Re: Religion, gay artists and homophobia

by Papaumau Tue Feb 21, 2012 1:55 pm

First topic message reminder :

I have found that the stance against homosexuality - and in many other "biblical sins" - in almost all of the religions of the world is based on writings in their holy books.

As the word that is accepted as the word of their Gods is either said to be spoken directly to the humans that report it, ( and in many of these cases these "conduits" from the Gods are found to simply be schizophrenic ), then the word that is written by the fallible human scribes of old into these holy books is at risk of being seen as the flawed interpretation of what these scribes and prophets said they know and found to be true.

The faithful - as in all of the details surrounding faith - believe in their faith because faith requires no proof and when they act on what they find in their holy books, ( although none of the contents of these books has ever been proven to be right or accurate in fact ), their behaviour, as a result, is based on myth rather than even on secular laws. In other words, because their faith dictates that everything that is in these holy books must be true, what they find there that connects to "sin" must also be true.

I have always felt that as far as the laws of the land that I live in should never be based on religious faith, I can only take the stance that if these laws ARE in any way influenced by religion then they are not laws that can apply to everybody or that can be applied to any kind of secular rules or regulations.

Regards.....

Papaumau.

by Norm Deplume Wed Feb 25, 2015 6:42 pm

polyglide wrote:snowyflake,
Homosexuality is abnormal in every respect of the word accepted by the vast majority of people, to attempt to disguise the fact is a none starter.

If you ask any lexicographer, you will discover that dictionaries are descriptive and record the meanings of words as they are understood by the majority of the users of the language.

I suggest you get a recent dictionary.

My copy of Chambers Thesaurus shows a large number of (mostly pejorative) synonyms for homosexual but abnormal does not figure among them. I can't find my copy of Roget's Thesaurus but I doubt very much that it does either.

[Actually it just occurred to me that your Rogers Thesaurus might not be a misprint - it could be from Viz and supposedly by Roger Mellie. It hardly needs emphasising that this would not be an authoritative source.]

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Wed Feb 25, 2015 6:48 pm

polyglide wrote:Greatest I am, Then you have never read the Old Testament. There are numerous references to events that have been proven to have taken place.

I know I'll regret this but you could quote 3 for us please?

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Wed Feb 25, 2015 7:04 pm

polyglide wrote:snowyflake, I once wanted to go into a part of land that had a poster saying, no entrance without consent. I said to my friend do you give me your consent, I will give you mine and in we went. Consent does not change anything. Of course it does harm. Just consider if everyone was homosexual. If it was normal then everyone could be homosexual and the human race would still survive. I have yet to see a definition that says it is normal as normal is accepted by the vast majority of the human race.

Firstly take a look at your post, that's what it looks like when you don't put two line breaks after every sentence, PLEASE STOP DOING THAT!!!! I sometimes post on a touch screen phone and your pointless line breaks are a nightmare. Moving on....Are you being obtuse on purpose as a joke? Consensual sex between adults is not harmful in the way rape, murder, incest, bestiality etc are, so your constant attempts to compare them is ludicrous.

"Just consider if everyone was homosexual."
Why? Everyone is not homosexual so it would be an utterly pointless exercise, futile.

"If it was normal then everyone could be homosexual and the human race would still survive. "
It is normal, we've covered this with evidence, you really need to read people's posts instead of ignoring them and just repeating the same erroneous claims. There have always been gay men and women in every human society that has ever existed, and the human race is still here, so again your point is moot.

"I have yet to see a definition that says it is normal as normal is accepted by the vast majority of the human race."
That's a lie, I posted it more than once, here it is again as defined by the APA and the World Health Organisation, amongst many others...
"Since the 1970s, the consensus of the behavioral and social sciences and the health and mental health professions globally is that homosexuality is a normal variation of human sexual orientation. The American Psychological Association Council of Representatives followed in 1975. Thereafter other major mental health organizations followed and it was finally declassified by the World Health Organization in 1990. The current research and clinical literature demonstrate that same-sex sexual and romantic attractions, feelings, and behaviours are normal and positive variations of human sexuality, reflecting the official positions of the American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association."

