A friend responds
August 11th, 2010 at 12:00 pm by David FarrarA friend of mine sent me the e-mail below, in response to my heated posts at what Hone Harawira said. He has given me permission to blog it:
Hi David
Have thought long and hard about saying something after reading your blog on Hone’s comments at the weekend.
I too disagree with Hone’s stance (yet another legacy of his mother) but, please be careful not to guild the lily to prove him wrong. Things are improving rapidly in terms of people being colour blind in good old Aotearoa/NZ. However, my observation and own personal experience tells me this is has been more in the last two decades and most particularly the last 10 years.
It was the 40s when my grandmother was refused a bank account in Te Awamutu because she was Maori. A young pakeha lawyer found her outside in the main street crying and asked her what was wrong. She told him and they got talking. He asked her what her maiden name was – Guildford. He took her back inside and they let her open an account in her maiden name.
Later that decade my father – her oldest son – got strapped at school for speaking Maori.
It was the 60s when my Dad experienced tension and discomfort when my mum’s family there was general unease about Maori and Pakeha getting together. Mum and Dad were lucky that her wonderful parents came round. That then saw them commented about in suburban Christchurch. It was at this time that they were both at teachers college and Dad was told: “Only one thing worse than a Maori teacher. Is one that thinks he’s clever.” Well, he was. A straight A student, letters in piano, and a fine singer.
This is within the “50 years ago” that you mentioned, but the legacy of such things still linger is my whanau.
However, it was only the mid to late 80s when I was banned from going into Cathedral Square in Christchurch. The city I was born in. Because it wasn’t safe for Maori to do so. I’m hardly the darkest hori you’ll ever come across.
That morphed in the 90s into a lot of non-Maori creating different categories of Maori. On a number of occasions I got comments like: “You’re not like those Maoris…. Bloody Maoris… Oh, but we don’t mean you.”
Yes things are changing. For the better. Most of that change has been in the last 30 years and most of that in the last decade. Lets not over ice the cake.
My correspondent is right that it is more the last two decades, that has seen racism become unacceptable, than the last 50 years. I regard true prejudice as so illogical and stupid, that I probably do tend to minimise that it does occur. And also there is a difference between life in urban Wellington and other parts of NZ.
Of course I stand by my point that you don’t fight prejudice with your own prejudice.
I regard myself lucky to have lived in this generation. Not only do we get air travel, the Internet etc, but we also live in a time when human rights have never been stronger.
It is amazing that only 100 or so years ago women were not even allowed to vote. Up until the 1970s Maori could not vote on the general roll. The US still had segregation up until the 1960s. It was basically a criminal offence to have gay sex up until the 1980s. I’m living through part of the change. Future generations will look back with bemusement at our history.
Tags: Hone Harawira, racism
August 11th, 2010 at 12:09 pm
Again, you are comparing ‘homosexuality’ with racism and it is not the same thing. Racism is is discrimination based on the color of someone’s skin, whereas homosexuality is based on human preference or desire.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 12:12 pm
In my experience, rural NZ is very racist. I am sure the same is true for a lot of urban NZ, but as I mix in, shall we say, more ‘educated circles’ in the city, I am probably a lot less exposed to it than I might otherwise be.
The difference with more educated circles is that the racism is hidden beneath the veneer of political correctness – it is a learnt skill to avoid partaking in the racism commentary or action (hence ‘educated’), but I am pretty sure its still there, below the surface – you don’t escape such a dominant paradigm in such a short amount of time…
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 12:13 pm
Maybe I’m missing the point… but doesn’t the fact that “things are improving rapidly in terms of people being colour blind in good old Aotearoa/NZ” (a sentiment with which I agree wholeheartedly) in fact justify your “rant” that Hone is an anachronistic racist with no place in Parliament?
The fact that other Maori Hone’s age and older – despite enduring the privations outlined in your friend’s letter, and endured by your friend – have matured into people who don’t harbour such hatred further supports your thesis.
It’s hard to rise above our pejudices, especially when we’ve been victimised by an identifiable group and thus it’s easy to characterise all members of that group as bad. I know I’m guilty of this when it comes to the police (there’s good and bad amongst them… I keep pointing up the bad because so many here seem to believe they’re all good. And infallible). But in my own defence, at least that’s based on voluntary membership of a group and thus concscious and willing acceptance of its prevailing cultural norms, not an uncontrolled marker like race.
(BTW I’m out today, so apologies for lack of response to any responses)
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 12:21 pm
Touching sob story. Has “Tara Te Heke” made her return? NZ will never be ‘colour blind’ with a racist party full of fuck wits like John Hatfield.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 12:23 pm
“It is amazing that only 100 or so years ago women were not even allowed to vote.”
Well, that’s a debatable benefit given the greater percentage by far are either totally brainwashed feminazis or screaming yabbering far left liberals. Thank God for standouts like Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin and Ann Coulter.
BTW, is your friend for or against the Maori Party, (racist by name and nature), and the “Maori” seats?
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 12:24 pm
Lost me at Aotearoa/NZ.
No such nation exists and never has. “Aotearoa” was a geographic feature, not a political unity.
You can’t communicate when you throw your audience away in the first paragraph.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 12:27 pm
What has what happened 40 years ago to this person’s family got to do with Harawira not wanting his children to marry non-Maori?
Intermarriage has been traditionally high in NZ, but this is now opposed openly by some Maori – Harawira and others, such as the Ngai Tahu’s Tahu Potiki in a recent article in the Christchurch Press.
IMHO, the charitable view is that it is Maori fear of losing their identity in the population melting pot. Or that Harawira and Tahu are merely being open about their prejudices (though prejudices generally run deeper than those admitted to).
As for the writer being excluded from Christchurch Cathedral, I am highly surprised. It is a very tolerant institution, and for example has had Muslims addressing its flock. Those running the show seem happy-clappy liberals.
However, I accept it occured. I know of similar incidents, such as one I observed of an older apparently non-Maori man being forced off the footpath in central Christchurch on an evening by a row of early-teenage Polynesians. Both he, and I when I went to him, accepted it as youthful hooliganism rather than racism. Perhaps there was some non-racist reason for the writer’s incident.
I am sceptical that young Maori were strapped for speaking Maori and solely for speaking Maori in NZ schools from the 1950s on. Speaking English may have been the rule, but where is the independent evidence that Maori kids from the 1950s on were strapped for speaking Maori?
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 12:36 pm
IMHO present-day Auckland leads the way in the multiculturalism of NZ by far, and for a much deeper reason than just the obvious one that that’s where most Asian, middle-eastern and PI immigrants live.
Unlike even Wellington, in Akl Johnny Foreigner is your customer, your supplier, your neighbour, your colleague and your good mate and drinking buddy. Old prejudices like “The Chinese this, the Islanders that, the Maoris the other” such as DPF’s correspondent describe simply can’t survive other than through a VERY concerted effort.
To an extent you can often characterise people by their ethnicity (where they still value it and haven’t become quintessential blah New Zealanders in all but skin tone) because like it or not there are traits that make the Chinese who they are, the Samoans who they are, and it would be ridiculous to pretend those don’t exist. So someone’s ethnicity is a feature just as their nice hair is, or their love of teeny-bopper music is, or their flash car is.
Constant immersion in a truly multi-cultural city breeds a more mature view of race, where you judge a man purely by his deeds, but his ethnicity if an attribute of him.. and it’s not something taboo that must never be mentioned. It is something – invariably positive – that just is. But it is worlds apart from olde New Zealand sentiments about “the Maoris.”
In Auckland I wouldn’t hesitate to mention in any company that I have to go meet my mate Jack the Chinese dude with the flash Honda later, and everyone present would know that I meant exactly what I said, there was no implied “dirty f*cking” between “the” and “Chinese dude” for example. The rest of the country – and I include Wellington in this – still has some way to go to catch up to this.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 12:37 pm
When we highlight the strapping for speaking “Te Reo”, the refusal to open a bank account for a maori, the ingrained attutudes of some pakeha to racial intermarriage and similar thinking that was the norm some years ago, we do so with a level of faith that the majority of New Zealanders see that behaviour and thinking as fundamentally wrong.
However, there are still those whose thinking is linked to certain prejudices that the majority of New Zealanders accept to be wrong, and Hone Harawira would appear to have placed himself on the wrong side of that line.
Yes, the changes have happened in the last 50 years, and faster still in the last 10. Would your correspondant prefer a slower pace of change?
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 12:39 pm
c’mom Jack in the 50′s my father was strapped & wrapped over the knuckles with a ruler for the heinous crime of writing with his left hand, it doesn’t take to much imagination to think you’d be strapped for speaking a ‘foreign’ in school, & the Square was a dangerous place for a ‘darkie’ to be seen at certain times.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 12:40 pm
no, he is comparing homophobia with rascism, and yes, it is the same thing, born out of stupidity, ignorance and intolerance.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 12:40 pm
…I should add that I make the above comment as an escapee of Auckland now living in the capital.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 12:41 pm
I can understand and sympathise with that post. I grew up in rural Taranaki and one thing I recall from my childhood days is my father marching in a ‘No Maoris no Tour ‘demonstration’ in Hawera. Yet I can also recall vividly being asked “Have you washed your hands yet” and when I replied “No” being told “Do it now, you don’t want to be like the Maoris. That destroyed the respect I had for my father for taking the stand he did over the Tour. Confusing? Not really. That was rural NZ in the 1950s.
I count myself fortunate to have spent over two decades in the military. I was able to experience Maoridom at its best and learn from it. I take a degree of pride being able to sing our National Anthem in Te Rao. Don’t have to much of a problem with the Maori flag either in the same way as I can understand why some in England choose to fly the ‘Cross of St George’.
But Hone leaves me cold because he is stuck in a time warp grievance mode when in fact he and his ilke are being left behind by a burgeoning Maori middle class who can see the way forward and it’s not Hone’s way.
Sir Aparina Ngata said words to the effect that State welfare will destroy my people. He’s was right in spades. Welfareism and the belief that the State has a greater responsibility than the individual to provide is a dependancy trap exacerbated by the use of the Waitangi Tribunal process by the unscruplous to nurture a Cargo Cult mentality among those who want to believe.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 12:48 pm
Having been a young un in Christchurch in the 80s I can tell you it was not the Maoris to be feared of in the Square but the punk rockers with their dyed spikey hair-dos and the monarchist Wizard (and maybe that guy with the radio up against the ear all the time going “yeah, yeah yeah”). But after a run at Wizards on Gloucester St and a couple of bucks spent at The Dog House, we were all mates. Those were the days.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 12:51 pm
“Lost me at Aotearoa/NZ.”
Murray- that’s the name the Maori claim they gave to New Zealand after they arrived from Hawaii and displaced the original inhabitants. Of course there are a hundred questions of logic surrounding the application of this appellation, but none of the ruling elite, desperately prostrating themselves to racism and political correctness in order to remain on the government sycophant’s gravy train, are going to break the mould and ask them.
For example, how could a number of geographically and culturally separate tribes with no written language and who mainly waged war upon each other, agree on a name for the whole land mass? Impossible. It is a myth that NZ was called Aotearoa.
Its just typical of the PC bullshit and reverse racism this country is drowning in, and that the ruling elite brainwash our gullible, naive and innocent kids with, and attempt to shove down our throats in huge quantities daily.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 12:54 pm
^^^Lost me at Hawaiki = Hawaii. FAIL – go directly to history class, do not pass go, do not collect $200. Idiot.
Someone else had to point this out to you yesterday, clearly your faculty for learning things you don’t want to know is pretty poor.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 1:00 pm
Jack5, he said Cathedral Square, not the Cathedral itself. There was a much stronger and open skin-head presence in ChCh then.
However, some balance. Your friend has possibly shown some prejudices of his own, probably inadvertently.
Have they considered that the recommendation that they avoid Cathedral Square was not a Maori thing, but because skinheads targeted Asians, Africans and Arabs as well as Maori? Being advised of dangerous places isn’t racism. It isn’t nice being told that you shouldn’t go places, but when I was in Johannesburg in the 90′s, I didn’t take advice to stay out of the city centre as racism against white people. I took it as well meaning advice to keep me safe.
Have they considered that being strapped for speaking Maori was not because it was being Maori. As someone else said, in the 70′s my sister was rapped across the knuckles with a steel ruler because she wrote with her left hand, and she was also punished for speaking Dutch. There was a very wide streak of intolerance in all schools at that time, it wasn’t limited to Maori.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 1:01 pm
“got strapped at school for speaking Maori”
Vote:Crikey thats nothing I got strapped for speaking English at school in 1955 on the accusation of one of my fellow students
I know where you live Peter Ponsonby!
August 11th, 2010 at 1:06 pm
eszett.
Touch a raw nerve , did he?
Anyway, what’s the definition of “homophobia”? Seems like a weird construct.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 1:07 pm
In the 50′s I was strapped for saying w instead of r.
My father was told by the kaumatua to strap the kids if they spoke in Maori in the classroom.
I was scared to go into the Square as a young woman because of the likelihood of sex attacks.
At university I was raped and beaten up by a Maori bloke who called me a “white c—”.
When I got married in the 70′s I couldn’t borrow money for a TV set without my husband’s signature.
I was turned down for the first teaching job I applied for because the headmaster said they didn’t want too many women on the staff. My PPTA officer said that was fair enough as there should be a balance (the women on the staff numbered 3 out of over 50).
