D
Deleted member 303751
Guest
@Inkandtatts 13. Basically most of my original points 1 - 13 explain that.
PRIDE in sexuality?
- Thread starter Bread.
- Start date
- Status
D
Deleted member 303751
Guest
I edited no 11. ^^
D
Deleted member 303751
Guest
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
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.
D
Deleted member 303751
Guest
@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?
Don't get pissy with me because you didn't get your daily dose
Last edited by a moderator:
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
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
Gold Member
FTFY.
Bread.
Gold Member
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.
Gold Member
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.
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.
Bread.
Gold Member
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
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.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
and look at his counterarguments to these facts, all insults.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...
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 think I need to point this out again O mouldy yeasted one.
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.
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.
Gold Member
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...
- Status