Manny Pacquiao

[john]

Manny Pacquiao

Says humans who engage in same sex relationships are worse that animals cos animals don’t do it.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/video/2016/feb/16/manny-pacquiao-people-in-same-sex-relationships-worse-than-animals-video

But apparently they do.

http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/so-it-turns-out-giraffes-are-gayest-animal-planet231014/#gs.Fpj1cxo

Another spectacular own goal from an ill informed crusading Christian!

[Humph Warden Bennett]

Own up-you are just glad because he lost the Nike contract.

[john]

Too true.

I do not want to see the street cred of my new Nike zimmer frame devalued.

[Hope]

Too true.

I do not want to see the street cred of my new Nike zimmer frame devalued.

'Nike', 'zimmer frame' and 'street cred' are all ready 3 devalued phraseswhen combined like this, john   

[Khatru]

Unfortunately, there are many uninformed and uneducated Filipinos who would not care how many offensive and denigrating statements Pacquiao says. Those Filipinos would still vote for this man who never got to sponsor or pass any legislation while in Congress.   Kind of like Donald Trump I guess.

[Leonard James]

He may be good at boxing but he's an ignoramus about some things.

[Shaker]

He may be good at boxing but he's an ignoramus about some things.

That's the second boxer in about as many months who has made similar comments.

I suppose we should be sympathetic - the mere desire for a career spent being hit repeatedly around the head coupled with the actuality of such a career isn't exactly indicative of high intelligence.

Still, he has a good side - face down on the canvas, unconscious:

https://youtu.be/FzvggTg9Cx0

[Leonard James]

That's the second boxer in about as many months who has made similar comments.

I suppose we should be sympathetic - the mere desire for a career spent being hit repeatedly around the head coupled with the actuality of such a career isn't exactly indicative of high intelligence.

Still, he has a good side - face down on the canvas, unconscious:

https://youtu.be/FzvggTg9Cx0

I have never seen a boxing match (other than inadvertently on the tv or cinema), and that video was the most boring, daft spectacle I have seen recently. Two guys prancing about like demented kangaroos trying to beat each other unconscious is not my idea of sport. I 'liked' the end though!   

[floo]

That's the second boxer in about as many months who has made similar comments.

I suppose we should be sympathetic - the mere desire for a career spent being hit repeatedly around the head coupled with the actuality of such a career isn't exactly indicative of high intelligence.

Still, he has a good side - face down on the canvas, unconscious:

https://youtu.be/FzvggTg9Cx0

Too right!

[Shaker]

I have never seen a boxing match (other than inadvertently on the tv or cinema), and that video was the most boring, daft spectacle I have seen recently. Two guys prancing about like demented kangaroos trying to beat each other unconscious is not my idea of sport. I 'liked' the end though! 

You would have appreciated a young Mike Tyson back in the day when he was at the top of his form, Len - straight out of the corner, maybe twenty seconds of light jabbing from the opponent and then a single almighty wallop from Tyson that left the other bloke staring at the lights. Fight over, the rest of the evening is your own.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1z9mbQk58B0

[Leonard James]

You would have appreciated a young Mike Tyson back in the day when he was at the top of his form, Len - straight out of the corner, maybe twenty seconds of light jabbing from the opponent and then a single almighty wallop from Tyson that left the other bloke staring at the lights. Fight over, the rest of the evening is your own.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1z9mbQk58B0

YUK! I refuse to watch any more.

[OH MY WORLD!]

I'm with you Leo. Two guys prancing about is a buzz kill. (snork)  But boxing is a great to watch but it reminds me of the rodeo. All those hits to the heads and all those broken bones makes a boxer's and a cowboy's retirement years a real drag. Not all of course.

[Leonard James]

I'm with you Leo. Two guys prancing about is a buzz kill. (snork)  But boxing is a great to watch but it reminds me of the rodeo. All those hits to the heads and all those broken bones makes a boxer's and a cowboy's retirement years a real drag. Not all of course.

Boxing is two guys deliberately trying to harm each another, and for this reason I find it bisgusting and distasteful.

A rodeo is exciting to watch, and there is no intention of harming on the part of either rider or horse, even though sometimes it can happen.

[Shaker]

Boxing is two guys deliberately trying to harm each another, and for this reason I find it bisgusting and distasteful.

A rodeo is exciting to watch, and there is no intention of harming on the part of either rider or horse, even though sometimes it can happen.

I'd much rather rodeos were banned and boxing allowed - as daft as some of these chumps may be, at least they choose freely and voluntarily to run the risk of damaging themselves. The horses don't.

[Rhiannon]

I'd much rather rodeos were banned and boxing allowed - as daft as some of these chumps may be, at least they choose freely and voluntarily to run the risk of damaging themselves. The horses don't.

Agree. There's also the argument that boxing clubs do provide discipline, friendship and direction for disaffected young people - many boxers testify that without boxing it would have been a life of crime for them.

[Leonard James]

As usual I shall have to be in the minority! 

[Rhiannon]

As usual I shall have to be in the minority! 

I don't disagree with you, Len - it's not something I get at all. But it seems to serve a purpose

[Leonard James]

Well, I suppose it's only like breaking a horse in, really.

[Rhiannon]

We'll we're back to choice again. Even the thickest boxer has a choice. Horses not so much.

[Bubbles]

I'd much rather rodeos were banned and boxing allowed - as daft as some of these chumps may be, at least they choose freely and voluntarily to run the risk of damaging themselves. The horses don't.

The purpose of the rodeo isn't to hurt the horse in any way.

It's just making entertainment out of teaching a horse to take a rider.

Don't you agree with horse riding?

Do you think it's cruel or something?

[Shaker]

The purpose of the rodeo isn't to hurt the horse in any way.

I know that isn't its purpose, but innumerable horses are hurt (some of them badly) and killed regardless.

It's just making entertainment out of teaching a horse to take a rider.

I don't see animals as entertainment for the idle whims of human beings.

Don't you agree with horse riding?

No.

Do you think it's cruel or something?

It reinforces the attitude that other animals are things, objects, commodities to be used for entertainment by humans.

[Sebastian Toe]

The purpose of the rodeo isn't to hurt the horse in any way.

It's just making entertainment out of teaching a horse to take a rider.

Don't you agree with horse riding?

Do you think it's cruel or something?

That's the horses covered, now what about the bulls?

[Spud]

One response to the theory that homosexuality in animals justifies it in humans is to argue that if it does then rape or filial cannibalism in animals justifies the same behaviour in humans.

[Nearly Sane]

One response to the theory that homosexuality in animals justifies it in humans is to argue that if it does then rape or filial cannibalism in animals justifies the same behaviour in humans.

I've never seen the argument that it 'justifies', just seen people point out in reply to idiots who state it is unnatural that it does happen in many other animal.


Your blatant strawman with yet another of these facile comparisons to something like rape or cannibalism is tedious an irrelevant. Come back when you actually want to have a discussion rather than spew fatuous nonsense.

[Leonard James]

One response to the theory that homosexuality in animals justifies it in humans is to argue that if it does then rape or filial cannibalism in animals justifies the same behaviour in humans.

Humans are animals, and DO indulge in such behaviour on occasions. The difference is one of morality. If the activity harms anybody we legislate against it.