Are Gay Pride Marches Past Their Sell By Date?

[Mister M]

12 minutes ago, Jack Grey said:

So basically all religions are discriminative? 

 

They all say being gay is wrong 

 

So anyone who follows the Bible or Koran should be prosecuted?

No, the law is significantly more nuanced than that.

[Jack Grey]

4 minutes ago, Mister M said:

No, the law is significantly more nuanced than that.

Laws don't work if they are grey

 

They have to be black or white

 

My posts are all about who decides what is hate speech

 

Because no matter what you say it's gonna offend someone 

[Delayed]

18 minutes ago, Jack Grey said:

So basically all religions are discriminative? 

 

They all say being gay is wrong 

 

So anyone who follows the Bible or Koran should be prosecuted?

I follow the bible.

 

I'm not prosecuted because I don't go around quoting the bible and I don't allow the bible to influence my decisions at work.

 

Because to do so would be................ that's right....... discriminatory.......ta dah

Just now, Jack Grey said:

 

My posts are all about who decides what is hate speech

 

 

Police and Courts have the final say

[Mister M]

1 minute ago, Jack Grey said:

Laws don't work if they are grey

 

They have to be black or white

 

My posts are all about who decides what is hate speech

 

Because no matter what you say it's gonna offend someone 

That's why we have Parliament to frame the law, and judges to interpret the law.

[Jack Grey]

The only law within a democracy should be that you can say what ever you like

 

It's a simple as that 

[Anna B]

14 minutes ago, Mister M said:

That's why we have Parliament to frame the law, and judges to interpret the law.

Well one would think so, but if the law isn't clear all sorts of chaos ensues, and the only one's to benefit are the greedy lawyers. And mistakes are made. Not good enough.

[Magilla]

16 minutes ago, Mister M said:

That's why we have Parliament to frame the law, and judges to interpret the law.

...and juries, to evaluate each case on it's merits.

[Delayed]

1 minute ago, Anna B said:

Well one would think so, but if the law isn't clear all sorts of chaos ensues, and the only one's to benefit are the greedy lawyers. And mistakes are made. Not good enough.

Our equality and discrimination laws are perfectly clear though 

[Magilla]

2 minutes ago, Jack Grey said:

The only law within a democracy should be that you can say what ever you like

 

It's a simple as that 

Which you absolutely can do...

 

...but that does not, and should not, insulate you from any potential consequences from doing so.

[Chekhov]

On 29/07/2023 at 19:00, altus said:

Gay men's sperm works just as well as straight men's sperm does. A gay son is just as capable of producing an offspring that is every bit as biologically related to you as a straight son is.

Your implication that a gay son having a child is no problem, and could just as easily have a child as a straight son is, I feel, somewhat economical with the actualité.....

In the first place how exactly can two men have a child ? They cannot (however much this mad woke world of ours might regret that biological fact).

A surrogate is required which I would not have thought would be that easy to find.

Second, whose sperm would be used, and therefore who would actually be the father ? In some ways I don't want to emphasise this too much because adoptive parents are every bit parents as far as I am concerned, but they are not, as you put it, biologically related.

Third, what is the child going to think ? Surely he will want to know who his mum is and why he has not got one.