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Wed Feb 25, 2015 7:22 pm

polyglide wrote:snowyflake,
How many times must I point out, I have no interest in the Old Testament,
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Then why did you quote it's bigoted homophobic passages at the start of this discourse?

polyglide wrote:the writings were by men and women of that time, for that time, other than the prophercies, many of which have been verified.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Surely if it's origins are an omniscient and omnipotent being then the year it was penned is irrelevant, and the prophercies (sic) would speak for themselves. Again can you name three of these prophersies (sic) that have been verified?

polyglide wrote:If I think homosexuality is abnormal and that is homophobic, then you are right, ,
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:You have said you do many times, and yes it is homophobic.

polyglide wrote:If I feel the world would be better if there was no homosexuals, I do, and that is homophobic, then I hold my hands up.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote: Were no homosexual, not was no homosexuals. Well at least you've stopped lying about being fine with them, but your attitude is still morally repugnant. This is another reason religions have had their day, and why decent people and civilised societies should consign religious superstition to the dustbin of history where it belongs. I have no desire to get rid of gay people, but we'd certainly be better of without religion as your posts in this thread have amply demonstrated.

polyglide wrote:As I have stated previously, the only thing homosexuality offers to society is self gratification, if what it involves is more so, the acts involved and not the person, then please give a full explanation.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:You don't find love gratifying? How odd. Or are you saying two people can only have a loving relationship if they procreate? Again a very odd idea, I love my wife and we've not had children, nor will we now, that doesn't stop us loving each other. You have some very very odd ideas, even for a theist.

by Greatest I am Thu Feb 26, 2015 4:48 pm

polyglide wrote:Greatest I am,

Then you have never read the Old Testament.

There are numerous references to events that have been proven to have taken place.

My whole faith is based on the promise made by Jesus.
I do not understand much of the Old Testament, as it was written at a time when I do not realise the relevance of many of the writings, as the times were entirely different, the laws were different and the meaning of words in relationship to many matters were different.

Sure. Some fiction includes facts that are real.

But for you to read anything literally in a book that begins with a talking animal and ends with a seven headed monster shows just how foolish your religion has made you.

Your mind is stuck in the Dark Ages of reading myths as real and your morals show it.

You end having to embrace barbaric human sacrifice and trying to profit from the punishment of the innocent instead of the guilty.

If you cannot see the immorality of your position then you might wonder where your satanic morals have come from.

Regards
DL

by polyglide Fri Feb 27, 2015 4:51 pm

snowyflake,
As with Dr. Sheldon, your understanding of English leaves much to be desired.

I said that homosexuality offers only gratification to those involved and nothing more.

I said give me anything else it offers to the world in general.

Nothing whatsoever to do with what I think about anything else.

by polyglide Fri Feb 27, 2015 5:00 pm

snowyflake,
Past or present makes no difference, was, were, both applicable.

It would make matters a little clearer if you could just answer the questions.

by Norm Deplume Fri Feb 27, 2015 6:20 pm

polyglide wrote:
I said that homosexuality offers only gratification to those involved and nothing more.

A lot like masturbation, then?

I find that a game of Scrabble or Bridge offers gratification to those involved and nothing more. As does prayer, but I don't indulge in that.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Fri Feb 27, 2015 8:12 pm

polyglide wrote:snowyflake, As with Dr. Sheldon, your understanding of English leaves much to be desired.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Very funny, as you've chosen the uncapitalised use of Snowyflake, yet chosen to capitalise the word as in the middle of a sentence, or is my substandard grasp of English missing a trick that your expertise has utilised? Hilarious stuff, well done...

polyglide wrote: I said that homosexuality offers only gratification to those involved and nothing more. I said give me anything else it offers to the world in general.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:It offers the opportunity for a person to love another person and share their lives with them, and even raise children together if they choose. As I stated earlier and you ignored. I also pointed out that my wife and I have not had children together and never will now, perhaps you are suggesting my marriage is just self gratification?

polyglide wrote: Nothing whatsoever to do with what I think about anything else.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:I think your bigoted prejudice towards gay people is quite enough actually. More than enough to be honest.

by snowyflake Fri Feb 27, 2015 8:15 pm

polyglide wrote:snowyflake,
As with Dr. Sheldon, your understanding of English leaves much to be desired.

