http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TG2t6N9xN0
http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/neil-francis-apologises-over-remarks-on-gay-people-and-sports-1.1695229
He took up an offer from Matt Cooper to go on his Today FM show The Last Word along with Welsh referee Nigel Owens, who came out as gay in 2005, initially to family and friends and then to the wider rugby community in 2007, prior to the Rugby World Cup.
"When you have people of Neil's stature coming out and saying these comments I don't think people realise what an influence they have. A lot of young people out there who are finding it difficult to deal with the issues, dealing with who they are, it (remarks like those) have a huge influence.
"We don't want to go out and shout it from the rooftops that we are gay, we just want to be ourselves and get on with our lives.
"It is a very sad world when you think that an individual has to choose between, 'can I carry on with my sport,' or 'can I carry on with who I am'. . . it is a very sad state that someone has to make that choice.
Quote from: seafoid on February 19, 2014, 07:47:11 PM
"We don't want to go out and shout it from the rooftops that we are gay, we just want to be ourselves and get on with our lives.
Tom Daley gave it a fair go!
Why does your sexual orientation define who you are though? I don't understand why anyone in sports feels the need to celebrate their sexual preference. Why can't they just be the footballer or the Rugby referee or the son or the brother, the tandem diver....
I would nearly argue though that the player gets even more attention than they would have previously? Both positive and negative but from what I can see for the most part positive....
apart from martina navratilova can't recall too many women sports people shouting
Neil Francis is and always has been a p***k.
Never understood why i needed to know if an actor / sportsman / newsreader is gay / straight / bi. All i need to know is if they're any good.
Quote from: The Iceman on February 19, 2014, 08:41:28 PM
Why does your sexual orientation define who you are though? I don't understand why anyone in sports feels the need to celebrate their sexual preference. Why can't they just be the footballer or the Rugby referee or the son or the brother, the tandem diver....
Celebrate? What are they celebrating? You think somebody coming out is triumphalist or soemthing?
Why does your religion define who you are? Why does your gender define who you are? Why does your nationality define who you are? Sexuality of course partly defines who you are.
The reason that sportspeople come out is that, historically, homosexuality has been repressed and rejected in many sporting environments, especially in the "macho" team sports such as American football. Michael Sam is a footballer. He is also gay. Opening up about it allows him to move forward with his life without having to hide the truth about he is as a person. One day it will not be newsworthy but today, given the tiny number of current sportspeople who are out, it is. If you don't like it or it makes you feel uncomfortable, then don't read the news source doing the reporting.
What about young gay people looking for role models ? Or should they just pretend to be straight?
I think they have very high suicide rates - is that fair ?
Quote from: Cold tea on February 19, 2014, 10:39:33 PM
apart from martina navratilova can't recall too many women sports people shouting
Most ladies sports are not as high profile therfore it is not as newsworthy but you don't even have to go back a month. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26084748
I suppose the question is why do they have to hide it? As opposed to flaunting Gay Pride, which I find to be a bit OTT sometimes, why does anyone have to hide their sexual orientation. I'm not talking about being proud of it, or any other glib nonsense, but the fact that a sportsman 'coming out' is big news still shows why they do it that way. I've never seen a sportsman come out as being heterosexual. (Paul Galvin came out at Metrosexual but that's a different story entirely).
I agree it shouldn't be a big deal, and I also agree that sometimes the coming out is overplayed, but I think it's only overplayed to try and speed up the normalisation process.
Quote from: EC Unique on February 20, 2014, 12:32:26 PM
You never seen pictures of Paul Scholes or Jamie Carragher on the front pages.
FALSE
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgcCqXgIQAAbaW3.jpg)
Quote from: ballinaman on February 20, 2014, 12:46:22 PM
Quote from: EC Unique on February 20, 2014, 12:32:26 PM
You never seen pictures of Paul Scholes or Jamie Carragher on the front pages.
FALSE
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgcCqXgIQAAbaW3.jpg)
Imagine the off spring! :o ;D
Quote from: EC Unique on February 20, 2014, 12:49:00 PM
Quote from: ballinaman on February 20, 2014, 12:46:22 PM
Quote from: EC Unique on February 20, 2014, 12:32:26 PM
You never seen pictures of Paul Scholes or Jamie Carragher on the front pages.
FALSE
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgcCqXgIQAAbaW3.jpg)
Imagine the off spring! :o ;D
?
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ukV69vAqXAk/UmusB0PKEKI/AAAAAAAAojE/yDRqgLLOzy4/s1600/David+MOYES.png)
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 20, 2014, 12:35:43 PM
I suppose the question is why do they have to hide it? As opposed to flaunting Gay Pride, which I find to be a bit OTT sometimes, why does anyone have to hide their sexual orientation. I'm not talking about being proud of it, or any other glib nonsense, but the fact that a sportsman 'coming out' is big news still shows why they do it that way. I've never seen a sportsman come out as being heterosexual. (Paul Galvin came out at Metrosexual but that's a different story entirely).
I agree it shouldn't be a big deal, and I also agree that sometimes the coming out is overplayed, but I think it's only overplayed to try and speed up the normalisation process.
Do you think Cusack coming out publicly as gay was OTT or just the way it was going to be, the way it needed to be?
There are 2 points to be considered, the prevailing attitudes in the environment and engrained self esteem issues.
It's good that Francis came out publicly about his attitudes to gays so that his prejudices could quite plainly be dissected and ridiculed for all to see.
It couldn't happen to a more deserving candidate :)
Quote from: Main Street on February 20, 2014, 01:28:59 PM
I suppose morons like Trevor Francis should be heard and just get that whole prejudiced crap out into the open and take it apart bit by bit.
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 20, 2014, 12:35:43 PM
I suppose the question is why do they have to hide it? As opposed to flaunting Gay Pride, which I find to be a bit OTT sometimes, why does anyone have to hide their sexual orientation. I'm not talking about being proud of it, or any other glib nonsense, but the fact that a sportsman 'coming out' is big news still shows why they do it that way. I've never seen a sportsman come out as being heterosexual. (Paul Galvin came out at Metrosexual but that's a different story entirely).
I agree it shouldn't be a big deal, and I also agree that sometimes the coming out is overplayed, but I think it's only overplayed to try and speed up the normalisation process.
Do you think Cusack coming out publicly as gay was OTT or just the way it was going to be, the way it needed to be?
There are 2 points to be considered, the prevailing attitudes in the environment and engrained self esteem issues.
It's good that Francis came out publicly about his attitudes to gays so that his prejudices could quite plainly be dissected and ridiculed for all to see.
It couldn't happen to a more deserving candidate :)
Who gives the big moron the forums to air his ill-informed views on anything let alone rugby?
Quote from: LeoMc on February 20, 2014, 12:15:20 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 19, 2014, 10:39:33 PM
Is it all about c**k - apart from martina navratilova can't recall too many women sports people shouting they like chewing the carpet.
Most ladies sports are not as high profile therfore it is not as newsworthy but you don't even have to go back a month. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26084748
And did anyone gave a flying one about her sexuality, when is the next heterosexual pride march. Attention seeking doesn't come close.
Quote from: Main Street on February 20, 2014, 01:28:59 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 20, 2014, 12:35:43 PM
I suppose the question is why do they have to hide it? As opposed to flaunting Gay Pride, which I find to be a bit OTT sometimes, why does anyone have to hide their sexual orientation. I'm not talking about being proud of it, or any other glib nonsense, but the fact that a sportsman 'coming out' is big news still shows why they do it that way. I've never seen a sportsman come out as being heterosexual. (Paul Galvin came out at Metrosexual but that's a different story entirely).
I agree it shouldn't be a big deal, and I also agree that sometimes the coming out is overplayed, but I think it's only overplayed to try and speed up the normalisation process.
Do you think Cusack coming out publicly as gay was OTT or just the way it was going to be, the way it needed to be?
There are 2 points to be considered, the prevailing attitudes in the environment and engrained self esteem issues.
It's good that Francis came out publicly about his attitudes to gays so that his prejudices could quite plainly be dissected and ridiculed for all to see.
It couldn't happen to a more deserving candidate :)
As I said, nobody should need to 'come out' at all. And the reason they do, and the reason they accept the publicity that brings, is so that they can live their life in normal afterwards. The reason why some of these 'outings' are overplayed is so that future athletes will have it a bit easier, and so on until it becomes not newsworthy, or normalised. I think Donal Óg probably did a lot of good to other young fellas in the same situation.
Its just another facet of progressive thinking v's human nature. One seeks to celebrate difference the other hates it.
We are a conflicted species and most likely always will be.
Its not for nothing we came up with the normal distribution curve.
Quote from: johnneycool on February 20, 2014, 01:30:14 PM
Quote from: Main Street on February 20, 2014, 01:28:59 PM
I suppose morons like Trevor Francis should be heard and just get that whole prejudiced crap out into the open and take it apart bit by bit.
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 20, 2014, 12:35:43 PM
I suppose the question is why do they have to hide it? As opposed to flaunting Gay Pride, which I find to be a bit OTT sometimes, why does anyone have to hide their sexual orientation. I'm not talking about being proud of it, or any other glib nonsense, but the fact that a sportsman 'coming out' is big news still shows why they do it that way. I've never seen a sportsman come out as being heterosexual. (Paul Galvin came out at Metrosexual but that's a different story entirely).
I agree it shouldn't be a big deal, and I also agree that sometimes the coming out is overplayed, but I think it's only overplayed to try and speed up the normalisation process.
Do you think Cusack coming out publicly as gay was OTT or just the way it was going to be, the way it needed to be?
There are 2 points to be considered, the prevailing attitudes in the environment and engrained self esteem issues.
It's good that Francis came out publicly about his attitudes to gays so that his prejudices could quite plainly be dissected and ridiculed for all to see.
It couldn't happen to a more deserving candidate :)
Who gives the big moron the forums to air his ill-informed views on anything let alone rugby?
Cusack said on the late late that he was in a gay club somewhere and someone asked him if he was the Cork goalie and he denied it and that was what started the process of him coming out. He didn't want to deny it any longer.
I think he was very inspiring to a lot of rural gay people. Sort of like the brother talking about depression.
Very impressive family, in fairness
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 20, 2014, 12:35:43 PM(Paul Galvin came out at Metrosexual but that's a different story entirely).
How does one come out as metrosexual?
Like this
(http://cdn1.independent.ie/migration_catalog/article25238302.ece/ALTERNATES/h342/paul)
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 20, 2014, 02:18:46 PM
Quote from: Main Street on February 20, 2014, 01:28:59 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 20, 2014, 12:35:43 PM
I suppose the question is why do they have to hide it? As opposed to flaunting Gay Pride, which I find to be a bit OTT sometimes, why does anyone have to hide their sexual orientation. I'm not talking about being proud of it, or any other glib nonsense, but the fact that a sportsman 'coming out' is big news still shows why they do it that way. I've never seen a sportsman come out as being heterosexual. (Paul Galvin came out at Metrosexual but that's a different story entirely).
I agree it shouldn't be a big deal, and I also agree that sometimes the coming out is overplayed, but I think it's only overplayed to try and speed up the normalisation process.
Do you think Cusack coming out publicly as gay was OTT or just the way it was going to be, the way it needed to be?
There are 2 points to be considered, the prevailing attitudes in the environment and engrained self esteem issues.
It's good that Francis came out publicly about his attitudes to gays so that his prejudices could quite plainly be dissected and ridiculed for all to see.
It couldn't happen to a more deserving candidate :)
As I said, nobody should need to 'come out' at all. And the reason they do, and the reason they accept the publicity that brings, is so that they can live their life in normal afterwards. The reason why some of these 'outings' are overplayed is so that future athletes will have it a bit easier, and so on until it becomes not newsworthy, or normalised. I think Donal Óg probably did a lot of good to other young fellas in the same situation.
Afaia, Donal Og came out because he was preempting the issue. He was pushed into a corner which presumes the publicity factor was an unknown and the thought of it probably inspired a lot of apprehension for him.
Yes, nobody should have to come out, but go back to the time before Donal Og came out and the question existed about how does a society move to a situation where nobody has to come out? A pioneer coming out will attract attention for a variety of reasons.
As I said, the issues are twofold, the personal issues that Donal Og had to confront and the issues (of ignorance and prejudice) that exist on a social level.
Both personal and social issues have to be confronted and laid bare. In that there is no doubt that Donal Og did a lot of good.
I don't recall any big coming outs in Ireland or neighbouring lands, just the newsworthy coming outs of pioneers like that rugby player and Cusack.
I don't follow whats happening in the USA.
I think the point of gay pride and the 'coming out' business is for it to become so commonplace that in future we'll return* to a time when it'll be considered no big deal what your sexual preferences are. Nobody will have to 'come out' because they won't feel any pressure to be 'in' in the first place. Gay pride parades are an act of defiance in cultures where homosexual or bisexual behaviour is or was suppressed, and I think the intention of them is to let gay people know that there's no need to stay in the closet. It's like the atheist billboards doing the rounds in America at the minute reassuring atheists in religiously-dominated areas that it's okay to be an atheist and that they're not alone.
* Yes, return to a time when it's no big deal. The idea that there's something wrong with homosexual behaviour is a relatively recent invention. In ancient Rome and ancient Greece nobody gave a toss.
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 20, 2014, 06:47:23 PM
I think the point of gay pride and the 'coming out' business is for it to become so commonplace that in future we'll return* to a time when it'll be considered no big deal what your sexual preferences are. Nobody will have to 'come out' because they won't feel any pressure to be 'in' in the first place. Gay pride parades are an act of defiance in cultures where homosexual or bisexual behaviour is or was suppressed, and I think the intention of them is to let gay people know that there's no need to stay in the closet. It's like the atheist billboards doing the rounds in America at the minute reassuring atheists in religiously-dominated areas that it's okay to be an atheist and that they're not alone.
* Yes, return to a time when it's no big deal. The idea that there's something wrong with homosexual behaviour is a relatively recent invention. In ancient Rome and ancient Greece nobody gave a toss.
Bad choice off words. ;D Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 20, 2014, 06:47:23 PM
I think the point of gay pride and the 'coming out' business is for it to become so commonplace that in future we'll return* to a time when it'll be considered no big deal what your sexual preferences are. Nobody will have to 'come out' because they won't feel any pressure to be 'in' in the first place. Gay pride parades are an act of defiance in cultures where homosexual or bisexual behaviour is or was suppressed, and I think the intention of them is to let gay people know that there's no need to stay in the closet. It's like the atheist billboards doing the rounds in America at the minute reassuring atheists in religiously-dominated areas that it's okay to be an atheist and that they're not alone.
* Yes, return to a time when it's no big deal. The idea that there's something wrong with homosexual behaviour is a relatively recent invention. In ancient Rome and ancient Greece nobody gave a toss.
Bad choice off words. ;D Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
You sure you're not repressing anything? You seem particular fascinated with other lads
there are probably 3 or 4 threads out of this one.
gallsman you are getting a bit wound up from my contribution earlier in fairness. My question was/is about the motives of the "coming out" I think part of it is for the increased attention. I am not discounting their is honest desire to live out their life as they want to either but I think a lot of it is attention seeking.
@eamonn you can argue for and against all day that it's natural or its not. But if you argue its natural because it was common practice and exists still today then you have to keep the door open for the likes of pedophilia which was common practice in greek and roman times (seeing as you want to use that era) and exists today..... and has been suggested to be listed as a sexual orientation by psychological schools.....
bottom line in all of my points is there should be no need to come out. just be the sports person.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 20, 2014, 06:47:23 PM
I think the point of gay pride and the 'coming out' business is for it to become so commonplace that in future we'll return* to a time when it'll be considered no big deal what your sexual preferences are. Nobody will have to 'come out' because they won't feel any pressure to be 'in' in the first place. Gay pride parades are an act of defiance in cultures where homosexual or bisexual behaviour is or was suppressed, and I think the intention of them is to let gay people know that there's no need to stay in the closet. It's like the atheist billboards doing the rounds in America at the minute reassuring atheists in religiously-dominated areas that it's okay to be an atheist and that they're not alone.
* Yes, return to a time when it's no big deal. The idea that there's something wrong with homosexual behaviour is a relatively recent invention. In ancient Rome and ancient Greece nobody gave a toss.
Bad choice off words. ;D Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
What about cunnilingus? Or Aer Lingus ?
Quote from: The Iceman on February 20, 2014, 10:01:33 PM
there are probably 3 or 4 threads out of this one.
gallsman you are getting a bit wound up from my contribution earlier in fairness. My question was/is about the motives of the "coming out" I think part of it is for the increased attention. I am not discounting their is honest desire to live out their life as they want to either but I think a lot of it is attention seeking.
It's a curiosity how you consider seeking a lot of attention was part of the motivation for just about the only Irish sportsman to come out, before he himself was outed. And considering, for the previous 20 years of his existence he lived in fear of attention to that very issue. Was there possibly some overwhelming catharsis, coupled with an overwhelming desire for nationwide attention 'look at me, look at my issues'?
Is there any resemblance between your thoughts on the matter and the reality of the experience for Donal Og?
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 02:02:11 PM
Quote from: LeoMc on February 20, 2014, 12:15:20 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 19, 2014, 10:39:33 PM
Is it all about c**k - apart from martina navratilova can't recall too many women sports people shouting they like chewing the carpet.
Most ladies sports are not as high profile therfore it is not as newsworthy but you don't even have to go back a month. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26084748
And did anyone gave a flying one about her sexuality, when is the next heterosexual pride march. Attention seeking doesn't come close.
Was Donal Og attention seeking when he came out?
Was Conor attention seeking when he talked about depression?
Was Oisin attention seeking when he talked about his gambling addiction?
IMO in each case they showed bravery in coming out and talking about something which is seen as shameful by many and which is brushed under the carpet or kept hidden to the detriment of the mental health of those who are gay / depressed / addicted.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 20, 2014, 06:47:23 PM
I think the point of gay pride and the 'coming out' business is for it to become so commonplace that in future we'll return* to a time when it'll be considered no big deal what your sexual preferences are. Nobody will have to 'come out' because they won't feel any pressure to be 'in' in the first place. Gay pride parades are an act of defiance in cultures where homosexual or bisexual behaviour is or was suppressed, and I think the intention of them is to let gay people know that there's no need to stay in the closet. It's like the atheist billboards doing the rounds in America at the minute reassuring atheists in religiously-dominated areas that it's okay to be an atheist and that they're not alone.
* Yes, return to a time when it's no big deal. The idea that there's something wrong with homosexual behaviour is a relatively recent invention. In ancient Rome and ancient Greece nobody gave a toss.
Bad choice off words. ;D Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
What about a womans ass or is that out of bounds as well?
