The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I heard two people talking about this the other night, and was wondering what you guys thought. Is being gay in your DNA, or is it 'acquired' through your life?
So yeh, enlighten me...
So yeh, enlighten me...
Page:
Thankyouverymuch FFF but there's one thing,
You spelt Appaling wrong.
You spelt Appaling wrong.
It's called Minimal Group Discimination, if we're going to get into specifics. Sexuality is not an issue with children - they don't think about it, but an assumed heterosexuality means automatic descrimination.
Think about it - with small kids, the boys stick with the boys, and the girls stick with the girls. You ask a kid about the opposite sex, they'll probably say they hate them.
Because sexuality has nothing to do with it - by this logic, the boys sticking together would mean they're all gay. Er ... no.
This, coupled with the apauling homophobic stance of the media and government, means the word gay becomes a common insult.
Who does that remind you of?
Hmmmm ....
You child, FF.
Think about it - with small kids, the boys stick with the boys, and the girls stick with the girls. You ask a kid about the opposite sex, they'll probably say they hate them.
Because sexuality has nothing to do with it - by this logic, the boys sticking together would mean they're all gay. Er ... no.
This, coupled with the apauling homophobic stance of the media and government, means the word gay becomes a common insult.
Who does that remind you of?
Hmmmm ....
You child, FF.
> Forest Fan wrote:
> Even small children realise homosexuality is wrong - they use
> it as an insult.
'Small children' don't know what gay is. If you'd have written 'teenagers', fair do! Even if they do use it, it doesn't mean they know the meaning of it. I'm sure we've all been there - used a 'cool' word we don't know the meaning of.
I think it's considered cool to call someone gay now, anyway, so there's one fantastic thing about being gay. People are giving praise to it without even realising, no matter how insulting they mean for it to be.
> Even small children realise homosexuality is wrong - they use
> it as an insult.
'Small children' don't know what gay is. If you'd have written 'teenagers', fair do! Even if they do use it, it doesn't mean they know the meaning of it. I'm sure we've all been there - used a 'cool' word we don't know the meaning of.
I think it's considered cool to call someone gay now, anyway, so there's one fantastic thing about being gay. People are giving praise to it without even realising, no matter how insulting they mean for it to be.
Hey FF - do you refuse to do maths, because the 0 stands for nothing, which is obviously evil. I suppose you do all your sums in Roman Numerals.
The church said it - it must be true. Right?
On this whole gay issue:
You're a child, FF.
The church said it - it must be true. Right?
On this whole gay issue:
You're a child, FF.
Forest Fan wrote:
"Even small children realise homosexuality is wrong - they use it as an insult."
What do you mean by 'even' small children realise it's wrong?
They have more immature minds, don't accept others, and that's the only reason their views are put up with. You can't explain to them that they are wrong, they think they are right, and nothing anyone else says can change their ultimately wrong views.
A bit like you, really...
"Even small children realise homosexuality is wrong - they use it as an insult."
What do you mean by 'even' small children realise it's wrong?
They have more immature minds, don't accept others, and that's the only reason their views are put up with. You can't explain to them that they are wrong, they think they are right, and nothing anyone else says can change their ultimately wrong views.
A bit like you, really...
Forest Fan wrote:
> Edgy wrote:
> Forest Fan - the church has changed.
>
> It is you who has kept in the dark ages.
>
> I still follow the laws Jesus set out 2000 years ago. He said cast
> out the immoral brother - I still believe that.
Where did he say that please? Cos here was me thinking he preached universal brotherhood.
"Love thy neighbour...oh, except for that guy. He looks funny."
> Edgy wrote:
> Forest Fan - the church has changed.
>
> It is you who has kept in the dark ages.
>
> I still follow the laws Jesus set out 2000 years ago. He said cast
> out the immoral brother - I still believe that.
Where did he say that please? Cos here was me thinking he preached universal brotherhood.
"Love thy neighbour...oh, except for that guy. He looks funny."
Forest Fan wrote:
>
> Y'know the answer I keep hearing is I have to change - my views have
> to change - soceity has to change - the Church has to change. You
> would have no problem in telling me to change my opinions on
> homo-sexuality, yet when I say I think homo-sexuals should change -
> you get offended. Strange.
Probably because we're talking about opinions which you've been brainwashed into and, as your excuse for not answering my questions proves, don't actually 100% believe in anyway. Whereas we're talking about something which has a scientific basis (the fact that homosexuals are that way by a mix of both nature and nurture).
So all in all, that was a nice attempt by an overly-simple young boy to oversimplify the issue. Tell you what; instead of trying to move the goalposts on yet another debate, how about you answer my questions?
>
> Y'know the answer I keep hearing is I have to change - my views have
> to change - soceity has to change - the Church has to change. You
> would have no problem in telling me to change my opinions on
> homo-sexuality, yet when I say I think homo-sexuals should change -
> you get offended. Strange.
Probably because we're talking about opinions which you've been brainwashed into and, as your excuse for not answering my questions proves, don't actually 100% believe in anyway. Whereas we're talking about something which has a scientific basis (the fact that homosexuals are that way by a mix of both nature and nurture).
So all in all, that was a nice attempt by an overly-simple young boy to oversimplify the issue. Tell you what; instead of trying to move the goalposts on yet another debate, how about you answer my questions?
Forest Fan wrote:
>
> When did I say I don't follow the Bible literally?
You didn't. But you also said that you'd never eaten blood, and have been reduced to claiming that steak needs to be washed and that it isn't necessary to eat kosher meat in order to obey the commandment on eating blood, in order to try and keep up your fantasy of being a perfect christian. I've made what is called "a deduction". And you, by proving every word I've said about your cowardice correct, have shown that deduction to be correct.
>
> I have found you aggressive and petty.
Aw, poor you eh? I find it very amusing how you find the fact that I've asked questions to which you've ran and hid from giving the answers "petty". I make no bones about aggressively pushing you for answers; you proved over and over again that you'll avoid questions and lie through your teeth otherwise. Perhaps if you were a little less cowardly and evasive, I wouldn't have been so aggressive.
For my part, I have found you cowardly and evasive and I continue to do so. Whilst I accept my aggression, you seem incapable of admitting to yourself just how cowardly and hypocritical you are. All of which adds up to an unhealthy mind on your part.
>
>
> Oh well, I've answered them once - and that took enough time. So with
> my answers - it's a case of take it or leave it. The other uses of
> Special Reserve seem to take the answers.
Except no, they don't. I'm guessing that they simply don't have the time or inclination to expose your lies in so graphic a fashion. I wouldn't like to say for certain though; unlike you, I don't claim to speak on behalf of others here.
You've answered about 2 of the questions I asked. You've avoided answering every other question, offering only lies and misdirection. I can't say as I'm surprised you've manufactured an excuse to end this; your messianic fantasy world clearly can't take the intrusion of reality borne by logical questioning.
For my part, I'm satisfied that I've proved beyond any doubt that you are a liar, a hypocrite, a coward, and a self-deluding egotist. Over the course of the last week, you've reduced yourself to a figure of fun with the lengths you've gone to in order to avoid answering questions. What's more, the way in which you've avoided some of them (the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics in particular) would seem to indicate rather strongly that you do in fact know that you are wrong in what you say. Whilst that does increase the pity I feel for you, in that your mental health must be fragile indeed for you to purport to hold such strong beliefs whilst simultaneously being aware of the flaws and lies that underpin them, it also makes one fact very clear to me; you're a rank hypocrite. I hope that one day you have the courage to address the inadequacies in yourself that are keeping you a prisoner of fear and fantasy. Until then dear boy, there are a number of questions that you're too afraid to answer. No amount of hasty jusification for cowardice on your part is going to change that.
>
> When did I say I don't follow the Bible literally?
You didn't. But you also said that you'd never eaten blood, and have been reduced to claiming that steak needs to be washed and that it isn't necessary to eat kosher meat in order to obey the commandment on eating blood, in order to try and keep up your fantasy of being a perfect christian. I've made what is called "a deduction". And you, by proving every word I've said about your cowardice correct, have shown that deduction to be correct.
>
> I have found you aggressive and petty.
Aw, poor you eh? I find it very amusing how you find the fact that I've asked questions to which you've ran and hid from giving the answers "petty". I make no bones about aggressively pushing you for answers; you proved over and over again that you'll avoid questions and lie through your teeth otherwise. Perhaps if you were a little less cowardly and evasive, I wouldn't have been so aggressive.
For my part, I have found you cowardly and evasive and I continue to do so. Whilst I accept my aggression, you seem incapable of admitting to yourself just how cowardly and hypocritical you are. All of which adds up to an unhealthy mind on your part.
>
>
> Oh well, I've answered them once - and that took enough time. So with
> my answers - it's a case of take it or leave it. The other uses of
> Special Reserve seem to take the answers.
Except no, they don't. I'm guessing that they simply don't have the time or inclination to expose your lies in so graphic a fashion. I wouldn't like to say for certain though; unlike you, I don't claim to speak on behalf of others here.
You've answered about 2 of the questions I asked. You've avoided answering every other question, offering only lies and misdirection. I can't say as I'm surprised you've manufactured an excuse to end this; your messianic fantasy world clearly can't take the intrusion of reality borne by logical questioning.
For my part, I'm satisfied that I've proved beyond any doubt that you are a liar, a hypocrite, a coward, and a self-deluding egotist. Over the course of the last week, you've reduced yourself to a figure of fun with the lengths you've gone to in order to avoid answering questions. What's more, the way in which you've avoided some of them (the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics in particular) would seem to indicate rather strongly that you do in fact know that you are wrong in what you say. Whilst that does increase the pity I feel for you, in that your mental health must be fragile indeed for you to purport to hold such strong beliefs whilst simultaneously being aware of the flaws and lies that underpin them, it also makes one fact very clear to me; you're a rank hypocrite. I hope that one day you have the courage to address the inadequacies in yourself that are keeping you a prisoner of fear and fantasy. Until then dear boy, there are a number of questions that you're too afraid to answer. No amount of hasty jusification for cowardice on your part is going to change that.
No fun in that
Please stop ressurecting this thread. It is obvious that Forest Fan just likes to act like he has a set of morals however he just preaches outdated views from a book with a million interpretations. we all know homosexuality isn't wrong and we all know it is different for each and every person whether they feel they were born it or whether they realised it later in life. Personally I think the latter is the most accurate but we're not going to solve anything by debating moral values and what's right and wrong with Forest Fan so please. Just drop it.
Page: