Immoral Poofters

Morality is subjective tho

Each person has their own set of morals so to THEM anything at all they find morally abhorent IS immoral, but that is no more a universally true view than that of someone who thinks the same thing ISNT immoral based on a different personal morality

So no, I really cant see why these things trouble you really, I cant see why other peoples preferences, likes or dislikes should be of the slightest concern to you whatsoever to be perfectly honest

As I wouldnt expect you to feel a need to change YOUR views just because someone else doesnt agree with them its EQUALLY reasonable for you to not expect someone else to change their views simply because you dont agree with them

So “if” (as I’m not convinced) you ARE infact gay then thats “it”, youre JUST gay, youre nothing special, you being gay doesnt make you any better or worse than anyone else and it most certainly doesnt make your views or opinions any more important or valid than anyone elses

If you cant accept other peoples views when they are different then you really give up the right to expect anyone to accept your views too

The word “hypocrite” springs to mind

Idont really think murder is a good comparative actually

Its a law, not a personal view

Although some do think ALL taking of life is wrong (jehovahs witnesses as an example) even during war, its not a legal personal option or choice whether to choose to be a murderer or to not choose that

The law says its wrong and it doesnt matter what people think the law is in place till someone changes it

As for not expecting that view, you should have really

I never expect anyone to agree with anything I post nor to change their view because I have, I certainly dont think any view on most topics can be universal as each society is a unique construct

If you pay more attention to what I am usually saying rather than the way I say it you will see my main bone of contention is integrity and consistency on a personal level

IE, someone not doing something they criticise whilst being unaware they are being a total hypocrite

I personally think anyone is and should be entitled to hold any view at all whether its racist, sexist, hieghtest or whatever-ist, and that IF by some chance most people come to share that view its not “wrong” its simply the majority speaking

But on an individual level each view is perfectly entitled EVEN if someones view is that they SHOULD be able to murder anyone they like

As long as they dont then go out and practise that view seeing as it IS illegal, then thats fine, they can think it and talk about it as much as they like and I couldnt care less

Re gay weddings on TV tho, gays walk around in public so them getting married on TV is hardly an opinion that should be listened to or acted upon as I dont think the majority of people would be that bothered really, but if the majority WERE bothered then it should be banned or moved to the post watershed period

As a personal opinion someone is just as entitled to find it disgusting and society destroying as someone is to think its cute and should be shown more

Niether is universally more right or wrong than the other IMO

It would however be reasonable to at least try and get some professional child psychologists views on how exposure to gay visuals might affect kids both positively and negatively

But realistically that would be impossiible as they WILL be either staunchly pro gay or anti gay themselves so a lack of bias would be almost impossible to find

I dont buy into the “people are ALL born gay” nonsense, but I also dont think that merely seeing a gay wedding on tv will make kids decide to be gay when they grow up, but having a narrow minded and dysfunctional pair of hetro parents IS quite likely to I reckon

What consenting adults get up to behind closed doors is nobody elses business nor their problem EVEN where you have some very VERY lose moralled folks who practise the disgusting and slutty act of kissing someone on the first shag lol

But just because its none of their business DOESNT IMO mean they arent entitled to find it repulsive, abhorent or unnatural until it directly affects them and their rights or makes their opinion less valid as a result of pursuing the minority agenda

So anywhere a council thinks its fine to have gay literature it SHOULD be just as fine to have gay literature

Although the current social tide means that its fine to have gay literature where peoplle who might be offended by that might be, but its not acceptable to have christian literature in a public building where gays might go and be offended which is where I think the line of validity has been crossed

@ubermik wrote:

Morality is subjective tho

Each person has their own set of morals so to THEM anything at all they find morally abhorent IS immoral, but that is no more a universally true view than that of someone who thinks the same thing ISNT immoral based on a different personal morality

So no, I really cant see why these things trouble you really, I cant see why other peoples preferences, likes or dislikes should be of the slightest concern to you whatsoever to be perfectly honest

As I wouldnt expect you to feel a need to change YOUR views just because someone else doesnt agree with them its EQUALLY reasonable for you to not expect someone else to change their views simply because you dont agree with them

So “if” (as I’m not convinced) you ARE infact gay then thats “it”, youre JUST gay, youre nothing special, you being gay doesnt make you any better or worse than anyone else and it most certainly doesnt make your views or opinions any more important or valid than anyone elses

If you cant accept other peoples views when they are different then you really give up the right to expect anyone to accept your views too

The word “hypocrite” springs to mind

Morality..for the individual….may be be subjective but for society it becomes objective, particularly in law. We may not agree with its objectivity but are required to abide by its rules and regualtions or pay the penalty as a result.

Hence paedophilia is subjecyively immoral to most but subjectively moral and indeed natural for some. However society has placed a boundary which is legally defined, objectively, as one not to be crossed. hence with murder, incest etc etc etc.

If society, as a generic whole not as a myriad of individuals who are live, work, and sleep togehter, accepts the rule of law as objective (as indeed it must to maintain its stability without descending into anarchy) then it must recognise or at least accept the objectivity of morality in a legal sense. This acceptance therefore directly affects our sense of right and wrong over many many centuries and defines our nation’s character. It develops and evolves during that time to accept fundamental changes in law and will eventually take the viewpoint of the law.

Hence homosexuality has only been legal for 30 years or so and hence we still have a viewpoint of many, formed by legislation and society’s view of right and wrong, which believes its wrong- society cannot metamorphasise overnight- it cannot wholly reneg on its committment to what is believed to be right until the 1960’s only to be then told “oops, we think we were wrong on this one”

Homosexuality is not “wrong” because society says it isnt “wrong”. Individuals will say homosexuality is wrong because their views, as an individual, do not have to conform to society’s view. Give it a couple of centuries Pikey n we’ll have a gay black prime minister

Look this is all very long-winded. All Pikey want to know is … is it immoral for a couple of blokes to dress up as girlies and shag each other up the shitter?? I mean, ffs it doesn’t merit a bloody great essay does it???