You would say that. You're little better than he is.

May I remind anyone who doesn't like my description of kirkstaller that he defended the Catholic Church's position that abortion is worse than raping a minor.

How am I relative to you?

I'm not.

You have repeatedly defended kirkstaller's disgusting views throughout this thread, and have regularly shown yourself to be an unpleasant bigot in your own right.

Have I? Repeatedly? Where? As I recall, I have not repeatedly expressed opinion on the specifics of his views. I have not been a foul-mouthed bigot who cannot accept others may hold different views / beliefs to me.

Anyway, please answer the question - where do I fit in relative to you in this world that exists in your mind?

you really are a pr1ck

Isn't he just.

What condescending pr1ck would claim words are worse than actions.

What amazes me, and has for some time, is that "it" hasn't been banned, it never adds anything to any debate and constantly takes a controversial view for the sake of it.

From about page 74 onwards. And maybe before that, I don't know.



Oh, but you have. You even came out with some b[io[/ill[io[/icks about how he had the 'moral high ground', and how his views on homosexuality had 'validity'.



You have not been foul-mouthed, no. You have been, and continue to be, a bigot. You seem to think that using a few profanities is somehow worse than wishing to oppress a whole group of people based solely on their sexuality. You seem to think that my calling a poster 'subhuman scum' is worse than that poster saying that aborting the foetus of a nine-year-old rape victim is a more heinous crime than the rape itself. In short, your moral compass is all fooked up.

And, just so you know, its not bigotry to be unable to accept the bigotry of others. If your 'different views and beliefs' are abhorrent (they are, by the way), I have every right to point that out.

I don't think that's the case with Dally. His views on homosexuality, for example, are consistently disgusting. I think to suggest that he's merely trying to be controversial is to give him credit he does not deserve.

all the links to the Wail are simple devicive though, he's an odeous wretch of a "man".

Guys.
Let's move on.

Lets not forget we are all human beings. The world would be a boring place if we all shared the same views. I have no interest in calling Kirkstaller or Dally petty names, or belitting them for what they believe in. IMO its wrong for them to hold that belief, but thats up to them. I am more interested in asking questions and trying to find out why Kirkstaller holds the views he does, and for Kirkstaller if at all possible to see our side of the argument, so lets cut out the petty name calling eh?

Anyone who supports the Catholic Church's position that the doctors aborting the unborn child of a nine-year-old rape victim are worse than her rapist is a scumbag. A person holding such a view deserves to be belittled and deserves to be insulted. The same applies to those who would deny rights to a whole group of people solely because they don't like their sexuality. A bit of 'petty name calling' pales into insignificance in the face of the expression of such vile views on a public forum.

Shouldn't you have melted like a big rapidly burning candle?

That's what happened to the Nazis in "Raiders Of The Lost Ark."

And I agree, their views are abohorrent, but to call someone "it" and an "odious wretch of a ""man"" " is unjustified and uncalled for, imo. Rise above it because at the moment imo Kirkstaller is provoking the reaction that he is trying to justify why he is going to heaven, and why Jesus chose him, and why people are just sooooo bad and all that other nonsense. Don't give him more ammunition mate, thats all I'm saying.

I've just explained why it's not 'uncalled for'. It is entirely called for when they express views that (rightly) provoke anger. How would you describe a person who expresses the views they have? Kirkstaller has said we're all going to burn for eternity just because we don't believe in his imaginary friend, that homosexuality is wrong, and that doctors who perform abortions are worse than rapists. Is that better or worse than calling someone an 'odious wretch', would you say?



I care little about whether he has 'ammunition' or not. I have an opinion about him and his God that it is my right to express. If that convinces him (even more) that I'm going to Hell and he's not, so what? It doesn't make it any more true.

It wasn't Standees phrase "odious wretch" it was his implication of "man" in quote marks. And to say you care little whether he has ammunition or not you certainly have a lot to say. I'm really not having a pop, I just think the name calling is getting tiresome.

In what way are my views on homosexuality disgusting? You love to be controversial by imputing meaning beyond what I type.

Well, if he doesn't think Dally is much of a man, he's entitled to that opinion. I've seen little from Dally to suggest that Standee is being unfair.



I have a lot to say [ibecause[/i I don't care whether he has 'ammunition' or not. Or rather, because I don't see my insulting him as strengthening his case one bit. Whether you think my name-calling is unjust or not, it doesn't make his views any more palatable.



Don't read it then.

Dally is tiresome, and he's no "man"

You've defended Kirkstaller's view that homosexuality was wrong by saying his views were 'valid'. In the past (maybe even in this thread, I can't be bothered to look through all 90-odd pages), you've described homosexuality as 'unnatural'. You even tried to put together some ill-considered biological justification for your horse argument. In that way.

Oooo, are you giving away Dallys secrets here, dare I ask, is Dally a[i woman [/iicon_confused.gif:

I'm saying it's worthless as an individual, certainly if the tripe posted is what it really thinks. I actually believe it's more than one idiot that uses a name to just post garbage and antagonise people.