I walked through a Hamilton mall last year with two Chinese officials and heard, “F—-ing Chinks” more than once (so did they BTW) and one Maori man asked me WTF I thought I was doing with them.
We could all nurture grievances from the past – racist, sexist, fattist whatever. It doesn’t help to brood on past wrongs especially when society has striven to make things better. As far as I am concerned, Hone can say what he likes but I note it is from a position of particular privilege.
Some people are dumb and prejudiced. Some people enjoy their grudges. Some feel money would fix it (like the women in the police rape cases who say money would make things right. Eh?). Some just get on with building the best life they can.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 1:23 pm
This illustrates how much non-Maori have moved on. Harawira, if he is generally representative of Maori, is evidence of how Maori have failed to keep up with improving racial attitudes.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 1:29 pm
There’s noting inherantly wrong with the Maori Party. Contrary to your belief, its not racist. From their constitution (emphasis mine):
The Maori party is immature, however I think it has the opportunity to grow and to enable both Maori and Non Maori alike achieve at least part of its own Vision. Its actually quite a good vison.
I do however have Issue with Maori seats. Thats Political welfarisim. And Racist.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 1:31 pm
It is significant that your friend talks of Christchurch where to this day appalling racial attitudes persist.
I grew up in rural Northland where there was not the slightest hint of anti Maori sentiment. (Why, the best two cricketers in my father’s local team were Maori fellers and they were respected for their ability.) All that has developed in later years, largely as a result of the antics of the Harawira family and a few other over-educated ne’er do well brown bastards.
I moved to Canterbury in 1967 and for the first time experienced open racial and parochial hostility. Those Cantabs are a strange parochial lot who appear to have learned little this past fifty years..
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 1:31 pm
^^^ I don’t think the Maori Party is fundamentally racist. But Harawira certainly is, and they endorse him. Pity.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 1:33 pm
Similar to Ray but in 1961 my first punishment at school was having my mouth sellotaped for speaking (English). And many straps over the years for speaking. I can understand it feeling worse if it was being strapped for expressing your personal culture but it was common for teachers to use violence for all sorts of “discipline”.
I grew up in a non racist environment, probably due to very few races being openly represented in the population. My best friend apparently was part Maori but it was just a curiosity. A girl with Swiss parents was just one of the class. An Austrian science teacher was a bit of a hard case. Foreign visitors were rare and very interesting because they were different.
I moved with work to Auckland mid-seventies and joined a very multiracial rugby club and that was very different experience but with everyone getting on pretty well. And very interesting, especially trips up north which always meant marae visits.
Maybe that’s why I’m puzzled when people openly display racism, usually seems to be just an expression of unthinking prejudice.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 1:38 pm
Thanks for that pointless little autobiography. zzzzzzzz…zzzzzzzzzz … yawn..
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 2:19 pm
So, does the oft-mentioned strapping of kids for speaking Maori in schools boil down to once corporal punishment was used in schools, and now it isn’t?
Presumably in Te Reo immersion schools there are times when children must not speak English, and if they ignore the rules and speak English, they will be punished in some way?
As for my confusing the writer’s reference to Cathedral Square with the Cathedral, my apologies folk. Sometimes Cathedral Square is unsafe for anyone, regardless of ethniciity. It’s dark and has little through foot traffic. The madly spendahaholic Christchurch City Council is mainly to blame, IMHOs. First by ending its use as the main bus drop off and pick up point, and second, as the country’s biggest housing owner after the Housing Corporation, by offering an array of cheap flats to convicts ending their prison terms, to their families, to drifters, druggies, and general no-hopers. Ninety-five per cent of this riff-raff comes from the north.
Will Anderton, sure to be the new mayor fix this? The day after the sky rains $100 notes.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 2:27 pm
BEA B …has made by far the best response on this issue and I suggest David use it as a response to his friends grievances.
Other commentators make the point that you got strapped or caned for speaking any language in class during the 50s except in response to the teacher. In the 40s the bank of New Zealand was owned by the Government and most ordinary people banked with the Post Office Savings Bank. There were powerful Maori Members of Parliament available to take grievances to. In the 60s a single comment by an individual at a Teachers College shouldn’t have been the basis for a life long chip on the shoulder and in the 80s a friendly warning that an out of control group of skinheads might cause him harm should have been received as someone acting in his interests not against them…….Its all about life and we all have to surmount the obstacles needed to survive and prosper, not let problems true or perceived fester and grow.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 2:43 pm
“Lost me at Hawaiki = Hawaii. FAIL – go directly to history class, ”
Its not history you tool, its fucking mythology. You do understand the fundemental difference between factual history and fairy stories don’t you?
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 2:49 pm
If you say so, Don.
Maybe this will help you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia
“Homophobia is a range of negative attitudes and feelings towards homosexuality and people identified or perceived as being homosexual. Definitions refer variably to antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, and irrational fear.
Homophobia is observable in critical and hostile behavior such as discrimination and violence on the basis of a perceived non-heterosexual orientation.
In a 1998 address, author, activist, and civil rights leader Coretta Scott King stated that “Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood.”
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 2:52 pm
Seems to me like if you don’t like anyone who happens to be gay then you’re guilty. Even if you don’t like them because they’re a prick.
Chris Carter could be right, we all hate him because hes gay, not because hes spent years ripping us off.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 2:53 pm
No coincidence that the homophobes and Islamaphobes are often the same people?
No Murray – it’s possible to not like some homosexual people and practices, and to not like some Islamic people and practices, without being phobic about the whole groups.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 2:55 pm
What an enourmous load of shit pete.
How unlike you.
BTW how does Islam feel about gays? Does that make them islamophobic as well????
Oh shit logic error, theroy explodes in face.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 2:59 pm
The Religion of Peace has a special place in its heart for homosexuals too.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 3:01 pm
I remember getting beat up alot because i was European in the 80′s and 90′s and there is still plenty of racism going on today from those same people.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 3:04 pm
It’s not possible to say how 1.5b people collectively feel about gays. I’m sure many of the heterosexuals won’t have much if any feelings for gay although some will no doubt be anti-gay, but many millions if Muslims will be gay so will have feelings for gays.
Racism in NZ is far less definable because unlike religious groups there is a far bigger mix of races amongst the population, and in individuals.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 3:14 pm
Indeed. As does the religion of Christ.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 3:39 pm
Fortunately, these days, the religions of Christ don’t carry out too many stonings and other grizzly executions.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 3:56 pm
Talking of executions-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/08/iran-mohammad-mostafaei-rights-lawyer
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 4:04 pm
True, Rich Prick, these days they don’t, but that’s not very comforting, is it? It’s like saying we don’t kill blacks anymore, but hating them is still ok.
