Sick wickedness of Catholic parents.

[Anchorman]

Can't remember any anti-Communism preaching in the UK in the '70's and 80's.
I DO know a fair few evangelicals who are unashamed socialists, and one communist who is a part tpreacher. None would spout their party politics from Church platform or pulpit.
Nor would I expect them to.

[Nearly Sane]

Can't remember any anti-Communism preaching in the UK in the '70's and 80's.
I DO know a fair few evangelicals who are unashamed socialists, and one communist who is a part tpreacher. None would spout their party politics from Church platform or pulpit.
Nor would I expect them to.

Though I have known priests in the RC tell their congregation to vote Labour because they were the RC party even when the SNP candidate was a member of their congregation and the Labour candidate not RC.

[Leonard James]

Truth is, during the cold war there was as much anti commie preaching being done in your nation and mine as there was in the USA.

This is not merely bullshit but bullshit on stilts, spray-painted with gold paint, varnished, squirted with Hugo Boss and with hundreds and thousands sprinkled on top. Since this remark was directed at/a response to Rhiannon, the "your nation" in the quoted sentence refers to Great Britain (or the UK). I don't know, and if I'm brutally honest am not especially interested, in whether Canada ("mine") had its equivalent of the USA's Red Scare with an alcoholic politician soon to die a premature death of his addiction orchestrating a campaign of smear, innuendo, insinuation and suspicion against people of nothing more than socially liberal and progressive views (with the attendant destruction of careers and lives that ensued), but I do know one thing: this nation - my nation; Rhiannon's nation - didn't. I neither know nor care about Canada, but there wasn't "as much anti commie preaching being done" in our realm "as there was in the USA."

So give over with this fulminating horseshit and learn some history which extends beyond the borders of the USA's lumber room.

Having lived at the time I can assure you that in Britain it was known as "the McCarthy red-scare witch-hunt".

[Rhiannon]

Ah, now this is interesting. Having g done a quick google on the Red Scares I found this:

Homosexuality was classified as a psychiatric disorder in the 1950s.[53] However, in the context of the highly politicised Cold War environment, homosexuality became framed as a dangerous, contagious social disease that posed a potential threat to state security.[53] As the family was believed to be the cornerstone of American strength and integrity,[54] the stigmatisation of homosexuals as "sexual perverts" meant that they were both unable to function within a family unit and presented the potential to poison the social body.[55] This era also witnessed the establishment of widely spread FBI surveillance intended to identify homosexual government employees.[56]

Full text here.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism#Victims_of_McCarthyism

Which might go some way to explain why homosexuality still freaks out so many in the States.

[Leonard James]

Ah, now this is interesting. Having g done a quick google on the Red Scares I found this:

Homosexuality was classified as a psychiatric disorder in the 1950s.[53] However, in the context of the highly politicised Cold War environment, homosexuality became framed as a dangerous, contagious social disease that posed a potential threat to state security.[53] As the family was believed to be the cornerstone of American strength and integrity,[54] the stigmatisation of homosexuals as "sexual perverts" meant that they were both unable to function within a family unit and presented the potential to poison the social body.[55] This era also witnessed the establishment of widely spread FBI surveillance intended to identify homosexual government employees.[56]

Full text here.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism#Victims_of_McCarthyism

Which might go some way to explain why homosexuality still freaks out so many in the States.

Very likely! Thank goodness the younger generation won't be influenced by it.

[ad_orientem]

How the hell did this thread get into communism?

[Shaker]

How the hell did this thread get into communism?

I don't know and don't care, but I suspect that Len and trent, if thus inclined, may want to know more about the two bears* in your avatar.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bear_%28gay_culture%29

[ad_orientem]

Sorry, did you say something?

[Shaker]

No, but I did type something.

[ad_orientem]

What?

[Shaker]

Reply #107.

[ad_orientem]

Pardon?

[Hope]

Acceptance is key.

There is 'acceptance' and 'acceptance'.  To take the argument away from the emotive issue of sexuality for a moment; there are behaviours which society almost without exception regard with revulsion - rape and murder being two examples.  Back in 1993, the Uk was rocked by the reports of the horrific death of James Bulger, at the hands of Robert Thompson and Jon Venables.  How were the parents of these two 10-year olds to behave?   Were they to accept the behaviour, or were they to reject the behaviour but continue to accept the individuals? 
...........

I think the problem is less with the parents in this story but with society which insists that you can'y divorce the two elements in this way; in other words, one can't accept the individual without accepting the behaviour.

[Shaker]

There is 'acceptance' and 'acceptance'.  To take the argument away from the emotive issue of sexuality for a moment; there are behaviours which society almost without exception regard with revulsion - rape and murder being two examples.

Off the top of your head, why do you think that that might be the case?

[Hope]

There is 'acceptance' and 'acceptance'.  To take the argument away from the emotive issue of sexuality for a moment; there are behaviours which society almost without exception regard with revulsion - rape and murder being two examples.

