Zanzibar outlaws homosexual acts

[radhak]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3625269.stm


was not aware this was of issue anywhere but the US.

btw, there is implicit gender-bias thrown in : gays get 25 years, lesbians only 7 ;)

------------

Zanzibar's parliament has passed a bill that outlaws homosexuality and lesbianism.
The bill imposes stiff penalties which include up to 25 years imprisonment for those in gay relationships.

The overwhelmingly Muslim Indian Ocean island is a key tourist destination on the East African coast.

The attorney-general said they were determined to prevent Zanzibari culture from being corrupted. The president is expected to approve the bill into law.


Rare union

Correspondents say the number of homosexuals and lesbians is on the rise in the Indian Ocean island.

The penalty for those in lesbian relationships will be a seven-year jail term.

A penalty of life imprisonment will be imposed on anyone found guilty of sodomising a minor.

The bill was supported by both the ruling Chama cha Mapinduzi (CCM) and the Civic United Front (CUF) - a rare occasion of political unity.

[miloblithe]

I think most countries in the world outside Europe ban homosexuality:

http://www.ageofconsent.com/ageofconsent.htm

[baby duck monge]

boo. let people be what they are.

[bousozoku]

Why didn't they just ban reality from their shores? Are they going to be able to censor satellite broadcasts? Are the people living there so naive that they don't know what really happens?

[applemacdude]

Doesnt this belong more in the political section?

[wwidgirl]

wow. more proof the world sucks.

[Dippo]

I think the gender bias is a little stupid, but we could certianly use laws like that here in the US. :D

[vniow]

I think the gender bias is a little stupid, but we could certianly use laws like that here in the US. :D

http://woah.alamak.com/i/slap.gif

[blue&whiteman]

http://woah.alamak.com/i/slap.gif

i'm all for people doing what they want in the privacy of their own room but you indicating a slap to his face makes you no better than dippo for what he said.

remember a thing called free speech?

[Taft]

i'm all for people doing what they want in the privacy of their own room but you indicating a slap to his face makes you no better than dippo for what he said.

remember a thing called free speech?

I think he does. And as a result, he has "voiced" his disgust with Dippo's close-minded and hate-filled response. Unless you think that little emoticon qualifies as a threat? If so, that's just silly.

A virtual slap in the face is nice compared to the verbal tongue lashing I think he deserves.

Taft

[hacurio1]

I think the gender bias is a little stupid, but we could certianly use laws like that here in the US. :D

I agree, but if we start debating this topic, this thread will turn into an infinite debate about human rights, extreme views of human rights, conservative views, extreme conservative views, and some people will even say the rest of the world sucks and the rest of the world population have primitive and uneducated views. Every body is entitled to an opinion, but some people take these topics personal and out of the scope of rationality; hence, turning an interesting conversation into insults and rude comments. That’s why talking about homosexuality, religion, gender, etc, is not always a good idea.

[blue&whiteman]

I think he does. And as a result, he has "voiced" his disgust with Dippo's close-minded and hate-filled response. Unless you think that little emoticon qualifies as a threat? If so, that's just silly.

A virtual slap in the face is nice compared to the verbal tongue lashing I think he deserves.

Taft

to me it indicated that he should be slapped for saying that. just my take on it..

[vniow]

I think he does. And as a result, he has "voiced" his disgust with Dippo's close-minded and hate-filled response.


She.

to me it indicated that he should be slapped for saying that. just my take on it..

I could have posted a long winded response on why I was disgusted and offended by Dippo's comment but I chose a smiley instead. It said all that I wanted to. I know about free speech and I also know that I have the right (within the forum rules) to post my responses to said comments.

[blue&whiteman]

fair enough. I simply misread you. sorry for the confusion.

[zimv20]

the irony is that the most famous person (who i know of) to come from zanzibar was gay

[mactastic]

the irony is that the most famous person (who i know of) to come from zanzibar was gay

And we know how much you love irony!

[SlyHunter]

Canada has just outlawed any statement printed or by voice that denigrates or insults Homosexuals. In otherwords they have just outlawed the bible.

I started a thread on that topic there as Sly69 and am sure there is a link there to the original story. http://www.imesh.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=50881

And now you know where I came from.

[blue&whiteman]

Canada has just outlawed any statement printed or by voice that denigrates or insults Homosexuals. In otherwords they have just outlawed the bible.

I started a thread on that topic there as Sly69 and am sure there is a link there to the original story. http://www.imesh.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=50881

And now you know where I came from.

shows how good a nation canada is. canada has the best human rights in the world period. I think the fact that they put peoples rights before the bible proves that. the bible is backward thinking and very old so in some ways you have to go against it in the modern world to make life equal for all.

canada was also one of the first nations to allow same sex marriages to the full extent. this means a same sex couple has all the wedlock rights a strait couple does. canada also was the first nation in the world to have an anti-stalking law to help protect women.

to move forward you must think forward.

[whocares]

Canada has just outlawed any statement printed or by voice that denigrates or insults Homosexuals. In otherwords they have just outlawed the bible.

I started a thread on that topic there as Sly69 and am sure there is a link there to the original story. http://www.imesh.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=50881

And now you know where I came from.

Of course, the Bible knows what's best for Canada, and the government elected by Canadians doesn't have a ****ing clue... :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[SlyHunter]

Of course, the Bible knows what's best for Canada, and the government elected by Canadians doesn't have a ****ing clue... :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
I have the right to not like Homosexuals because they are homosexuals.
You have the right to not like christians because they are christians.
Now in Canada only one of us has our rights.
Its not even legal technically to print or read a bible in Canada. In otherwords they just made it illegal to be a christian in Canada. They just made it illegal to be a Muslem in Canada. They just made it illegal to be a Mormon in Canada. By that one short sighted narrow minded law.

Truthfully I doubt they'll enforce it that strictly. But they could if they wanted to, now.

[blue&whiteman]

you can be sure this law won't affect free speech or religion anyway. i'm sure the focus here is senseless bashing of homosexuals for the sake of hate. free speech and bashing are 2 very different things..

[whocares]

I have the right to not like Homosexuals because they are homosexuals.
You have the right to not like christians because they are christians.
Now in Canada only one of us has our rights.
Its not even legal technically to print or read a bible in Canada. In otherwords they just made it illegal to be a christian in Canada. They just made it illegal to be a Muslem in Canada. They just made it illegal to be a Mormon in Canada. By that one short sighted narrow minded law.
(...)

I fully understand your point in that it's wrong for the Bible to be illegal.
However, I do not feel you have the right to not like homosexuals because they are homosexuals. Do you not like black people just because they are black?

My point is, the Canadian government is better suited to decide on Canada's future, than a 2000 year old book. I wont even enter the debate about the Bible not conveying the words of God and Christ.

Canada is right is creating such a law, as it protects homosexuals from insults and discrimination, and believe it or not, it would protect *your* rights and liberties if you were a Canadian. I'd like to take a few minutes to remind you that Christians used to be a minority, and they would have enjoyed some similar law that would protect them.

