4 hours ago, Biffen said:

Keep fighting your fight. Why stop after Stonewall?

Your opening sentence mentions all the churches that tolerate an aberrant sexuality and but only one that throws them off buildings and tortures them .

Of course the Gillard govts bleeding heart could never bleed enough for an oppressed minority-the left never can throw enough of other peoples money at the latest trendy oppressed bunch.They want the poor oppressed Muslims here by the million. Oppression votes all round!!

Yes it's non stop gay bashing in this country.All we do is hunt down gays ,almost like a sport.When we're not doing that we are painting swastikas and torching known gay houses. 

There are millions of us and we all get together right after Sunday Service, get drunk and then start a mob raid on gays-it's pretty much our raison d'être. then we taunt teens until they can't take it anymore.

Stop the crocodile tears. I'm getting emotional.

Wowee. Boy oh boy gee whizz.

Well, at least now I know I don't have to take you seriously.

53 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

Wowee. Boy oh boy gee whizz.

Well, at least now I know I don't have to take you seriously.

Yes I'm unelightened.Ive no idea how oppressed and bullied you all are.

On 14/10/2017 at 11:36 PM, dieter said:

Well said, Mr Goffy. Couldn't have put it better myself. I hope like hell that the bigots and idiots who are the basis of the no vote get their comeuppance. 

I love how you think if people vote a certain way they should get their "comeuppance". Typical of brutal leftist regimes.

1 hour ago, Wrecker45 said:

I love how you think if people vote a certain way they should get their "comeuppance". Typical of brutal leftist regimes.

To the Gulag with you, filthy capitalist running dog lackey!

May all who oppose us, be crushed under the heel of... um... equal legal status as citizens. Bwaaaa ha ha ha quake in fear your doom is at hand!

 

But seriously, it is perhaps just a little ironic that people raise the specter of brutal repression by the gaystapo or whatever silly name they give it this week. When if you look at a global map of where law has been updated to include SSM, you'll basically find 'human rights and citizenship based democracies' in one colour and 'the full range of every type of repressive regime you can imagine' in the other.

Reminded of an Orwell quote, one which barely needs to be updated, just change the names.

 

“When one thinks of all the people who support or have supported Fascism, one stands amazed at their diversity. What a crew! Think of a programme which at any rate for a while could bring Hitler, Petain, Montagu Norman, Pavelitch, William Randolph Hearst, Streicher, Buchman, Ezra Pound, Juan March, Cocteau, Thyssen, Father Coughlin, the Mufti of Jerusalem, Arnold Lunn, Antonescu, Spengler, Beverley Nichols, Lady Houston, and Marinetti all into the same boat! But the clue is really very simple. They are all people with something to lose, or people who long for a hierarchical society and dread the prospect of a world of free and equal human beings."

 

 

21 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

To the Gulag with you, filthy capitalist running dog lackey!

May all who oppose us, be crushed under the heel of... um... equal legal status as citizens. Bwaaaa ha ha ha quake in fear your doom is at hand!

 

But seriously, it is perhaps just a little ironic that people raise the specter of brutal repression by the gaystapo or whatever silly name they give it this week. When if you look at a global map of where law has been updated to include SSM, you'll basically find 'human rights and citizenship based democracies' in one colour and 'the full range of every type of repressive regime you can imagine' in the other.

Reminded of an Orwell quote, one which barely needs to be updated, just change the names.

 

“When one thinks of all the people who support or have supported Fascism, one stands amazed at their diversity. What a crew! Think of a programme which at any rate for a while could bring Hitler, Petain, Montagu Norman, Pavelitch, William Randolph Hearst, Streicher, Buchman, Ezra Pound, Juan March, Cocteau, Thyssen, Father Coughlin, the Mufti of Jerusalem, Arnold Lunn, Antonescu, Spengler, Beverley Nichols, Lady Houston, and Marinetti all into the same boat! But the clue is really very simple. They are all people with something to lose, or people who long for a hierarchical society and dread the prospect of a world of free and equal human beings."

 

 

Since you have done the mapping where do the countries that are on UN Human Rights Council predominantly sit?

42 minutes ago, Wrecker45 said:

Since you have done the mapping where do the countries that are on UN Human Rights Council predominantly sit?

The UN's integrity on a variety of issues is being undermined by the unanticipated rise of multi-polar geopolitics and the conflicting interests and cultural demands of new and powerful blocks.

You can react to that two main ways.

Actually stand up for the civil rights culture, reaffirm equality before the law and accept the reality of a free society where the quality of relationships, whether personal, political or business, is measured by the quality of informed consent.

Or, 

Package the problem into a bundle of secret world government conspiracy theories which you can wave around to create a smokescreen for your own objections to making liberal democratic values a reality.

1 hour ago, Little Goffy said:

The UN's integrity on a variety of issues is being undermined by the unanticipated rise of multi-polar geopolitics and the conflicting interests and cultural demands of new and powerful blocks.

You can react to that two main ways.

Actually stand up for the civil rights culture, reaffirm equality before the law and accept the reality of a free society where the quality of relationships, whether personal, political or business, is measured by the quality of informed consent.

Or, 

Package the problem into a bundle of secret world government conspiracy theories which you can wave around to create a smokescreen for your own objections to making liberal democratic values a reality.

Unanticipated for the blind.

The obvious thing to do is treat the UN with contempt as Trump is so skilfully doing.

It is a real conundrum  for the left how to love the UN at the same time as  supporting SSM. 

4 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

The UN's integrity on a variety of issues is being undermined by the unanticipated rise of multi-polar geopolitics and the conflicting interests and cultural demands of new and powerful blocks.

You can react to that two main ways.

Actually stand up for the civil rights culture, reaffirm equality before the law and accept the reality of a free society where the quality of relationships, whether personal, political or business, is measured by the quality of informed consent.

Or, 

Package the problem into a bundle of secret world government conspiracy theories which you can wave around to create a smokescreen for your own objections to making liberal democratic values a reality.

geez goffy, i really wish you would speak english sometimes

22 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

geez goffy, i really wish you would speak english sometimes

Ha! ok, um.

The United Nations is becoming a bit of a crapshuffle because when it was created nobody imagined that the backward pre-modern brown people would ever have their own nations.

So now you can grit your teeth and stand up for the deep values of freedom even when you don't like he people getting it,

or

You can blame the whole thing on the radical lefties who let the brown people out of their cage, close your curtains and have a cry-[censored] in the dark.

 

 

 

7 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

Ha! ok, um.

The United Nations is becoming a bit of a crapshuffle because when it was created nobody imagined that the backward pre-modern brown people would ever have their own nations.

So now you can grit your teeth and stand up for the deep values of freedom even when you don't like he people getting it,

or

You can blame the whole thing on the radical lefties who let the brown people out of their cage, close your curtains and have a cry-[censored] in the dark.

 

 

 

nice try. no cigar.

I'd contribute to this thread, but there are too many mad Leftist Merlinos on this forum.

2 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

Ha! ok, um.

The United Nations is becoming a bit of a crapshuffle because when it was created nobody imagined that the backward pre-modern brown people would ever have their own nations.

So now you can grit your teeth and stand up for the deep values of freedom even when you don't like he people getting it,

or

You can blame the whole thing on the radical lefties who let the brown people out of their cage, close your curtains and have a cry-[censored] in the dark.

 

 

 

So basically you are saying that the backward brown people are homophobic.

Or

You could explain to me what the colour of people's skin has to do with this.

 

3 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

Ha! ok, um.

The United Nations is becoming a bit of a crapshuffle because when it was created nobody imagined that the backward pre-modern brown people would ever have their own nations.

So now you can grit your teeth and stand up for the deep values of freedom even when you don't like he people getting it,

or

You can blame the whole thing on the radical lefties who let the brown people out of their cage, close your curtains and have a cry-[censored] in the dark.

