Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Alabama school backs down over student’s gay rights t-shirt

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Staircase2 2 Sep 2011, 5:36pm

    Well done Sara!

    Someone should send this girl a box of Stonewall’s ‘Some People Are Gay Get Over It!’ T-shirts!

    Send them enough to hand out to the whole class! :o)

    Hoorah!

    Bless ya, Sara
    Keep up the good work!

    1. Staircase2 2 Sep 2011, 5:37pm

      Anyone wanting to know more about the Stonewall t-shirts and campaign can click on this link: http://www.stonewall.org.uk/at_school/education_for_all/quick_links/education_resources/4007.asp

      1. I have orederd hundreds of them…for Nov 5th!

        1. Its a marginal step above your kind burning books – always a delight to see the ignorant and weak minded having fun.

          1. And giving money to Stonewall : D

          2. Yup. Not too bright, is he, Iris? :)

        2. Deeside Will 3 Sep 2011, 10:26am

          Well done, Keith. Just like all those people who bought up William Tyndale’s English bibles so that they could burn them. Tyndale found the money useful, as it allowed him to print more. Glad you’re taking a leaf out of their book.

          1. Another manisfestation of Keiths mindless murderous hatred.
            .
            Moreover . . .
            .
            “When they begin buring books in the street they will being burning people”

        3. David Myers 6 Sep 2011, 12:03am

          This homophobic troll is just bullsh#tting. He wouldn’t spend a dime that goes towards gay/lesbian lib.

        4. Ah that reminds me, where did I put that box of Alpha course t-shirts.

    2. Hmm, a few hundred postcards to the school governors will work equally well!

  2. Ian Bower 2 Sep 2011, 6:59pm

    Well done Sara. :)

  3. A good story from a part of the US where you don’t always expect them in this regard.

  4. AlaskanAmber 2 Sep 2011, 7:38pm

    I wish we could do some legal actions like those mentioned here in Alaska. We have have had all those problems mentioned and more!

  5. The hate of some evil right wing Christians will not stop until they harm gays and their friends gays and their friends will need to rise up to stop these evil people before they do more harm and damage to gays and their friends, like this girl did to get her right to wear a t shirt.

  6. Congrats!!! I am grateful for you brave work. What an honour to live in a world with beautiful people like this.

  7. “Incestuous? fine by me.”…
    Say the homosexuals that believe no consensual adult sexual practice is immoral!

    1. Incest may not be moral, but it is biblical.

      1. God made it unlawful to have incestuous relations in leviticaus 18:6-17.

        1. By your same “logic”, god made it unlawful to eat prawns, cut ones hair, and wear two types of thread, but DOES allow having slaves, pillaging, incest and stoning people for cheap giggles.

          Only a fool would take the bible as any form of “fact”.

          You, sir, are clearly one such buffoon.

          1. Another one that thinks I am an Israelite?
            Oh dear!

          2. “Another one that thinks I am an Israelite?”

            A what now? I do not care what daft and lunatic fringe religion you call yourself, all I see is a sever lack of edcuation and understanding. You can call yourself anything you like, I just say what I see:- a fool.

        2. Keith wrote
          .
          “God made it unlawful to have incestuous relations in leviticaus 18:6-17.”
          .
          Keith it is odd how you focus on incest alone, but as you should know the book of Leviticus is a comprehensive book of purity on all aspects of living.
          .
          Keith when did you eat shell fish, knowing full well that it is strictly forbidden.

        3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 8:55am

          Irrelvent comment.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

      2. “Incest may not be moral, but it is biblical.”
        .
        Which is why Keith needs to project the immorality of the bible on to LGBT people

    2. friday jones 2 Sep 2011, 10:53pm

      Gosh those homosexuals sound like bad people all right. Good thing we’re gay then, instead of whatever a homosexual is supposed to be. Gay people don’t seem to have any of the problems Keith ascribes to those homosexuals he’s always on about.

      1. “Gay people don’t seem to have any of the problems Keith ascribes to those homosexuals he’s always on about.”

        That’s because the erudite Keith likes to think we’re all as uneducated and as weak-minded as he clearly is. It keeps him happy, so who are we to let the truth ruin his delusions.

        1. DJ Sheepiesheep 3 Sep 2011, 1:00am

          Keith, you don’t get to pick and choose which bits of the Old Testament to use to support your argument. Unless of course you are just a bigot.

          1. I certainly don’t pick (like Will) the bits pertaining only to the Israelites. Only a bigot and a bibliophobic idiot such as yourself, would condemn somebody for aspiring to live a moral life as proscribed in the bible. You go on excusing filthy harmful degrading practices and I will sit back and watch the deadly outcome, secure in the knowledge that my moral choices protect me from that which you fear.

          2. “I certainly don’t pick (like Will) the bits pertaining only to the Israelites.”

            Sure you do. The bible is the recourse of those with nothing else to back up their bigotry.

            “Only a bigot and a bibliophobic idiot such as yourself,”

            Delusional.

            “condemn somebody for aspiring to live a moral life as proscribed in the bible”

            No, we condemn those who impose such a ridiculous and contradictory philosophy non others. Such as fools like you.

            “You go on excusing filthy harmful degrading practices”

            You mean like my successful long term marriage to my partner? I sure will, but thanks for the support!

            “I will sit back and watch the deadly outcome”

            You’ll be waiting a while. We are not going anywhere, and we’re winning every day more rights over insane Neanderthals like you.

            “my moral choices protect me from that which you fear.”

            You keep telling yourself that, it protects you for the reality that you’re not only blatantly stupid, but deranged.

          3. First Biblical marriage was Adam and Lilith btw. But she was emancipated so Adam got a clever blond bimbo Eva that fed him apples for the rest of their miserable life in original sin.

          4. With regards to Keith’s pick and mix approach to the bible.
            .
            You cannot quote from one aspect of Leviticus on moral purity, and ignore the rest of the book.
            .
            If you reject a liberal approach to the bible, you cannot have your cake and each. Rather you cannot have your shell fish and eat them

          5. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 8:56am

            Again, irrelevent comment from keith.
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    3. Deeside Will 3 Sep 2011, 10:28am

      Homophobic? Fine by me. Just keep your bible out of my pants.

      1. I guess the homosexuals don’t like it up em!
        Please inform me as to which STD I should fear if I adhere to bible standards?
        There are countless diseases, some fatal, that await those that do not adhere to bible standards.
        As for this quote “You mean like my successful long term marriage to my partner?” … long term monogamous marriage IS a bible standard, assuming it is a male and female marriage.

        1. “I guess the homosexuals don’t like it up em!”

          Great line. I’ve lowered my expectations to the point where they’ve already been met. Bravo.

          “Please inform me as to which STD I should fear if I adhere to bible standards?”

          If you adhere to “bible standards”, I’d be more worried about jail. Do you agree with incest and slavery then, Keith?

          “long term monogamous marriage IS a bible standard, assuming it is a male and female marriage.”

          You assume.I think. That’s the difference. If If I agreed with you on that statement, we’d both be wrong. Marriage pre-dates the bible. But don’t blame yourself – let me do it for you.

          Does it upset you Keith that we have equality? Clearly you not as au fait with “bible standards” of christianity as you fool yourself to believe. But that’s no surprise, hypocrisy is usually part and parcel of fools like you who pick and choose lines from a contradictory book to suit your own prejudices. And after all, prejudice is the domain of the weak mind, isn’t it?

          1. The law forbidding incest was created 3500 years ago in the bible and slavery was regulated to insure humane treatment. These are clearly evasive tactics employed to avoid the question which was…
            “Please inform me as to which STD I should fear if I adhere to bible standards?”
            Any danger of a straight answer on this?
            Also, since the first biblical marriage was Adam and Eve, name a marriage that (supposedly) pre-dates this? Should be fun!

          2. @Will
            You said”You assume.I think. That’s the difference. If If I agreed with you on that statement, we’d both be wrong. Marriage pre-dates the bible. But don’t blame yourself – let me do it for you”

            So are you now saying that long term monogamoys marriage is NOT a bible standard (as I stated)????

          3. I’m going to ignore the rest of your comments, they are ridiculous and nonsensical.

            But this “Please inform me as to which STD I should fear if I adhere to bible standards?””

            There is no such thing as “bible standards”. Ergo, your entire statement is false. If by monogamy in marriage, you refer to, then why are you obsessed and concerned with STI’s? STI’s are preventable with edcuation among those who CHOOSE to have sex outside marriage, as is their right in a democracy. Surely you should be concerned with YOUR lack of edcuation, That is a far more pressing problem for you personally.

            “The law forbidding incest was created 3500 years ago in the bible and slavery was regulated to insure humane treatment.”

            Do you have proof of this? No. And slavery was never “humane” you backward fool. Supporting slavery is another facet of your warped and ridiculous mind.

            Your entire logic is warped and probably the result of a mental difficulty or schitzaphrenia.

          4. “Also, since the first biblical marriage was Adam and Eve, name a marriage that (supposedly) pre-dates this? Should be fun!”

            Oh it is fun, I assure you. I’m having a great laugh at your expense.

            Adam and Eve did not exist. This is only a reality in the minds of the foolish and stupid.

            So you want me to make a historical reference to a couple of people who did not exists?

            Sure. Like I’ll lower my IQ down to THAT level of ignorance.

            Biblical ideas aren’t as common as stupid people think they are.

            Could you not afford to go to school or what was the problem? I see college was out of the questions too….

          5. “I’m going to ignore the rest of your comments, they are ridiculous and nonsensical.”

            Will, you’re being too generous in your summary of keith there :D He’s beyond all reason and obsessed with incest and bestiality. I’ve got a brick wall in my garden that I get more satisfaction from debating with. He’s only here to distract and flaunt his supposed superior knowledge by engaging in weird games that involve ignoring what people say or wilfully misunderstanding them.

            So sad really. I do hope he gets the help he clearly needs.

          6. Let’s just say Keith is NOT a philosopher or an enlightened teacher, as he has claimed to be on a previous thread.

            I’d be curious to know how he accounts for the variety of life forms on earth…

          7. I agree Iris and JonPol. But its nice to point out where a degenerate who condones slavery is so very wrong, it gives me a good laugh. Idiots like him always show their true colours eventually:- slavery, incest, and other things they enjoy with impunity from the bible. I’m off now to see if I can butcher a kid on a mountain because “god told me to as with Issac” to give me a giggle.

          8. Monogamous marriage is almost definitely not bible standards weddings used to just mean the women had to be monogamous but the men could sleep with whoever they wished.

        2. Deeside Will 3 Sep 2011, 12:56pm

          “…slavery was regulated to insure humane treatment.”

          Yes, it sure was. Here are Yahweh’s instructions to Moses (whose historical existence is as problematical as that of Romulus and Remus):

          “This is the ruling you are to lay before them. When you buy a Hebrew slave, his service shall be for six years. In the seventh year he may leave; he shall be free with no compensation to pay. If he came single, he shall leave single; if he came married, his wife shall leave with him. If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons and daughters, wife and children shall belong to her master, and the man must leave alone. But if the slave declares, ‘I love my master and my wife and children; I renounce my freedom’, then his master shall take him to God, leading him to the door or the door post. His master shall pierce his ear with an awl, and he shall be in his service for all time. If a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not regain her liberty like male slaves.” (Exodus 21:1 – 7)

          1. Please highlught which part is inhumane?
            Do you realize that manyy of what were called slaves were what we call prisoners of war? Do you disagree with taking prisoners of war?

          2. Deeside Will 3 Sep 2011, 1:31pm

            I see. So HEBREW slaves were prisoners of war, were they? And it’s humane to say that a man who married after becoming a slave can gain his freedom only at the price of abandoning his wife and children, is it? And that a female slod as a slave must never be freed? As Thomas Paine observed, “People in general do not know what wickedness there is in this pretended word of God.”

          3. Do you disagree with taking prisoners of war?

            For slavery, yes.

            So you condone slavery.

            How enlightened.

            Education, its the only way to save other people form the likes of troglodytes like you.

          4. “Please highlught which part is inhumane?”

            I do not consider the ownership of a person by another person to be morally acceptable under any circumstances. I am shocked to observe that you, apparently, do.

          5. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 8:57am

            Another irrelevent comment.
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

        3. @Keith
          .
          When you talk about STDs, it is curious that in your world this is only ever associated with homosexuals. In reality the vast majority of patients attending GUM clinics are heterosexuals.

        4. long term monogamous marriage IS a bible standard,…actually thats not an entirely accurate or honest statement about what the bible says about marriage. Read Unprotected Texts: The Bible’s Suprising Contradictions About Sex & Desire by Jennifer Wright Knust. See some excerts in this link:
          http://www.npr.org/2011/03/10/133245874/unprotected-texts-the-bible-on-sex-and-marriage

          Or God & Sex: What The Bible Reallys Says by Michael Coogan. See an interview with him about the book in the link below:
          http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2027582,00.html

        5. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 8:56am

          Completely irrelevent.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    4. Keith wrote
      .
      “Say the homosexuals that believe no consensual adult sexual practice is immoral!”
      .
      Where have I condoned incest on these threads?

    5. David Myers 6 Sep 2011, 12:11am

      Why is everyone feeding this ignorant troll? All you do is confirm his sense of self-worth. Surely that does not desuade him. Ignore him, it pisses him off.

    6. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 8:54am

      Totally irrelevent. LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  8. Ignore the troll. He’s desperate for attention, it seems. Pathetic attempts to provoke. How sad.

  9. Great news – and a nice t shirt too. Simple but says it all.

  10. Hoover High School violated her First and Fourth Amendment Rights.

    In reality Couvillon’s T-Shirt is simply stating that she is not a bully.

    According to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC):

    “School officials claimed they were concerned for Couvillon’s safety, but Couvillon said she has not experienced any threats of violence, nor did school officials confirm there had been threats.

    In fact, Couvillon had routinely worn the T-shirt during the previous school year without incident.”

    Shame on Hoover High.

    Rock that T-Shirt !!!

