Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

What does the future hold for Donald Trump? - threadbans in OP

13603613633653661189

Comments

  • Posts: 3,773 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    There is no link that will be accepted by you. It IS that hard. You will never ever ever accept any link. EVER!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,106 ✭✭✭Christy42


    Kids have more adult relations than just their parents. Aunts, Uncles, older cousins, older siblings if there is a large age gap. Family friends who come around for dinner. Any of whom may be around for dinner or at a wedding and bring their partner. Straight or gay relationship. Or maybe a kid has a friend whose parents are same sex etc. etc. etc.


    With much more societal acceptance people are not hiding their personal lives as much and therefore people and children will see same sex couples more often. I like the tolerant and accepting but we should deny their existence to kids as much as possible and compare it to talking to kids about pedofiles.


    Also what societal norms are being ripped up?



  • Posts: 3,773 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I don't think you are actually reading my point. Just seeing what you want to see. Nothing that I've said is homophobic. Gays were treated horrifically by society 50 years ago. Criminalized, ostracized. Similar to how paedophiles are treated today. That's not homophobic to say that.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,019 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,970 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    drawing parallels to paedophilia is. Plenty of other groups were treated horrifically by society 50 years ago. just a coincidence you decided to pick on homosexuality to draw your parallel. you must think we are all thick.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,332 ✭✭✭✭extra gravy


    What are you on about? You were complaining about poor Candace Owens being a target of abuse and when I provide you with evidence where a psychopath called her his inspiration, your response is deflection and "Hitler toilet paper something something". Says a lot that you dismiss it as "ramblings". How convenient.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,967 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Difference is there was nothing wrong with what gay people were doing, because relationships between consenting adults is fine regardless of sexual orientation. There is no victim.

    There is always a victim in child sexual abuse. Always. That's why it could never and would never be accepted. In the past few decades as we've learnt more about what it means to be LGBT, the struggles they face and how we strive to be more accepting of them and treat them with the normalcy they deserve, so too have we learnt more about the effects of child sexual abuse with more victims being willing to come forward whereas it used to be largely swept under the rug. We have a better understanding of the effects and do what we can to prevent it.

    You're trying to conflate the two in a slippery slope argument to create a tenuous link between them. That is homophobia.

    And you have the audacity to complain about how waspish and mean "the left" are?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,731 ✭✭✭✭salmocab


    Gays and Pedophiles were treated and are treated different for very different reasons. One is among consenting people that was disliked because views at the time were extremely conservative, one involves rape.



  • Posts: 3,773 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    What specific part of my post do you disagree with? That gays were criminalised and ostracised? Or that the same thing happens to paedophiles today?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,970 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    the part where you drew parallels between homosexuality and paedophilia.



  • Advertisement
  • Subscribers Posts: 43,446 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    i disagree with you trying to collate the two.

    whats difficult to understand about that?



  • Posts: 3,773 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    The societal norm that the majority of families have a mother and a father. We should stop pretending that it's just one option and that it's equally likely for one parent to be transgender leper from Zimbabwe



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,967 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Do you think it was right for gay people to be criminalised and ostracised? Why or why not?

    Do you think it is right for paedophiles to be criminalised and ostracised? Why or why not?



  • Posts: 3,773 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Actually you are the one dodging. We're done with this nonsense. I'm not engaging with someone who acts in bad faith like your good self.



  • Posts: 3,773 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I'm not saying they are the same. That's why I used the word 'parallel'.

    It's like saying black people and women faced similar struggles in the past. It's not collating them, it's saying there are echoes or parallels in how they were viewed by society.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,103 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Yes, but one treatment was clearly wrong and came from a position of fear, bias and homophobia.

    The other is based on the protection of children. That you can see a parallel shows just how wrong and how much damage the 'conversatives' of the past actually caused.

    That liberals are seen as anyway dangerous given that is amazing.



  • Posts: 3,773 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    No. They were/are consenting adults and what they do in their private lives is nobody's business but their's.

    Yes. In order to protect children from being groomed and/or abused.



  • Posts: 3,773 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    That's the whole point of this bill in Florida. It is rooted in the protection of children. The preservation of innocence in their very early formative years. Asking to wait until they are 8 years old until they learn about LGBT is not asking too much. You might call it homophobia but I just call it letting kids be kids. You'd swear they were thowing gays off buildings like in the Middle East they way some people talk about it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,103 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    It isn't rooted in the protection of children. Protection of children is putting in place laws, safeguards, child protection policies. The fact that conservatives care more about guns after Sandy Hook tells you that.