 

 

 

All the brownies except the Palestinians.

3 hours ago, daisycutter said:

geez goffy, i really wish you would speak english sometimes

Maybe you only understand the english you like to hear, daisy.

2 hours ago, ProDee said:

I'd contribute to this thread, but there are too many mad Leftist Merlinos on this forum.

Mad lefties, mad righties, I know where I stand. I stand somewhere in the middle where religion doesn't dictate common sense and the realities and complex issues of life in an affluent society surrounded by inequality and disprivelege, a process dictated by centuries of colonial and religious bigotry.

25 minutes ago, dieter said:

Mad lefties, mad righties, I know where I stand. I stand somewhere in the middle where religion doesn't dictate common sense and the realities and complex issues of life in an affluent society surrounded by inequality and disprivelege, a process dictated by centuries of colonial and religious bigotry.

Dieter - you are a couple of steps left of communism.

25 minutes ago, dieter said:

Mad lefties, mad righties, I know where I stand. I stand somewhere in the middle where religion doesn't dictate common sense and the realities and complex issues of life in an affluent society surrounded by inequality and disprivelege, a process dictated by centuries of colonial and religious bigotry.

what has saudi arabia got to do with this thread, didi?

2 hours ago, dieter said:

Mad lefties, mad righties, I know where I stand. I stand somewhere in the middle where religion doesn't dictate common sense and the realities and complex issues of life in an affluent society surrounded by inequality and disprivelege, a process dictated by centuries of colonial and religious bigotry.

I'm pickin up what you're puttin down brother.

15 hours ago, Wrecker45 said:

So basically you are saying that the backward brown people are homophobic.

Or

You could explain to me what the colour of people's skin has to do with this.

As I said, the UN was created at a time when it was not expected that more than a handful of 'non-white' countries would ever exist, let alone have real influence on global politics.

The colour of people's skin has only as much to do with the issue as history made it so - liberalism, democracy, and modern citizenship rights were both products of and drivers of the multiple revolutions (intellectual, democratic, economic, social) which transformed the culture and institutions either side of the North Atlantic.

That these various transformations also massively increased the material productivity and social mobilisation of the relevant countries meant that expanding empires to dominate the 'pre-revolutionary' parts of the world was so easy that in some places it was close to accidental.

That the reforms which occurred in this transformation of society were often deeply flawed (voting rights, segregation, hanging judges, transportation to hard labour in Van Diemen's land, etc) meant that there has always been an edge of cruel hypocrisy to it all. Obviously the sharp end of that hypocrisy was in the imperial territories, which has had the tragic double consequence that not only were those societies excluded from modern civil rights and democracy during the period of empire, but in the eyes of all the conquered peoples the entire concept of liberal democracy was tainted and made to look like an elitist scam.

That the elitism and exclusion was explicitly 'white over coloured' is how the distrust of liberal-democratic values came to be so thoroughly established in 'non-white' societies, and is clearly a major reason that values of personal liberty, citizenship and human rights and so forth have had so much difficulty getting traction when pushing against the conservative and reactionary elements in ex-colony countries. And easy enough to see why - how can you tell a people that you insulted, exploited and excluded that 'oh, now we believe in respect and inclusion'.

So, it is all tragic, and you can see where they are coming from. But that doesn't change the fact that same-sex relationships are still criminal in a very large portion of the world, and that in many other parts (Indonesia and Egypt being the most fresh examples) it may not be specifically against the law, but any of a variety of other laws can be put to use imprisoning and humiliating same-sex attracted people.

So, I hope that helps answer your question. The short version is -

The connection between 'brown people' and intolerance is born of the fact that 'brown people' were excluded from the progress of tolerance for about two centuries. 

It is not because they are brown, but because of how they were treated because they are brown.

" Coffee coloured people by the score " !

On 20/10/2017 at 1:32 PM, Wrecker45 said:

Unanticipated for the blind.

The obvious thing to do is treat the UN with contempt as Trump is so skilfully doing.

It is a real conundrum  for the left how to love the UN at the same time as  supporting SSM. 

There is no equality and there is no fair.

Hierarchy will always exist-it is why they built the pyramids.

No socialist trained half-wit will ever change that.

the best we can hope for is open discourse where everyone is entitled to speak their mind without being witch hunted for it.

20 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

As I said, the UN was created at a time when it was not expected that more than a handful of 'non-white' countries would ever exist, let alone have real influence on global politics.

The colour of people's skin has only as much to do with the issue as history made it so - liberalism, democracy, and modern citizenship rights were both products of and drivers of the multiple revolutions (intellectual, democratic, economic, social) which transformed the culture and institutions either side of the North Atlantic.

That these various transformations also massively increased the material productivity and social mobilisation of the relevant countries meant that expanding empires to dominate the 'pre-revolutionary' parts of the world was so easy that in some places it was close to accidental.

That the reforms which occurred in this transformation of society were often deeply flawed (voting rights, segregation, hanging judges, transportation to hard labour in Van Diemen's land, etc) meant that there has always been an edge of cruel hypocrisy to it all. Obviously the sharp end of that hypocrisy was in the imperial territories, which has had the tragic double consequence that not only were those societies excluded from modern civil rights and democracy during the period of empire, but in the eyes of all the conquered peoples the entire concept of liberal democracy was tainted and made to look like an elitist scam.

That the elitism and exclusion was explicitly 'white over coloured' is how the distrust of liberal-democratic values came to be so thoroughly established in 'non-white' societies, and is clearly a major reason that values of personal liberty, citizenship and human rights and so forth have had so much difficulty getting traction when pushing against the conservative and reactionary elements in ex-colony countries. And easy enough to see why - how can you tell a people that you insulted, exploited and excluded that 'oh, now we believe in respect and inclusion'.

So, it is all tragic, and you can see where they are coming from. But that doesn't change the fact that same-sex relationships are still criminal in a very large portion of the world, and that in many other parts (Indonesia and Egypt being the most fresh examples) it may not be specifically against the law, but any of a variety of other laws can be put to use imprisoning and humiliating same-sex attracted people.

So, I hope that helps answer your question. The short version is -

The connection between 'brown people' and intolerance is born of the fact that 'brown people' were excluded from the progress of tolerance for about two centuries. 

It is not because they are brown, but because of how they were treated because they are brown.

It doesn't answer my question nor did I ask one but thanks for trying.

I don't personally believe brown people are homophobic but you seem to. Then you try and blame white people for making brown people homophobic. The kind of warped argument I come to expect from leftists.

1 hour ago, Biffen said:

There is no equality and there is no fair.

Hierarchy will always exist-it is why they built the pyramids.

No socialist trained half-wit will ever change that.

the best we can hope for is open discourse where everyone is entitled to speak their mind without being witch hunted for it.

You must admit, if you want 'everyone' to speak their minds, that it becomes galling and annoying to hear the same bulldust clap trap over and over again from the likes of Pell, Bolt, Abbott, Hanson, Bernardi, Christensen, Dutton, Turnbulldust, Gillard, Latham, dodo Morrison who every time he opens his gob sounds like Franco Cozzo, I could go on and on and on...

1 minute ago, dieter said:

You must admit, if you want 'everyone' to speak their minds, that it becomes galling and annoying to hear the same bulldust clap trap over and over again from the likes of Pell, Bolt, Abbott, Hanson, Bernardi, Christensen, Dutton, Turnbulldust, Gillard, Latham, dodo Morrison who every time he opens his gob sounds like Franco Cozzo, I could go on and on and on...

They can all speak too-whether or not you like it-open discourse means having opinions we disagree with expressed as well.

Just now, Biffen said:

They can all speak too-whether or not you like it-open discourse means having opinions we disagree with expressed as well.

Then again, there's the saying, If you've got nothing nice to say...