LGB Alliance monkeypox tweets deleted

[pezdis]

The LGB Alliance tweets from yesterday about gay men and monkeypox have been deleted by twitter for either homophobia or misinformation.

It does not follow, because Jackie Doyle Price believes that allowing the state to interfere in the Sacraments is a Very Bad Thing, that someone from a different religion will agree.

I can't imagine any religion believing it is a good thing for the state to interfere in their sacraments regardless of their agreement with any particular issue the state wished to impose at that point in time. Just because the Quakers agreed with same sex marriage doesn't mean they would be happy for the state to impose it on them.

Only today the LGB Alliance told the Scottish Parliament that "after gays rights were given, the percentage of gay people in the population didn't go up, not at all."

twitter.com/thekieranaldred/status/1531607839474651137

This is completely incorrect as any quick Google or involvement with the LGBT community will tell you:

www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-60429942

www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/06/number-people-identify-lesbian-gay-bisexual-uk-high

No wonder they have no credibility! They are so ill-informed about everything.

I don't think that Hearache cares. They seem to either don't know how legislating works, or think that every issue is polarised and follows that absolutism that we seem to see so much of.

Did you mean to post an article referring to LGBT 'characters' on the tele, Hearache? I mean.... really?

OK.

By the real world, do you mean twitter? Because have I got news for you...

Its still one thread

its just needed more titles as posts only go to 1000

on other threads where posts go on indefinitely it would still be one thread…obviously

saying there are 16 threads is very disingenuous, its a continuation

Yes.... we view it as one thread. Because, if you used MN at all, you will understand that a thread is limited to 40 pages.

Hence, the use of '16'.

But if you want to be pedantic, it is of course 16 individual threads.

Have you looked at any of them? You will notice how they are linked using the only options we have available to us.

We're limited to 1000 (?) posts per thread, so we have to break them up.

vehemently supported by Mumsnet

I wonder whether they would put that on a t-shirt!

Only today the LGB Alliance told the Scottish Parliament that "after gays rights were given, the percentage of gay people in the population didn't go up, not at all."

The state isn't interfering in the sacraments when it allowed gay marriage. It allowed gay civil marriage and gave any religion that wanted to marry gays the choice to do so.

No religion was forced to marry anyone. In fact (at the COE's request) they even passed a law so the Church of England would be banned from performing them:

www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-20680924

It does not appear that you (or Jackie Doyle Price) have done much research on this topic.

Thankfully most MPs ignored her nonsense and voted for gay rights!

saying there are 16 threads is very disingenuous, its a continuation
You need to take that up with whoever named them. 🤷‍♀️
**
**

Can I ask then how many of those declaring themselves as lesbians are actually transitioned males?

There seems to be a split in the definition of homosexual these days. It is vital for accuracy for every one of those data collections to be very clear what they are using as a definition.

If you cannot be very clear, please do not post ambiguous data.

You're just being silly now.

You need to take that up with whoever named them. 🤷‍♀️

yeah... your twisting and swivelling is quite clear.

But if you want to be pedantic, it is of course 16 individual threads.

It's not me who's being pedantic here 😆

You need to take that up with whoever named them

no I don’t

I feel like I am reading the opinions of someone who lives at right-angles to reality.

The situation was the subject of much debate in 2013. When the legislation for civil partnerships was passed, the compromise was that NO religion whatsoever could be invoked in a civil partnership ceremony. There was even Senior clerics of some denominations were concerned they would be forced to perform same-sex marriages. Other denominations were

They had the same title, and the continuation link was provided just before they reached the maximum number of posts, so yes it was clear to those of us following that they were a continuation of the same thread discussing AB and stonewall and GCC.

Do you want that explaining in easier words?

Oh ffs mumsnet.

As I was saying. The situation was the subject of much debate in 2013. When the legislation for civil partnerships was passed, the compromise was that NO religion whatsoever could be invoked in a civil partnership ceremony. There was even a list of prohibited music for civil partnership ceremonies because it was deemed too religious in content and the sole preserve of marriage ceremonies.

This served particular denominations well.

By the time the equal marriage campaign gained enough force to reach parliament though, the leaders of the denominations it did not serve, e.g. Quakers, Reform Jews, had got together to say they felt it was discriminatory that the legislation restricted them from performing same-sex marriages. So we had religious freedome being compromised after all! How to resolve this? Well, parliamentary debate happened. Lots of it.

The new compromise they eventually developed was legislation to specifically protect the CoE, thus allowing other denominations to perform same-sex marriages.

This thread seems to have become two people's attempt to get people to drop their support for the LGB Alliance, and as is always the case with trans rights (because the hatred of LGB Alliance is related to their sensible statements over trans rights), never to debate the actual issue, which is how to stop the spread of Monkeypox by gay men.

an MP who voted against equal marriage in England and Wales in 2013 and Northern Ireland in 2019. Clear homophobia.

By your admitted personal definition, not that of many gay and lesbian people who have their personal reasons for not supporting same sex marriage as an institution.

My definition of "clear homophobia" is refusing to accept that people can be exclusively same sex attracted. Like many transactivists and their supporters do. So there you go.

I feel like I am reading the opinions of someone who lives at right-angles to reality.

A feeling I often have when reading posts from TRAs and their friends.

“The state isn't interfering in the sacraments when it allowed gay marriage. It allowed gay civil marriage and gave any religion that wanted to marry gays the choice to do so.

No religion was forced to marry anyone. In fact (at the COE's request) they even passed a law so the Church of England would be banned from performing them:”

Aw, bless. You found a source!

But did you read past the headline? If you quote a source it would be advisable not to quote one that explains exactly why Jackie Doyle Price would have voted against the Bill. And why the compromise (that no church could be forced into a marriage ceremony they disagreed with) was reached.

In fact, if your argument is that the state interfering in the sacraments is ‘nonsense’, don’t quote a source that shows there was considerable concern that this was just what the Bill was in danger of doing; both cross party and across religions.

”It does not appear that you (or Jackie Doyle Price) have done much research on this topic.”

No, of course not. It would be too much for my female brain to cope with. I haven’t the foggiest idea how I acquired a working knowledge of the difference between religious marriage, civil marriage, blessing a marriage and having a religious celebration of a marriage previously performed by a civil official. Probably something in the tea I drink.