Thread: A "fix" for homosexuality

Originally Posted by ukdude84

Any society that allows such disgraceful unions is asking for trouble. I am saddened that such moral cancers have forced the west into moral freefall. In this regard critics of the west are right, society lacks morals and decency. Sicknesses prevade us and this weakens us. We are not upstanding in our morality.

The same morality that calls for the summary execution of those with whom you disagree?

I'm glad my morality differs from the likes of you.

My friends, I think we can now see that opposition to same-sex marriage is a moderate position.

Originally Posted by pramjockey

The same morality that calls for the summary execution of those with whom you disagree?

I'm glad my morality differs from the likes of you.

Those who disgrace natural law deserve the law of the jungle.

Originally Posted by ukdude84

I have no quam eliminating degenerates for the good of society.

Ah, so when you said this:

Originally Posted by ukdude84

No. The state must ensure the collective ideal is worked towards. For me, I seek neither their punishment or death, just a legal rebuke of their actions. To spread immorality against natural law is not in the interest of society.

Were you confused, or just trying to hide your true position?



You do know that advocating beating and killing gays constitutes a violation of the hate speech laws in the EU?

Perhaps your partnership with the state isn't as solid as you think, since your state could well punish you for your thoughts.

Originally Posted by ukdude84

Any society that allows such disgraceful unions is asking for trouble. I am saddened that such moral cancers have forced the west into moral freefall. In this regard critics of the west are right, society lacks morals and decency. Sicknesses prevade us and this weakens us. We are not upstanding in our morality.

Hmmm. What of subjects of the state, like yourself, who violate it's laws?

Would you advocate having the V&V police come by your place and beat you for your trespass against the state?

Guys, he's trying to be satirical.

Ouch.

Matt, that was harsh.

Originally Posted by MattInFla

Ah, so when you said this:



Were you confused, or just trying to hide your true position?



You do know that advocating beating and killing gays constitutes a violation of the hate speech laws in the EU?

Perhaps your partnership with the state isn't as solid as you think, since your state could well punish you for your thoughts.



Hmmm. What of subjects of the state, like yourself, who violate it's laws?

Would you advocate having the V&V police come by your place and beat you for your trespass against the state?

There is a clear position. Try to follow it now. As a first step, in practise, a legal rebuke. Should they persist, beatings. That is the proposed law.

Now my personal view is open to more then that, but I am not advocating it as the law.

Originally Posted by ukdude84

There is a clear position. Try to follow it now. As a first step, in practise, a legal rebuke. Should they persist, beatings. That is the proposed law.

Now my personal view is open to more then that, but I am not advocating it as the law.

Either way, you've contradicted yourself. You asserted there should be no punishment, then added beatings, then called for execution.

And you avoid the whole hate speech violation. If you and the state are truly "One", perhaps you should punish yourself for your immoral and unlawful behavior?

Freedom of speech is assured here. We do not adopt all EU laws. Ie Holocaust denial is not a crime here, in much of Europe it is.

Originally Posted by MattInFla

Either way, you've contradicted yourself. You asserted there should be no punishment, then added beatings, then called for execution.

And you avoid the whole hate speech violation. If you and the state are truly "One", perhaps you should punish yourself for your immoral and unlawful behavior?

Should they refuse to stop after legal action, more punishing options must be open. For societies sake.

I also support the death penalty for severe criminals, rapists etc.

Originally Posted by ukdude84

Should they refuse to stop after legal action, more punishing options must be open. For societies sake.

So, when you said you advocated no punishment, you were confused, or were you trying to hide your position?

No. No punishment if they accept legal rebuke. Should they resist, I would crush them like Stalin.

Originally Posted by ukdude84

Those who disgrace natural law deserve the law of the jungle.

Can you explain just what is 'natural law'?