1
General Discussion / Re: Coronavirus Thread.
« on: March 30, 2020, 07:03:41 PM »
Stay safe Warriors. Been a while since I visited. The lock downs in Ontario getting tighter.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Too many distractions and now is 4-0Have not been on this forum in sometime and I log in and then US score. steups
whais d good pecan long time no read
Can#t find a major outlet with this news though But found this interesting column;
Qatar had the strongest bid for the 2022 Fifa World Cup. Here's why
Qatar does not have a rich football history. But we had compelling answers for all the doubters, and the process was fair
By Hamad bin Khalifa bin Ahmad Al Thani (Guardian UK)
Watched the first 4 episodes of Penny Dreadful but nothing's really happened to make me interested yet, so I've sort of drifted from it... the cast is excellent, but the story is progressing way to slow, and there's not that much happening for me to be interested
Even with acknowledging the Burnsian notion of "man's inhumanity to man", this contributes dangerous suppositional reasoning that's perhaps a comfort to historical oppressors, and - to put it mildly - likely taxing and vexing to history's catalogue of the oppressed. One has doubts as to the comprehensive utility of applying ceteris paribus in reconstructing the history of the world. Inverting and conflating Arawaks into Caribs and Caribs into Arawaks is somewhat deontologically challenging, not to mention invariably reductionist and problematic.
I would like to respond to this but I need to fully digest what I think you are saying - in a few days.
What do you think or yuh too fraid to talk?
Well I think we will see more and more of this happening around the world until most folks are too scared for their jobs to say what they truly belief about the issue of Gay marriage from a religious perspective.
The days of freedom of speech and even freedom of choice could be rapidly coming to an end.
Even with acknowledging the Burnsian notion of "man's inhumanity to man", this contributes dangerous suppositional reasoning that's perhaps a comfort to historical oppressors, and - to put it mildly - likely taxing and vexing to history's catalogue of the oppressed. One has doubts as to the comprehensive utility of applying ceteris paribus in reconstructing the history of the world. Inverting and conflating Arawaks into Caribs and Caribs into Arawaks is somewhat deontologically challenging, not to mention invariably reductionist and problematic.
Findings on the hypothesis?
... what I'm suggesting is that there's room for all of these word choices and others.
I see you are trying to play clever and dumb at the same time but anyone with a brain can workout what you were saying and implying in post below so I decided to make my position crystal clear to you and to everyone else least I be falsely accused of being homophobic by the gullible ones reading your post and taking it as gospel.Both Socapro and Congo stated that they were victims of unwanted sexual attention originally disguised as benign socialization. And I think that they both responded with the threat of violence if not violence, against the offender. And they have both made their positions clear on homosexuality.
I am curious if there are forum members who feel that they have been victimized. I have never been victimized and my views on homosexuals are liberal. Congo and Socapro have been victimized and their views are conservative, some would argue, even hateful and bigoted.
Just curious if anecdotal data supports my hypothesis. That's all.
And btw, when I was approached I did not view it as being victimized as you term it as I am not a fan of playing the victim card at every opportunity. I simply said I was not that way inclined and therefore was not interested and took myself away. Simple.
The only way I would have viewed myself as being victimized is if the perpetrator was in a position of power and insisted on making future advances even after I made my position clear that I was not interested.
Both Socapro and Congo stated that they were victims of unwanted sexual attention originally disguised as benign socialization. And I think that they both responded with the threat of violence if not violence, against the offender. And they have both made their positions clear on homosexuality.
I am curious if there are forum members who feel that they have been victimized. I have never been victimized and my views on homosexuals are liberal. Congo and Socapro have been victimized and their views are conservative, some would argue, even hateful and bigoted.
Just curious if anecdotal data supports my hypothesis. That's all.
Ah not sure that "victimized" is ah word that covers the landscape. How about "offended"? How about "angered"?
As I already explained I am not one for threatening violence against Gays or anyone else but I am all for folks having the right to defend themselves in kind if threatened with violence.
If you were smart enough you would have worked that out and not be viewing my cheers to Congo's post about defending himself against violence as me advocating violence against Gays.
My cheers to Congo's post would have been the same if the initial person who threatened him with the violence to which he reacted was a straight person. I don't discriminate when it comes to a human's right to self-defense.
The Shadow song I posted was just to emphasize my position on "Human Rights" but you should have been able to logically work it out even if I did not post the Shadow song and so the date I posted the song should really be irrelevant to your ability to use your common sense.
What a long reply just to try to disguise the fact that I proved that you were lying!
And you don't have to apologize for your lie which suits me fine as it only confirms that you did it deliberately but at least you weren't allowed to get away with your yap yap BS!
As I said if you cannot bring the quote of me saying I reacted violently to an unwanted sexual advance from a gay person then it proves that you are a liar or have reading comprehension difficulties.I only just spotted the highlighted paragraph above with an accusation from Pecan that included my name.
So Mr Pecan please bring the quote and show me where I ever said that I was a victim of unwanted sexual attention from a homo originally disguised as benign socialization and responded with the threat of violence if not violence, against the offender?!
I've never been violent or have threatened violence against a Gay person in all my life not that it may not happen in the future if I am ever put in a position where I am left with no choice in order to defend myself from physical abuse or assault.
Some of you fellas are either dangerous liars or lack English comprehension skills.
If Pecan is unable to bring the quote of me saying I was violent or threatened violence against a homo who made unwanted sexual advances then I expect an apology posted in this thread for his heterophobic lies within the next 24 hours. The clock is ticking!
You serious? are your sensibilities so offended you have time to look for reasons for and to demand an apology?
Now which is it as you seem unable to bring the quote?!
... To question 2. yes I have been asked on a couple of occasions in the past. Once was when I went to the house of a male friend who I did not realise was gay. I of course left immediately when I realised why I was invited round to his house.
Sadly within a year of that incident he died and his family never revealed exactly what he died of but my strong suspicion based upon his sexual life style was that he died of aids.
Steups @SocaPro.... When I confronted him about it, homeboy try to get violent with me. Say what, I went and pick up a carload, roll back for him. Put some chrome to his temple and told him that if he even think about trying any thing like that again, I would put his head on a stick. After that homie had very little to do with me and he became very professional. This after threatening to penalise me academically etc. I never outed him to anyone, he continued living his life with his smokescreens and all. That is most people's position, live and let live. Just don't come around me with that nastiness.
I already stated my view that I have no problem with Gays once they don't try to promote the perverted sexual act that they regularly engage in as natural and healthy to the general public. It becomes my business if it is pushed in my face at every turn and also if they try to promote the homosexual act as natural and healthy to children in our schools and against the wishes of the majority of parents.
Pushing something in my face that I find naturally disgusting is against my rights as a human being to not have to be exposed to it, its as simple as that. I have no problem once it is not pushed in my face on daily basis.
Let's examine this circular piece of logic... according to YOU, you alone determine your "rights", not a court, not a government, not an authority... you alone determine. So you find homosexual intercourse "naturally disgusting" so by extension anybody who participates in it, or who asserts their right to... are violating your "rights."
That piece of specious logic (being charitable here) aside, you claim that homosexual sex is being promoted in schools and being "pushed in your face." Like FF say... whey de hell you does be hanging out? In all my born years I never witness homosexual sex. Nobody never push nutten in my face... not even on de internet. Sounds like you does be watching gay porn den feel conflicted about it.
Do you work within the community as an advocate for gay rights or something?
No - I consider it every person's duty to defend the rights of your fellow human beings, and to challenge prejudice and discrimination.
So you're like a missionary sent to the colonies, yet silent at home? Lehwe make a turn in Brixton nah.
Why do you think I'm silent at home? You know what they say about ASSumptions there Asylum.
There was no room nor need to assume. Let's examine the alternatives: you're being either contradictory, "hypocritical" or prevaricatory. At best, you're an ambiguous equivocator.
Lehme know when yuh reach Brixton (or Socapro's barbershop).
I only just spotted the highlighted paragraph above with an accusation from Pecan that included my name.
So Mr Pecan please bring the quote and show me where I ever said that I was a victim of unwanted sexual attention from a homo originally disguised as benign socialization and responded with the threat of violence if not violence, against the offender?!
I've never been violent or have threatened violence against a Gay person in all my life not that it may not happen in the future if I am ever put in a position where I am left with no choice in order to defend myself from physical abuse or assault.
Some of you fellas are either dangerous liars or lack English comprehension skills.
If Pecan is unable to bring the quote of me saying I was violent or threatened violence against a homo who made unwanted sexual advances then I expect an apology posted in this thread for his heterophobic lies within the next 24 hours. The clock is ticking!