I said that homosexuality offers only gratification to those involved and nothing more.

I said give me anything else it offers to the world in general.

Nothing whatsoever to do with what I think about anything else.

Does your heterosexual relationship with your wife offer you any gratification? How is that different to a homosexual relationship? I think I understand you pretty well, polyglide. You're a religious bigot and a homophobe and base your beliefs on an ancient text to justify your bigotry.

What else is there to understand. You're coming in loud and clear.

by snowyflake Fri Feb 27, 2015 8:17 pm

polyglide wrote:snowyflake,
Past or present makes no difference, was, were, both applicable.

It would make matters a little clearer if you could just answer the questions.

What questions? You didn't ask me any. And if you don't quote your text or mine, it's difficult to keep track of the conversation.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Fri Feb 27, 2015 8:24 pm

polyglide wrote:snowyflake, As with Dr. Sheldon, your understanding of English leaves much to be desired.

polyglide wrote:Human Rights. It says a person should have the right to enjoy his/her posessions. Two homosexuals went to a Chrisian families home that did bred bred and breakfast, they were well aware of the couples belief and yet although there were numerous other alternatives they had to go to this couples home and expect to sleep together in one of their beds.The couple refused and the pair of nondecripts, not because of their homosexuality, but their behaviour, took them to court and the court said the couple were discriminate. The million dollar question- where were the coupes human rights?.

Well done, I haven't laughed this much in ages, the lesser known spelling of bread in particular was hilarious, is your apostrophe key broken, or are you hitting the return key by mistake? By the way the answer to your "million dollar" question is that there is no such thing as a right to discriminate. The couple didn't go their home either, they went to their place of business, as it was being used as a B&B, and therefore public access was invited, and they had no right to refuse anyone based on their sexuality any more than they would on their skin colour. This kind of bigoted homophobic discrimination is illegal, something you might do well to take on board.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Fri Feb 27, 2015 8:27 pm

polyglide wrote:snowyflake,
Past or present makes no difference, was, were, both applicable. It would make matters a little clearer if you could just answer the questions.

Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Ahem.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:
polyglide wrote:Greatest I am, Then you have never read the Old Testament. There are numerous references to events that have been proven to have taken place.

I know I'll regret this but you could quote 3 for us please?

You seem to have ignored this, why not take your own advice? Also and your use of was instead of were was another example of execrable grammar, but please do remind everyone you don't know this, whilst trying to insult the English comprehension skills of everyone who disagrees with you.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Fri Feb 27, 2015 8:31 pm

snowyflake wrote:
polyglide wrote:snowyflake,
Past or present makes no difference, was, were, both applicable.

It would make matters a little clearer if you could just answer the questions.

What questions? You didn't ask me any. And if you don't quote your text or mine, it's difficult to keep track of the conversation.

Well, loud anyway. I'm not sure clarity is something I'd use to describe his posts if I'm honest, but then with my sub-standard grasp of English it's probably to be expected. Rolling Eyes

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Fri Mar 06, 2015 9:02 pm

AwfulTruth wrote:There is also the seriously constructive notion that in the wild, including human beings, the incidents of non-breeders (gay people and animals) helps to create a check on population numbers and can prevent, in some instances, a population explosion.

That human beings should and must be encouraged to come out and not feel compelled to 'breed' with members of the opposite sex, is actually a very healthy concept based on pragmatic assessment rather than some kind of useless dogma.

The ideology of the study of human nature should include the acceptance that human beings are far too complex to be labelled as just 'gay, straight or bisexual', and that sexual proclivity is not a matter of morality or choice, but rather a predisposed proto-genetic imperative, that transcends human philosophy, religious tenets, hostile dogma, or any other mumbo jumbo that negates the reality of the human condition and sacrifices scientific truth on the altar of homophobia.

I rest my case.

Missed this one before, an excellent post if I may say so.

by polyglide Sat Mar 07, 2015 11:28 am

AwfulTruth,
I agree with the above providing exactly the same kind of logic is used in all a matters concerning humans and not selective.

Murder, abuse, theft, etc; etc; it is too easy to make a statement involving one aspect and then attempting to make other excuses not to include others when it suits.

by snowyflake Sat Mar 07, 2015 12:05 pm

polyglide wrote:AwfulTruth,
I agree with the above providing exactly the same kind of logic is used in all a matters concerning humans and not selective.

Murder, abuse, theft, etc; etc; it is too easy to make a statement involving one aspect and then attempting to make other excuses not to include others when it suits.

You are not very good at reading people's posts without the brick wall of religious preconception and bias blinding your reason. A murderer or a thief or a paedophile is a CRIMINAL. Being homosexual is not a crime! How many times do we have to repeat this to you before you realise your foolishness? Do you not see that your religious bias is lumping homosexuality into criminal behaviour. IT ISN'T!

Get over it. Let go of your hatred and bias for people who are, after all, you believe created in god's image . You will feel much better about it and I'm sure it will make you feel closer to god and less judgemental. All that hatred and confusion isn't healthy.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Sat Mar 07, 2015 8:08 pm

polyglide wrote:AwfulTruth,
I agree with the above providing exactly the same kind of logic is used in all a matters concerning humans and not selective.

Murder, abuse, theft, etc; etc; it is too easy to make a statement involving one aspect and then attempting to make other excuses not to include others when it suits.

So have you told your gay "friends" that you think they are no better than murderers and abusers? Or do you only use this homophobic religious bigotry for your pet prejudices when it suits, then ignore it when you want to pretend you're a loving caring christian?

by Greatest I am Sat Mar 07, 2015 9:57 pm

polyglide wrote:

I said that homosexuality offers only gratification to those involved and nothing more.

What gratification do any of us owe the population at large?

What have you given?

What do heterosexuals offer for the gratification of others when the world population is growing as it does?

Regards
DL

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Sun Mar 08, 2015 11:01 am

polyglide wrote:AwfulTruth,
I agree with the above providing exactly the same kind of logic is used in all a matters concerning humans and not selective. Murder, abuse, theft, etc; etc; it is too easy to make a statement involving one aspect and then attempting to make other excuses not to include others when it suits.

You think murder theft and abuse should be decriminalised? I am too scared to ask what the "etc etc" refers to, but your post is as absurdly stupid as it is offensive, and several posters have gone to the trouble of pointing out that your religious bigotry towards gay people has you comparing them with heinous crimes and criminals. Such as, but not limited to, murderers and rapists. Though I'm sure we can all now see how incongruous this claim is alongside your now equally absurd claims that you love gay people, that you have gay friends, and that you treat gay people as equals. You really need to take some time to reflect on your attitude towards people who just happen to be gay, and examine whether it really is reasonable to compare them to rapists and murderers, as this kind of prejudice is deeply unhealthy, and egregiously immoral. Your religious beliefs having you making the most absurd claims that fly in the face of overwhelming evidence, but this particular belief is very harmful to others who have done nothing to do deserve such prejudice.

by polyglide Mon Mar 09, 2015 2:42 pm

Dr. Sheldon,
I could realy go to town and explain just what you are, however, I will just put you straight once and for all regarding homosexuality.

I have no problem whatsoever with homosexuals, as I have pointed out many times, as I have several friends that are so.

NOW, get someone to explain just what that means.

I at no time have I ever tried to compare homosexuality with anything else.

NOW get someone to expalin that to you.

My point is that it does not matter if it is murder, excessive love, hate, kindness, heartfelt sympathy, etc; if genes are responsible for everything we are, then you have to make the same response as the preson involved having had no choice.

NOW, get someone to explain that to you and stop attepting to intimidate others, who are more able to uderstand what is written as oppose to attempting to cause trouble due to your obvious lack of understanding what is written as opposed to what you think.

by snowyflake Mon Mar 09, 2015 7:31 pm

If you think that everything is in the genes and we have no control over our genes or their configuration, why is homosexuality a sin? And surely god would have known it was in the genes and made an allowance for it. Why didn't he?

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Mon Mar 09, 2015 7:56 pm

polyglide wrote:Dr. Sheldon, I could realy go to town and explain just what you are,
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:More ad hominem, sigh. Far better if you got someone to explain that really has two l's in it. Now please do leave the childish ad hominem alone there's a good chap.

polyglide however, I will just put you straight once and for all regarding homosexuality.I have no problem whatsoever with homosexuals, as I have pointed out many times, as I have several friends that are so.NOW, get someone to explain just what that means.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:You can repeat this ad infinitum, however we all read your posts repeatedly claiming gay people were unnatural, abnormal perverted deviants, so it's a palpable lie. You still haven't told us if you have told your gay "friends" that you feel this way about them. I'm guessing you haven't, so they're not your friends at all as you're lying to them as well.

I at no time have I ever tried to compare homosexuality with anything else. NOW get someone to expalin that to you.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:You've repeatedly made analogous comparisons between being gay and heinous crimes like rape and murder, GET SOMEONE TO EXPLAIN THAT TO YOU, as your grasp of English seems to have left you unaware of it, but again we have all read your posts so don't waste everyone's time denying it when we know otherwsie.

polyglide My point is that it does not matter if it is murder, excessive love, hate, kindness, heartfelt sympathy, etc; if genes are responsible for everything we are, then you have to make the same response as the preson involved having had no choice.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Another gem, care to show where I claimed our genes were responsible for any of that? A person doesn't choose to be gay any more than they choose to be straight. Murder by definition involves a conscious decision as it has to be premeditated, look it up in a dictionary.

polyglideNOW, get someone to explain that to you and stop attepting to intimidate others, who are more able to uderstand what is written
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:I think I just wet myself, it never ceases to amaze that someone, with writing abilities that are to put it mildly nothing to boast about, keeps trying to insult others in this way. Just where exactly have I tried to intimidate anyone? Dear oh dear...do grow up Polyglide and leave the constant ad hominem alone, how many times must you be told before you desist from these childish tantrums every time someone dares to disagree with you. This is supposed to be a forum for debate after all.

as oppose to attempting to cause trouble due to your obvious lack of understanding what is written as opposed to what you think.
Dr Sheldon Cooper wrote:Again would you care to give even a shred of evidence for this rather childish accusation? I'm guessing not as you've shown no inclination thus far to evidence any of your histrionics. I am more than happy for others to read what's been written by you and by me, and decide for themselves whether you're talking complete rubbish, again.

by polyglide Tue Mar 10, 2015 11:22 am

Dr, Sheldon,
Please substanciate your remarks that I have compared homosexuality with any other activity.

If not then you should be barred from posting for a month for I take great exception to this.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Tue Mar 10, 2015 11:35 am

polyglide wrote:Homosexuality is abnormal in every respect of the word accepted by the vast majority of people, to attempt to disguise the fact is a none starter.

You could make the same for murder, wife beating and child abuse, just because you think homosexuality does not harm anyone does not alter the FACTS.

Since you asked me to verify you'd made an analogous comparison between being gay and some fairly nasty heinous crimes here's one example above. It's on the previous page, and it is far from the only example.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Tue Mar 10, 2015 11:37 am

Now perhaps you'd care to cite a single remark of mine that is homophobic, since you've made this astnishingly false accusation against me.

Though I doubt you'll even acknowledge it now, for shame.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Tue Mar 10, 2015 12:57 pm

So he storms in, makes the most outrageously false accusation up, asked for evidence for my post which I've given countless times accusing me of lying. So I evidence my claim again and he ignores it. I ask him to evidence his outrageous lie and he ignores that.