[SlyHunter]

you can be sure this law won't affect free speech or religion anyway. i'm sure the focus here is senseless bashing of homosexuals for the sake of hate. free speech and bashing are 2 very different things..
That link included a trial where they arrested a preacher for saying Homosexuality was bad. Also mentioned investigation into another preacher who said that homosexualities could be help for prosecution but then decided not to prosecute under that law.

It appears nobody actually followed the link to see what I'm actually talking about so I'll go ahead and post my original post on the topic here.


'Canada is a pleasantly authoritarian country," Alan Borovoy, general counsel of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, said a few years ago. An example of what he means is Bill C-250, a repressive, anti-free-speech measure that is on the brink of becoming law in Canada. It would add "sexual orientation" to the Canadian hate propaganda law, thus making public criticism of homosexuality a crime. It is sometimes called the "Bible as Hate Literature" bill, or simply "the chill bill." It could ban publicly expressed opposition to gay marriage or any other political goal of gay groups. The bill has a loophole for religious opposition to homosexuality, but few scholars think it will offer protection, given the strength of the gay lobby and the trend toward censorship in Canada. Law Prof. David Bernstein, in his new book "You Can't Say That!" wrote that "it has apparently become illegal in Canada to advocate traditional Christian opposition to homosexual sex." Or traditional Jewish or Muslim opposition, too.

Yea sure lets make it illegal to voice our true opinions. Lets hire thought police to run around and control the way people think. Lets outlaw all religions for all of them condemns Homosexuality. Yes I realize some smart ass will now come up with a modern twisted religion that loves Homosexuality.

Since Canada has no First Amendment, anti-bias laws generally trump free speech and freedom of religion. A recent flurry of cases has mostly gone against free expression. The Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission ruled that a newspaper ad listing biblical passages that oppose homosexuality was a human-rights offense. The commission ordered the paper and Hugh Owens, the man who placed the ad, to pay $1,500 each to three gay men who objected to it. In another case, a British Columbia court upheld the one-month suspension, without pay, of a high school teacher who wrote letters to a local paper arguing that homosexuality is not a fixed orientation but a condition that can and should be treated. The teacher, Chris Kempling, was not accused of discrimination, merely of expressing thoughts that the state defines as improper.

That anti-free-speech principle, social conservatives argue, will become explicit national policy under C-250, with criminal penalties attached. Religious groups say it would become risky for them to teach certain biblical passages. If a student says something that irritates homosexuals in class, the student's parents might be held legally liable. Some Canadians worry that, for instance, discussions about gay men giving blood will be suppressed. Robert Spitzer of Columbia University, a longtime supporter of gay rights and an important figure in the American Psychiatric Association, published a study finding that many gays can become heterosexual. Would that study be banned under C-250 as hate speech? And since C-250 does not mention homosexuality but focuses broadly on "sexual orientation," Canada's freewheeling judiciary may explicitly extend protection to many "sexual minorities." Pedophilia and sadism are among the conditions listed by the American Psychiatric Association under "sexual orientation."

Church foes? The churches seem to be the key target of C-250. One of Canada's gay senators denounced "ecclesiastical dictators" and wrote to a critic, "You people are sick. God should strike you dead." In 1998, lesbian lawyer Barbara Finlay of British Columbia said "the legal struggle for queer rights will one day be a struggle between freedom of religion versus sexual orientation."

It's starting to be defined just that way in other countries. In Sweden, sermons are explicitly covered by an anti-hate-speech law passed to protect homosexuals. The Swedish chancellor of justice said any reference to the Bible's stating that homosexuality is sinful might be a criminal offense, and a Pentecostal minister is already facing charges. In Britain, police investigated Anglican Bishop Peter Forster of Chester after he told a local paper: "Some people who are primarily homosexual can reorientate themselves. I would encourage them to consider that as an option." Police sent a copy of his remarks to prosecutors, but the case was dropped. In Ireland last August, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties warned that clergy who circulated a Vatican statement opposing gay marriages could face prosecution under incitement-to-hatred legislation.

In the United States, the dominance of anti-bias laws and rules limiting free speech and free exercise of religion is clear on campuses, not so clear in the real world. Still, First Amendment arguments are losing ground to antidiscrimination laws in many areas, and once stalwart free-speech groups, like the American Civil Liberties Union, have mostly gone over to the other side. An unlikely split has occurred. In the interest of fighting bias, liberal groups reliably promote laws that limit First Amendment principles. The best defenders of free speech and freedom of religion are no longer on the left. They are found on the right.


http://www.townhall.com/columnists/johnleo/jl20040412.shtml
Rereading it I see I missed that religious loophole clause but according to the above article its not much of a loophole.

[vwcruisn]

Canada has just outlawed any statement printed or by voice that denigrates or insults Homosexuals. In otherwords they have just outlawed the bible.

I started a thread on that topic there as Sly69 and am sure there is a link there to the original story. http://www.imesh.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=50881

And now you know where I came from.


ahh.. outlawing hate.. what a beautiful concept

[whocares]

you can be sure this law won't affect free speech or religion anyway. i'm sure the focus here is senseless bashing of homosexuals for the sake of hate. free speech and bashing are 2 very different things..

And it brings up the philosophical question of what is the limit of free speech... Saying you don't like gays, or christians, or {insert group of people here} for trivial reasons* infringes on other people's freedom.



(*IMHO religious reasons are equally trivial because they are based on people's beliefs. I'm not insulting religion or religious people's beliefs. I'm just saying that not like gays because my religion says you shouldn't, is a trivial reason for not liking them.)

[wwidgirl]

Leviticus 20:13, says, according to the New International Version, "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

ugh..... that's pretty hatefilled.

"Justice J. Barclay wrote in his opinion that the human-rights panel "was correct in concluding that the advertisement can objectively be seen as exposing homosexuals to hatred or ridicule."

"When the use of the circle and slash is combined with the passages of the Bible, it exposes homosexuals to detestation, vilification and disgrace," Barclay said. "In other words, the biblical passage which suggests that if a man lies with a man they must be put to death exposes homosexuals to hatred."

In the 2001 ruling, Saskatchewan Human Rights Board of Inquiry commissioner Valerie Watson emphasized that the panel was not banning parts of the Bible. She wrote that the offense was the combination of the symbol and the biblical references. Owens, in fact, published an ad in 2001, without complaint, that quoted the full text of the passages he cited in the offending 1997 ad. "

source (http://www.survivalforum.com/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=813)

OLD NEWS KIDDIES- 2001

[blue&whiteman]

well those religions will just have to take the anti-gay parts out of their service or whatever then. can these religions not exist without anti-homosexual? many beliefs in the world change their ways to suit the modern world.

thank god i'm a buddhist and I don't have to put up with all the backward thinking christians do.

everything in the world changes eventually and all you can hope for is that things change for the better. I feel it has.

the less hate and negativity in the world the better.