Off the top of your head, why do you think that that might be the case?

Read the rest of the post your have partially quoted from.

[Shaker]

I have (indeed, did) and it doesn't answer the question I posed. That's why I asked it.

[Hope]

I have (indeed, did) and it doesn't answer the question I posed. That's why I asked it.

I explained in pretty simple English why I believe that there is 'acceptance' and 'acceptance'.  I suppose I could rework it in words of one syllable for you, but it might take some time.

[Shaker]

I explained in pretty simple English why I believe that there is 'acceptance' and 'acceptance'.

Where and when?

I suppose I could rework it in words of one syllable for you, but it might take some time.

I doubt you're doing anything else of any use, worth or value, so go for it.

[Hope]

I doubt you're doing anything else of any use, worth or value, so go for it.

That's right, the second assignment for my Institute of Fundraising Certificate in Fundraising qualification (due in next Tuesday) is of no 'use, worth or value'.  Nor is preparing for a job interview I've got the day after that.  Shan't be putting myself out for someone who clearly has limited understanding of basic English.

[Shaker]

I doubt you're doing anything else of any use, worth or value, so go for it.

That's right, the second assignment for my Institute of Fundraising Certificate in Fundraising qualification (due in next Tuesday) is of no 'use, worth or value'.  Nor is preparing for a job interview I've got the day after that.  Shan't be putting myself out for someone who clearly has limited understanding of basic English.

All sounds like a load of idle wank of the late middle-aged unemployed. Somebody who a matter of a few hours ago labelled an ordinary post on this forum as containing "a lot of clever words" - actually, some very ordinary words, ordinarily arranged in clear and simple, comprehensible sentences - has no place or business in decrying anybody else's understanding of basic English as "limited."

[Aruntraveller]

Acceptance is key.

There is 'acceptance' and 'acceptance'.  To take the argument away from the emotive issue of sexuality for a moment; there are behaviours which society almost without exception regard with revulsion - rape and murder being two examples.  Back in 1993, the Uk was rocked by the reports of the horrific death of James Bulger, at the hands of Robert Thompson and Jon Venables.  How were the parents of these two 10-year olds to behave?   Were they to accept the behaviour, or were they to reject the behaviour but continue to accept the individuals? 
...........

I think the problem is less with the parents in this story but with society which insists that you can'y divorce the two elements in this way; in other words, one can't accept the individual without accepting the behaviour.

If as I believe, and through years of interaction(stop sniggering at the back Shaker) within the gay community, know, being gay is a pretty much fixed state for a small but fixed % of the population. It is therefore plain stupid not to accept it as a parent. To do otherwise alienates your offspring and brings untold misery to them and to themselves. I have NEVER heard one happy story come out of rejection by parents of gay offspring. OF course you will have because you have a story for every occasion on gay issues. I wonder why that is.

Your introduction of Venables et al, is a straw man unworthy of even you.

[Shaker]

If as I believe, and through years of interaction

*snigger*

(stop sniggering at the back Shaker

Ooh bugger.

Sorry.

Carry on.

[Owlswing]

I doubt you're doing anything else of any use, worth or value, so go for it.

That's right, the second assignment for my Institute of Fundraising Certificate in Fundraising qualification (due in next Tuesday) is of no 'use, worth or value'.  Nor is preparing for a job interview I've got the day after that.  Shan't be putting myself out for someone who clearly has limited understanding of basic English.

Another totally bloody useless qualification - why don't you get a qualification in something that is going to involve rather more than screwing money out of people for some dubious "good cause!".

And just because it is you, as a devoyted and committed Christian, doing it, does not make it a good or wothwhile casue.

[OH MY WORLD!]

Exactly Anchorman, The only anti communist barking I heard in the USA, Canada and the UK was from our politicians. Don't try and tell me yours didn't do their share of anti communist barking. As far as teaching, Rhi was being dishonest by using the word teaching, as if children were being taught this from their grade three teachers all across America. Nope, my cousins never said any anti pinko commie words to me and they were schooled in N and S Dakota, Nebraska, Minnesota, Colorado and Oregon. So Rhi is shoveling a load of her BS.

[Nearly Sane]

Acceptance is key.

There is 'acceptance' and 'acceptance'.  To take the argument away from the emotive issue of sexuality for a moment; there are behaviours which society almost without exception regard with revulsion - rape and murder being two examples.  Back in 1993, the Uk was rocked by the reports of the horrific death of James Bulger, at the hands of Robert Thompson and Jon Venables.  How were the parents of these two 10-year olds to behave?   Were they to accept the behaviour, or were they to reject the behaviour but continue to accept the individuals? 
...........

I think the problem is less with the parents in this story but with society which insists that you can'y divorce the two elements in this way; in other words, one can't accept the individual without accepting the behaviour.

you really can't help yourself, can you? All it takes is a couple of posts on homosexuality and off you will go making an implicit comparison between trentvoyager's  relationship and rape and murder.