Kyle is not stating something he believes in... he’s taking a cheap shot at something OTHERS believe in.
JUST SAYING!!!!!!
Just so I understand this because I'm confused. In this forum we've had examples from the Israel folau rugby australia thread and the ssm plebiscite thread, where commentary (from predominantly religious forummers) was given that the ssm plebiscite was contrived by the lgbt community to
1. Introduce sex to minors
2. Groom minors to be homosexual in future
3. That introducing ssm would lead to pedophilia
4. That introducing ssm would lead to bestiality
5. That introducing ssm would lead to polygamy
6. To force religious beliefs to be "defeated"
7. That it would lead to a less moral and ethical society
8. That they would force straight minors to role play as the opposite sex in safe schools and make boys wear skirts
9. That they're making their "sick, twisted" lives seem as normal
10. That they're going to force all churches to perform ssm
And this was all fair and "loving" commentary and religious people needed to have their high profile public say to oppose the immoral, unethical ssm act.
Even in this thread we've seen one post where being gay was grouped in the same category as being "criminals, junkies"
And this is all fair respectful commentary according to some.
So the above 10 "talking" points from the ssm plebiscite thread, grouping gays with "criminals and junkies" and folaus famous tweet were anything but "loving" nor were they "just discussion". They were hateful comments.
On a side note the George Michael mural was painted LONG BEFORE the ssm plebiscite, it had been there for a long time. So no, you're wrong that it was painted just for the ssm plebiscite.
The other thing you're wrong about is that it was painted to insult religious people. Here's the thing about art, it's open to interpretation, that every individual can have their own idea about a piece of art. While you may have seen it as an insult, the lgbt saw George Michael as THEIR saint. He represented the struggles that they go through in life, he was their icon. So in no way was it intended as an insult. If you consider this as an insult, then you may want to give Easter and Christmas holidays back to the pagans, as those dates are the pagans original holidays, so stop insulting them.
Onto Kyle sandilands, the blokes a fucking drop kick and says things for shock value. However, as much as you may say they are not his beliefs, the fact is many atheists believe Mary had sex with another man to give birth to Jesus. Go on atheists pages and they make fun of the immaculate conception with comments that "one woman's lie about an affair that got out if hand ". I say this with no intent to insult but to simply say this side of the story has existed long before Kyle made it public, although no one was quite as insulting as Kyle in telling that "joke".
And lastly homosexuality looks like it has scientific explanations of a combination of genetics and environmental factors CAUSING it. So to a degree, it's out of those people's hands that they end up homosexual, that's the way they are.
Meanwhile religion is a choice, a belief system, an idea. You're not born as religious, you're born with a clean slate and then indoctrinated by your parents or you choose it as an acceptable idea/belief system
And by all means we will continue to criticize religion for its short comings. I refuse to not criticize ideas like
* chop off a thieves hands - Islamic belief
* you will receive 72 virgins in heaven - Islamic
* an innocent baby is born in sin - Catholic
* homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God- Christianity/islamic
* Jesus rose from the dead
* Mohammed flew to heaven on a flying horse
So the above will not be exempt from criticism just because it's religion. Ideas are criticized and if they pass the test, they're accepted, of they fail the test? Then thank fuck we criticize ideas and get rid of the bad ones.