Quote from: ludermor on February 21, 2014, 09:24:53 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 20, 2014, 06:47:23 PM
I think the point of gay pride and the 'coming out' business is for it to become so commonplace that in future we'll return* to a time when it'll be considered no big deal what your sexual preferences are. Nobody will have to 'come out' because they won't feel any pressure to be 'in' in the first place. Gay pride parades are an act of defiance in cultures where homosexual or bisexual behaviour is or was suppressed, and I think the intention of them is to let gay people know that there's no need to stay in the closet. It's like the atheist billboards doing the rounds in America at the minute reassuring atheists in religiously-dominated areas that it's okay to be an atheist and that they're not alone.
* Yes, return to a time when it's no big deal. The idea that there's something wrong with homosexual behaviour is a relatively recent invention. In ancient Rome and ancient Greece nobody gave a toss.
Bad choice off words. ;D Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
What about a womans ass or is that out of bounds as well?
Or any other orifice. What is natural anyway ?
Quote from: hardstation on February 21, 2014, 10:24:13 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on February 21, 2014, 10:01:18 AM
Quote from: johnneycool on February 21, 2014, 09:36:30 AM
Quote from: EC Unique on February 21, 2014, 09:30:25 AM
Hmmm, methinks the boy doth protest too much!!
Ah, the old 'you don't like Gays so you must be Gay' logic. ::)
You don't like gays?
No. I don't dislike them either.
I'd love the British royal family to all turn out gay and then they would die out, wouldn't they? Then Elton can take his rightful place on the throne
Quote from: Orior on February 21, 2014, 11:28:34 AM
I'd love the British royal family to all turn out gay and then they would die out, wouldn't they? Then Elton can take his rightful place on the throne
(http://politicalfootballs.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/king-ralph01.jpg)
Quote from: Orior on February 21, 2014, 11:28:34 AM
I'd love the British royal family to all turn out gay and then they would die out, wouldn't they? Then Elton can take his rightful place on the throne
Would he not empty his bowels regularly anyway ?
Quote from: seafoid on February 21, 2014, 10:35:38 AM
Quote from: ludermor on February 21, 2014, 09:24:53 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 20, 2014, 06:47:23 PM
I think the point of gay pride and the 'coming out' business is for it to become so commonplace that in future we'll return* to a time when it'll be considered no big deal what your sexual preferences are. Nobody will have to 'come out' because they won't feel any pressure to be 'in' in the first place. Gay pride parades are an act of defiance in cultures where homosexual or bisexual behaviour is or was suppressed, and I think the intention of them is to let gay people know that there's no need to stay in the closet. It's like the atheist billboards doing the rounds in America at the minute reassuring atheists in religiously-dominated areas that it's okay to be an atheist and that they're not alone.
* Yes, return to a time when it's no big deal. The idea that there's something wrong with homosexual behaviour is a relatively recent invention. In ancient Rome and ancient Greece nobody gave a toss.
Bad choice off words. ;D Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
What about a womans ass or is that out of bounds as well?
Or any other orifice. What is natural anyway ?
Men being with women, and don't even start me on the child abuse that is two gay men going for adoption, that thing should never be allowed.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 21, 2014, 02:52:06 PM
Quote from: seafoid on February 21, 2014, 10:35:38 AM
Quote from: ludermor on February 21, 2014, 09:24:53 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 20, 2014, 06:47:23 PM
I think the point of gay pride and the 'coming out' business is for it to become so commonplace that in future we'll return* to a time when it'll be considered no big deal what your sexual preferences are. Nobody will have to 'come out' because they won't feel any pressure to be 'in' in the first place. Gay pride parades are an act of defiance in cultures where homosexual or bisexual behaviour is or was suppressed, and I think the intention of them is to let gay people know that there's no need to stay in the closet. It's like the atheist billboards doing the rounds in America at the minute reassuring atheists in religiously-dominated areas that it's okay to be an atheist and that they're not alone.
* Yes, return to a time when it's no big deal. The idea that there's something wrong with homosexual behaviour is a relatively recent invention. In ancient Rome and ancient Greece nobody gave a toss.
Bad choice off words. ;D Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
What about a womans ass or is that out of bounds as well?
Or any other orifice. What is natural anyway ?
Men being with women, and don't even start me on the child abuse that is two gay men going for adoption, that thing should never be allowed.
What about two gay women adopting? Is that Ok?
Quote from: Cold tea on February 21, 2014, 02:52:06 PM
Quote from: seafoid on February 21, 2014, 10:35:38 AM
Quote from: ludermor on February 21, 2014, 09:24:53 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 20, 2014, 06:47:23 PM
I think the point of gay pride and the 'coming out' business is for it to become so commonplace that in future we'll return* to a time when it'll be considered no big deal what your sexual preferences are. Nobody will have to 'come out' because they won't feel any pressure to be 'in' in the first place. Gay pride parades are an act of defiance in cultures where homosexual or bisexual behaviour is or was suppressed, and I think the intention of them is to let gay people know that there's no need to stay in the closet. It's like the atheist billboards doing the rounds in America at the minute reassuring atheists in religiously-dominated areas that it's okay to be an atheist and that they're not alone.
* Yes, return to a time when it's no big deal. The idea that there's something wrong with homosexual behaviour is a relatively recent invention. In ancient Rome and ancient Greece nobody gave a toss.
Bad choice off words. ;D Common place or not a man wanting to put his c**k up another man's ass is not a natural thing.
What about a womans ass or is that out of bounds as well?
Or any other orifice. What is natural anyway ?
Men being with women, and don't even start me on the child abuse that is two gay men going for adoption, that thing should never be allowed.
I'd say you can argue living repressed intolerant households would be closer to child abuse over having 2 caring dads.
Quote from: Main Street on February 21, 2014, 08:53:46 AM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 20, 2014, 10:01:33 PM
there are probably 3 or 4 threads out of this one.
gallsman you are getting a bit wound up from my contribution earlier in fairness. My question was/is about the motives of the "coming out" I think part of it is for the increased attention. I am not discounting their is honest desire to live out their life as they want to either but I think a lot of it is attention seeking.
It's a curiosity how you consider seeking a lot of attention was part of the motivation for just about the only Irish sportsman to come out, before he himself was outed. And considering, for the previous 20 years of his existence he lived in fear of attention to that very issue. Was there possibly some overwhelming catharsis, coupled with an overwhelming desire for nationwide attention 'look at me, look at my issues'?
Is there any resemblance between your thoughts on the matter and the reality of the experience for Donal Og?
I think you'll find the title of this thread is Neil Francis and
gay sportspeople therefore my contributions are not limited to only Donal Og's case?
Donal Ogs brother seems to be trying to get onto the media circuit to make a few quid since coming out. People seem to want to hear about it, no idea why
Quote from: Cold tea on February 21, 2014, 02:52:06 PM
Quote from: seafoid on February 21, 2014, 10:35:38 AM
Quote from: ludermor on February 21, 2014, 09:24:53 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 20, 2014, 06:47:23 PM
I think the point of gay pride and the 'coming out' business is for it to become so commonplace that in future we'll return* to a time when it'll be considered no big deal what your sexual preferences are. Nobody will have to 'come out' because they won't feel any pressure to be 'in' in the first place. Gay pride parades are an act of defiance in cultures where homosexual or bisexual behaviour is or was suppressed, and I think the intention of them is to let gay people know that there's no need to stay in the closet. It's like the atheist billboards doing the rounds in America at the minute reassuring atheists in religiously-dominated areas that it's okay to be an atheist and that they're not alone.
* Yes, return to a time when it's no big deal. The idea that there's something wrong with homosexual behaviour is a relatively recent invention. In ancient Rome and ancient Greece nobody gave a toss.
Bad choice off words. ;D Common place or not a man wanting another man ass is not a natural thing.
What about a womans ass or is that out of bounds as well?
Or any other orifice. What is natural anyway ?
Men being with women, and don't even start me on the child abuse that is two gay men going for adoption, that thing should never be allowed.
Think you need to learn the difference between "natural" and "normal/usual/more commonplace".
Black people are much less common in Ireland than white people. Doesn't mean being black is not natural.
Homosexual behaviour is widely seen in non-human mammals too. You saying its "unnatural" in those species?
As for the child abuse comment, either you're on the windup or you're an unthinking, reactionary idiot, because you can't back that up. I'll be generous and opt for the former.
Quote from: J70 on February 21, 2014, 04:59:02 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 21, 2014, 02:52:06 PM
Quote from: seafoid on February 21, 2014, 10:35:38 AM
Quote from: ludermor on February 21, 2014, 09:24:53 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 20, 2014, 06:47:23 PM
I think the point of gay pride and the 'coming out' business is for it to become so commonplace that in future we'll return* to a time when it'll be considered no big deal what your sexual preferences are. Nobody will have to 'come out' because they won't feel any pressure to be 'in' in the first place. Gay pride parades are an act of defiance in cultures where homosexual or bisexual behaviour is or was suppressed, and I think the intention of them is to let gay people know that there's no need to stay in the closet. It's like the atheist billboards doing the rounds in America at the minute reassuring atheists in religiously-dominated areas that it's okay to be an atheist and that they're not alone.
* Yes, return to a time when it's no big deal. The idea that there's something wrong with homosexual behaviour is a relatively recent invention. In ancient Rome and ancient Greece nobody gave a toss.
Bad choice off words. ;D Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
What about a womans ass or is that out of bounds as well?
Or any other orifice. What is natural anyway ?
Men being with women, and don't even start me on the child abuse that is two gay men going for adoption, that thing should never be allowed.
Think you need to learn the difference between "natural" and "normal/usual/more commonplace".
Black people are much less common in Ireland than white people. Doesn't mean being black is not natural.
Homosexual behaviour is widely seen in non-human mammals too. You saying its "unnatural" in those species?
As for the child abuse comment, either you're on the windup or you're an unthinking, reactionary idiot, because you can't back that up. I'll be generous and opt for the former.
It's also natural for non-human animals to eat their young - I give no credit to the its natural argument whatsoever.....
Quote from: The Iceman on February 21, 2014, 05:00:37 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 21, 2014, 04:59:02 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 21, 2014, 02:52:06 PM
Quote from: seafoid on February 21, 2014, 10:35:38 AM
Quote from: ludermor on February 21, 2014, 09:24:53 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 20, 2014, 06:47:23 PM
I think the point of gay pride and the 'coming out' business is for it to become so commonplace that in future we'll return* to a time when it'll be considered no big deal what your sexual preferences are. Nobody will have to 'come out' because they won't feel any pressure to be 'in' in the first place. Gay pride parades are an act of defiance in cultures where homosexual or bisexual behaviour is or was suppressed, and I think the intention of them is to let gay people know that there's no need to stay in the closet. It's like the atheist billboards doing the rounds in America at the minute reassuring atheists in religiously-dominated areas that it's okay to be an atheist and that they're not alone.
* Yes, return to a time when it's no big deal. The idea that there's something wrong with homosexual behaviour is a relatively recent invention. In ancient Rome and ancient Greece nobody gave a toss.
Bad choice off words. ;D Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
What about a womans ass or is that out of bounds as well?
Or any other orifice. What is natural anyway ?
Men being with women, and don't even start me on the child abuse that is two gay men going for adoption, that thing should never be allowed.
Think you need to learn the difference between "natural" and "normal/usual/more commonplace".
Black people are much less common in Ireland than white people. Doesn't mean being black is not natural.
Homosexual behaviour is widely seen in non-human mammals too. You saying its "unnatural" in those species?
As for the child abuse comment, either you're on the windup or you're an unthinking, reactionary idiot, because you can't back that up. I'll be generous and opt for the former.
It's also natural for non-human animals to eat their young - I give no credit to the its natural argument whatsoever.....
Well presumably any objection you have then, if any, to homosexuality, is not based on the "its not natural" "argument, unlike the fella I was responding to.
thats another thread - I think it may have been done to death already....
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-5oUdLf1f4r4/UQJmUwImRRI/AAAAAAAAcrk/pCvprUhG_jo/s640/Lord+why+do+you+pile+all+these+troubles+upon+us.jpg)
for the record I have nothing against gay people. I know lots of gay people and have no problem with them at all.
Quote from: The Iceman on February 21, 2014, 05:31:06 PM
for the record I have nothing against gay people. I know lots of gay people and have no problem with them at all.
I think you were doing okay up until then.
Quote from: deiseach on February 21, 2014, 05:34:52 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 21, 2014, 05:31:06 PM
for the record I have nothing against gay people. I know lots of gay people and have no problem with them at all.
I think you were doing okay up until then.
Because the argument always turns into religion or homophobic rhetoric. Which this isn't.
I believe a lot of the sportspeople who come out are seeking the attention. And it only escalates in many cases. Take the commentators at the Winter Olympics - former ice skating competitors. Come out as Gay. Get a job on TV - camper than a row of tents - money, ratings and eamonns of the world lap it up, by the book, the memoirs and watch the show...
Quote from: The Iceman on February 21, 2014, 05:58:11 PM
Quote from: deiseach on February 21, 2014, 05:34:52 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 21, 2014, 05:31:06 PM
for the record I have nothing against gay people. I know lots of gay people and have no problem with them at all.
I think you were doing okay up until then.
Because the argument always turns into religion or homophobic rhetoric. Which this isn't.
I believe a lot of the sportspeople who come out are seeking the attention. And it only escalates in many cases. Take the commentators at the Winter Olympics - former ice skating competitors. Come out as Gay. Get a job on TV - camper than a row of tents - money, ratings and eamonns of the world lap it up, by the book, the memoirs and watch the show...
Yet you have a wide school of thought that the college football kid who recently came out will hurt his position in the draft (and thus his potential earnings).
There is only one admitted gay player in the NBA and he is currently without a contract. How many are in the NFL? EPL? Baseball? County level GAA?
Clearly, if these sports are representative of the general population in terms of sexual orientation, there are a lot of closeted top level sports figures. So its plainly obvious why people are reluctant to be the pioneers that lead the way and thus why such a big deal is made when someone actually goes ahead with it. Call those that brave it ttention whores if you like (and maybe some ARE cashing in), but to most, they're just courageous, same as the likes of Jackie Robinson 60 years ago. Someone has to lead the way against prejudice.
Quote from: Kidder81 on February 21, 2014, 04:52:10 PM
Donal Ogs brother seems to be trying to get onto the media circuit to make a few quid since coming out. People seem to want to hear about it, no idea why
Well that takes the biscuit. Gay and greedy, right? Awful
Quote from: J70 on February 21, 2014, 06:22:10 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 21, 2014, 05:58:11 PM
Quote from: deiseach on February 21, 2014, 05:34:52 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 21, 2014, 05:31:06 PM
for the record I have nothing against gay people. I know lots of gay people and have no problem with them at all.
I think you were doing okay up until then.
Because the argument always turns into religion or homophobic rhetoric. Which this isn't.
I believe a lot of the sportspeople who come out are seeking the attention. And it only escalates in many cases. Take the commentators at the Winter Olympics - former ice skating competitors. Come out as Gay. Get a job on TV - camper than a row of tents - money, ratings and eamonns of the world lap it up, by the book, the memoirs and watch the show...
Yet you have a wide school of thought that the college football kid who recently came out will hurt his position in the draft (and thus his potential earnings).
There is only one admitted gay player in the NBA and he is currently without a contract. How many are in the NFL? EPL? Baseball? County level GAA?
Clearly, if these sports are representative of the general population in terms of sexual orientation, there are a lot of closeted top level sports figures. So its plainly obvious why people are reluctant to be the pioneers that lead the way and thus why such a big deal is made when someone actually goes ahead with it. Call those that brave it ttention whores if you like (and maybe some ARE cashing in), but to most, they're just courageous, same as the likes of Jackie Robinson 60 years ago. Someone has to lead the way against prejudice.
100%.
Quote from: J70 on February 21, 2014, 06:22:10 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 21, 2014, 05:58:11 PM
Quote from: deiseach on February 21, 2014, 05:34:52 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 21, 2014, 05:31:06 PM
for the record I have nothing against gay people. I know lots of gay people and have no problem with them at all.
I think you were doing okay up until then.
Because the argument always turns into religion or homophobic rhetoric. Which this isn't.
I believe a lot of the sportspeople who come out are seeking the attention. And it only escalates in many cases. Take the commentators at the Winter Olympics - former ice skating competitors. Come out as Gay. Get a job on TV - camper than a row of tents - money, ratings and eamonns of the world lap it up, by the book, the memoirs and watch the show...
Yet you have a wide school of thought that the college football kid who recently came out will hurt his position in the draft (and thus his potential earnings).
There is only one admitted gay player in the NBA and he is currently without a contract. How many are in the NFL? EPL? Baseball? County level GAA?
Clearly, if these sports are representative of the general population in terms of sexual orientation, there are a lot of closeted top level sports figures. So its plainly obvious why people are reluctant to be the pioneers that lead the way and thus why such a big deal is made when someone actually goes ahead with it. Call those that brave it ttention whores if you like (and maybe some ARE cashing in), but to most, they're just courageous, same as the likes of Jackie Robinson 60 years ago. Someone has to lead the way against prejudice.
My mind isnt made up on the college football kid to be honest. Part of me recognizes he is a very talented player and was always going to be drafted early. Maybe he gets a earlier draft pick from one of the West Coast teams who want more ticket sales from liberal fans? who knows.....
Quote from: The Iceman on February 21, 2014, 04:44:20 PM
Quote from: Main Street on February 21, 2014, 08:53:46 AM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 20, 2014, 10:01:33 PM
there are probably 3 or 4 threads out of this one.
gallsman you are getting a bit wound up from my contribution earlier in fairness. My question was/is about the motives of the "coming out" I think part of it is for the increased attention. I am not discounting their is honest desire to live out their life as they want to either but I think a lot of it is attention seeking.
It's a curiosity how you consider seeking a lot of attention was part of the motivation for just about the only Irish sportsman to come out, before he himself was outed. And considering, for the previous 20 years of his existence he lived in fear of attention to that very issue. Was there possibly some overwhelming catharsis, coupled with an overwhelming desire for nationwide attention 'look at me, look at my issues'?
Is there any resemblance between your thoughts on the matter and the reality of the experience for Donal Og?
I think you'll find the title of this thread is Neil Francis and gay sportspeople therefore my contributions are not limited to only Donal Og's case?
Which part of your thoughts on Donal Og coming out has to with your claim that "a lot of it is attention seeking"?
I'm afraid Donal Og doesn't make the news over here on the Best Coast of America....
Quote from: thebigfella on February 21, 2014, 04:22:14 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 21, 2014, 02:52:06 PM
Quote from: seafoid on February 21, 2014, 10:35:38 AM
Quote from: ludermor on February 21, 2014, 09:24:53 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 20, 2014, 06:47:23 PM
I think the point of gay pride and the 'coming out' business is for it to become so commonplace that in future we'll return* to a time when it'll be considered no big deal what your sexual preferences are. Nobody will have to 'come out' because they won't feel any pressure to be 'in' in the first place. Gay pride parades are an act of defiance in cultures where homosexual or bisexual behaviour is or was suppressed, and I think the intention of them is to let gay people know that there's no need to stay in the closet. It's like the atheist billboards doing the rounds in America at the minute reassuring atheists in religiously-dominated areas that it's okay to be an atheist and that they're not alone.
