Gaybook

[Frood]

I don't object to homosexuals having parades. I agree they have the same rights as everyone else. So when they expose themselves in public during the day, they should be arrested or fined, like everyone else.

Even if the parade is about LGBT issues? (sexual and gender identification) They've sought out the proper permits to conduct the parades plus warned all around their small area of the festivities, and the vast majority are happy to participate somewhat clothed while a few odd ones out feel it's their personal mission to express themselves and the world they'd like to live in by going somewhat less than clothed?



You're judging those odd ones out by your own philosophical or spiritual bent. You've invoked majority rule even.



There are 365 days per standard year. If you can't look or stay away for .003 percent of the year because someone or some group is at odds with your mindset, how can you expect any respect for your choices or way of life for the greater 364 days remaining? .003 is about 24 hours incidentally. Most parades don't even go past 2-4 hours tops. We're getting into miniscule fractions if we really look at it objectively.



Would you prefer those same fractional nude LGBT types popping up day to day like nudity terrorists for the rest of the year? Instead of a bomb blast, you and your children are forced to witness the naked human form exposed at the most inopportune moments.



Live and let live I say.



A permitted alternative celebration of sexuality or gender shouldn't have to subscribe to what Christians, Muslims, Jews, or anyone else has to say on it.



Allow those people that and you might just get back some marginal respect.

[Anonymous]

Human nature is to push boundaries. A little is never enough.

[Frood]

Human nature is to push boundaries. A little is never enough.

That's how the Catholic Church felt about Martin Luther in his sackcloth and ashes during and after their excommunication process. Your current faith takes great breaths from his boundary pushing strides.



The LGBT community is made up of many different mindsets. Some of them are Catholic, Protestant, Lutheran, or subsequent Evangelical. Some are Muslim, some are Buddhist, some are Hindu.



Some, like me, have no beliefs in that regard.



Pushing boundaries isn't a sin and it's one of the better human traits. If you can't respect boundary pushing outside of your own spirituality, how can you respect the boundary pushes which evolved and shaped your faith?



I really don't want to fight with you or anyone else. It's fun to stir but it's more fulfilling to accept (even in disagreement).

[Anonymous]

There has to be lines drawn. It's like this, we got abortions legalized with certain limits. That wasn't good enough, so now there is a fight for the "freedom" to abort babies right up until the day before the due date.  There has to be boundaries in place, or people will eventually be living in a world of chaos where anything goes. You take away everyone's freedom when everything is acceptable. Now watch...I predict pastors being fined/jailed for "hate speech" and not perform homosexual weddings.  If people are permitted to have festivals where getting naked and performing sex acts becomes acceptable and routine....they will push beyond that. Go to the next level. It's just what happens. I don't have the freedom to trust Christ because of the reformation. That wasn't boundary pushing in that sense. It was calling out apostasy. When you remove accountability, you get horrific results. I don't want to fight, either. Big girls can disagree and give their points while keeping respect.

[Bricktop]

I don't object to homosexuals having parades. I agree they have the same rights as everyone else. So when they expose themselves in public during the day, they should be arrested or fined, like everyone else.

Even if the parade is about LGBT issues? (sexual and gender identification) They've sought out the proper permits to conduct the parades plus warned all around their small area of the festivities, and the vast majority are happy to participate somewhat clothed while a few odd ones out feel it's their personal mission to express themselves and the world they'd like to live in by going somewhat less than clothed?



You're judging those odd ones out by your own philosophical or spiritual bent. You've invoked majority rule even.



There are 365 days per standard year. If you can't look or stay away for .003 percent of the year because someone or some group is at odds with your mindset, how can you expect any respect for your choices or way of life for the greater 364 days remaining? .003 is about 24 hours incidentally. Most parades don't even go past 2-4 hours tops. We're getting into miniscule fractions if we really look at it objectively.



Would you prefer those same fractional nude LGBT types popping up day to day like nudity terrorists for the rest of the year? Instead of a bomb blast, you and your children are forced to witness the naked human form exposed at the most inopportune moments.



Live and let live I say.



A permitted alternative celebration of sexuality or gender shouldn't have to subscribe to what Christians, Muslims, Jews, or anyone else has to say on it.



Allow those people that and you might just get back some marginal respect.

Did you read what you wrote?



So, if someone rapes a woman in 0.00004 of the year, we should accept it?



The are NO fractions of criminal acts. It is, or it isn't. If it is, then the context is irrelevant.

[RW]

It is or it isn't but police still use their discretion when choosing to arrest people.



Deny it.  I dare you.

[Frood]

It is or it isn't but police still use their discretion when choosing to arrest people.



Deny it.  I dare you.

He's just trying to start a flamewar. I pay such attempts no heed. He's an amateur.