    1. Gay Daily Mail Reader 3 Sep 2011, 6:55am

      First Amendment Rights also allow people to be homophobic and racist and wear T-Shirts supporting fundamental Christianity. It would be better for schools in America to operate a uniform policy like many British schools so there cannot be any argument over dress-code. I wear a uniform at work.

  11. This was a walk-over case for the right to freedom of expression. The school board knew it, and caved in. I’d say it’s unwise to read more than that into the story.

  12. SARA YOU ROCK!!! *gives you a virtual cookie* I’m so happy that someone stands up for what is right in the world. GAY IS THE WAY!!!

  13. Dan Filson 3 Sep 2011, 6:35am

    Congratulations also to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) which I’ll bet needs more money for its work

  14. Keith would like to know which STD he should fear if he adheres to biblical standards?

    Well Keith, pretty much all of them… because here’s the thing about diseases classified as STI’s – they’re only classified that way because sex is the most common mode of transmission, not because it is the ONLY one.

    So every time you have a medical procedure, you need to fear… fear that someone didn’t properly clean the instruments being used. Should you stop to help an injured stranger – or child you don’t know – you should fear, because you don’t know what they may have and they may not be capable of telling you. When you start slurping down some of that homemade punch at church, because you don’t know that someone else with an STI didn’t bleed in it. When you have sex with your wife, because you don’t know that SHE has adhered to biblical standards.

    But of course, recognizing any of that means actually looking for information sources outside of your bible…

    1. What a dumb reply. I asked which Sexually Transmitted Disease I should fear. That means, a disease passed on through SEXUAL contact! The answer is none. How could a pair that adhered to bible standards possibly contract an STD?
      How many people in a (mutual) monogamous marriage AIDS or other STDs from their partners? None!
      Those that follow bible standards have nothing to fear from STDs.
      Incidentally, I do not go to church and I don’t drink blood. Even if I did contract a disease that way, it would not be an STD. Please look up STD

      1. Deeside Will 3 Sep 2011, 1:55pm

        How many people in a (mutual) monogamous gay relationship contract AIDS or other STDs from their partners? None!

        1. Wrong. HPV is prevalent even amongst the aforementioned, also oral cancer amongst women, to mention just two.

          1. And your study?

            Or are you just going to quote a bible passage about a whale eating some loser?

          2. Oh, and to correct your ignorance:

            75% of sexually active will have at least one HPV infection in their lifetime. Both men and women can be infected with HPV. Both can have genital warts, and both can develop cancer from HPV infection, although only women can develop cervical cancer. HPV doesn’t discriminate based on sexual preference; heterosexuals are just as likely to contract HPV. The highest rate of infection is among young adults aged 15 to 24. The majority of people will get HPV at least once in their lifetime, but only a small percentage of infections will cause cancer.

            Either way, none of this is of any relevance to you ranting like a lunatic with bible quotes on a gay site to make you feel one bit more the vile bigot you really are.

            The issue here is you will selectively seek anything that condemns people you have no business getting involved with, and when you fail, as you do often, you resort to ridiculous “bible standards” like they actually exist.

            Its quite sad.

          3. @Keith-

            Last week, when you barged into this site pontificating that all homosexuals are pedophiles, you were proven to be dishonest and perfectly capable of distorting the results of legitimate scientific research in order to suit your own hate-the gays agenda.

            At that time you distorted statistics, and JohnK was able to make you retract your lie by referring to the same stats, and I named 11 American and Canadian scientists who had complained that fundamentalists xtians were misrepresenting their work.

            So if you are going to refer to a study to back up your claims, I would insist that you name your source because I have reason to distrust you.

            Also at that time, you admitted using material from NARTH.

          4. He’s using NARTH “studies”??? Well, there we have it. They’re as mad as he is.

            Lets all talk about how having sex with your daughters is just dandy, you know, to make him feel welcome:-

            Genesis 19 19:35 And they made their father drink wine that night also: and the younger arose, and lay with him; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose. Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father.

            The bible is great, lets you do anything it seems…. except get a decent edcuation.

          5. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 8:58am

            Irrelevent subject.
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

      2. Why would I give a damn about what STI’s YOU need to fear??? LOL! Who cares. Really. People having non-monogamous sex can also avoid STI’s. Its called protection and safe sex. Look THAT up.

        1. Safe sex (even with a sheath) is a myth, unless between a monogamous male and female. it should be called less risky

          1. Oh, dear. What a stupid response.

          2. It is in fact called ‘safer sex’.

          3. Well said JonPol. Keith is not that bright, and probably suffering from some illness. Prefers getting up on his sister and keeping people as slaves – the last 200 years were waisted on him. Lets hope the authorities get to him before he acts on his lunacy.

          4. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 8:59am

            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!
            -
            Irrelevent comment.

      3. Keith, your posts demonstrate that despite your protestations to the contrary, you are at considerable risk… because you lack accurate information.

        Do you understand that just because something – like Hepatitis or HIV/AIDS – is classified as an STD, that does not mean it is ONLY an STD? If it is blood borne, saliva borne, mucus borne… you don’t have to have sex to get it. And if you get one of those infections, it isn’t really going to matter that you didn’t get it from boffing someone… it’s still going to completely alter your life, possibly even kill you.

        Oh, and that doesn’t even address another aspect… your WIFE might just as easily contract any of those diseases through any of the “innocent” means I mentioned before. Unless she is tested before each sexual encounter you two have… you’re going to end up with it as well. And then, yes, dear Keith, you will OFFICIALLY have an STD, no matter how biblically faithful you might think you’re being.

        1. His wife? Perish the thought. I’d be more concerned with her taking up a drug/drink habit to put up with mating with an mentally deficient animal like Keith….. evolution does produce some failures.

        2. I did not say it was ONLY an STD though. I asserted that those couples that live by bible standards are safe as it is possible to be from STDs.
          This does not mean that these loathsome diseases which are spread by the immoral, will not be passed on to some innocent in another way other than sexually. and then transmitted sexually as you say but bible standards are the best protection.
          The immoral certainly are a bloodguilty lot for the spread of deadly disease!

          1. “The immoral certainly are a bloodguilty lot for the spread of deadly disease!”

            People having sex is not immoral, its just sick individuals obsessed with sex (or the lack of in their own lives) that think it is. You, point in case.

            You do what you want, and let others get on with their own lives. Its well know that people who insist other follow their own “morality” have little to begin with in the first place. No doubt you’re angry at life because it dealt you with a poor deal or something, as clearly seen by your lack of schooling and the need to rant like a insane nut on a gay site.

            Either way, its of no bearing to reality. Education about safe sex is abundant, and people like you are passing into irrelevance. And not a moment too soon either Keith.

          2. “I asserted that those couples… are safe as it is possible…”

            No, that’s not what you asserted.

            You asked, specifically, “Please inform me as to which STD I should fear if I adhere to bible standards?”

            And I told you. Now you’re trying to dance around and add caveats that were not present in your inquiry. That’s deceitful, and I’m POSITIVE that lying is a big no-no. So big a no-no it’s part of the 10 Commandments… which, incidentally, don’t mention monogamy OR homosexuality. Funny, that.

          3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 8:59am

            Hijacking thread again with irrelevent comments.
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

      4. Keith wrote
        .
        “Incidentally, I do not go to church and I don’t drink blood Even if I did contract a disease that way, it would not be an STD. Please look up STD”
        .
        Keith presumably the reason why you do not go to church, is becasue you have aliented your self from every church you have ever been to.

      5. Well if you are strictly adhering to a biblical version of marriage, as you claim, then perhaps one of your slaves or concubines would pass one on to you.

      6. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 8:58am

        This has nothing to do with the story, therefore, irrelevent.
        -
        LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    2. Its quite simple really, neither you nor you wife are immune to diseases which can be transmitted sexually; many of which can be transmitted by other means. If, say Keith’s “wife” (not sure if he is married or not) contracted HIV through helping an injured stranger at the side of the road, then he were to have sex with her before this was known, then he could quite easily contract it through sexual contact, even within a mutually monogmaous relationship.

  15. @Will
    I am unable to ‘quote’ your amusing assertion since the reply feature is in/op.. So I wil reply here. I do feel however that it is like a game of’whack a mole’. After each ridiculous claim is smahed, up pops another!
    You say…”There is no such thing as “bible standards””
    My reply…the bible standards on marriage are clear.
    A Man and a Woman to stick together.
    Genesis 2:22-24
    Jesus orders monogamy using Genesis 2:24 as his reference
    Matthew 19::4-6
    The marriage bed must be free from fornication and uncleanness
    hebrews 13:4 .
    As regards incest, it was prohibited in Leviticus 18:6-17, 29; 20:11, 12, 14

    I ask again which STD should I fear if myself an d my wife adhere to the bibles standard on sex and marriage as quoted?

    1. They’re bible quotes. Not bible standards. To you perhaps, but not to everyone. You’re tiresome and idiotic biblical rants are just foolish.

      I assume you believe in a 6,000 year old earth and all the other trimmings of stupidity the bible offers?

      Get an edcuation, child, you statements in here are cyclical arguments for those who have nothing better to offer.

    2. Oh, and since you quote genesis, explain to me how did the “first children” of Adam & Eve have offspring to make the human race?

      Go on, if you can.

      Then explain to me why the earth is 6,000 years old.

      If you can.

      I expect so much, I know, but you seem like such a good sport, what with your vast knowledge of science and all….

      1. Are you serious?
        Go to bible class or google ‘starter questions for bible students’
        Neither myself nor the bible say that the earth is 6000 years old. Please look up ‘creative day’

        1. Oh, I see you ignore the dam & Eve question. How funny is that?

          Can’t answer it, or don’t want to add to your obvious stupidity?

          “Neither myself nor the bible say that the earth is 6000 years old”

          Really? This shows you do not even know your own bible that you spit out every time y6ou have a losing position. Most estimates based on a literal interpretation of the Bible, and in particular the belief that the Hebrew word “yom” in Genesis refers to a 24 hour day. The calculations cluster around 6,000 years ± 2,000 years for both the age of the Earth and of the rest of the universe.

          Of course, only a fool would believe this.

          But back to Adam & Eve…… go on, enlighten me. They existed right?

          1. They had sons and daughters. At a time when man lived for around 900 yerars and genetically close to perfection, there being no risk from genetic defect, Gods command to fill the earth meant that Cain (Adams son) would marry his sister and so on and so forth!
            Would you now like me to explain a creative day?

          2. This flexible use of the word “day” to express units of time of varying length is clearly evident in the Genesis account of creation. Therein is set forth a week of six creative days followed by a seventh day of rest. In the Scriptural record the account of each of the six creative days concludes with the statement: “And there came to be evening and there came to be morning” a first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth day. (Ge 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31) The seventh day, however, does not have this ending, indicating that this period, during which God has been resting from his creative works toward the earth, continued on. At Hebrews 4:1-10 the apostle Paul indicated that God’s rest day was still continuing in his generation, and that was more than 4,000 years after that seventh-day rest period began. This makes it evident that each creative day, or work period, was at least thousands of years in length.
            The entire period of the six time units or creative “days” dedicated to the pre

          3. LOL! You you actually believe their sons and daughters has incestual sex with each other???? Oh, dear. And on top of your love of slavery you add a love of incest!?! And you have some kind of proof that these messed up kids doing it with each other were “genetically close to perfection, there being no risk from genetic defect”???

            If I ever needed any more proof that you have the IQ of a tomato, this is it. You really are beneath contempt and beyond any salvation that edcuation could bring. Truly awful that the edcuation services in your country allowed you continue your life with such learning difficulties being ignored.

            I do not care about “creative day”. It is nether scientific or even rational. Its the stuff of children and fools. Such as yourself.

            I am repulsed by you Keith, honestly I am. Your ignorance is in excess of even the low levels we normally see in here. You clearly are in need of help. Still, its of no bearing to my life, I go on unhindered by basket cases like you.

          4. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:01am

            Mind numbingly irrelevent.
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

        2. Deeside Will 3 Sep 2011, 3:26pm

          A “creative day” is just a silly ad hoc invention designed to try to get round the plain fact that the creation narrative in Genesis is nothing more than an ancient myth. I wonder if I can avoid paying my bills when they say that “payment is due within 14 days” by pleading that I understand it to mean “creative days”.

          Adam and Eve are as historical as Pygmalion and Galatea, and the Garden of Eden is as historical as the Garden of the Hepserides.

          1. Deeside Will 3 Sep 2011, 3:28pm

            Sorry, for the typo. I meant “Hesperides”.

        3. You will invariably say that you do not take “all” of the bible literally….

          Are you saying that you agree with Darwinism then?

        4. The bible is no longer needed to explain the origin of life forms on earth, just as similar creation myths from other cultures are no longer relevant.

          The discovery of the universe is an ongoing process, and we do not need to attribute the unknown to God.

        5. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:00am

          This is irrelevent.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:00am

      Totally irrelevent.
      -
      LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  16. COTD…
    The entire period of the six time units or creative “days” dedicated to the preparation of Earth is summed up in one all-embracing “day” at Genesis 2:4: “This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time of their being created, in the day that God made earth and heaven.

    1. Cookoo! Cookoo!

      You do realise that is nonsense, don’t you? Probably not. Not too bright and poor schooling makes for dull minds. But then again, you think knocking up your sister is perfectly okay, don’t you, you filthy little dog, so I can only assume the voices in your head get more shrill by the day.

      1. You are asking me what the bible say and I am telling you what it says (which is in contrast to what you think it says). I don’t give a monkey’s cuss whether you accept it or not.but if you don’t want answers, why ask questions then insult me?
        It is actually you that thinks it is ok to knock up your sister is it not, as long as the sex is between consensual adults and is ‘safe sex’?
        Personally, it makes sense to me that God commanded sex between close relatives when it was a safe practice, in order to populate the earth. i also see the sense in disallowing it when it became unsafe. Assuming the bible is true, Do you know a better way?

        1. “Assuming the bible is true, Do you know a better way?”

          What? Are you even reading the posts??? The bible is as ture as Harry Potter is proof of witchcraft.

          “why ask questions then insult me?”

          Because its funny. Why else?

          “It is actually you that thinks it is ok to knock up your sister is it no”

          Eh, no, I would never do anything so vile. You’re the one plugging the whole “bible standards”. And knocking up your sister or daughter seems okay in the bible, and your statement “god commanded sex between close relatives when it was a safe practice”. Ergo, you support this behaviour….. sorry, sex with your sister is never a safe practice, or have you tried this out already? Sicko.

          1. So do you believe it would be immoral to knock up ones sister, even if the act was between consenting adults which, apparently can be done safely with condoms?
            me sicko? I do not condone incest neither do I condone sodomy, a perverted filthy practice which spreads deadly disease far more than incest.

          2. “So do you believe it would be immoral to knock up ones sister, even if the act was between consenting adults which, apparently can be done safely with condoms?”

            Why would I believe knocking up ones sister is moral, its disgusting. How obnormal to ebven postulate that to someone else. We do not all share your uncivilised beliefs in what the bible “allows” you to do.

            You do, however. You must, if you support “biblical standards”. As you do obviously and clearly condone slavery and stoning.

            Sick, sick, sick individual.

          3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:03am

            Irrelevent, again.
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

        2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:02am

          Again, absolutely irrelevent.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

      2. See – off he goes, Will. Saying that LGBT people support incest. Even when people have made the effort to correct him he just reverts to the same cr@p. I doubt an hour passes without either incest, gay sex or bestiality entering his mind.

        I do pity him – clinging to superstition and going round and round in a desperate attempt to prove we’re ‘bad’.

        1. Yep. He’s obsessed with sex alright. Never notices that we actually might love our partners. His kind never do. Reminds me of Skinner, he was equally obsessed with sex and bible validation with sleeping with one’s close kin.

          1. A good example of how dangerous a belief system can be.

            He wouldn’t last long standing on a soapbox in Trafalgar Square !

          2. Wouldn’t last long in any civilised country, JonPol. He’s probably some swamp dweller. He has the edcuation of one, anyway.

          3. There must be a place for him with the ‘little folk’, Will.

          4. Or in a care facility….

    2. Here’s a few others for you Keith.

      Deuteronomy:-

      “And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife” – no wonder you like slavery! Hubba hubba, eh?

      “If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated” – wow, no need for monogamous marriage when you can have polygamy, eh, Keith? How many wives you you have and how many do you hate?

      Leviticus 21:9 :- “A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death”

      So slavery, incest, polygamy, murder, are all “biblical standards”. How fascinating.

      You have a fabulous lifestyle, Keith…. not exactly one free from STD’s or ending up in jail, but who am I to judge, I’m not one of those religious freaks who thinks he can selectively pick passages form the bible and use to condemn others. Only a fool would do that, eh?

      1. Why do you keep quoting Israelite law. I am neither an israelite nor am I bound by Abrahamic Covenant you mental case!

        1. Its the bible, isn’t it? You quoted Leviticus. And now so do I.

          Or is it the selective bit you prefer, the bits that suits your bigotry and lack of education?

          Why exactly did you not go to school? Were you poor?

          1. You are confusing moral Law which was covered in Leviticus and Mosaic statutes and ceremonial law. The moral code (such as you shall not murder), was a universal law yet the ceremonial and statutory part of the law was abolished when jesus arrived. I don’t select the bits i prefer, i select the bits that are relevant and apply to non Israelites (now Jews). You should either get a better understanding or stop digging!

          2. “I don’t select the bits i prefer”

            Really? You quoted Leviticus before, and now you don’t want it quoted by others? How bizarre, Keith. How really bizarre. And yet you support Adam & Eve’s kids getting it on with each other on the bases that they were genetically pure. LOL! Are you bi-polar, perhaps? Or suffering from a mental illness? Come on, you can tell us.

          3. What does education have to do with it? I am talking about morals. You have no reference point for morals, indeed it appears you do not even accept the concept of morals.
            I on the other hand have a monogamous marriage, as required in the bible. I need not concern myself with Sexual disease since I do not engage in the unclean acts that cause even monogamous homosexual men to contract loathsome diseases such as HPV and women oral cancer.
            You are not even opposed to father and son consensual sodomy which demonstrates the ‘low sink’ of debauchery your mode of life endorses.

          4. Morals? From you? Someone who thinks he can quote Leviticus and then deny its of relevance when it suits him? There’s a word for that:- its hypocrite

            And this line “you are not even opposed to father and son consensual sodomy which demonstrates the ‘low sink’ of debauchery your mode of life endorses”???

            I did not such thing. There’s word for this too, its liar.

            And my sick little friend, its YOU who seems to condone incest it seems.

            So, you’re a hypocrite and a liar. Hardly one to be anywhere quoting morals to someone like me who is vastly superior to you in every way.

            And edcuation is of key concern here, you are the result when you have so little of it. A lair. A hypocrite., And an individual obsessed with sick sexual practices whilst condoning slavery and stoning.

            You are a repugnant individual, and have no morals I would even spit at.

        2. creative day ???

          Sounds like you’ve been dipping into the Jewish Cabala or early Christian Gnosticism. Your cosmology is straight out of Stoicism.

          Where did you learn these things???

          1. Please state which part of my post you dispute. If all of it, please quote one portion you dispute, citing your reasons.

          2. Show us one scientific paper or reference on “creative day” being real.

            Then we can talk.

            Until then, its a made up term by idiots desperate to back up their own lack of understanding of science and reality.

        3. “For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV)

          So the all the Old Testament is still a law for you.

        4. David Myers 6 Sep 2011, 12:16am

          Blah Blah Blah. Get a life Keith – go preach to those who care and quit trolling here. Oh that’s right you won’t get to talk about all those subjects that secretly fasinate you. What a pathetic person you are.

        5. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:03am

          Hijacked with irrelevent comments from Keith, again.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

      2. You do realize that this refers to cremation after execution and not burned alive? I reckon you don’t!
        Compare Joshua 7:25

        1. “Why did you bring trouble on us? The LORD brings trouble on you today.” And all Israel stoned him with stones. They burned them with fire and stoned them with stones.”

          Yeah, after a stoning. How enlightened of you Keith. Add stoning to your love of incest, polygamy, slavery and other perversions you seem to condone.

          Have you spoken to a professional about all of this? I don’t know what your problem is, but I’ll bet it’ll be hard to pronounce….

          1. Compared to the babrbaric practices of surrounding nations, stoning was humane. Youi should see how the Assyrians treated criminals.
            Fornication is a serious offence. It is responsible for the sexual plagues we now have that kill even innocent babies.

          2. “It is responsible for the sexual plagues we now have that kill even innocent babies.”

            There is not response to this lunatic statement, other then you are insane. And sick in the head.

          3. “Compared to the babrbaric practices of surrounding nations, stoning was humane.”

            Interesting. Are you really advocating moral relativism here, Keith?

          4. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:05am

            Irrelevent.
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

        2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:04am

          Protesting again Keiths irrelevent comments and use of this site.
          -
          Please sort PinkNews.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:01am

      Absolutely irrelevent.
      -
      LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  17. @Will
    ” am repulsed by you Keith, honestly I am.”
    It does amuse me to be called filthy…by a sodomite!!!!

    1. Really? Good for you, sicko.

      That kind of “amusement” is typically in keeping with people who want to sleep with their sisters.

      1. Incidentally, I do not find being called a “sodomite” by you offensive, its hardly merits recognition, but I would abhor being though of as a fool. Which is why I am amazed you are still here.

    2. A sodomite means you are from Sodom not that you practice Sodomy …… FAIL!!

  18. @Will
    “Show us one scientific paper or reference on “creative day” being real.”
    I have shown you why it does not mean a literal day. Now you show me why it does!

    1. You have shown me nothing then you silly opinion on a bible quote. Now please, do not bore me with such childish terms, they have no bearing in reality. Either put up some science, or shut up.

      1. If you engage me in debate, you will either become accustomed to losing or post evidence to support your claims. You assert that the Genesis account refers to a literal day. i have shown compelling evidence that it is not a literal day despite your denial of the evidence. now you show me your evidence that it does refer to a literal day. this is strike 2. One more and you are out!

        1. “i have shown compelling evidence that it is not a literal day despite your denial of the evidence.”

          Where? You’re opinions? ONE SCIENTIFIC PAPER OR REFERENCE,

          Failure to do so will simply validate what we already know:- that you are a fool.

        2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:06am

          No relevence to this thread.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    2. There is no mention of a creative day in Genesis.

      What is the origin of this term?

      And who described creation in such a way as to get around specific dates and the age of the earth?

      You have not shown us why it does not mean a literal day; you have related a fictional story that someone composed without any scientific evidence and at a time when better explanations were unavailable.

      1. Neither is there a mention of a 24 hour day. ‘Day’ has many meanings and should be taken in context. What does it mean ‘in your fathers day?’ 24 hours????
        n I hav shown you why it is not a lieteral day and you are now making yourselves look stupid (again) whilst refusing to show where the Genesis account asserts that it is a 24 hour day.
        I will post my reasonin YET AGAIN.for the hard of thinking! The explanation follows this post. i also await your own explanation of why you interpret it as a 24 hour day.

        1. This flexible use of the word “day” to express units of time of varying length is clearly evident in the Genesis account of creation. Therein is set forth a week of six creative days followed by a seventh day of rest. In the Scriptural record the account of each of the six creative days concludes with the statement: “And there came to be evening and there came to be morning” a first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth day. (Ge 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31) The seventh day, however, does not have this ending, indicating that this period, during which God has been resting from his creative works toward the earth, continued on. At Hebrews 4:1-10 the apostle Paul indicated that God’s rest day was still continuing in his generation, and that was more than 4,000 years after that seventh-day rest period began. This makes it evident that each creative day, or work period, was at least thousands of years in length.
          Continued…

          1. The reality here is you are ignoring anywhere else you have been challenged and proven wrong, in lieu of some ridiculous “creative day” nonsense which you incorrectly assume is either relevant or we somehow care about.

          2. How can there have been a morning and evening on the first, second and third day when there was no sun? Also, how could plants survive for thousands of years without sunlight?

          3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:07am

            Protest comment to Keiths irrelevence of this site.
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

        2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:06am

          Yawn – irrelevent.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:05am

      Again, Totally irrelevent.
      -
      LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  19. The entire period of the six time units or creative “days” dedicated to the preparation of Earth is summed up in one all-embracing “day” at Genesis 2:4: “This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time of their being created, in the day that God made earth and heaven.

    1. Repetition of such a silly disproven fairy story hardly makes it any more the real.

      1. Still waiting for the reason you determine it to be a 24 hour day….

        1. Oh really.

          Why would I do that when the ENTIRE book of genesis is nothing but a fairy tale.

          Tell you what, I’ll answer you nonsense, when you can prove to me why the house made of twigs by a piggy fell down when blown on by the wolf, instead? I would really know to know the science behind that one.

          You are a one trick pony Keith – nothing else of relevance to say but your obsession with sex and talking about some feverish nonsense.

          You, sir, are a buffoon.

        2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:08am

          Repeated irrelevence.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    2. The fact remains that we no longer need the bible’s version of the myth of creation; and we can be good without God. :)

      You have neglected to answer my question regarding the age of the earth.

      1. I did answer the question. perhaps you missed it in which case I repeat..
        I would not have good reason to dispute scientific evidence that the earth is around 3-4 billion years old.

        1. Good. Now we’re getting somewhere. So where is the Garden of Eden that is logically 4.54 billion years old?

          1. The answer was for Jonpol. You will not receive answers until you qualify your statement that the genesis account refers to literal 24 hour periods. Strike 3 looms!

          2. “You will not receive answers until you qualify your statement that the genesis account refers to literal 24 hour periods”

            Literal day, 2,000 years day, Santa Clause, its all nonsense, so why do you persist in pushing home a point which is made up? Are fairy tales something you relish arguing about?

            And I’m sure you do not want to answer, it makes you look like a bigger fool than you already have in public. I’m mortified for you, I really am.

          3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:09am

            Keiths comments are irrelevent.
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

        2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:09am

          Irrelevent, yet again.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:08am

      Protest comment to Keiths complete irrelevence to this site.
      -
      LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  20. “The reality here is you are ignoring anywhere else you have been challenged and proven wrong, in lieu of some ridiculous “creative day” nonsense which you incorrectly assume is either relevant or we somehow care about.”
    Well since it was you that asked the question about the age of the earth( something that does not interest me) it obviously IS something you care about. Again I say, why ask questions about things you somehow don’t care about? Weirdo!

    1. Of course, I do care. I am interested in all science and truth, since I took the time and effort to actually go to college, unlike you. Including why someone thinks its normal to condone sex with ones sister, despite the biological risks, and engages in fairy tales to persecute others. I find it sick, but interesting. You are such a specimen that interests me. Granted a bacterial culture has more insight than you, but at least its technically a culture….

      1. You are contradicting yourself since you said.. “The reality here is you are ignoring anywhere else you have been challenged and proven wrong, in lieu of some ridiculous “creative day” nonsense which you incorrectly assume is either relevant OR WE SOMEHOW CARE about.”
        Can’t make up your mind whether you care ior not. you care enough to ask me a question though and when i answer you decide you don’t care!!! Consistency is not your strong set, neither is backing up your claims such as the Genesis account referring to literal 24 hour days, or do you conveniently not care at present and will care only when I assert that it was not a literal day.?

        1. You seem to enjoy circular arguments of irrelevance. Are you a complete idiot, or missing some key parts?

          1. I am losing patience with the inability of dimwits such as yourself to assimilate simple information as provided by myself. Nobody is that stupid, which causes me to concluse that the evasion is deliberate.
            As I have clearly smashed your 1st grade assertions, there will be no more answers on the subject of the earth or creation. I will address only moral arguments.

          2. “Nobody is that stupid, which causes me to concluse that the evasion is deliberate.”

            You obviously are, yet it doesn’t seem to bother you. Curious.

            “As I have clearly smashed your 1st grade assertions”

            No, you tried to pit your weak mind again someone with a masters degree in science. You lost. Miserably.

            “will address only moral arguments.”

            Indeed. Like how you condone incest, slavery and stoning. Oh, yeah, we’d love to hear YOUR moral leanings on the subject, you sick freak.

          3. I am losing patience with the inability of dimwits such as yourself to assimilate simple information as provided by myself.
            .
            Good. Fvck off then, you silly creature.
            .
            (PS ‘By myself’ is semi-literate pretension.)

          4. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:20am

            Keith, LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

        2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:19am

          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    2. David Myers 6 Sep 2011, 12:19am

      Why are you all putting up with Keith’s highjacking of this site for his hate mongering and bible pushing? All you do is feed is perverted ego. Stop feeding trolls! Please!

    3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:18am

      Yet another irrelevent comment.
      -
      Protest comment.
      -
      LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!.

  21. @Will
    “Why would I do that when the ENTIRE book of genesis is nothing but a fairy tale”
    So you don’t look like an ignorant fool, which you surely do, making claims about the bible that you cannot back up such as “the genesis account referring to literal days of 24 hours”.
    do you want to hang it up now or produce the scriptural backing for this claim?

    1. Let me get this right? You want me to validate the fact that the book of genisis is a fairy tale by using the same book, which I know to be a fairly tale, as proof that it is a fairy tale?????

      LOL!

      Its gets better by the seconds. What a utter fool you are.

      Listen carefully: I. Want. Scientific. Evidence.

      I know its a long shot, what with you probably descended form a long line of genetic defects caused by mommy and daddy being brother and sister and all, but do try understand.

      1. Regardless of whether you believe the account to be fact or fiction, you asserted that the Genesis account refers to literal days of 24 hours. you can either retract that statement or show scripturally which texts refer to literalk days and why so. If your next reply is another non answer, you lose by default, having been given three chances to support your claims. You are not looking good in front of PN witnesses.

        1. “you asserted that the Genesis account refers to literal days of 24 hours.”

          I merely enquired as to which ridiculous religious notion to the bibles literally you subscribe to, you went on the tangent assuming I cared which fairly story you think is real. I do not maintain the literal day, as how can I when I know the whole thing is fiction? Does that make even the remotest bit of sense to you? Seriously, its exasperating how basic I have top get here.

          The sad truth is you only grasp on to what you think you know. Arguing a ridiculous concept over another instead of addressing what was put to you scientifically only show you up for the appalling level of knowledge you really have, and how desperate you are to cling to such silly notions to validate your hate. I am amazed how you managed to survive even the most rudimentary tasks with such a lack of understanding, compounded with such bigotry and hate to others. You’d be a fascinating case for a professional therapist.

          1. Now back to the topic, do you support all of Leviticus laws, since you feel eager to quote them?

        2. People, as thrilling as this subject is, I’m not sure it’s especially relevant to the story about a student gaining permission to wear a gay rights t-shirt. Personally, I couldn’t care less which origin story Keith choses to believe in, provided that he shows compassion and respect towards the diversity of people he shares the planet with. As it seems that he does not, and that he appears actively to revel in his own little contribution to Hate Culture, while (remarkably) condoning slavery, surely this is a more important issue to tackle than, well, how long the days might have been supposed to be in Genesis…?

          1. I do show respect to people that deserve it. i am not bound by ant law or code to respect uinclean or unlawful practices such as homosexuality (criminal in many lands, bestiality, incest,and polygamy)
            the bible say “hate what is bad” Psalm 97:10 (the practice, not the individual)

          2. Sally, I agree, but this degenerate and hateful fool needs to be exposed for what he is. And I am very much enjoying the sharpening of my claws of his dull mind.

          3. “i am not bound by ant law or code to respect uinclean or unlawful practices such as homosexuality ”

            Actually, you are. Its just another facet of your delusional and deficient mind to think so. You’re probably a person on limited power and influence in life, hence your stupidity for display for all to wonder at on a gay site.

          4. …. and lucky for you stupidity is not a crime, so you’re free to rant on this site and bore us silly with your notions of which fairy tale is more right then the other.

          5. “I do show respect to people that deserve it.”

            No. I doubt I’m likely to get through to you over your heterosexist and slut-shaming attitudes, but I wonder whether it might be worth repeating one point for you.

            You condone slavery. You apparently fail to see any issue with one person having ownership over another….

            I’m sorry Keith, but as far as I’m concerned, that is *insufficient respect*.

            So, here’s my suggestion for you. Why don’t you stop writing silly comments on this site for a while and just go and educate yourself. Develop your own moral code a little. Learn why slavery is not acceptable. And then find somebody to repent to. Please.

            Seriously. There is no greater evil than that which is done in the name of God.

          6. David Myers 6 Sep 2011, 12:20am

            Absolutely right on. Keith has highjacked this thread for his own perverse pleasure and you all continue to reward him for it? Come on, everybody tune him out.

        3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:20am

          Not relevent.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

      2. If you are going to make statements such as…
        “The reality here is you are ignoring anywhere else you have been challenged and proven wrong, in lieu of some ridiculous “creative day” nonsense which you incorrectly assume is either relevant or we somehow care about.”… you need to provide the opposing argument in a compelling form. the opposing argument is that the account refers to literal days. Do you even have an opposing view regarding the interpretation of a Genesis day?

        1. “you need to provide the opposing argument in a compelling form.”

          We did. You ignored them.

          “the opposing argument is that the account refers to literal days”

          No, the opposite argument is that neither “literal days” or some ridiculous “god gays” exists, or have any proof that they are real.

          “Do you even have an opposing view regarding the interpretation of a Genesis day?”

          I think we’ve covers this already. Its is a clear sign of some deep seated mental instability, which I am sure you must have some awareness of, to keep obsessing over something that has been shown to be irrelevant to the discussion

          Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

          You are point in case of this.

          1. Whay then are you arguing about interpretations of words, and concepts you do not accept? Why bring it up? You say I am obsessing but i am not the one that keeps harping on about Genesis neither dis I raise it?
            It is clear that you do not want to commit to an interpretation of the Genesis ‘day’ but you are keen to refute my interpretation. This is called moving the goal posts.
            It is also clear from the folowing statement that you do not accept the concept of a day…”No, the opposite argument is that neither “literal days” or some ridiculous “god gays” exists,”
            Good day to you.. oops, I used the word ‘day’, that will confuse you!

          2. Are you still going on about the genesis literal days nonsense? Really, can’t you afford your medication?

            Look, no one really cares, there is no such thing as literal days or god days when it comes to the bible, as none of it is real. For the 6th time.

            Do you obsess a lot like this normally?

          3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:21am

            Pointless comment, Keith.
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

        2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:21am

          Irrelevent, Keith.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:19am

      Hijacked again with irrelevent comments.
      -
      Protest comment.
      -
      LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  22. We can be good without Yahweh, God or Allah; Zeus, Demeter or Poseidon; Abassi, Shango or Yemaya; Asgard, Fenrir, Loki, Odin, Baldur, Thor and the Valkyries.

    That people are concerned for others, can empathize, feel and imagine as well as reason, test and evaluate, simply is true.

    We can make sense of the world using reason, experience and shared human values; and we encourage one another (you too, Keith) to make the best of our lives containing meaning and purpose, without resort to superstitions and the supernatural.

    1. ‘Shared human values’ means not perpetuatinhg the spread of immorality and it’s deadly diseases which kill even innocent babies. Perhaps the gay brigade should practice what they preach.
      http://www.avert.org/pregnancy.htm

      1. More “morality” crap form one who thinks slavery is dandy. I suggest the religious brigade practice what THEY preach, namely compassion and understanding. Two qualities you lack in abundance but usually overshadowed by your ignorance.

        1. yes, we know you do not accept a unified moral code and you think it is up to each individual to self determine their own moral code. Great recipe for moral decline and disease, as we have witnessed!
          Which aspect of slavery law in the bible do you believe to be inhumane?

          1. “Which aspect of slavery law in the bible do you believe to be inhumane?”

            Are you serious? All slavery is inhuman. For you to condense slavery shows your own lack of a moral compass. Its quite disgusting.

          2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:23am

            Irrelevent, yet again, Keith.
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

        2. See JonPol’s comment, Keith? This is called relevance based in scientific reality. See the difference between his and your obsessive rants about some stupid non-existent “literal days” so called argument? See how petty your silly quotes form that vile and baseless “Heterosexuals Organized for a Moral Environment” site really are?

          I doubt you can see this, but this is how real people discuss. In real quantifiable terms. Unlike you.

          1. Unfortunately, Keith is stuck in an abstract world, and he refuses to understand that morality is simply a relationship between mind and body, no more and no less.

            In the absence of evidence, morality does not exist outside time and space.

      2. According to Sir George Alleyne, Director Emeritus, Pan American Health Organisation, the world’s greatest killers are non-communicable diseases.

        Not only are

        1) Cardio-vascular diseases,
        2) Diabetes,
        3) Chronic respiratory disease, and
        4) Cancer

        killing 35 million people a year, they are killing more and more people at an earlier age.

      3. @Keith -

        As I’ve told you on a previous thread, we can give full recognition to the importance of moral values, of kindness and compassion, fairness and justice, honesty and integrity, not as external obligations to which we must conform but as qualities which enrich our lives and our relationships with others.

        1. And I rightly replied that ‘Shared human values’ means not perpetuatinhg the spread of immorality and it’s deadly diseases which kill even innocent babies.
          You are not practicing the good words which you preach at all are you?

          1. “You are not practicing the good words which you preach at all are you?”

            LOL! Neither do you, it seems. You’re just a rambling nut who doesn’t understand what they are saying.

          2. Could you be more specific?

            For example, it is understood that shared human values are positive actions designed to make the world a better and happier place, right?

            And yes, I am a work in progress and I do make mistakes sometimes.

          3. That’s the thing JonPol, this degenerate wants everyone to abide by his own views and morals. So, no gay people would be allowed, but we’d have slaves and probably so anything that the bible lets us do, like stone people, and have sex with our daughters. I know what would I would like to live in, and it ain’t his thankfully. But as I have said, there are far more people like you JonPol who have decent values that do not involve slavery and persecution of others. I do not think Keith would even have the mind depth to understand that.

          4. @Will -

            yea..well, I can think of a few examples where Keith’s vision has touched the ground, i.e. David Koresh, Jonestown, not to mention the entanglements of ‘spiritual’ and temporal powers in the history of Western Civilisation.

            Today, Democracy is a self-correcting system, and theocratic attempts are snipped in the bud although we have seen that they carry the seeds of their own destruction.

          5. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:24am

            No relevence.
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

      4. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:22am

        Yet another irrelevent comment.
        -
        Protest comment.
        -
        LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  23. Deeside Will 3 Sep 2011, 5:42pm

    Keith, all that you are achieving with your absurd contortions is to demonstrate to any person of reasonable intelligence and education exactly why it is impossible to regard the Pentateuch as anything other than a mélange of mythology and superstition.

    To return to the matter in hand, some of us are gay. That’s the way it is, always has been, and always will be. Your despicable and immoral attitude to us belongs to a previous century. Time has moved on since then, and you can’t put the clock back.

    1. Some people are attracted sexually to prepubescent children and hold that they were born that way., not being interested in the sexually mature. Are such mental urges immoral in your opinion or are they justified by the claim “born this way?”

      1. “Are such mental urges immoral in your opinion or are they justified by the claim “born this way?””

        Such urges are not moral or immoral, but sex with children is not consensual. Do not make this tired argument, it has no relevance to gay people and it is a straw man argument. Two consenting adults, who are not related (by the way, I know you enjoy the whole sick sister knocking up bit, as per your “bible standards”), can in a democracy do as they please, its of no business to you or anyone else for that matter. Gay people are not child abusers, this has been repudiated many times. Its only NARTH and sex-obsessed fools like you who think it makes them feel better about their prejudices that do.

        Please try harder, we’ve heard all this nonsense before. It is the recourse of the weak minded.

        1. Not moral or immoral??? Do you not accept that one can have immoral thoughts? Is there no beginning to morality with you. I am not mentioning sex with children, merely sexual attraction. Also, why do you discriminate between related consentin adults and non related consenting adults, assuming that safe sex is practiced or that the consenting adults are homosexual?

          1. “Do you not accept that one can have immoral thoughts?”

            No. Only when applied to “moral standards” made by others, like you. And we have identified without a shadow of doubt you are a lair and a hypocrite, so the benchmark is irrelevant.

            “Is there no beginning to morality with you”

            How would you know, you condone slavery. Nothing as repugnant and as demeaning to a life by owning it.

            “why do you discriminate between related consenting adults and non related consenting adults”

            Why do you not? Are they the same to you?

          2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:25am

            No barring on the subject.
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

      2. Deeside Will 3 Sep 2011, 8:48pm

        Keith, I don’t know why you’re bringing up the “born this way” question; no-one knows the answer to it, although people may have opinions, but it’s of no relevance here. I wouldn’t dream of trying to justify homosexuality on the grounds that we’re “born this way” – whether or not we are – because no such justification is needed. There is simply nothing wrong with it. You may think there is and get screwed up about it, but if you fail to perceive the beauty of gay love and gay sex, that’s fine by me. Not being gay, you don’t need to.

        Reading some of your posts has stimulated me to peruse the Pentateuch again, especially the parts that I haven’t read since I was a child (and didn’t fully understand back then) and which one seldom or never hears read out in church. It’s even worse than I remembered, being full of immoral stories, barbarous precepts, contradictions, childish “miracles” and primitive superstitions. The best that can be said of it is that there are some bits of gold among an immense amount of dross. That any modern, civilized person can for one moment contemplate taking it as a source of moral guidance is simply astonishing to me.

        1. Homosexuals often use the’born this way’ defence to justify homosexuality, which is condemned as immoral in the bible and is aunlawful in many lands. Clearly, thethe question of whether it is right or wrong is not resolved, despite your assertion that “£there is niothing wrong with it”. Homosexuality is fornication. It perpetuates the spread of killer diseases. Did I mention that it is against Gods law too?
          When deciding the right and wrongs of a consensual sexual act between adults, which determinant enables you to reach a conclusion as to right or wron? Also, are there any consensual sexual acts you deem wrong between adults and how so?

          1. Keith, homosexuality is not fornication! Fornication may well increase ones chances of contracting STD’s but not exclusively same sex contact. There are more heterosexuals with HIV. Lesbians are the lowest risk group.
            I don’t need the bible to tell me what’s right or wrong… it’s obvious!!!!
            Why does your God allow innocent children to die of starvation? My mother went to church, never drank, smoked or even swore but died of cancer, Why?
            Prove to me that Hogwarts doesn’t exist!

          2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:26am

            No barring, irrelevent.
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

      3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:25am

        Yet again, completely irrelevent.
        -
        LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!
        -
        Protest comment.

  24. @Will
    In bible times, slaves were usually either prisoners of war (with rules regarding humane treatment) or willingly selling themselves into servitude. to pay debts. The equivalent today is prisoners of war and contractual workers. So I ask again, which aspect is inhumane, and do you not agree that prisoners should be taken in war or contractual employment?

    1. That is ridiculous. You clearly do not know what you are on about. Slavery predates written records and has existed in many cultures, prehistoric graves from about 8000 BC in Lower Egypt suggest that a Libyan people enslaved a San tribe. Slavery was not always prisoners of war or voluntary. What a stupid thing to say. Many slaves were born into servitude and their treatment was appalling, there was nothing “humane” about it.

      The fact you cannot see what is inhuman about slavery puts you at odds with the UN and every civilised country on the planet, and has no place in a civilised and democratic society. The fact you agree with it, demonstrates a perversion in you that is quite sick.

      You are now getting to a position that is a parody, and I find any rational discourse from you is almost pre-existant. You are a cretin, and a fool, and a vile example of humanity. Thankfully people like you are a minority, and disappearing as the rest of the world moves on.

      1. I have not condones the slavery from other cultures other than Israelite slkavery which was humane and compatible with prisoners of war and contract workers today. Hopw disingenious and deceitful of you to imply that I condone Egyptian slavery which was cruel, barbaric.and not subject to humane laws as was the Israelit slavery.. You have also failed to specifically state which aspect of Israelite slavery was inhumane. You are clearlyunable to answer and must revert to type, employing meaningless insults. Carry on avoiding my question on an issue that again YOU yourself raised, not me. Readers can see your are an evasive, offensive amoral slug!

        1. The fact that there were minor laws in ancient Israel which meant that slavery was not nearly as harsh as their condition elsewhere, is irrelevant. Slavery is one of the most dehumanising things one human can do to another, and at no time was slavery considered anything other than servitude. Even in Israel. You defend that the indefensible.

          And because it was the norm 3000 years ago, does not make it the norm now. Like many things form antiquity, we have moved on, from such things as burning witches, living on a flat earth, and thinking that the normal channel for a supreme creator is a burning bush. Its people like you who hold these things as relevant today, to validate your lack of humanity and compassion and understanding.

          I am less then surprised that you think slavery in Israel was a good thing. To be frank, you could not go any lower in my estimation, I already think there are thing lying on their backs at the bottom of ponds with a better understanding of humanity than you.

          1. .. a question of treating others with human dignity, isn’t it?

            Well put, Will.

          2. I did not say slavery was good. Another lie! I see that it was necessary and was not cruel or inhumane. You have not yet apologized for the lie that i condoned Egyptian slavery, a cruel barbaric practice , completely different from Israelite slavery and not subject to humane law.
            A Hebrew who sold himself into slavery to an alien resident, to a member of an alien resident’s family, or to a settler could be repurchased at any time, either by himself or by one having the right of repurchase. The redemption price was based on the number of years remaining until the Jubilee year or until the seventh year of servitude. (Lev 25:47-52; De 15:12) When granting a Hebrew slave his freedom, the master was to give him a gift to assist him in getting a good start as a freedman. (Deut 15:13-15)

          3. You quite the bible again…. yawn. The bible is proof of nothing, as its all a load of rediculious and irrelevant stories that don’t have any basis in reality. NEXT….!

          4. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:28am

            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!
            -
            Please protest and remind both Keith and PinkNews.

    2. “The equivalent today is prisoners of war and contractual workers”

      Prisoners of war today are not sold into slavery, and contractual workers get paid and can terminate employment.

      Ergo, your comparison is as stupid as one can get. You really are one of the most mentally retarded individuals I have ever encountered on this site.

      1. Prisoners of war ARE slaves by definition in that they are deprived of their liberty, in servitude and subject to forced labour if and when required.
        As regards those willingly selling themselves into slavery, where is the inhumanity there?

        1. “As regards those willingly selling themselves into slavery, where is the inhumanity there?”

          Who are these people?

          “Prisoners of war ARE slaves by definition in that they are deprived of their liberty”

          Wrong.

          SLAVE noun /slāv/ A person who is the legal property of another and is forced to obey them

          A prisoner of war of is subject to the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War – read it. Its is designed to remove freedom, but not induce slavery or forced labour.

          Do you ever get tired of being wrong all the time?

          1. :(Merriam Webster) Slave:- one that is completely subservient to a dominating influence .
            There is more than one definition you see!
            The Israelite prisoners of war (slaves) were subject to Gods humane laws. As I have said, I do not subscribe to human signed documents such as the Geneva convention since I see the bible as a higher source of morality. You have still to show which aspect of israeklite slavery is inhumane as you asserted.

          2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:29am

            Boring and irrelevent, Keith
            -
            Protest comment to remind Keith and PinkNews – LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

        2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:28am

          Another totally irrelevent comment.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    3. You should read this Keith, I doubt you have before…..

      Article 1.

      All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

      Article 2.

      Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

      Article 3.

      Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

      Article 4.

      No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

      1. I hold to biblical law and subscribe to no human declaration. It is interesting though that the declaration recognizes the right of religion. Bet you hate that one!
        Article 18 must make you cringe…
        “the right to to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance”

        1. “I hold to biblical law and subscribe to no human declaration”

          Obviously. But most of civilisation has moved passed people like you, you’re a relic and a fool. And I for one am delighted to see your kind dying a slow death on a gay site, it really warms me.

          “Bet you hate that one!”

          You’re not religious, you’re using religion as a means to persecute. See point above about you being a fool.

          1. thanks for the critique. Incidentally, I am heartened that you find my mere words persecution.

          2. I sincerely doubt Will holds you with any such regard. Nor do the rest of us. In fact, I doubt anyone you ever meet would either when one is as repulsive a human as you.

          3. Believe me, Sally, I don’t. There are things on my shoe that I would scratch off that have more intelligent then this moron.

        2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:29am

          Irrelevent!
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    4. @Keith -

      In my opinion, you have been drawn into an abstract world by people who convinced you that they knew the mind of God, and who taught you that God wants you to hate.

      In that sense you have been born into slavery yourself.

      It’s never too late to get a hold of yourself, demand your human rights, and free yourself from these delusions.

      1. “In that sense you have been born into slavery yourself.”

        Well said. Ignorance is a modern form of slavery, one which some people are willing participants in.

      2. Thanks all the same but I am confident in my beliefs, my ability to defend them and my protection from loathsome diseases that kill even innocent babies. I think I have it right and if more thought like me AIDs woul be a thing of the past as would unwanted pregnancy, abortion, incest, paedophilia,polygamy,and bestiality.
        http://www.avert.org/pregnancy.htm

        1. B L Z bub 3 Sep 2011, 8:04pm

          Unfortunately the world still suffers from severe ignorance.

          I see you have all of the symptoms.

          Religion. Stupidity. Ill thought out speech. Babbling in tongues.

          Help is available.

        2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:30am

          Totally irrelevent!
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!
          -
          Protest comment.

    5. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:27am

      Can we all protest and remind Keith an PinkNews that LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  25. Well, I’ve had enough for now. Clearly you, Keith, are a pathetic lost cause, trapped in your own hate and stupidity, and I pity you enormously.

    I did really enjoy proving you wrong so often, but I have to get back to my partner, to whom I am married to. I’m sure that upsets you to no end, but that is only sauce for the goose, Keith.

    I’ll be watching out for you, and your stupid comments, and I’ll be sure to show others what a deformed and pathetic sorry example of a human you are at every opportunity – its the advantage of edcuation, you really have no match for it.

    So don’t go anywhere, I enjoy it too much!

    1. Obviously a masochist, possibly a self harmer. Definitely a candidate for HPV!

      1. Poor Keith. Got to feel sorry for him. First he was obsessed with pedo’s then bestiality, now it’s STD’S. Sex, sex, sex, that’s all he ever thinks about. What a pervert. I love reading his comments, they remind me how few issues I have in life and how unfortunate his life must be. It must be horrible being keith. Poor fella.

        1. Dr Robin Guthrie 3 Sep 2011, 8:11pm

          I think I stated before on one of these forums that I could not imagine for 1 second living such a life of vile hatred.

          It really would be a pointless life.

          He must really hate himself.

          1. That’s why I feel sorry for him. But, isn’t the domestos logo brilliant though. You can even see at such a small scale what the product it is.

      2. What ever puerile names you call Will, if won’t change the fact he made a complete idiot out of you, will it Keith?

      3. “Obviously a masochist, possibly a self harmer. Definitely a candidate for HPV!”

        What a marvellous conclusion…. and all because you’re not bright enough to keep up with the rest of humanity. A reaction no different form a 5 year old who is frustrated by bed time rules.

        You’re pathetic, Keith.

        1. Ahh Keith… or is that Will… or indeed Rich?

          I see we are still clutching at straws and using all these straws to try and beat the LGBT community. the more you try, the stronger we get… so use your loaf, yes, the wholegrain not the shell…. and accept. You will never ever ever succeed. I dread to think of the stuff you are telling your children or your neighbours.

      4. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:31am

        Irrelevent, Keith!
        -
        LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  26. The Law protected slaves from brutalities. A slave was to be set at liberty if mistreatment by the master resulted in the loss of a tooth or an eye. As the usual value for a slave was 30 shekels (compare Ex 21:32), his liberation would have meant considerable loss to the master and, therefore, would have served as a strong deterrent against abuse. Although a master could beat his slave, the slave, depending upon the decision of the judges, was to be avenged if he died under his master’s beating. However, if the slave lingered on for a day or two before dying—this indicating that the master had not intended to kill the slave but to discipline him—he was not to be avenged. (Ex 21:20, 21, 26, 27; Le 24:17)

    1. Also, it would appear that for the master to have been considered free of guilt the beating could not have been administered with a lethal instrument, as that would have signified intent to kill. (Compare Nu 35:16-18.) Therefore, if a slave lingered on for a day or two, there would be reasonable question as to whether the death resulted from the chastisement. A beating with a rod, for example, would not normally be fatal, as is shown by the statement at Proverbs 23:13: “Do not hold back discipline from the mere boy. In case you beat him with the rod, he will not die.”

      1. Certain special regulations applied to a female Hebrew slave. She could be taken as a concubine by the master or designated as a wife for his son. When designated as a wife for the master’s son, the Hebrewess was to be treated with the due right of daughters. Even if the son took another wife, there was to be no diminishing of her sustenance, clothing, and marriage due. A failure on the son’s part in this respect entitled the woman to her freedom without the payment of a redemption price. If the master sought to have a Hebrewess redeemed, he was not permitted to accomplish this by selling her to foreigners.—Ex 21:7-11.

        1. And now it’s slaves! Oh dear. Poor keith. Where did you copy and paste that nonsense from keith?

          1. Yeah, I think others have proven the man somewhat lacking in the brains department, and now he’s gone and proven it. Nothing worse than a stupid man who can’t see that he’s stupid.

        2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:32am

          No barring, no relevence.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

      2. B L Z bub 3 Sep 2011, 8:08pm

        BIBLE QUOTE , BIBLE QUOTE.

        You are a disgrace to humanity.

        You should be jailed or killed.

        You have not one iota of love in you do you. Nobody EVER loved you, NOBODY.

        And nobody ever will.

        You will go to your grave, KNOWING, that you have defiled every single thing your Loving Jesus ever said.

        With all your hatred and Judging and vileness.

        Ever treated an HIV ridden baby you disgusting sh!t.

        1. Go take your clozapine, you drooling, mentally challenged imbecile.
          You have nothing intelligent to offer and I would be picking on a cripple to engage such a moron! I am your intellectual and moral superior. There will be no further reply to you.

          1. Ironic you know what clozapine is. I’m guessing you have some in your bathroom cabinet if your love of slavery and other debauch passions ever come out in a doctors session?

          2. Intellectual superior? Delusional and disturbed. I think you were shown up more then once by many others here for being anything but that, and its set you off on a little tantrum, similar to what a frustrated child would do.

          3. …wearing your Napoleon costume again… ??

          4. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:33am

            Again, LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

      3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:32am

        Completely irrelevent.
        -
        LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!
        -
        Protest comment. Please join, send a message to PinkNews and Keith.

    2. David Myers 6 Sep 2011, 12:26am

      You see what a pathetic egotist Keith is? He has to answer himself, then answer his answer to himself. Why does Pink News allow this miscreant to continue to highjack this thread which is about a brave teenager who took her repressive school board to task for trying to muzzel her right to free expression?

    3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:31am

      No relevence to this site.
      -
      LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  27. @Will
    I said…“why do you discriminate between related consenting adults and non related consenting adults”

    You said…Why do you not? Are they the same to you?

    My reply…No they are not the samne to me. i discriminate on the grounds that incest is immoral., being contrary to Gods law.
    Which grounds do YOU discriminate on and why

    1. And now it’s incest? Oh jeez, keith you have some serious issues. Pedo’s, bestiality, STD’s, Slaves and now incest. Get some help keith.

    2. B L Z bub 3 Sep 2011, 8:14pm

      In your “Existance for Dummies” manual.

      Incest is what either, Adam / Eve or their sons got up to. Idiot.

      1. I’ve never though of that. Adam and Eve’s kids must have had incestual relationships.

        1. B L Z bub 3 Sep 2011, 8:20pm

          Adam and the Rib produced woman ( Eve )

          Produced a Kid.

