Re: Coalition For Marriage : Wed May 23, 2012 2:42 pm  

supportplay wrote: You seem to have missed the point of this entire thread seemingly because, as you have stated, you can't be bothered to read it so I'll help you here. No-one cares what Kirkstaller believes in and would be quite happy to let him have his beliefs as is his right (rights which you think are a new-fangled thing although some rights have come from that advanced country you mentioned earlier - contrary anyone?). What they don't appreciate is those beliefs being foisted upon them. The OP didn't want debate as he stated himself, he wanted to further his cause and garner support for his religion based opinion and people, quite rightly have given him their opinion on the matter. This is a debate on the topic of same-sex marriage and this particular demographic shows that people on RLFans are a very tolerant bunch who will stand together against discrimination regardless of the motivation. It seems I read better than you. What he actually said (my stresses) was: If you are interested in hearing more, or if you are willing to help, please visit: http://c4m.org.uk When you visit the site you can sign the petition and show your support for the existing definition of marriage. Then there was a big display of INTOLERANT bigotry in response and almost from the off. A "very tolerant bunch" - don't make me laugh.

supportplay wrote: You seem to have missed the point of this entire thread seemingly because, as you have stated, you can't be bothered to read it so I'll help you here. No-one cares what Kirkstaller believes in and would be quite happy to let him have his beliefs as is his right (rights which you think are a new-fangled thing although some rights have come from that advanced country you mentioned earlier - contrary anyone?). What they don't appreciate is those beliefs being foisted upon them. The OP didn't want debate as he stated himself, he wanted to further his cause and garner support for his religion based opinion and people, quite rightly have given him their opinion on the matter. This is a debate on the topic of same-sex marriage and this particular demographic shows that people on RLFans are a very tolerant bunch who will stand together against discrimination regardless of the motivation. It seems I read better than you. What he actually said (my stresses) was: If you are interested in hearing more, or if you are willing to help, please visit: http://c4m.org.uk When you visit the site you can sign the petition and show your support for the existing definition of marriage. Then there was a big display of INTOLERANT bigotry in response and almost from the off. A "very tolerant bunch" - don't make me laugh.

Re: Coalition For Marriage : Wed May 23, 2012 2:47 pm  

Gareth1984 wrote:

If he wants to impose his beliefs onto others he needs to do far better than merely state that his particular interpretation of religious scripture says so.

As I noted above, he was simply and politely asking if like-minded people would like to express there opinion by way of a pettion. For that, he has been pilloried by the RLFans thought police - people who are so blinkered they think their display of rabid intolerance of the OP consitutes tolerance. You couldn't make it up as they say.

Re: Coalition For Marriage : Wed May 23, 2012 2:48 pm  

Dally wrote: It seems I read better than you. What he actually said (my stresses) was: If you are interested in hearing more, or if you are willing to help, please visit: http://c4m.org.uk When you visit the site you can sign the petition and show your support for the existing definition of marriage. Then there was a big display of INTOLERANT bigotry in response and almost from the off. A "very tolerant bunch" - don't make me laugh. Read the entire thread, I'm sick of summarising for you. The thread was created to garner support for his cause and people simply told him why they do not support it. Don't get your knickers in a twist jumping on the band-wagon, it has taken the rest of us 80 pages of debate including the OP to help form our opinions on the matter.

Dally wrote: It seems I read better than you. What he actually said (my stresses) was: If you are interested in hearing more, or if you are willing to help, please visit: http://c4m.org.uk When you visit the site you can sign the petition and show your support for the existing definition of marriage. Then there was a big display of INTOLERANT bigotry in response and almost from the off. A "very tolerant bunch" - don't make me laugh. Read the entire thread, I'm sick of summarising for you. The thread was created to garner support for his cause and people simply told him why they do not support it. Don't get your knickers in a twist jumping on the band-wagon, it has taken the rest of us 80 pages of debate including the OP to help form our opinions on the matter.