* Yes, return to a time when it's no big deal. The idea that there's something wrong with homosexual behaviour is a relatively recent invention. In ancient Rome and ancient Greece nobody gave a toss.
Bad choice off words. ;D Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
What about a womans ass or is that out of bounds as well?
Or any other orifice. What is natural anyway ?
Men being with women, and don't even start me on the child abuse that is two gay men going for adoption, that thing should never be allowed.
I'd say you can argue living repressed intolerant households would be closer to child abuse over having 2 caring dads.
I'd say you are correct about repressed intolerant households, but two caring dads surely push the child down a certain path and as nature intended the mother to give birth and raise the young what maternal instincts have two gays in raising and supporting a young child. It's wrong, it's unnatural and the PC world has gone mad to allow it. Elton John is about 70 and him and his gay partner have basically bought kids - it's sickening.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 12:11:01 AM
Quote from: thebigfella on February 21, 2014, 04:22:14 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 21, 2014, 02:52:06 PM
Quote from: seafoid on February 21, 2014, 10:35:38 AM
Quote from: ludermor on February 21, 2014, 09:24:53 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 20, 2014, 06:47:23 PM
I think the point of gay pride and the 'coming out' business is for it to become so commonplace that in future we'll return* to a time when it'll be considered no big deal what your sexual preferences are. Nobody will have to 'come out' because they won't feel any pressure to be 'in' in the first place. Gay pride parades are an act of defiance in cultures where homosexual or bisexual behaviour is or was suppressed, and I think the intention of them is to let gay people know that there's no need to stay in the closet. It's like the atheist billboards doing the rounds in America at the minute reassuring atheists in religiously-dominated areas that it's okay to be an atheist and that they're not alone.
* Yes, return to a time when it's no big deal. The idea that there's something wrong with homosexual behaviour is a relatively recent invention. In ancient Rome and ancient Greece nobody gave a toss.
Bad choice off words. ;D Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
What about a womans ass or is that out of bounds as well?
Or any other orifice. What is natural anyway ?
Men being with women, and don't even start me on the child abuse that is two gay men going for adoption, that thing should never be allowed.
I'd say you can argue living repressed intolerant households would be closer to child abuse over having 2 caring dads.
I'd say you are correct about repressed intolerant households, but two caring dads surely push the child down a certain path and as nature intended the mother to give birth and raise the young what maternal instincts have two gays in raising and supporting a young child. It's wrong, it's unnatural and the PC world has gone mad to allow it. Elton John is about 70 and him and his gay partner have basically bought kids - it's sickening.
Is it better for a kid to be left in a childrens home somewhere with no one to care for them?
Quote from: Cold tea on February 21, 2014, 02:52:06 PM
Men being with women, and don't even start me on the child abuse that is two gay men going for adoption, that thing should never be allowed.
I will start you. How is it "child abuse" for gay people to have families?
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 12:11:01 AM
I'd say you are correct about repressed intolerant households, but two caring dads surely push the child down a certain path and as nature intended the mother to give birth and raise the young what maternal instincts have two gays in raising and supporting a young child. It's wrong, it's unnatural and the PC world has gone mad to allow it. Elton John is about 70 and him and his gay partner have basically bought kids - it's sickening.
Well then you're going to be very sick watching this horrific outcome of two lesbians raising children (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMLZO-sObzQ).
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 22, 2014, 02:16:13 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 21, 2014, 02:52:06 PM
Men being with women, and don't even start me on the child abuse that is two gay men going for adoption, that thing should never be allowed.
I will start you. How is it "child abuse" for gay people to have families?
Come on now Eamonn. Don't you know that all the gay people are the offspring of other gay people? All the way back to the beginning. Ergo any gay parent is leading their child to a life of the gay. There is no other explanation.
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 22, 2014, 02:22:41 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 12:11:01 AM
I'd say you are correct about repressed intolerant households, but two caring dads surely push the child down a certain path and as nature intended the mother to give birth and raise the young what maternal instincts have two gays in raising and supporting a young child. It's wrong, it's unnatural and the PC world has gone mad to allow it. Elton John is about 70 and him and his gay partner have basically bought kids - it's sickening.
Well then you're going to be very sick watching this horrific outcome of two lesbians raising children (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMLZO-sObzQ).
I have no issue with a mother raising her child, no matter what lifestyle choice of partner she has chosen, in fact there is probably many benefits for a child to be raised by two maternally intuitive women than one. It is two gay men raising a young child that shouldn't be accepted, but hey it's the 21st century and those who are in the minority or who set themselves aside as different should be totally tolerated in case we may cause offence. I am sure there is tonnes and tonnes of research carried over decades and decades that show young children raised by two gay men go on to have happy normal lives and their sexuality isn't influenced at all by what they see at home!!
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 22, 2014, 02:16:13 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 21, 2014, 02:52:06 PM
Men being with women, and don't even start me on the child abuse that is two gay men going for adoption, that thing should never be allowed.
I will start you. How is it "child abuse" for gay people to have families?
Gay men to adopt children, if a gay women has a child the child is with their mother. No one can deny the mother is the most important part of the family, a child needs that bond, how can such a bond be prevalent with two men?
Quote from: BennyHarp on February 22, 2014, 12:14:18 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 12:11:01 AM
Quote from: thebigfella on February 21, 2014, 04:22:14 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 21, 2014, 02:52:06 PM
Quote from: seafoid on February 21, 2014, 10:35:38 AM
Quote from: ludermor on February 21, 2014, 09:24:53 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 20, 2014, 06:47:23 PM
I think the point of gay pride and the 'coming out' business is for it to become so commonplace that in future we'll return* to a time when it'll be considered no big deal what your sexual preferences are. Nobody will have to 'come out' because they won't feel any pressure to be 'in' in the first place. Gay pride parades are an act of defiance in cultures where homosexual or bisexual behaviour is or was suppressed, and I think the intention of them is to let gay people know that there's no need to stay in the closet. It's like the atheist billboards doing the rounds in America at the minute reassuring atheists in religiously-dominated areas that it's okay to be an atheist and that they're not alone.
* Yes, return to a time when it's no big deal. The idea that there's something wrong with homosexual behaviour is a relatively recent invention. In ancient Rome and ancient Greece nobody gave a toss.
Bad choice off words. ;D Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
What about a womans ass or is that out of bounds as well?
Or any other orifice. What is natural anyway ?
Men being with women, and don't even start me on the child abuse that is two gay men going for adoption, that thing should never be allowed.
I'd say you can argue living repressed intolerant households would be closer to child abuse over having 2 caring dads.
I'd say you are correct about repressed intolerant households, but two caring dads surely push the child down a certain path and as nature intended the mother to give birth and raise the young what maternal instincts have two gays in raising and supporting a young child. It's wrong, it's unnatural and the PC world has gone mad to allow it. Elton John is about 70 and him and his gay partner have basically bought kids - it's sickening.
Is it better for a kid to be left in a childrens home somewhere with no one to care for them?
So do you want to just hand them out to clear the care homes out?
Quote from: The Iceman on February 21, 2014, 06:27:17 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 21, 2014, 06:22:10 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 21, 2014, 05:58:11 PM
Quote from: deiseach on February 21, 2014, 05:34:52 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 21, 2014, 05:31:06 PM
for the record I have nothing against gay people. I know lots of gay people and have no problem with them at all.
I think you were doing okay up until then.
Because the argument always turns into religion or homophobic rhetoric. Which this isn't.
I believe a lot of the sportspeople who come out are seeking the attention. And it only escalates in many cases. Take the commentators at the Winter Olympics - former ice skating competitors. Come out as Gay. Get a job on TV - camper than a row of tents - money, ratings and eamonns of the world lap it up, by the book, the memoirs and watch the show...
Yet you have a wide school of thought that the college football kid who recently came out will hurt his position in the draft (and thus his potential earnings).
There is only one admitted gay player in the NBA and he is currently without a contract. How many are in the NFL? EPL? Baseball? County level GAA?
Clearly, if these sports are representative of the general population in terms of sexual orientation, there are a lot of closeted top level sports figures. So its plainly obvious why people are reluctant to be the pioneers that lead the way and thus why such a big deal is made when someone actually goes ahead with it. Call those that brave it ttention whores if you like (and maybe some ARE cashing in), but to most, they're just courageous, same as the likes of Jackie Robinson 60 years ago. Someone has to lead the way against prejudice.
My mind isnt made up on the college football kid to be honest. Part of me recognizes he is a very talented player and was always going to be drafted early. Maybe he gets a earlier draft pick from one of the West Coast teams who want more ticket sales from liberal fans? who knows.....
Sorry Iceman, that's not right. He was a very good college player, but he was projected anywhere between low 4th and high 6th round. That's the sort of territory that can find it hard to make the team. If you wanted to be cynical you could say he came out so that any team that drafts him might be a tad more reluctant to cut him, but I think that would be unfair. He came out to him Missou teammates before the season, and this seems to be similar. Let's just get it out there, deal with it and move on.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 04:59:23 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 22, 2014, 12:31:08 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 09:05:19 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 22, 2014, 02:14:54 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
Not natural? What does this mean? Do you mean animals don't do it?
It's a live style choice, when bitches are in heat a dog will ride anything, procreation and all that!
Is your (presumed) heterosexuality a lifestyle choice?
No is yours? It is a genetic trait programmed into all animal's so they procreate and survive as a species.
So why do you think homosexuality is a lifestyle choice?
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 09:01:54 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 22, 2014, 02:16:13 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 21, 2014, 02:52:06 PM
Men being with women, and don't even start me on the child abuse that is two gay men going for adoption, that thing should never be allowed.
I will start you. How is it "child abuse" for gay people to have families?
Gay men to adopt children, if a gay women has a child the child is with their mother. No one can deny the mother is the most important part of the family, a child needs that bond, how can such a bond be prevalent with two men?
So widowers shouldn't be allowed to keep their children unless they hook up with another woman?
Where are you getting all this research from? (I'm joking. I know you're pulling this stuff out of your ass and don't have a single scrap of research to back up any of what you're saying.)
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 09:05:19 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 22, 2014, 02:14:54 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
Not natural? What does this mean? Do you mean animals don't do it?
It's a live style choice, when bitches are in heat a dog will ride anything, procreation and all that!
Huh? Dogs make lifestyle choices? It's natural but it's not natural?
(http://static1.fjcdn.com/thumbnails/comments/Hipster+or+not+I+like+those+cool+dance+moves+he+s+_4f0443e81a79793be3772804f9452eb1.jpg)
QuoteSo widowers shouldn't be allowed to keep their children unless they hook up with another woman?
This is an offensive thing to say. Widowers did not deliberately seek to deprive their children of a mother.
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 22, 2014, 07:35:34 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 09:05:19 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 22, 2014, 02:14:54 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
Not natural? What does this mean? Do you mean animals don't do it?
It's a live style choice, when bitches are in heat a dog will ride anything, procreation and all that!
Huh? Dogs make lifestyle choices? It's natural but it's not natural?
(http://static1.fjcdn.com/thumbnails/comments/Hipster+or+not+I+like+those+cool+dance+moves+he+s+_4f0443e81a79793be3772804f9452eb1.jpg)
No dogs acting on natural instincts when a bitch is in heat will try to ride anything - surely you are an educated person and don't need this spelled out.
Quote from: J70 on February 22, 2014, 05:50:42 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 04:59:23 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 22, 2014, 12:31:08 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 09:05:19 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 22, 2014, 02:14:54 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
Not natural? What does this mean? Do you mean animals don't do it?
It's a live style choice, when bitches are in heat a dog will ride anything, procreation and all that!
Is your (presumed) heterosexuality a lifestyle choice?
No is yours? It is a genetic trait programmed into all animal's so they procreate and survive as a species.
So why do you think homosexuality is a lifestyle choice?
I do because it is not natural.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 09:00:22 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 22, 2014, 05:50:42 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 04:59:23 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 22, 2014, 12:31:08 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 09:05:19 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 22, 2014, 02:14:54 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Common place or not a man wantinganother man is not a natural thing.
Not natural? What does this mean? Do you mean animals don't do it?
It's a live style choice, when bitches are in heat a dog will ride anything, procreation and all that!
Is your (presumed) heterosexuality a lifestyle choice?
No is yours? It is a genetic trait programmed into all animal's so they procreate and survive as a species.
So why do you think homosexuality is a lifestyle choice?
I do because it is not natural.
So you think people who are gay are REALLY heterosexuals who go against every natural instinct and choose to be attracted to the same sex? How does that work?
Quote from: J70 on February 22, 2014, 09:31:09 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 09:00:22 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 22, 2014, 05:50:42 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 04:59:23 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 22, 2014, 12:31:08 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 09:05:19 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 22, 2014, 02:14:54 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
Not natural? What does this mean? Do you mean animals don't do it?
It's a live style choice, when bitches are in heat a dog will ride anything, procreation and all that!
Is your (presumed) heterosexuality a lifestyle choice?
No is yours? It is a genetic trait programmed into all animal's so they procreate and survive as a species.
So why do you think homosexuality is a lifestyle choice?
I do because it is not natural.
So you think people who are gay are REALLY heterosexuals who go against every natural instinct and choose to be attracted to the same sex? How does that work?
You are wasting your time debating with him. His every utterance on this thread has been crass and homophobic. Personally I hope he has no offspring who "choose" to be gay.
Yup. I think he's pretty much bate. We could let him wriggle on that "it's wrong because it's unnatural/it's wrong because it's natural" hook for all eternity, but it'd get tedious very quickly.
Jason Collins signs with the Nets on a 10 day contract today. Becomes the first openly gay person to be signed to a team in the NBA or any other major American sport.
Quote from: michaelg on February 22, 2014, 09:46:25 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 22, 2014, 09:31:09 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 09:00:22 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 22, 2014, 05:50:42 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 04:59:23 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 22, 2014, 12:31:08 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 09:05:19 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 22, 2014, 02:14:54 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
Not natural? What does this mean? Do you mean animals don't do it?
It's a live style choice, when bitches are in heat a dog will ride anything, procreation and all that!
Is your (presumed) heterosexuality a lifestyle choice?
No is yours? It is a genetic trait programmed into all animal's so they procreate and survive as a species.
So why do you think homosexuality is a lifestyle choice?
I do because it is not natural.
So you think people who are gay are REALLY heterosexuals who go against every natural instinct and choose to be attracted to the same sex? How does that work?
You are wasting your time debating with him. His every utterance on this thread has been crass and homophobic. Personally I hope he has no offspring who "choose" to be gay.
The homophobic card, is there a card more played in society at present! ::)
Indeed. There are various degrees of homophobia so it is a very sweeping accusation.
Quote from: EC Unique on February 24, 2014, 09:36:10 AM
Indeed. There are various degrees of homophobia so it is a very sweeping accusation.
You are either homophobic or you're not.
I suppose you think there are various degrees of racism as well?
Pathetic response from someone trying to make excuses for being a homophobe(and a rascist)
Quote from: EC Unique on February 24, 2014, 09:36:10 AM
Indeed. There are various degrees of homophobia so it is a very sweeping accusation.
And no one on here thought you could make a bigger fool of yourself than you do on the Utd and Liverpool threads.
We were all wrong, take a bow.
There are those who are not comfortable with the idea of homosexuality and then there are those who condone violence against homosexuals. Both homophobic but to a differing degree...
http://gaeliclife.com/2014/02/joe-brolly-the-only-gay-in-the-village/
Quote
Joe Brolly: The only gay in the village
Last week, Missouri University's All-American defensive end Michael Sam, decided to tell the world that he is gay. Later this year, Sam will become the only openly gay player in the NFL.
The defensive player of the year, playing for the college champions, in the strongest college conference, would normally be a first round draft pick. But because he is homosexual, it is likely he will instead be chosen somewhere between rounds three and five.
A number of high profile players have already said that as a gay man, he won't be welcome in an NFL locker room. As a homosexual, his endorsement potential is uncertain. The big American Football franchises fear his shirt sales will be sluggish. In 2014, this is how they roll in the Land of the Free.
The United States are not alone. In England's professional and semi-professional soccer leagues, from the premiership all the way down to the regional conferences, guess how many openly gay players there are? One. No, that is not a misprint. His name is Liam Davis and he plays for Gainsborough Trinity in the Western Conference, augmenting his meagre income by running a cafe with his partner Neil in Cleethorpes. Like Michael Sam, Davis is in a minority of one.
I spoke to Alan Milton during the week, Director of Communications with the GAA. He told me there are just over 200,000 adult males playing Gaelic games, mostly in Ireland. Yet at club and county level, there is not a single openly gay footballer. This is in the context of an average of 10 percent of the population being gay. Not a single homosexual Gaelic footballer. Perhaps the genetic make up of the GAA community is unique.
When Cork hurler Donal Óg Cusack proclaimed his homosexuality several years ago, he was seen as a trailblazer. Feted on The Late Late Show and the daytime chat shows, his warts and all autobiography Come What May became a best seller. It charted a trail of one night stands from Cork to Ho Chi Minh city and offered up one of the immortal lines of recent years. When Cusack told his father he was gay, his father said "Like f*** it Donal Óg, the abuse you're going to get about this son. I thought it was hard defending your short puck-outs, but f*** it, this one."
Turns out, Donal Óg wasn't blazing a trail at all. He opened a door, but only his brother followed, and that was only after he had retired from the Cork panel. Thing is, there is nothing average about Donal Óg. Fiercely self confident, charismatic and independent, he also has a fanatical streak. When you are in his company, he burns. One night at a charity function some years ago in Cork Opera House, he got very cross at me during a debate on the GPA. C
oming off stage, I went to shake his hand at which point he threatened to break my nose and had to be held back by some of the organisers. No, Donal Óg is not the sort of person to suffer in silence. Unlike those many thousands of anonymous gay men pretending to be something they're not in club and county changing rooms all over the country.
On Sunday past on Newstalk's Off the Ball program, the panel were reviewing a similar piece I had written in Sunday's Irish Mail. Neil Francis, veteran journalist and ex-Irish rugby international, suggested that in the same way he was not interested in ballet, gay men were not interested in sport and that homosexuals tended to be hairdressers rather than sportsmen. For around 20 minutes, he stuck to this theme.
The following night, he went onto Today FM's Last Word and grovelled, saying he was horrified when he had listened to his words afterwards. He went on to apologise unreservedly. It was an apology borne of political correctness and the need to salvage his media career. As Nigel Owens, the only openly gay rugby referee, put it on the same programme, how could an experienced journalist have said such things in the course of a long interview unless he meant them?
The truth is that Neil's view is representative of the view of the majority of Irish people. Even people of good intention, who support the notion of equality, are extremely uncomfortable with the reality. Society here believes that being gay is being inferior, which is why homosexuality has been forced underground.
The GAA community is a very close knit one. The plus side of that is great support for our neighbour. The downside is the pressure to conform. When has a gay man ever taken his partner to the club dinner dance or chatted about a one-night stand with another man in the dressing room?
