If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
It has less chance of sinking in than is has of merely sinking - which, largely speaking, it has already done - but never mind that; let's bring this back to you and your assertion which need not and indeed should not have to be backed up by some other document not of your making. But you're not going to answer. End of.
It has less chance of sinking in that is has of merely sinking - which, largely speaking, it has already done - but never mind that; let's bring this back to you and your assertion which need not and indeed should not have to be backed up by some other document not of your making. But you're not going to answer. End of.
You cleverly (or stupidly, one can never be certain) omitted the words 'someone whom they have not met but because of their sexuality' in other words they are creating a class of person against whom they have an animus - this is clearly a prejudgement.
I left out those words because they are irrelevant to anyone holding strong religious beliefs.
Regarding the question,
Why IS it prejudice to suggest that having religious beliefs that are against homosexuals makes one prejudiced in such a case?
I would have thought that was self-evident. Unless, of course, one is the person exhibiting such prejudice (ie against anyone holding such a religious belief re homosexuality) in which case 'blinkered' springs to mind.
I left out those words because they are irrelevant to anyone holding strong religious beliefs.
Regarding the question,
Why IS it prejudice to suggest that having religious beliefs that are against homosexuals makes one prejudiced in such a case?
I would have thought that was self-evident. Unless, of course, one is the person exhibiting such prejudice (ie against anyone holding such a religious belief re homosexuality) in which case 'blinkered' springs to mind.
Nazism was a strongly 'religious' movement, in that people were expected to follow things by dictat, not reason. Much the same can be said of Stalinist Russia, the Cambodia of Pol Pot, or North Korea.
To have strong political, quasi-religious views that were against Jews was unquestionably wrong. They weren't excused by the depth of one's faith.
I've already been more than patient and, if you are quite clear in your mind as to the wording of the relevant clauses in the law that directly compromise - or, as you put it, "destroy" - the institution of marriage as it was understood and sanctioned in law before this legislation was passed and that damage or othewise affect conjugation and procreativity between marries couples of the opposite sex - and I assume that you must be, given the extent of your repeated dogmaticism on this - I do not see why you need yet more time to outline them clearly and unequivocally here so that those who, like me, do not understand your position on it can avail themselves of the opportunity to do so.
I've already been more than patient and, if you are quite clear in your mind as to the wording of the relevant clauses in the law that directly compromise - or, as you put it, "destroy" - the institution of marriage as it was understood and sanctioned in law before this legislation was passed and that damage or othewise affect conjugation and procreativity between marries couples of the opposite sex - and I assume that you must be, given the extent of your repeated dogmaticism on this - I do not see why you need yet more time to outline them clearly and unequivocally here so that those who, like me, do not understand your position on it can avail themselves of the opportunity to do so.
How to Be Patient
It has never been easy to be patient, but it's probably harder now than at any time in history. In a world where messages and information can be sent across the world instantly, everything is available with only a few clicks of the mouse. Fortunately, patience is a virtue that can be cultivated and nurtured over time. You will be pleasantly surprised by how relaxation and peace of mind can impact the quality of your life.
Whether you're stuck in a traffic jam or frustrated with a difficult project, impatience is a natural reaction to have when things aren't going your way. Learning to control and neutralize your impatience will help you become calmer,...
So why do you get so grotesquely over-heated about photographs of highly competent musicians such as Alison Balsom and insist on sharing your objectification of her on this Board?
Erm.....what's that got to do with the price of fish? I am sure that even the most dedicated homosexualist would agree that Alison Balsom is a rather attractive young lady. But that makes no difference whatsoever to her trumpet playing.
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.
How to Be Patient
It has never been easy to be patient, but it's probably harder now than at any time in history. In a world where messages and information can be sent across the world instantly, everything is available with only a few clicks of the mouse. Fortunately, patience is a virtue that can be cultivated and nurtured over time. You will be pleasantly surprised by how relaxation and peace of mind can impact the quality of your life.
It's not often that I quote Mr Pee (and I trust that he will raise no objection to my doing so in a different context on this occasion), but "Erm.....what's that got to do with the price of fish?" It was you who raised the issue of "patience" as a red herring here.
You've repeatedly made very clearly expressed statements about a recent piece of legislation to the effect that it allegedly affects adversely the rights of heterosexual couples and "destroys" the very meaning of marriage as it was previously understood, so one presumes that you know of what you write, yet your coyness (I'm trying to be polite as well as patient!) in revealing the evidential substance behind your vociferous assertions should not require any more time than it would take you to type them out.
It's not often that I quote Mr Pee (and I trust that he will raise no objection to my doing so in a different context on this occasion), but "Erm.....what's that got to do with the price of fish?" It was you who raised the issue of "patience" as a red herring here.
You've repeatedly made very clearly expressed statements about a recent piece of legislation to the effect that it allegedly affects adversely the rights of heterosexual couples and "destroys" the very meaning of marriage as it was previously understood, so one presumes that you know of what you write, yet your coyness (I'm trying to be polite as well as patient!) in revealing the evidential substance behind your vociferous assertions should not require any more time than it would take you to type them out.
Nazism was a strongly 'religious' movement, in that people were expected to follow things by dictat, not reason. Much the same can be said of Stalinist Russia, the Cambodia of Pol Pot, or North Korea.
To have strong political, quasi-religious views that were against Jews was unquestionably wrong. They weren't excused by the depth of one's faith.
The striking thing about the tyrannies you mention is that they were (are) all avowedly atheist ( no recognition of God) The State was (is) 'God'.
So in a sense you are right. I have always maintained atheism is just another 'religion'. As much a matter of 'faith' in the largely unknown as any other.
However, to state that Nazism was a 'strongly religious movement' is an obvious and pretty desperate attempt to blame what is generally recognised as 'religion' for a particularly obnoxious atheistic creed!.
The striking thing about the tyrannies you mention is that they were (are) all avowedly atheist ( no recognition of God) The State was (is) 'God'.
So in a sense you are right. I have always maintained atheism is just another 'religion'. As much a matter of 'faith' in the largely unknown as any other.
However, to state that Nazism was a 'strongly religious movement' is an obvious and pretty desperate attempt to blame what is generally recognised as 'religion' for a particularly obnoxious atheistic creed!.
Then how wrong you are! An atheist is simply someone who is not convinced there are gods. That's all. There's no other 'baggage' that defines an atheist.
And as I have said before, Hitler was a Catholic in good standing as late as 1943 (apparently) and often cited God in his speeches. (Plus the facts that most Germans were either Catholics or Lutherans, and the Wermacht wore "Gott mit uns" on their belt buckles.) Stalin was an atheist, definitely. But a non-religious society is not an atheist one - particularly if a religion is replaced by a quasi-religion such as communism or nazism.
And views that are based on belief or dogma - such as "all Jews are evil" are quasi-religious precisely because they are not based on evidence, but on belief or dictat.
I left out those words because they are irrelevant to anyone holding strong religious beliefs.
Regarding the question,
Why IS it prejudice to suggest that having religious beliefs that are against homosexuals makes one prejudiced in such a case?
I would have thought that was self-evident. Unless, of course, one is the person exhibiting such prejudice (ie against anyone holding such a religious belief re homosexuality) in which case 'blinkered' springs to mind.
Of course I object to religiously-inspired hatred of lesbians & gay men. Lesbians and gay men are born such; Catholics are not, they are, for the most part, brain-washed at birth to be Catholics, whereas most lesbians and gay men are brain-washed not to be lesbian or gay, despite that being their nature.
Erm.....what's that got to do with the price of fish? I am sure that even the most dedicated homosexualist would agree that Alison Balsom is a rather attractive young lady. But that makes no difference whatsoever to her trumpet playing.
Your lack of self-knowledge and the resultant patronising sexism is quite staggering.
Last edited by Guest; 06-09-13, 09:07.
Reason: chuck in patronising, why not?
Comment