Drinking gives you liver disease and I'm sitting having a beer right now. As I said earlier don't bum anyone and you'll be fine - otherwise mind your own business.
So what you saying is no alcohol has scientific evidence? And get to feck with minding my own business advice, am trying to liven up the place
You just made the insidious case for culling gay people like badgers - I think telling you to mind your own business was being quite civil about it.
He lost me at the bit about the going rate for child sex at the time was 6 or 7 so that's fine.. Jesus Christ .
I got absolutely nothing whatsoever against gays but they have enough rights as it is and they should put up with what they have right now. Their demands for parity with normal people when it comes to marriage, adoption, blood donations etc is pathetic
You're entitled to your opinion, but all the things you list above are battles the LGBT community has already won. The Civil Partnerships Act (as near marriage as makes no difference) was passed in 2005 and became law in 2006. Gay men and lesbians won the right to be legally married in churches in 2011 and the first marriages took place in 2014. Lesbian couples have been able to legally adopt ever since the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act was amended to remove the "Need For A Father" clause in about 2007. The blood donor ban for gay men was lifted in 2011. I'm pleased that you have nothing against LGBT people and now that you're a little better informed you'll rest assured now that, having achieved the objectives you listed, there should be no more campaigns on those issues.
Errrrrr........ it's not a question of wanting to join the military. They already can. The ban on gay men and lesbians in the UK Armed Forces was lifted in 1999 after the successful campaign by a group called The Rank Outsiders. Doesn't anybody on this site know any of this..?? Do I have to keep pointing out all those successful campaigns, the outcome of which were plastered all over the TV News and popular press at the time they occurred.
But you haven't provided the link. All you've done is refer, in the vaguest possible terms, to a "study". Can you please provide a link. I'm becoming increasingly doubtful that you can. OK.... a couple of points here. Firstly, the whole basis of this discussion is the <ahem> "study" referred to. It is therefore incumbent on the person using it as a basis for their argument to provide the evidence to support it. Secondly, I didn't say I wanted to discredit it, I said I wanted to read it so I could make my own mind up. That is a reasonable thing to want to do and doesn't in any way imply bias. If you provide a link, the grown ups on here will be able to read it and make comments based on an informed opinion. That's what grown ups do. The way this is going though, your evasiveness is increasingly suggestive of somebody who is talking through their arse and making up bogus "research" claims to support an anti-gay stance. I hope that's not the case, but it's increasingly looking like that. Please.... don't introduce any more Straw Men into the discussion, simply provide a link. If you have the report - as you say you have - it should be an easy thing to do.