You can’t excuse bigotry here just because there is more brutal bigotry elsewhere.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 4:19 pm
It would seem that Greg Gutfeld, who hosts the Redeye show on Fox, has a proposal for a place near the site of the former WTC in New York that might enhance tolerance, understanding and dialog:
As Allahpundit says – If we’re going to celebrate tolerance regardless of the sensitivities of the surrounding area, let’s celebrate!
If you want to contribute names for the new gay bar you can join the comments here. The ones I like to date:
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 4:25 pm
Oh I dunno eszett, that’s a bit of a broad generalisation, but if it is so, I’d rather be “hated” than dead. But that’s just me.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 4:26 pm
How about calling it “iSlam Men”?
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 4:30 pm
Some of these are bad:
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 4:35 pm
So what’s your problem with Harawira then?
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 4:42 pm
If an Islamic suicide bomber whipped out his “suspicious package” and detonated it in a gay bar, would the kiwiblog right cheer or condemn?
Genuine question.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 4:42 pm
Why not stir more and do the same with a Christian gay bar? In memory of 9-11 of course.
Fox should show their tolerance and have a permanent gay slot on Hannity.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 4:47 pm
I’d look for moral and ethical guidance from the Left before I said anything.
Too boring. There’s so many Catholic churches in NY already.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 4:53 pm
You’ll find that the typical gay bars are friendly to any men, no matter what faith.
But I do love the names! They are great.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 5:21 pm
“Lost me at Hawaiki = Hawaii. FAIL – go directly to history class, ”
Its not history you tool, its fucking mythology. You do understand the fundemental difference between factual history and fairy stories don’t you?
factual history according to who ?
You do understand that for a culture with a history of oral traditions, the truth of our stories higher meanings were hidden so dumbfucks like you wouldn’t know the difference between factual history and a fairy story, unless they were interpreted with the magic jawbone ?
it must be great to live in blissful ignorance and to pass that trait on to your dumbfuck kids eh murray ?
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 5:48 pm
How do you know?
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 5:50 pm
tom hunter 4:47 pm,
You’ll get on the bad side of Lucia Maria, Tom.
Back to the Islamic gay bar name suggestions:
Vote:• Billy Goats Buff
• Arabian Knights
• WMDs
• Halaal Meat & Greet
• Threading the Goat
• Through the Camel’s Eye
• The Nervous Goat
• The Fifth Wife
• Mohammed’s Meat Palace
• Mohammed’s Honour Guard
• Aladdin’s Cave
• Bedouin and Squeal
• Clamy Palms
• The Prophet’s Ass
• The Desert Train
• The Camel Train
• The Mecca-Nised Goat
• Put Down Thy Mat and Pray
• The Prayer Mat
• Imam Your Servant (for the Islamic b&d crowd)
• Allah-oooh-Akbar
• Mohammed-aaah-Li
• Ram-id-in
• 72 Goats
August 11th, 2010 at 5:54 pm
pollywog 5:21 pm,
Do you have to talk about “oral traditions” when we’re in the process of naming Islamic gay bars …
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 5:57 pm
eszett, gays use the word “homophobia” as a weapon, and aim it at anyone who disagrees with their conduct. I do not hate, fear, feel comtempt, or aversion to anyone who claims to be homosexual; I just feel that same-sex conduct is wrong.
Dr Scott Lively puts it this way –
I think that says it all. I totally reject the idea that anyone who does not agree with homosexuality is a bigot or racist, or anything else. The homosexuality subject has nothing whatsoever to do with Civil Rights.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 5:57 pm
Eszett, do consider those who object to demands of the militant homosexual lobby as homophobes?
The militant fringe is demanding that NZ Blood Services accept homosexual’s blood. I agree with NZ Blood Services. This is madness. It would put the public at risk. Do you consider those who set the NZ Blood Services policy homophobes?
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 6:04 pm
Estimates of the proportion of gays in a population range from 1-20% (upper levels in some NZ surveys), depending on accuracy and honesty of surveys, degree of homosexuality (totally or occasional homosexual acts), and lifetime or snapshot counts. The most common proportions in surveys are 4-6%. On that basis it’s reasonable to assume 60-90m in a population of 1.5b. Occasionals which could take it to hundreds of millions.
“For some people, sexual orientation is continuous and fixed throughout their lives. For others, sexual orientation may be fluid and change over time”.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 6:11 pm
Well, then don’t engage in it.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 6:47 pm
Not sure what point you are trying to make here. As long as NZ Blood excludes certain groups on basis of solid scientific evidence that they pose a significant risk, I don’t see a problem.
E.g. they exclude British citizens from donating blood as well. Do you think that they are xenophobe because of that?
But more to your point, do you consider anyone who questions that policy a “militant British”? Or is it just homosexuals who qualify qualify for that?
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 6:57 pm
I agree with that. No body forces you to be homosexual, or agree with it. Nobody forces you to be a Maori or agree with Moari and that certainly doesn’t make you a racists.
But hating Maoris for being Maori and discriminating against Maori does.
Of course it does. It has everything to do with Civil Rights.
Vote:This, if nothing else, demonstrates your very own bigotry.
August 11th, 2010 at 8:18 pm
Jack5, he said Cathedral Square, not the Cathedral itself. There was a much stronger and open skin-head presence in ChCh then.
Vote:………
there were some who were giving Nazi salutes and they were aimed at Asians. It was an embarrassing situation for the tourist industry. Someone got rid of them.
August 11th, 2010 at 8:55 pm
eszett, the point I was making was that no one other than an odd ball individual would question the policy of excluding people who have been in Britain during a period would question the policy. You have twisted NZ Blood Services policy.
The objection by militant homosexuals to the policy of excluding homosexuals from donating blood because of the high risk of them having an STD particularly HIV is just an example of militants homosexuals attitude. Fletch gave a very good example of how homosexual activists use the term homophobe as a means to try and attack anyone who object to their unreasonable demands using dishonest means.
I object to homosexuals going into schools and portraying the homosexual lifestyle as a valid lifestyle choice.
It leaves children vulnerable to predators such as Dobbyn.
http://www.safenz.org.nz/sxdb/dobbynmichael.htm
All homosexuals are not paedophiles but a disproportionate number are and people who try to influence adolescents are contributing to their abuse.
There is no evidence that people are born homosexual. If lobbying against people recruiting n schools make me a homophobe then I am guilty.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 10:09 pm
see, Chuck, it’s not about NZ Blood, it’s more about your bigoted misconception of homosexuals. you really think it’s a lifestyle choice. Well, please, just for one day and to prove the point, please choose to be a homosexual. I’d really like to see that. Just prove to me and the world that it can be a choice. Stroll down to K’Rd and into Urge and have a nice evening with some of the boys. You don’t have to engage into any sexual activity, maybe just choose to pash one of the lads, just for show. Just to prove that you could choose a “homosexual lifestyle” if you wanted to.
