Jump to content

LGBT education puts young at higher risk of grooming according to C of E Vicar


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, InigoMontoya said:

Non sequitur.

 

 

Concentrate on the issue that he is a bigot who is inciting hatred.

 

Substitute "Jew" for "Gay" in his statement and it's become a de jure criminal offence.

Wrong. If he's inciting hatred, it's crime whether it is based on religion or sexual orientation.

Then it becomes a debate if his comment is just misinformed stupidity or hate speech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Mister M said:

He can't substantiate his opinion, just a case of a bigot putting 2 & 2 together and coming up with 5.

Why would he , because its his OPINION . Everyone is entitled to their opinion on issues , it dosnt make anyones more or less valid than someone with a different opinion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest makapaka
19 minutes ago, Penistone999 said:

Why would he , because its his OPINION . Everyone is entitled to their opinion on issues , it dosnt make anyones more or less valid than someone with a different opinion. 

Yes he’s  entitled to his opinion - absolutely.

 

It does make it less valid if people can explain why it’s wrong - like if my opinion is I can flap my arms and fly over the Sheffield arena - I’m entitled to my opinion but it would be wrong.

 

and if someone says a teacher explaining to children about LGBT people is sexual grooming they are an idiot -  but you’re right they are still entitled to their opinion.

 

 the Church of England have also said they disagree with his opinion.

 

so it seems not many people agree with their opinion - but they are entitled to it - you’re right.

 

do you agree with their opinion? 

 

Edited by makapaka
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Penistone999 said:

Why would he , because its his OPINION . Everyone is entitled to their opinion on issues , it dosnt make anyones more or less valid than someone with a different opinion. 

You sound like the conspiracy theorists - just because you can establish that it i was only 99.99% certain the twin towers collapsed due to plane strikes and fires they maintain their crazy theories (no planes, mini nukes etc) are equally valid.

Edited by Longcol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Penistone999 said:

Why would he , because its his OPINION . Everyone is entitled to their opinion on issues , it dosnt make anyones more or less valid than someone with a different opinion. 

Of course it's less valid. In the same way if I said in my opinion earth worms can talk if we only had the technology to hear them, you'd think I was talking out of my hat, much like reverend wassisname.

 

He's completely free to voice his opinions but it doesn't make it fact and others are equally free to call him out on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Penistone999 said:

Why would he , because its his OPINION . Everyone is entitled to their opinion on issues , it dosnt make anyones more or less valid than someone with a different opinion. 

This is the post truth world that Trump and his supporters dream of. No facts, just fake news.

People can, and will make up their own minds about the validity of his opinion. It wouldn't take them too long to realise that he's conflating sexuality with predatory behaviour, and trying to make a correlation between same sex attraction and abuse. Two completely different things. Not opinion, just a fact.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, makapaka said:

Yes he’s  entitled to his opinion - absolutely.

 

 

and if someone says a teacher explaining to children about LGBT people is sexual grooming they are an idiot -  but you’re right they are still entitled to their opinion.

 

 

He said teaching them about LGBT issues makes them susceptible to grooming.

I assume he meant by third parties outside of school, not the teacher, or the teaching is grooming.

I disagree with him, on my understanding, but your reading of it is different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest makapaka
49 minutes ago, Voice of reason said:

He said teaching them about LGBT issues makes them susceptible to grooming.

I assume he meant by third parties outside of school, not the teacher, or the teaching is grooming.

I disagree with him, on my understanding, but your reading of it is different.

With respect your understanding isn’t correct. He called it state sponsored child abuse and that the RSE programme was child grooming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.