[Frohickey]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3625269.stm


Why are people even surprised at this news? The reason for this is there, plain as day...

Second paragraph. The overwhelmingly Muslim Indian Ocean island is a key tourist destination on the East African coast.

Its the law in Iran (http://www.irvl.net/homosexuality.htm).
Pretty much any Muslim country that are organized around Sharia law (http://www.ilga.info/Information/Legal_survey/middle%20east/supporting%20files/sharia_law.htm).

I do admire Islam's characterization of what sexuality and sex would be like in paradise. Here is a snippet from the above url.

Islam considers sexuality an absolutely normal and natural urge of every human being. Symbolic of this positive attitude is the important place sex is accorded in paradise.... Islamic representations of paradise depict a height of delights, with, among other things, girls whose virginity is continually renewed, immortal boys as beautiful as hidden pearls, perpetual erections and infinite orgasms.

Now, if only Muslim biomedical firms can make a drug that renews virginity, gives perpetual erections (without infringing on Pfizer's patent on Viagra), and infinite orgasms... :D :D :D

[wwidgirl]

It's not just that he was anti-gay. He had had another ad before that didn't include that particularly hateful bible verse. Homophobia IS OK. But a bible verse talking about homosexuals SHOULD BE PUT TO DEATH including a symbole with an x through it another story.

[SlyHunter]

well those religions will just have to take the anti-gay parts out of their service or whatever then. can these religions not exist without anti-homosexual? many beliefs in the world change their ways to suit the modern world.

thank god i'm a buddhist and I don't have to put up with all the backward thinking christians do.

everything in the world changes eventually and all you can hope for is that things change for the better. I feel it has.

the less hate and negativity in the world the better.
To do that would be to declare that the book you have faith in is a work of fiction and subject to editing by ordinary mortal men.

Also this isn't just about religion this is about controlling people. Controlling them thru the use of vocabulary. I remember once reading a book about a bunch of slaves who didn't know they were slaves. See in their language there was no word for slave, freedom, I, me etc. They were enslaved by language, which made it difficult for them to think things out of the norm for without the vocabulary you can be restricted.

Its not right legislating controls of what you can think or say about a topic. Next they'll make it illegal to say anything bad about their government. Illegal to say anything bad about their medical system. Illegal to criticize anything. Dominoes.

[wwidgirl]

Not really. This was three years ago. we're fine thank you very much.

Also, the bible HAs changed. If you look at different versions of the bible, THEY ARE DIFFERENT VERSIONS!

I did a search and the new testament verse 1 Corinthians 6:9 does USUALLY say something about homosexuality, depending on which version of the bible you look at. if you go to my link below and check out different versions of the new testament, not all of them have this reference to homosexuality oddly enough.

http://www.ccel.org/wwsb/1Corinthians/6.html

King James Version.
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

And somehow, an explicit reference to homosexuality is found in the NEW king james version.

NEW King James
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites,

Young's literal translation.
Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites

etc. AND often the word "sodomite" is used intead of homosexual meaning that Lesbians ARE ALLOWED according the bible, and I guess if you're gay and don't sodomise that you're good to go?


To do that would be to declare that the book you have faith in is a work of fiction and subject to editing by ordinary mortal men.

Also this isn't just about religion this is about controlling people. Controlling them thru the use of vocabulary. I remember once reading a book about a bunch of slaves who didn't know they were slaves. See in their language there was no word for slave, freedom, I, me etc. They were enslaved by language, which made it difficult for them to think things out of the norm for without the vocabulary you can be restricted.

Its not right legislating controls of what you can think or say about a topic. Next they'll make it illegal to say anything bad about their government. Illegal to say anything bad about their medical system. Illegal to criticize anything. Dominoes.

[SlyHunter]

It's not just that he was anti-gay. He had had another ad before that didn't include that particularly hateful bible verse. Homophobia IS OK. But a bible verse talking about homosexuals SHOULD BE PUT TO DEATH including a symbole with an x through it another story. He said the same thing about vendors selling things in the temple. I always figured that Jesus had his own opinions about things that did not always coincide with those opinions of Gods. Proof that Jesus was a man. Nobody has the right to force anyone to remove those passages from the bible.

[zimv20]

the less hate and negativity in the world the better.
it's irony day! is it the case that religion increases it, or is it just my imagination?

[blue&whiteman]

Its not right legislating controls of what you can think or say about a topic.

it is right when stopping it stops hate. it would not hurt people against homosexuality to stop being against it but it does hurt the homosexuals themselves to let the hate happen.

[wwidgirl]

He said the same thing about vendors selling things in the temple. I always figured that Jesus had his own opinions about things that did not always coincide with those opinions of Gods. Proof that Jesus was a man. Nobody has the right to force anyone to remove those passages from the bible.
THis is now. this is today. We're talking about how things affect people TODAY.

[blue&whiteman]

it's irony day! is it the case that religion increases it, or is it just my imagination?

only the people that follow religion blindly increase negativity. religion is simply a guideline. some follow it to a T and other follow it with a critical mind.

[wwidgirl]

lot of misinformation has been circulated about C-250:

- C-250 is not a new law. C-250 does not even add a new section or subsection to an existing law. It merely enlarges subsection 4 of section 308; it increases the number of classes protected from hate speech and literature from the previous four groups to five.

- It is not a pro-homosexual bill. The bill does not mention gays, lesbians or homosexuals. It equally protects persons of all sexual orientations, whether heterosexual, bisexual or homosexual, not just gays or lesbians.

- It does not represent a threat to any priest, minister, pastor or other clergy delivering anti-gay sermons. Anyone delivering an anti-gay speech based on the famous six passages in the Bible or similar passages from the holy texts of other religions is immune from prosecution. This would apply whether the person is a member of the clergy or laity.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_hat6.htm

[hacurio1]

And it brings up the philosophical question of what is the limit of free speech... Saying you don't like gays, or christians, or {insert group of people here} for trivial reasons* infringes on other people's freedom.



(*IMHO religious reasons are equally trivial because they are based on people's beliefs. I'm not insulting religion or religious people's beliefs. I'm just saying that not like gays because my religion says you shouldn't, is a trivial reason for not liking them.)

Ok, but people’s beliefs are the basis of a societal structure like ours. Freedom of speech is an ideology not something tangible. So how is it that the government should tell us what beliefs are more important or more valid than others? Also, please someone educate me. I know what homosexuality is, but what is it? I mean, does it come from the psyche? Is it a chemical imbalance in the brain? What part of the brain determines gender? Is it based on hormones? Is it social? I’m not trying to be rude, I’m just ignorant in that matter. Where does homosexuality come form? I don’t think I will be able to make an educated opinion if I don’t know what I’m talking about. Human rights is one thing, but I think that using Human rights to elaborate an argument about something I don’t know, just doesn’t cut it for me.