What you have very nicely done is just list the usual prejudice and bullshit of the typical ignorant bigot.
You might as well have said, you don’t want any Maoris as teachers, it is well known that Maoris always end up on the dole and you don’t want them to portray that as an acceptable lifestyle.
And anyone who challenges you is a “militant homosexual”. How pathetic!
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 11:05 pm
eszett, hating Maori’s for being Maori is discrimination, yes, I agree with you 100%. A Maori cannot choose to be anything other than a Maori. But a ‘homosexual’s identity, really, is based on preference, desire, and conduct. A homosexual may not choose to be that way on purpose – it may be something to do with what happened to him/her when they were younger, but that does not mean society should accept his conduct because he cannot help it.
Your invitation to Chuck to be a homosexual for one day is just silly. He doesn’t want to live that lifestyle, but some people do choose to live that lifestyle and choose it consciously. Many have lived the homosexual life and decided against it, and gone on to mmarry and be very happy.
Vote:August 11th, 2010 at 11:28 pm
Question: would you hate an alcoholic for being an alcoholic? Was he born that way, or is it his actions (drinking) that define what he is? Can an alcoholic make a case for discrimination because of what he is? You cannot tell many alcoholics (when they are sober) from a non-alcoholic by looking at them. Neither can you tell a homosexual from a heterosexual by looking at them.
So, I ask you, why should society create anti-discrimination laws that give preference to either because of the desires they have, or the way they want to live? It’s basically all about how they conduct themselves. The gay-lobby has ripped off what the term ‘Civil Rights’ is really about. They are misusing the term.
What defines both is what they desire and act upon. Both of them may not wish to be what they are; both may have chosen a lifestyle, and become addicted. Or it may be that some event in their life pushed them toward what they are.
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 7:14 am
Once a homosexual always a homosexual? Do they have a choice?
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 7:36 am
Again, Fletch, it is complete and utter bullshit. All you are trying to do is rationalise your own prejudice. The attempt to describe homosexuality as choice or as disease is not founded in any evidence but fear and loathing in your own mind.
Remaining ignorant is a choice, Fletch. Being gay isn’t.
And it is very much civil rights issue. (From Wikipedia)
“Civil rights include the ensuring of peoples’ physical integrity and safety; protection from discrimination on grounds such as physical or mental disability, gender, religion, race, sexual orientation, national origin, age, and individual rights such as the freedoms of thought and conscience, speech and expression, religion, the press, and movement.”
On that note, Fletch, you will note (and agree) that “religion” is part of the civil rights. I am sure you will also agree that religion is very much a choice. I wonder if you were happy if people discriminated against you because of your choice of a christian lifestyle.
Or do you think freedom of religion is not a civil right issue as well?
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 10:05 am
All you are trying to do is rationalise your own prejudice. The attempt to describe homosexuality as choice or as disease is not founded in any evidence but fear and loathing in your own mind.
google > homosexuality evolutionary dead end
you might be surprised to have your prejudices/bias confirmed either way…
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 10:24 am
“Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood.”
I agree that it is pathetic that there are still so many bigots (particularly Christians) who are against homosexuality. A lesser known form of discrimination is speciesism – from Wikipedia:
David Sztybel holds that the treatment of animals can be compared to the Holocaust in a valid and meaningful way. In his paper Can the Treatment of Animals Be Compared to the Holocaust? using a thirty-nine-point comparison Sztybel asserts that the comparison is not offensive and that it does not overlook important differences, or ignore supposed affinities between the human abuse of fellow animals, and the Nazi abuse of fellow humans. The comparison of animal treatment and the Holocaust came into the public eye with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals’ “Holocaust on your Plate” exhibit. Sztybel equates the racism of the Nazis with the speciesism inherent in eating meat, or using animal by-products, particularly those produced on factory farms. However, even among the supports of the concept of speciesism as a critical tool, such comparisons are not always supported. Y. Michael Barilan writes that speciesism is not the same thing as “Nazi racism” because Nazi racism extolled the abuser and condemned the weaker and the abused. He describes speciesism as the recognition of rights on the basis of group membership rather than solely on the basis of moral considerations.
Another article:
It is a day much like any other… A day during which over two hundred and twenty thousand animals will be killed.
A day when countless animals will suffer through being burned, electrocuted, beaten, denied enough room to even turn around, and otherwise tortured, exploited and enslaved. Step inside a slaughterhouse and see the horror for yourself.
Bodies strewn about, dead and dying, the stench of the blood of thousands is in the air. Yet the butchers continue their work, slashing the throat of one chicken after another.
Their still-quivering bodies then immersed in boiling water. Some still alive, until in their last moments they are boiled alive. Some fall from the hands of their killer and lie twitching on the floor living out their last hours in futile desperation trying to re-gain control of their bodies for just long enough to drag themselves away. But there is no place to go no place to run – they are powerless before their butchers.
It’s just another day in New Zealand. The plight of these animals is so extreme it seems incomprehensible that anyone who cares about animals would do anything less than they possibly could to help as many of these animal as they can.
Becoming vegan is a great place to start. It saves lives, and every life is precious. But in our fast-food nation these lives are a mere drop in the bucket. Simply trying to avoid taking an active part in the exploitation, abuse, and killing of animals is not enough. Nor can the animals afford for us to become complacent, settling for only avoiding supporting animal industries when it’s easy for us.
Think of the animals being tortured and killed as you are reading this and ask yourself: is there really nothing more you could be doing to help them? Whether it be engaging in direct action, protesting a vivisection lab, doing public speaking, supporting vegan businesses, rejecting consumer society, campaigning for legislation, or simply urging businesses to not use bone-char refined sugar in vegan products, the bottom line is the animals need you to get active and do your best for them today and every day.
Our society is incredibly apathetic and it’s all too easy to get mired in one’s doubts over which campaign to spend one’s time on, or simply give up out of despair that one can never do enough. But look into the eyes of a calf as she is taken off to slaughter and tell her that you’re really doing everything you can. Tell her that it’s more important for you to go to a show than to hold out flyers about veganism. Tell a chicken imprisoned on a factory farm that you would rather stay home and watch TV than free her.
Certainly this doesn’t mean one needs to spend every waking moment of every day fighting for the animals. We all need our down time to recharge and keep from getting burnt out. The trick is not to use that as an excuse to do less than we can, but instead constantly challenge ourselves to do more to help the animals.
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 10:37 am
Fletch,
If male (for the sake of simplicity) homosexuality is a choice, then it follows that if any man is attracted to another man, then all men (including you and I) must have the same capacity for attraction to other men , as proper ‘attraction’ is is not a choice.