[Frood]

There has to be lines drawn. It's like this, we got abortions legalized with certain limits. That wasn't good enough, so now there is a fight for the "freedom" to abort babies right up until the day before the due date.  There has to be boundaries in place, or people will eventually be living in a world of chaos where anything goes. You take away everyone's freedom when everything is acceptable. Now watch...I predict pastors being fined/jailed for "hate speech" and not perform homosexual weddings.  If people are permitted to have festivals where getting naked and performing sex acts becomes acceptable and routine....they will push beyond that. Go to the next level. It's just what happens. I don't have the freedom to trust Christ because of the reformation. That wasn't boundary pushing in that sense. It was calling out apostasy. When you remove accountability, you get horrific results. I don't want to fight, either. Big girls can disagree and give their points while keeping respect.

I don't want religious figureheads jailed for disagreeing no more than I want those non religious or altered state of religiousness people jailed because the rubber stamped religions or philosophies disagree with it.



Fine, disagree. Good for you. Just don't try to stop something. That's not tolerance. That's dogma.

[Bricktop]

It is or it isn't but police still use their discretion when choosing to arrest people.



Deny it.  I dare you.

Here you go again.



I shall enlighten you.



In most western police forces, the legislation that empowers a police officer allows said officer the discretion to exercise his or power in the execution of his or her duty.



Said discretion is applicable ONLY where said officer cannot determine if, based on all of the facts at his or her disposal,an offence has been committed. That discretion does NOT apply when evidence is overwhelming that an offence is committed; the officer is duty and legislatively bound to exercise his or her authority.



Thus, an officer who stops a motorist for speeding does NOT have the discretion to release said driver because she had nice tits.



If he releases said motorist on that basis, he or she would be liable for disclipinary action.



If a person behaves in an indecent, offensive or disorderly manner, and an officer stands by and takes no action, it is subject to action.



I don't know about Canada, but if a participant in a procession here in Oz behaved indecently, and in contravention of his senior officers direction a police officer arrested the offender, the senior officer would have NO basis for disciplinary action.



I hope that helps you understand the term "discretionary" in law enforcement terms.



May I recommend that before you enter a discussion on issues with which you have no knowledge or experience, you do a little research with someone that has?



I am at your disposal at any time to enlighten you.

[Anonymous]

I mean I'm gonna be against late term abortion.  And death penatly. I would go against that. I'm not down for brutality.  There are things I find intolerable.  Alot of people have things they feel are completely not tolerable. This is human. That is what we areally working with. This isn't utopia, and never will be.

[Bricktop]

It is or it isn't but police still use their discretion when choosing to arrest people.



Deny it.  I dare you.

He's just trying to start a flamewar. I pay such attempts no heed. He's an amateur.

No.



As you know, because you enquired, I am actually a legendary and well known flamer.



As you know fuck all about flaming, simply declaring someone an amateur because you don't have the backbone to confront said "amateur" is rather puerile.



If you wish to test my mettle, step up and swing a punch.



Then we'll see who's got balls and who's got a big fucking mouth.

[RW]

It is or it isn't but police still use their discretion when choosing to arrest people.



Deny it.  I dare you.

Here you go again.



I shall enlighten you.



In most western police forces, the legislation that empowers a police officer allows said officer the discretion to exercise his or power in the execution of his or her duty.



Said discretion is applicable ONLY where said officer cannot determine if, based on all of the facts at his or her disposal,an offence has been committed. That discretion does NOT apply when evidence is overwhelming that an offence is committed; the officer is duty and legislatively bound to exercise his or her authority.



Thus, an officer who stops a motorist for speeding does NOT have the discretion to release said driver because she had nice tits.



If he releases said motorist on that basis, he or she would be liable for disclipinary action.



If a person behaves in an indecent, offensive or disorderly manner, and an officer stands by and takes no action, it is subject to action.



I don't know about Canada, but if a participant in a procession here in Oz behaved indecently, and in contravention of his senior officers direction a police officer arrested the offender, the senior officer would have NO basis for disciplinary action.



I hope that helps you understand the term "discretionary" in law enforcement terms.



May I recommend that before you enter a discussion on issues with which you have no knowledge or experience, you do a little research with someone that has?



I am at your disposal at any time to enlighten you.

I did go over it - with you at which time you clearly admitted to letting people off the hook.  An officer didn't issue me a speeding ticket last year because it was my birthday.  It's a common practice.  You know it.  I know it.



Thanks for your previous consultation :)

[Bricktop]

That is actually unlawful. It is not excercising police discretion, but human prejudice.

[RW]

It happens ALL the time.  :P

[Romero]

There has to be lines drawn. It's like this, we got abortions legalized with certain limits. That wasn't good enough, so now there is a fight for the "freedom" to abort babies right up until the day before the due date.

Uh, no there isn't.



Women don't want to get abortions. Sometimes they have to. Believing they want to wait until the last minute is pretty sick.



Did you know that there are many times more natural spontaneous abortions than selective abortions?