A
Andy
Guest
i doubt he protests that much when Dave and Mark pop round for a quiet evening... other than when they leave 
Andy_sx
Andy_sx
Currently reading:
OT - Censored or Not?
O
Ozric-Al
Guest
OK, in response to the original question - Not. It's quite simple - if you don't like it don't look. Same as if you don't like seeing willys on TV don't look, turn the channel over. I do exactly the same when Big Brother comes on. Complete and utter waste of energy programmes like that so I don't watch it.
"Doctor said to give up Keee-Babs. I said 'No, no-no'"
"Doctor said to give up Keee-Babs. I said 'No, no-no'"
M
Matt
Guest
Are we talking about should kissing be banned or just gay kissing from year books?
Because ALL kissing has been banned from year books it kind of makes the whole gay thing moot.
Because ALL kissing has been banned from year books it kind of makes the whole gay thing moot.
O
Ozric-Al
Guest
I think the original post is relating to this incidence of censorship alone so you're right, why has it been reported? Sensationalism no doubt.
"Doctor said to give up Keee-Babs. I said 'No, no-no'"
"Doctor said to give up Keee-Babs. I said 'No, no-no'"
A
Anonymous
Guest
What the **** is happening to this place ???
Is this a car forum ? Why have we all started getting overtly political all of a sudden ?
Some of the comments in this thread are just pure, bigoted homophobia. And we are seeing more of this ignorant ******** on this forum every day.
It beggars belief how some of you lack the intelligence and basic common sense required to be a human being. It's ****ing awful **** to see predjudiced, knuckle dragging lowlifes make sickening comments like these.
I used to love this place.
It's turned into a ****ing cess pit now. I hope you all rot in the festering **** you have created here.
And what really grates, is that the large proportion of dumb ****s who post here aren't even ****ing members !!
(And yes, I get the irony that I'm not a member either)
Is this a car forum ? Why have we all started getting overtly political all of a sudden ?
Some of the comments in this thread are just pure, bigoted homophobia. And we are seeing more of this ignorant ******** on this forum every day.
It beggars belief how some of you lack the intelligence and basic common sense required to be a human being. It's ****ing awful **** to see predjudiced, knuckle dragging lowlifes make sickening comments like these.
I used to love this place.
It's turned into a ****ing cess pit now. I hope you all rot in the festering **** you have created here.
And what really grates, is that the large proportion of dumb ****s who post here aren't even ****ing members !!
(And yes, I get the irony that I'm not a member either)
M
mick calvert
Guest
here mate i think you want to talk to his guy:
A
Andy
Guest
ok anon, personally i think you need to calm down a bit, and if your going to have a pop at alot of us, why not have the descency and balls to out your name to it
while i dont necessarily agree with what some have said in this thread, i respect that they have their own views and beliefs and even to an extent a comfort zone, hence i didnt make a post like yourself
Andy_sx
while i dont necessarily agree with what some have said in this thread, i respect that they have their own views and beliefs and even to an extent a comfort zone, hence i didnt make a post like yourself
Andy_sx
E
Ed
Guest
Actually mate, i think you'll find that however distasteful their opinions are to you, you have to respect them. Just as they will respect yours.
i should add, thats @ anon
____________________________________________________________
1.2 Bravo 80 SX
i should add, thats @ anon
____________________________________________________________
1.2 Bravo 80 SX
OP
OP
Ian
Guest
Oh look, I put a name on my post...
I wonder who's posting this post..
hmm.
TROLL!!!
I wonder who's posting this post..
hmm.
TROLL!!!
D
donny lad
Guest
i reckon he should give dr phill a ring, theres nothing that ,man cant sort out lol hes like a god
S
scotty
Guest
(Bigoted homophobia!!!) ware are you seeing any evidance of that???, I ask the man with no name.
Scotty.
Scotty.
OP
OP
Ian
Guest
I like the fact that this thread wasn't deleted even if this is not the time nor the place to debate whether two gays should be printed in an American Yearbook.
It's taken one idiot to flame people who's opinions are negative towards homosexuality, like myself, and all hell has nearly broke lose.
I think it's you that need to get a grip Anonymous as I am no way a homophobe.
FYI, I used to work in a gay restraunt, so to speak - 14 employees, 3 were straight, one being myself.
No, the Carlberg wasn't trying to pull a fast one on the Guinness.
It's taken one idiot to flame people who's opinions are negative towards homosexuality, like myself, and all hell has nearly broke lose.
I think it's you that need to get a grip Anonymous as I am no way a homophobe.
FYI, I used to work in a gay restraunt, so to speak - 14 employees, 3 were straight, one being myself.
No, the Carlberg wasn't trying to pull a fast one on the Guinness.
E
Ed
Guest
i don't get the carslberg joke.. n i'm drinking export rite now...
incidentally there is no reason for this thread to be deleted, nothing has been said thats is against any law. Or rule of the forum for that matter.
____________________________________________________________
1.2 Bravo 80 SX
incidentally there is no reason for this thread to be deleted, nothing has been said thats is against any law. Or rule of the forum for that matter.
____________________________________________________________
1.2 Bravo 80 SX
O
Ozric-Al
Guest
@ Anon - I have had a good look through this thread following your less than appropriate challenge to ensure there is nothing that could be classed as homophobic or in any way bigoted. I have even asked a Gay work colleague to have a read and we have both come to the same conclusions: -
People have merely stated THEIR OWN OPINION in a way that relates to the nature of homosexuality. In the purest sense homosexuality is against natures way and is therefore wrong. However, no-one has stated that BEING homosexual is wrong and have, in certain posts, almost defended the right to choose. We both agree that this is a fairly balanced view and typical of society (and current legislation) as a whole.
Personally, I don't agree with many of the posts on here as I believe it's the individuals right to choose. I also believe it is the individuals right to choose how they display their affections. The fact is that in many countries it is frowned upon for heterosexual couples to make outward displays of affection in public, e.g. Thailand. Personally I think it's great to see people displaying affection in public and would certainly have no problem with the picture that this post originally referred to because if it did upset me I would just not look at it. The fact that it doesn't upset me perhaps exhibits a level of maturity and confidence in my own sexuality that you and others do not have.
Looking at the thread the only post that is really offensive is yours. If you cannot see that I suggest you grow up and have a word with yourself. At the end of the day people are always going to have opinions on everything and anything and we all have the right to hold opinions different to those of others. As I said before, nothing up to your post has been offensive and has at worst, been bar-room banter of a quite innocent nature. I see no reason to lock the post or delete any messages and I will even leave your inappropriate tirade alone as I am quite impressed with the way that people have responded to it (well, so far anyway).
"Doctor said to give up Keee-Babs. I said 'No, no-no'"
People have merely stated THEIR OWN OPINION in a way that relates to the nature of homosexuality. In the purest sense homosexuality is against natures way and is therefore wrong. However, no-one has stated that BEING homosexual is wrong and have, in certain posts, almost defended the right to choose. We both agree that this is a fairly balanced view and typical of society (and current legislation) as a whole.
Personally, I don't agree with many of the posts on here as I believe it's the individuals right to choose. I also believe it is the individuals right to choose how they display their affections. The fact is that in many countries it is frowned upon for heterosexual couples to make outward displays of affection in public, e.g. Thailand. Personally I think it's great to see people displaying affection in public and would certainly have no problem with the picture that this post originally referred to because if it did upset me I would just not look at it. The fact that it doesn't upset me perhaps exhibits a level of maturity and confidence in my own sexuality that you and others do not have.
Looking at the thread the only post that is really offensive is yours. If you cannot see that I suggest you grow up and have a word with yourself. At the end of the day people are always going to have opinions on everything and anything and we all have the right to hold opinions different to those of others. As I said before, nothing up to your post has been offensive and has at worst, been bar-room banter of a quite innocent nature. I see no reason to lock the post or delete any messages and I will even leave your inappropriate tirade alone as I am quite impressed with the way that people have responded to it (well, so far anyway).
"Doctor said to give up Keee-Babs. I said 'No, no-no'"
B
Buzz
Guest
well, for me its this simple:
If photographs of heterosexual kissing are permitted, then there is absolutely nothing wrong with the photograph above representing homosexual kissing.
On the other hand if kissing isn't allowed to be shown at all, then i wonder what the editor/teacher-supervisor was thinking when allowing this, apart from deliberately allowing it to stir up debate?
I guess for me the question isn't really about wether a homosexual kiss photo should be printed in a yearbook, because we dont have all the facts.
Buzz
The champion of the Bravo 1.4 & now ex owner of a Bravo 1.8
If photographs of heterosexual kissing are permitted, then there is absolutely nothing wrong with the photograph above representing homosexual kissing.
On the other hand if kissing isn't allowed to be shown at all, then i wonder what the editor/teacher-supervisor was thinking when allowing this, apart from deliberately allowing it to stir up debate?
I guess for me the question isn't really about wether a homosexual kiss photo should be printed in a yearbook, because we dont have all the facts.
Buzz
The champion of the Bravo 1.4 & now ex owner of a Bravo 1.8