[wwidgirl]

You can say whatever you want about homosexuality.
It's not about beliefs. You can believe whatever you want.
But you can't put an ad out that includes a verse which says that Homosexuals should be put to death. You can say it's wrong, you can say it's against nature but you can't say they should be put to death (and a two male symbols with an x through it)

Ok, but people’s beliefs are the basis of a societal structure like ours. Freedom of speech is an ideology not something tangible. So how is it that the government should tell us what beliefs are more important or more valid than others? Also, please someone educate me. I know what homosexuality is, but what is it? I mean, does it come from the psyche? Is it a chemical imbalance in the brain? What part of the brain determines gender? Is it based on hormones? Is it social? I’m not trying to be rude, I’m just ignorant in that matter. Where does homosexuality come form? I don’t think I will be able to make an educated opinion if I don’t know what I’m talking about. Human rights is one thing, but I think that using Human rights to elaborate an argument about something I don’t know, just doesn’t cut it for me.

[blue&whiteman]

you can be sure this law won't affect free speech or religion anyway. i'm sure the focus here is senseless bashing of homosexuals for the sake of hate. free speech and bashing are 2 very different things..

like I said before. thanks wwidgirl for backing this up.

[hacurio1]

You can say whatever you want about homosexuality.
It's not about beliefs. You can believe whatever you want.
But you can't put an ad out that includes a verse which says that Homosexuals should be put to death. You can say it's wrong, you can say it's against nature but you can't say they should be put to death (and a two male symbols with an x through it)

Actually, it is about believes, ideas, conceptions, perceptions, and preconceptions. People fighting against homosexuality or for it, do it because they believe in certain things. I agree with you, I “believe” that saying that homosexuals should be put to death is wrong, but there are people who believe gay marriage shouldn’t be allowed, and there are people who believe its ok. But how can I have a stand in something I don’t fully understand, that’s why I asked the questions about homosexuality! I’m not religious, but I had a problem about your reference with religion. And I ask again, government has the power to say what it’s ok and what isn’t, that’s why laws are in place, but should laws prevail over religion? You see, it’s just a very gray and complicated area. Millions around the world believe in God first, and then in the physical world, and one cant just say, your view is old and must be changed. That’s why a person’s believes are core for this argument. Changing a person’s opinion is easy, changing a perception is hard, but changing believes is almost impossible.

[zimv20]

does it come from the psyche? Is it a chemical imbalance in the brain? What part of the brain determines gender? Is it based on hormones? Is it social?
where does your attraction to women come from?*

*i'm making at least two assumptions here

[vwcruisn]

where does your attraction to women come from?*

*i'm making at least two assumptions here


and i would be willing to bet that your assumptions are correct ;)

[Taft]

She.

Eep! Should've known that. Sorry!

Taft

[SlyHunter]

lot of misinformation has been circulated about C-250:

- C-250 is not a new law. C-250 does not even add a new section or subsection to an existing law. It merely enlarges subsection 4 of section 308; it increases the number of classes protected from hate speech and literature from the previous four groups to five.

- It is not a pro-homosexual bill. The bill does not mention gays, lesbians or homosexuals. It equally protects persons of all sexual orientations, whether heterosexual, bisexual or homosexual, not just gays or lesbians.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_hat6.htm
beastiality, pedophilia and all sexual orientations.

All Pedophiles should die!
Oops luckily I'm not in Canada or I could go to jail for saying that.


Wierd thing is I could also go to jail in Canada for saying "all homosexuals are genetic freak of nature and we should find ways to detect them at birth and either alter them physically so they match their genetic disposition or alter them genetically so as to cure the human race of homosexuality."

It should be wrong to go to jail for simply saying what you really think.

[numediaman]

Actually, it is about believes, ideas, conceptions, perceptions, and preconceptions. People fighting against homosexuality or for it, do it because they believe in certain things. . .

Homosexuals do not fight for homosexuality, they fight to be treated as equals in this society, as human beings.

You can believe what you want -- whether about homosexuality or religion -- but changing laws based on religious beliefs is flagrantly unconstitutional. Therefore, this government feels it must change the constitution itself to introduce hate into law.

[SlyHunter]

Homosexuals do not fight for homosexuality, they fight to be treated as equals in this society, as human beings.

You can believe what you want -- whether about homosexuality or religion -- but changing laws based on religious beliefs is flagrantly unconstitutional. Therefore, this government feels it must change the constitution itself to introduce hate into law.
No they fight for the right to flaunt their homosexuality in our faces.
They fight for the right to force us to teach our kids too early about sex because they want to hold hands in public which makes our kids ask questions they shouldn't be asking till their much older.
They fight for the right to force us to accept their abnormality as normal.

[Ugg]

No they fight for the right to flaunt their homosexuality in our faces.
They fight for the right to force us to teach our kids too early about sex because they want to hold hands in public which makes our kids ask questions they shouldn't be asking till their much older.
They fight for the right to force us to accept their abnormality as normal.

It's really funny to hear you blasting gays the way you do. Are you as strident in your objections to the portrayals of violence and sex by Hollywood? The majority of kids in this country are forced to deal with sex way too early due to the programming on TV. That is what you should be railing about, not a handful of men and women who want to hold hands.

If kids were taught about sex, maybe this country wouldn't have so many unwanted pregnancies and abortions. But no, heaven forbid that we teach children about their bodies.

I don't know why you fear gays so much but it's not because they are abnormal. Homosexuality has existed long before christ or any other major religion came onto the scene. It's abnormal to want everyone to conform to some "christian" ideal. It's abnormal to hate like you seem to.

Get a life.

[jefhatfield]

beastiality, pedophilia and all sexual orientations.

All Pedophiles should die!
Oops luckily I'm not in Canada or I could go to jail for saying that.


Wierd thing is I could also go to jail in Canada for saying "all homosexuals are genetic freak of nature and we should find ways to detect them at birth and either alter them physically so they match their genetic disposition or alter them genetically so as to cure the human race of homosexuality."

It should be wrong to go to jail for simply saying what you really think.

dude,

you are living in the wrong country during the wrong time

you would have fit better into hitler's germany

most of the people in this forum, which i started...unfortunately, are either left, right, or center...but sometimes i hear ultra leftist or ultra right wingers, like you, and if i could get all the posts from extremists from both sides, it would all sound like the same person...mao, pol pot, hitler, hussein, stalin, etc...they all sound the same in the end

hey , i wonder is this is some sort of conspiracy and you are actually ovi in disguise ;)

[SlyHunter]

It's really funny to hear you blasting gays the way you do. Are you as strident in your objections to the portrayals of violence and sex by Hollywood? The majority of kids in this country are forced to deal with sex way too early due to the programming on TV. That is what you should be railing about, not a handful of men and women who want to hold hands.

If kids were taught about sex, maybe this country wouldn't have so many unwanted pregnancies and abortions. But no, heaven forbid that we teach children about their bodies.

I don't know why you fear gays so much but it's not because they are abnormal. Homosexuality has existed long before christ or any other major religion came onto the scene. It's abnormal to want everyone to conform to some "christian" ideal. It's abnormal to hate like you seem to.