It is little wonder that so many of our young men are prepared to hide their real selves and pretend to be something they are not. It is a simply intolerable state of affairs. Whether a man is sexually attracted to women, or men, or both, is entirely natural. Yet, young people in our community are growing up in an environment that is strongly homophobic. The result is that many of your young men are miserable.
It goes without saying that the Catholic Church's attitude to homosexuality is not just homophobic but grotesquely hypocritical, but amazingly, it continues to have traction. In the North, we have the added problem of some political parties who espouse overtly homophobic views. In 2008, Iris Robinson, DUP MP and wife of Northern Ireland's First Minister, stated in the House of Parliament that homosexuality was, "More vile than child sex abuse."
Her colleague Ian Paisley Junior – DUP MP for North Antrim, told a Hot Press journalist in 2008, "Gays and lesbians repulse me." Just last year, attacking the proposal to introduce same sex marriage, Junior said this would lead to the age of consent being reduced and, "Attempts to legalise euthanasia. The morality of the nation is at stake."
Tom Elliot became the short-lived leader of the UUP in 2010 after he said in the leadership debate that he would never attend, "A gay parade or a GAA match." You couldn't make it up.
Worryingly, the GAA has no initiative of any kind in place in relation to homophobia. The stated reason is that no one has ever complained about such discrimination. Out of sight and out of mind.
Interestingly, ladies GAA and camogie is not afflicted by this entrenched fear and discrimination. I know a large number of openly gay girls who have the confidence to live their lives without fear and are fully accepted within their clubs and counties. Why should they live a repressed existence? Perhaps women have a more practical and empathetic outlook.
The idiotic and deeply unpleasant idea that being homosexual is somehow less than being heterosexual needs to be laughed out of our games and more importantly, out of our community. Women were treated as inferior for hundreds of years until this scandal was tackled head on. The same applied to the black community and other minority races. The problem with the mainstream gay community is that it is invisible.
The GAA must take the initiative on this. It is high time that we began the process of emancipating this large, suffering minority.
Unless I am entirely wrong and Donal Óg is the only gay in the GAA village.
- See more at: http://gaeliclife.com/2014/02/joe-brolly-the-only-gay-in-the-village/#sthash.ACTcywDS.dpuf
Quote from: screenexile on February 24, 2014, 12:05:05 PM
http://gaeliclife.com/2014/02/joe-brolly-the-only-gay-in-the-village/
Quote
Joe Brolly: The only gay in the village
Last week, Missouri University's All-American defensive end Michael Sam, decided to tell the world that he is gay. Later this year, Sam will become the only openly gay player in the NFL.
The defensive player of the year, playing for the college champions, in the strongest college conference, would normally be a first round draft pick. But because he is homosexual, it is likely he will instead be chosen somewhere between rounds three and five.
A number of high profile players have already said that as a gay man, he won't be welcome in an NFL locker room. As a homosexual, his endorsement potential is uncertain. The big American Football franchises fear his shirt sales will be sluggish. In 2014, this is how they roll in the Land of the Free.
The United States are not alone. In England's professional and semi-professional soccer leagues, from the premiership all the way down to the regional conferences, guess how many openly gay players there are? One. No, that is not a misprint. His name is Liam Davis and he plays for Gainsborough Trinity in the Western Conference, augmenting his meagre income by running a cafe with his partner Neil in Cleethorpes. Like Michael Sam, Davis is in a minority of one.
I spoke to Alan Milton during the week, Director of Communications with the GAA. He told me there are just over 200,000 adult males playing Gaelic games, mostly in Ireland. Yet at club and county level, there is not a single openly gay footballer. This is in the context of an average of 10 percent of the population being gay. Not a single homosexual Gaelic footballer. Perhaps the genetic make up of the GAA community is unique.
When Cork hurler Donal Óg Cusack proclaimed his homosexuality several years ago, he was seen as a trailblazer. Feted on The Late Late Show and the daytime chat shows, his warts and all autobiography Come What May became a best seller. It charted a trail of one night stands from Cork to Ho Chi Minh city and offered up one of the immortal lines of recent years. When Cusack told his father he was gay, his father said "Like f*** it Donal Óg, the abuse you're going to get about this son. I thought it was hard defending your short puck-outs, but f*** it, this one."
Turns out, Donal Óg wasn't blazing a trail at all. He opened a door, but only his brother followed, and that was only after he had retired from the Cork panel. Thing is, there is nothing average about Donal Óg. Fiercely self confident, charismatic and independent, he also has a fanatical streak. When you are in his company, he burns. One night at a charity function some years ago in Cork Opera House, he got very cross at me during a debate on the GPA. C
oming off stage, I went to shake his hand at which point he threatened to break my nose and had to be held back by some of the organisers. No, Donal Óg is not the sort of person to suffer in silence. Unlike those many thousands of anonymous gay men pretending to be something they're not in club and county changing rooms all over the country.
On Sunday past on Newstalk's Off the Ball program, the panel were reviewing a similar piece I had written in Sunday's Irish Mail. Neil Francis, veteran journalist and ex-Irish rugby international, suggested that in the same way he was not interested in ballet, gay men were not interested in sport and that homosexuals tended to be hairdressers rather than sportsmen. For around 20 minutes, he stuck to this theme.
The following night, he went onto Today FM's Last Word and grovelled, saying he was horrified when he had listened to his words afterwards. He went on to apologise unreservedly. It was an apology borne of political correctness and the need to salvage his media career. As Nigel Owens, the only openly gay rugby referee, put it on the same programme, how could an experienced journalist have said such things in the course of a long interview unless he meant them?
The truth is that Neil's view is representative of the view of the majority of Irish people. Even people of good intention, who support the notion of equality, are extremely uncomfortable with the reality. Society here believes that being gay is being inferior, which is why homosexuality has been forced underground.
The GAA community is a very close knit one. The plus side of that is great support for our neighbour. The downside is the pressure to conform. When has a gay man ever taken his partner to the club dinner dance or chatted about a one-night stand with another man in the dressing room?
It is little wonder that so many of our young men are prepared to hide their real selves and pretend to be something they are not. It is a simply intolerable state of affairs. Whether a man is sexually attracted to women, or men, or both, is entirely natural. Yet, young people in our community are growing up in an environment that is strongly homophobic. The result is that many of your young men are miserable.
It goes without saying that the Catholic Church's attitude to homosexuality is not just homophobic but grotesquely hypocritical, but amazingly, it continues to have traction. In the North, we have the added problem of some political parties who espouse overtly homophobic views. In 2008, Iris Robinson, DUP MP and wife of Northern Ireland's First Minister, stated in the House of Parliament that homosexuality was, "More vile than child sex abuse."
Her colleague Ian Paisley Junior – DUP MP for North Antrim, told a Hot Press journalist in 2008, "Gays and lesbians repulse me." Just last year, attacking the proposal to introduce same sex marriage, Junior said this would lead to the age of consent being reduced and, "Attempts to legalise euthanasia. The morality of the nation is at stake."
Tom Elliot became the short-lived leader of the UUP in 2010 after he said in the leadership debate that he would never attend, "A gay parade or a GAA match." You couldn't make it up.
Worryingly, the GAA has no initiative of any kind in place in relation to homophobia. The stated reason is that no one has ever complained about such discrimination. Out of sight and out of mind.
Interestingly, ladies GAA and camogie is not afflicted by this entrenched fear and discrimination. I know a large number of openly gay girls who have the confidence to live their lives without fear and are fully accepted within their clubs and counties. Why should they live a repressed existence? Perhaps women have a more practical and empathetic outlook.
The idiotic and deeply unpleasant idea that being homosexual is somehow less than being heterosexual needs to be laughed out of our games and more importantly, out of our community. Women were treated as inferior for hundreds of years until this scandal was tackled head on. The same applied to the black community and other minority races. The problem with the mainstream gay community is that it is invisible.
The GAA must take the initiative on this. It is high time that we began the process of emancipating this large, suffering minority.
Unless I am entirely wrong and Donal Óg is the only gay in the GAA village.
- See more at: http://gaeliclife.com/2014/02/joe-brolly-the-only-gay-in-the-village/#sthash.ACTcywDS.dpuf
This is bullshit (the piece in bold I mean (sorry Billy). A false premise from the outset. Sam is projected between the 3rd and 5th, and always has been.
Quotethis is bullshit
this is journalism
Fixed that for ye. ;)
Possible quibble with Sam's draft position aside (not saying he's wrong), Brolly is spot on.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 08:05:35 AM
Quote from: michaelg on February 22, 2014, 09:46:25 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 22, 2014, 09:31:09 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 09:00:22 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 22, 2014, 05:50:42 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 04:59:23 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 22, 2014, 12:31:08 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 09:05:19 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 22, 2014, 02:14:54 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
Not natural? What does this mean? Do you mean animals don't do it?
It's a live style choice, when bitches are in heat a dog will ride anything, procreation and all that!
Is your (presumed) heterosexuality a lifestyle choice?
No is yours? It is a genetic trait programmed into all animal's so they procreate and survive as a species.
So why do you think homosexuality is a lifestyle choice?
I do because it is not natural.
So you think people who are gay are REALLY heterosexuals who go against every natural instinct and choose to be attracted to the same sex? How does that work?
You are wasting your time debating with him. His every utterance on this thread has been crass and homophobic. Personally I hope he has no offspring who "choose" to be gay.
The homophobic card, is there a card more played in society at present! ::)
Well, show the man that we are not wasting our time with you then. Answer my question.
Quote from: J70 on February 24, 2014, 01:19:52 PM
Possible quibble with Sam's draft position aside (not saying he's wrong), Brolly is spot on.
My problem with stuff like that is it undermines the rest. It's sensationalist and it's wrong. Sam was projected in and around the 100th pick. That's 4th round. This was before he came out. Some agencies dropped him in their projections because they weren't sure what effect it would have, but regardless he was never, ever going to a first round pick. Brolly makes it sound as if him coming out has dropped him like a stone to the 3rd - 5th round. That's not correct, and that makes me view the entire article with a jaundiced eye.
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 24, 2014, 02:06:34 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 24, 2014, 01:19:52 PM
Possible quibble with Sam's draft position aside (not saying he's wrong), Brolly is spot on.
My problem with stuff like that is it undermines the rest. It's sensationalist and it's wrong. Sam was projected in and around the 100th pick. That's 4th round. This was before he came out. Some agencies dropped him in their projections because they weren't sure what effect it would have, but regardless he was never, ever going to a first round pick. Brolly makes it sound as if him coming out has dropped him like a stone to the 3rd - 5th round. That's not correct, and that makes me view the entire article with a jaundiced eye.
Why? The main thrust of the article is self evident and correct. He's not arguing opinion such as tactics or best player.
Because it's hyperbole, so I always say "what else is hyperbole"? My issue with Brolly always seems to be the same. He seems to usually have a nugget, or a good point, but it's so buried in bullshit that you have to go rooting for it. The urge to go rooting gets old very quickly.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 08:05:35 AM
The homophobic card, is there a card more played in society at present! ::)
Ignorance is bliss. And you are pretty ignorant. May I point you towards the path of enlightenment:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect
Quote from: AZOffaly on February 24, 2014, 02:31:31 PM
Because it's hyperbole, so I always say "what else is hyperbole"? My issue with Brolly always seems to be the same. He seems to usually have a nugget, or a good point, but it's so buried in bullshit that you have to go rooting for it. The urge to go rooting gets old very quickly.
Not in this case, for me anyway. Besides, it has in fact been discussed widely in the sports media, at least from my listening, that Sam's draft position would be adversely impacted.
Sam's draft position might be adversely impacted, but then again it might not. Certainly nobody has said that. But my point is he was NEVER projected as a first rounder, he was always ranked 90+.
I think his coming out may affect his draft position if teams are afraid to draft him because they'd be afraid to cut him. But that's a separate discussion. What I'm saying is that Brolly's intro to this story is bullshit, which is a pity because as you say, the rest of the article contains an important point. Why do we not have more GAA players (which is our universe at the end of the day) who have felt comfortable enough to come out. Donal Óg and his brother are still the only ones really.
Quote from: heganboy on February 24, 2014, 02:53:14 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 08:05:35 AM
The homophobic card, is there a card more played in society at present! ::)
Ignorance is bliss. And you are pretty ignorant. May I point you towards the path of enlightenment:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect
Yes - the things we don't know that we don't know.
As I get older I like people less and less. I enjoy my little corner of the world, my family, my circle of friends. I'd rather not have to deal with drama or bullshit caused by people outside of that - but that's life I think and in many ways true (even a little bit) for a lot of us?
but frig how the word "tolerance" has changed. I tolerate Gay people, much like I tolerate most people. I don't agree with them most of the time and that's ok - or it used to be.
I don't hate them and I don't particularly like them (that goes for Gays and most people) but I tolerate you's all in my old understanding of the word.
But tolerance has been redefined.
Tolerance now means acceptance and agreement and if you don't accept or agree then you hate and are intolerant. And if that's the case then the new PC world is intolerant of you and your beliefs. Confused? So am I.
Because I tolerate gay people doesn't mean I accept or agree with what they do in the bedroom. In turn that doesn't mean I'm homophobic as the word is understood today, nor am I a hater. But why don't you tolerate that? Why is that not good enough? Tolerance isn't about affirming gay beliefs as equally right and equally valid and if you're all about tolerance then why not tolerate my beliefs?
I wish all of these sports men and women good luck in their careers. I think they should be left alone to play the game they're paid (or not) to play and what they do at home in their bedrooms is their business. I don't want it flaunted or celebrated just as much as I don't want anyone's private life flaunted in public.
I couldn't give a shite if you like or don't like gay people or other races or ethnicities or whichever in the confines of your head, as long as you don't discriminate against them or oppress them or whatever. That is tolerance.
However, if you're going to get involved in a discussion of these issues, then expect to be challenged to defend your position. You are not entitled to respect of your opinions. Respect and tolerance are different things.
I have not oppressed or discriminated against anyone. Would you stand up for discrimination against me and my religious beliefs and the right to practice them?
I also didn't ask you to respect my opinions. My point from the outset was to question the motives for coming out and why it was even necessary. I was asking more than telling but the usual suspects jumped on it and turned it into something else.
I also don't have to accept or respect the tangents that the thread went off on and some of the crazy arguments on both sides.
I can and have always defended my position. My last post on it was that those who counter it have no tolerance for my beliefs or opinions, but demand "tolerance" from me and go even further and demand acceptance and agreement of their beliefs and opinions.....
Quote from: J70 on February 24, 2014, 05:00:58 PM
I couldn't give a shite if you like or don't like gay people or other races or ethnicities or whichever in the confines of your head, as long as you don't discriminate against them or oppress them or whatever. That is tolerance.
However, if you're going to get involved in a discussion of these issues, then expect to be challenged to defend your position. You are not entitled to respect of your opinions. Respect and tolerance are different things.
Get a grip sometime discrimination is warranted and necessary. This homophobic card is pathetic, if two grown men want one another let them at it, I couldn't care less as a society we shouldn't allow them to adopt children though it's akin to child abuse.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 05:17:19 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 24, 2014, 05:00:58 PM
I couldn't give a shite if you like or don't like gay people or other races or ethnicities or whichever in the confines of your head, as long as you don't discriminate against them or oppress them or whatever. That is tolerance.
However, if you're going to get involved in a discussion of these issues, then expect to be challenged to defend your position. You are not entitled to respect of your opinions. Respect and tolerance are different things.
Get a grip sometime discrimination is warranted and necessary. This homophobic card is pathetic, if two grown men want one another let them at it, I couldn't care less as a society we shouldn't allow them to adopt children though it's akin to child abuse.
This part I don't understand. Child abuse?? Really??
Firstly do you understand the meaning of abuse?
Secondly how are 2 men less capable of rearing children in a loving way than anyone else who is raising a child?
Yes I understand that a mother is important for a child but there are many many children who grow up without one and do just fine and you have no evidence to suggest that not having a mother is some kind of abuse!!!
It's probably the most ridiculous/ignorant statement I've seen on here to be fair!
You have the right to practice your religious beliefs in whatever way they dictate,as long as those practices do not infringe the basic human rights of other members of society. So you can work in the local shop all day,
thinking that you disapprove of the gay couple up the road as much as you want. However, the minute you try to implement your beliefs by refusing to serve them because of their lifestyle, you have violated the the social contact that binds us all as citizens in a modern democracy, and you lose my support immediately.
On the other hand, if you truly tolerated them (look up the definiton -
to permit without repugnance was one good one) then you wouldn't be bothered either way, and you also wouldn't ask the following
Quote from: The Iceman on February 24, 2014, 05:14:46 PM
I have not oppressed or discriminated against anyone. Would you stand up for discrimination against me and my religious beliefs and the right to practice them?
So in a country that is still overwhelmingly Christian/Catholic, you're asking who will defend your Catholic/Christian view? Classic conservative three card trick.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 05:17:19 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 24, 2014, 05:00:58 PM
I couldn't give a shite if you like or don't like gay people or other races or ethnicities or whichever in the confines of your head, as long as you don't discriminate against them or oppress them or whatever. That is tolerance.
However, if you're going to get involved in a discussion of these issues, then expect to be challenged to defend your position. You are not entitled to respect of your opinions. Respect and tolerance are different things.
Get a grip sometime discrimination is warranted and necessary. This homophobic card is pathetic, if two grown men want one another let them at it, I couldn't care less as a society we shouldn't allow them to adopt children though it's akin to child abuse.
Yeah you've said that before about child abuse.
Are you going to make your case this time?
Quote from: The Iceman on February 24, 2014, 05:14:46 PM
I have not oppressed or discriminated against anyone. Would you stand up for discrimination against me and my religious beliefs and the right to practice them?
I also didn't ask you to respect my opinions. My point from the outset was to question the motives for coming out and why it was even necessary. I was asking more than telling but the usual suspects jumped on it and turned it into something else.
I also don't have to accept or respect the tangents that the thread went off on and some of the crazy arguments on both sides.
I can and have always defended my position. My last post on it was that those who counter it have no tolerance for my beliefs or opinions, but demand "tolerance" from me and go even further and demand acceptance and agreement of their beliefs and opinions.....
I will stand up for your religious beliefs up until the point where they adversely impact on others. If your religion tells you to discriminate against gays, I cannot defend you putting those beliefs into practice. Same for teaching creationism or trying to get contraceptives banned or preventing girls from getting educated or refusing medical treatment for your child or donning a suicide vest etc. etc.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 05:17:19 PM
we shouldn't allow them to adopt children though it's akin to child abuse.
Are you saying that your preference on what to do with your genitalia is the key factor is deciding whether you are fit to adopt / raise kids?
or are you saying that adopting kids is a form of child abuse?
your opinion is quite amazing to me, and quite entertaining too - please keep it up. If you could take a moment to give us a few lines that explain your views about hole banging I would love to read it as I'm having a crappy day and your posts have a tendency to make me laugh.
