Disagree with me as much as you want. There's no law against it, and I could care less. However, when you dismiss the likes of Hitchens and Fry as "morons", then that shows you up in a different light. Peter Hitchens was only ever meant to clean his brothers shoes. Intelligence was completely wasted on him. He always lurked in Christopher's shadow. From your utterances, and deep prejudices, I assume you are of the religious persuasion.
The correlating figure which you conveniently miss is, "What is the percentage of gay men who are peadophiles?"
Not just Muslims tbf but don't let that get in the way eh. Typical of certain types of people when they can't discuss rationally, try and resort to insults. Problem is I don't care and am happy to say what I need to. It says a lot that you have this faux outrage but can't be arsed to look it up for yourself and present your findings. Gay men to boy rape ratio is 3-5 Straight men to girl is 1-11
But they are/were Morons just as Dawkins is a rabid ****wit disliked by atheists. My own persuasion doesn't mean I dislike other atheists or commentators/writers etc. Just these ****wits who have gained prominence from idiots "you must believe what we believe"
Overall that would be a difficult figure to come to for various reasons However looking at various studies of victims and even experiences of gay men there are startling stats, which was my initial claim So for example the number of gay men who say they had sexual experiences with adult men when they were kids. A high percentage according to some American studies
So in other words you haven't got a clue as to the figures. Your assertion that there is a higher link between gay men and paedeophilia and hetrosexual men and *****philia would thus appear groundless and thus scurrolous. The only conclusion that most fair minded people would come to is that the overwhelming majority of gay men and hetrosexual men are NOT *****philes.
I didn't insult you plums, I stated a fact, the Muslim community don't accept homosexuality, as your religion instructs you. The fact that homosexuality is still punishable by death in a number of Muslim states gives us a clue like. Why should I look up your spurious facts? The burden of proof is yours soft arse.
He knows **** all about the subject, he's pulling numbers out of his arse There's 2 different types of *****phile for a start http://www.csom.org/train/etiology/4/4_1.htm
Get over yourself. You actually need some degree of intelligence to question the people you malign. You fail miserably on that score.
I don't see anyone claiming that the majority were or are anything, apart from racist ****wits regarding Asian/Muslim men The issue was that the figure of *****phile rings busted where the leaders were gay Good try to but no cigar, with regards to the attempt to change the perimeters of the discussion
I don't live in a Muslim country I live here and maybe just maybe mg views here are based not on my religious belief but, as you should be aware from other thread, my 15 years plus in community safety related field in a senior management position. My initial comment was based on a response to a claim you made. What you said isn't true and I said so. It was comment for comment
Why cause you say so? FYI I have sat with at least one of the ****wits you mentioned, have you? "you must believe what we believe"
Your professional life has nothing to do with it, so I've no idea why you've brought that up? You're a practising Muslim and your religion doesn't accept homosexuality - fact. Therefore your view on homosexuality is bound to be tainted by your religious beliefs. The fact that you waded in to this thread and decided that you'd defend a post that resembled views from the 1950's backs that up. As in case you'd forgotten, the poster was trying to suggest that a child would be somehow unsafe with a man who was homosexual, based solely on his sexuality, Which is statistically incorrect for a start off, but is also the mindset of a homophobe. A heterosexual man wouldn't have the same suggestion thrown at him despite the vast majority of *****phile offences being committed by heterosexual men.
My first comment to you was based on my professional knowledge not my religion. Not once have I given a view on homosexuality generally. The fact that you want to turn this into a religious discussion is based on your prejudices not mine I could directly quote what I said and back it up but it appears you would prefer to sling mud FYI I can happily discuss my religious beliefs too and how that does indeed dictate my views on certain topics. But quite often, as in this case, I chose not to
The perimeters of the discussion related to the number of homosexual footballers in the professional game. So where do you want to go with that? I also not that you swept aside the assertion that the conclusion most fair minded people would come to is that the overwhelming majority of gay men and hetrosexual men are NOT *****philes - probably because you don't want to hear it because it doesn't suit your agenda.
You already have mate. I wasn't turning it into a religious discussion, but your religion has context in this area, hence the reason I mentioned it. Me bringing it up isn't showing prejudice either, you however were showing obvious prejudice love x
I don't, but that's not the issue, lol. You don't have to be a politician to talk about politics, or a racist to talk about race!