Get a life.
I don't fear gays I don't think I should have to explain what gay is to a 7 year old or even a 12 year old.

I think it is wrong they tried to by passing the normal processes and performed all those illegal marriages. I don't think homosexual marriages should be legalized but I dont' think they should be illegal either. Why do we have to be given permission to do anything? Why can't we just do. I think the US government should get out of regulating marriages completly even to the point where there is no such thing as "filing jointly" to the irs. I believe line marriage, block marriages, harems, etc should all be not illegal. The only time the US government should get involved is in contractual disputes. It is not the US governments fault that private hospitals honor spousal visitation for hetrosexuals and not homosexuals. It is not the US governments fault that insurance companies give a spouse free insurance but only if your hetrosexual. These companies can change their policy without a law being made. It should be left up to the marketplace.

I do fear the day that homosexuals feel safe to hug, hold hands and cuddle out in public, but thats a seperate argument. I also fear making laws that say I can't preach my beliefs if they are counter to your beliefs. I fear people going to jail simply because they hate homosexuals. If they actually beat one up yeah send him to jail but just because they say they hate homosexuals get real. I hate kids with their pants hanging half way down their rear should I go to jail for that? Problem is you people on both sides take things way tooooooo far.

I also think its stupid my sister see's nothing wrong with allowing her 16 year old and 7 year old kids and 4 year old nephew watches horror flicks like ghost ship where they sliced a guys face in half with mono wire plus worse but if they see my background on the computer of a naked Allysa milano then thats the end of the world. I like the fact that when I went to Germany the coppertone girl wasn't wearing a bathing suit on the billboard and nobody was in an accident underneath.

I am a complex individual.

[wwidgirl]

Sorry you're wrong. Beastiality, pedophilia are NOT sexual orientations.

And you would NOT go to jail for saying what you wrote below. Why are you making stuff up?

beastiality, pedophilia and all sexual orientations.

All Pedophiles should die!
Oops luckily I'm not in Canada or I could go to jail for saying that.


Wierd thing is I could also go to jail in Canada for saying "all homosexuals are genetic freak of nature and we should find ways to detect them at birth and either alter them physically so they match their genetic disposition or alter them genetically so as to cure the human race of homosexuality."

It should be wrong to go to jail for simply saying what you really think.

[SlyHunter]

Sorry you're wrong. Beastiality, pedophilia are NOT sexual orientations.

And you would NOT go to jail for saying what you wrote below. Why are you making stuff up?
If you read what the law said literally like a lawyer would you would see I'm not making anything up. That may not have been the original intent but that is the consequences the fact that your law enforcment agencies have choose not to enforce the law 100% is besides the point. The point is any time they want to they can.

I guarantee you a Pedophile would disagree with you. So would someone into beastiality S&M etc. Doing bottles someone who loves bottles is a sexual orientation.

[SlyHunter]

One other thing back to the religious restrictions trying to force christians to edit the bible so it no longer violated Canada's, Swedens or someone else anti hate laws.

There is a reason why we in the US has seperation of church and state laws and it is not to protect the government from churches.

[wwidgirl]

Under the law those are not sexual orientations.

You would not go to jail. You might have to pay damages.

And i would love to see the original law.

If you read what the law said literally like a lawyer would you would see I'm not making anything up. That may not have been the original intent but that is the consequences the fact that your law enforcment agencies have choose not to enforce the law 100% is besides the point. The point is any time they want to they can.

I guarantee you a Pedophile would disagree with you. So would someone into beastiality S&M etc. Doing bottles someone who loves bottles is a sexual orientation.

[numediaman]

If you read what the law said literally like a lawyer would you would see I'm not making anything up. That may not have been the original intent but that is the consequences the fact that your law enforcment agencies have choose not to enforce the law 100% is besides the point. The point is any time they want to they can.

I guarantee you a Pedophile would disagree with you. So would someone into beastiality S&M etc. Doing bottles someone who loves bottles is a sexual orientation.

wwidgirl has found this post too offensive because I used the word stupid.

therefore, I'm out of here.

[wwidgirl]

No one is forcing christians to edit the bible. I've already gone through this. Please look for the post.

One other thing back to the religious restrictions trying to force christians to edit the bible so it no longer violated Canada's, Swedens or someone else anti hate laws.

There is a reason why we in the US has seperation of church and state laws and it is not to protect the government from churches.

[jefhatfield]

i think we are being spammed ...ie) ovi, gocyrus, etc

i have seen it here in four years on the boards and posters like these don't last long

jef

[hacurio1]

Homosexuals do not fight for homosexuality, they fight to be treated as equals in this society, as human beings.

You can believe what you want -- whether about homosexuality or religion -- but changing laws based on religious beliefs is flagrantly unconstitutional. Therefore, this government feels it must change the constitution itself to introduce hate into law.

Again, you are missing the point. We are NOT talking about the U.S. here. Read back, the thread started with laws of foreign countries taking different approaches on dealing with certain issues about Homosexuality. We both can think and believe in whatever we what, but in other countries around the world religion is a very important aspect (that is a fact not an opinion), and my original point is that changing people’s believes is the hardest thing to do. U think is a human rights issue, good, many people will agree with you, but many other will disagree, thats why there are so many debates out there.

[vniow]

No they fight for the right to flaunt their homosexuality in our faces.
They fight for the right to force us to teach our kids too early about sex because they want to hold hands in public which makes our kids ask questions they shouldn't be asking till their much older.
They fight for the right to force us to accept their abnormality as normal.

Teach your kids too early about sex? Making your kids ask questions when you see us holding hands in public? Foring you to accept our abnormality???

You have some seriously ****ed up ideas about homosexuals.

[Sayhey]

i think we are being spammed ...ie) ovi, gocyrus, etc

i have seen it here in four years on the boards and posters like these don't last long

jef

Do you think it is one of our old "friends" returning under a new name?

[radhak]

No they fight for the right to flaunt their homosexuality in our faces.
They fight for the right to force us to teach our kids too early about sex because they want to hold hands in public which makes our kids ask questions they shouldn't be asking till their much older.
They fight for the right to force us to accept their abnormality as normal
.....
I don't fear gays I don't think I should have to explain what gay is to a 7 year old or even a 12 year old.

so you are fine having to explain heterosexuality to a 7 year old?

I am not aware of any 7 year old having a problem with 2 adults holding hands, whatever gender, unless an adult tells them otherwise. (like overheard once, "don't hold that other boy's hands, what are you, a fag?"


I think it is wrong they tried to by passing the normal processes and performed all those illegal marriages. I don't think homosexual marriages should be legalized but I dont' think they should be illegal either. Why do we have to be given permission to do anything? Why can't we just do. I think the US government should get out of regulating marriages completly even to the point where there is no such thing as "filing jointly" to the irs. I believe line marriage, block marriages, harems, etc should all be not illegal. The only time the US government should get involved is in contractual disputes. It is not the US governments fault that private hospitals honor spousal visitation for hetrosexuals and not homosexuals. It is not the US governments fault that insurance companies give a spouse free insurance but only if your hetrosexual. These companies can change their policy without a law being made. It should be left up to the marketplace.
Like restaurants with 'No colored folks served here?', or airlines firing cabin crew beyond a certain age, or "Jews need not apply" or, something similar?


