La_Dolce_Vita Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/6431831/Ha...ders-suing.html Now this to me seems more of an issue of freedom of speech. She may be a bigoted fool, but how dare she be forced into an interview with the police and be effectively punished for declaring her ignorant views to the Council. Such behaviour by the State really would create divisions when gay people are blamed for creating this sort of situation. The Council and Police are scumbags for subjecting this woman to such treatment (threats of criminal action) and it is disturbing that there is such a climate of opinion that such treatment is acceptable. It isn't the first time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbms Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 Bloody hell LDV are you feeling ok? you are talking sense there and actually standing up for one who you would consider a bigoted homophobic. On a technical point she is correct by calling them sodomites well active ones, but in saying that so are many hetrosexuals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted October 26, 2009 Author Share Posted October 26, 2009 Yes, I am standing up for the fact that they are clearly not allowed to have free speech. I think this is wrong, even though she is a bitch. It is derogatory to refer to a gay man as a sodomite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebrof Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 Yes, I am standing up for the fact that they are clearly not allowed to have free speech. I think this is wrong, even though she is a bitch. It is derogatory to refer to a gay man as a sodomite. Why? It would only be derogatory if there was something reprehensible about sodomy. I don't think there is. Do you? S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted October 26, 2009 Author Share Posted October 26, 2009 Because people shouldn't be defined by their sexual behaviours. I mean I don't think of straight men as fanny fuckers, it would be weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misfit Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 I mean I don't think of straight men as fanny fuckers, it would be weird. I think I just came up with an idea for a new song Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Roo Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 I don't think of straight men as fanny fuckers, You are funny LDV! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macmannin Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Funny in the head Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Funny in the head I don’t agree. LDV and I might well snarl and spit about a number of things, but she expresses a viewpoint that has validity in all cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbms Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Yes, I am standing up for the fact that they are clearly not allowed to have free speech. I think this is wrong, even though she is a bitch. It is derogatory to refer to a gay man as a sodomite. Seems you didn't read what I said fully, I said the term could be used against many hetrosexuals, try for once taking the literal meaning i.e. sodomite = one who partakes in the act of sodomy (anal sex), now unless for some reason homosexual men have grown another oriface I would say like it or not if they are active that term is technically correct and as I previously said same can be said for many hetrosexuals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Yes, I am standing up for the fact that they are clearly not allowed to have free speech. I think this is wrong, even though she is a bitch. It is derogatory to refer to a gay man as a sodomite. Seems you didn't read what I said fully, I said the term could be used against many hetrosexuals, try for once taking the literal meaning i.e. sodomite = one who partakes in the act of sodomy (anal sex), now unless for some reason homosexual men have grown another oriface I would say like it or not if they are active that term is technically correct and as I previously said same can be said for many hetrosexuals. It might well be technically correct to refer to a GAY person as a sodomite, or to someone suffering from a crippling disease as a cripple, or even someone with spasticity as a consequence of cerebral palsy a spastic but that doesn’t make it right. It doesn’t make it right for two reasons, plus a third for good measure. Reason one. To use such terms in non exclusive and specific context is now socially unacceptable by custom and practice. Reason two. It is wrong to label a person as a disability or a characteristic that they have. They are fundamentally people first and any characteristic, if relevant, comes second. Reason three. It’s bloody hurtful to people who are the targets, it’s bloody rude, and the adoption of verbs or adjectives as nouns gets on my tits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Have a look at: Consultation Criminal Justice Bill 2009 Clause 72 (pages 202 to 210) makes it an offence to commit acts intended to stir up hatred. This includes hatred on grounds of race, sexual orientation, religious belief or lack of belief or persons with any kind of disablement. I reckon that if the Comin dictatorship get their way they would be able to close down this discussion on Manxforums. I agree with LDV - we need to stand up for free speech even if it's offensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluemonday Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Norfolk Constabulary has defended its action as "proportionate". Paraphrasing Christine Keeler's immortal words: “Well, they would say that, wouldn't they?” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Roo Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 I don’t agree. LDV and I might well snarl and spit about a number of things, but she expresses a viewpoint that has validity in all cases. Is that a typing error? LDV is a guy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Goblin Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Norfolk Constabulary has defended its action as "proportionate". Paraphrasing Christine Keeler's immortal words: “Well, they would say that, wouldn't they?” Mandy Rice-Davies, actually. Sorry for being a pedant! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.