Thread: the political correctness and do gooders have gone too far

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

But don't we have a 'right to be bigots' now, according to our loony Attorney General, Senator George Brandis, who is a disgrace to the country. My relatives didn't fight to protect the freedom to be a bigot, I know that for certain.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

I agree with you DiscoMick , it is a fact that anyone has a 'right' to be a bigot.

That does not give that person a right to inflict or force bigotted opinions upon others who are not.

Senator George Brandis , by his meanderings , alludes common people to believe that it is acceptable.....which it is not.

He should be encouraging integrated honesty in the country , not bigotry , but that would threaten and destroy his very existence.

He's just justifying Cory Bernardi's presence in the senate.

Originally Posted by frantic

And it's pretty obvious if a hetro male Pedo walks into the girls room, not so obvious if he's dressed as a she . A lot of people who are gender variable are straight, others swing, whilst others play the home team. Of all thoese it would be naive to believe none where evil.
I was referring to the stupid seen most in religious clicks in hospital where they refuse certain treatments even of it kills them, how long till a stupid X insists on treatment or refuses it of/for a male/ female issue when they don't have the bits in reality. But it will make a funny video

Where is the evidence of these gender variable definitions you speak of? Or is it something you thought up yourself?

Where is the evidence TV's (cross-dresser heterosexuals) also being significantly represented as being paedophiles? It is common in media/movies but not sure the statistical evidence exists to back that up.

Not that this is the point of this thread.

I didn't say you couldn't be a bigot, just that they want exactly what you have. No fanfare, no special treatment etc. Just to be in the way they want to be.

Well, all this talk about bigots, looked up in my two dictionaries, only cheap ones, the Macquarie , 4th edition, and Routledges new sixpenny dictionary, 1892.


Macquarie-- Bigot, a person who is intolerantly convinced of the rightness of a particular creed, opinion, practice, etc.


Routledge's-- A blind zealot. [ zealot- an enthusiast, over zealous]


It seems the modern definition indicates how full of it humans have become. Bob

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

O.K. then what about:

• 47XXY Kleinfelters
• 45XO Turners
• 48XX-XY Mosaic
• 47XXX Triple X

Where do they fit?

Are you going to make them another species because they don't fit your simplistic view of the universe?

nope If the DNA filter opens the door for you then it opens the door for you and you can go in.

simple binary yes/no. If you happen to be able to open both doors, good on ya you get a free choice in life not many other have the opportunity to make, be proud of it.

oh and remember the original post said toilet doors, cause its the only place I could think of where it actually matters what door opens for you based on gender. my standard rule for religious nutters, homosexuals and ADG's applies "I dont care what you do as long as you dont try to involve me in it and do it way the hell over there out of my area of responsability"

Speaking of public toilets.
In the last few weeks I have had the pleasure of having to walk hand in hand with my Mrs into disabled toilets,the looks I got mainly from women I may add were disgusting,what did they think??? Going in there for a quicky???
Andrew

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

Where is the evidence of these gender variable definitions you speak of? Or is it something you thought up yourself?

Where is the evidence TV's (cross-dresser heterosexuals) also being significantly represented as being paedophiles? It is common in media/movies but not sure the statistical evidence exists to back that up.

Not that this is the point of this thread.

Please read and comprehend not jump to accuse
Cross dressers Poeple who identify as the opposite sex, born with the wrong bits etc or other labels as politically correct , are straight, gay or bi, and i never said SIGNIFICANTLY represented as paedophiles , rather that it would be NIAEVE (simple english maybe, STUPID) to believe that none where molesters. You made the assumtion about percentages.
You like to label anyone who disagrees with you as homophobic , you did this several times last year in another deleted thread about scumbags abusing kids when i spoke about Bevan, Arkelll and Evans.