I do fear the day that homosexuals feel safe to hug, hold hands and cuddle out in public, but thats a seperate argument.
I already fear putting the TV on because of the sex there. I am unable to watch ads because my 5 year old watches wide-eyed when the couple make out as if in a bedroom (and they are in a cab!), I stopped watching Friends after she asked me, "what does 'are you doing her' mean?"

I would take two adults holding hands and cuddling in real life anytime, so I could tell my daughter, people in love do that, and be not afraid that the gender of the adults could be an issue.



I also fear making laws that say I can't preach my beliefs if they are counter to your beliefs. I fear people going to jail simply because they hate homosexuals. If they actually beat one up yeah send him to jail but just because they say they hate homosexuals get real. I hate kids with their pants hanging half way down their rear should I go to jail for that?
There is quite a bit of support for freedom of speech in this country for you to be afraid it might die out. but freedom of speech never meant egging anybody to harm others. but since you have interpreting many of our laws to your liking, maybe that's another interpretation of yours. or maybe you like the way some islamic clerics issue fatwas for murder?

nobody, in all the examples you have quoted, is in danger of arrest for simply hating homosexuals, but for trying to spread that hatred. And you object to that, but you are the one who has a problem with people spreading/demonstrating love.


Problem is you people on both sides take things way tooooooo far.
does that mean you think of yourself as middle of the road? i must say i'd be scared of meeting somebody more right-wing than you.



I also think its stupid my sister see's nothing wrong with allowing her 16 year old and 7 year old kids and 4 year old nephew watches horror flicks like ghost ship where they sliced a guys face in half with mono wire plus worse but if they see my background on the computer of a naked Allysa milano then thats the end of the world.
how about if it was a naked picture of Ashton Kutcher? would you be okay with that?



I am a complex individual.
sorry, not true. you are only too shallow.

[zimv20]

I do fear the day that homosexuals feel safe to hug, hold hands and cuddle out in public
wow, you don't get out much, do you? i mean, seriously, i see that almost every day.

the people who i know are scared of that the most, i often feel are those who are closeted. i know at least two people who for years verbally bashed gays -- who are now out.

[jefhatfield]

Do you think it is one of our old "friends" returning under a new name?

some like to stir up the pot after they have been banned

when i see this type of activity, i just tell the mods and they determine what's up...some offenders have been forgiven and come back on board nicer, more compassionate members and some have not even after being kicked off more than once

i understand good political debate, but i don't understand spammers who come from the outside just to stir things up in a flamewar...at least to attest to macrumors' growing popularity, there are political debators who actually like a good argument and come here for intelligent and balanced debate

...although i think it tends to be skewed a little left of center these days but that is the problem with the internet...radio tends to be skewed more to the right of center and neither internet nor radio are very good representations of the average american and much better indicators as to what is happening on one side of the politcial aisle or the other

the only time i see any sort of equality is at the polls...and even there, i see a lot of work that needs to be done

there have to be more right wingers on macrumors than backtothemac and desertrat ;)

[Sayhey]

there have to be more right wingers on macrumors than backtothemac and desertrat ;)

There are a few more than that, but I agree that we need intelligent discussion from many political positions. By the way, I haven't seen a post from 'Rat for a little while, hope he's coming back. I also hope our new friend is not trolling the forums just to stir up folks. I'm close to putting only my second poster on my "ignore" list.

[Rower_CPU]

Do you think it is one of our old "friends" returning under a new name?

IPs don't seem to indicate this.

[Frohickey]

Actually, it is about believes, ideas, conceptions, perceptions, and preconceptions. People fighting against homosexuality or for it, do it because they believe in certain things. I agree with you, I “believe” that saying that homosexuals should be put to death is wrong, but there are people who believe gay marriage shouldn’t be allowed, and there are people who believe its ok. But how can I have a stand in something I don’t fully understand, that’s why I asked the questions about homosexuality! I’m not religious, but I had a problem about your reference with religion. And I ask again, government has the power to say what it’s ok and what isn’t, that’s why laws are in place, but should laws prevail over religion? You see, it’s just a very gray and complicated area. Millions around the world believe in God first, and then in the physical world, and one cant just say, your view is old and must be changed. That’s why a person’s believes are core for this argument. Changing a person’s opinion is easy, changing a perception is hard, but changing believes is almost impossible.

Boy, are you wrong!!! :eek:

And I ask again, government has the power to say what it’s ok and what isn’t, that’s why laws are in place, but should laws prevail over religion?

Government has NO POWER unless its power that people have given to it, as explicitly stated in the U.S. Constitution. There is no mention of marriage or homosexuality in it. So, that power, the power to define marriage, or the appropriateness of homosexuality belongs to the people, or the states, for the few states where its people have given the state the power.

[srobert]

Zanzibar? Is'nt it the birth country of late Freddy Mercury (May he rest in peace), lead singer of the band Queen?

He must be rolling in his grave. Was'nt he homosexual? (or bi?) (this is not a critic, I was, and I still am, a big fan of the guy)

[Sayhey]

IPs don't seem to indicate this.

Thanks for checking, Rower.

[Frohickey]

Homosexuals do not fight for homosexuality, they fight to be treated as equals in this society, as human beings.

You can believe what you want -- whether about homosexuality or religion -- but changing laws based on religious beliefs is flagrantly unconstitutional. Therefore, this government feels it must change the constitution itself to introduce hate into law.

NAMBLA is fighting for the ability to make sweet love with boys. Sure, they might be a fringe group, how come GLAAD is not squishing NAMBLA into oblivion?

Who were the first ones that wanted Hate crime legislation? Which group followed on after the first Hate crime legislation was passed?

[zimv20]

Zanzibar? Is'nt it the birth country of late Freddy Mercury (May he rest in peace), lead singer of the band Queen?

He must be rolling in his grave. Was'nt he homosexual? (or bi?)
yep! that's irony of which i spoke earlier

[blackfox]

Guess I'll have to change my vacation plans...

[jefhatfield]

IPs don't seem to indicate this.

well i hope new members of all political beliefs realize that they cannot pull an ovi or gocyrus and expect to stay on here forever

political discussions get heated from time to time, but they should never preach all out hate like some posts i have seen here from the said poster who seems to get off on really pissing off the macrumors members by his often racist and insensitive remarks and calls to "kill" other people

if i was a mod, i would ban this offending member immediately

[Rower_CPU]

well i hope new members of all political beliefs realize that they cannot pull an ovi or gocyrus and expect to stay on here forever

political discussions get heated from time to time, but they should never preach all out hate like some posts i have seen here from the said poster who seems to get off on really pissing off the macrumors members by his often racist and insensitive remarks and calls to "kill" other people

if i was a mod, i would ban this offending member immediately

SlyHunter has been warned and informed of the rules. I'm not sure if your second sentence is aimed at them or someone else.

