Have we reach peak LGBT nonsense?

eagle eye wrote: »

No conversation is the best way to get rid of thing beliefs.

I'm sure he's open to a rational discussion on it...

eagle eye wrote: »

As long as it's not wishing I'll on somebody.

eagle eye wrote: »

That's racism.

But how can it be racism if it's not wishing ill on people and it's an opinion?

What's the difference between "hate speech" and saying something racist exactly?

eagle eye wrote: »

It's idiotic just like Folau's beliefs.
We are talking racism when you view a race of people as beneath you.

Folau clearly views himself to be better than gay people... He was warned and decided to carry on with this nonsense...

eagle eye wrote: »

It's idiotic just like Folau's beliefs.
We are talking racism when you view a race of people as beneath you.

complete cop out...

its hate speech

telling people they are going to hell because they are a certain way... is hate speech.

you clearly do not agree, and thats fine... but it doesnt change the fact that its hate speech.

Mrsmum

Although most people nowadays think his beliefs about gay people are ignorant and outdated, nevertheless clearly the man believes that gay acts are sinful. But he believes that as an absolute devotee of the teaching of his particular religion. For him it is not an opinion but a belief. Seeing as practically every human being fits into at least one of the categories listed, he says we are all going to hell if we don't repent. It seems to me he doesn't have more hatred for gay people above other sinners, just that they are a group (because of their sexual acts) among other sinners. Please note I am not agreeing with him that gay acts are sinful, just saying that's what he believes. I say gay acts rather than gay people because if he believed gay people are intrinsically bad, why them ask them to repent since just by being gay they would already be doomed which is not what he says.
Of course it seems ridiculous to expect gay people to desist from gay sex for the whole of their lives, which imo is what he thinks they must do in order not to go to hell but that's because we are coming from a totally different place from him. This world is only short term compared to an eternity of being with God in the next world to someone as fundamentally religious as him. So yeah it's a big ask for a gay person not to act on it but from where he is coming from the reward is literally heaven. It's literally impossible to understand his position for anyone, which is most people, who intend to enjoy this life and especially if you don't believe in any next life. He does though and he sees the next life as way more important than this one and so when he begs/implores all people, including gay people to repent ie turn to God, I think he is doing it from a position of caring not hate. He's not sating F you all, I'm going to heaven anyway, who cares about the rest of ye. He's saying please see the big picture and save yourselves.

The Specialist

sydthebeat wrote: »

And yet facts can exist as irrefutable facts.

When you question the validness of facts you create this "fake news" culture that's permeating society these days.

There is right - think and there is wrong-think. And just because some one proclaims something that is wrong and abhorrent but dresses it up as "their fact" doesn't mean they should be free to do so without consequences.

We could also apply your points to the trans community. They have personally decided they are a sex different to what they were born as and demand everyone else support their delusions. They have even dictated specific pronouns to be called by (a gross act by any standard, there is nobody on this earth who should be allowed to put or take words from anyone elses mouth). Some people are even facing criminal trials because they refuse to follow this idiocy. There is something inherently wrong with an ideology and way of thinking that says "my feelings are top trumps above anything else and don't you dare say otherwise".

The Specialist wrote: »

We could also apply your points to the trans community. They have personally decided they are a sex different to what they were born as and demand everyone else support their delusions. They have even dictated specific pronouns to be called by (a gross act by any standard, there is nobody on this earth who should be allowed to put or take words from anyone elses mouth). Some people are even facing criminal trials because they refuse to follow this idiocy. There is something inherently wrong with an ideology and way of thinking that says "my feelings are top trumps above anything else and don't you dare say otherwise".

yeah.... all the above could very well be considered transphobic at best, its definitely ignorant.

you clearly have an agenda on that issue

The Specialist

sydthebeat wrote: »

yeah.... all the above could very well be considered transphobic at best, its definitely ignorant.

you clearly have an agenda on that issue

No ignorance. Biological fact is biological fact, your feelings are irrelevant. No agenda at all but there can't be double standards, we can all argue against big bad Folaus sky fairy logic but we dare not question the logic of someone defying the entire history of biology? Something wrong there.

The Specialist wrote: »

No ignorance. Biological fact is biological fact, your feelings are irrelevant. .

Are you a biologist?
Neurologist?
Psychologist?

Could you detail what research have you done on this topic?
Could you point to some scientific papers that support your insistence that trans people are suffering from delusion?

The Specialist wrote: »

No ignorance. Biological fact is biological fact, your feelings are irrelevant. No agenda at all but there can't be double standards, we can all argue against big bad Folaus sky fairy logic but we dare not question the logic of someone defying the entire history of biology? Something wrong there.

You're pretending as if a person being transgender is a modern thing. It's happened throughout history and there's nothing ruling out the possibility of biological factors favouring a person's likelihood of being transgender and identifying with a different gender as a result.

Suspect its your own bigotry taking over.

King Mob wrote: »

Again, you just declared that hate speech doesn't exist...

Is this something you get to decide?

In my opinion, there’s no such thing as hate speech. There you go. If you can tell me who gets to decide what hate speech is, maybe I’ll reconsider my position.

splinter65 wrote: »

In my opinion, there’s no such thing as hate speech. There you go. If you can tell me who gets to decide what hate speech is, maybe I’ll reconsider my position.

Then, by your logic, there is no such thing as racism.

Who gets to decide what's racist?
No one I guess, so there's no way to tell what's racist.

Do you believe it's possible to say something racist?
If so, what makes something racist?

eagle eye wrote: »

I think in a case like that it's a bit different due to emotional strain.

You see this is the problem with “hate speech”. It’s not possible to define it so it’s not possible to legislate for it. It’s nonsense.

splinter65 wrote: »

In my opinion, there’s no such thing as hate speech. There you go. If you can tell me who gets to decide what hate speech is, maybe I’ll reconsider my position.

Yep but that's more like pretending homophobia, racism and antisemitism aren't hate speech. They are. It's more that you're uncomfortable that countries legislate against it because of the incredibly, hurt, discomfort it can cause and can also lead to far more violent actions as well.

King Mob wrote: »

Then, by your logic, there is no such thing as racism.

Who gets to decide what's racist?
No one I guess, so there's no way to tell what's racist.

Do you believe it's possible to say something racist?
If so, what makes something racist?

No racism is when someone is discriminated against because of their race.
“I didn’t get the job because I’m Asian”

splinter65 wrote: »

No racism is when someone is discriminated against because of their race.

Nope, you're limiting the definition. From the Oxford dictionary. In effect you'd be claiming prior to entering power, the Nazis weren't engaging in antisemitic behaviour. That's not true... Their rhetoric was antisemitic as well as actions they took.

Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.

splinter65 wrote: »

No racism is when someone is discriminated against because of their race.
“I didn’t get the job because I’m Asian”

Ok. So what would you call it when some one states "Asian people are inferior to white people"?

splinter65 wrote: »

You see this is the problem with “hate speech”. It’s not possible to define it so it’s not possible to legislate for it. It’s nonsense.

LOL

:D:D:D:D:D

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1989/act/19/enacted/en/html

we already have Hate Speech legislation.

batgoat wrote: »

Yep but that's more like pretending homophobia, racism and antisemitism aren't hate speech. They are. It's more that you're uncomfortable that countries legislate against it because of the incredibly, hurt, discomfort it can cause and can also lead to far more violent actions as well.

I’m not uncomfortable about anything. I’m on this guys list of people who are going to Hell.
Why do you think I’m uncomfortable ?!?

King Mob wrote: »

Ok. So what would you call it when some one states "Asian people are inferior to white people"?

That persons opinion. They’d be wrong of course. But still entitled to their opinion.

splinter65 wrote: »

That persons opinion. They’d be wrong of course. But still entitled to their opinion.

So it's not a racist thing to say then?

And how can you say they are wrong? Who are you to decide? :rolleyes:

eagle eye

sydthebeat wrote:

complete cop out..
its hate speech

I'm not backing down from my position. I don't agree with you and that's fine. You are entitled to your opinion as well. I just don't see hate there.

sydthebeat wrote:

telling people they are going to hell because they are a certain way... is hate speech.

I don't agree. He was asking these people to repent do they don't go to hell. He is entitled to hold the view that being actively gay is a sin. Same as you and I are entitled to hold the opinion thsy his religion is wrong.

sydthebeat wrote:

you clearly do not agree, and thats fine... but it doesnt change the fact that its hate speech.

We disagree, so be it. I think people fly off the handle and call things hate too much.

The Specialist

King Mob wrote: »

Are you a biologist?
Neurologist?
Psychologist?

Could you detail what research have you done on this topic?
Could you point to some scientific papers that support your insistence that trans people are suffering from delusion?

Gender Dysphoria was classified as a mental illness until very recently under the DSM. Now that they have removed it the potential harm is greater than good.

Would we encourage schizophrenics to cultivate as many voices as they want without intervention? **** no. They might even “feel” it’s their right to do so but something is wrong in the brain there. So declassifying trans as a mental illness now has people giving hormone blockers to children (enforcing their own mental illness on the children), surgical procedures to mutilate their bodies to resemble their new “identity”, and speech/thought policing that wouldn’t be out of place in the Nazis. They should be getting serious help, not being told do as you wish.

King Mob wrote: »

So it's not a racist thing to say then?

And how can you say they are wrong? Who are you to decide? :rolleyes:

In my opinion they’re wrong. You’re not too sure about opinions king mob.

sydthebeat wrote: »

LOL :D:D:D:D:D

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1989/act/19/enacted/en/html

we already have Hate Speech legislation.

So let the judge decide wether or not someone’s opinion is hate speech.
Your problem is....
Your NOT the judge.

The Specialist wrote: »

Gender Dysphoria was classified as a mental illness until very recently under the DSM. Now that they have removed it the potential harm is greater than good.

Would we encourage schizophrenics to cultivate as many voices as they want without intervention? **** no. They might even “feel” it’s their right to do so but something is wrong in the brain there. So declassifying trans as a mental illness now has people giving hormone blockers to children (enforcing their own mental illness on the children), surgical procedures to mutilate their bodies to resemble their new “identity”, and speech/thought policing that wouldn’t be out of place in the Nazis. They should be getting serious help, not being told do as you wish.

Cool.
Homosexuality was also in the DSM.

Could you take a swing at answering my questions again, thanks.

You seem to be making a lot of definite statements of fact on a lot of complex topics, so would be good to see if this is coming from someone with actual knowledge and expertise, or if it's all just lay opinion.

What are you using to compare a trans person to a person with schizophrenia?

splinter65 wrote: »

In my opinion they’re wrong. You’re not too sure about opinions king mob.

And in your opinion, is that a racist statement?

Or do you believe that it is not possible to make a racist statement?

salmocab

Remember when this thread was about Israel Folau? Great days

splinter65 wrote: »

So let the judge decide wether or not someone’s opinion is hate speech.
Your problem is....
Your NOT the judge.

never claimed to be

but you did claim however that :

You see this is the problem with “hate speech”. It’s not possible to define it so it’s not possible to legislate for it. It’s nonsense.

and you were SO wrong LOL

splinter65 wrote: »

So let the judge decide wether or not someone’s opinion is hate speech.
Your problem is....
Your NOT the judge.

So I can't call stormfront hate speech unless they face prosecution?