- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
- Messages
- 18,153
- Reaction score
- 3,160
Only against gay people or a whole range of people?I've explained as simply as I can how Folau was discriminatory, if you cannot understand it by now you never will.
Only against gay people or a whole range of people?I've explained as simply as I can how Folau was discriminatory, if you cannot understand it by now you never will.
I've read 'em..... don't believe I have missed the point at all....you were essentially trying to counter/ invalidate an argument by saying pedophiles have made the same argument. I'm just expressing my opinion that bringing pedophiles into the conversation immediately qualifies as drawing some sort of comparison and I don't think there's any solid basis to draw that comparison.Sorry, you seem to have missed my point entirely. Perhaps you should read the flow of conversation that I was responding to.
Then your opinion is shown to be worthless through its complete error. My point in stating a simple fact was, broadly speaking, the same one that you made in your reply to me.I've read 'em..... don't believe I have missed the point at all....you were essentially trying to counter/ invalidate an argument by saying pedophiles have made the same argument. I'm just expressing my opinion that bringing pedophiles into the conversation immediately qualifies as drawing some sort of comparison and I don't think there's any solid basis to draw that comparison.
Sorry Rod, that is factually incorrect. I'm not defending medieval Christianity, at whose feet (mostly the Catholics) lie an appalling level of atrocity and injustice, however the facts are that treatment of so called heretics was varied across that time space and from location to location. The definition of a heretic was itself variable. It is important to try and be accurate with information, too many people these days just say whatever truth they want to believe in as though it is fact, without any reference to reliable research and data.just a reminder that Christian people and authorities killed everyone they could find and classify as heretic for 400+ years
It’s sounds like you’re talking about the Manly squad!It’d all good if you bash/assault women, bash people, go to gaol or avoid gaol over seas for crimes, sexually abuse women, do drugs or do them on camera, get caught with drugs, be a drug cheat, high level drink driving and god knows what else but once you say something about gay ***** you are banned for ever!!! lmao fk that’s soft
yeah ok ill be more accurate, Catholics should stfu about any injustices made, protestants were victims as well as perpetrators so they have more credibility and I think the orthodox church stayed out of it mostly after they split so they are ok (but they are lucky because they hated the pope so much they probably just did the opposite out of spite, so Catholics went around killing people and they did the opposite)Sorry Rod, that is factually incorrect. I'm not defending medieval Christianity, at whose feet (mostly the Catholics) lie an appalling level of atrocity and injustice, however the facts are that treatment of so called heretics was varied across that time space and from location to location. The definition of a heretic was itself variable. It is important to try and be accurate with information, too many people these days just say whatever truth they want to believe in as though it is fact, without any reference to reliable research and data.
That's um... better... thanks Rod...yeah ok ill be more accurate, Catholics should stfu about any injustices made, protestants were victims as well as perpetrators so they have more credibility and I think the orthodox church stayed out of it mostly after they split so they are ok (but they are lucky because they hated the pope so much they probably just did the opposite out of spite, so Catholics went around killing people and they did the opposite)
Most the people complaining would have just scrolled right past and not had a second thought about what he posted.. but when the media says jump, they jump.. why? because it fuels their egos, and they can look like a big hero on social mediaHow did he treat them though? He didn't action anything that would classify him as treating them in a way. He was ADVISING THEM to repent. Last time I checked that wasn't a crime.
Lol whatever. I’mThen your opinion is shown to be worthless through its complete error. My point in stating a simple fact was, broadly speaking, the same one that you made in your reply to me.
With all the information I've put into this thread, I'm sure you can figure out it.Only against gay people or a whole range of people?
Well there's more evidence this is all about the money.https://www.news.com.au/sport/rugby...s/news-story/bb0e68e71927dc9ca18765faaee86acf
Not the sharpest tool in the box, the old Izzy....
If I call someone at work at fuckwit, they take offense, then I apologise, and I get fired, I can still file a lawsuit for unfair dismissal. Keep in mind what he said on his PERSONAL social media channel shouldn't result in the termination of his contract.Well there's more evidence this is all about the money.
it's ridiculous bro.. but it's certainly not limited to 'discrimination' or whatever they considered Israel's actions to be.. I had a friend who was fired for simply not providing her employer with her Facebook details... what a time to be alive hahaIf I call someone at work at fuckwit, they take offense, then I apologise, and I get fired, I can still file a lawsuit for unfair dismissal. Keep in mind what he said on his PERSONAL social media channel shouldn't result in the termination of his contract.
And that's where you're wrong because it should and it did.If I call someone at work at fuckwit, they take offense, then I apologise, and I get fired, I can still file a lawsuit for unfair dismissal. Keep in mind what he said on his PERSONAL social media channel shouldn't result in the termination of his contract.