Please report posts that you feel cross the line - it makes it a lot easier for all the mods to see what's going on. :)

[zimv20]

I'm not sure if your second sentence is aimed at them or someone else.

he's looking right at you, Rower. a tree growing on a graph hill, indeed. take your nature/science monster somewhere else, frankenstein.

:-)

[radhak]

if i was a mod, i would ban this offending member immediately


I disagree. he did not insult or threaten anybody personally, nor behave irrationally (ok, i am not talking about his viewpoints ;)) or anything that might warrant banning. actually, nobody has, in this thread at least. let us not become a closed group ourselves.

and also, with DesertRat MIA, we need somebody like to this to liven things up. otherwise we'd all be a m.a.s. (mutually admiring society). :D

[jefhatfield]

SlyHunter has been warned and informed of the rules. I'm not sure if your second sentence is aimed at them or someone else.

Please report posts that you feel cross the line - it makes it a lot easier for all the mods to see what's going on. :)

i tend to under report, since i consider myself as a friend to our long lost spikey, who has come back here nicer and gentler, but who really gave macrumors a hard time way back when..he doesn't anymore and he has learned his lesson

but when i do report, it's only after a pattern i see of an abusive poster and sometimes the mods react and sometimes they don't...but it's totally their call

at least the mods now know about the said poster and maybe he will conform because the political forums do need more members with right wing views since i find the forums here stacked with too many liberals...and i am a democrat ;)

[Rower_CPU]

he's looking right at you, Rower. a tree growing on a graph hill, indeed. take your nature/science monster somewhere else, frankenstein.

:-)

Why you little! :mad: :p

jef-

Understood. Other mods don't patrol in here as often as I, so reports are definitely the fastest way to get a result, if its warranted.

[jefhatfield]

beastiality, pedophilia and all sexual orientations.

All Pedophiles should die!
Oops luckily I'm not in Canada or I could go to jail for saying that.


Wierd thing is I could also go to jail in Canada for saying "all homosexuals are genetic freak of nature and we should find ways to detect them at birth and either alter them physically so they match their genetic disposition or alter them genetically so as to cure the human race of homosexuality."

It should be wrong to go to jail for simply saying what you really think.

we are in a free country so you can say what you want out in public and in some contexts, let's say owning a strip club or adult bookstore, you can say and show quite a lot, but note the rules in these forums,

... and that there is a standard of decency here and that there are many minors who are members here, are realize that open ended, public, all age forums need rules

[jefhatfield]

Why you little! :mad: :p

jef-

Understood. Other mods don't patrol in here as often as I, so reports are definitely the fastest way to get a result, if its warranted.

one poster here quoted links from the christian identity movement who are violent nazi skinheads aligned with the kkk

originally i thought this poster was in agreement with such an extremist group, but i later found him not to be anything like that...so it's not always easy to tell if someone comes on these forums like a hitler, mao , stalin, saddam-type character with all the signs of being a sociopath, that they are actually like that

perhaps some posters have had a bad day or two and have been banned for that and weren't actually the monsters they portrayed themselves as...i sure some people thought spikey was some sort of psycho monster but he really wasn't

i hope offending members are warned at least once because i assume many, if not most, don't read the rules

[jefhatfield]

...also i have seen a poster with a soviet hammer and sickle as their avatar

for some who suffered under the sometimes brutal reign of communism wouldn't find his avatar very funny

escrew.com is great for hard hitting, adults only flamewars and offensive/semi-offensive avatars, but there are kids and teens here, too and many who are our chief members

[hacurio1]

Boy, are you wrong!!! :eek:



Government has NO POWER unless its power that people have given to it, as explicitly stated in the U.S. Constitution. There is no mention of marriage or homosexuality in it. So, that power, the power to define marriage, or the appropriateness of homosexuality belongs to the people, or the states, for the few states where its people have given the state the power.

Why do some people just don’t read all the posts, and then just reply without elaborating their argument? We are talking about Canada and Zanzibar, not the U.S.

Moreover, even if we were talking about the U.S, the conception that people in power just make decisions that people always agree with, is just not true. I agree, “People give power to the state… So, that power, the power to define marriage, or the appropriateness of homosexuality belongs to the people, or the states, for the few states where its people have given the state the power;” sadly, that is not always how it always works, that’s why we have thousands of stupid laws in individual states, (http://www.dumblaws.com/). Read some of the laws form that website, and then tell me, does the system always work how is supposed to?

But more to the point, the argument that I have been trying to make is that people’s believes are very strong, and very difficult to change or modify. You can’t just tell somebody who centers his life on conservative views and values that homosexuality is ok, and (i.e. marriage) is now acceptable, that times have change and so must religion and so his views. That’s why this debate has been going on in schools, the government, individual states, etc. One can't just say, “Its about Human rights.” You also need to educate if you what people to understand your views.

[Frohickey]

Why you little! :mad: :p

jef-

Understood. Other mods don't patrol in here as often as I, so reports are definitely the fastest way to get a result, if its warranted.

Teacher Rower_CPU... jefhatfield is being a meanie. Make him stand in the corner wearing the funny hat. :eek: :D :D :D

[rainman::|:|]

NAMBLA is fighting for the ability to make sweet love with boys. Sure, they might be a fringe group, how come GLAAD is not squishing NAMBLA into oblivion?

Who were the first ones that wanted Hate crime legislation? Which group followed on after the first Hate crime legislation was passed?

Why is the Christian Right trying to illegalize gay marriage, yet they don't make amendments forbidding adultery and divorce? these two are the things that devalue marriage, not more marriage. GLAD, PFLAG, HRC, any of the gay groups don't bother with nambla for two reasons... 1) not only is it a fringe group, but we're talking membership in the tens or low hundreds, they're microscopic; and 2) because pedophilia and homosexuality have nothing to do with each other at all. If GLAD went and assailed nambla, it would legitimize some sort of connection between the two things, which would be a great way to reverse the other work they've done. There does need to be some organization to combat nambla, and the other similar groups (butterfly kisses, any organization that promotes child sex abuse), but it's not the responsibility of gays to take them out. 90% of pedophiles are heterosexuals, they form groups too, clubs, active circuits for the abuse, yet the only one people know about is nambla.

tho to be perfectly honest, there are a handful of gay organizations that i believe are trying to get rid of them, because accurate or not, society has somehow connected gays to nambla.

to the main topic. great, homosexuality criminalized in another country. well, they can do what they want with their sovereignty, but they have to realize this puts them in the same class with countries that promote acid scarring of women, rapist armies, infanticide.

paul

[SlyHunter]

Originally Posted by jefhatfield
well i hope new members of all political beliefs realize that they cannot pull an ovi or gocyrus and expect to stay on here forever

political discussions get heated from time to time, but they should never preach all out hate like some posts i have seen here from the said poster who seems to get off on really pissing off the macrumors members by his often racist and insensitive remarks and calls to "kill" other people

if i was a mod, i would ban this offending member immediately

SlyHunter has been warned and informed of the rules. I'm not sure if your second sentence is aimed at them or someone else.

Please report posts that you feel cross the line - it makes it a lot easier for all the mods to see what's going on. :)

I have never made a call to kill other people. I would never.
I also have not stated any racist remark whatsoever.
I have honestly given my point of view. You apprently think anyone who doesn't think like you deserves to be banded.

That is similar to Canada's Hate law. They are trying to prevent people from honestly expressing their opinions if it goes against the PC of what they want the people to follow. They are trying to limit free speach to only that speach that they approve of.

The reason the US has freedom of speach law is not to protect people who say things you agree with but to protect people who say things you not only disagree with but to the point to try to force them to shut up.
People who say things you agree with don't need protection.

Disclaimer: I do realize that private property rights trump free speach rights and thus the forum itself has the right to enforce their rules.

[jefhatfield]

Why is the Christian Right trying to illegalize gay marriage, yet they don't make amendments forbidding adultery and divorce? these two are the things that devalue marriage, not more marriage. GLAD, PFLAG, HRC, any of the gay groups don't bother with nambla for two reasons... 1) not only is it a fringe group, but we're talking membership in the tens or low hundreds, they're microscopic; and 2) because pedophilia and homosexuality have nothing to do with each other at all. If GLAD went and assailed nambla, it would legitimize some sort of connection between the two things, which would be a great way to reverse the other work they've done. There does need to be some organization to combat nambla, and the other similar groups (butterfly kisses, any organization that promotes child sex abuse), but it's not the responsibility of gays to take them out. 90% of pedophiles are heterosexuals, they form groups too, clubs, active circuits for the abuse, yet the only one people know about is nambla.

tho to be perfectly honest, there are a handful of gay organizations that i believe are trying to get rid of them, because accurate or not, society has somehow connected gays to nambla.

to the main topic. great, homosexuality criminalized in another country. well, they can do what they want with their sovereignty, but they have to realize this puts them in the same class with countries that promote acid scarring of women, rapist armies, infanticide.

paul

i saw nambla at the gay parade in 1989 in san francisco and people, mostly gay people, threw stuff and them...i was with my girlfriend (a bisexual woman) and we both were sickened to our stomachs and could not imagine any sector of the gay or straight communities supporting them

the christian right would have been more well received at the gay parade than that group which really, by promoting sex with minors, are actually promoting rape, which boils down to "violence" against minors

no corner of the gay movement that i have ever heard of promotes violence or rape

[jefhatfield]

I have never made a call to kill other people. I would never.
I also have not stated any racist remark whatsoever.
I have honestly given my point of view. You apprently think anyone who doesn't think like you deserves to be banded.

That is similar to Canada's Hate law. They are trying to prevent people from honestly expressing their opinions if it goes against the PC of what they want the people to follow. They are trying to limit free speach to only that speach that they approve of.

The reason the US has freedom of speach law is not to protect people who say things you agree with but to protect people who say things you not only disagree with but to the point to try to force them to shut up.
People who say things you agree with don't need protection.

Disclaimer: I do realize that private property rights trump free speach rights and thus the forum itself has the right to enforce their rules.

i am not in agreement with far left liberals who want to ban non-pc statements...sometimes the far left leaning posters turn this political forum into an insult thread and it's then when i want to ask arn to ban the whole section...i feel responsibility here since i started these goddamn forums which get really ********* up sometimes

obviosly, you have not seen my many battles with the far left...i am a conservative democrat so don't label me because i seem "leftist" to you

censorship is wrong in an all out adults only forum...we have minors here and have to cater to their points of view...and innocence...remember when you were 13? or younger?

thus we don't have all out porn here and don't get into the nitty gritty of muslim hate groups, christian hate groups, black hate groups, white hate groups, or other offensive points of view not suitable for children...if this were an 18 or older forum, then fine, bring in all points of views including nazis, animal sex, torture, dismenberment, rotten.com material, and pedophiles...but we have a massive group of regular 13-17 year old mac enthusiasts here on this site

i should know...i am one of the first members ever who posted regularly and the oldest active poster here so i am not making this stuff up

just be a little sensitive and use some common sense...i won't ban you because i can't...but any moderator could

[Frohickey]

Why is the Christian Right trying to illegalize gay marriage, yet they don't make amendments forbidding adultery and divorce? these two are the things that devalue marriage, not more marriage. GLAD, PFLAG, HRC, any of the gay groups don't bother with nambla for two reasons...

The homosexuals in NAMBLA are fighting for homosexuality... and pedophilia as well. The post was in response to numediaman's Homosexuals do not fight for homosexuality, they fight to be treated as equals in this society, as human beings.

Actually, the Christian Right is not trying to illegalize gay marriage. Its trying to prevent the legalization of gay marriage. Different things. First, is trying to outlaw something that is already legal. Second is trying to keep something illegal from becoming legal.

I think that these should be decided within the states, or within each family unit, if the people do not give the power to the state to decide.

Back to the original thread, since Zanzibar is making homosexual acts illegal, and most likely, the impetus is in following Sharia law, and they are within their right to do so owing to their sovereignty, and in our belief system, this puts them in the same league as practicers of female mutilation, infancide, and maybe cannibalism. What should we do about it? Do we leave them alone to continue their oppressive actions, or should we
...invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. --Ann Coulter

:D :eek: :D

[Frohickey]

thus we don't have all out porn here and don't get into the nitty gritty of muslim hate groups, christian hate groups, black hate groups, white hate groups, or other offensive points of view not suitable for children.

I hate groups that are trying to kill me.
If these groups are fine with me, I'm fine with them.

Some porn out there is fine too. Arn would make a lot of $$$ if we had a porn section. :eek:
Apple should preload some iMacs with iPorn. :eek: :eek: :D

[jefhatfield]

I hate groups that are trying to kill me.
If these groups are fine with me, I'm fine with them.

Some porn out there is fine too. Arn would make a lot of $$$ if we had a porn section. :eek:
Apple should preload some iMacs with iPorn. :eek: :eek: :D

actually "iPorn" are all the macintosh rumors which call for a g5 powerbook...when and if that thing comes out sometime this winter or soon thereafter, it will rank as high on the sexy meter as the sports illustrated swimsuit issue

[pseudobrit]

...also i have seen a poster with a soviet hammer and sickle as their avatar

Guilty as charged. It's just a bit of irony from me. After being red baited about a million times, I decided to just slap the corner of the CCCP flag up there.

I'm also a big fan of Soviet hockey.

[pseudobrit]

Disclaimer: I do realize that private property rights trump free speach rights and thus the forum itself has the right to enforce their rules.

Indeed. A degree of civility is required here.