Quote from: J70 on February 24, 2014, 05:35:33 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 24, 2014, 05:14:46 PM
I have not oppressed or discriminated against anyone. Would you stand up for discrimination against me and my religious beliefs and the right to practice them?
I also didn't ask you to respect my opinions. My point from the outset was to question the motives for coming out and why it was even necessary. I was asking more than telling but the usual suspects jumped on it and turned it into something else.
I also don't have to accept or respect the tangents that the thread went off on and some of the crazy arguments on both sides.
I can and have always defended my position. My last post on it was that those who counter it have no tolerance for my beliefs or opinions, but demand "tolerance" from me and go even further and demand acceptance and agreement of their beliefs and opinions.....
I will stand up for your religious beliefs up until the point where they adversely impact on others. If your religion tells you to discriminate against gays, I cannot defend you putting those beliefs into practice. Same for teaching creationism or trying to get contraceptives banned or preventing girls from getting educated or refusing medical treatment for your child or donning a suicide vest etc. etc.
Firstly the Catholic Church does not tell anyone to discriminant against Gay people. If you think they do then that's a grave misunderstanding and one I think the Church is attempting to reconcile (see Pope Francis).
This is definitely another thread but how does teaching Creationism in a Catholic school adversely impact others? Or lobbying against contraception and promoting sex only inside of sacramental marriage? Or campaigning to attend abortion and protect all life?
From the above it would seem that you are willing to let me have my opinions and beliefs and practice them as long as they don't counter with yours? but what if your's counter with mine? Or are you the only one who is right? Which goes back to my point about the tolerance of intolerance.....
Quote from: The Iceman on February 24, 2014, 06:10:59 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 24, 2014, 05:35:33 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 24, 2014, 05:14:46 PM
I have not oppressed or discriminated against anyone. Would you stand up for discrimination against me and my religious beliefs and the right to practice them?
I also didn't ask you to respect my opinions. My point from the outset was to question the motives for coming out and why it was even necessary. I was asking more than telling but the usual suspects jumped on it and turned it into something else.
I also don't have to accept or respect the tangents that the thread went off on and some of the crazy arguments on both sides.
I can and have always defended my position. My last post on it was that those who counter it have no tolerance for my beliefs or opinions, but demand "tolerance" from me and go even further and demand acceptance and agreement of their beliefs and opinions.....
I will stand up for your religious beliefs up until the point where they adversely impact on others. If your religion tells you to discriminate against gays, I cannot defend you putting those beliefs into practice. Same for teaching creationism or trying to get contraceptives banned or preventing girls from getting educated or refusing medical treatment for your child or donning a suicide vest etc. etc.
Firstly the Catholic Church does not tell anyone to discriminant against Gay people. If you think they do then that's a grave misunderstanding and one I think the Church is attempting to reconcile (see Pope Francis).
This is definitely another thread but how does teaching Creationism in a Catholic school adversely impact others? Or lobbying against contraception and promoting sex only inside of sacramental marriage? Or campaigning to attend abortion and protect all life?
From the above it would seem that you are willing to let me have my opinions and beliefs and practice them as long as they don't counter with yours? but what if your's counter with mine? Or are you the only one who is right? Which goes back to my point about the tolerance of intolerance.....
Oh come on, I would have thought it was plainly obvious I was talking about legislation and wider society, not just the catholic church (I haven't seen many catholic suicide bombers nor heard of catholics refusing blood transfusions for kids). I went to catholic school - I was NOT taught creationism, especially not in science class. It's adverse impact is that it is not science - it equates science with superstition and throws logic, reason and evidence, the cornerstones of science our the window. Society is ignorant enough about science and critical thinking without encouraging the wider teaching of creationism. And preach all you want about contraception, but the moment you get it made unavailable to me through legislation, that's when you lose my support for your religious views. If you want to forgo rubbers, no one is holding a gun to your head, but stay the f**k out of my bedroom.
Quote from: J70 on February 24, 2014, 06:36:33 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 24, 2014, 06:10:59 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 24, 2014, 05:35:33 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 24, 2014, 05:14:46 PM
I have not oppressed or discriminated against anyone. Would you stand up for discrimination against me and my religious beliefs and the right to practice them?
I also didn't ask you to respect my opinions. My point from the outset was to question the motives for coming out and why it was even necessary. I was asking more than telling but the usual suspects jumped on it and turned it into something else.
I also don't have to accept or respect the tangents that the thread went off on and some of the crazy arguments on both sides.
I can and have always defended my position. My last post on it was that those who counter it have no tolerance for my beliefs or opinions, but demand "tolerance" from me and go even further and demand acceptance and agreement of their beliefs and opinions.....
I will stand up for your religious beliefs up until the point where they adversely impact on others. If your religion tells you to discriminate against gays, I cannot defend you putting those beliefs into practice. Same for teaching creationism or trying to get contraceptives banned or preventing girls from getting educated or refusing medical treatment for your child or donning a suicide vest etc. etc.
Firstly the Catholic Church does not tell anyone to discriminant against Gay people. If you think they do then that's a grave misunderstanding and one I think the Church is attempting to reconcile (see Pope Francis).
This is definitely another thread but how does teaching Creationism in a Catholic school adversely impact others? Or lobbying against contraception and promoting sex only inside of sacramental marriage? Or campaigning to attend abortion and protect all life?
From the above it would seem that you are willing to let me have my opinions and beliefs and practice them as long as they don't counter with yours? but what if your's counter with mine? Or are you the only one who is right? Which goes back to my point about the tolerance of intolerance.....
Oh come on, I would have thought it was plainly obvious I was talking about legislation and wider society, not just the catholic church (I haven't seen many catholic suicide bombers nor heard of catholics refusing blood transfusions for kids). I went to catholic school - I was NOT taught creationism, especially not in science class. It's adverse impact is that it is not science - it equates science with superstition and throws logic, reason and evidence, the cornerstones of science our the window. And preach all you want about contraception, but the moment you get it made unavailable to me through legislation, that's when you lose my support for your religious views. If you want to forgo rubbers, no one is holding a gun to your head, but stay the f**k out of my bedroom.
Again though this is all your personal preference and opinion. So mine are only ok while they work in agreement or accordance with yours but I don't have the same liberty? The tolerance of intolerance strikes again :)
"Many psychologists and psychiatrists have demonstrated that there is no relation between celibacy and pedophilia," the Italian cardinal said. "But many others have demonstrated, I have been told recently, that there is a relation between homosexuality and pedophilia. That is true. That is the problem."
Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Holy See's secretary of state 2010
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/religion/2010-04-14-catholic-gay_N.htm (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/religion/2010-04-14-catholic-gay_N.htm)
Basic misconception on what tolerance is - you do not believe in abortion, you are entitled to live your life that way, ask your family to do the same, try to influence your friends etc. What you are not allowed to do is limit anyone elses right to live to different values.
I grant you that abortion is more complex, given that the traditional religious belief is that the feotus is a viable life fro conception and by limiting abortion you are upholding the basic right to life of that foetus.
But the last I heard, in the Republic abortion is not freely available, as it is the democratic will of the people to have limited access to it, and the people have been asked on numerous occasions. As for NI, if you disagree with the staus quo, you have the democratic right to work for change. That does not entitle you to block clinics, threaten medical staff or in the most extreme cases in America, kill doctors.
The attitude you display in your posts is one of persecution - which as i said above is a classic conservative trick - you are (I assume) a heterosexual Catholic, who is free to practice his religion, free to marry whatever woman you wish, free to adopt children if you wish. free to send them to a school with a religous ethos if you wish, free to hold hands on a night out with the person you love without wondering if someone is going to smash your head in because of it.
Perhaps when we've finished getting justice for people who truly need it in our society, we can look at the needs of people whose idea of discrimination is not being free to discriminate.
Child abuse can take many forms, I am in no way stating that the child is in any sexual danger any more so that with heterosexual parents. Society is cruel especially kids cruel to one another, will the child be brought up with certain views because his mummy and daddy are men, off course they will. Will the child's parenting be accepted on a social level among his peers of course it will, they will neither be bullied or abused about because everyone in society now knows it's the norm to be gay. Some of you boys would need to cop on a PC world is OK but when you are leaving a child open to years of torment and victimization because some government official thought Billy and Peter would be great dads you would need to get a grip. And as for the evidence crew, we all grew up and know what kids are like unless you lead a very sheltered life, where's the decades of research to show that two men adopting a child does them any good. In fairness to Elton John his children will never be in proper society , their proper society is probably everyone has for or five daddy's!
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 06:51:14 PM
Child abuse can take many forms, I am in no way stating that the child is in any sexual danger any more so that with heterosexual parents. Society is cruel especially kids cruel to one another, will the child be brought up with certain views because his mummy and daddy are men, off course they will. Will the child's parenting be accepted on a social level among his peers of course it will, they will neither be bullied or abused about because everyone in society now knows it's the norm to be gay. Some of you boys would need to cop on a PC world is OK but when you are leaving a child open to years of torment and victimization because some government official thought Billy and Peter would be great dads you would need to get a grip. And as for the evidence crew, we all grew up and know what kids are like unless you lead a very sheltered life, where's the decades of research to show that two men adopting a child does them any good. In fairness to Elton John his children will never be in proper society , their proper society is probably everyone has for or five daddy's!
So leave them in the orphanage?
Quote from: The Iceman on February 24, 2014, 06:40:22 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 24, 2014, 06:36:33 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 24, 2014, 06:10:59 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 24, 2014, 05:35:33 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on February 24, 2014, 05:14:46 PM
I have not oppressed or discriminated against anyone. Would you stand up for discrimination against me and my religious beliefs and the right to practice them?
I also didn't ask you to respect my opinions. My point from the outset was to question the motives for coming out and why it was even necessary. I was asking more than telling but the usual suspects jumped on it and turned it into something else.
I also don't have to accept or respect the tangents that the thread went off on and some of the crazy arguments on both sides.
I can and have always defended my position. My last post on it was that those who counter it have no tolerance for my beliefs or opinions, but demand "tolerance" from me and go even further and demand acceptance and agreement of their beliefs and opinions.....
I will stand up for your religious beliefs up until the point where they adversely impact on others. If your religion tells you to discriminate against gays, I cannot defend you putting those beliefs into practice. Same for teaching creationism or trying to get contraceptives banned or preventing girls from getting educated or refusing medical treatment for your child or donning a suicide vest etc. etc.
Firstly the Catholic Church does not tell anyone to discriminant against Gay people. If you think they do then that's a grave misunderstanding and one I think the Church is attempting to reconcile (see Pope Francis).
This is definitely another thread but how does teaching Creationism in a Catholic school adversely impact others? Or lobbying against contraception and promoting sex only inside of sacramental marriage? Or campaigning to attend abortion and protect all life?
From the above it would seem that you are willing to let me have my opinions and beliefs and practice them as long as they don't counter with yours? but what if your's counter with mine? Or are you the only one who is right? Which goes back to my point about the tolerance of intolerance.....
Oh come on, I would have thought it was plainly obvious I was talking about legislation and wider society, not just the catholic church (I haven't seen many catholic suicide bombers nor heard of catholics refusing blood transfusions for kids). I went to catholic school - I was NOT taught creationism, especially not in science class. It's adverse impact is that it is not science - it equates science with superstition and throws logic, reason and evidence, the cornerstones of science our the window. And preach all you want about contraception, but the moment you get it made unavailable to me through legislation, that's when you lose my support for your religious views. If you want to forgo rubbers, no one is holding a gun to your head, but stay the f**k out of my bedroom.
Again though this is all your personal preference and opinion. So mine are only ok while they work in agreement or accordance with yours but I don't have the same liberty? The tolerance of intolerance strikes again :)
If wanting science taught in science class, contraceptives for sale in the shops, children not denied medical attention by misguided parents etc.etc. is classed as intolerant, then I guess I am intolerant. All that proves is that not everything is worthy of being tolerated! :)
Quote from: muppet on February 24, 2014, 06:55:08 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 06:51:14 PM
Child abuse can take many forms, I am in no way stating that the child is in any sexual danger any more so that with heterosexual parents. Society is cruel especially kids cruel to one another, will the child be brought up with certain views because his mummy and daddy are men, off course they will. Will the child's parenting be accepted on a social level among his peers of course it will, they will neither be bullied or abused about because everyone in society now knows it's the norm to be gay. Some of you boys would need to cop on a PC world is OK but when you are leaving a child open to years of torment and victimization because some government official thought Billy and Peter would be great dads you would need to get a grip. And as for the evidence crew, we all grew up and know what kids are like unless you lead a very sheltered life, where's the decades of research to show that two men adopting a child does them any good. In fairness to Elton John his children will never be in proper society , their proper society is probably everyone has for or five daddy's!
So leave them in the orphanage?
As opposed to having them adopted by gays, then yes.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 05:17:19 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 24, 2014, 05:00:58 PM
I couldn't give a shite if you like or don't like gay people or other races or ethnicities or whichever in the confines of your head, as long as you don't discriminate against them or oppress them or whatever. That is tolerance.
However, if you're going to get involved in a discussion of these issues, then expect to be challenged to defend your position. You are not entitled to respect of your opinions. Respect and tolerance are different things.
Get a grip sometime discrimination is warranted and necessary. This homophobic card is pathetic, if two grown men want to bang the hole of one another let them at it, I couldn't care less as a society we shouldn't allow them to adopt children though it's akin to child abuse.
+1
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 06:51:14 PM
Child abuse can take many forms, I am in no way stating that the child is in any sexual danger any more so that with heterosexual parents. Society is cruel especially kids cruel to one another, will the child be brought up with certain views because his mummy and daddy are men, off course they will. Will the child's parenting be accepted on a social level among his peers of course it will, they will neither be bullied or abused about because everyone in society now knows it's the norm to be gay. Some of you boys would need to cop on a PC world is OK but when you are leaving a child open to years of torment and victimization because some government official thought Billy and Peter would be great dads you would need to get a grip. And as for the evidence crew, we all grew up and know what kids are like unless you lead a very sheltered life, where's the decades of research to show that two men adopting a child does them any good. In fairness to Elton John his children will never be in proper society , their proper society is probably everyone has for or five daddy's!
By that standard, we shouldn't have interracial marriage because kids might be bullied. Or people shouldn't move countries so their kids won't have a different accent or skin colour. Or catholic kids shouldn't be mixed with protestant. Kids will always find differences,.real or otherwise, to exploit. It's up to parents to teach their kids right from wrong.
Where's the research showing the harm suffered by children of same sex parents?
some of us boys don't live near you, and some of us boys have kids over visiting regularly who have 2 mommies and some have 2 daddies, and some of us boys couldn't give a shit. Some of us boys have kids visiting that have different coloured skin from us, and some who believe in very different Gods than others, or even none at all and none gives a shit about that either. But on their behalf, I thank you for your interest in the prevention of their bullying (torment and victimization) in advance, they are all very grateful for your concern and would direct you here for some of your very needy scientific and peer approved academic background that your substantial research has failed to turn up to this point
http://www.apa.org/about/policy/parenting.aspx
If you have any concerns with the big words please don't hesitate to reach out.
in case there are too may words there let me give you the gist of it;
QuoteOverall, results of research suggest that the development, adjustment, and well-being of children with lesbian and gay parents do not differ markedly from that of children with heterosexual parents.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 06:51:14 PM
In fairness to Elton John his children will never be in proper society , their proper society is probably everyone has for or five daddy's!
Anything brought up by thon two fruitcakes can't be normal.
Quote from: BennyCake on February 24, 2014, 07:10:28 PM
Anything brought up by thon two fruitcakes can't be normal.
And I would imagine your kids are going to turn into well rounded and well adjusted human beings despite you, or maybe just to spite you, you never know...
Quote from: BennyCake on February 24, 2014, 06:58:49 PM
Quote from: muppet on February 24, 2014, 06:55:08 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 06:51:14 PM
Child abuse can take many forms, I am in no way stating that the child is in any sexual danger any more so that with heterosexual parents. Society is cruel especially kids cruel to one another, will the child be brought up with certain views because his mummy and daddy are men, off course they will. Will the child's parenting be accepted on a social level among his peers of course it will, they will neither be bullied or abused about because everyone in society now knows it's the norm to be gay. Some of you boys would need to cop on a PC world is OK but when you are leaving a child open to years of torment and victimization because some government official thought Billy and Peter would be great dads you would need to get a grip. And as for the evidence crew, we all grew up and know what kids are like unless you lead a very sheltered life, where's the decades of research to show that two men adopting a child does them any good. In fairness to Elton John his children will never be in proper society , their proper society is probably everyone has for or five daddy's!
So leave them in the orphanage?
As opposed to having them adopted by gays, then yes.
But the argument against the Gay parents was "you are leaving a child open to years of torment", presumably from ignorant children that are somehow innately homophobic. Leaving the child parentless in an orphanage, when a loving couple is available & willing to adopt, to my mind is far greater abuse.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 05:17:19 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 24, 2014, 05:00:58 PM
I couldn't give a shite if you like or don't like gay people or other races or ethnicities or whichever in the confines of your head, as long as you don't discriminate against them or oppress them or whatever. That is tolerance.
However, if you're going to get involved in a discussion of these issues, then expect to be challenged to defend your position. You are not entitled to respect of your opinions. Respect and tolerance are different things.
Get a grip sometime discrimination is warranted and necessary. This homophobic card is pathetic, if two grown men want one another let them at it, I couldn't care less as a society we shouldn't allow them to adopt children though it's akin to child abuse.
Out of interest, why do you regularly use language such as this when you are talking about homosexuality?
Quote from: michaelg on February 24, 2014, 07:16:35 PM
Out of interest, why do you regularly use language such as this when you are talking about homosexuality?
Thought some interesting peer reviewed scientific research would help here :
QuoteSTUDY: HOMOPHOBIA IS OFTEN A SIGN OF LATENT HOMOSEXUALITY
APRIL 9, 2012
Although it may seem obvious to many, it's promising to see that research is being done on this timely subject. Conducted by a team from the University of Rochester, the University of Essex, England, and the University of California in Santa Barbara, the findings from this study (Parental Autonomy Support and Discrepancies Between Implicit and Explicit Sexual Identities: Dynamics of Self-acceptance and Defense) will be published the April issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
The intention of the study was to examine the role that both parenting and sexual orientation play in the formation of intense and visceral fear and hatred of gay people, including self-reported homophobic attitudes, discriminatory bias, implicit hostility towards gays, and endorsement of anti-gay policies.
The findings? Homophobia is more prevalent in people who have an unacknowledged attraction to the same sex and who grew up with authoritarian parents who openly criticized LGBT people and culture. "Individuals who identify as straight but in psychological tests show a strong attraction to the same sex may be threatened by gays and lesbians because homosexuals remind them of similar tendencies within themselves," said Dr. Netta Weinstein, from the University of Essex and the study's lead author.
"In many cases these are people who are at war with themselves and they are turning this internal conflict outward," said co-author Dr. Richard Ryan, the professor of psychology at the University of Rochester.
The study's findings bring new empirical evidence to the table that supports the psychoanalytic theory that the fear, anxiety, and aversion that many seemingly heterosexual people hold toward gays and lesbians actually stems from their own repressed same-sex attractions and desires.
http://www.revelandriot.com/study-homophobia-is-often-a-sign-of-latent-homosexuality-86569
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 06:51:14 PM
Child abuse can take many forms, I am in no way stating that the child is in any sexual danger any more so that with heterosexual parents. Society is cruel especially kids cruel to one another, will the child be brought up with certain views because his mummy and daddy are men, off course they will. Will the child's parenting be accepted on a social level among his peers of course it will, they will neither be bullied or abused about because everyone in society now knows it's the norm to be gay. Some of you boys would need to cop on a PC world is OK but when you are leaving a child open to years of torment and victimization because some government official thought Billy and Peter would be great dads you would need to get a grip. And as for the evidence crew, we all grew up and know what kids are like unless you lead a very sheltered life, where's the decades of research to show that two men adopting a child does them any good. In fairness to Elton John his children will never be in proper society , their proper society is probably everyone has for or five daddy's!
Yes, society is cruel. You're demonstrating that perfectly. I don't know whether or not you have children, but if you do, and your opinions rub off on them, then they'll be the cruel kids you speak of. That makes you the problem.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 06:51:14 PM
Child abuse can take many forms, I am in no way stating that the child is in any sexual danger any more so that with heterosexual parents. Society is cruel especially kids cruel to one another, will the child be brought up with certain views because his mummy and daddy are men, off course they will. Will the child's parenting be accepted on a social level among his peers of course it will, they will neither be bullied or abused about because everyone in society now knows it's the norm to be gay. Some of you boys would need to cop on a PC world is OK but when you are leaving a child open to years of torment and victimization because some government official thought Billy and Peter would be great dads you would need to get a grip.
Saw a great one the other day, can't find the image so I'm going to post the text:
"Instead of preventing gays from adopting kids for fear that they'll be bullied, try telling your shitty little kids to stop being bullies."
If someone is going to be bullied because of what their parents are, the responsibility for that lies with the parents of the bullies, not the gay parents of the victim.
QuoteAnd as for the evidence crew, we all grew up and know what kids are like unless you lead a very sheltered life, where's the decades of research to show that two men adopting a child does them any good. In fairness to Elton John his children will never be in proper society , their proper society is probably everyone has for or five daddy's!
Aside from you using the word "evidence" as a pejorative, let me tell you a story about some of the sights I used to see around England. I saw teenage mothers in tracksuits standing around the shopping centre all day, you couldn't get moving for prams. "Pram jams" I called them.
I saw girls having a fight where one of them used their pram (with a child in it) as a battering ram to hit another girl.
I saw children tripping and falling only for their mothers to start screaming "F***ing stupid! Get up!"
I saw a child getting up to walk a few yards on a low wall beside the footpath (as children often do) only for the mother to turn around and roar "Get down off there you f***ing dickhead!"
I saw children minding their own business only to be smacked upside the head for no reason.
I saw all manner of abuse meted out to these children in Salford every single day, and it's a good bet that their parents were straight, not gay. So. Do we ban straight people from having children? In fact, do we put any controls on who can and cannot have children based on their parenting ability?
There's plenty of reasons why people shouldn't be allowed to have childer, and there's plenty of factors in what makes someone a good or bad parent, out the sexual orientation of the parents is not one of them.
By the way, have you seen this first hand account of what it's like to be raised by gay parents (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMLZO-sObzQ)?
A Republican Lobbyist Is Trying To Get Gay Football Players Banned From The NFL
WASHINGTON -- A Republican lobbyist is preparing legislation that would ban gay athletes from playing in the National Football League, a move he says is necessary to prevent American society from sliding into indecency.
Jack Burkman, the CEO of Burkman LLC, said Monday that he would push Republican lawmakers to support the measure, which he put together after college football star Michael Sam announced that he is gay. In an interview with The Huffington Post, Burkman insisted that five members of the House of Representatives and one senator are interested in co-sponsoring the bill, and that those numbers would rise to 36 and five, respectively, within three weeks. Notably, he declined to name any of the lawmakers in question.
The absence of any actual details -- from the language of the bill to the names of potential supporters -- gave the announcement the unmistakable whiff of a publicity stunt. Burkman's own public relations firm broke the news of the legislation. Beyond his motive, however, is a larger question: Why would Burkman even bother? Sam's announcement was met with widespread support. Why should Congress create a conflict where, for the most part, one doesn't exist?
Even Burkman concedes that conservatives like himself are supposed to find it abhorrent when the government tells a private business how to conduct its affairs.
"However," he added, "there are times when that is trumped for reason of great urgency or necessity. And I think this is it, because I see the society sliding in the wrong direction."
"I felt that if the NFL doesn't have any morals, and people like [Commissioner] Roger Goodell, who are just go-along-get-along guys, just want to appease advertisers, appease corporate America and all that stuff," he said, "I figured, well, it is time for conservatives in Congress to step in and define morality for them."
But the slope is slippery and filled with intolerance. Burkman expressed particular concern about the possibility of a gay man disrupting the delicate equilibrium of a locker room. Does that extend to congressional locker rooms? Should openly gay politicians be prohibited from serving in Congress since, after all, lawmakers share gyms there?
"That is up to Congress," Burkman said.
Would Burkman be fine with openly gay men playing in the NFL if they used separate bathrooms from straight players?
"That would be a start," he said.
And what about the obvious historical parallel to the era when Major League Baseball prohibited black ballplayers from taking the field?
"That is a completely different thing, a different issue. Race, skin color, have nothing to do with it," Burkman said. "This is not about bigotry. It is about common decency and civility. Society is moving to a point where we are going to have unisex bathrooms and the next generation thinks that is OK."
Burkman's bill, if it's ever actually introduced, stands no chance of passage. Just imagine the laugh President Barack Obama would have if it somehow made its way to his desk.
But the fact that he sees it as a potential fault line -- he floated the possibility of the bill being used by a Republican primary challenger to pluck off the incumbent -- suggests that GOP operatives anticipate some sort of a social conservative backlash and wouldn't mind profiting from it. Burkman isn't a no-name lobbyist. Though he appears on cable news less frequently these days than he used to, his firm had a big growth in clients this past year.
He is also not necessarily the best person to wage a fight over decency and morality. A few years back, his name was reportedly found on the D.C. madam's list of clients of high-end prostitutes.
"The story simply was false," he said. "I'll say what I said on the air at the time. It is simply a false story. The numbers listed were never mine. It was planted by somebody in the liberal blog world."
"My life has been far from perfect. I am hardly any type of embodiment of moral perfection," he added. "But I have never let that stop me from doing what I think is right for the nation."
For someone so fearful of a gay player entering an NFL locker room, one might be surprised by Burkman's claim that he has gay friends. He can't figure out how they will react to his new venture.
"I think they would respect it," he said. "I would hope that they would respect that a person is doing what he thinks is good public policy and doing what he thinks is right for the country."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/24/ban-gays-nfl_n_4849250.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063
Quote from: muppet on February 24, 2014, 06:55:08 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 06:51:14 PM
Child abuse can take many forms, I am in no way stating that the child is in any sexual danger any more so that with heterosexual parents. Society is cruel especially kids cruel to one another, will the child be brought up with certain views because his mummy and daddy are men, off course they will. Will the child's parenting be accepted on a social level among his peers of course it will, they will neither be bullied or abused about because everyone in society now knows it's the norm to be gay. Some of you boys would need to cop on a PC world is OK but when you are leaving a child open to years of torment and victimization because some government official thought Billy and Peter would be great dads you would need to get a grip. And as for the evidence crew, we all grew up and know what kids are like unless you lead a very sheltered life, where's the decades of research to show that two men adopting a child does them any good. In fairness to Elton John his children will never be in proper society , their proper society is probably everyone has for or five daddy's!
So leave them in the orphanage?
So hand them out to anyone who wants them?
Quote from: J70 on February 24, 2014, 07:02:43 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 06:51:14 PM
Child abuse can take many forms, I am in no way stating that the child is in any sexual danger any more so that with heterosexual parents. Society is cruel especially kids cruel to one another, will the child be brought up with certain views because his mummy and daddy are men, off course they will. Will the child's parenting be accepted on a social level among his peers of course it will, they will neither be bullied or abused about because everyone in society now knows it's the norm to be gay. Some of you boys would need to cop on a PC world is OK but when you are leaving a child open to years of torment and victimization because some government official thought Billy and Peter would be great dads you would need to get a grip. And as for the evidence crew, we all grew up and know what kids are like unless you lead a very sheltered life, where's the decades of research to show that two men adopting a child does them any good. In fairness to Elton John his children will never be in proper society , their proper society is probably everyone has for or five daddy's!
By that standard, we shouldn't have interracial marriage because kids might be bullied. Or people shouldn't move countries so their kids won't have a different accent or skin colour. Or catholic kids shouldn't be mixed with protestant. Kids will always find differences,.real or otherwise, to exploit. It's up to parents to teach their kids right from wrong.
Where's the research showing the harm suffered by children of same sex parents?
I love the internet warriors, if your son / father / brother told you he was gay on this board you would say you are totally fine with it, if a man approached you in a bar and tried to cop off with you on this board you would say you are fine with that - the reality for all these warriors I suspect would be very different. Where is you research to say gay people adopting kids has been a roaring success with the child suffering no emotional or physical harm?
A parent is a child's role model if mummy and daddy are men what does that teach them!
Quote from: muppet on February 24, 2014, 07:15:34 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on February 24, 2014, 06:58:49 PM
Quote from: muppet on February 24, 2014, 06:55:08 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 06:51:14 PM
Child abuse can take many forms, I am in no way stating that the child is in any sexual danger any more so that with heterosexual parents. Society is cruel especially kids cruel to one another, will the child be brought up with certain views because his mummy and daddy are men, off course they will. Will the child's parenting be accepted on a social level among his peers of course it will, they will neither be bullied or abused about because everyone in society now knows it's the norm to be gay. Some of you boys would need to cop on a PC world is OK but when you are leaving a child open to years of torment and victimization because some government official thought Billy and Peter would be great dads you would need to get a grip. And as for the evidence crew, we all grew up and know what kids are like unless you lead a very sheltered life, where's the decades of research to show that two men adopting a child does them any good. In fairness to Elton John his children will never be in proper society , their proper society is probably everyone has for or five daddy's!
So leave them in the orphanage?
As opposed to having them adopted by gays, then yes.
But the argument against the Gay parents was "you are leaving a child open to years of torment", presumably from ignorant children that are somehow innately homophobic. Leaving the child parentless in an orphanage, when a loving couple is available & willing to adopt, to my mind is far greater abuse.
There is no mother - loving couple my hole what maternal instincts and emotional help will two gay men be to a child, oh that's right they probably are women born into men's bodies, Jesus wept!
Quote from: michaelg on February 24, 2014, 07:16:35 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 05:17:19 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 24, 2014, 05:00:58 PM
I couldn't give a shite if you like or don't like gay people or other races or ethnicities or whichever in the confines of your head, as long as you don't discriminate against them or oppress them or whatever. That is tolerance.
However, if you're going to get involved in a discussion of these issues, then expect to be challenged to defend your position. You are not entitled to respect of your opinions. Respect and tolerance are different things.
Get a grip sometime discrimination is warranted and necessary. This homophobic card is pathetic, if two grown men want one another let them at it, I couldn't care less as a society we shouldn't allow them to adopt children though it's akin to child abuse.
Out of interest, why do you regularly use language such as this when you are talking about homosexuality?
Because it shows it is unnatural, any other questions kid.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 10:06:12 AM
Quote from: muppet on February 24, 2014, 06:55:08 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 06:51:14 PM
Child abuse can take many forms, I am in no way stating that the child is in any sexual danger any more so that with heterosexual parents. Society is cruel especially kids cruel to one another, will the child be brought up with certain views because his mummy and daddy are men, off course they will. Will the child's parenting be accepted on a social level among his peers of course it will, they will neither be bullied or abused about because everyone in society now knows it's the norm to be gay. Some of you boys would need to cop on a PC world is OK but when you are leaving a child open to years of torment and victimization because some government official thought Billy and Peter would be great dads you would need to get a grip. And as for the evidence crew, we all grew up and know what kids are like unless you lead a very sheltered life, where's the decades of research to show that two men adopting a child does them any good. In fairness to Elton John his children will never be in proper society , their proper society is probably everyone has for or five daddy's!
So leave them in the orphanage?
So hand them out to anyone who wants them?
Stupid question! Social services vet all Couples who want to adopt to the nth degree to make sure they will be fit to look after a child... You can't just walk into an orphanage and say "I want that one!"
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 10:10:04 AM
Quote from: J70 on February 24, 2014, 07:02:43 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 06:51:14 PM
Child abuse can take many forms, I am in no way stating that the child is in any sexual danger any more so that with heterosexual parents. Society is cruel especially kids cruel to one another, will the child be brought up with certain views because his mummy and daddy are men, off course they will. Will the child's parenting be accepted on a social level among his peers of course it will, they will neither be bullied or abused about because everyone in society now knows it's the norm to be gay. Some of you boys would need to cop on a PC world is OK but when you are leaving a child open to years of torment and victimization because some government official thought Billy and Peter would be great dads you would need to get a grip. And as for the evidence crew, we all grew up and know what kids are like unless you lead a very sheltered life, where's the decades of research to show that two men adopting a child does them any good. In fairness to Elton John his children will never be in proper society , their proper society is probably everyone has for or five daddy's!
By that standard, we shouldn't have interracial marriage because kids might be bullied. Or people shouldn't move countries so their kids won't have a different accent or skin colour. Or catholic kids shouldn't be mixed with protestant. Kids will always find differences,.real or otherwise, to exploit. It's up to parents to teach their kids right from wrong.
Where's the research showing the harm suffered by children of same sex parents?
I love the internet warriors, if your son / father / brother told you he was gay on this board you would say you are totally fine with it, if a man approached you in a bar and tried to cop off with you on this board you would say you are fine with that - the reality for all these warriors I suspect would be very different. Where is you research to say gay people adopting kids has been a roaring success with the child suffering no emotional or physical harm?
A parent is a child's role model if mummy and daddy are men what does that teach them!
1. You've not addressed my point about the ludicrousness of your "bullying" argument.
2. I WOILD be fine if my son turns out to be gay and I'm bringing him in a manner where he will be comfortable telling me and comfortable with that realization.
3. If someone copped a feel.at a bar, I would tell them to get lost, the same as I would with an unwanted female advance. Strangely enough, despite your apparent fears, its not something that happens a lot. Maybe if you go to gay bars it does, but I don't.
4. On the "internet warrior" pejorative, I suspect you may be projecting a little. Even if not, you're just trying to replace debate with irrelevant bluster to distract from your failing logic.
5.As with any role model or parent, what the child learns depends on the parents themselves. As for the research, I don't have to quote any (but I will certainly try to look it up later) - if you want to discriminate, the onus is on you to provide justification. Vague, half-baked thoughts based on prejudice don't meet that standard.
Quote from: J70 on February 25, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 10:10:04 AM
Quote from: J70 on February 24, 2014, 07:02:43 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 06:51:14 PM
Child abuse can take many forms, I am in no way stating that the child is in any sexual danger any more so that with heterosexual parents. Society is cruel especially kids cruel to one another, will the child be brought up with certain views because his mummy and daddy are men, off course they will. Will the child's parenting be accepted on a social level among his peers of course it will, they will neither be bullied or abused about because everyone in society now knows it's the norm to be gay. Some of you boys would need to cop on a PC world is OK but when you are leaving a child open to years of torment and victimization because some government official thought Billy and Peter would be great dads you would need to get a grip. And as for the evidence crew, we all grew up and know what kids are like unless you lead a very sheltered life, where's the decades of research to show that two men adopting a child does them any good. In fairness to Elton John his children will never be in proper society , their proper society is probably everyone has for or five daddy's!
By that standard, we shouldn't have interracial marriage because kids might be bullied. Or people shouldn't move countries so their kids won't have a different accent or skin colour. Or catholic kids shouldn't be mixed with protestant. Kids will always find differences,.real or otherwise, to exploit. It's up to parents to teach their kids right from wrong.
Where's the research showing the harm suffered by children of same sex parents?
I love the internet warriors, if your son / father / brother told you he was gay on this board you would say you are totally fine with it, if a man approached you in a bar and tried to cop off with you on this board you would say you are fine with that - the reality for all these warriors I suspect would be very different. Where is you research to say gay people adopting kids has been a roaring success with the child suffering no emotional or physical harm?
A parent is a child's role model if mummy and daddy are men what does that teach them!
1. You've not addressed my point about the ludicrousness of your "bullying" argument.
2. I WOILD be fine if my son turns out to be gay and I'm bringing him in a manner where he will be comfortable telling me and comfortable with that realization.
3. If someone copped a feel.at a bar, I would tell them to get lost, the same as I would with an unwanted female advance.
4. On the "internet warrior" pejorative, I suspect you may be projecting a little. Even if not, you're just trying to replace debate with irrelevant bluster to distract from your failing logic.
5.As with any role model or parent, what the child learns depends on the parents themselves. As for the research, I don't have to quote any (but I will certainly try to look it up later) - if you want to discriminate, the onus is on you to provide justification. Vague, half-baked thoughts based on prejudice don't meet that standard.
J70..i woudnt bother engaging with this chap. The constant vile posts that spew from his keyboard shows he isnt worth anymore of your time
Quote from: Cold tea on February 22, 2014, 09:01:54 AM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 22, 2014, 02:16:13 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 21, 2014, 02:52:06 PM
Men being with women, and don't even start me on the child abuse that is two gay men going for adoption, that thing should never be allowed.
I will start you. How is it "child abuse" for gay people to have families?
Gay men to adopt children, if a gay women has a child the child is with their mother. No one can deny the mother is the most important part of the family, a child needs that bond, how can such a bond be prevalent with two men?
So what about adopted kids who dont have either of their parents?
Kids accept their surroundings to be normal, young kids dont see that someone is black, or white, or has one parent or two dads, they just arent programmed that way.
They are influenced by people around them, like you that tell them it isnt right to have two dads
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 10:10:04 AM
Quote from: J70 on February 24, 2014, 07:02:43 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 06:51:14 PM
Child abuse can take many forms, I am in no way stating that the child is in any sexual danger any more so that with heterosexual parents. Society is cruel especially kids cruel to one another, will the child be brought up with certain views because his mummy and daddy are men, off course they will. Will the child's parenting be accepted on a social level among his peers of course it will, they will neither be bullied or abused about because everyone in society now knows it's the norm to be gay. Some of you boys would need to cop on a PC world is OK but when you are leaving a child open to years of torment and victimization because some government official thought Billy and Peter would be great dads you would need to get a grip. And as for the evidence crew, we all grew up and know what kids are like unless you lead a very sheltered life, where's the decades of research to show that two men adopting a child does them any good. In fairness to Elton John his children will never be in proper society , their proper society is probably everyone has for or five daddy's!
By that standard, we shouldn't have interracial marriage because kids might be bullied. Or people shouldn't move countries so their kids won't have a different accent or skin colour. Or catholic kids shouldn't be mixed with protestant. Kids will always find differences,.real or otherwise, to exploit. It's up to parents to teach their kids right from wrong.
Where's the research showing the harm suffered by children of same sex parents?
I love the internet warriors, if your son / father / brother told you he was gay on this board you would say you are totally fine with it, if a man approached you in a bar and tried to cop off with you on this board you would say you are fine with that - the reality for all these warriors I suspect would be very different. Where is you research to say gay people adopting kids has been a roaring success with the child suffering no emotional or physical harm?
A parent is a child's role model if mummy and daddy are men what does that teach them!
What if the dad leaves and it's just the mother? Is that better than 2 gay parents ?
Just for practical things, like.
Cold Tea, your inflammatory language has been reported on this thread. I've edited the posts. You're 100% free to state and defend your opinion, but please stop using deliberately antagonistic or insulting language. Everyone else, please do not resort to insults in response. I've edited a couple of responses too.
Quote from: J70 on February 25, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
2. I WOILD be fine if my son turns out to be gay and I'm bringing him in a manner where he will be comfortable telling me and comfortable with that realization.
I bet you would, and what if your father told you he was gay?
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/anti-gay-law-could-affect-relations-between-ireland-and-uganda-1.1704106
Cold tea must be on his way to Uganda.
Threads like this will just go round in circles. People will have very strong views one way or the other and it is highly unlikely that a nameless internet forum will change peoples views. The best thing to do on this subject is agree to disagree.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 20, 2014, 06:47:23 PM
I think the point of gay pride and the 'coming out' business is for it to become so commonplace that in future we'll return* to a time when it'll be considered no big deal what your sexual preferences are. Nobody will have to 'come out' because they won't feel any pressure to be 'in' in the first place. Gay pride parades are an act of defiance in cultures where homosexual or bisexual behaviour is or was suppressed, and I think the intention of them is to let gay people know that there's no need to stay in the closet. It's like the atheist billboards doing the rounds in America at the minute reassuring atheists in religiously-dominated areas that it's okay to be an atheist and that they're not alone.
* Yes, return to a time when it's no big deal. The idea that there's something wrong with homosexual behaviour is a relatively recent invention. In ancient Rome and ancient Greece nobody gave a toss.
Bad choice off words. ;D Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
Neither is going to Mass.
Quote from: ludermor on February 25, 2014, 03:20:17 PM
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/anti-gay-law-could-affect-relations-between-ireland-and-uganda-1.1704106
Cold tea must be on his way to Uganda.
He could run for public office.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 10:11:41 AM
Quote from: muppet on February 24, 2014, 07:15:34 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on February 24, 2014, 06:58:49 PM
Quote from: muppet on February 24, 2014, 06:55:08 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 06:51:14 PM
Child abuse can take many forms, I am in no way stating that the child is in any sexual danger any more so that with heterosexual parents. Society is cruel especially kids cruel to one another, will the child be brought up with certain views because his mummy and daddy are men, off course they will. Will the child's parenting be accepted on a social level among his peers of course it will, they will neither be bullied or abused about because everyone in society now knows it's the norm to be gay. Some of you boys would need to cop on a PC world is OK but when you are leaving a child open to years of torment and victimization because some government official thought Billy and Peter would be great dads you would need to get a grip. And as for the evidence crew, we all grew up and know what kids are like unless you lead a very sheltered life, where's the decades of research to show that two men adopting a child does them any good. In fairness to Elton John his children will never be in proper society , their proper society is probably everyone has for or five daddy's!
So leave them in the orphanage?
As opposed to having them adopted by gays, then yes.
But the argument against the Gay parents was "you are leaving a child open to years of torment", presumably from ignorant children that are somehow innately homophobic. Leaving the child parentless in an orphanage, when a loving couple is available & willing to adopt, to my mind is far greater abuse.
There is no mother - loving couple my hole what maternal instincts and emotional help will two gay men be to a child, oh that's right they probably are women born into men's bodies, Jesus wept!
If anything happened my missus (God forbid) then I would like to think I, as a man, would be able to still provide a loving, supportive role for my child with plenty of emotional help. Don't think I would hand him in to the authorities and say that I, as a man, don't have the maternal instincts to look after this child so he's better off in an orphanage. Plenty of single men have bought up kids - I don't get your logic that two men are incapable.
In your highly educated opinion, can a single man bring up a kid?
In my short time as a parent I've heard the phrase "it takes a village to raise a child" and that really rings true for me. My wife and I need as much help as possible to raise our kids (4) and we don't have a lot of family around so we rely on friends. Regardless if you rely on friends or family the child needs the example, support and teaching from multiple sources. I love to see the wee lads with their Irish Granda - it warms the heart.
I think two men could raise a child. But I think they'd do a better job with the village model (insert the village people joke here). Kids need a Mother in their lives - they do. If two gay men are going to adopt and raise a child they need to have a strong female around to provide at least a bit of that Motherly nurturing.
None of this is ideal for me. Just like single parents and broken homes and kids passed around from care facility to care facility - it's not the traditional family I stand for. I'm not saying it doesn't or it can't work. But I'll chose the traditional family over the "modern" family every time.
Broken homes and absent fathers seems to be at the crux of a lot of societies problems. It's all happening on our watch.....
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 01:32:50 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 25, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
2. I WOILD be fine if my son turns out to be gay and I'm bringing him in a manner where he will be comfortable telling me and comfortable with that realization.
I bet you would, and what if your father told you he was gay?
Your scepticism is due to your judging other people by your standards.
Quote from: EC Unique on February 25, 2014, 03:35:34 PM
Threads like this will just go round in circles. People will have very strong views one way or the other and it is highly unlikely that a nameless internet forum will change peoples views. The best thing to do on this subject is agree to disagree.
No, the best thing to do is challenge narrow and prejudiced views. And to continue to do so.
A very well known GAA journalist, formerly of a very traditional family arrangement, is up before the courts now on a very serious charge.
Not good for his kids. I think GLBT people get a lot of unwarranted flak and that straight family life is not necessarily always all it is cracked up to be. An awful lot of innocent women were persecuted in Ireland in previous generations because they didn't conform to what others felt was respectable.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/you/article-2451155/Philomena-Lee-To-think-nuns-told-son-searching-me.html
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 10:12:34 AM
Because it shows it is unnatural, any other questions kid.
*Headdesk*
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 01:32:50 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 25, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
2. I WOILD be fine if my son turns out to be gay and I'm bringing him in a manner where he will be comfortable telling me and comfortable with that realization.
I bet you would, and what if your father told you he was gay?
I would be heartbroken for him and my mother. For him because the society from which he came forced him to deny his sexuality. For my mother obviously because she married a confused, repressed gay man.
Any other abusive retorts?
Quote from: BennyHarp on February 25, 2014, 04:12:48 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 10:11:41 AM
Quote from: muppet on February 24, 2014, 07:15:34 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on February 24, 2014, 06:58:49 PM
Quote from: muppet on February 24, 2014, 06:55:08 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 06:51:14 PM
Child abuse can take many forms, I am in no way stating that the child is in any sexual danger any more so that with heterosexual parents. Society is cruel especially kids cruel to one another, will the child be brought up with certain views because his mummy and daddy are men, off course they will. Will the child's parenting be accepted on a social level among his peers of course it will, they will neither be bullied or abused about because everyone in society now knows it's the norm to be gay. Some of you boys would need to cop on a PC world is OK but when you are leaving a child open to years of torment and victimization because some government official thought Billy and Peter would be great dads you would need to get a grip. And as for the evidence crew, we all grew up and know what kids are like unless you lead a very sheltered life, where's the decades of research to show that two men adopting a child does them any good. In fairness to Elton John his children will never be in proper society , their proper society is probably everyone has for or five daddy's!
So leave them in the orphanage?
As opposed to having them adopted by gays, then yes.
But the argument against the Gay parents was "you are leaving a child open to years of torment", presumably from ignorant children that are somehow innately homophobic. Leaving the child parentless in an orphanage, when a loving couple is available & willing to adopt, to my mind is far greater abuse.
There is no mother - loving couple my hole what maternal instincts and emotional help will two gay men be to a child, oh that's right they probably are women born into men's bodies, Jesus wept!
If anything happened my missus (God forbid) then I would like to think I, as a man, would be able to still provide a loving, supportive role for my child with plenty of emotional help. Don't think I would hand him in to the authorities and say that I, as a man, don't have the maternal instincts to look after this child so he's better off in an orphanage. Plenty of single men have bought up kids - I don't get your logic that two men are incapable.
In your highly educated opinion, can a single man bring up a kid?
Totally, that answer you ok?
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on February 25, 2014, 03:37:35 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 20, 2014, 06:47:23 PM
I think the point of gay pride and the 'coming out' business is for it to become so commonplace that in future we'll return* to a time when it'll be considered no big deal what your sexual preferences are. Nobody will have to 'come out' because they won't feel any pressure to be 'in' in the first place. Gay pride parades are an act of defiance in cultures where homosexual or bisexual behaviour is or was suppressed, and I think the intention of them is to let gay people know that there's no need to stay in the closet. It's like the atheist billboards doing the rounds in America at the minute reassuring atheists in religiously-dominated areas that it's okay to be an atheist and that they're not alone.
* Yes, return to a time when it's no big deal. The idea that there's something wrong with homosexual behaviour is a relatively recent invention. In ancient Rome and ancient Greece nobody gave a toss.
Bad choice off words. ;D Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
Neither is going to Mass.
I agree, point being?
Quote from: Maguire01 on February 25, 2014, 07:34:53 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 01:32:50 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 25, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
2. I WOILD be fine if my son turns out to be gay and I'm bringing him in a manner where he will be comfortable telling me and comfortable with that realization.
I bet you would, and what if your father told you he was gay?
Your scepticism is due to your judging other people by your standards.
I live in the real world.
Quote from: J70 on February 25, 2014, 09:14:41 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 01:32:50 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 25, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
2. I WOILD be fine if my son turns out to be gay and I'm bringing him in a manner where he will be comfortable telling me and comfortable with that realization.
I bet you would, and what if your father told you he was gay?
I would be heartbroken for him and my mother. For him because the society from which he came forced him to deny his sexuality. For my mother obviously because she married a confused, repressed gay man.
Any other abusive retorts?
None, any other bullshit retorts?
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 10:57:23 PM
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on February 25, 2014, 03:37:35 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 20, 2014, 08:18:22 PM
Quote from: Eamonnca1 on February 20, 2014, 06:47:23 PM
I think the point of gay pride and the 'coming out' business is for it to become so commonplace that in future we'll return* to a time when it'll be considered no big deal what your sexual preferences are. Nobody will have to 'come out' because they won't feel any pressure to be 'in' in the first place. Gay pride parades are an act of defiance in cultures where homosexual or bisexual behaviour is or was suppressed, and I think the intention of them is to let gay people know that there's no need to stay in the closet. It's like the atheist billboards doing the rounds in America at the minute reassuring atheists in religiously-dominated areas that it's okay to be an atheist and that they're not alone.
* Yes, return to a time when it's no big deal. The idea that there's something wrong with homosexual behaviour is a relatively recent invention. In ancient Rome and ancient Greece nobody gave a toss.
Bad choice off words. ;D Common place or not a man wanting another man is not a natural thing.
Neither is going to Mass.
I agree, point being?
Actually I was wrong, gay, straight, bi are all natural, sure many other species also engage in hetro, homo and bisexual sex/relations. As far as I know, only a dog in Italy willingly goes to Mass.
Of course Lot being one of the role models of the Bible.
Sounds like where the government in Uganda get their political policies.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 10:56:11 PM
Quote from: BennyHarp on February 25, 2014, 04:12:48 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 10:11:41 AM
Quote from: muppet on February 24, 2014, 07:15:34 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on February 24, 2014, 06:58:49 PM
Quote from: muppet on February 24, 2014, 06:55:08 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 24, 2014, 06:51:14 PM
Child abuse can take many forms, I am in no way stating that the child is in any sexual danger any more so that with heterosexual parents. Society is cruel especially kids cruel to one another, will the child be brought up with certain views because his mummy and daddy are men, off course they will. Will the child's parenting be accepted on a social level among his peers of course it will, they will neither be bullied or abused about because everyone in society now knows it's the norm to be gay. Some of you boys would need to cop on a PC world is OK but when you are leaving a child open to years of torment and victimization because some government official thought Billy and Peter would be great dads you would need to get a grip. And as for the evidence crew, we all grew up and know what kids are like unless you lead a very sheltered life, where's the decades of research to show that two men adopting a child does them any good. In fairness to Elton John his children will never be in proper society , their proper society is probably everyone has for or five daddy's!
So leave them in the orphanage?
As opposed to having them adopted by gays, then yes.
But the argument against the Gay parents was "you are leaving a child open to years of torment", presumably from ignorant children that are somehow innately homophobic. Leaving the child parentless in an orphanage, when a loving couple is available & willing to adopt, to my mind is far greater abuse.
There is no mother - loving couple my hole what maternal instincts and emotional help will two gay men be to a child, oh that's right they probably are women born into men's bodies, Jesus wept!
If anything happened my missus (God forbid) then I would like to think I, as a man, would be able to still provide a loving, supportive role for my child with plenty of emotional help. Don't think I would hand him in to the authorities and say that I, as a man, don't have the maternal instincts to look after this child so he's better off in an orphanage. Plenty of single men have bought up kids - I don't get your logic that two men are incapable.
In your highly educated opinion, can a single man bring up a kid?
Totally, that answer you ok?
So one man can raise a child on his own, but two can't?
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 10:58:36 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on February 25, 2014, 07:34:53 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 01:32:50 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 25, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
2. I WOILD be fine if my son turns out to be gay and I'm bringing him in a manner where he will be comfortable telling me and comfortable with that realization.
I bet you would, and what if your father told you he was gay?
Your scepticism is due to your judging other people by your standards.
I live in the real world.
That doesn't make any sense.
If my father told me he was gay I'd accept him. He'd still be my father. He'd still be interested in going to GAA matches.
What would the likes of Cold Tea do if their son or daughter came to them and told them they were Gay?
Would they just disown them?
Quote from: laoislad on February 26, 2014, 10:00:29 AM
What would the likes of Cold Tea do if their son or daughter came to them and told them they were Gay?
Would they just disown them?
I'd imagine take them to Iris' mate for the cure!
Quote from: laoislad on February 26, 2014, 10:00:29 AM
What would the likes of Cold Tea do if their son or daughter came to them and told them they were Gay?
Would they just disown them?
I'm sure he would be disappointed like most parents would (although some on here will not admit it) but at the end of the day your children should be given the love and support they need.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 11:00:38 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 25, 2014, 09:14:41 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 01:32:50 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 25, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
2. I WOILD be fine if my son turns out to be gay and I'm bringing him in a manner where he will be comfortable telling me and comfortable with that realization.
I bet you would, and what if your father told you he was gay?
I would be heartbroken for him and my mother. For him because the society from which he came forced him to deny his sexuality. For my mother obviously because she married a confused, repressed gay man.
Any other abusive retorts?
None, any other bullshit retorts?
Sorry, but I'm not bitter and afraid of homosexuality as you apparently are, so stop projecting your anxieties onto the rest of us and get some help.
Quote from: EC Unique on February 26, 2014, 11:54:09 AM
Quote from: laoislad on February 26, 2014, 10:00:29 AM
What would the likes of Cold Tea do if their son or daughter came to them and told them they were Gay?
Would they just disown them?
I'm sure he would be disappointed like most parents would (although some on here will not admit it) but at the end of the day your children should be given the love and support they need.
That is the most sensible honest answer on this thread, you should be commended on your honestly, the bullshitters on here are trying to be oh so politically correct and trying to score petty points, let them at it I say.
Quote from: J70 on February 26, 2014, 11:57:05 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 11:00:38 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 25, 2014, 09:14:41 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 01:32:50 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 25, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
2. I WOILD be fine if my son turns out to be gay and I'm bringing him in a manner where he will be comfortable telling me and comfortable with that realization.
I bet you would, and what if your father told you he was gay?
I would be heartbroken for him and my mother. For him because the society from which he came forced him to deny his sexuality. For my mother obviously because she married a confused, repressed gay man.
Any other abusive retorts?
None, any other bullshit retorts?
Sorry, but I'm not bitter and afraid of homosexuality as you apparently are, so stop projecting your anxieties onto the rest of us and get some help.
As mentioned if men want to be biological with men let them at it, I have no issue with anyone's sexual preference, it is unnatural however and gay men shouldn't be allowed to adopt children. Now that this has been cleared up with you, go back to bullshitting yourself you would have no issue with your father / brother / son telling you they are gay. Good man. :-* :-* :-*
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 12:28:29 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 26, 2014, 11:57:05 AM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 11:00:38 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 25, 2014, 09:14:41 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 25, 2014, 01:32:50 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 25, 2014, 11:31:40 AM
2. I WOILD be fine if my son turns out to be gay and I'm bringing him in a manner where he will be comfortable telling me and comfortable with that realization.
I bet you would, and what if your father told you he was gay?
I would be heartbroken for him and my mother. For him because the society from which he came forced him to deny his sexuality. For my mother obviously because she married a confused, repressed gay man.
Any other abusive retorts?
None, any other bullshit retorts?
Sorry, but I'm not bitter and afraid of homosexuality as you apparently are, so stop projecting your anxieties onto the rest of us and get some help.
As mentioned if men want to be biological with men let them at it, I have no issue with anyone's sexual preference, it is unnatural however and gay men shouldn't be allowed to adopt children. Now that this has been cleared up with you, go back to bullshitting yourself you would have no issue with your father / brother / son telling you they are gay. Good man. :-* :-* :-*
And you go back to your vacuous "unnatural" argument and your ignorant, arrogant assumption that everyone else has the same pyschological hangups that you do.
That's it kid keep taking the tablets and playing the homophobic card, you must have a few decks of them you're playing that many. :-* :-*
Quote from: EC Unique on February 26, 2014, 11:54:09 AM
Quote from: laoislad on February 26, 2014, 10:00:29 AM
What would the likes of Cold Tea do if their son or daughter came to them and told them they were Gay?
Would they just disown them?
I'm sure he would be disappointed like most parents would (although some on here will not admit it) but at the end of the day your children should be given the love and support they need.
I would have been disappointed ten years ago, as the society my child would be facing was widely typified by prejudiced neaderthals like Cold Tea.
Now I would not have an issue - at least here in the part of the states I live in, homosexuality is not an issue. More people accept it and are comfortable with it. My child would not face widespread discrimination, could live a happy, open life and could get married if they chose.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 12:38:18 PM
That's it kid keep taking the tablets and playing the homophobic card, you must have a few decks of them you're playing that many. :-* :-*
If it walks like a duck...
That's it kid keep lying to yourself, it's amazing how a man with such tolerant views on gays and their right can't tolerate iceman's religious views hypocritical in the extreme and you say I am prejudiced, you couldn't make it up. For the last time I don't care what a person's sexual preference is, has that registered yet?
I personally wouldn't be disappointed if my son or daughter came out as Gay.
What I would be though is worried. Worried for them that there are people like cold tea and EC unique in the world who will see them as less then they are. Who would think my son or daughter don't deserve the same rights as they have all because of their sexual preferences.
So yeah I wouldn't be disappointed or ashamed but I would be terrified for them and what they will have to face from an ignorant world.
You boys must have loads of gay friends.
The hypocrite mentioned gay bars, do you go there to befriend them and tell not to be afraid to call round?
Quote from: J70 on February 26, 2014, 12:41:31 PM
Quote from: EC Unique on February 26, 2014, 11:54:09 AM
Quote from: laoislad on February 26, 2014, 10:00:29 AM
What would the likes of Cold Tea do if their son or daughter came to them and told them they were Gay?
Would they just disown them?
I'm sure he would be disappointed like most parents would (although some on here will not admit it) but at the end of the day your children should be given the love and support they need.
I would have been disappointed ten years ago, as the society my child would be facing was widely typified by prejudiced neaderthals like Cold Tea.
Now I would not have an issue - at least here in the part of the states I live in, homosexuality is not an issue. More people accept it and are comfortable with it. My child would not face widespread discrimination, could live a happy, open life and could get married if they chose.
It would most likely rule out you having naturally conceived grandchildren (from that child).
So if you adopted a child and raised them as your own and they had kids ............ oh never mind
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 12:47:01 PM
That's it kid keep lying to yourself, it's amazing how a man with such tolerant views on gays and their right can't tolerate iceman's religious views hypocritical in the extreme and you say I am prejudiced, you couldn't make it up. For the last time I don't care what a person's sexual preference is, has that registered yet?
The difference is that the Catman-Iceman's views are dangerous. You can make it up, it's called "God".
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 12:50:17 PM
You boys must have loads of gay friends.
Does facebook level friends count (context I have about 200 friends on facebook from uni, work, GAA, backpacking, friends of friends who socialise in same groups etc.). I'd say about 3-4 of them are openly lesbian/bisexual and about 3 are openly gay. Closest friendship level would probably be uni friends, backpacker friends or work colleagues. That said there is at least one close friend who I reckon is in the closet and two female friends who appear to be asexual.
Yeah makeuppy facebook friends are your friends, you get out much with the 200+, ring them much to find out the craic?
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 02:19:52 PM
Yeah makeuppy facebook friends are your friends, you get out much with the 200+, ring them much to find out the craic?
fcuk up ! please
Quote from: J OGorman on February 26, 2014, 02:22:40 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 02:19:52 PM
Yeah makeuppy facebook friends are your friends, you get out much with the 200+, ring them much to find out the craic?
fcuk up ! please
Don't read it dickhead. :-*
I have a few gay acquaintances. None of them chose to be gay.
It's like your GAA county affiliation. You get on with it.
Good man I have two, probably two more that the PC brigade on here.
Just a thought but it is likely that he means in general, rather than on this board in this thread
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 02:29:22 PM
Quote from: J OGorman on February 26, 2014, 02:22:40 PM
fcuk up ! please
Don't read it d**khead. :-*
Quote from: heganboy on February 26, 2014, 03:07:09 PM
Just a thought but it is likely that he means in general, rather than on this board in this thread
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 02:29:22 PM
Quote from: J OGorman on February 26, 2014, 02:22:40 PM
fcuk up ! please
Don't read it d**khead. :-*
Another thought - don't read it kid. :-* :-* :-*
if you could get the hang of the quotes thing, that'd be great....
also - its the same thought you had last time, not another thought. Your next thought is scheduled for late this summer
Quote from: Jonah on February 26, 2014, 03:20:41 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 02:43:42 PM
Good man I have two
braincells?
What a witty retort - for information though it's not all one word, the irony of it all. ;D
Quote from: heganboy on February 26, 2014, 03:13:58 PM
if you could get the hang of the quotes thing, that'd be great....
also - its the same thought you had last time, not another thought. Your next thought is scheduled for late this summer
Sorry too technical for me, you still reading my posts. :-* :-* Stalker ;)
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 02:19:52 PM
Yeah makeuppy facebook friends are your friends, you get out much with the 200+, ring them much to find out the craic?
I delete anyone I have not spoke to, rang, facebook chatted, whatsup chat, socialised with or spoke to on the phone in the last 6 months. I do make an effort to stay in contact with them all to some degree, if that does not happen I delete, so yes all friends or acquaintances who I would be more than happy to catch up with for a coffee or a pint. One of my brothers mates is bisexual and I have gone on the beer with him plenty of times. I have gone on the beer with almost all those 200 (some younger cousins excluded). That reminds me one of my female cousins is bisexual. I really think you would be suprised how few of the posters here would feel put out or uncomfortable (even alot of the lads with a fair ould believe in god etc.)
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 12:47:01 PM
That's it kid keep lying to yourself, it's amazing how a man with such tolerant views on gays and their right can't tolerate iceman's religious views hypocritical in the extreme and you say I am prejudiced, you couldn't make it up. For the last time I don't care what a person's sexual preference is, has that registered yet?
You expessedly do care when it comes to adoption and your attitude to gay relatives.
I'll address your other nonsense later.
Your hypocrisy - that should be a laugh.
And I don't care about any adults sexual preference, it's the last time I'll say it but say it again I will as you are obviously can't understand English. But gay me shouldn't be allowed to adopt children.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 04:42:57 PM
And I don't care about any adults sexual preference, it's the last time I'll say it but say it again I will as you are obviously can't understand English. But gay me shouldn't be allowed to adopt children.
Ha, ha Froidian slip me thinks
What a come ballbag, u really are the most dislikeable person on here and thats saying something
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 04:42:57 PM
And I don't care about any adults sexual preference, it's the last time I'll say it but say it again I will as you are obviously can't understand English. But gay me shouldn't be allowed to adopt children.
Cold tea that is your opinion.
There is more evidence out there to show that parents of the opposite sex can do a worse job of raising children than people of the same sex.
2 Men would not being going out to have children to get more money from benefits I know of cases where that has happened in belfast.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 04:42:57 PM
But gay me shouldn't be allowed to adopt children.
for me this has just moved this thread up there with Tony's hotel booking
Quote from: Mayo4Sam on February 26, 2014, 04:49:28 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 04:42:57 PM
And I don't care about any adults sexual preference, it's the last time I'll say it but say it again I will as you are obviously can't understand English. But gay me shouldn't be allowed to adopt children.
Ha, ha Froidian slip me thinks
What a come ballbag, u really are the most dislikeable person on here and thats saying something
You know f**k all about me ballbag, so dry your eyes dickhead. :-*
Quote from: heganboy on February 26, 2014, 05:23:51 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 04:42:57 PM
But gay me shouldn't be allowed to adopt children.
for me this has just moved this thread up there with Tony's hotel booking
That shows you how sad your life is when a typo gives you are a hardon, or was it the thought I might be available to you princess. :-*
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 12:47:01 PM
That's it kid keep lying to yourself, it's amazing how a man with such tolerant views on gays and their right can't tolerate iceman's religious views hypocritical in the extreme and you say I am prejudiced, you couldn't make it up. For the last time I don't care what a person's sexual preference is, has that registered yet?
Yes, this thread has shown you plainly do care. You don't want them to adopt kids. you call their sexuality "unnatural" (whatever that means). You apparently would be horrified if a relative turned out to be gay. You cannot comprehend that other people don't share your horror and continually say we are full of shit. In follow-up posts to this you mockingly ask if we go to gay bars to befriend gay people. Like I said, "if it walks like a duck"...
As for Iceman and hypocrisy, you can look back a few pages for an exchange myself and Iceman has on this subject. Where have I advocated that his views (or yours) be repressed? I have no problem with Iceman's religious views... until they start of adversely impact on others. If you and your mates want to get together in a room and scream and moan about gay people engaging in "unnatural" acts, go ahead. You're not hurting anyone except perhaps your own intellects by just doing that. The moment you try to get legislation passed or otherwise attempt to discriminate against gay people (or any other group) based on nothing except maybe the dogma of some religious group or twisted political philosophy, then that's a problem. And acceptance of or tolerating someone's right to one's views is not the same thing as respecting them.
But to show how dumb and meaningless your "hypocrisy" accusation is, let's substitute racism for homophobia. If I oppose and ridicule the views of a racist, is that intolerance? Am I hypocritical because I am preaching "tolerance" but by condemning the racist's "intolerance" I am thus also being "intolerant" of their views? Are all opinions worthy of tolerance? Are there no opinions on tolerance and bigotry which can be condemned without opening yourself up to the label of "hypocrite"?
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 04:42:57 PM
And I don't care about any adults sexual preference, it's the last time I'll say it but say it again I will as you are obviously can't understand English. But gay me shouldn't be allowed to adopt children.
Rignt. No problem at all with sexual preference!
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 05:41:11 PM
Quote from: Mayo4Sam on February 26, 2014, 04:49:28 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 04:42:57 PM
And I don't care about any adults sexual preference, it's the last time I'll say it but say it again I will as you are obviously can't understand English. But gay me shouldn't be allowed to adopt children.
Ha, ha Froidian slip me thinks
What a come ballbag, u really are the most dislikeable person on here and thats saying something
You know f**k all about me ballbag, so dry your eyes d**khead. :-*
I know you're a bigoted young lad who isnt liked on-line and I'd imagine off line isnt going too well either
Quote from: EC Unique on February 26, 2014, 01:01:45 PM
Quote from: J70 on February 26, 2014, 12:41:31 PM
Quote from: EC Unique on February 26, 2014, 11:54:09 AM
Quote from: laoislad on February 26, 2014, 10:00:29 AM
What would the likes of Cold Tea do if their son or daughter came to them and told them they were Gay?
Would they just disown them?
I'm sure he would be disappointed like most parents would (although some on here will not admit it) but at the end of the day your children should be given the love and support they need.
I would have been disappointed ten years ago, as the society my child would be facing was widely typified by prejudiced neaderthals like Cold Tea.
Now I would not have an issue - at least here in the part of the states I live in, homosexuality is not an issue. More people accept it and are comfortable with it. My child would not face widespread discrimination, could live a happy, open life and could get married if they chose.
It would most likely rule out you having naturally conceived grandchildren (from that child).
That thought could cross one's mind, certainly, but do you not think the bigger picture, i.e. the happiness and well-being of your actual child, would and should be the most important issue?
Seriously your hypocrisy knows no bounds, by the sounds of it you have no problem with anyone's views unless they aren't yours. If nature intended men to be mummy's it would have allowed for that in evolution that is fact so get over it and your own hypocrisy kid, you are full of anger, maybe you should get a big man hug, heganboy would gave you one, and a hug, mayoforsam also seems up for it!
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 05:52:58 PM
Seriously your hypocrisy knows no bounds, by the sounds of it you have no problem with anyone's views unless they aren't yours. If nature intended men to be mummy's it would have allowed for that in evolution that is fact so get over it and your own hypocrisy kid, you are full of anger, maybe you should get a big man hug, heganboy would gave you one, and a hug, mayoforsam also seems up for it!
Nature intends nothing, you have no clear understanding of how evolution works. So it is not fact ya dope. You presume intelligent design, which does not form part of evolutionary theory.
I know men can't conceive and give birth or has that changed?
Quote from: Mayo4Sam on February 26, 2014, 05:49:58 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 05:41:11 PM
Quote from: Mayo4Sam on February 26, 2014, 04:49:28 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 04:42:57 PM
And I don't care about any adults sexual preference, it's the last time I'll say it but say it again I will as you are obviously can't understand English. But gay me shouldn't be allowed to adopt children.
Ha, ha Froidian slip me thinks
What a come ballbag, u really are the most dislikeable person on here and thats saying something
You know f**k all about me ballbag, so dry your eyes d**khead. :-*
I know you're a bigoted young lad who isnt liked on-line and I'd imagine off line isnt going too well either
You know all this because off some random posts on a message board, you're some genius bet you are quite the man, what have you 4590 face book friends. ;)
It's remarkable how Cold Tea hasn't been banned yet. I think most people are in agreement regarding his contributions to this thread - seem to recall he courted controversy on the Athlone child rapist thread too. The ironic thing is his 1st post on this thread he mentioned attention seekers!
Cold Tea - genuinely you need to stop posting on this thread. You also need to think about what your saying here and if you think it's right or acceptable. Honestly think you might have some underlying issue going on. Definitely insecure about something I think!
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 06:00:25 PM
I know men can't conceive and give birth or has that changed?
You said "nature intended" and ....."would have allowed for that in evolution that is FACT"
Evolution does not work with an intended end goal.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 06:02:22 PM
Quote from: Mayo4Sam on February 26, 2014, 05:49:58 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 05:41:11 PM
Quote from: Mayo4Sam on February 26, 2014, 04:49:28 PM
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 04:42:57 PM
And I don't care about any adults sexual preference, it's the last time I'll say it but say it again I will as you are obviously can't understand English. But gay me shouldn't be allowed to adopt children.
Ha, ha Froidian slip me thinks
What a come ballbag, u really are the most dislikeable person on here and thats saying something
You know f**k all about me ballbag, so dry your eyes d**khead. :-*
I know you're a bigoted young lad who isnt liked on-line and I'd imagine off line isnt going too well either
You know all this because off some random posts on a message board, you're some genius bet you are quite the man, what have you 4590 face book friends. ;)
4,590 Facebook friends is 4'590 more than your imaginary friend ;)
Cold tea doesn't think gays should adopt children. Where's the problem with that? He's entitled to his opinion. Just because you disagree, doesn't mean he's anti-gay or homophobic.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 05:52:58 PM
Seriously your hypocrisy knows no bounds, by the sounds of it you have no problem with anyone's views unless they aren't yours.
What part of "unless they adversely impact" do you not understand?
And totally silent on my last paragraph. What a shock!
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 05:52:58 PM
If nature intended men to be mummy's it would have allowed for that in evolution
Evolution is powered by variation acted upon by natural selection. There is lots of variety in nature, sexual orientation being one of those traits and not confined to humans. Besides, if reduced odds of passing on genes is your rationale for opposing same sex parenting, should we bar sick people from being parents? Chances are they're not going to survive to see their kids into adulthood. Why would you put their kids through that trauma? What about people who need fertility treatment? Test tubes babies are not natural. by your definition. And their kids are going to get some abuse on the playground when the bullies find out!
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 05:52:58 PM
that is fact so get over it and your own hypocrisy kid, you are full of anger, maybe you should get a big man hug, heganboy would gave you one, and a hug, mayoforsam also seems up for it!
Nice.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 06:00:25 PM
I know men can't conceive and give birth or has that changed?
Neither can many women, yet you don't oppose them adopting.
This is turning into school boy bickering at the lunch table.
Can a Mod not just lock it up?
Just for the record - there needs to be a total distinction between the biological requirements for reproduction Vs the multitude of requirements necessary for succeessful parenting.
Quote from: BennyCake on February 26, 2014, 06:22:55 PM
Cold tea doesn't think gays should adopt children. Where's the problem with that? He's entitled to his opinion. Just because you disagree, doesn't mean he's anti-gay or homophobic.
His language and logic would suggest he is.
Quote from: Maguire01 on February 26, 2014, 07:26:43 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on February 26, 2014, 06:22:55 PM
Cold tea doesn't think gays should adopt children. Where's the problem with that? He's entitled to his opinion. Just because you disagree, doesn't mean he's anti-gay or homophobic.
His language and logic would suggest he is.
No people would to think I am because I don't think two gay men should adopt a child.
Quote from: Sea The Stars on February 26, 2014, 06:07:22 PM
It's remarkable how Cold Tea hasn't been banned yet. I think most people are in agreement regarding his contributions to this thread - seem to recall he courted controversy on the Athlone child rapist thread too. The ironic thing is his 1st post on this thread he mentioned attention seekers!
Cold Tea - genuinely you need to stop posting on this thread. You also need to think about what your saying here and if you think it's right or acceptable. Honestly think you might have some underlying issue going on. Definitely insecure about something I think!
I think there is a button you can use to report me and ask for me to be banned,
work away kid. Not such a simple button for a child mentally affected by being raised by two gay men however.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 07:28:19 PM
Quote from: Maguire01 on February 26, 2014, 07:26:43 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on February 26, 2014, 06:22:55 PM
Cold tea doesn't think gays should adopt children. Where's the problem with that? He's entitled to his opinion. Just because you disagree, doesn't mean he's anti-gay or homophobic.
His language and logic would suggest he is.
No people would to think I am because I don't think two gay men should adopt a child.
You made numerous posts on the explicit sexual activity that two gay men may get up to. Totally irrelevant. You failed to provide any proper logic as to why two mean would be any less suitable as parents than two gay women, or indeed one man who was widowed.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 07:29:54 PM
Quote from: Sea The Stars on February 26, 2014, 06:07:22 PM
It's remarkable how Cold Tea hasn't been banned yet. I think most people are in agreement regarding his contributions to this thread - seem to recall he courted controversy on the Athlone child rapist thread too. The ironic thing is his 1st post on this thread he mentioned attention seekers!
Cold Tea - genuinely you need to stop posting on this thread. You also need to think about what your saying here and if you think it's right or acceptable. Honestly think you might have some underlying issue going on. Definitely insecure about something I think!
I think there is a button you can use to report me and ask for me to be banned, work away kid. Not such a simple button for a child mentally affected by being raised by two gay men however.
You still haven't detailed how the child would be affected. Apart from by bullying. Probably from children who have been influenced by homophobic parents.
Quote from: Cold tea on February 26, 2014, 07:29:54 PM
Quote from: Sea The Stars on February 26, 2014, 06:07:22 PM
It's remarkable how Cold Tea hasn't been banned yet. I think most people are in agreement regarding his contributions to this thread - seem to recall he courted controversy on the Athlone child rapist thread too. The ironic thing is his 1st post on this thread he mentioned attention seekers!
Cold Tea - genuinely you need to stop posting on this thread. You also need to think about what your saying here and if you think it's right or acceptable. Honestly think you might have some underlying issue going on. Definitely insecure about something I think!
I think there is a button you can use to report me and ask for me to be banned, work away kid. Not such a simple button for a child mentally affected by being raised by two gay men however.
More suppositions about children being raised by gay parents. Are they based on anything other than your thought processes?
Quote
your thought processes?
that's a stretch right there...
Right lads, this thread has gone just about as far as it can. The petty insults have started now and it's not all coming from 1 side either. A few lads need to have a look at themselves here if they are being honest. Thread is now locked.