          Who did Kid sleep with to produce more Kids?

          INCEST>>>>>>

          1. B L Z bub 3 Sep 2011, 8:26pm

            As it is written in his Good book.

            Clearly Keith is nothing more than an amateur in his God invoked
            lies.

            He’s just a sad bigot, thinking that he is hiding behind his
            version of religion.

            He clearly knows nothing about it. Just a nasty person.

    3. Dr Robin Guthrie 3 Sep 2011, 8:44pm

      Hi Keith.

      At work I saved the lives of 5 people and lost 1.

      First one being an alcoholic who swallowed his own vomit.

      Second, a woman who took too many drugs, namely crack cocaine and alcohol.

      Third. A 5 year old girl who ended up losing a leg in a car crash but she survived

      Fourth. An 89 year old woman who’s time just came.

      Fifth. A car accident victim who will never walk again.

      The one person that I lost, is the one person that will stay with me for the rest of my life.

      Its so sad that you cannot understand that all you can come up with is criticism and hate.

      I’mn tired and going to bed. No doubt you will shilly shally your uneducated religious
      hate on my comments.

      No what. I do not care. You are NOTHING.

      A piece of SH!T that needs wiped off this stupid little planet.

      Drop dead you hateful little loser.

      And WHEN o WHEN will this rag stop these BIGOTS>

      1. Hi Nurse Guthrie. Is there a point to your post? What are you doing to prevent the death of innocent babies infected by AIDs, spread by the immoral? Surely the moral life style I espouse would prevent such horror . Your ethics perpetuate it so don’t shove your self righteousness down my throat until you become part of the soulution and not the problem, which you currently are!
        Also, you are the bigot, seeking to silence religious expression as permitted by the Declaration of Human Rights.

        1. Another Hannah 3 Sep 2011, 9:50pm

          I think he’s showing you what an evil pathetic turd you are Keith. You don’t follow the bible, the stuff your spouting is a corruption and twisting of the bible, and my own belief is that you will be damned to the fires of hell for wasting your own time, and other people’s on this planet. YOU will be called to account in many ways. How much good have you done Keith? How’s your tally for goodness? It’s easy to see here that it’s at less than zero. You can be good without God, and bad with God Keith. I suppose Mary Magdalene is damned by your twisted reckoning. In fact its you Keith. Your going to be damned for what your trying to do here. You need to read that bible taking a more scientific unbiased stance.

          1. You believ that ctime wasting is a capital crime yet you are calling me a turd. look in the mirror you hypocritical piece of human garbage!

          2. Oh, my. Gone over the edge have we? Did the smarter people upset you? Must remind you of 2nd grade, probably that was the point you left school, was it?

        2. Evil Keith 4 Sep 2011, 8:42am

          Fvck off…………..

        3. Evil Keith 4 Sep 2011, 8:43am

          Fvck off……………………………..
          Fvck off…………
          Fvck off…………
          Fvck off…………Fvck off…………Fvck off…………
          Fvck off…………
          Fvck off…………Fvck off…………Fvck off…………Fvck off…………Fvck off…………
          Fvck off…………
          vFvck off…………
          Fvck off…………

        4. “Also, you are the bigot, seeking to silence religious expression as permitted by the Declaration of Human Rights.”

          LOL! So you just reads what I put up and now you’re an expert? You fcuking idiot. So, NOW you “not subscribe to human signed documents” when it suits you?

          We call that hypocrisy.

          And the Charter is about expression, not religious ideology being imposed on others. Are you even capable of understand the nonsense that comes out of your vile little mouth?

          We call that stupidity.

        5. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:34am

          Irrlevent and ignorant.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    4. I see the Keith creature is obsessed with Will now….

      1. DJ Sheepiesheep 3 Sep 2011, 10:58pm

        Keith, can you help us out, please. Who is the bigger douche bag: you or your imaginary friend?

    5. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:34am

      Not relevent to this comment page.
      -
      LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  28. We can be good without God. :D

    1. And Shame on Hoover High School.

      Rock that T-Shirt !!!

      1. Yep, great t shirt and a great result, Jonpol.

  29. To Pinknews, why do you allow such abominations like Keith to abuse people on these threads?

    To others, I have reported as many of his hateful and ridiculous posts, you should do the same. Maybe we can rid this GAY site of him and his pollutants.

    1. Maybe not!

      1. Evil Keith 4 Sep 2011, 8:42am

        Fvck off…………

  30. @Jonopol
    “And yes, I am a work in progress and I do make mistakes sometimes”

    Progress means going forward. the shared human values you endorse do not mean sharing loathsome diseases which are spread by immorality.. If you truly held to those good words rather thabn quote them in a mealy mouthed parrot fashion, you would strive to be a better example to your fellow man by not perpaetuating and endorsing immorality that kills even innocent babies. How are your shared human values looking now?

    1. And you’re supposed to be a better man? Funny. All I can see in you is one angry fool with a very, very limited edcuation and a clear mental health issue, who thinks ranting about babies on a gay site is something to hold worthy of something. Its not.

      You’re just another sad religious nutter who’s time would be better spent roaring at cars at the intersection.

      Nice that you’re still here, though, ranting away like a 5 year old on a sugar low. Reminds me of how blatantly superior we all are to you, how easy your kind is to defeat, and why we will continue to win more legal equality rights – and lets face it, no matter whether you obey the law or not, is irrelevant, the laws are being changed. What are you going to do about it? Nothing. Oh, that’s not entirely true, Keith, is it? You can rant like an emotional and intellectual retard on a gay site…. that’ll teach us all, won’t it? LOL!

      1. Interesting that you don’t deny that innocent babies are killed due to AIDS, spread by immorality. I suppose that part of ‘humanism’ is not convenient to those that seek selfish perverted desires!

        1. According to UNICEF, most child deaths (and 70% in developing countries) result from one the following five causes or a combination thereof:

          acute respiratory infections
          diarrhea
          measles
          malaria
          malnutrition

          Also, organisations working with AIDS-infected children have received and continue to receive a tremendous amount of support, and that includes support from the gay community.

          http://www.avert.org/children.htm

        2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:36am

          Ignorant and irrelevent.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

      2. Regarding legal rights, it is not looking good for the gay brigade at the moment.
        The Equality & Human Rights Commission announced in July 2011 its intention to intervene in cases before the European Court of Human Rights defending individuals who had refused to provide public services on the grounds of a service-user’s sexual orientation.

        1. “The Equality & Human Rights Commission announced in July 2011 its intention to intervene in cases before the European Court of Human Rights defending individuals who had refused to provide public services on the grounds of a service-user’s sexual orientation.”

          Hardly “not looking good” is it? If you bother to read the papers, you’d see they backed down on this. So save your glee for something worth while, like the rapture.

          “Interesting that you don’t deny that innocent babies are killed due to AIDS, spread by immorality.”

          Deny? Of course I deny, I deny that it has any basis in reality. But its a denial of a lunatic and ridiculous statement by a fool who thinks cutting and pasting from a right wing anti-gay conspiracy site is something that merits treatment as a logical statement? Really? You expect us to debate THAT travesty of a statement with you?

          I notice that you never denied that you pick selective lines out of Leviticus for your “biblical standards” lark when it suits you.

          1. Link please to the backing down article.
            Also, which bits have I ignored from leviticaus that I ahould not have?
            HIV has killed many babies through the mothers breast milk. HIV is spread predominantly by sexual promiscuity. Are you still in denial?
            http://familydoctor.org/online/famdocen/home/women/pregnancy/illness/093.html
            http://www.aidsmap.com/Mother-to-baby-transmission/page/1044918/

            Prevention would be the humanist approach but that will never happen with selfish pleasure seekers will it?
            You can avoid any risk of HIV if you Practice abstinence (not having sex). You also won’t get infected if your penis, mouth, vagina or rectum doesn’t touch anyone else’s penis, mouth, vagina, or rectum.
            Sex can be safely practiced within a monogamous heterosexual marriage. If this is not to your liking, abstain!

          2. “HIV has killed many babies through the mothers breast milk. HIV is spread predominantly by sexual promiscuity. Are you still in denial?”

            Are you incapable of reading? Are you THAT stupid. Read back. Read it again. Then come back, there’s a good child.

            You want a link? Can’t use google yourself, can we? Okay so, I enjoy proving you wrong: http://www.eauk.org/media/ehrc-backtracks-on-promised-support-for-christians.cfm

            “Sex can be safely practiced within a monogamous heterosexual marriage.”

            This would make sense if straight people didn’t cheat. They do. Its a reality. Get over it.

          3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:37am

            Keith – ignoeant and irrelevent (esp to humanity)
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

        2. And either way, we are getting the laws changed. Every day is another win, minor setbacks are there, sure, but all things to those who wait (and fight for them) – I’m married to my partner, full legal recognition. I am a senior manager in a multinational company, with plenty of people in my staff, all know that I’m gay, and laws that protect me should any of them behave like you (not that we hire idiots like you, you need at least some college edcuation to work where I do)

          Quite a few wins for them der ho-mo-sexuals, isn’t it? How does that make you feel?

          I know how it makes me feel.

          1. The law does not protect you from my speech. the law protects my speech and freedom of worship. The same law that allows you to claim that good is bad and bad is good as you have been asserting. According to you, my moral standards on sex and marriage which can only result in freedom from sexual diseases, are bad, whilst yourr model of each to their own with no moral boundaries, perpetuating deadlky disease, is good!

          2. “The law does not protect you from my speech.”

            What you say is garbage, and of no relevance. That’s might right, to challenge, and prove you wrong time and time again. A right I have more then exercised here to great effect.

            “my moral standards on sex and marriage which can only result in freedom from sexual diseases”

            And my safe sex practices in the past result in freedom from sexual diseases. The rest of your comment was the usual tired nonsense of garbage.

            But back to the point at hand. How does it make you feel that you are being marginalised and proven wrong so often?

          3. Ah, poor keith. Will, you’re making him look more and more foolish with every comment he writes back to you. I love all the details he writes above, keiths new fantasy; ‘ if your penis, mouth, vagina or rectum doesn’t touch anyone else’s penis, mouth, vagina, or rectum.’ First all keith could talk about was pedo’s then bestiality, then incest, then STD’s, then slaves, now it’s penis’ vagina’s and rectums. Oh dear, Keith is obsessed with sex, I think he may be a recovering sex addict. Like someone who gives up smoking, they just don’t shut up about smoking. Sex as all keith thinks about. He’s just funny. I love reading his comments. I also think he is an ex gay, probably been to one of those cure centres. His comments just sound too knowing of a promiscuous life that he once lived (or at least fantasised about living). Sad really. Poor fella.

          4. “I think he may be a recovering sex addict.”

            Or another sick minded freak with sexual issue, more like. Undoubtedly a potential danger to his family and society at large. The obsession Keith has with sex and sexual habits of others is usually indicative of a very disturbed mind, probably sexual impotence or fights a repressed sexual desire that would land him in prison.

          5. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:37am

            Keith = irrelevent.
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    2. Keith –

      You said:

      “Progress means going forward. the shared human values you endorse do not mean sharing loathsome diseases which are spread by immorality.. If you truly held to those good words rather thabn quote them in a mealy mouthed parrot fashion, you would strive to be a better example to your fellow man by not perpaetuating and endorsing immorality that kills even innocent babies. How are your shared human values looking now?”

      Exactly when did anyone in the gay community condone the man who knows he has HIV, yet still has unprotected with someone unknowing and uninfected?

      Please provide a link.

      On the other hand, a morality that depends on belief in God is not an unusual claim.

      Speaking of mistakes, we all make them, some more monumental than others.

      Paul of Tarsus, for example, made an historical blunder when he taught that within his lifetime Jesus would return in glory , so that members of the new cult actually did give up all the wealth to the dispossessed.

      1. …also, no matter how many times you repeat that homosexuality is immoral, it does not make it so.

        You are mistaken, just as when you claimed that all homosexuals are pedophiles.

        1. I have noticed this post just now and you have joined the ranks of liars. Your posts will now be ignored unless you show (link) the post where I allegedly said that all homosexuals are paedophiles.
          It is commonly accepted that lying is an admission of defeat in a debate. It is also the last refuge of the wretched loser.
          I await the proof!

          1. blow it out your ear.

          2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:38am

            Irrelevent comment, Keith.
            =
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

        2. what… nothing to say about Paul of Tarsus’ monumental mistake??

          maybe you’ve found a better idea of when the world will end in your hate guide… I mean your moral guide…

      2. Everyone that fornicates does so knowing they are a potential recipient iof the virus and that the virus may be passed on to an innocent person through non sexual contact, even babies. There is where the guilt lies. Kill fronication and you kill AIDS, simple!
        I think you mean Saul of Tarsus. It is those little things that expose ignorance

        1. “Kill fronication and you kill AIDS, simple!”

          Kill fronication and you kill the human race, simple!

          An other winner from the erudite Keith.

        2. @Keith
          .
          How many Heterosexual “Sex Websites” are you discussing this issue on?

        3. When was the last time you gave your wealth to the dispossessed?

          I suppose you will say there are more than one meaning to the word ‘wealth’?

          If Paul of Tarsus spoke the word of God, how could he have been wrong about something as pivotal as the perusia, the omega itself? wow!

        4. David Myers 6 Sep 2011, 12:32am

          Neither this thread nor any other on Pink News is the “Church of Keith”. You are all giving him ego points and feeding his trollish sense of purpose. Please do not feed this evil troll and keep letting him hijack threads. You are involuntarily tithing to the Church of Keith. For shame!

          1. Agreed.

        5. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:38am

          Totally ignorant and irrelevent.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:35am

      Pure ignorance. No relevence.
      -
      LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  31. @Will. You have wrongly convinced yourself that because you are ‘ap[parently’ in a monogamous homosexual relationship. You are imune from disease. This is not true. HPV is always a threat to you . Interesting though that you espouse monogamy. Do you believe promiscuity to be immoral?

    1. And you’ve wrongly convinced yourself that being potentially susceptible to STDs makes everyone who isn’t a virgin an evil abomination who deserves a slow painful death.
      Torquemada would’ve been proud.

    2. “You have wrongly convinced yourself that because you are ‘ap[parently’ in a monogamous homosexual relationship. You are imune from disease”

      So have you. But at least my scientific training allows me to see that without the hocus pocus crap of “biblical standards” you use to blind yourself of the truth. Knowledge is power, after all, which is why you have so little in your life.

      1. Which STD does your scientific training tell you that mongamous heterosexual married couples are at risk from. Also, I notice you do not deny the HPV risk. You are so fond af telling me I am wrong ad nauseum but you never specify a point of error. Please specify where I was in error on my last post.

        1. We’ve been over this. You’re are inept at reading anything that damages your fragile world view it seems, or mentally damaged. Either way, to repeat myself only brings me to your level. Perhaps you can start answering points put to you, since you seem such an expert in all things ignorant?

          1. Yes we have been over it and the answer was that there is no STD that a monogamous hetrerosexual couple need fear. I do conced the remote possibility of a freak transmission via blood transfusin , which will of course likely be the infected blood of an immoral person. At any rate, it is solely immorality that keeps AIDS thriving!

          2. Let me correct that, its was all garbage:

            Yes we have been over it and the answer was that there is no STD that a monogamous couple need fear. I do conced the remote possibility of a freak transmission via blood transfusin , which will of course likely be the infected blood of another person. At any rate, it is solely edcuation that keeps AIDS thriving!

          3. Keith wrote
            .
            “Yes we have been over it and the answer was that there is no STD that a monogamous hetrerosexual couple need fear.”
            .
            Keith heterosexual marriages are predominately not monogamous, reflected by the problem that 66% tend to end in divorce.
            .
            Keith are you discussing this issue on heterosexual websites?, if not, why not?

          4. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:40am

            Keith – LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

        2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:40am

          Protest comment to Irrelevent comments from Keith.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:39am

      No barring. Totally irrelevent.
      -
      LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  32. MassiveHomo 4 Sep 2011, 5:12pm

    Lol at Keith over here. I’m a homo wooooooo and it’s going to be great fun in hell (with all the other homos there). Already set up the disco ball.

    Keith, not everyone has to follow the bible and its views. I doubt jesus forced all his views upon people (assuming he existed for this example), so I’m sure he’s not very proud of you at the moment eh. Stop forcing your beliefs on everyone. We’re autonomous humans and can choose what we want to believe.

    1. It is true that you have the choice whether to lead a debauched perverse life or clean moral one. Of course, the consequences of fornication and unclean sexual practice extend to even innocent babies who die every year from the preventable killer AIDS. All persons of sexual immorality share a ‘corporate bloodguilt’ in this regard. This is not a belief, this is a fact.

      1. “It is true that you have the choice whether to lead a debauched perverse life or clean moral one”

        Wrong. Again. There is not one scientific or anecdotal paper that backs this up. Only NARTH support this nonsense, and they have been proven as wrong as often as you.

        “Of course, the consequences of fornication and unclean sexual practice extend to even innocent babies who die every year from the preventable killer AIDS”

        Wrong. Babies do not get AIDS due to “gay fornication”

        “All persons of sexual immorality share a ‘corporate bloodguilt’ in this regard”

        Wrong. Only a lunatic or someone with mental health issues would think gay people are killing babies. You need second-generation antipsychotic medication. Funny you were able to reference clozapine earlier. Every been diagnosed schizophrenic? I’m guessing you have.

        “This is not a belief, this is a fact.”

        Wrong. You have no proof, ergo its an opinion. An incorrect opinion.

        Do you ever get tired of being wrong?

        1. @Will’
          “Wrong. Babies do not get AIDS due to “gay fornication””
          Of course technically nobody gets AIDS through fornication. including babies. If that is your get out of jail card it is a rather pathetic diversion.. HIV is passed on through bodily fluids. In the case of babies it is received through the mothers breast milk or even whilst in the womb. In any case, the virus will of ten be present due to fornication of one or both partners. AIDS is a STD , spread by fornication that even now has infected the blood supply that kills other innocents. Either way you slice it, initially homosexuals and now gemneral fornicators are responsible for the perpetuation of the killer virus which kills innocent babies.

          1. Please do not attempt to lecture me. I have a masters degree is science. You cut and paste science 101, as is fitting with

            HIV AIDS is a disease. Safe sex reduces the risk of transmission substantially. Like all diseases, edcuation is key to its prevention. As people will have sex, screaming like a lunatic will neither make it go away, or cure people with it. I remind you it is scientifically proven that religion reduces the intelligence of a person. Less intelligent people are more likely to do stupid thing. Look at you, for example. perhaps we need to start with removing damaging religious nonsense and prejudice from the population to the let the rest of us get on with curing all diseases?

            I am keeping this simple for you.

          2. Keith wrote
            .
            “Either way you slice it, initially homosexuals and now gemneral fornicators are responsible for the perpetuation of the killer virus which kills innocent babies.”
            .
            Keith are you targetting heterosexual websites with you rhetoric?, if not, why not?

          3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:42am

            Wrong and irrelevent.
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

      2. MassiveHomo 6 Sep 2011, 12:37pm

        It’s not a choice – you’re born gay. If you’re born straight as I assume you are, it can’t be hard for you to see I was born gay. Stop trying to taint homosexuality with AIDS links. Heteros pass AIDS too anyway ya know.

        Your crazed beliefs though will never amount to anything, nor change anything that cannot be changed. No one on here will be enlightened or anything of the sort. You’re fighting a battle that’s already lost for you. I’d recommend leaving it as you’re wasting your time.

      3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:41am

        Another completely ignorant and irrelevent comment.
        -
        LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  33. @Will
    “I have a masters degree is science”

    Do they give refunds?
    ____________
    “Like all diseases, edcuation is key to its prevention. As people will have sex, screaming like a lunatic will neither make it go away,”

    No, you are wrong! there is plenty of education but it still thrives. Prevention is the key to prevention. this requires abstinence until monogamous marriage. Do you deny this would solve the AIDs problem?
    ________________________
    “it is scientifically proven that religion reduces the intelligence of a person.”

    Isaac Newton disagrees!
    ______________________

    “Look at you, for example. perhaps we need to start with removing damaging religious nonsense”

    You certainly are suffering from a defficiency in the memory dept. I have stated numerous times that I am not attached to nor do I endorse any religion.
    I keenly anticipate your next ‘gems’ of wisdom and higher learning, and the rebuke that will surely follow!

    1. “Do they give refunds?”

      Yawn….. is that it, the bast you can come back? Bitter about your lack of edcuation are we?

      “Isaac Newton disagrees!”

      Isaac Newton lived 300 years ago. Today’s scientists, however, DO agree.

      “there is plenty of education but it still thrives.”

      You are living proof that edcuation is wasted on the stupid, aren’t you? There are a lot of stupid religious types. How else do you explain YOU’RE lack of intelligence in this area?

      “I have stated numerous times that I am not attached to nor do I endorse any religion.”

      But you promote literal “biblical standards” and ram it down e3veryones throat liek we all as think as you? Sure you not religious! LOL! Delusional!!!

      “I keenly anticipate your next ‘gems’ of wisdom and higher learning, and the rebuke that will surely follow!”

      The why have all your so called “rebukes” failed? You trip up every time. You have never address one piece of science. And I laugh at your “efforts” constantly.

      What a fool you are….

    2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:42am

      So irrelevent.
      -
      LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!
      -
      Protest comment to PinkNews.

  34. “there is no STD that a monogamous couple need fear. I”

    I must correct you since HPV is a threat to all monogamous practicing homosexuals. Oral cancer is also a threat.to female homosexuals.

    1. So what? Lung cancer, heart disease and diabetes are a much bigger threat to me than the HPV. I see the understanding of magnitude and prevalence is beyond your simple and closed mind, lair.

      1. If I may quote, to yet again show you up as a fool: “A safe and effective HPV vaccine (Gardasil) is available to protect males against the HPV types that cause most (90%) genital warts and most anal cancers. The vaccine is available for boys and men, ages 9 through 26 years. It is given in three shots over six months. Condoms (if used with every sex act, from start to finish) may lower your chances of passing HPV to a partner or developing HPV-related diseases.”

        And in case you are to ignorant to understand the above:- a man can vaccinate early in life and then it is not a concern for a monogamous gay couple. I’ve already been vaccinated, so has my partner, so go an explain to me how I can catch HVP again???? No, please. Do.

        Is this too difficult for you? Does your little lying head hurt? One of the benefits of edcuation, unlike your sad little world, is I have a decent job , so can effort health care and have the intelligence and awareness to see the value of educating others too.

    2. Another Hannah 4 Sep 2011, 9:49pm

      are you stupid Keith or what? where’s it going to come from? through the ether by magic? Since your probably a creationist I’ll just point out what rubbish the creation/evolution debate is. Made it in seven days? Made the world and the process of evolution, and the other sciences. See no need for purely creationist rubbish, unless you’ve another agenda of course. Another angle – 7 days? Not human days. If you make universes and whole scientific systems your obviously quite large, bigger than our solar system, so one day would mean a different period of time for you – our one day is based on one revolution around the sun. The people who are stopping the teaching of science are doing it for rea sons other than religious. Go and do something good and useful Keith, the bible tells you not to do what your doing here, and spout the rubbish your spouting here – its pure evil and will result in a great deal of torment. Just supposing you in your arrogant certainty are wrong.

      1. What are you babbling on about you moron? Where is WHAT going to come from. Where have I said i believe the world was created in 7 days? I do not!

        1. Keith, why are you know resorting to naming calling, instead of reasoned and repsectfull debate which you previously endorsed?

          1. . . . and which you are currently endorsing on the following thread?
            .
            http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2011/09/04/thousands-of-primary-school-pupils-reported-for-homophobia/

          2. You will notice that the poster initiated abuse by calling me stupid. On second thoughts, you will notice but ignore!

          3. yea…he didn’t even say ‘please’….

            keith and his buddy must be taking turns at the keyboard…clearly two people using this avatar.

          4. Chats because he’s a liar.

        2. “Where have I said i believe the world was created in 7 days?”

          Oh, yeah, magical pixie “creationist days” – which anyone can make up to be any amount you want to fit the science. Sooooooooo intelligent. LOL!

          What I can’t understand, if “intelligent design” exists, why do is it always advanced by stupid people?

        3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:43am

          Irrelevent… again.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:43am

      Nothing to do with this thread. Irrelevent.
      -
      LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  35. “Keith are you targetting heterosexual websites with you rhetoric?, if not, why not?”

    Heterosexuality is not a sin. Homosexuality is..

    1. Heterosexuality is not a sin. Homosexuality is..

      …not a “sin” either. Only in the mind of bigots.

    2. Ooh, pretty. Placed in context with the rest of keith’s arguments, this one turns the whole mess into a perfect circle!

    3. WILL PN GET THIS FVCKER OUT OF HERE>>>>>>>>>>>

      1. Heartily seconded. We know what the idiot thinks now. With brass knobs on.

        1. And we know what the homosexual brigarde think. And if we forget, there are always the tedious Gay Pride Marches to ram it down our throats, along with the Gay Police Association, Gay Pilots Association, Gay Builders Association, Gay Lawyers Association, Gay train spotters association…ok, i made the last one up but you get the picture . It is a relentless, in your face barrage of homosexualiy.
          Normal sane people do not need to dispolay their sexual preferences in the workplace or in organizations since it is a private matter. there is no ‘ Straight Police association, no ‘Straight Pilots Association’..The homosexual brigade are clearly defined by their sexuality.

          1. And we know what the religious brigade think. And if we forget, there are always the tedious Holy Mary-lark Marches to ram it down our throats, along with the Anti-Gay NARTH Association, American Family Association, Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, Christian Anti-Defamation Commission, Christian Science Association…ok, i made the last one up but you get the picture . It is a relentless, in your face barrage of purile religion.
            Normal sane people do not need to display their religious nonsense in the workplace or in organizations since it is a private matter. There is no ‘Secular Police association, no ‘Secular Pilots Association’..The religious nutter brigade are clearly defined by their ridiculous beliefs

          2. Look, don’t enage with him. He’ll get bored when no-one responds. Treat his arguments with the attention they deserve.

            Besides, I just think the guy is a joker – clearly not content with his own life he has to try and upset the lives of those around him. Quite sad really.

          3. AGAIN…………….WILL PN GET THIS FVCKER OUT OF HERE>>>>>>>>>>>

          4. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:44am

            Irrelevent… yet again.
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    4. David Myers 6 Sep 2011, 12:36am

      And heterosexuality does not spread AIDS? Idiot troll!

      1. Where did I say that? I have condemned fornication many times on here you slobbering fool. Remind me which group was responsible for the initial rapid acceleration of AIDS and which group is considered highest risk?

        1. …you mean who were among the first victims of AIDS

          Do you know anything about the origin of this virus?

          and have you figured out why a good God would create such a thing??

        2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:45am

          Irrlevent, yet again.
          -
          Protest comment.
          -
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    5. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:44am

      Completely irrelevent, again.
      -
      LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  36. Actually, I would prefer that nobody respond, considering the lies and idiotic replies I have been subject to. I am happy to post my thoughts for perusal, without reply.
    Consider it a gift of enlightenment and accelerated moral learning

    1. Tough, you’re not getting off the hook with your puerile lying and hypocrisy, you offensive Muppet.

      And I hardly think a rambling load of incoherent bible nonsense is a “gift of enlightenment”…. you need to get that schizophrenia seen to, the Clozapine aion’t doing what it should.

    2. Ahh, poor keith. You need some love in your life. I’m sure if someone loved you and you could love someone else, then you wouldn’t be so bitter and twisted and hateful and deluded about gay guys. Go out and meet someone instead of commenting on a website that you hate. It’s such a waste of life. btw, I think your choice of avatars are very camp.

    3. “Consider it a gift of enlightenment and accelerated moral learning”
      What was that about schizophrenics and their tendency for grandiose statements again?
      He’s still labouring under the illusion we value his opinions or consider him some type of oracle.

      1. Agreed. Without doubt this man has a mental health issue.

    4. Keith . . . what a load of sanctimonous vomit you mindless murderous muppet!!!

      1. Murderous?? You look forward to information regarding my personal identity?
        You are coming undone like a cheap suit.
        Toys in the attic …so to speak!

        1. Keith that right . . . what a load of sanctimonous vomit you appear to be decending into you mindless murderous muppet!!!

          1. Cheap suit? . . . so you are not much of a dresser
            .
            Toys in the attic . . . still obessed with children, but continuing to project you paedophile proclivities on to LGBT people
            .
            Murderous? . . . how do you sleep at night with all this murderous rage you express on PN
            .
            Personal identiy . . . so why do you continue to protect who you are?, what particular social identity are you protecting?

        2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:46am

          Irrelevent again stupid!
          =
          LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    5. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:46am

      Time to rid of irrelevent Keith.
      -0
      LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  37. there is no such thing as Gay Rights as per the article. We all have exactly the same rights.
    I have noticed some gay brigade activity however which appears to infringe on heterosexual rights. there are a large number of hotels and Guest houses that by implication, exclude heterosexuals. I have reported this to the EHRC of Great britain as a possible breach under the equalities act. I will post information as to the development of my complaint.
    here are some examples of homosexuals thinking they have the rigt to exclude heterosexuals by implication.
    http://www.rainbowselection.com/en?utm_source=PN&utm_medium=banner&utm_content=buttonman&utm_campaign=2011

    http://guyzhotel.com/

    1. Keith . . . I look forward to more information about your personal identity!!!

      1. To what end?

        1. You know what end!!!

          1. Rear end?

          2. Thats right!!!

    2. Great . . . I look forward to revealing your personal identity!!!!

      1. Sorry sunshine. Try hampstead Heath.

        1. @ Keith. Im confused. You’ve spent alot of time explaining your interpretation of the Genesis account of creation, you’ve used lines of arguement about sex and sexuality which are commonly used by hardline Christian fundamentalists, and now your saying that you don’t endorse any particular religious view. Whats that all about?

          1. You tell me which religion forbids it’s members to go to war as required by Jesus teachings. That’s just for starters. Everyone knows religion is a racket and has zero to do with the bible!

          2. Erm…right…ok. Thats an interesting response. So the bible has nothing to do with religion? Can you explain a little more about what you mean by that.

        2. Keith . . . What is it about Hampstead heath that I need to try?

          1. The toilets?

          2. Are there toilets on Hampstead health?

          3. Well, Keith seems to know where they are…. what a surprise.

    3. Keith -

      You said:

      “there is no such thing as Gay Rights as per the article. We all have exactly the same rights.”

      Yes, we all have exactly the same rights !!!!!

      And gay rights are human rights, just as Hillary Clinton said when she visited Uganda a few months ago.

    4. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:47am

      No barring. Totally irrelevent.
      -
      Protest comment.
      -
      LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  38. Keith wrote
    “Murderous?? You look forward to information regarding my personal identity?
    You are coming undone like a cheap suit.
    Toys in the attic …so to speak!”
    .
    . . . . . . . . . .

    Keith, thanks for making it clear that your mission here is not only to harrass LGBT people, but to also to attempt to harm them emotionally as well!
    .

    1. Mission??
      You go too far!
      I was just passing through but encountered some religiophobic bigots en route and dealt accordingly.
      Can’t see myself staying too long, can’t seem to find any intelligent life.

      1. Good
        .
        Well P**s off then

      2. Showing up here and calling us all disgusting is not exactly what I would call ‘passing through’.

        Now you know what being responsible for what you say really means, because we have given you an accelerated sexual education while you have taught us nothing we didn’t already know.

      3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:48am

        Irrlevent, again. Will the homophobia on these threads ever be tackled by PinkNews?
        =-
        LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

      4. “Can’t see myself staying too long, can’t seem to find any intelligent life.”

        Well, I can’t seem to find any of your comments any more…..

        heh heh heh

    2. “Keith, thanks for making it clear that your mission here is not only to harrass LGBT people, but to also to attempt to harm them emotionally as well!”
      But it is okay to harass ‘H’ people and falsely accuse them?

      1. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth
        .
        The Bible curiously, is supporting all PN readers who take a pot shot at you!!!
        .
        Now where is my Big . . .

        1. The biblical mandate is regarding punishment after trial, not revenge. Just like in law, you cannot take revenge but must leave it to the law to administer fair (eye for eye) punishment.
          It comes a sno surprise that you misinterpreted that passage since you have misinterpreted every other aspect of scripture you have quoted.

          1. Keith
            .
            Pink news readers gave you a fair trial, and you were found guilty.
            .

          2. …and the sentence? Message wipe out. How futile all his efforts were :)

      2. Please provide a link..

      3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:48am

        Irrelevent. We are not up for debate.

    3. @John K
      Here is the info you seek.
      I must say the gay brigade are very well organized in matters of moral perversion. The perverted heteros have a bit of catching up to do…

      http://www.pinkuk.com/listings/venue.aspx?id=377
      http://www.pinkuk.com/listings/cruising/cruisingListing.aspx?cid=2

      1. I can see that you are not only fascinated by Gay crusing sites, but you also seek out information about them?

        1. He knows too much about a lot of gay stuff, and focuses on the acts of a few which he perceives as negative…. I smell “ex-gay”

          1. He seems to quote “The Devil Wears Prada” an awful lot for a guy who’s supposedly heterosexual and anti gay. How many times has he posted Meryl Streep’s power-bitch catchphrase from that movie now?
            “That is all”.

          2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 2:29pm

            I question your use of the ‘ex’ in there. More like closet.

      2. Keith
        .
        How odd, I typed into google “dogging uk” and it gave me 4,050,000 results
        .
        Clearly you hetereosexuals are not only well organized, but it appears that most tesco car-parks are hetersexual dogging sites.
        .
        Filthy perverts, which dogging site do frequent then Keith?

      3. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:49am

        Again, irrelevent, creepy Keith
        -
        LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  39. Shouldn’t that be…”Where Are there toilets on Hampstead health?”

    1. No!!!
      .
      The question was
      .
      “Are there toilets on Hampstead health?”

      1. Yes there are. Clapham Common also has some if that is more convenient!

        1. So what you are saying is that there are only two gay crusing sites in London?, but yet most Tesco carparks are heterosexual dogging sites
          .
          OMG – what filthy perverts you heterosexuals are!!!

          1. Yes. All fornicators are disgusting perverts.. Nice to hear it from you for a chamge!
            My time has not been wasted.

          2. I was using the term rhetorically. Moreover, to highlight the hypocrisy concerning heterosexual promiscuity, which allthough ignored by you, appears to be mainstream rather than peripheral

          3. JohnK –

            I understood your use of the words ‘filthy perverts’, and I could see how Gumbo would jump on any morsel that falls from your table to denigrate you.

            I’m waiting for Keith/Gumbo to tell me what the bible (his only moral guide) has to say about pedophilia…

            I mean specifically about pedophilia…

          4. Jonpol
            .
            Exactly
            .
            I am trying economy of words this evening – Lol

          5. “My time has not been wasted.”

            Yeah, the sea of deleted comments are not a waste of time! LOL! Oh, mercy, I am laughing at you….. this is just too good!

          6. Last comment directed at Keith, not John…. sorry, laughing too much to bother to reread how my comments look!

          7. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:51am

            Again Keith = Irrelevent.
            -
            LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

    2. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:50am

      Again, completely irrelevent.
      -
      Protest comment.
      -
      Please join in peeps.
      -
      LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  40. Why has the format of the last comments in this thread been changed.. ???

  41. Jock S. Trap 9 Sep 2011, 9:51am

    BS – irrelevent.
    -
    LGBTQI people are NOT up for debate on this site!!

  42. To hear a child of 8 or 9 years old say to his parents, when asked if he’d like a certain paid of jeans, to hear the child say “It looks gay” just shows you how narrow minded and uneducated the parents could be. Note I said could be, not ‘are’….

  43. Go Sara!!!!

    And don’t forget to sue the school for thousands of $ for hurt feelings over this unnecessary event. Its the 21st Century, and there is no place for this type of thing to happen!

  44. Gumbo-

    the word ‘fornication’ is obsolete because it implies a moral judgement.

    The proper expression is ‘sexual intercourse’.

  45. who cares?

  46. I never said that, Gumbo.

    You are mistaken.

  47. “The bible does not mention paedophilia”, you said.

    Obviously, I ask because you have said time and time again that your only moral guide is the bible, and also said that pedophilia is homosexual fortification.

    So if the bible, which you say contains God’s law, says nothing about pedophilia, and the bible is your only moral guide, what leads you to believe that pedophilia is against God’s law?

    “proably due to the fact that it is a psychiatric disorder and psychiatry is a modern branch of medicine.” is hardly the kind of intelligent answer I was expecting from an enlightened teacher like you, Gumbo.

    I’d like to know the names of the authors in your collection.

    And btw, it was me, not JohnK, who asked you the question.

  48. *** forNication… such an obsolete word… sexual intercourse is the correct term..

  49. Gumbo -

    You have always said that the bible is your only moral guide. This is the very first time you mention the conscience, and the term ‘biblical principles’.

    I think you are coming along then… thanks to our accelerated sexual education.

  50. @Keith …you claim that you do not endorse any particular religious perspective, and yet at several points in this dialogue you have done just that. I don’t understand how you can deny that you endorse a particular religious viewpoint when it has become very clear that your outlook on life has its foundation in hardline conservative Christian fundamentalistism. I would point out that a great of what you have said is not supported by biblical scholarship or among Christian academics and that your attitude and demeaner in this dialogue has been anything but Christ-like or Christian. You have employed several fallacious lines of arguement which cast serious doubt on the credibility and truthfulness of your assertions. Little or nothing that you said here would stand up to the scrutiny of logical and objective critical thinking and analysis, rigurous scientific testing, or biblical scholarship and criticism. You can come back at me and call me every name under the sun all you like

  51. I have spoken with and encountered alot of people like you. You don’t intimidate me and you are not my intellectual or moral superior.

  52. “Back Thursday for more accelerated moral classes.”
    .
    So Keith, what are you doing on Wednesday, we might descend into moral and spiritual depravity without your persistent guidance?

  53. “Hard to know the difference when both Johns are idiots.”
    .
    What happened to the nobility of debate? Feeling the heat of defeat already.
    .
    What a poor loser you are

  54. Keith/Gumbo -

    Ha ha ha… you sleaze…

    Have you stoned any adulterers lately … if not, why not?

  55. “It teaches us to use our conscience”

    LOL!

    Yeah, how to have sex with our siblings, and our daughters, hoew to muyrder, how the earth is flat, how god like to get his kicks out sending old farts up a mountain to butcher their kids then change his mind, how to get eaten by a whale and survive, how to stone women for being unclean, how to kill your neighbours if they do not burn offerings that please god…

    …riddled with useful and consistent information – useful for someone with a lobotomy and/or the IQ of a banana! LOL!

  56. I’ve done my homework on theology, the psychology of authoritarian, legalistic, totalitarian religious cults, biblical scholarship, critical thinking and analysis, the philosophy of religion and of ethics, among other things. So I already know that your full of bullsh!t, so dont think that you can intimidate me with your pseudo-religious scare tactics and your self-righteous posturing.

  57. blow it out your ear..

  58. “Sexual intercourse between a man and wife is not fornication.”

    What do you call it when you have sex with your sister? Do you remember what the doctors told you the term was when you were caught?

  59. Gumbo is so confused he can neither read nor spell properly. Needs a break…eh, eh…

  60. Jonpol
    .
    How does Keith manage to function in the complex modern world, with only an ancient collection of fables as his guide. So to speak!
    .
    As you mentioned, our accelrated moral and sexual education, free of charged might help this poor deluded individual.

  61. As someone pointed out the other day, Keith’s major problem is that he has interpreted (St.) John’s use of the term “Word” to mean the Torah instead of the Greek “Logos”.

    In terms of theology, it seems to me that would prevent him from arriving at the concept of the Trinity. In fact, Keith has yet to mention the Holy spirit in any of his comments.

    Also, he has fiddled around with biblical verses in such a way that he actually believes that a good God has ordained him to hate, and to hate homosexuals in particular.

    I’m no expert, but if I believed in a good God and was ordained by God to hate… I would use head and question either the goodness of God, or my interpretation of his “word”.

  62. JohnK -

    Have you ever heard of A.J. Jacobs?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5MkpzMAOZM

    and there’s more where that came from.. :D

  63. Good grief, you did it twice…and you don’t remember?

    Do you believe in the Trinity then?

  64. Keith –

    No, I am not an expert in exegesis, and neither are you.

    You could never pass for a biblical scholar because you are using selected texts to support your prejudices and your hatred.

    That in itself is a perversion of God’s word… if in fact the bible is God’s word…and if in fact God does exist.

    If you believe that God exists, do you really believe in God, a Christian God of love?

  65. Yeah, lets go kill anyone that wears two threads and eats shrimp too.

    You compete fcuking idiot.

    I see some of your comments are gone, Keith? Ahhhhhh. How sad.

  66. Will -

    It looks to me that Keith’s comments are being deleted… and the format here is screwed up… mmm…looks like housework..

  67. “Yeah, lets go kill anyone that wears two threads and eats shrimp too.”
    .
    Will – and do not forget the Goat sacrifices as well!!!, perhaps this is what he is doing on his annouced day off!!!
    .
    Lol

  68. Hi Jonpol
    .
    Thanks for the link, I will take a look.

  69. “No, I am not an expert in exegesis, and neither are you”
    .
    Jonpol, this is it in a nutshell.
    As if this Muppet has studied exegesis beyond dipping in and out of a rather crude “Fundmentalist Concordance”

  70. An old high school buddy of mine went right off the deep end using a ‘concordance’ all by himself… like he had re-discovered the wheel… no-one could tell him anything… sad, but true.

    But he was nowhere as offensive as Keith…

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all