    But again, the bill ins;'t about protection, it is about stopping people talking. Where does freedom of speech sit with that? I thought that was all that mattered?

    And what about those children that are the kids of LGBT parents? Do the parents have to pretend until the child is 8? If not, why is it ok for that child to know, but not their classmates? As what is the punishment for the child if they were to talk to their classmates about their parents?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,967 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Okay, so you agree that there is a clear difference between the two. It's a difference we all know, understand and agree on.

    The reasons you've outlined above are the exact reasons why the two things are not the same, and why acknowledging LGBT rights does not open the door to acceptance of paedophilia.

    So can you explain what you perceive to be the link between the two? For example in your post you say black people and women faced similar struggles in the past and you're not linking the two by saying that. However your argument that acceptance of LGBT rights could lead to paedophilia being accepted is akin to saying accepting black peoples rights could lead to increases in rapes of women.

    So can you explain why teachers acknowledging different types of family structures exist can lead to acceptance of paedophilia?



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 3,773 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    The problem with liberal thought is that it's rooted in emotions and faux empathy. If we don't treat everyone the same, we end up with situations like the grooming gangs in England. Where one ethnic group gets away with grooming and abusing vulnerable young girls for years because everyone is afraid of offending anyone or being considered racist. But if the ethnicity of the perpetrators and victims was reversed it would be cracked down upon in a heartbeat. I think it's better for a few people's feelings to be hurt than for children to be exposed to overly grown up topics too soon. The risks outweigh the benefits. Just my opinion.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,103 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    You have heard about the catholic church? Come on, be serious now. Those were evil men, that happened to have a particular religion. Their religion had nothing to do with the evil they carried out. I am talking about both the grooming gangs and the catholic church.

    No doubt the reverence that is given to religion has led to many perpertators getting away with rape and abuse of children for many years. Thankfully, that reverence that a persons belief somehow gives them protection of gives them a benefit of the doubt is falling away.

    What had liberals got to do with grooming gangs in the UK?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,788 ✭✭✭Rawr


    In my own inane attempt to bring us back on topic; I might suggest that Trump himself probably doesn’t give 2 damns about LGBT policy or the people such policies impact. He appears to just want praise from his base for doing things he thinks might be “on brand” with his MAGA shenanigans.

    I might even further suggest that if the Trump Base had somehow been mostly made up of LGBT folk, he’d probably spout pro-LGBT stuff all of the time in order to get some praise from them. The guy does not appear to have any form of political scruples, beyond whatever he thinks will benefit him or make him look good to his fans.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,980 ✭✭✭Patrick2010


    Thanks Rawr, thought I'd wandered into the wrong thread there!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,970 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    I doubt could tell you what the acronym LGBT stands for without prompting.



  • Posts: 6,559 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    So I have a pretty small social circle overall. I know at least two same sex couples in Ireland directly. Then I also work with at least one couple in the US via work that have kids. So it's far from abnormal and your logic appears to be "treat it as abnormal". You haven't established any danger of teaching kids about it so what exactly are you safeguarding them from? Why is it dangerous for children about LGBT people? It's not remotely sexualizing to acknowledge that kids can different family structures, in fact it's protecting those children who are in different structures to educate about it so they aren't treated as abnormal.


    Also in relation to your legalizing paedophilia bs, it's pretty telling that you don't seem to be addressing any of the posters that have pointed to the clear difference which is protecting from actual harm and the fact children cannot consent.


    In relation to consent, ironically enough the Republicans have actively opposed teaching about consent as part of sex education.




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,970 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    what else could you expect from the party that brought you Matt gaetz.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,967 ✭✭✭✭Penn




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,788 ✭✭✭Rawr


    Would probably think it was a sandwich.

    Trump: An LGBT? Yes, I would like two, on white bread and hold the lettuce. Make them GBTs instead.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 6,559 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Interested to see if Woljtek favours consent classes. It's very much so something being pushed by the people he despises but it's a positive means to prevent abuse, rapes etc. And largely railed against by those who don't want kids to know about LGBT couples.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement