Heartland

Posted: **16 Mar 2012, 11:31**

Thank christ.
I hope all this will be in the citizen test....

Posted: **16 Mar 2012, 12:09**

markfiend wrote:Kind of backs me up. Those of us who wish to live in a fair, decent society need to push back against bigoted attitudes precisely because so many people hold them.

Two generations ago, homosexuality was illegal. And if polled, you'd probably have found that the majority supported that status quo. Now, we're on the brink of gay marriage (unless the Cat'lick bishops get their way... which seems unlikely). Do you think this change of societal attitudes happened by "reasoned arguments"? You can't reason a person out of a position they didn't arrive at by reason.

Change happened because gay people (and their supporters) got up in people's faces. People told homophobic* bigots to f*ck off. People pushed so that gradually, societal attitudes changed. (And a great deal still needs to be done.)

You don't make advances for social justice by sitting on your arse. That's the point of the MLK quote up there. If you want a fairer society, you have to do something about it, otherwise you're more of a hindrance than a help.

I know it's a clichÃ©, but if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

* Incidentally, I mislike the word homophobia. Anti-gay bigotry isn't a "fear", it's hatred.

I'm going to probably make you feel smug here! I did try reasoned debate on the comments section of the Telegraph about gay marriage. Pointed out how it didnt lead to the collapse of any of the societies that tried it, how it was purely the business of two consenting adults, and no more the business of them than anyones affair if they choose to wear a small crucifix. Oh dear. I foolishly posted this through Facebook, so under my real name and with a picture of me. The mildest comment was me being told that they'd expect that attitude from someone in Brighton (I'm not, it's my surname), the worst was someone saying that he wouldnt trust me or any gay/bi man with a male child adopted or blood, because as soon as it reached puberty, I'd groom it for sex. Quite literally gobsmacking..

Posted: **16 Mar 2012, 13:14**

No, that sort of thing isn't going to make me feel smug. It's going to make me feel angry, actually. (Not at you, at that commenter.)

I hope you told him to stick his bigoted opinions where the sun don't shine.

Posted: **16 Mar 2012, 14:52**

markfiend wrote:No, that sort of thing isn't going to make me feel smug. It's going to make me feel angry, actually. (Not at you, at that commenter.)

I hope you told him to stick his bigoted opinions where the sun don't shine.

I didn't get the chance, I was told straight after, gloatingly in my opinion, that it didn't matter if "we" won, we'll all be "stoned to death when when the muslims take over"! I give up when Islamic tinfoil hattery appears.

Posted: **16 Mar 2012, 15:19**

Oh FFS. Fatwa envy.

Posted: **16 Mar 2012, 15:40**

DeWinter wrote: I didn't get the chance, I was told straight after, gloatingly in my opinion, that it didn't matter if "we" won, we'll all be "stoned to death when when the muslims take over"! I give up when Islamic tinfoil hattery appears.

How sick ...

... hopefully, you've also received some supportive messages ...

...

Posted: **16 Mar 2012, 23:23**

Quiff Boy wrote:
stufarq wrote:The Queen's a man? Or has someone in the passport office been coming to work in drag?
from what i've heard she's a male reptoid

Oh yeah, I'd forgotten about that.

markfiend wrote:unless the Cat'lick bishops get their way

I think we're still a long way off catlicking being legalised.

Posted: **16 Mar 2012, 23:47**

Being645 wrote:
DeWinter wrote: I didn't get the chance, I was told straight after, gloatingly in my opinion, that it didn't matter if "we" won, we'll all be "stoned to death when when the muslims take over"! I give up when Islamic tinfoil hattery appears.
How sick ... ... hopefully, you've also received some supportive messages ... ...

Not on the Telegraph message board I wouldn't think. So let me get this straight - you post left-wing messages on the Telegraph message board and right-wing ones on here. The definition of masochism !

Posted: **17 Mar 2012, 00:15**

Being645 wrote: How sick ... ... hopefully, you've also received some supportive messages ... ...

There was about six "for", and the rest "against". What all we "for" had in common was we all posted under our real names. Those posting against nearly all refused, claiming holding "anti gay" opinions would cause them trouble at work. Cant imagine any employer trawls comment sections myself! I like to think secretly they were ashamed.

Posted: **17 Mar 2012, 00:21**

Nikolas Vitus Lagartija wrote: Not on the Telegraph message board I wouldn't think. So let me get this straight - you post left-wing messages on the Telegraph message board and right-wing ones on here. The definition of masochism !

Ahh, Libertarians! We p*ss off EVERYONE!:p
I cant remember who called me a turkey voting for Christmas just to be contrary on this site..
I dont think anyones opinions are entirely left or right. I've talked about the need for and economic sense of a living wage many times on here.

Posted: **17 Mar 2012, 00:24**

DeWinter wrote:I dont think anyone's opinions are entirely left or right. I've talked about the need for and economic sense of a living wage many times on here.

Shame - there was me thinking that the Tea Party had finally found its dream candidate !

Heartland

Stupid People