The Gay Megathread (see mod note on post #2212)

Well I couldn't read a map to save my life, so I just ignored it. I've generally left it up to my girlfriend at the time.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

^ You forgot the map reading part. Its the crucial crux of his whole argument. That and "Go find the evidence yourself it is no good if I tell it to you".

Aside from that, you have it down.

AND his wife agrees with him. That's important too.

nozzferrahhtoo

^ You forgot the map reading part. Its the crucial crux of his whole argument. That and "Go find the evidence yourself it is no good if I tell it to you".

Aside from that, you have it down.

Summary:

JimiTime has absolutely nothing to back up his stance that same-sex couples are inferior to a male+female couple when it comes to raising children. Rather than admit it, he hides behind insults, lies and emoticons.

I think that covers it, yes?

ShooterSF wrote: »

Wow that post smacks of ignorance. You think people being treated unfairly should stop complaining and move on or take a holiday? The reason people are not getting bored is because unlike some topics we discuss which are somewhat trivial this one revolves around the quality of life some get to live and some of us even those not directly affected aren't having it.

People asking other people to justify why their religious beliefs should dictate how the civil state treats all its citizens = gay stuff.

Expression of opposition to same-sex couple's adopting on the grounds that male/female is the best parenting combination = not gay stuff.

Colour me confused.

ShooterSF

Onesimus wrote: »

I havnt bothered to read this thread at all. But out of curiousity decided to come and make comment that: I don't understand how this thread is lasting so long and why both sides of the argument can discuss gay stuff for so long and not get bored or move onto something else for a change.

Sounds like ya'll are long overdue a holiday. :pac:

Wow that post smacks of ignorance. You think people being treated unfairly should stop complaining and move on or take a holiday? The reason people are not getting bored is because unlike some topics we discuss which are somewhat trivial this one revolves around the quality of life some get to live and some of us even those not directly affected aren't having it.

Onesimus wrote: »

I havnt bothered to read this thread at all. But out of curiousity decided to come and make comment that: I don't understand how this thread is lasting so long and why both sides of the argument can discuss gay stuff for so long and not get bored or move onto something else for a change.

Sounds like ya'll are long overdue a holiday. :pac:

Just for the record, I haven't been discussing 'gay stuff', though admittedly, it impacts on homosexuals wanting to adopt children. Its the opposing side that keep bringing up the 'gay stuff'. I've had some posts deleted though, as I was being a bit too playful. Jimi going back to his box:( (And there was much cheering

)

eviltimeban

The whole thing about the gay marriage issue is that Christians don't have the monopoly on marriage. Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Scientologists (!), all get married. And they are different religions (well maybe not scientologists

).

What if I set up my own religion and stated that my religion's definition of marriage was that of a union between a man and a fish. And I go around vehemently opposing and protesting against anyone who says it is otherwise. But then that'd be crazy right?

Yet there are PLENTY of people who believe that the Christian view of marriage as ONLY being between a man and a woman is crazy too.

So why do Christians believe that they have the exclusive rights to declare what marriage is? "Married" isn't just a religious term, its a civil one. Let's say two people get married, a man and a woman, and neither are Christians. It'd still be a "marriage" in your eyes. But its got nothing to do with you. So what difference does it make if those people are the same sex? They are not getting married in your church or by your rules...Quite frankly its none of the Christian church's business. Right?

So Christians, why ruin it for everyone else?

MadsL

JimiTime wrote: »

Or that your question is irrelevant.

How on earth is is not relevant? Do explain, I would love to hear that.

But if you reckon that stupid or vindictive more accurately describes your posts, then work away.

Ah, the subtle dig. Not quite an insult, not exactly hostile, just this side of the charter. Well played.

I wouldn't have been that harsh on you.

Why? Because I called you on it?

Good luck showing how my post means I called YOU stupid or vindictive though:)

Oh, was it other posters then that you were calling stupid or vindictive? Do explain. I'm all ears.

NuMarvel wrote: »

Well, it's the Gay Megathread, so chances are the topics being discussed in here will be related to gay people in some way. We could try to discuss the new Total Recall movie, but it's link to the thread topic would be tenuous.

As for why we're still discussing it, that should be obvious. If they were implemented, the opinions and ideas put forward by some folk in the thread would have a very real effect on the lives of gay men and women in Ireland. It's only right that the people who would be affected voice their opinion and challenge what's being said.

Or more to the point , the opinions and ideas put forward by some folk in the thread are being implemented and have a very real effect on the lives of gay men and women in Ireland and we would like them to stop.

NuMarvel

Onesimus wrote: »

I havnt bothered to read this thread at all. But out of curiousity decided to come and make comment that: I don't understand how this thread is lasting so long and why both sides of the argument can discuss gay stuff for so long and not get bored or move onto something else for a change.

Sounds like ya'll are long overdue a holiday. :pac:

Well, it's the Gay Megathread, so chances are the topics being discussed in here will be related to gay people in some way. We could try to discuss the new Total Recall movie, but it's link to the thread topic would be tenuous.

As for why we're still discussing it, that should be obvious. If they were implemented, the opinions and ideas put forward by some folk in the thread would have a very real effect on the lives of gay men and women in Ireland. It's only right that the people who would be affected voice their opinion and challenge what's being said.

Onesimus

I havnt bothered to read this thread at all. But out of curiousity decided to come and make comment that: I don't understand how this thread is lasting so long and why both sides of the argument can discuss gay stuff for so long and not get bored or move onto something else for a change.

Sounds like ya'll are long overdue a holiday. :pac:

[Deleted User]

JimiTime wrote: »

.

Well if you ever decide to grow up and try to engage in rational, coherent and honest discussion for a change, my points are still there.
Until then, they'll just stay there showing just how silly and underhanded your points are.

marienbad

I was just browsing some christians posting history and the fascination with homosexuality is staggering. Why is that ? What is it with them and sexuality in general and homosexuality in particular ?

Why is it in a country that is 87% christian there is no such obsession with say -curruption which has done untold damage to those kids they are so concerned about ? And at least 87% of those criminals are Christian.

Sarky wrote: »

I don't think you're sorry at all.

That little exchange drifted over your head methinks

[Deleted User]

JimiTime wrote: »

I can't believe I didn't see this sooner, but it explains a lot.
OK, just to clear up this misunderstanding.
(snipped increasingly manic, nonsensical drivel)

So to sum up the studies you keep harping on about if fact do not say what you've claimed, in fact you've never read any of them.
You can't show that any of the studies you are rejecting out of hand are biased or wrong, despite your claims.
And you've still to point out a single difference between the genders that is essential and more beneficial to child rearing.
And on all of that you seem to have lost the ability to write coherently.

It's kinda sad to see someone try to cling to their dishonest position so hard it makes them seem so off the wall.

I don't think you're sorry at all.

Penn wrote: »

1) Studies have NOT formed my opinion on this topic.

2) When I say to the the study junkies about looking for studies on fathers and mothers etc, I'm not actually saying that I've read them etc I thought I was quite clear on that many times. I've alluded to things I've read in times gone by relating to roles of fathers etc, but I haven't got a reem of studies that I'm just not giving you. LOL, if you think I've been saying I have all the proof, I'm just not giving it. I thought I was repeatedly clear, that what I have is of no value to you and those who think similarly. I've told you, that if you have an honest interest in the truth of the matter, open your eyes, start looking for yourself going forward. If you require studies, I've said have a look for studies relating to fathers and mothers etc, rather than ones that have an increased risk of being sullied by political agendas. I mean, I'm assuming that's what those who require studies do? You look for studies on the topics you're debating or what-not? That is your field of knowledge by the sounds of it. Looking at and analysing studies etc, so you would be better qualified to know the value of the study etc.

Well thats a very fair point. Let me go look for myself so, and I'm sorry for being such a ridiculously moronic imbecile.

ShooterSF

Scenario 1: Person claims anecdotal evidence and personal experience that let's say Jews are better at handling money and will only bank with Jews. General populations response "okaay. whatever."

Scenario 2: Person claims anecdotal evidence and personal experience that let's say Jews are better at handling money and demands that laws be put in place that Banks can only hire Jews. General populations response "Whoa. Where's you proof? Show us the studies!"

Difference. It's there.

Penn

JimiTime wrote: »

Your view that mostly mothers drop kids to school is just based on your own personal biases. Show me the study, SHOW ME THE STUDY!

1) Studies have NOT formed my opinion on this topic.

2) When I say to the the study junkies about looking for studies on fathers and mothers etc, I'm not actually saying that I've read them etc I thought I was quite clear on that many times. I've alluded to things I've read in times gone by relating to roles of fathers etc, but I haven't got a reem of studies that I'm just not giving you. LOL, if you think I've been saying I have all the proof, I'm just not giving it. I thought I was repeatedly clear, that what I have is of no value to you and those who think similarly. I've told you, that if you have an honest interest in the truth of the matter, open your eyes, start looking for yourself going forward. If you require studies, I've said have a look for studies relating to fathers and mothers etc, rather than ones that have an increased risk of being sullied by political agendas. I mean, I'm assuming that's what those who require studies do? You look for studies on the topics you're debating or what-not? That is your field of knowledge by the sounds of it. Looking at and analysing studies etc, so you would be better qualified to know the value of the study etc.

marienbad

JimiTime wrote: »

Your view that mostly mothers drop kids to school is just based on your own personal biases. Show me the study, SHOW ME THE STUDY!

open your eyes jimmy- if you can't see then we just can't help you.

28064212

JimiTime wrote: »

Your view that mostly mothers drop kids to school is just based on your own personal biases. Show me the study, SHOW ME THE STUDY!

Yet another post showing that you just don't "get it". You think you're parodying a position, but you're actually responding to a totally different point that no-one has made

Penn wrote: »

And yet, it's mostly mothers (the ones who aren't good at map reading) who drop their children to school.

Argument defeated.

Your view that mostly mothers drop kids to school is just based on your own personal biases. Show me the study, SHOW ME THE STUDY!

JimiTime wrote: »

I'm not forcing anyone to respond to anything am I? I thought people were voluntarily giving up their own time. Again, its surreal that the position, 'Mothers and fathers are important' is now 'Laughable'. Crazy stuff altogether:)

The position that mothers and fathers are so important that any variation should be prevented is laughable.

Penn

JimiTime wrote: »

Well you don't want kids getting lost on the way to school now do we?

And yet, it's mostly mothers (the ones who aren't good at map reading) who drop their children to school.

Argument defeated.

Sarky wrote: »

Perhaps you could just admit you have nothing but your own prejudice to back your laughable position and apologise for wasting everyone's time instead?

I'm not forcing anyone to respond to anything am I? I thought people were voluntarily giving up their own time. Again, its surreal that the position, 'Mothers and fathers are important' is now 'Laughable'. Crazy stuff altogether:)

NuMarvel wrote: »

Hold on... don't most sat navs have a woman's voice as the default option? That's clearly just political opportunism being spun as equality and runs contrary to what "real science" has proven.

This must be stopped IMMEDIATELY!

Any sat-nav I've ever encountered results in this woman's voice being heard yelling at that woman's voice that the route she is insisting is the best one is not in fact the best route as if we cut onto the R513 we can go to Mitchelstown via Hospital then zip down the M8 and avoid the nightmare that is Buttevant. Says it right here on the map this woman is reading....