Dr Brown wrote: » Yes but calling me names is not an argument.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » It is pointless arguing with bigots. So i call them out instead.
Diversity for Hire wrote: » Yep a pedo who enjoyed young boys in Nepal. Imagine a straight politician defending a poet who buggered young girls.
Dr Brown wrote: » There is a link just as men are more likely to abuse kids than women. I'm sorry if the facts are not PC. Also gay "marriage" has only recently become a "human right" due to political pressure 20 Years ago the very concept would of been laughed at, and rightly so.
Dr Brown wrote: » Yet people will call me a bigot for pointing out there is a link between pedophilia and a certain lifestyle.
Mongfinder General wrote: » Didn’t Mr Norris allude to such a link in an interview in 2002? https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/norris-paedophilia-tape-aired-1.885694%3fmode=amp
Mongfinder General wrote: » Didn’t Mr Norris allude to such a link in an interview in 2002? https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.times.com/news/norris-paedophilia-tape-aired-1.885694%3fmode=amp
"Pre-pubescent children who lack any identifying characteristics of sexual maturity. I cannot understand why anybody would find them sexually appropriate," he added.
"But I am sorry to say, I would let down the next generation because I wouldn’t be the slightest bit interested in people who are considerably younger than me," he added.
Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: » I’m starting a ‘straight pride’ campaign. I’m assuming no one will have any problems with it...
AndrewJRenko wrote: » I don't see any such allusion in that article. Am I missing something? But even if he did, I'm not sure than an 'allusion' in a 15 year old interview counts as good evidence.
Mongfinder General wrote: » This part. asserted that there was “something to be said” for the approach in which a young man was introduced to sexual behaviour by an older man. Of course there’s no definition of young and old in the article. However, it really smacks of carnal banditry.
"Pre-pubescent children who lack any identifying characteristics of sexual maturity. I cannot understand why anybody would find them sexually appropriate," he added
ohnonotgmail wrote: » i think you need to look up the meaning of paedophilia. YOu dont seem to know what it means.
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Just to be clear - we're not debating the issues around paedophilia or marriage equality now - we're debating whether you ever caused harm to gay people. So I'm simply pointing out your harmful comments - so you did actually cause harm to gay people.
On the issue of paedophilia, I'm confused by your latest comment that "as men are more likely to abuse kids than women". If you have evidence of a link between homosexuality and paedophilia, then please present that evidence. Most child abuse is done by a family member, not the bogey man in the park in the long raincoat.
On the issue of marriage equality, it is a human right. Why would you want to stop some people for getting married?
Mongfinder General wrote: » Enlighten me because I believe it to be an adult having sexual relations with a person below the age of consent. The interview was mired in controversy. Now I’m not conflating it with his character defence of his ex accused of statutory rape but referencing Greek paedophilia sets a bad tone.
Dr Brown wrote: » So having an opinion is causing harm to people ? What about the gay activists who threatened me with violence do you condemn that ? Just pick up a newspaper and will find most child abuse victims are male. They can get "married" all they want I just don't think the state should recognize it.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » like i said you need to look up what pedophilia actually is.
Mongfinder General wrote: » If you have a more succinct definition then please share it.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » you didnt bother to look it up, did you?
whiskeyman wrote: » A lot of it is done for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR and PR) reasons. It makes the company look good, and HR and Co. put it in their 'Great Place to Work' portfolios, and internal newsletters etc... I can't remember much emphasis on it when the recession was on and money was tight. The budget for such things has increased and companies are competing on these levels now. Like all CSR things though, there can be some good to it. If Pride week makes a company a better environment for even 1 person who is worried about their sexuality, well then surely that's a good thing. At a recent LGBT talk I went to, a foreign colleague stood up and talked from the heart about how he has to hide his sexuality from his friends and even family back home as it's still a stigma there, but here he feels accepted and can be true to himself.
rusty cole wrote: » Am I correct in guessing all these companies are not allowed ask a persons sexual orientation for example at time of interview, or religion or even I think marital status ??? yet they cannot get enough of endorsing gay pride week!! what about if we sent an email round saying support straight day!! Kiss a hetero and make them smile!! that would be hate speech I guess!! ooh your kind used to sentence my kind to time in prison, sure we only got our apology just weeks ago, didn't you see. wat the fook else do this twats want!!! haaay yaaaal, we anna be recognised and called by out pro-nouns!!! this is all very strange to me but typical attention seeking shyte!!
Mongfinder General wrote: » Why would I look up something I already know?
Mongfinder General wrote: » Enlighten me because I believe it to be an adult having sexual relations with a person below the age of consent.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » clearly you dont
ohnonotgmail wrote: » it conflates homosexuality with paedophilia so it is very much wrong.
Edz87 wrote: » Companies, especially banks, like to pretend to give a **** about people. They don't. They want your money and pretending to be "inclusive" or whatever is just a ploy. Makes me sick
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Oh please don't play the victim just yet. No, having an opinion is not causing harm. We're all welcome to our opinions. Spreading lies and misinformation is causing harm and that's what you've been doing. Campaigning to refuse rights to marriage on grounds of sexual preference is causing harm and that's what you've been doing here.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
