Can't take it!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-03-2013, 03:37 PM
RE: Can't take it!
(31-03-2013 02:55 PM)smidgen Wrote:  
(31-03-2013 02:16 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  Considering it's exactly bigoted blatant homophobic opinions like his that leave society with an overriding sour opinion of gay people which in turn effects things like gay teen suicide rate, then I think I'm entitled to wish pain and suffering upon him and all that he loves for eternity.

Maybe you'd have a differing opinion if it was you he was saying things like:

Remember, these are his genuine opinions.
Why do I care? I don't care, BUT because he's said such things I shrug it off and simply no longer have any good will towards him plane and simple. He's the one making the big deal of it. Maybe if he wasn't such a blatant homophobe then he wouldn't be in this mess right now.

You need to learn to just ignore People Muffs. Some People are just not worth the effort or the energy.


I really don't think you are understanding the words coming out of my mouth.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Now with 40% more awesome.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-03-2013, 04:35 PM (This post was last modified: 31-03-2013 04:40 PM by smidgen.)
RE: Can't take it!
(31-03-2013 03:37 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(31-03-2013 02:55 PM)smidgen Wrote:  You need to learn to just ignore People Muffs. Some People are just not worth the effort or the energy.


I really don't think you are understanding the words coming out of my mouth.

I really don't care. I think you need to take a fuckin chill pill.

[Image: i-Jn5RHZ7-S.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-03-2013, 05:15 PM
RE: Can't take it!
Holy shit!
I think this whole thing could have been handled better by all sides.

Meanwhile...




“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Full Circle's post
31-03-2013, 05:28 PM
RE: Can't take it!
What is this sudden obsession from people to publicly demand people justify the reps they give (not just from Woofs, I've seen a few people do it)? Like it or not, people can give their allotted reps whenever they want, and for whatever reason.

I also find it mildly amusing that, whilst people can get very upset about negative reps they receive (or in one case I saw, a positive rep someone they didn't like got), no-one has yet got upset about a positive rep they've received. I'm yet to see someone say "omg, this is ridiculous, the rep system is super important and someone gave me a positive in reference to a joke, that's totally abusing the system".

PS. Woofs, I think your criticism for FSM_scot may have been just slightly over the top. Criticising the job he does on this forum (a very good, and at times thankless, job) is possibly a little strong for a disagreement over a couple of rep points.

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Hughsie's post
31-03-2013, 05:44 PM
RE: Can't take it!
(31-03-2013 05:28 PM)Hughsie Wrote:  What is this sudden obsession from people to publicly demand people justify the reps they give (not just from Woofs, I've seen a few people do it)? Like it or not, people can give their allotted reps whenever they want, and for whatever reason.

I also find it mildly amusing that, whilst people can get very upset about negative reps they receive (or in one case I saw, a positive rep someone they didn't like got), no-one has yet got upset about a positive rep they've received. I'm yet to see someone say "omg, this is ridiculous, the rep system is super important and someone gave me a positive in reference to a joke, that's totally abusing the system".

PS. Woofs, I think your criticism for FSM_scot may have been just slightly over the top. Criticising the job he does on this forum (a very good, and at times thankless, job) is possibly a little strong for a disagreement over a couple of rep points.

Actually, I did and do complain about a positive rep I received.

I don't like that positive rep Nappa gave me after I neg-repped him. I want it off of my Rep-sheet.

He made it to make himself look better than I am; it's not only condescending and completely wrong too. Seeing it annoys me to hell. (Can't we set-up a away to remove the reps from a banned person, they seem pretty pointless once the person is gone...)

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-03-2013, 05:56 PM (This post was last modified: 31-03-2013 05:59 PM by Mr Woof.)
RE: Can't take it!
(31-03-2013 02:14 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  Allow me to quote some homophobic bigotry:

Quote: As you are probably aware gay men in many cases adopt passive and positive roles relevant to intercourse with one adopting the dominant male role and the other the submissive role. Some swap roles (versatile) and others abstain from anal intercourse. Whether this aligns well with bringing up a child is highly debatable. Sure, heteros, in some instances practise buggery,but it is not obligatory,and the fact that males may be obliged to engage in unhygienic, unaesthetic intercourse, may not be their fault

Quote:The past few decades or so has seen the gay community attempt to merge into main stream society and they have used alleged discriminations and violence against them to create an atmosphere conducive to such their sexuality being thought no different to that of heterosexuals, when in fact it is,physically, manifestly so.

Quote:Finally let me mention bi-sexuality; here the sex addict...

Quote:You see gay culture through rose coloured glasses and refuse to consider any criticisms; like many others,you are hoodwinked by the claims that homosexuality is normal and not a condition to be acceptive of, or look to correct.


Quote:I am very happy that in my youth I saw this optional (for some) life style for what it is, in at least some circumstances, and can warn others of embracing something that is not natural at all, in any meaningful sense, being, rather, a denied affliction.

(My personal fav: )
Quote:Gay folk, like all of us, are good and bad in varying degrees and I think the genuine ones would prefer heterosexuality if they had the chance. Why wouldn't they? Any schism designed to advance gay sexuality at the expense of the conventional is to promote an inferior (by virtue of physical actuality) one.

Not to mention the whole overriding thread.

RE alleged homophobic bigotry as determined by Scott and Earmuffs

(1) Simple statement of a fact.
Historically and from an evolutionary stance male parenting has not been the over riding norm, without which I would not be here to write this. I have suggested that this new phenomenon and any negative considerations should be considered. There may well be an innate childish instinct that feels a strangeness in having two dads. At least one well known American actor could think of nothing worse than two dads. All sexuality is between the consenting parties, however it may impinge on new and unorthodox parenting.

(2) I believe that generally in many aspects the majority of women are quite different from the majority of men. I also believe that some people choose homosexuality or bi-sexuality as an option and endeavour to popularise it. Others of course are predisposed in this way. I have never been an advocate of gay bashing in either case. As to the extent of this, compared with marital abuse in heterosexuals, child abuse, road rage, rapes of all types, animal cruelty, abuse of the aged and infirm, I do not see gay abuse as a special case.

(3) Homosexuality is still not the norm. Even among transsexual groups there is bickering what with non op people opposed to those who have had sex change operations. Obviously at least some opt to change their gender to fit in with their sexual feelings because they would prefer this, seeing it more appropriate.
Correction is up to the individual, I suppose, that or a quasi sexuality/gender.

(4) My youthful experience with bi sexuality did not inspire pride.
As for 'un natural', my statement here may be too strong; it is obviously natural to some. As indicated, for some it may be an option, for others an obligation governed by their inner feelings. The question of 'affliction" or asset, when it comes to parenting remains to be seen.

(5)Emphasis here being physical actuality.
Actual parenting, as opposed to surrogacy seems preferable.
Time may show gays make marvellous parents, who knows, but adoption seems far preferable here.

I see my argument as reasonable. I did not personally attack my opponent and simply expressed considerations not allegedly 'hard cold facts ' designed to appeal to those already convinced of the excellence in gay parenting per se.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-03-2013, 06:16 PM
RE: Can't take it!
(31-03-2013 05:56 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  
(31-03-2013 02:14 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  Allow me to quote some homophobic bigotry:

(My personal fav: )

Not to mention the whole overriding thread.

RE alleged homophobic bigotry as determined by Scott and Earmuffs

(1) Simple statement of a fact.
Historically and from an evolutionary stance male parenting has not been the over riding norm, without which I would not be here to write this. I have suggested that this new phenomenon and any negative considerations should be considered. There may well be an innate childish instinct that feels a strangeness in having two dads. At least one well known American actor could think of nothing worse than two dads. All sexuality is between the consenting parties, however it may impinge on new and unorthodox parenting.

(2) I believe that generally in many aspects the majority of women are quite different from the majority of men. I also believe that some people choose homosexuality or bi-sexuality as an option and endeavour to popularise it. Others of course are predisposed in this way. I have never been an advocate of gay bashing in either case. As to the extent of this, compared with marital abuse in heterosexuals, child abuse, road rage, rapes of all types, animal cruelty, abuse of the aged and infirm, I do not see gay abuse as a special case.

(3) Homosexuality is still not the norm. Even among transsexual groups there is bickering what with non op people opposed to those who have had sex change operations. Obviously at least some opt to change their gender to fit in with their sexual feelings because they would prefer this, seeing it more appropriate.
Correction is up to the individual, I suppose, that or a quasi sexuality/gender.

(4) My youthful experience with bi sexuality did not inspire pride.
As for 'un natural', my statement here may be too strong; it is obviously natural to some. As indicated, for some it may be an option, for others an obligation governed by their inner feelings. The question of 'affliction" or asset, when it comes to parenting remains to be seen.

(5)Emphasis here being physical actuality.
Actual parenting, as opposed to surrogacy seems preferable.
Time may show gays make marvellous parents, who knows, but adoption seems far preferable here.

I see my argument as reasonable. I did not personally attack my opponent and simply expressed considerations not allegedly 'hard cold facts ' designed to appeal to those already convinced of the excellence in gay parenting per se.

1) The American Academy of Pediatrics found "...no cause and effect relationship between parents' sexual oientation and children's well-being..."
http://www.healthychildren.org/English/f...ocal+token
and
"A growing body of scientific literature reveals that children who grow up with one or two gay and/or lesbian parents will develop emotionally, cognitively, socially, and sexually as well as children whose parents are heterosexual."
http://www.healthychildren.org/English/f...ocal+token

2) The American Psychological Association has said "...most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation."
http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/sexual-orientation.aspx

5) Adoption by whom? Gay couples?

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-03-2013, 06:36 PM
RE: Can't take it!
(31-03-2013 06:16 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(31-03-2013 05:56 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  RE alleged homophobic bigotry as determined by Scott and Earmuffs

(1) Simple statement of a fact.
Historically and from an evolutionary stance male parenting has not been the over riding norm, without which I would not be here to write this. I have suggested that this new phenomenon and any negative considerations should be considered. There may well be an innate childish instinct that feels a strangeness in having two dads. At least one well known American actor could think of nothing worse than two dads. All sexuality is between the consenting parties, however it may impinge on new and unorthodox parenting.

(2) I believe that generally in many aspects the majority of women are quite different from the majority of men. I also believe that some people choose homosexuality or bi-sexuality as an option and endeavour to popularise it. Others of course are predisposed in this way. I have never been an advocate of gay bashing in either case. As to the extent of this, compared with marital abuse in heterosexuals, child abuse, road rage, rapes of all types, animal cruelty, abuse of the aged and infirm, I do not see gay abuse as a special case.

(3) Homosexuality is still not the norm. Even among transsexual groups there is bickering what with non op people opposed to those who have had sex change operations. Obviously at least some opt to change their gender to fit in with their sexual feelings because they would prefer this, seeing it more appropriate.
Correction is up to the individual, I suppose, that or a quasi sexuality/gender.

(4) My youthful experience with bi sexuality did not inspire pride.
As for 'un natural', my statement here may be too strong; it is obviously natural to some. As indicated, for some it may be an option, for others an obligation governed by their inner feelings. The question of 'affliction" or asset, when it comes to parenting remains to be seen.

(5)Emphasis here being physical actuality.
Actual parenting, as opposed to surrogacy seems preferable.
Time may show gays make marvellous parents, who knows, but adoption seems far preferable here.

I see my argument as reasonable. I did not personally attack my opponent and simply expressed considerations not allegedly 'hard cold facts ' designed to appeal to those already convinced of the excellence in gay parenting per se.

1) The American Academy of Pediatrics found "...no cause and effect relationship between parents' sexual oientation and children's well-being..."
http://www.healthychildren.org/English/f...ocal+token
and
"A growing body of scientific literature reveals that children who grow up with one or two gay and/or lesbian parents will develop emotionally, cognitively, socially, and sexually as well as children whose parents are heterosexual."
http://www.healthychildren.org/English/f...ocal+token

2) The American Psychological Association has said "...most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation."
http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/sexual-orientation.aspx

5) Adoption by whom? Gay couples?

Well the scientific people follow their criteria in these matters.
There will be dissenters,not necessarily religious people.
It may be a little premature, in the big picture, relevant to what may be experienced.

The American Psychological Association are good examples of appeasers as they flirt with Big Pharma and its off shoots.

I think it would be preferable for gays or heteros to adopt rather than engage surruagates to further increase our population, with so many needy third world children.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-03-2013, 07:26 PM
RE: Can't take it!
Some things never change.

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-03-2013, 07:44 PM
RE: Can't take it!
(31-03-2013 07:26 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  Some things never change.

Yes, quite sadly. I wish you would spice up your gloryhole routine.

[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Tartarus Sauce's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: