Welcome to Cutting Edge. Guests can see and read the contents of most of the boards on this forum but need to become members to read all of them. Currently membership is instant, but new accounts may be deleted if not activated within fourteen days.

If you decide to join the forum, please open your welcome message for further details. New members are requested to introduce themselves on the appropriate thread on our welcome board.

Members may post messages and start threads, but it is essential that they read our posting rules and advice before doing so. If you have any immediate questions or queries, please post them on the suggestions board.

After posting at least ten messages, members are able to contact each other and the staff through our personal messaging system.

This forum is administrated by Ivan and moonbeam and moderated by boatlady and astradt1.

Thank you for visiting Cutting Edge.

Food for thought

Page 10 of 10 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Food for thought

Post by polyglide on Mon Feb 23, 2015 2:25 pm

First topic message reminder :

I trust everyone reading this will take it as an unbiased reflection of the present situation and possible implications regarding faith.

There is much concern at the present time regarding young girls leaving home and joining the fighting in the belief that their faith demands it.

These are Muslim girls and one wonders why they would leave a so called better society to join in the fighting.


It should not be a secret what the parents of these girls teach their children as right from wrong, based on ther Koran.

These girls see day after day the way in which the vast majority of the youth of today behaves, along with the television and newspapers showing a long list of activities alien to the girls belief.

MP's lying, thieving and charged with the worst possible crimes of child abuse, 480 judges charged with crimes, parents killing their children, wives being beaten up, youths falling about and full of drugs etc;

This surely gives those Muslim's intent on brainwashing these poor girls to go to war, all the ammunition they need.
avatar
polyglide

Posts : 3118
Join date : 2012-02-13

Back to top Go down


Re: Food for thought

Post by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD on Tue Nov 17, 2015 1:59 pm

No one has the right to make bigoted homophobic remarks, this is the crux of your error. Besides you have not stopped at calling it a sin, to be honest I find the idea of supernatural misdemeanours like sin laughably idiotic anyway. However you have described gay people in the grossest most insulting manner, using terms bordering hate crime. You've lied continually about the dictionary definition of homosexuality, claiming all dictionaries define homosexuals as perverts, despite not producing one dictionary that does this and repeatedly ignoring the Oxford English Dictionary definition. 

Worst of all you gleefully took pleasure in bullying another poster, who happened to be gay and fed up with your many insults, leaving this forum. Despite this and the many bigoted homophobic posts you've written you continue to make the absurd claim you have gay friends. Of course this is nonsense,  as you know full well they'd never speak to you again if you were honest to their faces about your bigoted prejudice against them. 

You're fooling no one polyglide. Nor is your attempt to paint my challenging your homophobia as some sort of obsession fooling anyone either. 

I thought you were leaving this topic alone? I'd advise you to, as I have done before, it certainly doesn't present you or your beliefs in very favourable light.

It is perfectly natural to be gay, this has been shown beyond a reasonable doubt, so reproducing that lie is silly. I've no idea what a  Cathlic(sic) is, but having an opinion does not mean there are no consequences to expressing it, hence your repulsive homophobia is best kept to yourself.

Lastly it is absurdly stupid to claim you have gay friends and that you don't judge them. All that means is you judge them behind their backs as we have all seen you do on here repeatedly. That's not just homophobic it's rank hypocrisy.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD

Posts : 3125
Join date : 2013-10-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by polyglide on Tue Nov 17, 2015 2:44 pm

Dr, Sheldon,
You brought the subject up not I.

Ivan's dictionary definition of Perversion " sexual behaviour that is considered abnoramal and unacceptable"

Dictionary definition of abnomal " deviant, diverting or deversing from what is accepted as normal.

How you can say I have no Gay friends is beyond me, perhaps you have the same illness as snowyflake, thinking you can mind read and blames it onto anothers lack of intelligence, it's called gross hypocricy.

I do not like swearing, drunkeness, misuse of drugs, smoking, fighting etc; etc; and I do not like homosexuality and would never indulge in any of them but have friends who no doubt have done and still do I would never even think of sitting down and explaining my opinions on any of them including homosexuality
perhaps you have explained to your friend, I feel you may have just the one or two exactly what you feel about Christians etc;






avatar
polyglide

Posts : 3118
Join date : 2012-02-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD on Tue Nov 17, 2015 7:29 pm

I certainly didn't bring it up, you were making bigoted homophobic remarks before I had ever posted on here,  and you persisted in lying about having gay friends which prompted this exchange. Your dishonest use of semantics is irrelevant, and every time you do it I'll point out your lie, because you claimed "all dictionaries define homosexuals as perverts" and none of them do. Why you wish to show yourself a liar when several posters have quoted  'and' linked the OED definition only you can now. Anyway each time you post this lie I'll post the OED definition with a working link to show you're lying.

First your claim:
by polyglide on Sat Mar 31, 2012 12:12 pm
The dictionary to which I refer is the latest. I can see no reason whatsoever for anyone taking exeption to being called what the dictionary states they are. But a pervert is exactly what the dictionary says and there can be no doubt about it, or you start changing the meaning of every word to suit your own interpretation.

Now the correct OED definition of homosexual:
Definition of homosexual in English:
adjective
1 Sexually attracted to people of one’s own sex. LINK TO OED

You don't have gay friends because it's based on a lie, any more than racists who claim their bets friends are black are telling the truth, and as you deride & insult them with homophobic judgements on here in secret whilst lying to their faces. What's more you've been asked specifically many times if you have ever told them that you think they are "abnormal unnatural perverted deviants" and have evaded answering. We can all safely assume why.

Behaviours are a choice,  being gay is not. Why you stupidly persist in ignoring this only you can know.  I've made no general comment about Christians,  so that's yet another lie from you. No doubt another attempt at deflection. I know a few and do them the credit as I do most Christians of accepting your repulsive bigoted prejudices are far from typical.

I see rather than honestly address your appalling comments,  or leave it alone you are now returning to type and offering ad hominem insults about how many friends I have. Not content with defaming one that recently died of cancer. What a thorough joy you must be to those around you if this is typical of how you behave.
avatar
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD

Posts : 3125
Join date : 2013-10-11
Location : Wales

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD on Tue Nov 17, 2015 7:40 pm

polyglide wrote:Dr, Sheldon, You brought the subject up not I.

by polyglide on Fri Mar 16, 2012 1:05 pm
Homosexuality is a perversion choose how you try to explain it, and to some is abhorant and no law will change a persons opinion if they are of that opinion. LINK

I didn't join this site until October 2013. That's another lie from you champ. LINK Oh dear, when will you learn that lies will always reveal themselves.
avatar
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD

Posts : 3125
Join date : 2013-10-11
Location : Wales

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by polyglide on Wed Nov 18, 2015 3:36 pm

Dr, Sheldon,
Firstly I feel you think that I feel sexual perversion is the sole occupation of homosexuals, WRONG, anyone me included who is involved in that which is accepted by the vast majority as a perversion are included.

Secondly just where have I said you joined the site October 2013?.
avatar
polyglide

Posts : 3118
Join date : 2012-02-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD on Wed Nov 18, 2015 8:37 pm

polyglide wrote:Dr, Sheldon,
                Firstly I feel you think that I feel sexual perversion is the sole occupation of homosexuals, WRONG, anyone me included who is involved in that which is accepted by the vast majority as a perversion are included. Secondly just where have I said you joined the site October 2013?.

Firstly I think no such thing, what I think is in my posts, try reading them instead of making up lies. Secondly just where have I ever claimed you said I joined the site October 2013?