The ‘choice’ therefore, is whether a man chooses to act on that attraction or not.
For homosexuality to be a choice, then we all have to feel it, but choose to ignore it. Is that what you are saying…?
Unless, of course, you believe that who we are attracted to is a matter of choice – in which case you don’t subscribe to notions of romantic love etc…
Either scenario could be correct, I don’t really care. Each to their own etc…
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 10:38 am
I killed one of our chickens yesterday cos it’s leg was all festered up from some weird chicken festering leg disease thing.
Today i have to dip 2 other chickens legs in kerosene to stop them from festering but i may just kill them and eat them over the weekend instead…dunno
depends how much of my killer instinct i want to pander to and whether i feel like eating chicken this weekend, which brings me to point about choice.
I have thought of killing people in anger like i’ve had homosexual thoughts during sex but never acted out either of those fantasies.
Does that mean i’m a gay serial killer or is it only when i act on those choices do i become one and was i born this way or was it conditioned by the environment ?
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 11:06 am
maybe you should act out your homosexual thoughts, pollywog, it may relieve your tension and you will stop fantasising about killing people
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 11:17 am
hmmm…yeah, dunno eh eszett
theres the inherent danger that if i did, i would override my guilt response and trigger a full on maniacal bloodlust of serial gay killing and orgiastic necrophilia
nah…best to let sleeping dogs lie methinks and ocassionally masturbate the tension away online
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 11:29 am
Sam, I don’t quite follow your reasoning there. Some men are also attracted to sex with animals, or to sex with young children. Are you saying that we all have the capacity for those attractions as well?
Well, that is the problem I have with orientation theory: you say homosexuality is an orientation – OK. But what about pedophilia? Why isn’t that an orientation, even if the man has those desires but never acts on it? Or bestiality? What separates people with those desires from people with same-sex desires? I just don’t see what the difference is.
No, we don’t all have to feel it. It’s only a choice for the person that feels that desire. Some people like Coke and some like Pepsi. They have a choice to make in that case. Some people don’t like cola at all and do not have to make that choice. An alcoholic often has to make the choice as to whether to take a drink or not, but that choice won’t affect those who don’t care for alcohol. I think the point is, is that every desire man feels is not necessarily good. We can be tempted to do evil or misordered things (like bestiality).
eszett, Civil Rights (as it is understood) did not always include sexual orientation. It has been twisted over time to include that. But as I mentioned above, what about the rights of people who are into bestiality or something else? You will say because it is bad for society, but again, what if the person with that desire never acts on it? Why isn’t his desire as authentic as someone with same-sex desires? I will also say that I believe the practice of homosexuality is bad for society as well.
You think we aren’t discriminated against?
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 11:34 am
For your reading pleasure, here is a list of sexual orientations –
Some few are protected under civil rights laws but most not.
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 12:04 pm
Have you not heard eszett? Homosexuality will result in the downfall of society and increase the number of deaths of innocent babies. It says so in the Bible, Fletch can tell you all about it. It’s definitely the most pressing issue today, ahead of poverty, war, and all those other things Christians generally don’t give a shit about being passionate about.
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 12:16 pm
So then, Fletch, you are actually arguing that being homosexual is not a choice – it is in that capacity for sexual attraction that you suggest some have and some don’t. It is a choice whether a man has homosexual relationships (mostly), but he is still homosexual if he is attracted to men but ‘chooses’ to abstain.
If a man is attracted to children in a sexual way, then he is a paedophile. He may choose whether or not to act on it, but he is still a paedophile, (etc, replace with beasts, corpses, geriatrics etc etc…)
If you can choose your attraction, then either everyone has the same range of attractions to choose from, or they don’t. if they don’t have the same attractions to choose from, then certain attractions must be innate to an individual (whether hereditary, or however else it might be manifested).
As I said earlier, I am not arguing for one position or the other – I really don’t care. I am simply bemused by the logical inconsistencies in your position…
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 12:25 pm
eszett, I hardly think Wikipedia is a reliable reference. If adult homosexuals want to sodomise each other that is their civil right. I do not have a problem with that. However when they want my grandchildren taught that homosexuality is a valid lifestyle choice that affects other people’s civil rights. It makes confused adolescents vulnerable to homosexual predators like Michael James Dobbyn.
http://www.safenz.org.nz/sxdb/dobbynmichael.htm
Before any of you homosexual paedophile apologists claim Dobbyn was a paedophile but not a homosexual I can tell you this scum had sex with males over 16 as well as those under 16. He is a homosexual paedophile who could not even control his urges while on bail.
One person’s rights affect another. I say a child right to receive their moral and ethical values from their parents trumps homosexual’s right to recruit.
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 1:14 pm
Christchurch is notorious for its racial intolerance. I don’t know what it’s like now, but certainly when I lived there interracial couples were probably looked at sideways.
I am not sure the Waikato is much better either.
Probably not the best examples given the locations.
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 1:21 pm
It started early Blair, if you didn’t arrive on one of the first four ships you were inferior. Was it a pommy thing? Dunedin’s first two ships (with Scottish immigrants) are looked on as historical rather than superior.
Choice of names may be indicative – Christchurch versus Fort Edin.
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 1:37 pm
Christchurch is notorious for its racial intolerance. I don’t know what it’s like now,
i found asians bear the large brunt of the cracka ass backlash now, though rich whitey still pretty much keep to themselves
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 2:08 pm
sorry to bust your bubble, Chuck Bird
Your merely parroting the myth that there is somehow a link between homosexuality and paedophilia, because it somehow suits your prejudice. Only there isn’t. Your grandchildren are, statistically speaking, safer with a gay teacher than a straight one.
http://www.childwelfare.gov/
“Adoption expert, Carrie Craft cites the Child Welfare Information Gateway (previously National Adoption Information Clearinghouse) as stating, “A child’s risk of being molested by his or her relatives’ heterosexual partner is over one hundred times greater than by someone who might be identifiable as being homosexual.” The study also found that of 269 cases of child sex abuse, only two offenders where found to be gay or lesbian. The American Psychological Association agrees, “Another myth about homosexuality is the mistaken belief that gay men have more of a tendency than heterosexual men to sexually molest children. There is no evidence to suggest that homosexuals molest children.”
According to these reputable studies, gay men are actually less likely to molest children.”
Also an interesting read here:
http://www.ipce.info/host/howitt/2c.htm
“There were no peer-oriented homosexual males in our sample who regressed to children. Homosexuality and homosexual pedophilia are not synonymous. In fact, it may be that these two orientations are mutually exclusive, the reason being that the homosexual male is sexually attracted to masculine qualities whereas the heterosexual male is sexually attracted to feminine characteristics, and the sexually immature child’s qualities are more feminine than masculine …
In any case, in over 12 years of clinical experience working with child molesters, we have yet to see any example of a regression from an adult homosexual orientation. The child offender who is also attracted to and engaged in adult sexual relationships is heterosexual. It appears, therefore, that the adult heterosexual male constitutes a greater sexual risk to underage children than does the adult homosexual male.”
(Groth and Birnbaum, 1978, pp. 180-181)
While one might have considerable doubts about Groth and Birnbaum’s analysis of the nature of homosexual attraction, they are clearly unequivocal about the risks of adult homosexuals becoming diverted into paedophilia. Homosexuals committed to adult partners will not be forced by situational or personal pressures into even temporary paedophile episodes; heterosexual men apparently pose a far greater risk in this regard.
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 2:40 pm
actually, Fletch, I did a bit of a search on that list you posted. Funnily enough, I found that list on the usual christian, family values, but no link to the original source that you claim.
However once you start looking for the original source, you do find something astonishing.
Here’s a copy of the original source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSM-IV_Codes
When you look closely, you will find a list of paraphilias, “defined as powerful and persistent sexual interest other than in copulatory or precopulatory behavior with phenotypically normal, consenting adult human partners”
The list is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_paraphilias
Notice the differnce to yours? It says nothing about sexual orientation, but parphilias and homosexuality, bi- sexuality and heterosexuality are missing from that list.
Seems to me that you are posting christian bullshit and propaganda.
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 2:56 pm
eszett, check out this article in PDF form by Brian W. Clowes and David L. Sonnier, talking about the connection between paedophilia and homosexuality. Some very startling numbers there.
Some extracts –
Sorry for the huge paste, but there is a lot of info in their. Is worth reading the whole thing. Citations are given in the PDF (which I haven’t reprinted here).
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 3:05 pm
eszett, checked out your links. It says in the wiki article
So, it’s not ‘Christian Bullshit’, it’s just that I was posting an earlier version of the list (from the year 2000). Since then, some revisionism has gone on – and not for the better. Do you think they were removed because of more scientific evidence that proved they were not disorders? Think again – they were removed because of activism, pure and simple. Read HERE for some of the history of what happened in 1973 if you want to know more (I’m sure you hate me pasting all the time).
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 3:30 pm
Hey Fletch, did you know that there are heterosexual pedophiles too? We should ban heterosexuality too! By engaging in it you are promoting pedophilia you dirty Christian heterosexual/pedophile! By God’s wrath shall you die for your disgusting sin!
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 3:49 pm
Complete and utter bullshit, Fletch.
You are merely regurgitating that indoctrination crap from you christian websites.
There is no link between homosexuality and paedophilia. No matter how much you insist on it. It has been comprehensively proven, you merely want that myth to continue. We can of course bombard each other with links, you from your christian and so called “family values” websites, and I can look through some serious academic sources.
Of course you will dismiss anything as a result of activism. And of course Homosexuality and Bisexuality was once considered an mentally illness. Thankfully, not any more, we have moved on from such dark ages. And merely not due to activism, but through research and evidence have proven, beyond any doubt that it is not an illness and shouldn’t be viewed as such.
That some (like you) choose to live in the past and in ignorance, nourishing your cherished beliefs and convictions regardless of evidence or reason, well, that’s your choice. You can choose to be a close minded bigot, if that pleases you. The very same way that people choose to be close minded racists when segregation was abandoned and when inter-racial marriages became legal.
The very same kind of people then were arguing in the very same way that you are now.
Thankfully you are but a small minority, and while nothing will ever convince you, it is important to stand up against people like you and your views. The very much the same way people stood up against racism and other bigotry.
Enough said on this topic for now. We wont agree anyway.
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 4:21 pm
Fletch, do you think there is a correlation between homosexuality and logic? Most of homosexual lobbyists seem to be able to understand the concept of disproportionate.
You hear them argue heterosexuals also get infected with HIV. What an inane comment. Of course heterosexuals get HIV but when you consider that male homosexuals make you less that 3% of the population and the majority of HIV infection is through homosexual infection. You should not have to have a degree in math to work out that homosexuals are disproportionately infected with HIV.
The same logic applies to sexual molestation of adolescents.
When the gay rights parades started there was a representation from NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) for a number of years. Homosexual activists eventually realised that they could not continue to support these perverts. There was some bitterness between these groups. Some of this bitterness remains.
We had a supporter of NAMBLA here in New Zealand. Homosexual Libertarian Jim Peron got kicked out of New Zealand when his links to NAMBLA were proved after his writings in praise of his boy lovers were uncovered.
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 5:32 pm
Oh dear, Chuck, you seriously need to think more before you post.
That is just embarrassing how flawed that line of thought was.
Seems you are the one who has a problem with correlation and logic. But that comes as no surprise.
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 9:25 pm
Eszett, you cannot support you flawed logic using references such as Wikipedia and another reference that refers Kinsey, a bisexual paedophile obsessed with all sort of sexual deviancies so you resort to name calling.
Show us all that you know the meaning of the word disproportionate. Kindly explain why homosexuals are greatly disproportionately infected with HIV. Could it have any thing to do with their sexual activities? Could it have anything to with the number of sexual partners they have? If these are not major factors tell us your theory.
When schools promote homosexuality to schools children they do not tell them of the risk of choosing a homosexual lifestyle. Death style might be a better name.
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 9:58 pm
Here are the citations from my paste above –
That scholarly enough for you?
And stop calling me a bigot; I am not. A vegetarian does not think it is moral or right for people to eat meat, but do they hate or are they bigoted toward those that do eat meat? Of course not. Likewise, I do not feel any prejudice, hate, fear, or any other negative emotions toward homosexuals. I do not agree with some of their practices – that is it. And I do not think this conduct should be promoted to school kids as a viable way of life, especially when half of gay students self-harm, and a third contemplate suicide, based on research here in NZ. (LINK)
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 10:24 pm
There’s a big difference between “promoting it as a way of life” and “assuring homosexuals that it is acceptable if that’s how they are”.
I would be very surprised if any or many people try to “encourage” acting out as a homosexual. Is there any evidence of this?
It’s quite different trying to diffuse the stigma of being homosexual, I can imagine that that could cause a lot of psychological issues.
Vote:August 12th, 2010 at 10:59 pm
Fletch
Try these.
http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/WHEREAS.pdf
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=16461
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=16465
Based on that, the language of a subculture, identifies that subculture’s focuses and values.
Every parents should read these and you got Peron bang to rights, plus he lied about his Nambla freinds.
Once a bright 12 yr old said to me, If marriage isn’t between a man and a woman then all bets are off it can be between anyone and anything surely?
So I replied look at the physical design of men and women, do men look as if they are designed for men?
He just grinned and said No, it’s simple isn’t it
I told him ‘yes but he would meet many educated people in his life who would argue otherwise’.
So I’ve noticed with pedophilia and homosexuality, it seems common sense, but people will argue till they are red in the face.
Vote:Then read the sub cultures language and you’ll see it’s simple.
But then you get it already.
August 13th, 2010 at 6:39 am
Look at the physical design of men and women, do women look as if they are designed from men’s ribs?
He just grinned and said No, it’s simple isn’t it
I told him ‘yes but he would meet many educated people in his life who would argue otherwise’.
So I’ve noticed with religiousilia and science blindness, it seems common sense, but people will argue till they are red in the face.
Then read the sub cultures language and you’ll see it’s simple.
But then most people get it already.
Vote:August 13th, 2010 at 9:14 am
Pete, I do not agree that there is such a big difference between “promoting it as a way of life” and “assuring homosexuals that it is acceptable”.
Some schools teach if you are attracted to someone of the opposite sex you are probably heterosexual, if you are attracted to someone of the same sex you are probably homosexual, if you are attracted to someone of the same sex and someone of the opposite sex you are probably bisexual. That’s cool.
http://www.3news.co.nz/Cool-to-be-gay/tabid/209/articleID/165779/Default.aspx
This may make students who have definitely decided they are homosexual feel better. However, it is likely to make confused adolescents consider experimenting. Some young boys have always have behaved in a manner that would be considered homosexual when they are reaching puberty and their genitals are changing. This may just involve comparing the size of their penis possibly erect. Schools teaching them that homosexuality is a valid lifestyle will tempt at least some of them to experiment. It will also make them vulnerable to paedophiles and also peers who have already experimented.
Some parents may be quite liberal in their view to sex and homosexuality while other may be strongly opposed to schools promoted homosexuality as a valid choice. I believe that schools should not the students’ values that are contrary to the values of a large number of the student’s parents. No doubt that makes me a homophobe to some of the homosexual activists on this blog.
Vote:August 13th, 2010 at 9:20 am
I’m not a homosexual activist, I have nothing to do with any homosexual groups or individuals. I just post my own opinions here.
I’m surprised you can’t see a significant different, but I guess that explains why you may see any education as promotion no matter what the intent actually is.
Vote:August 13th, 2010 at 9:45 am
But you are one. No negative feeling towards homosexuals? No prejudices? But you call them paedophiles and don’t want them in schools and support discrimination against them.
Don’t like being called a bigot. Stop being one.
Don’t just rely on cherry-picked research on christian websites with an agenda and broaden your mind. Engage with homosexual people and see how disturbing their life is. Try to think for one second outside of your tight little world.
As for the self harm and suicides rates of teenage homosexuals, you better take a very good look at yourself. It is the likes of you that preach hate and intolerance that are a prime cause for such self abuse. The conflict that these young people are going through, because some bigots keep telling them that what they feel and are is evil, unacceptable and bad.
It is deeply despicable and cynical to bring that as an argument.
No, Fletch, you should have a good look into the mirror and see the ugly truth.
Vote:August 13th, 2010 at 9:48 am
Pete, I was not inferring you were a homosexual activist. I was mainly referring to eszett who is keen to throw the homophobe label at anyone who disagrees with his point of view.
It may be possible to teach about sexual relationships that may not be harmful but too many liberals are doing a lot of harm and not just on the homosexual issue. I think it outrageous that school supply condoms to underage girls and if their fail they arrange an abortion all without notifying the parents.
The whole issue is who has primacy in how children are brought up – the parents or the state. That is why so many opposed the anti-smacking legislation. It undermines parental authority and sends the message to children that their parents cannot be trusted.
Vote:August 13th, 2010 at 10:14 am
Not because you disagree with me, Chuck, it’s because you hold an irrational fear and loathing towards a group of people who are not like you and try to devalue, dehumanise and criminalise them.
You don’t even make the slightest effort to try and understand them. All you do is look for more nonsense that feeds your fear and loathing.
Vote:August 13th, 2010 at 10:17 am
Pete, I hope the latest post by eszett explains why I feel like I do about militant homosexual activists. If they want live their own lives like that claimed when they campaigned for homosexual law reform. The activists behave like little children. Chris Carter is a fine example. The AIDS Foundation think with the high rate of HIV amongst homosexuals they are in a position to educate the rest of us how to behave so as not to become infected with HIV. What a sick joke. I doubt if any married man born in New Zealand has been infected by have unprotected with his wife.
As I mentioned earlier some idiot homosexual lobbyist is protesting that New Zealand Blood Services will not accept blood from homosexuals.
I hope this explains my view. It is good to be able to debate an issue with you. We may not agree on issues but we can debate civilly and agree to disagree.
Vote:August 13th, 2010 at 11:04 am
I hope the non homosexual bigots on this forum will have a look at what some homosexuals think of Homosexuals Opposed to Pride Extremism (HOPE) and judge who the real bigot is on this thread.
http://www.freejesus.net/home/viewtopic.php?t=1798
Introducing kindergarten and grade one students to alternative behaviours and lifestyles is psychological pedophilia. You don’t have to engage solely in physical contact to molest a child. You can diddle with their minds and their emotions.
The above quote is from a sensible homosexual
http://www.socon.ca/or_bust/?p=770
Vote:August 13th, 2010 at 11:09 am
Christians. Jesus sent them here on this Earth to preach the bad news of homosexuality. It is their life duty and their passion.
“I have a heart for the non-gays. I feel that God’s plan for me is to prevent faggots from influencing my children and their futures. I always felt like there was more to life, then one day I saw Brian Tamaki marching down Queen Street against civil unions and realised – this is why I was created. It is my destiny, bigger than life itself, is the cause against homosexuality and ultimately what Jesus was all about” – some Christian guy who probably goes to Fletch’s Church.
Benefits of Buddhism – inner calm, peace of mind, lifestyle of compassion, meditation, loving nature, vegetarianism, etc.
Benefits of becoming a Christian – get to dedicate your life to fighting against all the damage being caused by homosexuals on God’s Holy Land. There is no cause greater than this. We are living in the end times and if people are having anal sex this will result in the downfall of mankind.
Christianity – fighting against the rights of homosexuals ever since Jesus was crucified and died on the cross for it.
Vote:August 13th, 2010 at 11:19 am
Courage Wolf 11:09 am,
“In the end, though, you are still a leftard and your point of view is still wrong.”
F E Smith © 2010
Vote:August 13th, 2010 at 2:16 pm
This incoherent hodgepodge of ignorance, nonsense and prejudice certainly explains where you stand, Chuck, you leave no room for doubt about that.
Not sure where I morphed into a “homosexual activist” and then into a “militant homosexual activist”. Or what that actually means. If calling you what you are makes me an activist, oh well, so be it
Vote: