Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About hard2miss

  • Rank
    Registered User

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Well theres a lot of wierd people in the world then. It wasn't that long ago that being homosexual was wierd, how times have changed eh, maybe theres hope for us yet ? Marrage now is not the same thing and you don't have to be wierd to work that one out. I never gave homosexuality a second thought until they demanded they desolve marrage to prove a point, churches should advertise that what they offer is real marrage and maintain the ban on these fake hijacked marrages that are now offered.
  2. Yes it was... whats that word where you draw up an exagerated example of soething in order to express something ? It elludes me, but it was that. ---------- Post added 03-09-2013 at 01:02 ---------- Depends on how serious and what you thought marrage to be I suppose, to me it feels watered down. I took great pride in the institute of marrage but whats a marrage mean anymore ?
  3. Your mum was not on sort of witnes protection program was she ?
  4. Its obvious what was meant, keep flicking the mud you may hit someone. ---------- Post added 03-09-2013 at 00:50 ---------- None, but offended me deeply.
  5. Your question does not appear to have any meaning to me, could you please elaberate the point ?
  6. In the way Jimmy Saville just wanted to be round minors ? Wanting something and having it given is two different things. Marrage by definition is between a man and woman and has been since time began, I doubt very much 'they wanted to join in', they could not. But that never stopped them 'spit the dummy out' (see my innitial post in the topic) to get their way did it ?
  7. Yes it does. To those who took marrage for the institution it was to what it has become because of gay intolllerance. The very meaning and essence of marrage has now been changed because of the gay lobby and its intollerance of something they could not by definition be party to . Why was the unions of people not enough if in law they amounted to the same thing ? They wanted to strip away the word marrage and its meaning for nothing more than the intollerance of the rest of us and our way of life. Its the same thing to me.
  8. I stand corrected (if you felt the need) Marrage by its deffinition excluded homosexuals, they did not have to try join in, they had its equiverlant in law.
  9. Much the same way that the constitution that was once marrage has now been diluted and changed to mean something different because homosexuals were intollerent of something they could not by defenition be involved in.
  10. Agreed. It happens, now move on. Theres no reason for promotion of it in schools. And the media should also show sociaty how it is and not over percentigise homosexuality.
  11. What makes you think Im homophobic ? Do you find it hard to accept that I can have an issue with gay promotion and not actually have a problem with gays ? How strange you wish me to accept something while not allowing me the same respect. Your post did make me think you had a personal interest with the level you were going to to dismiss my opinion and lable me homophobic inorder to discredit me.
  12. I have know addicts that have been able to hold down jobs, the problems arrise when you have an addiction with no means to support it.
  13. Anyone who does not think theres an issue in the area should walk a day in the shoes of those complaining. I live close by and they are a problem.
  14. My mistake, I must have read into what you were saying incorrectly. You must be able to understand how easy that can be done ?
  • 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.