Conquer Club

unriggable wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:

Fieryo wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:Marriage is more than that and you know it. Why else would they want it?

I know this is corny, but maybe the two people love each other and want to express that in an equal manner as straight couples so that their love isn't deemed as less because they love someone of the same sex.

Fine, have a little ceremony. But these people are a danger to society of they're allowed to marry, adopt, and be considered by society as a family.

Uh, how? A danger? How can you even consider saying that about any group of people?

Radical Muslims are a danger to society.

Pedophiles are a danger to society (that's why I had to relate them, to dissprove this kind of idiotic comment).

Gays are a danger to society.

Napoleon Ier wrote:Radical Muslims are a danger to society.

Ok, kinda see your point there.

Pedophiles are a danger to society (that's why I had to relate them, to dissprove this kind of idiotic comment).

Pedophiles are bad, yes. Still don't see what they have to do with...

Gays are a danger to society.

How, exactly? You keep repeating that they are a danger, but I want to know how they are dangerous.

Explain why I should be afraid of gays.

Napoleon Ier wrote:

unriggable wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:

Fieryo wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:Marriage is more than that and you know it. Why else would they want it?

I know this is corny, but maybe the two people love each other and want to express that in an equal manner as straight couples so that their love isn't deemed as less because they love someone of the same sex.

Fine, have a little ceremony. But these people are a danger to society of they're allowed to marry, adopt, and be considered by society as a family.

Uh, how? A danger? How can you even consider saying that about any group of people?

Radical Muslims are a danger to society.

Pedophiles are a danger to society (that's why I had to relate them, to dissprove this kind of idiotic comment).

Gays are a danger to society.

How? I could understand if they fucked in other peoples houses, but I guarantee that you know a bunch of gays who are too scared to admit it. Convenient that you don't include a reason why they are dangerous.

Besides, they aren't going away. You can do all the eugenics in the world, its a natural thing, a genetic mutation, and it isn't going away.

Napoleon Ier wrote:Read the post. I relaise that it may difficult for leftists with their heads stuck so far up their arse to actually contemplate someone else has something valid to say, but I'm sure it isn't too much to ask you bother to read the post. Originally, it as someone else who brought racial discrimination into the debate, ok? A lot less related than pedophilia.

GAYS ARE TEH DANGERUZ!

Napoleon Ier wrote:

unriggable wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:

Fieryo wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:Marriage is more than that and you know it. Why else would they want it?

I know this is corny, but maybe the two people love each other and want to express that in an equal manner as straight couples so that their love isn't deemed as less because they love someone of the same sex.

Fine, have a little ceremony. But these people are a danger to society of they're allowed to marry, adopt, and be considered by society as a family.

Uh, how? A danger? How can you even consider saying that about any group of people?

Radical Muslims are a danger to society.

Pedophiles are a danger to society (that's why I had to relate them, to dissprove this kind of idiotic comment).

Gays are a danger to society.

All religionists are a danger to society.

I'm losing faith that nappy will ever prove his point. *sigh* all my dreams are ruined...

Neoteny wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:

unriggable wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:

Fieryo wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:Marriage is more than that and you know it. Why else would they want it?

I know this is corny, but maybe the two people love each other and want to express that in an equal manner as straight couples so that their love isn't deemed as less because they love someone of the same sex.

Fine, have a little ceremony. But these people are a danger to society of they're allowed to marry, adopt, and be considered by society as a family.

Uh, how? A danger? How can you even consider saying that about any group of people?

Radical Muslims are a danger to society.

Pedophiles are a danger to society (that's why I had to relate them, to dissprove this kind of idiotic comment).

Gays are a danger to society.

All religionists are a danger to society.

Gamers are a danger to society.

Linkin Park fans are a danger to society.

Wall Mart employees are a danger to society.


Man, this shit is easy! I can go on all day.

Gerbils?

Snorri1234 wrote:

Neoteny wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:

unriggable wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:

Fieryo wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:Marriage is more than that and you know it. Why else would they want it?

I know this is corny, but maybe the two people love each other and want to express that in an equal manner as straight couples so that their love isn't deemed as less because they love someone of the same sex.

Fine, have a little ceremony. But these people are a danger to society of they're allowed to marry, adopt, and be considered by society as a family.

Uh, how? A danger? How can you even consider saying that about any group of people?

Radical Muslims are a danger to society.

Pedophiles are a danger to society (that's why I had to relate them, to dissprove this kind of idiotic comment).

Gays are a danger to society.

All religionists are a danger to society.

Gamers are a danger to society.

Linkin Park fans are a danger to society.

Wall Mart employees are a danger to society.


Man, this shit is easy! I can go on all day.

Oh come on. People are a danger to themselves.

If you look at the scientific evidence, frankly it is ridiculous to think of a "gay gene" or other such straw men which may as well be concocted by violent leftist extremists during a magic mushroom session to make themseleves seem more rational.
I believe, from simple observation, that more homosexual leaning behaviours (there are no gays as such, rather a broad spetrum of sexuality, which most people would agree on except your average lobotomized politically correct citizen of the month like snorri who insists on a magical gene that scientists in Lapland discovered whilst drilling in the arctic ice) are simply the result of a psychological problem created by enviromental factors. true, I can't blame gays for hat. I don't. I'm not a "teh gays iz goin tah hellz111" type person, just somebody who believes that it is because of the lack of virility encouraged in modern society that weak and pathetic individuals resort to homosexuality as a psychological defense mechanism or to resolve their teenage identity vs. role confusion conflict. As such, it is an undesirable product of a sick, perverted society that thrives within it, and all gay feelings which exist to varying degrees in everyone must be purged. My opinions are largely derived from the works of a fascinating journalist, Eric Zemmour, if you're interested...

Napoleon Ier wrote:If you look at the scientific evidence, frankly it is ridiculous to think of a "gay gene" or other such straw men which may as well be concocted by violent leftist extremists during a magic mushroom session to make themseleves seem more rational.
I believe, from simple observation, that more homosexual leaning behaviours (there are no gays as such, rather a broad spetrum of sexuality, which most people would agree on except your average lobotomized politically correct citizen of the month like snorri who insists on a magical gene that scientists in Lapland discovered whilst drilling in the arctic ice) are simply the result of a psychological problem created by enviromental factors. true, I can't blame gays for hat. I don't. I'm not a "teh gays iz goin tah hellz111" type person, just somebody who believes that it is because of the lack of virility encouraged in modern society that weak and pathetic individuals resort to homosexuality as a psychological defense mechanism or to resolve their teenage identity vs. role confusion conflict. As such, it is an undesirable product of a sick, perverted society that thrives within it, and all gay feelings which exist to varying degrees in everyone must be purged. My opinions are largely derived from the works of a fascinating journalist, Eric Zemmour, if you're interested...

Gays are the result of society? One "founded upon Christian beliefs and morality?"

Napoleon Ier wrote:just somebody who believes that it is because of the lack of virility encouraged in modern society that weak and pathetic individuals resort to homosexuality as a psychological defense mechanism or to resolve their teenage identity vs. role confusion conflict.

Wow. Do you know any gay people or do you prefer to let stereotypes, cliches and misconceptions stand in their place. I think you've just proved something but it wasn't your point. It was instead that you're a bigot who hates what he does not understand.

Fieryo wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:just somebody who believes that it is because of the lack of virility encouraged in modern society that weak and pathetic individuals resort to homosexuality as a psychological defense mechanism or to resolve their teenage identity vs. role confusion conflict.

Wow. Do you know any gay people or do you prefer to let stereotypes, cliches and misconceptions stand in their place. I think you've just proved something but it wasn't your point. It was instead that you're a bigot who hates what he does not understand.

'

he says on this very page i believe that he bases his understanding of homosexuality on simple observation...i think its not beyond comprehensability to think he might in fact allow stereotypes to go unchallenged.

Fieryo wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:just somebody who believes that it is because of the lack of virility encouraged in modern society that weak and pathetic individuals resort to homosexuality as a psychological defense mechanism or to resolve their teenage identity vs. role confusion conflict.

Wow. Do you know any gay people or do you prefer to let stereotypes, cliches and misconceptions stand in their place. I think you've just proved something but it wasn't your point. It was instead that you're a bigot who hates what he does not understand.

I think bigot is our favorite word on CC's political discussions...

Neoteny wrote:

Fieryo wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:just somebody who believes that it is because of the lack of virility encouraged in modern society that weak and pathetic individuals resort to homosexuality as a psychological defense mechanism or to resolve their teenage identity vs. role confusion conflict.

Wow. Do you know any gay people or do you prefer to let stereotypes, cliches and misconceptions stand in their place. I think you've just proved something but it wasn't your point. It was instead that you're a bigot who hates what he does not understand.

I think bigot is our favorite word on CC's political discussions...

patently false....the words held in the highest esteem are Ron and Paul and its not even close.

Neoteny wrote:I think bigot is our favorite word on CC's political discussions...

I don't use it that often, but I think nappy's latest comment deserved it.

got tonkaed wrote:

Neoteny wrote:

Fieryo wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:just somebody who believes that it is because of the lack of virility encouraged in modern society that weak and pathetic individuals resort to homosexuality as a psychological defense mechanism or to resolve their teenage identity vs. role confusion conflict.

Wow. Do you know any gay people or do you prefer to let stereotypes, cliches and misconceptions stand in their place. I think you've just proved something but it wasn't your point. It was instead that you're a bigot who hates what he does not understand.

I think bigot is our favorite word on CC's political discussions...

patently false....the words held in the highest esteem are Ron and Paul and its not even close.

Damn... destroyed by logic...

Napoleon Ier wrote:If you look at the scientific evidence, frankly it is ridiculous to think of a "gay gene" or other such straw men which may as well be concocted by violent leftist extremists during a magic mushroom session to make themseleves seem more rational.

Show me that scientific evidenc please, kthnx?

I believe, from simple observation, that more homosexual leaning behaviours (there are no gays as such, rather a broad spetrum of sexuality,

You keep saying this but I see no actual evidence for it. Besides, it's not of any importance whether that is true.

which most people would agree on except your average lobotomized politically correct citizen of the month like snorri who insists on a magical gene that scientists in Lapland discovered whilst drilling in the arctic ice)

Actually, I'm not saying there is a gay gene as such. Sexuality is probably contained within many genes which all make a difference.

are simply the result of a psychological problem created by enviromental factors.

Proof?

true, I can't blame gays for hat. I don't. I'm not a "teh gays iz goin tah hellz111" type person,

You sure sound like one.

just somebody who believes that it is because of the lack of virility encouraged in modern society that weak and pathetic individuals resort to homosexuality as a psychological defense mechanism or to resolve their teenage identity vs. role confusion conflict.

Didn't you say you don't actually know any gay people?

As such, it is an undesirable product of a sick, perverted society that thrives within it, and all gay feelings which exist to varying degrees in everyone must be purged. My opinions are largely derived from the works of a fascinating journalist, Eric Zemmour, if you're interested...

Well obviously if you base your views on science from the writings of an anti-feministic, anti-human rights journalist instead of actual scientists, you have the edge in scientific debate.

Fieryo wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:just somebody who believes that it is because of the lack of virility encouraged in modern society that weak and pathetic individuals resort to homosexuality as a psychological defense mechanism or to resolve their teenage identity vs. role confusion conflict.

Wow. Do you know any gay people or do you prefer to let stereotypes, cliches and misconceptions stand in their place. I think you've just proved something but it wasn't your point. It was instead that you're a bigot who hates what he does not understand.

Weak and pathetic was bad language. A variety of individuals can be forced to resort to it, but it is unhealthy. Right, so, the bigot accusation...standard fare, I don't think I want to bother wwith it anymore...Do I know gay people? yes, a few. Not a large amount a half dozen, two of which I'm excellent friends with and play poker with every saturday. Good enough? or am I to be deprted to the gulag for "re-education" with homosexuals

Oh dear snorri...you didn't google Eric Zemmour did you

Napoleon Ier wrote:I'm not a "teh gays iz goin tah hellz111" type person, just somebody who believes that it is because of the lack of virility encouraged in modern society that weak and pathetic individuals resort to homosexuality as a psychological defense mechanism or to resolve their teenage identity vs. role confusion conflict. As such, it is an undesirable product of a sick, perverted society that thrives within it, and all gay feelings which exist to varying degrees in everyone must be purged. My opinions are largely derived from the works of a fascinating journalist, Eric Zemmour, if you're interested...

Brilliant. Just brilliant.

Anyhow much as I'd love to debate on my favorite forum....I have GCSE mocks to do. History tomorrow. Guiscard, tips?

Napoleon Ier wrote:Anyhow much as I'd love to debate on my favorite forum....I have GCSE mocks to do. History tomorrow. Guiscard, tips?

A new thread would be better. And what sort of history?

Also, congrats on 1000 posts!

Napoleon Ier wrote:Weak and pathetic was bad language. A variety of individuals can be forced to resort to it, but it is unhealthy.

I don't know anyone who is FORCED to be gay. They are only truly themselves when they can act, think and be the way they are the most comfortable. This ability is impinged upon when they are not allowed to be recognized as legitimate couples and forced to be second tier citizens with less rights than their neighbors because of their sexual orientation. (notice if you will how I got this back on topic. applause will be welcome.)

Napoleon Ier wrote:Anyhow much as I'd love to debate on my favorite forum....I have GCSE mocks to do. History tomorrow. Guiscard, tips?

Yeh. Try not to be so ignorant in future...

You certainly spout a lot of bollocks for someone still undertaking GCSEs...