cake and eat it

[chesters1]

Ken, it was back in the 80's, if, like me and Chesters, you had been "approached / flashed at" by one of the dirty old man types when you were a kid, then you would most probably feel the same as I do. No amount of legislation will ever make me change my views because I have seen the dark side of homosexuality, and to be quite honest, I think it is about time they were told to shut up about their "rights". And as for the use of the word "gay" to describe themselves...."Sad" would be much more appropriate.

 

Den

i was honored Den i attracted 3 of them ,one and his "brother" and another one .

But dont get me wrong i have no problem with gays as such and you will find someone pretty close is probably one or at least trisexual (men ,women and bicycles) but asides that were talking in my case pedophiles ,they like their meat rare but ofcourse they can be either sex not just males although its the generic dirty old man that get the headlines.

as i said i have no problem with gays but i do resent the Julian clarey types that use it to attract attention and spout filth ,and as you say being "different" should get you no more rights than anyone else if were all supposed to be equal.

being "equal" is just that your all the same what you get up to in the bedroom is not an excuse to demand anything unless your a domina and working!

 

if they didnt flout their gayness and just disapear into the back ground most as i said earlier wouldnt be noticed and as such picked apon but when like foreigners they demand you give them preferences it get up peoples noses.

 

i could finish by saying the old saying a couple are my best mates but i really dont have mates gay straight or both but i suspect a couple of my ex workmates are but they never raped me or forced me to watch their antics of a sexual nature so good luck to them .

 

as for the pedos ,all long dead i presume it was a long time ago and a different age where such things were "strange" and hushed up to the detriment of their prey ,the only mention of such things by my mum was that a person was a bit "strange" ,"dont go near mr x hes a bit strange" was all i was ever told and it was a great shock (but luckily it never got to actual trouser down naughty stuff but it was dammed close) when i found out what "strange " really meant

 

the other bit is choice ,sure you can refuse to bake a cake for anyone but its unfortunate today being truthful to the reason why appears to be unlawful ,i am sure refusing to bake a cake for a straight person would never had raised an eyebrow ,like the race card the gay card gets you results not available to most people and its probably used a great deal

 

unfortunately demanding i get the nearest seat on the bus to the door by mentioning i am ugly and fat gets me nowhere perhaps i should stick the words "and gay" may get results LOL

 

strange the clocks wrong "Edited by chesters1, Today, 05:52 PM." its only 5.34 now?!

 

as for 'cake and eat it' i have no problem with anyone eating cake so long as its not bigger than my cake and i am not forced to eat their cake!

Edited November 6, 2014 by chesters1

[Emma two]

Ken, it was back in the 80's, if, like me and Chesters, you had been "approached / flashed at" by one of the dirty old man types when you were a kid, then you would most probably feel the same as I do. No amount of legislation will ever make me change my views because I have seen the dark side of homosexuality, and to be quite honest, I think it is about time they were told to shut up about their "rights". And as for the use of the word "gay" to describe themselves...."Sad" would be much more appropriate.

It is, of course, nonsense to suggest that gay men have any greater predilection for underage sex than straight men. Or women come to that matter.

Den

Here we go again. Back in the 1960s and 1970s lots of people, took the view that the words ‘homosexual’ and ‘paedophile’ were more or less interchangeable, and that If your predilection were of the male on male variety you didn’t particularly differentiate between men and boys. That viewpoint is still shamefully held by many. It is, of course, nonsense to suggest that gay men have any greater predilection for underage sex than straight men. The truth is that most abuse occurs in the home or between family members, regardless if it is between family members of the same sex or otherwise. Of course there are paedophiles among gay men, just as there are among straight men, yet from the way the issue is still covered in some sections of the media you’d think the proportion was far higher than it actually is.

 

Are you seriously saying that some sad bloke showing you his knob has had such an impact rendered you a prejudical bigot? Happily it's your type who are being told to 'shut up' and we can live in hope that your feeble and foundless intolerence will die out with your generation.

 

There is lots of evidence to show that abused children are more often the victims of heterosexuals rather than gay people.

 

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/faculty_sites/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

[corydoras]

Ken, it was back in the 80's, if, like me and Chesters, you had been "approached / flashed at" by one of the dirty old man types when you were a kid, then you would most probably feel the same as I do. No amount of legislation will ever make me change my views because I have seen the dark side of homosexuality, and to be quite honest, I think it is about time they were told to shut up about their "rights". And as for the use of the word "gay" to describe themselves...."Sad" would be much more appropriate.

 

Den

So are paedophiles who target little girls "the dark side" of heterosexuality?

 

It's a been while since I heard such dogmatic poppycock spouted on here. Anybody that doesn't think like I do should be told to "sut up".

Edited November 6, 2014 by corydoras

[Emma two]

So are paedophiles who target little girls "the dark side" of heterosexuality?

 

 

Good point, they are and just what (poldark) exactly is the 'dark side of homosexuality'?

[corydoras]

Here we go again. Back in the 1960s and 1970s lots of people, took the view that the words ‘homosexual’ and ‘paedophile’ were more or less interchangeable, and that If your predilection were of the male on male variety you didn’t particularly differentiate between men and boys. That viewpoint is still shamefully held by many. It is, of course, nonsense to suggest that gay men have any greater predilection for underage sex than straight men. The truth is that most abuse occurs in the home or between family members, regardless if it is between family members of the same sex or otherwise. Of course there are paedophiles among gay men, just as there are among straight men, yet from the way the issue is still covered in some sections of the media you’d think the proportion was far higher than it actually is.

 

Are you seriously saying that some sad bloke showing you his knob has had such an impact rendered you a prejudical bigot? Happily it's your type who are being told to 'shut up' and we can live in hope that your feeble and foundless intolerence will die out with your generation.

 

There is lots of evidence to show that abused children are more often the victims of heterosexuals rather than gay people.

 

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/faculty_sites/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

It's a bit of a waste of time Emma. Some things won't change until the old dinosaurs die off.

[chesters1]

So are paedophiles who target little girls "the dark side" of heterosexuality?

 

It's a been while since I heard such dogmatic poppycock spouted on here. Anybody that doesn't think like I do should be told to "sut up".

Surely thats the dark side of homosexuality

If a bloke abused a female child isnt that more "normal" than a male abusing a male child ,there are probably standards even in paedophile rings i presume

Edited November 6, 2014 by chesters1

[corydoras]

Surely thats the dark side of homosexuality

If a bloke abused a female child isnt that more "normal" than a male abusing a male child ,there are probably standards even in paedophile rings i presume

Talking about having you cake and eating it. Do you think that sexuality is a choice chesters? If so can you remember when you decided to be heterosexual or were you just born that way?

 

Paedohiles that prey on little boys are bad, paedophiles that prey on little girls are just misguided. Only a misogynistic dinosaur of an old man would make an argument like that. You should be ashamed of that last post.

Edited November 6, 2014 by corydoras

[chesters1]

You cannot choose your sex but you can choose who to have sex with or are you run by your urges?

If a man has sex with a boy child not only is he a paedophile hes also gay ,the same goes if a women has sex with a girl child they are also gay.

It gets a little confusing if you hang on both sides of the fence but all are paedophiles.

I guess in some countries men and child brides are common to us they are peadophiles to them normal

 

I see its the jump on chesters thing again ,nowhere have i said its normal i was thinking was it different in pedo rings ,do you get more points buggering a boy or shafting a girl

Edited November 6, 2014 by chesters1

[barry luxton]

Should a checkout operator in a supermarket be able to refuse to sell you pork, or beef, or alcohol, or condoms?

I am free to choose who I provide my services to long may that freedom remain. Unfortunatly others have their hands tied and the p c brigade are rubbing their hands with glee, pathetic, just like the pathetic creature who set this shop keeper up. Edited November 6, 2014 by barry luxton

[barry luxton]

It's a bit of a waste of time Emma. Some things won't change until the old dinosaurs die off.

your not suggesting you support suicide now are you