride without merit is the seed of insecurity and the wound to those that need healing.

Unfortunately for many people their narcissism and demand for validation means they are incapable of keeping their sexuality private

I agree with both of you. All these couples that have pride in their children. It's fucking irritating the way they bang on about it all the time and the way they are incapable of keeping their kids hidden and therefore their sexuality private.

I'm like "You got laid and made a baby. Congrats and all that but Jeez, give it a rest at some point before your child reaches retirement age!" It's so annoying, for example, when they're all over Tesco flaunting their sexuality by having their babies in the prams and pushchais "Who cares that you got laid and made a baby!? Move your pride out of my way and let me get to the loo roll, and btw preggo lady over there, hide your damn bump and ban those T-Shirts that say "baby on board".....nobody thinks you should be proud of your sexuality honey!"

I never understood why "pride" was the chosen terminology.

It apparently caught on after the Stonewall riots and no explanation has ever been given but the suggestion is that it derived from everyone should be proud of who they are.

I would say no- and the best reason Ill quote the Late RT Honourable Pierre Trudeau, who has justice Minister said "The view we take is, there's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation"

Given the context in which that quote was originally said, using it in the latest of the stale one's self-pleasure threads is ironic

He would later say that the affairs of the bedroom also do not belong on the streets. < ---this is the part I offer on this debate and I agree with.

As children are the products of "affairs of the bedroom" and they therefore "do not belong on the streets", when is it proposed that they should be let out of the house?

 

[rapinoes smirking revenge]

how is having some kind of a pride day in any way "the state being in the bedroom" ? the state isn't forcing anyone to be gay or forcing them to celebrate pride. that makes zero sense.

 

[-Luka]

Define “flaunt”.

If you mean holding hands in the street, that’s acceptable or an arm around the partner.

If you mean swapping spit in public and just downright being inappropriate, then no.

GLB or not. I don’t wanna see that crap.

 

[rapinoes smirking revenge]

we should do away with any kind of st patrick's day parades or celebrations. being irish isn't anything that was achieved either.

 

[-Luka]

we should do away with any kind of st patrick's day parades or celebrations. being irish isn't anything that was achieved either.

but potatoes

 

[rapinoes smirking revenge]

i mean i'm all for a potato day

 

[Finn2.0]

This is what I come back to? Rapi planning to externinate both the gays and the Irish?

 

[Inkandtatts]

how is having some kind of a pride day in any way "the state being in the bedroom" ?

Precisely which is another reason why the quote is ironic in this thread. It was said when Trudeau was advancing a Bill to decriminalize homosexuality and abortion, amongst other huge changes. The full quote is "Take this thing on homosexuality. The view we take is, there's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation. What's done in private between adults doesn't concern the Criminal Code"

 

[rapinoes smirking revenge]

Precisely which is another reason why the quote is ironic in this thread. It was said when Trudeau was advancing a Bill to decriminalize homosexuality and abortion, amongst other huge changes. The full quote is "Take this thing on homosexuality. The view we take is, there's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation. What's done in private between adults doesn't concern the Criminal Code"

can't imagine why only a snippet of the quote was used. 🙄

 

[Deleted member 263960]

Precisely which is another reason why the quote is ironic in this thread. It was said when Trudeau was advancing a Bill to decriminalize homosexuality and abortion, amongst other huge changes. The full quote is "Take this thing on homosexuality. The view we take is, there's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation. What's done in private between adults doesn't concern the Criminal Code"

Thank you for the Stonewall reference ill look that up.

The quote I used, the first part was offered to be supportive of gay rights and was so well known to Canadians who lived through the times first hand so I saw no need to include the full quote but ty.

The latter, "that the affairs of the bedroom didn,t belong in the streets" may be after the HoC if memory serves - that part I agree with in terms of the "debate" primarily that pride- in the form of pride parades Ive seen, were quite lewd expressions of sexuality and bordering on criminal - for that reason I said "no" re debate question. (Same could be said for any marti gras type lewdness)

Im sidestepping the fact Canadian governments have moved beyond preventing discrimination- to advocacy regarding "pride" <---- a specific example of the state meddling in the affairs of the bedroom

 

[rapinoes smirking revenge]

is the canadian government forcing people to have gay sex?
and the question is is there a reason to have pride in your sexuality

so you answer no because the government should stay out of the bedroom. doesn't make sense no matter how you try twisting and jamming the peg in the space.

 

[Inkandtatts]

primarily that pride- in the form of pride parades Ive seen, were quite lewd expressions of sexuality and bordering on criminal - for that reason I said "no" re debate question. (Same could be said for any marti gras type lewdness)

That’s a fair point. I’ve been to pride parades and experienced similar but pride parades aren’t what the “debate” is about. The stale OP’s whole premise is to get across its homophobic views but in doing so it is simply advancing the logical (but completely stupid) point that all kids must be locked away since parents can’t be proud of their sexuality.

Tall Man understood exactly what the OP was up to:

I agree, sexuality is not an achievement, it shouldn't be celebrated nor should there be a "pride" month celebrating people for just "being who they are"

Im sidestepping the fact Canadian governments have moved beyond preventing discrimination- to advocacy regarding "pride" <---- a specific example of the state meddling in the affairs of the bedroom

What are they doing that meddles in bedroom affairs?

 

[-Luka]

That’s not precisely fair. I don’t think there should be a pride month. Because of the reason HR gave which you agreed to @HandbagThief. It’s not about pride anymore it is just a literal pornfest. Yet the idea for pride is always relayed upon over and over when criticised.

It’s a tough one because as always with these topics/debates there’s never a happy medium.

 

[babydolla]

im proud of everything about myself

 

[LostCause.]

This is what I come back to? Rapi planning to externinate both the gays and the Irish?

Welcome back. I wish you a speedy recovery in your ability to spell "exterminate."

 

[Finn2.0]

Welcome back. I wish you a speedy recovery in your ability to spell "exterminate."

I had to provoke you into responding somehow…

 

[Soapie]

I mean you should always have pride In yourself, which would encompass everything about you, which would include sexuality.

...but, even tho I didn't read all them blocks of text, just the title, im guessing this is less so in general and more specifically the pride parades n stuff... which is a bit silly, not even cause its shoving it in faces or whatever... its just kinda dumb

 

[emileh]

O

I mean you should always have pride In yourself, which would encompass everything about you, which would include sexuality.

...but, even tho I didn't read all them blocks of text, just the title, im guessing this is less so in general and more specifically the pride parades n stuff... which is a bit silly, not even cause its shoving it in faces or whatever... its just kinda dumb

Just remember who the OP is and all is answered...

 

[Soapie]

O

Just remember who the OP is and all is answered...

Yeah true, I just caught the word "parade" while scrolling so, can't really definitely say it's them who brought it up 😅

 

[Bread.]

I agree with both of you. All these couples that have pride in their children. It's fucking irritating the way they bang on about it all the time and the way they are incapable of keeping their kids hidden and therefore their sexuality private.

I mean you could always make a baby on your own.. oh wait. Two gay males are incapable of procreating.

I'm like "You got laid and made a baby. Congrats and all that but Jeez, give it a rest at some point before your child reaches retirement age!" It's so annoying, for example, when they're all over Tesco flaunting their sexuality by having their babies in the prams and pushchais "Who cares that you got laid and made a baby!? Move your pride out of my way and let me get to the loo roll, and btw preggo lady over there, hide your damn bump and ban those T-Shirts that say "baby on board".....nobody thinks you should be proud of your sexuality honey!"

The pride that blinds is the thief of PEACE. It is the father of jealousy and the constant need to compare.
Pride without merit is the seed of insecurity and the wound to those that need healing.

For someone belonging to a "group" whos goal is to simply "exist" you seem to harbor a lot of hatred for children that are just existing. There seems to be a lot of prejudice considering the child in that pushcart could be adopted by a gay couple who cant procreate or a surrogate carrying a baby for a gay couple that cant conceive.

This is not PRIDE of their sexuality.

As i explained earlier,

Humility encourages individuals to focus on communal values and ideals rather than emphasizing personal identity or desires. It puts others above yourself, just like GOD.

This type of “pride” is not self centered. As a result there is nothing wrong with it.
The type of PRIDE you like is the self centered sinful kind.
The type of PRIDE that got SATAN SMITED from the kingdom of GOD.
This is the kind of PRIDE that lies at the root of all human SIN.

“Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall” (Proverbs 16:18)

Define “flaunt”.

If you mean holding hands in the street, that’s acceptable or an arm around the partner.

If you mean swapping spit in public and just downright being inappropriate, then no.

GLB or not. I don’t wanna see that crap.

Dictionary
flaunt
/flônt,flänt/

1. display (something) ostentatiously, especially in order to provoke envy or admiration or to show defiance.

 

[SouporMan]

 

[Deleted member 263960]

my TLDR is this, ( forget PET, )

Having pride in sexuality? If manifested as hubris then I say no.

 

[Akrta]

my TLDR is this, ( forget PET, )

Having pride in sexuality? If manifested as hubris then I say no.

Why is that? Is this your opinion or is this basic on society of friends beliefs? 🤔

 

[Deleted member 303751]

I'm a member of the IDGAF community

 

[-Luka]

I mean you could always make a baby on your own.. oh wait. Two gay males are incapable of procreating.

For someone belonging to a "group" whos goal is to simply "exist" you seem to harbor a lot of hatred for children that are just existing. There seems to be a lot of prejudice considering the child in that pushcart could be adopted by a gay couple who cant procreate or a surrogate carrying a baby for a gay couple that cant conceive.

This is not PRIDE of their sexuality.

As i explained earlier,

This type of “pride” is not self centered. As a result there is nothing wrong with it.
The type of PRIDE you like is the self centered sinful kind.
The type of PRIDE that got SATAN SMITED from the kingdom of GOD.
This is the kind of PRIDE that lies at the root of all human SIN.

“Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall” (Proverbs 16:18)

Dictionary
flaunt
/flônt,flänt/

1. display (something) ostentatiously, especially in order to provoke envy or admiration or to show defiance.

Provoking envy?

I don’t think flaunt is the correct word then. I am not envious of gays and most certainly not envious of dancing like a fanny in the street

 

[rapinoes smirking revenge]

 

[Inkandtatts]

And there we have it. Yet another of the stale one’s wankbank threads framed as a debate.

It’s alarming how many images of gay men the OP has.

I’m not surprised that he has no pride in himself, nor should he have.

 

[Louize]

.... When was the last time straight people were killed or imprisoned for being in love?

*65 jurisdictions criminalise private, consensual, same-sex sexual activity. The majority of these jurisdictions explicitly criminalise sex between men via ‘sodomy’, ‘buggery’ and ‘unnatural offences’ laws. Almost half of them are Commonwealth jurisdictions.

*41 countries criminalise private, consensual sexual activity between women using laws against ‘lesbianism’, ‘sexual relations with a person of the same sex’ and ‘gross indecency’. Even in jurisdictions that do not explicitly criminalise women, lesbians and bisexual women have been subjected to arrest or threat of arrest.

*12 countries have jurisdictions in which the death penalty is imposed or at least a possibility for private, consensual same-sex sexual activity. At least 6 of these implement the death penalty – Iran, Northern Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Somalia and Yemen – and the death penalty is a legal possibility in Afghanistan, Brunei, Mauritania, Pakistan, Qatar, UAE and Uganda.

*14 countries criminalise the gender identity and/or expression of transgender people, using so-called ‘cross-dressing’, ‘impersonation’ and ‘disguise’ laws. In many more countries transgender people are targeted by a range of laws that criminalise same-sex activity and vagrancy, hooliganism and public order offences.

 

[Deleted member 303751]

@Louize yeah not in the uk or america, western countries yet many lgbt people pretend it's a living hell in those countries.

The truth is they used to be oppressed, they got their rights years ago but it wasn't good enough for them, they now demand special rights, validation, the right to impose their beliefs onto others and punish people if we don't subscribe to their beliefs/ ideology hence cancel culture.

It went from asking for acceptance to forced compliance. They took it too far. Forced acceptance is not acceptance and respect is earned it's not a given right.

 

[Louize]

And yet here you are in 2024 still trying to belittle people for their sexuality... In the UK.

 

[Deleted member 303751]

And yet here you are in 2024 still trying to belittle people for their sexuality... In the UK.

No, I'm not trying to belittle anyone.

 

[Louize]

K.

/ENDTHREAD

 

[Deleted member 303751]

Most people know they got their rights and took it too far

 

[Inkandtatts]

The truth is they used to be oppressed, they got their rights years ago but it wasn't good enough for them, they now demand special rights

What special rights do they demand?

It went from asking for acceptance to forced compliance. They took it too far.

What is this forced compliance? Edit: compliance with what? What is being forced and who is doing the forcing?

(These are genuine questions so I can try to understand what you’re saying)

 

[Bread.]

And there we have it. Yet another of the stale one’s wankbank threads framed as a debate.

It’s alarming how many images of gay men the OP has.

I’m not surprised that he has no pride in himself, nor should he have.

Its alarming how you always result to commenting on my threads with the same retort and insults since never actually add any meaningful opposing argument to my debate.

I dont need to seek acceptance, visibility, or empowerment about my sexuality.
I do not need anyone to affirm anything about me.

My thread was about pride in sexuality.
My opening dialogue did not mention anything about any specific sexuality
YOU chose to quote me and attack the straight sexuality and the children straight people conceive.
YOU are the one framing perspectives as insults

Goes to show how bitter you are of straight people. haha OWNED

 

[FreePalestineANTIFA]

im proud of be what i am, nothing wrong i suppose

 

[Deleted member 303751]

What special rights do they demand?


What is this forced compliance? Edit: compliance with what? What is being forced and who is doing the forcing?

(These are genuine questions so I can try to understand what you’re saying)

1. The right to impose their views/ ideology onto others 2. People being punished, vilified, demonized, called names transphobes, bigots, 'hateful ' etc if we disagree 3.

Compelled speech for pronouns 4. Laws introduced for forced pronoun use including in places of work. Fran Itkoff a charity worker with MS multiple sclerosis charity for 60 YEARS recently got fired because she didn't want to use pronouns in an email. As a result of their "diversity and inclusivity" policy

5. All institutions being ideologically captured. 6. Trans people invading womens sports stealing their trophies and prize money. 7. Convicted male criminals "identify" as female being moved to women's prisons 8. "Trans women " being in womens changing areas, crisis centres, sorority houses etc women were not asked, they didn't even acquise it was forced onto them 9. Rainbow flags everywhere

10. Laws being introduced where parents will go to prison if we don't allow our own children to "change gender" or go on puberty blockers 11. The suppression and distortion of language

12. Gay people having special rights in the courts 13. The minority of trans people changing all facets of society to accommodate them and it's detrimental to everyone else

14.Cancel culture people being vilified, demonized, fired and sometimes even arrested for conveying their opinion. its not lgbt people being cancelled because they are in a "marginalised group" the only people who are allowed to be criticises are the people not in the marginaled group I.e straight white males especially christians and it will never be called hate speech

. 15. The rights and feelings of transgender people having precedence over the rights and feelings of everyone else. Etc

 

[Soapie]

 

[Deleted member 303751]

@Inkandtatts ^^

 

[Deleted member 303751]

Edited 13. Not lgb people it's primarily trans people doing that

 

[Deleted member 303751]

I hope my answers were suffice for you

 

[FreePalestineANTIFA]

🙂

 

[Bread.]

Perhaps that's because your threads are never about debate. They're just a vehicle for you to propagate your nasty bigoted views and to try and inflame people into arguing with you.

The whole purpose of a debate is to exchange and understand different views.
ADULTS do this by structuring coherent arguments to these views and promoting critical thinking.
This is how we convey and analyze the strengths and weaknesses of our viewpoints.

Its ironic that the 2 posts youve made in this thread are "bigoted" insults towards me and have nothing to do with the debate.
Now go on and mod kids chat if you have nothing better to do than propagating nasty bigoted views

 

[Deleted member 303751]

Continued - 16. " Trans women" winning awards that are for women, female of the year awards, women's beauty contests, being put into positions of power for roles that are for women. Example "trans women" I.e a man Munroe Bergdoff being appointed as "the champion and spokesperson for women's rights" at the UN United nations.

It's an insult to women. Imagine if it was straight people winning awards that are for gay people or white people winning awards that are for black people. The Liberals would be outraged. I see double standards a lot.

 

[-Luka]

Can we not mention trans because trans isn’t a sexuality

 

[Inkandtatts]

Okay. So…

The subject here is sexuality. Trans isn’t a sexuality but I’ll go through what you’ve said, some of which I’m going to ask for more info on

1. The right to impose their views/ ideology onto others

Can you give me an example of where this has happened? What has happened?

2. People being punished, vilified, demonized, called names transphobes, bigots, 'hateful ' etc if we disagree

It’s not really about disagreement. Some people, including the OP of this thread and you sometimes, seem incapable of simply letting people be and appear to fixate on it. For example, a trans person living their life isn’t doing any harm to you yet you demonise them. There are plenty of others you could focus on - religious extremists/terrorists being one of them, for example

3.

Compelled speech for pronouns 4. Laws introduced for forced pronoun use including in places of work. Fran Itkoff a charity worker with MS multiple sclerosis charity for 60 YEARS recently got fired because she didn't want to use pronouns in an email. As a result of their "diversity and inclusivity" policy

Can you please point me in the direction of the law that forces preferred pronoun use? I checked and I can’t seem to find one anywhere

Incidentally, what you fail to mention about the specific case is that the MS Society admitted their mistake, offered to reinstate the lady, and apologised

5. All institutions being ideologically captured

Can you explain some more about what you mean?

6. Trans people invading womens sports stealing their trophies and prize money.

Using inflammatory language doesn’t help your cause but a discussion needs to be had by those in charge of sporting events on how to manage the issue.

7. Convicted male criminals "identify" as female being moved to women's prisons

You’re referring to the rapist in Scotland which was addressed by the authorities there. Are there any other examples you can give?

8. "Trans women " I.e Men being in womens changing areas, crisis centres, sorority houses etc women were not asked, they didn't even acquise it was forced onto them

I don’t know much about sorority houses as i think they’re American things. As for the rest, can you give examples please?

9. Rainbow flags everywhere

What’s the issue with that? Go to London and the place is full of Union Jacks. Nobody is forcing you to fly a rainbow flag.

10. Laws being introduced where parents will go to prison if we don't allow our own children to "change gender" or go on puberty blockers 11. The suppression and distortion of language

Can you point me to those laws/bills?
(Edited: to correct typo: it was "be", now corrected to "me")

12. Gay people having special rights in the courts

Can you explain what special rights Gay people have in the courts?

13. The minority of trans people changing all facets of society to accommodate them and it's detrimental to everyone else

Can you explain how you reached “the majority” and explain the rest of the statement, with reference to evidence?

 

[Deleted member 303751]

Seen JK Rowling was reported to the police for "misgendering" a trans person a few days ago. The narcissism of these people is ridiculous they misgender themselves. "Misgendering" is a self created first world problem it's not happening in muslim, African countries.

Ladies day at the Cheltenham horse racing festival has been renamed "style Wednesday" to be more "gender inclusive" a parent on yo u tub e has "transed" all FOUR of her children.


WPATH world professional association for transgender health. Their emails, files and video calls got leaked it's all online. Truly shocking what they have been doing.

but some better news puberty blockers for children will no longer be allowed in the NHS national health service in the uk.

 

[Inkandtatts]

10. Laws being introduced where parents will go to prison if we don't allow our own children to "change gender" or go on puberty blockers 11. The suppression and distortion of language

Also, how does that ^^^ fit with this….

but some better news puberty blockers for children will no longer be allowed in the NHS national health service in the uk.

Do the laws you mention that are going to send people to prison for not allowing their kids to have puberty blockers specify that not only must they allow it but they must also pay for it?

I checked but as I said I couldn’t find any laws. Maybe only GB news knows about them. If you have a link to the law, feel free to drop it on my PM

 

[Bread.]

Can we not mention trans because trans isn’t a sexuality

Well according to certain people, sexualities can change anytime and anyplace and involve anything or nothing at all. They are as infinite as the raging shitposts boba makes.

 

[Inkandtatts]

I know what a debate is. I'm pretty good at debating as you've found in the past. You aren't. Your views are based purely on dogma and immutable for that very reason. The threads you start are intended to propagate your vile bigoted views and promote argument. Any well thought out and reasoned responses are ignored.

Like I said, you're a third rate troll. Now go and attract mould spores yeasted one.

It’s also very very concerning to me how the stale OP wants to own you so much, someone he regards as a child 🚩

 

[Bread.]

I know what a debate is. I'm pretty good at debating as you've found in the past. You aren't. Your views are based purely on dogma and immutable for that very reason. The threads you start are intended to propagate your vile bigoted views and promote argument. Any well thought out and reasoned responses are ignored.

Like I said, you're a third rate troll. Now go and attract mould spores yeasted one.

And here is the person arguing that im inflaming people voluntarily responding with insults

Rule 1 @H.R. PufnStuf

 

[Inkandtatts]

And here is the person arguing that im inflaming people voluntarily responding with insults

Rule 1 @H.R. PufnStuf

....

The whole purpose of a debate is to exchange and understand different views.
ADULTS do this by structuring coherent arguments to these views and promoting critical thinking.
This is how we convey and analyze the strengths and weaknesses of our viewpoints.

Its ironic that the 2 posts youve made in this thread are "bigoted" insults towards me and have nothing to do with the debate.
Now go on and mod kids chat if you have nothing better to do than propagating nasty bigoted views LOL OWNED

^^ @H.R. PufnStuf , wanting to "OWN" someone it regards as a child

 

[Deleted member 303751]

@Inkandtatts 1. One example is the education system. Schools are like gender ideology indoctrination centres now 2. No its not about "letting people be" it's about people being vilified, fired, cancelled and sometimes even arrested if we convey an opinion that they disagree with.

3. There are laws in company's at workplaces, laws in canada and in some cases the CPS criminal prosecution service have got involved when parents don't use their own children's preffered pronouns. You say "laws" they can bypass laws. Example male policeman who identify as female can now strip search females in police custody. It didn't get passed as a law. It's on GB news.

5. Media, education system, tech companies, medical industry etc have been ideologically captured I.e captured by the left. 6.its not "inflammatory language " trans women are men they should never be in womens sports 7. I wasn't just referring to that. It's happening in other countries too especially in america

8. Lol are you joking, everyone knows that trans people are in womens changing areas, even womens r ape crisis centres 9. Do you see any straight pride flags? Equality does not mean one group of people having something another group of people don't have

10. New law in uk the gay conversion therapy law it includes "gender suppression " 11. Gay man punches straight man it's an assault, straight man punches gay man it's classed as a "homophobic assault" a hate crime because the other man is gay the straight man gets the harsher punishment longer jail sentence. The gay man gets more lenient punishment because he is gay I.e different treatment in law based on sexuality.

 

[Deleted member 303751]

@Inkandtatts 13. Basically most of my original points 1 - 13 explain that.

 

[Deleted member 303751]

I edited no 11. ^^

 

[Deleted member 303751]

I know what a debate is. I'm pretty good at debating as you've found in the past. You aren't. Your views are based purely on dogma and immutable for that very reason. The threads you start are intended to propagate your vile bigoted views and promote argument. Any well thought out and reasoned responses are ignored.

Like I said, you're a third rate troll. Now go and attract mould spores yeasted one.

Lol remember that time on another thread I said if you had £1 for every time you say to people "bigoted views" "hateful rhetoric " etc you could buy a house. You could probably buy another one" since about a month ago" the amount of times you have done that when people disagree with you. Go and do your homework, climb some trees or something

 

[Inkandtatts]

1. One example is the education system. Schools are like gender ideology indoctrination centres now

Can you explain this a little more please? The thread is about sexuality but you're talking about gender. What is going on in schools that make them gender ideology indoctrination centres?

There are laws in company's at workplaces, laws in canada and in some cases the CPS criminal prosecution service have got involved when parents don't use their own children's preffered pronouns. You say "laws" they can bypass laws. Example male policeman who identify as female can now strip search females in police custody. It didn't get passed as a law. It's on GB news.

So there are no laws, as you suggested here and it's incredibly difficult to take your points seriously when you say something like this...

4. Laws introduced for forced pronoun use including in places of work.

...and when you're asked about which law, you say this:

It didn't get passed as a law. It's on GB news.

Before anything reaches the CPS, there has to be a police investigation and they have to pass it to the CPS to consider prosecution. Can you give me the specific examples of where the CPS got involved when parent's don't use their own children's preferred pronouns?

Media, education system, tech companies, medical industry etc have been ideologically captured I.e captured by the left.

What does this actually mean though? What does "ideologically captured" mean? What does this capture involve? What is the result of the capture?

8. Lol are you joking, everyone knows that trans people are in womens changing areas, even womens r ape crisis centres

Ahhhh "everyone knows". That's like me saying something ridiculous like "everyone knows that every straight man secretly wants to experience gay sex every morning".

If everyone knows, perhaps you can explain the evidence you had for your previous point.

. Do you see any straight pride flags? Equality does not mean one group of people having something another group of people don't have

No, I've never seen one of those. I'll say to you what I've said to everyone else that's ever raised this. Get off the bloody internet and go make a straight pride flag then! (and when doing so, undermine the arguments advanced by the person that wants to own a child, that created this thread - who, by the way, is in a relationship with his father)

10. New law in uk the gay conversion therapy law it includes "gender suppression "

I'm struggling to understand what this means but could you point me in the direction of this particular new law? Or is it only on GB News, like the "law" you mentioned above?

11. Gay man punches straight man it's an assault, straight man punches gay man it's classed as a "homophobic assault" a hate crime because the other man is gay the straight man gets the harsher punishment longer jail sentence. The gay man gets more lenient punishment because he is gay I.e different treatment in law based on sexuality

hmmm, not quite. If I was to punch you in the face and say "I've just smashed your face in because you're straight", I'd get sentenced in the same way as you would if the role was reversed.

If you can show me the conviction rates and sentencing stats, I'll happily say I'm wrong though.

 

[Deleted member 303751]

@Inkandtatts you're just going round in circles now. I explained it

 

[Soapie]

On about flags being everywhere... you gotta admit some of em have pretty nice colour combinations. Some are absolutely hideous, but the majority are quite pleasant to look at.

(Unless your colour blind... that would suck)

 

[Inkandtatts]

@Inkandtatts you're just going round in circles now. I explained it

Why don't you go back and read what you said and read what I said. Then perhaps you'll see that you explained very little, made sweeping statements, and didn't bother to support any of it with evidence.

If you can't have a coherent discussion and explain your points - and use evidence to support them - you just start looking like a lunatic, and this is why you're called a bigot etc. One of the earlier encounters I had with you, I made statements that you had sexual relations Who is to say that such a statement is any less valid than what you say, when you change what you say (eg. "there is a law"...."actually, no there isn't a law") and/or don't back it up what you're saying?

You shut your mouth!

Don't get pissy with me because you didn't get your daily dose

 

[Finn2.0]

Don't get pissy with me because you didn't get your daily dose

It ain't my fault you're always too busy for me (do not mention my absence)

 

[Inkandtatts]

It ain't my fault you're always too busy for me (do not mention my absence)

I think it's time everyone knew anyway.

We were having a several month-long debate fest in my bedroom, debating the pros and cons of taking pride in sexuality, which involved practical exercises as well as oral arguments

 

[Finn2.0]

I think it's time everyone knew anyway.

We were having a several month-long debate fest in my bedroom, debating the pros and cons of taking pride in sexuality, which involved practical exercises as well as oral arguments

I'd love to say you are a master debater, but in reality I'm just proof we'll all go gay for the right payload.

 

[Louize]

I'd love to say you are a master debater, but in reality I'm just proof we'll all go gay for the right load.

FTFY.

 

[Bread.]

What special rights do they demand?


What is this forced compliance? Edit: compliance with what? What is being forced and who is doing the forcing?

(These are genuine questions so I can try to understand what you’re saying)

Okay. So…

The subject here is sexuality. Trans isn’t a sexuality but I’ll go through what you’ve said, some of which I’m going to ask for more info on



Can you give me an example of where this has happened? What has happened?




It’s not really about disagreement. Some people, including the OP of this thread and you sometimes, seem incapable of simply letting people be and appear to fixate on it. For example, a trans person living their life isn’t doing any harm to you yet you demonise them. There are plenty of others you could focus on - religious extremists/terrorists being one of them, for example


Can you please point me in the direction of the law that forces preferred pronoun use? I checked and I can’t seem to find one anywhere

Incidentally, what you fail to mention about the specific case is that the MS Society admitted their mistake, offered to reinstate the lady, and apologised


Can you explain some more about what you mean?

Using inflammatory language doesn’t help your cause but a discussion needs to be had by those in charge of sporting events on how to manage the issue.



You’re referring to the rapist in Scotland which was addressed by the authorities there. Are there any other examples you can give?



I don’t know much about sorority houses as i think they’re American things. As for the rest, can you give examples please?


What’s the issue with that? Go to London and the place is full of Union Jacks. Nobody is forcing you to fly a rainbow flag.


Can you point me to those laws/bills?
(Edited: to correct typo: it was "be", now corrected to "me")


Can you explain what special rights Gay people have in the courts?


Can you explain how you reached “the majority” and explain the rest of the statement, with reference to evidence?

Can you explain this a little more please? The thread is about sexuality but you're talking about gender. What is going on in schools that make them gender ideology indoctrination centres?


So there are no laws, as you suggested here and it's incredibly difficult to take your points seriously when you say something like this...

...and when you're asked about which law, you say this:


Before anything reaches the CPS, there has to be a police investigation and they have to pass it to the CPS to consider prosecution. Can you give me the specific examples of where the CPS got involved when parent's don't use their own children's preferred pronouns?


What does this actually mean though? What does "ideologically captured" mean? What does this capture involve? What is the result of the capture?


Ahhhh "everyone knows". That's like me saying something ridiculous like "everyone knows that every straight man secretly wants to experience gay sex every morning".

If everyone knows, perhaps you can explain the evidence you had for your previous point.


No, I've never seen one of those. I'll say to you what I've said to everyone else that's ever raised this. Get off the bloody internet and go make a straight pride flag then! (and when doing so, undermine the arguments advanced by the person that wants to own a child, that created this thread - who, by the way, is in a relationship with his father)


I'm struggling to understand what this means but could you point me in the direction of this particular new law? Or is it only on GB News, like the "law" you mentioned above?



hmmm, not quite. If I was to punch you in the face and say "I've just smashed your face in because you're straight", I'd get sentenced in the same way as you would if the role was reversed.

If you can show me the conviction rates and sentencing stats, I'll happily say I'm wrong though.

This is what a person that is arguing for the sake of arguing looks like. I can already imagine the tone in which he is typing. Asking questions to understand and posing questions as remarks are two different things.

@Tall Man has answered his questions and his counterargument to those answers are more questions.

Notice how this person fails to assert or acknowledge their own position on this debate without making resorting to some backhanded remark. (as was seen earlier when he let his emotions get the best of him and attacked the straight sexuality)

All telltale signs of unhealthy dialogue.

 

[Bread.]

If you can't have a coherent discussion and explain your points - and use evidence to support them - you just start looking like a lunatic, and this is why you're called a bigot etc. One of the earlier encounters I had with you, I made statements that you had sexual relations with a dog because you had a dog as your pfp. Who is to say that such a statement is any less valid than what you say, when you change what you say (eg. "there is a law"...."actually, no there isn't a law") and/or don't back it up what you're saying?


Don't get pissy with me because you didn't get your daily dose

There is no point in referencing sources when you will dismiss and invalidate facts.
This is how an intellectually inept debater and a person with a closed mind thinks.
You are better off trying to talk to a wall than having a discussion with a person like yourself.

 

[rapinoes smirking revenge]

listing a bunch of talking points and calling them facts and saying they're widespread isn't any kind of debating.

 

[rapinoes smirking revenge]

and also ink keeps asking more questions because the he's getting response that are just vague statements claiming something is taking place. almost like people just see headlines or quick snippets on twitter so any follow up questions can never actually be answered with anything but more vague statements.

 

[Bread.]

listing a bunch of talking points and calling them facts and saying they're widespread isn't any kind of debating

and also ink keeps asking more questions because the he's getting response that are just vague statements claiming something is taking place. almost like people just see headlines or quick snippets on twitter so any follow up questions can never actually be answered with anything but more vague statements.

Who has labeled anything as fact here? Learn to read.
I said there is no point in referencing sources because this person has a history of dismissing facts. When facts and sources are posted he will not counterargue these facts or reach common ground he will simply refuse to comment on it (ie he gets OWNED)

just go look at the multiple FACTS posted here

Abortion is not birth control.

Before you asshats begin, id like to note I am fully aware of the clickbait title and noting that murdering a child in the womb does in fact prevent a birth. This thread is about abortion being used as an alternative to contraceptives. ^ DO YOU ASSHATS SEE THAT IN BOLD ^ Let us continue...

forum.chat-avenue.com

and look at his counterarguments to these facts, all insults.

All emileh and ink do in every debate is say youre an agenda pusher and homophobe!
A prime example of people who dont know how to debate.

 

[emileh]

Who has labeled anything as fact here? Learn to read.
I said there is no point in referencing sources because this person has a history of dismissing facts. When facts and sources are posted he will not counterargue these facts or reach common ground he will simply refuse to comment on it (ie he gets OWNED)

just go look at the multiple FACTS posted here

Abortion is not birth control.

Before you asshats begin, id like to note I am fully aware of the clickbait title and noting that murdering a child in the womb does in fact prevent a birth. This thread is about abortion being used as an alternative to contraceptives. ^ DO YOU ASSHATS SEE THAT IN BOLD ^ Let us continue...

forum.chat-avenue.com

and look at his counterarguments to these facts, all insults.

All emileh and ink do in every debate is say youre an agenda pusher and homophobe!
A prime example of people who dont know how to debate.

I wonder why that is then? I've tried debating rationally with you and presenting well researched and fact checked points. Guess what your responses always are? That's right. Irrational dogma based anti-trans anti-gay propaganda. Never addressing any debate point directly.

I think I need to point this out again O mouldy yeasted one.

 

[Deleted member 263960]

Debate topic is "pride in sexuality" could we please not stray into arguing over issues re Trans

Someone made a comment that gays were given special treatment in court. This video may be an example of that.

Background. Street Preachers in Vancouver west end doing open air re hellfire and annoying local population. 6'-7" gay man and crowd confronts preachers. Melee ensues. 6-7 falls down and breaks leg. Preachers charged with a series of very serious criminal charges- including aggravated assault . Most witness accounts say no blows struck, and 6-7 tried to grab preacher mic which was the wrestling match.

The characterization by police- before charges about the preachers and even before even a hearing of the incident is startling.

Imagine a reversal of roles here- 2 gays demonstrating near a church, parishoners confront them, try to grab the mic and a preacher falls down breaks his leg. Gays charged, disparaged in the press pre hearing.

it relates to topic as actions by 6'-7 " could seen as toxic pride in sexuality/ and or state action could bee seen as improper expressions of pride.

 

[Bread.]

I wonder why that is then? I've tried debating rationally with you and presenting well researched and fact checked points. Guess what your responses always are? That's right. Irrational dogma based anti-trans anti-gay propaganda. Never addressing any debate point directly.

I think I need to point this out again O mouldy yeasted one.

Are you going to reference it like i did ink or is everyone to assume this statement as fact?

Or perhaps you can cite every new member and accuse them of being me like you have been accusing @Tall Man

Quite literally every debate thread ive hosted is full of you and ink throwing insults and trying to derail something you dont agree with. Typical woke tactic.

If you think this information is false then i am open to seeing you reference your "rational, well researched and fact checked" civil dialogue.
Perhaps you can quote yourself.

 

[emileh]

Are you going to reference it like i did ink or is everyone to assume this statement as fact?

Or perhaps you can cite every new member and accuse them of being me like you have been accusing @Tall Man

Quite literally every debate thread ive hosted is full of you and ink throwing insults and trying to derail something you dont agree with. Typical woke tactic.

If you think this information is false then i am open to seeing you reference your "rational, well researched and fact checked" civil dialogue.
Perhaps you can quote yourself.

I'm not getting drawn in. Have a dig through the various "debate" threads you've started. It's all there for anyone to see.

You won't of course...

 

[Bread.]

Debate topic is "pride in sexuality" could we please not stray into arguing over issues re Trans

Someone made a comment that gays were given special treatment in court. This video may be an example of that.
Background. Street Preachers in Vancouver west end doing open air re hellfire and annoying local population. 6'-7" gay man and crowd confronts preachers. Melee ensues. 6-7 falls down and breaks leg. Preachers charged with a series of very serious criminal charges- including aggravated assault . Most witness accounts say no blows struck, and 6-7 tried to grab preacher mic which was the wrestling match.

The characterization by police- before charges about the preachers and even before even a hearing of the incident is startling.

Imagine a reversal of roles here- 2 gays demonstrating near a church, parishoners confront them, try to grab the mic and a preacher falls down breaks his leg. Gays charged, disparaged in the press pre hearing.

These people, (much like emily and ink) think because someone disagrees with their views they have the right to demonize them.
Just like Tall Man stated here:

1. The right to impose their views/ ideology onto others 2. People being punished, vilified, demonized, called names transphobes, bigots, 'hateful ' etc if we disagree 3.

The police was calling this vancouver incident a potential hate crime? Because of the fact the person injured was GAY?
Sounds a lot like when certain people feel like they can do anything they want and then pull out the "race card" and call it discrimination.
Dont know what vancouver laws are since i dont live there but here that is considered battery/assault.

It reminds me of this video where the preacher is preaching about abortion and a woman tries to steal his mic. He politely asked multiple times to have it back. Then the police officer asks multitple times. Thank goodness the police in this incident actually responded accordingly.

These type people feel they are so entitled to do whatever they want. Thats why nobody likes them. They are only fueling their own division. If only they didnt have so much PRIDE.
Thank goodness i live in a FREE country.

or this video where another "college professor" wields a machete at a reporters neck. These criticical race, SJW, women studies, gender bender activists are the people who are destroying our future. Theyre just a bunch of societal rejects who cant respect themselves or others.

 

[Bread.]

I'm not getting drawn in. Have a dig through the various "debate" threads you've started. It's all there for anyone to see.

You won't of course...

You arent going to reference anything where you are rationally debating me with facts because you never have.

Its IRONIC you are liking posts of someone saying "listing talking points and calling them facts isnt debating" but its exactly what you are doing by not referencing facts when asked to do so.

And you call yourself a well articulated great debater.

Yeah you are some A tier debater by posting an opinion, calling it "fact" and when someone tells you post a source your response is "go look for it, its there"

 

[emileh]

I was right. 🤣

What a surprise.

 

[Inkandtatts]

Debate topic is "pride in sexuality" could we please not stray into arguing over issues re Trans

Someone made a comment that gays were given special treatment in court. This video may be an example of that.

Let's add some context to this:

"Two preachers were blasting anti-gay rhetoric in the rainbow-festooned Davie Street village, the historical enclave of Vancouver's gay community."

^^ That goes to intent, just like it should here on Forums (see below)*

The characterization by police- before charges about the preachers and even before even a hearing of the incident is startling.

If that's startling, how would you characterise those people?

Background. Street Preachers in Vancouver west end doing open air re hellfire and annoying local population. 6'-7" gay man and crowd confronts preachers. Melee ensues. 6-7 falls down and breaks leg. Preachers charged with a series of very serious criminal charges- including aggravated assault . Most witness accounts say no blows struck, and 6-7 tried to grab preacher mic which was the wrestling match.

You've outlined there what you believe happened. I can't see that there was any footage of the assault. The 6-7 as you refer to him, said this:

“It’s no surprise that that’s where they’re setting up to do that,” Morissette said of the location the group set up in. The West End is home to Vancouver’s LGBTQ neighbourhood.

“It happened to be me who stepped up and said, ‘You are not welcome in this community to be saying these things. Pack your things and go somewhere else,'” Morissette recalled of the confrontation. “They refused to do that. I asked them if they were going to stay if they would at least turn the volume down because I really can not stress enough how obscenely loud these speakers are. You can hear them for blocks, and blocks, and blocks.”

Morissette said he grabbed the microphone and refused to give it back. It was following this that he said a man “wrenched my leg against his until my tibia and fibula snapped, broke and my knee dislocated.""

Imagine a reversal of roles here- 2 gays demonstrating near a church, parishoners confront them, try to grab the mic and a preacher falls down breaks his leg. Gays charged, disparaged in the press pre hearing.

You're getting it all twisted. If the person really "fell down and broke his leg" then that's different but you seem to have made that assumption here rather than it being a reflection of the facts.

If you gave an accurate comparator, such as: "Imagine a reversal of roles here- 2 gays demonstrating near a church shouting anti-Christian rhetoric, parishoners confront them, try to grab the mic and the demonstrator wrenched their leg against the parishioner until their tibia and fibula snapped, broke and their knee dislocated. Gays charged, disparaged in the press pre hearing."

Then I'd say that the "gays" deserve to have the book thrown at them. Oddly enough though, it's not that often that the police (at least here) ask what the sexuality of an offender is. The only people that brought sexuality into that event were the preachers and I can't see anywhere that they are being treated more harshly because the victim is gay.

it relates to topic as actions by 6'-7 " could seen as toxic pride in sexuality/ and or state action could bee seen as improper expressions of pride.

How on Earth could it possibly, by any stretch of the imagination, be seen as that!?

I've looked at the background of these preachers and they're a bunch of hate-filled Westboro Baptist Church wannabes. The guy just wanted them to stop. How is that "toxic pride in sexuality" or "state action that could be seen as improper expression of pride"?

---
*Frankly your whole post - and that story - is a good example of what's happening here on forums.

We have the anti-various rhetoric spouted by the disgusting OP of this thread, and the likes of Tall Man (although he's not at the level of the OP) who can be seen as the preachers, and it's allowed to continue even though every single person on Forums knows exactly what their intent is. (Just like everyone on the street in that area in Vancouver knew what the intent of the preachers was)

Even by creating this thread, the OP does not have any intention of having a debate and everyone knows it. He starts these things to spew his anti-gay/anti-trans BS.

My comments to people like the disgusting OP and Tall Man have become more critical and may well be seen as going too far, but that's what we seem to be forced to do here, just like the guy who grabbed the mic.

 

[-Luka]

if anything countries round the world need a kick up the backside when it comes to equality. The sexuality isn’t the criminal the person is. If a man was guilty of r then life imprisonment. If a woman lied about such thing and was proven guilty, like the male, then life imprisonment.
Since topic is now going onto criminal justice systems.

Also if I had it my way it wouldn’t be life imprisonment that was imposed.

 

[Inkandtatts]

This is on topic:

View attachment 965682

 

[-Luka]

am I right in saying they were actually boyfriends? One of them proposed I think.

That’s acceptable to me. It’s minimalistic irrelevant that it was taken ant a pride event. And if it were a man or woman because inb4 Luka hates the str8s even though I have a girlfriend called jessica

 

[Finn2.0]

Well **** me with a rusty hatchet. Luka has been tamed by a fringe

 

[Inkandtatts]

am I right in saying they were actually boyfriends? One of them proposed I think.

That’s acceptable to me. It’s minimalistic irrelevant that it was taken ant a pride event. And if it were a man or woman because inb4 Luka hates the str8s even though I have a girlfriend called jessica

That's the one. The copper proposed to the one that looks like he failed an audition for an 80s music video

Well **** me with a rusty hatchet.

Sorry but it's not rusty

 

[-Luka]

Well **** me with a rusty hatchet. Luka has been tamed by a fringe

my forehead is fluent in barcode. jelly

 

[Finn2.0]

Sorry but it's not rusty

Then you’re **** out of luck. Rust it up and give me tetanus

 

[Bread.]

Let's add some context to this:

"Two preachers were blasting anti-gay rhetoric in the rainbow-festooned Davie Street village, the historical enclave of Vancouver's gay community."

^^ That goes to intent, just like it should here on Forums (see below)*

What better place to preach than in a community of sinners.

If that's startling, how would you characterise those people?

You've outlined there what you believe happened. I can't see that there was any footage of the assault. The 6-7 as you refer to him, said this:

“It’s no surprise that that’s where they’re setting up to do that,” Morissette said of the location the group set up in. The West End is home to Vancouver’s LGBTQ neighbourhood.

Kind of weird how there is no footage of this so called "homophobic hate speech" either. Apparently saying you love god and that homosexuality is a sin is hate speech. That is a far cry from what he told reporters that he was using homophobic slurs.

“It happened to be me who stepped up and said, ‘You are not welcome in this community to be saying these things. Pack your things and go somewhere else,'” Morissette recalled of the confrontation. “They refused to do that. I asked them if they were going to stay if they would at least turn the volume down because I really can not stress enough how obscenely loud these speakers are. You can hear them for blocks, and blocks, and blocks.”

Morissette said he grabbed the microphone and refused to give it back. It was following this that he said a man “wrenched my leg against his until my tibia and fibula snapped, broke and my knee dislocated.""

LOL I fixed it for you.
Please note the the text bolded in BLUE.

These are all traits of someone who is confrontional, combative and doesnt respect other people.
A lot like the confrontational and combative people that shitpost in all my debate threads.
They seem to be forgetting that they are voluntarily doing this and no one is forcing them to do anything.

Sounds to me like Justin Morisette got what he was asking for LOL OWNED

I've looked at the background of these preachers and they're a bunch of hate-filled Westboro Baptist Church wannabes. The guy just wanted them to stop. How is that "toxic pride in sexuality" or "state action that could be seen as improper expression of pride"?

---
*Frankly your whole post - and that story - is a good example of what's happening here on forums.

We have the anti-various rhetoric spouted by the disgusting OP of this thread, and the likes of Tall Man (although he's not at the level of the OP) who can be seen as the preachers, and it's allowed to continue even though every single person on Forums knows exactly what their intent is. (Just like everyone on the street in that area in Vancouver knew what the intent of the preachers was)

Even by creating this thread, the OP does not have any intention of having a debate and everyone knows it. He starts these things to spew his anti-gay/anti-trans BS.

My comments to people like the disgusting OP and Tall Man have become more critical and may well be seen as going too far, but that's what we seem to be forced to do here, just like the guy who grabbed the mic.

Again no one is forcing you to do anything just like no one forced morisette to square up against the preacher with the power of GOD. Unlike morisette, you have an ignore button.
But you will CHOOSE to voluntarily engage with insults because of the vile hate in your heart.

The problem with people like ink is that they are so thin skinned and offended by anything that they put a "hate/misogynist/homophobe" label on anyone that doesnt agree with their opinions. This is what pride does.

Here the person that was arrested for "hate speech". Not the incident in @H.R. PufnStuf video but one of his other street preachings. I watched all 26 mins of it. The only people that can be seen here expressing HATE are all the LGBT bystanders screaming profanities at him. Despite having a small army of hateful people sorrounding him he stood with GOD.

And here is the innocent "unhateful" victim. Funny how he is entitled to offensive speech but not the other way around.

Watch everyone ignore these FACTS LOL OWNED

 

[Soapie]

Imma be honest I skipped most of this.... but "being in a relationship with father" is not what I expected to see. Surely that's a poor phrasing of "they have a good relationship with their father"... right?

 

[-Luka]

Imma be honest I skipped most of this.... but "being in a relationship with father" is not what I expected to see. Surely that's a poor phrasing of "they have a good relationship with their father"... right?

I was tricked also. Would you like a Mars bar for the sorcery?

 

[Soapie]

I was tricked also. Would you like a Mars bar for the sorcery?

Yes please 🥺

 

[Bread.]

Imma be honest I skipped most of this.... but "being in a relationship with father" is not what I expected to see. Surely that's a poor phrasing of "they have a good relationship with their father"... right?

Its just a bigot envious that he doesnt have a relationship with GOD

 

[Soapie]

Oh. God. Thank god that's cleared up.

Laying pipe in that holy bussy

 

[Deleted member 263960]

Let's add some context to this:

"Two preachers were blasting anti-gay rhetoric in the rainbow-festooned Davie Street village, the historical enclave of Vancouver's gay community."

^^ That goes to intent, just like it should here on Forums (see below)*


If that's startling, how would you characterise those people?


You've outlined there what you believe happened. I can't see that there was any footage of the assault. The 6-7 as you refer to him, said this:

“It’s no surprise that that’s where they’re setting up to do that,” Morissette said of the location the group set up in. The West End is home to Vancouver’s LGBTQ neighbourhood.

“It happened to be me who stepped up and said, ‘You are not welcome in this community to be saying these things. Pack your things and go somewhere else,'” Morissette recalled of the confrontation. “They refused to do that. I asked them if they were going to stay if they would at least turn the volume down because I really can not stress enough how obscenely loud these speakers are. You can hear them for blocks, and blocks, and blocks.”

Morissette said he grabbed the microphone and refused to give it back. It was following this that he said a man “wrenched my leg against his until my tibia and fibula snapped, broke and my knee dislocated.""


You're getting it all twisted. If the person really "fell down and broke his leg" then that's different but you seem to have made that assumption here rather than it being a reflection of the facts.

If you gave an accurate comparator, such as: "Imagine a reversal of roles here- 2 gays demonstrating near a church shouting anti-Christian rhetoric, parishoners confront them, try to grab the mic and the demonstrator wrenched their leg against the parishioner until their tibia and fibula snapped, broke and their knee dislocated. Gays charged, disparaged in the press pre hearing."

Then I'd say that the "gays" deserve to have the book thrown at them. Oddly enough though, it's not that often that the police (at least here) ask what the sexuality of an offender is. The only people that brought sexuality into that event were the preachers and I can't see anywhere that they are being treated more harshly because the victim is gay.


How on Earth could it possibly, by any stretch of the imagination, be seen as that!?

I've looked at the background of these preachers and they're a bunch of hate-filled Westboro Baptist Church wannabes. The guy just wanted them to stop. How is that "toxic pride in sexuality" or "state action that could be seen as improper expression of pride"?

---
*Frankly your whole post - and that story - is a good example of what's happening here on forums.

We have the anti-various rhetoric spouted by the disgusting OP of this thread, and the likes of Tall Man (although he's not at the level of the OP) who can be seen as the preachers, and it's allowed to continue even though every single person on Forums knows exactly what their intent is. (Just like everyone on the street in that area in Vancouver knew what the intent of the preachers was)

Even by creating this thread, the OP does not have any intention of having a debate and everyone knows it. He starts these things to spew his anti-gay/anti-trans BS.

My comments to people like the disgusting OP and Tall Man have become more critical and may well be seen as going too far, but that's what we seem to be forced to do here, just like the guy who grabbed the mic.

If that's startling, how would you characterise those people?

what I found startling is that the police rendered a judgement on two accused before charges and before due process. My characterization is the preachers were engaging in constitutionally protected activity ( admittedly tp be provocative.) both officers are gay btw, recruited into VPD to be laison.

You're getting it all twisted. If the person really "fell down and broke his leg" then that's different but you seem to have made that assumption here rather than it being a reflection of the facts.

when the story was first published cbc reported various eyewitness accounts including the victim - most said 6-7 fell down during a wrestle over the mic he was grabbing. In fact footage to that effect eventually surfaced. My assumptions are based entirely on cbc reports etc as i wasnt personally there.

I've looked at the background of these preachers and they're a bunch of hate-filled Westboro Baptist Church wannabes. The guy just wanted them to stop. How is that "toxic pride in sexuality" or "state action that could be seen as improper expression of pride"?

that's an assumption too-. no idea if they are westborough types. I agree the 6-7 wanted them to stop. His pride in sexuality lead him to confront someone ( motive) whos speech he didnt like- and provoke/or engage a melee, and he was injured as a result. He wasnt angry with the noise- he made the same assumption you did, and then tried to pull the plug. Im trying to find out if he went down for asggravated assault ( which would be astounding) my guess is the preacher was downgraded to common assault.


Your last point is interesting, Mr 6-7 is a tall man also, only different. I understand your(or GayCommunity frustration with these types of threads- my sole purpose was focus on a point that could be debated ( special treatment in law) instead of the trans issues or the inevitable personal attacks etc.

The debate topic is probably flawed imo, because with all due respect to the creator, "Pride in sexuality" is just a matter of opinion, in part that's why I suggested a well known incident for further comment- because TM posted it- not to take sides" Thank you for your views on it. Fun fact I know that hood very well I lived kitty corner and know Davie Street quite well- great food and interesting people.

 

[Inkandtatts]

that's an assumption of yours. no idea if they are westborough types. I agree the 6-7 wanted them to stop. His pride in sexuality lead him to confront someone whos speech he didnt like- and provoke a melee, and he was injured as a result. He wasdnt angry with the noise- he made the same assumption you did, and then tried to pull the plug

I didn’t make an assumption. I looked it up. That’s what they were doing. He didn’t make an assumption either - he heard it live. It’s also fairly well publicised what these people are all about.

It’s interesting that you see “6-7” as the provocateur here when the preachers were the provocateurs, which you acknowledged here:

My characterization is the preachers were engaging in constitutionally protected activity ( admittedly tp be provocative.

If I as a white person went to a majority black neighbourhood and started chanting racist crap, that would be provocative in the same way as these preachers were. I’d also expect to be approached by someone and told to stop.

His pride in sexuality lead him to confront someone whos speech he didnt like

That’s an assumption you’re making. I’d like to think that regardless of his sexuality, he was being a decent human being, trying to stop some hate-filled asswipes from spewing hate. I’m not black but I’d tell a group of racist thugs chanting racist crap to STFU. I’m not trans but I’d also tell trans-haters to STFU .

 

[Deleted member 263960]

I didn’t make an assumption. I looked it up. That’s what they were doing. He didn’t make an assumption either - he heard it live. It’s also fairly well publicised what these people are all about.

It’s interesting that you see “6-7” as the provocateur here when the preachers were the provocateurs, which you acknowledged here:



If I as a white person went to a majority black neighbourhood and started chanting racist crap, that would be provocative in the same way as these preachers were. I’d also expect to be approached by someone and told to stop.


That’s an assumption you’re making. I’d like to think that regardless of his sexuality, he was being a decent human being, trying to stop some hate-filled asswipes from spewing hate. I’m not black but I’d tell a group of racist thugs chanting racist crap to STFU. I’m not trans but I’d also tell trans-haters to STFU .

I didn’t make an assumption. I looked it up. That’s what they were doing. He didn’t make an assumption either - he heard it live. It’s also fairly well publicised what these people are all about.

its an assumption that street preachers are westborough types/ because that was never proven or alleged. anyone can watch them for themselves on you tube- exactly what they were saying and their style, the specific assumption is that any preacher who sees homosexuality- as a sin etc is a phelps type, maybe its not an assumption but it is a sterotype

It’s interesting that you see “6-7” as the provocateur here when the preachers were the provocateurs, which you acknowledged here:

I dont think hes the provocatueur in the sense you are saying it. He had every right to object or counter argue, Where 6-7 went wrong is using force to emphasize his objection. Im characterizing that as toxic pride only to fit debate topic. If wee are so pround of our sexuality it drives us to engage in mutual combat- its a problem is my thought.

If I as a white person went to a majority black neighbourhood and started chanting racist crap, that would be provocative in the same way as these preachers were. I’d also expect to be approached by someone and told to stop.

I agree.

I’d like to think that regardless of his sexuality, he was being a decent human being, trying to stop some hate-filled asswipes from spewing hate

he may well be a decent human, but most decent people have shadows. On the "hate" part- i havent read the case in court to know what was deemed fact so I cant say. It could be that Mr 6-7 equated their "sermons" as homophobic- which these days is often interpreted as anything negative about gay/issues, which in turn is equated to hate, its quite circular reasoning.

I think whats been overlooked is this- even if the preachers are hate filled fanatics- it is extrodinairy for the cops to publically opine before a court hearing and disparge an accused, Its extrorinairy that a scuffle over a mic, is classed as aggravated assault- for something along the lines of being pushed. That seems to indicate a preferential treatment by the state/legal system/cops especially since the cops were gay-- based on the demograhic of the victim in this case a gay man.

The victim wasnt beaten, with the mic or anything ( thank god) he fell during a scuffle.

@Bread. im thinking this thread has run its course- do you agree?

edit: often* added in