Jump to content
We’re excited to announce the forum is under new management! Details to follow.


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Everything posted by WiseOwl182

  1. But the limit in the Rotherham section isn't 50 currently, it's 70. 50 is not fine in a 70, it's overly cautious and causes other cars to make manoeuvres. It displays a lack of driving competence.
  2. Yes, so you're supporting the LGBT rights side of the argument. No matter how you try to word it, you can only support one side in a conflicting argument. You tell me. I was posing the question.
  3. So therefore, when it comes to religious views Vs equality for homosexuals, the latter wins your support.
  4. Which category would you put the school protesters in? Are conservative religious beliefs less valid? Who do you agree with and support - those who say their religious beliefs mean homosexuality is wrong, or those who believe homosexuality is fine?
  5. I don't know about all religions, but certainly the Quran and Bible teach against homosexuality. No you can't. Either you agree that homosexuality is wrong, or you disagree. You can't support two opposing arguments equally.
  6. That homosexuality is wrong. Nope, I'm not. You just can't admit which viewpoint you're most in agreement with, and therefore the one you support more.
  7. You support the freedom of those religious beliefs, but you disagree with the principle, whereas on homosexuality you support both the freedom of expression to support it, and the principle itself.  Ergo your true support is with the latter.
  8. I'm suggesting that when it comes to freedom of religion Vs freedom of sexuality, the latter trumps the former in your eyes. I'm not confused. You support the freedom of those religious beliefs, but you disagree with the principle, whereas on homosexuality you support both the freedom of expression to support it, and the principle itself.
  9. The fact you refer to such expression as "wrongheaded and foolish" could safely be concluded that you disagree with it. Am I wrong?
  10. You don't know my view, but my assertion isn't that you can't support the expression of views you find bigoted, it's the fact that you find them to be bigoted means that you're taking one side over the other. So in this case, your support for freedom of sexuality trumps your support for the freedom of expression of religious views. To argue otherwise is clearly untrue. As above, your support for one side of the juxtaposition clearly outweighs the other.
  11. In which case, there should be no problem with these protests, as they're merely exercising that freedom of expression.
  12. You could be in the middle or outside lane, or you could be causing HGVs to overtake in the middle lane and therefore cause a knock on effect of pushing out 65mph drivers into the outside lane, so that there are no longer any lanes left for anyone wanting to drive at the 70 limit, therefore causing them to brake and triggering a concertina traffic jam.
  13. No, 50 to 60 isn't fine in the 50mph zone. That's speeding. The limit is 50 due to the configuration of the junctions. The 70 limit section is what is under discussion, and that section is clearly safe to be a 70 limit, and currently is a 70 limit, so driving at 70 on it is not "speeding" or "formula one".
  14. It's not unreasonable to go just under speed limit, say 65 in a 70. The "ludicrous" and "incompetent" statements are aimed towards those claiming 70 in a 70 is too fast, and proudly announcing they drive at 50 on motorways in clear conditions and don't mind holding traffic up and forcing them into manoeuvres.
  15. The speed limit is 70mph on the Rotherham section. It's a dual carriageway with central reservation so how is that too fast? Nice bit of sexist misandry but irrelevant. Seems to me people like to drive at the limit allowed to get to where they're going as quickly as LEGALLY ALLOWED to do so.
  16. You can't say you support their freedom of expression, whilst simultaneously dismissing their view as "bigoted". To answer my question, it seems for conflicted liberals, anti-homophobia trumps religious freedom and multiculturalism. How is taking their kids out school impacting or harming anyone else? If a religion is fundamentally homophobic but you're against homophobia, how can you support the freedom and expression of it?
  17. It's been done to death, but your quoted graphs show how much the deficit has fallen since the 2010 Labour peak.
  18. Why stop at 50 though? 40 would be even safer and environmentally friendly. It's only a few miles so losing another 10mph won't hurt much.
  19. Absolute. Rubbish. It's gone a very long way towards reducing the deficit.
  20. One can't support both when they're in direct contradiction. So who do you support? Equal rights for homosexuals, or freedom to express and exercise religious beliefs?
  21. It's not eating me up inside, but it must be eating the left up inside, not knowing which minority cause to support.
  22. Nice one. You've done some fantastic work trolling on this thread and it's been quite entertaining at times, I have to admit.
  23. You're delusional. The left may oppose Christianity but certainly not Islam. The problem is when the minorities they champion contradict one another, who do they support? That's what eats them up inside.
  24. In what way was that exaggerating? It's not on the same level as, say, "hurtling along at 30", is it?
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.