Polyglide you're priceless.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Tue Mar 10, 2015 1:15 pm

polyglide wrote:Dr, Sheldon, Please substanciate your remarks that I have compared homosexuality with any other activity. If not then you should be barred from posting for a month for I take great exception to this.

polyglide wrote: Homosexuality is abnormal in every respect of the word accepted by the vast majority of people, to attempt to disguise the fact is a none starter.

You could make the same for murder, wife beating and child abuse, just because you think homosexuality does not harm anyone does not alter the FACTS.

This is a "slam-dunk" surely? Surely no one with any integrity would hope to try and ignore such a damning contradiction?

Well he's discovered an interesting new way to spell substantiate anyway. Come on folks you can tell me if this is all an elaborate wind-up, I'll laugh I promise.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Tue Mar 10, 2015 1:20 pm

In all the excitement he's ignored this one as well.

Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:
polyglide wrote:
Greatest I am, Then you have never read the Old Testament. There are numerous references to events that have been proven to have taken place.

I know I'll regret this but you could quote 3 for us please?

Any time you're ready polyglide, otherwise we might be inclined to think you're just making things up.

by polyglide Tue Mar 10, 2015 3:05 pm

Dr, Sheldon,
Do you actually read what other posters say and what is more, with understanding.

I gave the oppropriate references, Matthew 16 :16 if you are too tired to read them that is your fault.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Tue Mar 10, 2015 3:45 pm

So no acknowledgment that your accusation against me being homophobic was a lie then. Quelle surprise.

No acknowledgment of my quoting your post where you compared being gay to murder paedophilia and rape then. Quelle surprise.

You still haven't said if you have told these gay friends you claim to have that you think they are abnormal unnatural perverted deviants?

Why won't you answer this question?

by polyglide Tue Mar 10, 2015 3:53 pm

DR. Sheldon.
This is a typical example of your inability to understand what is written as opposed to your misinterpretation.

At no time have I ever suggested you are one thing or another.

If so state where or apologise.

When I requested how your views are I gave several options which I feel covered all of them and did not in any way give an opinion on any.

This is your main fault, you do not read with any understanding.

If I said do you like jam on your bread, cheese, onions, or any other option, would you say I was in any way biased towards one or another?

Please read and understand what is written and not what you think is written.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Tue Mar 10, 2015 3:58 pm

polyglide wrote:DR. Sheldon.
This is a typical example of your inability to understand what is written as opposed to your misinterpretation.

At no time have I ever suggested you are one thing or another.

If so state where or apologise.

When I requested how your views are I gave several options which I feel covered all of them and did not in any way give an opinion on any.

This is your main fault, you do not read with any understanding.

If I said do you like jam on your bread, cheese, onions, or any other option, would you say I was in any way biased towards one or another?

Please read and understand what is written and not what you think is written.

So have you told your gay friends you think they're abnormal unnatural perverted deviants or not?

by polyglide Tue Mar 10, 2015 4:16 pm

Dr, Sheldon,
Every one I know, knows they are different.

A name is just a name.

If I was to pervert the cource of justice I would be a pervert, or did any other activity requiring the name.

It is you who are putting what is not implied into the matter.

As for not causing any problems, just tell that to the parents and the person involved when the whole family is split up because someone comes out and , unfortunately, through predudice he is not accepted within the family.

I deplore this but it is a mtter of fact in many cases and is part and parcel of the problem.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Tue Mar 10, 2015 6:16 pm

polyglide wrote:Dr, Sheldon,
Every one I know, knows they are different.

A name is just a name.

If I was to pervert the cource of justice I would be a pervert, or did any other activity requiring the name.

It is you who are putting what is not implied into the matter.

As for not causing any problems, just tell that to the parents and the person involved when the whole family is split up because someone comes out and , unfortunately, through predudice he is not accepted within the family.

I deplore this but it is a mtter of fact in many cases and is part and parcel of the problem.

So is that a yes you have told your gay "friends" that you think they are abnormal unnatural perverted deviants, or a no you haven't? You seem to be avoiding answering this, why is that?

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Tue Mar 10, 2015 6:18 pm

By the way Polyglide I don't see a single quote from to justify your implying I was homophobic, yet I also don't see an apology for this outrageous lie. Isn't lying a sin for christians any more, or are you just making this up as you go along?

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Tue Mar 10, 2015 6:23 pm

polyglide wrote:
Dr, Sheldon, Please substanciate your remarks that I have compared homosexuality with any other activity. If not then you should be barred from posting for a month for I take great exception to this.

polyglide wrote:
Homosexuality is abnormal in every respect of the word accepted by the vast majority of people, to attempt to disguise the fact is a none starter.

You could make the same for murder, wife beating and child abuse, just because you think homosexuality does not harm anyone does not alter the FACTS.

I didn't catch your apology here either for implying I had lied when I had not.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Tue Mar 10, 2015 6:26 pm

polyglide wrote: If I was to pervert the cource of justice I would be a pervert,

Well you might but the two things would be unrelated, perverting the cource (sic) of justice would make you a criminal, not a pervert, and this an unbelievably stupid claim you've posted. Also it's course of justice not cource (sic). However feel free to tell me I don't understand English again, as I think I am starting to see the actual problem here.

by polyglide Wed Mar 11, 2015 11:10 am

Dr, Sheldon,
You are so out of touch with reality as to make it a thing of the past.

I do not alude, sorry, allude to anything other that the point in question.

You have a strange way of thinking.

Because a perversion includes involving a crime it does not make it a perversion?????.

How odd.

by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD Wed Mar 11, 2015 12:00 pm

polyglide wrote:Dr, Sheldon,
You are so out of touch with reality as to make it a thing of the past.

I do not alude, sorry, allude to anything other that the point in question.

You have a strange way of thinking.

Because a perversion includes involving a crime it does not make it a perversion?????.

How odd.

I'll ignore the tedious attacks on my reasoning, as it's clear you genuinely believe this to be the case, and again I'm more than happy for everyone to read what's been written by you and by me and decide for themselves who's delusional.

Perverting the course of justice would not necessarily make you a pervert. It would definitely make you a criminal. As I said, though I did not say the two things were mutually exclusive. I'm afraid your grasp of the English language is sadly lacking here again, and is without doubt the reason you continually insist that everyone else is to blame for the confusion your garbled posts cause.

Have another read of my post and see if you can work out why your assumption was wrong.

In the mean time perhaps you are now ready to tell all the posters who have asked you whether you have told your gay "friends" that you think they're abnormal unnatural perverted deviants?

by Norm Deplume Wed Mar 11, 2015 12:44 pm

I checked on the meaning of 'pervert'.

pervert, n.

1. One who has been perverted; one who has forsaken a doctrine or system regarded as true for one esteemed false; an apostate.

2. Psychol. One who suffers from a perversion of the sexual instinct.

pervert, v.

1. trans. To turn upside down; to upset, overthrow; to subvert, ruin. Obs.
2. To turn aside from its right course, aim, etc.
2.a To turn aside from justice, right order, etc.
2.b To turn from the proper use, purpose, or meaning; to misapply, misconstrue, wrest the purport of.
2.c To turn, divert. Obs. rare—1.
2.d intr. for refl. To become perverted. rare.
3. trans. To turn (a person, the mind, etc.) away from right opinion or action; to lead astray; to corrupt.
3.b spec. To turn (any one) aside from a right to a false or erroneous religious belief or system (i.e. to what the speaker or writer holds to be such).
3.c intr. To turn aside from the right course; to become a pervert.
4. Geom. trans. To reverse the right and left directions of; to form the perverse of (see perverse n.).

There are a few things to note here.

First, the noun is not identical in use to the verb.
Second, meaning 2 of the noun is marked as specialist usage.

The various citations are too long to quote here but most refer to religious beliefs. The phrase "perverting the course of justice" appears under meaning 2a.

======
Using one sense (2a) of the verb and attaching to it a separate sense (2.) of the noun is an error. It is coining, without explanation, a new sense.

======
Under the original sense of the noun, someone who, for instance, decided that the Old Testament was irrelevant could legitimately be accounted a pervert.

by Sponsored content