You lied and claimed I had raised this topic, I merely linked posts by you on this topic, making grossly insulting and bigoted homophobic remarks, and long before I had even joined this site. How is that hard to understand? Here is one:
by polyglide on Fri Mar 16, 2012 1:05 pm
Homosexuality is a perversion choose how you try to explain it, and to some is abhorant and no law will change a persons opinion if they are of that opinion. LINK

This was post, you have ignored it of course:
I certainly didn't bring it up, you were making bigoted homophobic remarks before I had ever posted on here, and you persisted in lying about having gay friends which prompted this exchange. Your dishonest use of semantics is irrelevant, and every time you do it I'll point out your lie, because you claimed "all dictionaries define homosexuals as perverts" and none of them do. Why you wish to show yourself a liar when several posters have quoted 'and' linked the OED definition only you can now. Anyway each time you post this lie I'll post the OED definition with a working link to show you're lying.

First your claim:
by polyglide on Sat Mar 31, 2012 12:12 pm
The dictionary to which I refer is the latest. I can see no reason whatsoever for anyone taking exeption to being called what the dictionary states they are. But a pervert is exactly what the dictionary says and there can be no doubt about it, or you start changing the meaning of every word to suit your own interpretation.

Now the correct OED definition of homosexual:
Definition of homosexual in English:
adjective
1 Sexually attracted to people of one’s own sex. LINK TO OED

You don't have gay friends because it's based on a lie, any more than racists who claim their bets friends are black are telling the truth, and as you deride & insult them with homophobic judgements on here in secret whilst lying to their faces. What's more you've been asked specifically many times if you have ever told them that you think they are "abnormal unnatural perverted deviants" and have evaded answering. We can all safely assume why.

Behaviours are a choice, being gay is not. Why you stupidly persist in ignoring this only you can know. I've made no general comment about Christians, so that's yet another lie from you. No doubt another attempt at deflection. I know a few and do them the credit as I do most Christians of accepting your repulsive bigoted prejudices are far from typical.

I see rather than honestly address your appalling comments, or leave it alone you are now returning to type and offering ad hominem insults about how many friends I have. Not content with defaming one that recently died of cancer. What a thorough joy you must be to those around you if this is typical of how you behave.

You claimed that you never judged anyone, and I pointed out that you judged gay people. You have repeatedly lied about all dictionaries defining homosexuals as perverts, and I and several others have quoted and linked the OED among others, and exposed this bigoted homophobic lie.
avatar
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD

Posts : 3125
Join date : 2013-10-11
Location : Wales

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by polyglide on Fri Nov 20, 2015 11:29 am

Dr, Sheldon,
The fact that the dictionary you use now says only that it involves the same sex in no way precludes the fact that it is a perversion. it is the fact that it is between the same sex that makes it a perversion.

I realy cannot see your problem, I have said very clearly my opinion, as far as I am concerned it is wrong, I am entitled to that opinion and I do not hold it against anyone just as I do not all the many other things I feel wrong unless they are directly affecting others adversely.

I would advise you to get a proper dictionary and learn how to interpret the definitions.

I also take great exeption to your continual inference that my friendship with both Mike and David is something other than
a perfectly normal one between friends, I doubt very much if you understand what friendship means
avatar
polyglide

Posts : 3118
Join date : 2012-02-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD on Fri Nov 20, 2015 11:47 am

You are dishonestly misreprenting what you claimed,  again. You claimed that "all dictionaries defined homosexuals as perverts". I've quoted the claim in my last few posts, with a link to the page where you claimed it. No dictionary does this, so you were lying. What's more you falsely accused several posters of ignoring the dictionary and redefining words subjectively, when it was you who has done this, so another lie. Know you're dishonestly reversing your position and claiming the definition in the 'Oxford English Dictionary' doesn't matter, so you are now lying again and claiming homosexuality is defined to suit your own homophobic prejudices and not how the Oxford English Dictionary defines it. 

Again no one has said you're not entitled to an opinion. What you're not entitled to do is post bigoted homophobic lies to spread obnoxious and false prejudice against gay people. I have said I will always challenge that, and I am entitled to do so.

Polyglide wrote:I would advise you to get a proper dictionary and learn how to interpret the definitions.
What's wrong with the Oxford English Dictionary,  other than the fact it exposes your lie because it does not define homosexuality as perverted? You haven't produced a single dictionary that does do this either, so I'd humbly suggest it is you who needs to 'get a dictionary' or at least stop posting bigoted homophobic lies. I don't interpret the word either, as that is what a dictionary is for, perhaps this is the root cause of your inability to recognise the dictionary definitions. 



They're not your friends, because you're lying to them about how you really feel about them. We've all seen you make the most insulting bigoted homophobic remarks on here behind their backs, that's hardly the act of a friend. Now I take great exception to this as I do to all bigotry and homophobia.  




As to your ad hominem well this just shows you have no reasonable argument here, again. 




You keep saying you're going to drop it, but keep making the same bigoted homophobic remarks. Stop posting homophobic slurs and lying about having gay friends if you want to drop the subject, otherwise I'm duty bound to challenge such repulsive bigotry
avatar
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD

Posts : 3125
Join date : 2013-10-11
Location : Wales

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by polyglide on Sat Nov 21, 2015 11:39 am

Dr, Sheldon,
I would suggest you look up the definition of a bigot and then consider your numerous bigotory posts prior to your latest comments.

avatar
polyglide

Posts : 3118
Join date : 2012-02-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD on Sat Nov 21, 2015 1:00 pm

polyglide wrote:Dr, Sheldon,
                I would suggest you look up the definition of a bigot and then consider your numerous bigotory posts prior to your latest comments.

I think you mean "bigoted posts" not "bigotry posts". However since this is your usual slash and run unevidenced claim it gets Hitchen's razor, slash. You seem to think that the playground tactic of "no, you are" responses is somehow compelling polemic, it's really nowhere near as impressive as you think, and indicates you have nothing remotely germane or erudite to offer.  

Gay people are entitled to be treated exactly as straight people are, and with exactly the same rights. Making bigoted homophobic remarks simply is unacceptable, I wouldn't want someone to do this to me because of who I am, so it's unconscionable to allow it to happen to others. My comment towards you are based solely on your post content, this is neither bigoted nor ad hominem, two more definitions that escape you it seems, as your posts indicate you seem to want to filter it all through your own personal dictionary that you make up to suit your prejudices and beliefs, but which is nonetheless entirely at odds with the Oxford English dictionary and Webster's.

Lets take another look at your dictionary definition alongside the Oxford English dictionaries definition:

You lied that....
by polyglide on Wed Jul 08, 2015 11:48 am
Dr, Sheldon, Firstly lets put the dictionary definitions of homosexual in my dictionary, nonconformist, homosexuality, abnormality along with pervert, a person who practises sexual perversions.

Whereas the Oxford English Dictionary defines it:
adjective
Sexually attracted to people of one’s own sex.
LINK

Now one more time since you're determined to lie and use semantics and a thesaurus to try and justify your lie that all dictionaries define homosexuals as perverts, I have posted the OED definition, with a working link. QED
avatar
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD

Posts : 3125
Join date : 2013-10-11
Location : Wales

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD on Mon Nov 23, 2015 9:19 pm

by polyglide on Sat Oct 31, 2015 12:17 pm
I have never judged anyone

by polyglide on Fri Nov 06, 2015 1:01 pm
I have never judged anyone

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD on Wed Nov 18, 2015 9:37 pm
You claimed that you never judged anyone, and I pointed out that you judged gay people.

polyglide wrote:Dr, Sheldon,
I realy cannot see your problem, I have said very clearly my opinion, as far as I am concerned it is wrong,

by polyglide on Tue Nov 17, 2015 3:44 pm
I do not like homosexuality

sarcasm scratch Hmm...
avatar
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD

Posts : 3125
Join date : 2013-10-11
Location : Wales

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by polyglide on Tue Nov 24, 2015 11:33 am

Dr, Sheldon,
Are you realy saying that not agreeing with something is judging it and in the terms we are talking about?.

You can not agree with something but not judge it.


avatar
polyglide

Posts : 3118
Join date : 2012-02-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD on Tue Nov 24, 2015 5:42 pm

polyglide wrote:Dr, Sheldon, Are you realy saying that not agreeing with something is judging it and in the terms we are talking about?. You can not agree with something but not judge it.

That's a little disingenuous, as you haven't just disagreed with homosexuality, whatever that means. You have posted the most bigoted homophobic remarks, and described gay people in the most pejorative terms. You also insulted a poster on here who happened to be gay even though he tried his best to be polite towards you, and then when he could no longer take your bigoted homophobic insults, you even seemed to glean some satisfaction at his leaving. Here are some of the judgements and insults you've aimed at gay people:
by polyglide on Tue Nov 17, 2015 3:44 pm
I do not like homosexuality
polyglide wrote: as far as I am concerned it is wrong,
by polyglide on Tue Mar 20, 2012 4:20 pm
if a homosexual is born as such then so are rapists, child abusers and any other deviant. If you make an excuse for one why not the others?
The homosexuals are not content with being protected by law, as never before, they now want to have marriages as those of man and woman. I would agree with this wholeheartedly if they all went on an island all on their own and produced their like......The word marriage was raised as that to cover the joining together of a male and female and nothing else.
by polyglide on Wed Mar 21, 2012 12:40 pm
As for homosexual pride, I cannot for the life of me see anything to be proud of.....There is no injustice involved in a person who feels homosexuality is unacceptable, just as there is no injustice in homosexuals thinking it is.

There's enough there for anyone to see you have repeatedly judged gay people, and in the most offensive, bigoted and homophobic terms, even comparing being gay to heinous crimes like rape and paedophilia.




avatar
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD

Posts : 3125
Join date : 2013-10-11
Location : Wales

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by polyglide on Wed Nov 25, 2015 11:53 am

Dr, Sheldon,
To have an opinion based on fact is not judging anyone it is expressing an opinion, I did not judge homosexuallity God did.

The dictionary defines it and I have never compared it to anything else only explained that if one matter can be put down to genes or any other matter, only yesterday it was claimed that child abuse was down to the brain being connected wrongly, then you annot justify anything along the same terms.
avatar
polyglide

Posts : 3118
Join date : 2012-02-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD on Wed Nov 25, 2015 4:14 pm

polyglide wrote:Dr, Sheldon,
                To have an opinion based on fact is not judging anyone it is expressing an opinion, I did not judge homosexuallity God did. 

Rubbish, don't be absurd. You can be both expressing an opinion and be judging someone, I'd say they were synonymous, and blaming god is yet another own goal unless your numerous claims to have free will are a lie.

Polyglide wrote:The dictionary defines it and I have never compared it to anything else only explained that if one matter can be put down to genes or any other matter,

Liar
by polyglide on Tue Mar 20, 2012 4:20 pm
if a homosexual is born as such then so are rapists, child abusers and any other deviant. If you make an excuse for one why not the others?
That's a direct comparison, and a judgement. It's also imbecilic guff of course, as your comparing what people are to what people choose to do, and pretty appalling harmful things at that, gay people make no choice, and harm no one. You have also repeatedly ignored the dictionary definition, and lied claiming "all dictionaries defined homosexuals as perverts" and despite months of asking you have been unable to provide even one dictionary that does this, instead lying with semantics and a thesaurus.

Only you suggested being gay is genetic, though you did spend page after page lying and claiming it was me. A lie you refused to apologise for.
Re: Religion, gay artists and homophobia
Post by polyglide on Sat Apr 14, 2012 12:01 pm
How some people can make a simple statement become homophobic I do not know....If the scientists are correct and there are certain actions that are predetermined through our DNA then consideration should be given to those affected and not just those who fit into what some feel is right or wrong.

Polyglide wrote:only yesterday it was claimed that child abuse was down to the brain being connected wrongly, then you annot justify anything along the same terms
I doubt it, and you have form for making up such lies, and yet again we see you offer zero evidence to support the claim. Only a homophobic bigot would think that being gay needed to be justified anyway, another judgement. Again you make a direct comparison between the worst kind of harmful crime, that damages victims for life, with being gay. Gay people don;t choose any more than straight people do, and they don't harm anyone by being gay. There is no justification for a crime like paedophilia ever, but consenting adults don't need to justify who they love or sleep with. It's sickening that you can't even understand why the two are not remotely comparable.
avatar
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD

Posts : 3125
Join date : 2013-10-11
Location : Wales

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by polyglide on Fri Nov 27, 2015 11:57 am

Dr, Shedlon,
For the last time.

I do not judge homosexuals I disagree with homosesuality because the Bible does so, however, I agree that it is exactly what the vast majority of people in the world beleieve it to be and as the dictionaries define it.

The proramme that I watched clearly stated that in the case of child abusers their brain was wired in a different manner to to others and this could be the cause.

In contrast a lady who decided to be a lesbian said it was nonsense as she had a clear choice etc;

When God created mankind he was a perfect example of mankind with the capability of procreation in the manner God created and as with many other matters mankind has abused and misused to a great extent many things for the wrong purpose.

I disagree with homosexuality as I do many other things the Bible would not condemn it without a reason.

I do not judge anything I have enough sins of my own to contend with.

I will be enjoying a Sunday afternoon celebrating the birth of Jesus with my homosexual friend Mike on Sunday.

avatar
polyglide

Posts : 3118
Join date : 2012-02-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD on Fri Nov 27, 2015 3:51 pm

polyglide wrote:Dr, Shedlon, For the last time. I do not judge homosexuals
Don't be silly, of course you have judged them many many times, we've all read your many homophobic posts on here, referring to them in the worst kind of pejorative terms.
Re: Religion, gay artists and homophobia
Post by polyglide on Mon Apr 02, 2012 4:21 pm
I certainly am not a homofobic, homosexuality is a perversion.... it has gone on since history began but so has murder, child abuse and even animal abuse but that does not make it right,
Re: Religion, gay artists and homophobia
by polyglide on Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:26 pm
If a person feels homosexuality to be wrong, then he/she has every right to express their opinion,
Re: Religion, gay artists and homophobia
Post by polyglide on Fri Apr 20, 2012 1:05 pm
I have several homosexual friends...... my beliefs still think that there is still something not quite right
Re: Religion, gay artists and homophobia
Post by polyglide on Mon Apr 30, 2012 12:54 pm
Are you saying homosexuality is not a perversion? the dictionary says it is.
Re: Religion, gay artists and homophobia
Post by polyglide on Thu May 03, 2012 12:45 pm
You tread a very thin line when you say this that and the other cause problems to outsiders and do not include the actions of homosexuals
by polyglide on Mon Feb 09, 2015 2:34 pm
You say that homosexuality does not cause problems, are you realy so silly.
Re: Religion, gay artists and homophobia
Post by polyglide on Wed Feb 11, 2015 2:05 pm
Of course homosexuality is a preference
Re: Religion, gay artists and homophobia
Post by polyglide on Wed Feb 11, 2015 2:09 pm
According to every dictionary I know, homosexuality is a perversion,

For anyone who wants to read the whole sorry thread, and your many homophobic judgments.
LINK

Polyglide wrote:I disagree with homosesuality because the Bible does so, however, I agree that it is exactly what the vast majority of people in the world beleieve it to be and as the dictionaries define it.
That's a lie, you claimed that "all dictionaries defined homosexuals as perverts" and no dictionary does this. You've been shown the Oxford English dictionary definition numerous times as well, so this seems to be a lie your happpy to repeat even after it's been exposed many times.
Re: Religion, gay artists and homophobia
Post by polyglide on Wed Feb 11, 2015 2:09 pm
According to every dictionary I know, homosexuality is a perversion,
Yet not the Oxford English dictionary:
Homosexual
adjective
Sexually attracted to people of one’s own sex.
LINKOr Webster's either for that matter, in fact you can't show even one dictionary that defines in your prejudiced homophobic terms, quelle surprise...
So that shows you have lied, again, and that you have judged gay people, with bigoted homophobic lies.

Polyglide wrote:The proramme that I watched clearly stated that in the case of child abusers their brain was wired in a different manner to to others and this could be the cause.
Paedophiles commit heinous crimes, that cause untold suffering, if you want to try and make excuses for that you're on your own. Gay people don''t harm anyone, so it's an asinine comparison.  

 In contrast a lady who decided to be a lesbian said it was nonsense as she had a clear choice etc;

Ah, another handy factoid you've made up on the spot, only homophobic bigots try to make the imbecilic claim that gay people choose to be attracted to their own gender.

Polyglide wrote: I disagree with homosexuality as I do many other things the Bible would not condemn it without a reason.
The reason is it was written by bronze age misogynistic bigots. It also endorses slavery, rapine, genocide, and using your own infant child as a human sacrifice to name just a few of the repulsive narratives it contains. Then again you did claim on here to be ok with all that if god did it, so much christian morality.  

Polyglide wrote: I do not judge anything I have enough sins of my own to contend with. I will be enjoying a Sunday afternoon celebrating the birth of Jesus with my homosexual friend Mike on Sunday.
Not to their faces anyway, you prefer to judge them behind their backs. Have you ever told them to their faces you think they're abnormal, unnatural, perverted, deviants? I think we all know they'd never want anything to do with you again, which is why you lie to their faces and pretend to be their friends, I feel genuinely sorry for them to be deceived in such a horrible way.
avatar
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD

Posts : 3125
Join date : 2013-10-11
Location : Wales

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by polyglide on Sat Nov 28, 2015 11:22 am

Dr, Sheldon,
Get a life and learn how to consider others opinions in an acceptable manner.
avatar
polyglide

Posts : 3118
Join date : 2012-02-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD on Sat Nov 28, 2015 1:36 pm

polyglide wrote:Dr, Sheldon,
                 Get a life and learn how to consider others opinions in  an acceptable manner.

Ah, petty ad hominem, I wondered how long it would be. I have told you a few times that I will always challenge homophobic bigotry, as I find such behaviour unconscionable, and think it behoves all decent people to challenge bigotry and homophobia. If you don't want your homophobic judgements and lies exposed then drop the subject as you claimed you would, but don't insult everyone's intelligence by slipping in posts claiming to have gay friends, or that you don't judge gay people, or claiming the dictionary validates your prejudices, or else expect me to challenge such lies and homophobia.
avatar
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD

Posts : 3125
Join date : 2013-10-11
Location : Wales

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by Ivan on Tue Dec 22, 2015 2:59 pm

Whilst on the subject of food..... stirpot


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CWkz7phUwAAWDRf.jpg
avatar
Ivan
Administrator (Correspondence & Recruitment)

Posts : 6903
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : West Sussex, UK

http://cuttingedge2.forumotion.co.uk

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD on Tue Dec 22, 2015 5:12 pm

Very good, that's one I'd not seen before either.
avatar
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD

Posts : 3125
Join date : 2013-10-11
Location : Wales

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by Ivan on Sun Nov 20, 2016 8:48 am

"The fact that TV can make fun of vicars and not mullahs is a symbol of the strength of the former and the insecurity of the latter. You can stick your tongue out at a regiment, but not a street gang."
(A A Gill)
avatar
Ivan
Administrator (Correspondence & Recruitment)

Posts : 6903
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : West Sussex, UK

http://cuttingedge2.forumotion.co.uk

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by oftenwrong on Sun Nov 20, 2016 11:10 am

Men mellow with the passage of time, and young firebrands may end their lives largely in favour of the status quo ante.

Making fun of the Christian Church's holy fathers in 13th. Century Spain would not have been without consequences.
avatar
oftenwrong
Sage

Posts : 11621
Join date : 2011-10-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by polyglide on Mon Nov 21, 2016 2:35 pm

I am neither racist not homophobic, I call a spade a spade and make no excuse for doing so, what I feel regarding both is shared by the vast majority of the worls population.

I crossed swords with Dr. Sheldon because he was unable to accept the truth and wanted to make excuses rather than accept the reality.

I have exchanged points with several people who have done so in a proper manner and I only reply in kind, if you see some of the comments made by boatlady along with others you will grasp my point.

I am angry at the manner in which the people supposed to be giving a good example to the youth of today and conducting our affairs in a proper manner are in fact dealing in every possible anti social and perverted manner, disappointed may be a better description of how I feel.

What is even more of concern is when those who have all the bright ideas and think they are above being brought to task think everything in the garden is rosy, they are in for a rude awakening.

Just consider the actual facts and not attept to reduce all that is wrong in todays society, it presently stinks.

Regards.
avatar
polyglide

Posts : 3118
Join date : 2012-02-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by polyglide on Tue Nov 22, 2016 1:28 pm

For Dr, Sheldon's consideration, if you have an abnormality and find the reason for that normality it does not change the fact that it is an abnomality.

If you have a perversion and the cause is defined, it is still a perversion.

There are many types of perversion, some horrific and others brought about by the acts of nature, others by the will of man etc;

As for being coloured predudiced, I have stated previously the most devout Christians are the black people of Africa who will not make any compromises as many other so called Christians have done, and I love them all.

If you read the first book of the New Testament it will explain what all Christians should be doing at the present time, and it is not indulging in all the present corruption and anti social behavior, but attempting to inform people choose what they do that there is a way forward for everyone who wishes to take the right path,. and no Christian should judge another person, that will be down to God,
but that does not mean one has to agree to or accept wrong doing.

Regards.


avatar
polyglide

Posts : 3118
Join date : 2012-02-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD on Sat Mar 04, 2017 4:27 pm

polyglide wrote:I am neither racist not homophobic, I call a spade a spade and make no excuse for doing so, what I feel regarding both is shared by the vast majority of the worls population.

That's the most absurd hyperbole, how can you possibly make such bizarre claims as to know what the 'vast majority of the world's population believe or think? I'd love to see you try and evidence that. Your homophobia sadly is littering more than one thread, though I'll happily concede you donlt think your appalling prejudices and comments represent homophobia. Western civilisations have realised their grave moral injustice towards gay people, and most people now seem content to accept that what consenting adults do to each other is no one else's business, as long as no one is coerced or victimised adults should be free to love whoever they choose, both emotionally and physically. Condemning people with pejorative terms such as "perverts" just because they differ from the majority is of course the very definition of bigotry.

I ma an atheist, so I put no more store in religious texts be they biblical or Koranic in origins than I do in any other books. If moral or ethical concepts, ideas, and claims are demonstrably of value then they will stand on their own merits, condemning gay people is both immoral and evil. Citing religious beliefs does not make this any less so, it just shows an inability to think and reason morally, rather then playing the part of a servile automaton to archaic religious diktat. We don't allow slavery anymore after all, despite the bile, and Jesus endorsing it again and again. Nor do people waste much time worrying about the morality of eating shellfish or wearing blended fabrics. So cherry picking the bible to fuel homophobic prejudices is illogical and irrational, as well as immoral bigotry.
avatar
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD

Posts : 3125
Join date : 2013-10-11
Location : Wales

Back to top Go down

Re: Food for thought

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 10 of 10 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum