Religion Folau

[Catters 070911]

Actually for most of its history in Christian Europe the Churches’ age of consent was 12. For much of the history of America it has been 10. It’s only been in the last 100 years or so the the age of consent is where it is now.

So for much of its history the Church sanctioned what we would consider extremely “aberrant” behaviour. Interpretation is a funny thing.

Molestation happens all the time, in many places.

Some celebrities have been charged with molestation, such as Jimmy Saville, Gary Glitter, Rolf Harris and Michael Jackson.

Yet no-one calls for the TV or music industry to be closed down, nor are all celebrities assumed to be pedophiles.

In fact, statistics show that the vast majority of child molestations actually happen in the home, and the biggest perpetrators are often family members or people who visit the home.

The second biggest group is actually between teachers and under-age students, but this includes relationships where the teacher is committing carnal knowledge with the student.

The media just focuses on the church because many people are religious bigots and it plays to their opinion to make it sound like all churches do it.

Also, peds in the home form some of the media's audience. So they would rather cover up their crimes, and pretend it never happens to get the peds who do it in the home to still buy their newspapers and watch their news shows.

I feel sorry for those who get molested by a relative or visitor at home. They have less of a voice, because the media and the public care more about going after the peds in the church, and ignore victims elsewhere.


BTW, does the Koran talk about Allah marrying 14-year-olds? Where is the condemnation for that, or are the media and the public too gutless to say anything?

 

[Catters 070911]

"Homosexuality is not normal statistically and biologically. Statistically, it is not normal since it forms a minority and skewed in the normal distribution. Every biological function has a physiological goal and purpose. Sexual activity has two goals. One is procreation to safeguard the continuation of the species. The second one is the experience of pleasure, which in fact, is to facilitate the sexual activity and to strengthen the bond between husband and wife. Homosexuality negates one of the goals of sexual activity procreation.

Homosexuality has therefore, to be considered as an aberration in the psychosexual development ......."

Quoted from your post. Do you have a reference to a scientific journal for that?

Given that homosexuality occurs in other species of the animal kingdom, it should be considered very much normal. Are you going to put your head under the guillotine by telling heterosexual couples who use condoms or other means of birth control that they're abnormal?

Also, some couples actually can't have children, so should they not have sex, since they can't meet one of the two purposes?

 

[Evolved1]

Molestation happens all the time, in many places.

Some celebrities have been charged with molestation, such as Jimmy Saville, Gary Glitter, Rolf Harris and Michael Jackson.

Yet no-one calls for the TV or music industry to be closed down, nor are all celebrities assumed to be pedophiles.

In fact, statistics show that the vast majority of child molestations actually happen in the home, and the biggest perpetrators are often family members or people who visit the home.

The second biggest group is actually between teachers and under-age students, but this includes relationships where the teacher is committing carnal knowledge with the student.

The media just focuses on the church because many people are religious bigots and it plays to their opinion to make it sound like all churches do it.

Also, peds in the home form some of the media's audience. So they would rather cover up their crimes, and pretend it never happens to get the peds who do it in the home to still buy their newspapers and watch their news shows.

I feel sorry for those who get molested by a relative or visitor at home. They have less of a voice, because the media and the public care more about going after the peds in the church, and ignore victims elsewhere.


BTW, does the Koran talk about Allah marrying 14-year-olds? Where is the condemnation for that, or are the media and the public too gutless to say anything?

Allah or Mohammed?

From my understanding, Mohammed married Aisha when she was approximately 9yrs old.

Why do you want the media to condemn something that happened over 1000 years ago? That news is a little stale by now, no?

How old do you think virgin Mary was when God impregnated her? Power imbalance, large age gap, abuse of power, and that's not the worst of it...nothing weird happening there.

The bible and koran are equally immoral when viewed against modern ethical norms. Fortunately, nobody takes those books as the literal word of god in 2019...right? /s

 

[FredLeDeux]

The biggest thing people forget about what Folau said is that it is a quote directly from the Bible.

So this is the biggest case of "shooting the messenger" I have ever heard of.

Now, Folau could have done better than to put this on Twitter (to quote another Bible verse, "Don't offer your pearls amongst swine"), but the mesage wasn't his, originally.

It is no different to someone Tweeting a verse from "Mein Kumph", "Catcher In The Rye", or "Harry Potter".

He should have known that his audience would be too immature to accept his viewpoint.

Well, he did have a point when he said that 99.9% of "Christians" were slotted for "Hell".

 

[yodellinhank]

What's strange about it? Good advice I thought. Anal sex often causes tiny microscopic tears in the lining of the rectum, which can give STD's easier entry into the body.

Who said anything about anal sex? You seem to have a strange fixation with it

 

[Crankitup]

Who said anything about anal sex? You seem to have a strange fixation with it

Did you read this? #6,515

BTW I fail to see how one passing comment amounts to a fixation but I'm sure you'll enlighten me quick smart.

 

[yodellinhank]

Did you read this? #6,515

BTW I fail to see how one passing comment amounts to a fixation but I'm sure you'll enlighten me quick smart.

I did read that. And it was you who brought up anal sex, the poster never mentioned how he intended on having sex. And it was at least the second post you've made in this thread referencing anal sex.

 

[Crankitup]

I did read that. And it was you who brought up anal sex, the poster never mentioned how he intended on having sex.

I can see I'm going to have to spell this out for you aren't I. I told him him he could GAGF as far as I was concerned. He said he was going to get F'd (by a guy). Sucking someone's knob, or jacking someone off is not getting F'd is it? Can we end the discussion on anal sex now? If not, I think we'll know who actually has the fixation.

And it was at least the second post you've made in this thread referencing anal sex.

I made one passing comment. Other people (such as yourself) have since responded to my comment, forcing me to comment further. You've now made two comments referencing anal sex yourself. Can you see how this works?

 

[yodellinhank]

I can see I'm going to have to spell this out for you aren't I. I told him him he could GAGF as far as I was concerned. He said he was going to get F'd (by a guy). Sucking someone's knob, or jacking someone off is not getting F'd is it? Can we end the discussion on anal sex now? If not, I think we'll know who actually has the fixation.



I made one passing comment. Other people (sucha as yourself) have since responded to my comment, forcing me to comment further. You've now made two comments referencing anal sex yourself. Can you see how this works?

It was at least your second post referencing anal sex, nobody else has raised it.

You interpreted getting ****ed to mean receiving anal sex. If i told you i got ****ed by my wife would you interpret it the same way?

 

[Crankitup]

It was at least your second post referencing anal sex, nobody else has raised it.

Missed this #1,487 did you? And the 9 references to sodomy and other references to it using other words.

My only references to it have stemmed from a conversation that started with me telling someone to "use protection". After being forced to clarify what I meant I raised the issue. You're now forcing me to continue discussing it because of your obvious fixation.

You interpreted getting f’ed to mean receiving anal sex. If i told you i got f’ed by my wife would you interpret it the same way?

Not quite the same way. I would interpret that to mean you like her to wear a strap on.

 

[yodellinhank]

Missed this #1,487 did you? And the 9 references to sodomy and other references to it using other words.

My only references to it have stemmed from a conversation that started with me telling someone to "use protection". After being forced to clarify what I meant I raised the issue. You're now forcing me to continue discussing it because of your obvious fixation.

I did miss #1487. They don't get past you though, do they? And yet you deny your own posting on anal sex, perhaps you can't remember making the post.

Not quite the same way. I would interpret that to mean you like her to wear a strap on.

And that doesn't tell you something about your thought patterns?

 

[Crankitup]

I did miss #1487. They don't get past you though, do they?

Never read it before actually. Just used the forum search function. Just like you did to find out how many posts I've made on anal sex to tell me I'm fixated.

And yet you deny your own posting on anal sex, perhaps you can't remember making the post.

No, I denied your claim that I was fixated with it as well as repeatedly telling you that I made a comment on it when someone asked me to clarify what I meant by "use protection" and that any other references by me since have been answering follow up comments. If you think otherwise post some proof by showing where I've discussed it in this thread before #6,535.

Hopefully we've finished with your fixation now.

And that doesn't tell you something about your thought patterns?

No, it's simple English. In standard terminology if you are ****ing someone you are how shall I say it .... "giving". If you are getting ****ed you are "receiving". If you disagree I'll discuss it further in PM, or maybe start a new thread to discuss the intricacies because I'm sure no one else is interested in clogging up this thread with your attempts to save face. I'm certainly not.

 

[yodellinhank]

Never read it before actually. Just used the forum search function. Just like you did to find out how many posts I've made on anal sex to tell me I'm fixated.

I can honestly say I've never typed "anal sex" in any search bar.

No, I denied your claim that I was fixated with it as well as repeatedly telling you that I made a comment on it when someone asked me to clarify what I meant by "use protection" and that any other references by me since have been answering follow up comments. If you think otherwise post some proof by showing where I've discussed it in this thread before #6,535.

Hopefully we've finished with your fixation now.

#6386 is a post earlier than #6535, isn't it?

No, it's simple English. In standard terminology if you are ******* someone you are how shall I say it .... "giving". If you are getting f’ed you are "receiving". If you disagree I'll discuss it further in PM, or maybe start a new thread to discuss the intricacies because I'm sure no one else is interested in clogging up this thread with your attempts to save face. I'm certainly not.

Your mind! It's like the very act of love making is some sort of power struggle for you.

 

[Crankitup]

#6386 is a post earlier than #6535, isn't it?

Yes, it is. Can't see any references to anal sex there unless you're assuming that the person who I was replying to and quoted had that in mind when they asked if I could just as easily **** men. If so that would make your other comments to me earlier (#6,557 ) pretty hypocritical wouldn't it? Even if we ignore that fly in the ointment, all you have found is one more solitary example where rather than me raising the issue, I responded to someone else who raised it with me.

Are we done yet? If not send the next one by PM.

 

[yodellinhank]

...
Now just because I can't see myself ever wanting to use an orifice that was deigned to evacuate human waste or something along those lines

It's you making the assumptions

 

[Crankitup]

It's you making the assumptions

No once again it's you who has, especially with your comments at #6,557 in mind. Never used your tongue? In any case even if you ignore that aspect I didn't raise the subject but was responding to someone who raised it with me. Hopefully we're done now.

 

[yodellinhank]

No once again it's you who has, especially with your comments at #6,557 in mind. Never used your tongue? In any case even if you ignore that aspect I didn't raise the subject but was responding to someone who raised it with me. Hopefully we're done now.

The post you quoted never mentioned anal sex. You brought it up.

 

[Crankitup]

The post you quoted never mentioned anal sex. You brought it up.

So you concede my latest point and you're back onto my response to #6,515 again, which I have elaborated on already. Just get over it. You said I was fixated but it's you that has the fixation. We're going around in circles here and no one else is interested. So to save everyone else from reading this back and forth where you have tried in vain to justify your fixation allegation I'll stick you on ignore. Still won't stop you from having the last word because of course your ego demands it but I'll be the better man for everyone else's sake.

 

[yodellinhank]

So you concede my latest point and you're back onto my response to #6,515 again, which I have elaborated on already. Just get over it. You said I was fixated but it's you that has the fixation. We're going around in circles here and no one else is interested. So to save everyone else from reading this back and forth where you have tried in vain to justify your fixation allegation I'll stick you on ignore. Still won't stop you from having the last word because of course your ego demands it but I'll be the better man for everyone else's sake.

Such a giver. Enjoy your internet searches

 

[raskolnikov]

I'm what they call a 'top'. I've never taken it in my life. And considering I've been in a monogamous relationship for almost ten years I think the risks are fairly low.

 

[yodellinhank]

I'm what they call a 'top'. I've never taken it in my life. And considering I've been in a monogamous relationship for almost ten years I think the risks are fairly low.

So Crankitup was incorrect in their assumptions. Funny how somebody claiming so firmly that sexuality is simply (and only) a choice is then so fixed in their own ideas of what it all means. Hardwired even.

 

[Catters 070911]

Allah or Mohammed?

From my understanding, Mohammed married Aisha when she was approximately 9yrs old.

Why do you want the media to condemn something that happened over 1000 years ago? That news is a little stale by now, no?

How old do you think virgin Mary was when God impregnated her? Power imbalance, large age gap, abuse of power, and that's not the worst of it...nothing weird happening there.

The bible and koran are equally immoral when viewed against modern ethical norms. Fortunately, nobody takes those books as the literal word of god in 2019...right? /s

Yet only the Bible gets condemned for it.

How about having the guts to call out Islam as well, or are you afraid that if you do, you will have to worry about Salman Rushdie meeting his half of the rent?

 

[Evolved1]

Yet only the Bible gets condemned for it.

How about having the guts to call out Islam as well, or are you afraid that if you do, you will have to worry about Salman Rushdie meeting his half of the rent?

I called both books equally immoral when viewed through the prism of modern ethical standards. Modern Christianity is more tolerable purely because it's had more time to be moulded by a largely skeptical and secular society. Islam hasn't had that benefit, so some of its more barbaric aspects have been allowed to fester.

I really don't see how you can say I'm treating Islam more favourably based on anything I've posted here, nor do I see any reason why someone should fear for their safety simply because they criticise Islam on an anonymous online platform.

It's a common belief that fundamentalist Christianity poses a significant threat to our freedoms in Australia through their influence within the LNP. If or when another religion gains sufficient numbers and power to infect a major political party, it will be attacked with as much fervor.

 

[mcnulty]

Looks like Izzy’s new employer is also looking to put constraints on his “freedom of speech”. He was apparently duty bound to speak out last year. I wonder if he intends fighting the good fight, or whether god has given him special dispensation to keep his trap shut.

 

[Sainteric]

Rugby has announced an interim loss of 9.8million, Castle has admitted the Folau payout was a major cause.

Rugby very much a risky proposition recovering in this country