Re: Coalition For Marriage : Wed May 23, 2012 2:49 pm  

Dally wrote:

Gareth1984 wrote:

If he wants to impose his beliefs onto others he needs to do far better than merely state that his particular interpretation of religious scripture says so.

As I noted above, he was simply and politely asking if like-minded people would like to express there opinion by way of a pettion. For that, he has been pilloried by the RLFans thought police - people who are so blinkered they think their display of rabid intolerance of the OP consitutes tolerance. You couldn't make it up as they say.

And yet, you just have.

Re: Coalition For Marriage : Wed May 23, 2012 3:00 pm  

Dally wrote:

As I noted above, he was simply and politely asking if like-minded people would like to express there opinion by way of a pettion. For that, he has been pilloried by the RLFans thought police

I suggest you read the thread again.. The early responses were along the lines of no thanks as well as explanations as to why people disagree with the OP and support marriage equality. It was not until the OP came back into this thread to "defend" his opposition to gay marriage and began to make statements that homosexuality was wrong, compared homosexuality to murder and rape and tried to defend mysogony, genocide and suffering (caused by Kirkstallers God) that people began to "pillor" the OP

- people who are so blinkered they think their display of rabid intolerance of the OP consitutes tolerance. You couldn't make it up as they say.

Other than Kirsktaller very few people (if any) have displayed rabid intolerance in this thread. Most people seem to agree that kirkstaller can express his views however many people have criticised those views, which given the nature of those views is understandable.

I'd suggest that if you cannot see why Kirkstallers views have been criticised as they have done and think that others have been intolerent that you are the individual who has a blinkered view of what has been said in this thread.

[tb]

Re: Coalition For Marriage : Wed May 23, 2012 3:34 pm  

For those of you 'debating' with Dally - look back to p75 where this quote

Dally wrote:

Took the bait!

clearly sums up both his purpose on these boards and the futility of attempting to debate with him.

He is a troll. Pure and simples <annoying Russian meerkat impersonation click thing>

Re: Coalition For Marriage : Wed May 23, 2012 3:36 pm  

Dally wrote:

Then there was a big display of INTOLERANT bigotry in response and almost from the off. A "very tolerant bunch" - don't make me laugh.

I think the only big displays of intolerant bigotry are by you and Kirkstaller. The rest of us are very tolerant of gay people, same sex marriage, women in the church, the only people on here who are not are you and Kirkstaller, so Supportplay is correct, on this thread on Sinbin we are are very tolerant bunch.

Re: Coalition For Marriage : Wed May 23, 2012 3:40 pm  

tb wrote:

For those of you 'debating' with Dally - look back to p75 where this quote

clearly sums up both his purpose on these boards and the futility of attempting to debate with him.

He is a troll. Pure and simples <annoying Russian meerkat impersonation click thing>

Not at all. Just when I wrote that particular bit I admired the 'symmetry'. I was actually impressed Sheldon spotted it.

Re: Coalition For Marriage : Wed May 23, 2012 4:01 pm  

Hull White Star wrote:

:lol:

I think the only big displays of intolerant bigotry are by you and Kirkstaller. The rest of us are very tolerant of gay people, same sex marriage, women in the church, the only people on here who are not are you and Kirkstaller, so Supportplay is correct, on this thread on Sinbin we are are very tolerant bunch.

Standee isn't. He starting ranting about religion as a whole and how religion has never done a single positive thing ever. Bit silly that like.

Re: Coalition For Marriage : Wed May 23, 2012 4:17 pm  

Ajw71 wrote:

Standee isn't. He starting ranting about religion as a whole and how religion has never done a single positive thing ever. Bit silly that like.

No I haven't, but whilst you remind me, nobody has said a single positive thing religion has done.

I don't have a problem with religion (I think it's garbage, but each to their own), what I have a problem with is pompous, self-reighteous people like the OP, Dally and the idiots that known on my door to tell me about Jehovah, if I want religion I know where to find it, I don't need it peddling in the street like Mr Whippy on a hot summers day.