Actor Under Fire for Expressing his Opinion When Asked.

I have been reading these boards for years and this was the thread that finally made me register.
How are you enjoying yourself so far? :D

Welcome to the forum. Don't mind the strange reception. You're a lurker, you know what kind of distrustful bastards we are :)
 
I have been reading these boards for years and this was the thread that finally made me register.

It is wholly disgusting to me that a people who profess Christian values have such vitriol for people who do not share their views. You do not have love in your hearts. We have heard these arguments before and they have been used repeatedly to demonize and dehumanize oppressed minorities. Rhetoric like the kind being espoused in this thread should be classified as nothing less than hate speech.

How dare you make blanket statements about the people close to me. My mother is a lesbian and I am a rape baby. I am straight and married. How dare you tell me that gays lead to dissolution of the family unit. How dare you tell me that gays can't be loving people/parents. How dare you tell me gays can't teach family values.

Most importantly, how dare you try to tell me whom I can and cannot love or whom my children can or cannot love.

People are gay. Get over it.

You see, these kind of comments make Kirk Cameron appear to be as bad, if not worse than those hate mongers over at the WBC. Thats simply not the truth. Again, listen to the interview. It simply was not 'vitrolic', nor was it anywhere akin to hate speech.

Point being, no one has told YOU anything of the sort. You are all kinds of mad over things no one has said to you at all.
 
Yeah. He just said the gay is detrimental and ultimately destructive to so many of the foundations of civilization. What's the big deal?

It's not like anyone should ever get mad because someone said something bad about Christianity or religion in general.
 
Telling someone that they are destroying society is obviously a compliment

So is saying they shouldn't be able to marry

Or have equality
 
So every thing that happens in nature is good?

Is this really the path you want to go down?

Seriously first homosexuality is "unnatural" and when people point out it happens in nature the next thing is "oh but if it's natural it doesn't mean it's inherently good!" and then come the comparisons or "[insert horrible thing] happens in nature as well!"
 
Yeah. He just said the gay is detrimental and ultimately destructive to so many of the foundations of civilization. What's the big deal?

It's not like anyone should ever get mad because someone said something bad about Christianity or religion in general.

Did you find the interview 'vitrolic and full of hate'?

I didnt. Did you?

And fwiw, Piers Morgan has come out to say that Kirk Cameron was brave for honestly expressing his opinion the way he did. Obviously, while he may disagree with the comments, he didnt find them 'vitrolic and full of hate' either.
 
He's definitely in the closet about something, Traitorfish.

And fwiw, Piers Morgan has come out to say that Kirk Cameron was brave for honestly expressing his opinion the way he did. Obviously, while he may disagree with the comments, he didnt find them 'vitrolic and full of hate' either.

Heterosexual man finds homophobic comments okay/non-offensive, there for its not homophobic or offensive

Or something
 
He's definitely in the closet about something, Traitorfish.

I dont think so. Those types are usually quite the hate mongers. Kirk Cameron? Not so much. He's just a guy thats not about to water down his faith simply to appease political correctness. Good for him.
 
You see, these kind of comments make Kirk Cameron appear to be as bad, if not worse than those hate mongers over at the WBC. Thats simply not the truth. Again, listen to the interview. It simply was not 'vitrolic', nor was it anywhere akin to hate speech.
I don't think that statements like "gay marriage is wrong", or "homosexuality is immoral" are particularly vitrolic. "It's a threat to the civilization's foundations", however, is a different issue. It's definitely vitrolic, though not sure about it being hate speech ("homosexuals are a threat..." would definitely be hateful, though). I don't like the "brave defenders of CIVILIZATION!!!!" types. There's a destructive hysteria involved in their rhetorics.

So every thing that happens in nature is good?
Indeed! So drop the "homosexuality is bad because it's not natural" argument.
 
I dont think so. Those types are usually quite the hate mongers. Kirk Cameron? Not so much.

I tend to believe that people who espouse the belief that certain groups* (historically ranging from Jews, Muslims, Catholics, Blacks, Asians, Homosexuals, Natives etc) as being destructive to society, to be pretty hateful and also hate mongers.
 
Did you find the interview 'vitrolic and full of hate'?

I didnt. Did you?

And fwiw, Piers Morgan has come out to say that Kirk Cameron was brave for honestly expressing his opinion the way he did. Obviously, while he may disagree with the comments, he didnt find them 'vitrolic and full of hate' either.
As I said in an earlier reply to you, I didn't see the interview. I don't know if it was or wasn't. I don't care.

What I do know is you're going to have a hard time contextualising that remark I posted in a way that I'd find anything less than distasteful, and certainly not brave.
 
I tend to believe that people who espouse the belief that certain groups* (historically ranging from Jews, Muslims, Catholics, Blacks, Asians, Homosexuals, Natives etc) as being destructive to society, to be pretty hateful and also hate mongers.

Again, context. He wasnt referring to a 'group' but to a 'behavior'. Lets at least keep what he said in its correct context instead of making it something he never said.

As I said in an earlier post I didn't see the interview. I don't know if it was or wasn't.

I know you're going to have a hard time contextualising that remark I posted in a way that I'd find anything less than distasteful, and certainly not brave.

Dont you think you should see it if you are going to discuss it? :confused: Or at the very least refer to it in the manner you are? How do you know the context then if you havent seen it?
 
I dont think so. Those types are usually quite the hate mongers. Kirk Cameron? Not so much. He's just a guy thats not about to water down his faith simply to appease political correctness. Good for him.
But his beliefs are stupid. What's admirable about sticking to your guns when it turns out that they're not actually guns, but bits of partially-chewed toffee?
 
Yeah because people like David Starkey talking about how "black culture" has negatively affected white, working class people and causing them to riot is alot more inoffensive and palatable than just straight-out saying that the "blacks did it".
 
But his beliefs are stupid. What's admirable about sticking to your guns when it turns out that they're not actually guns, but bits of partially-chewed toffee?

I disagree his beliefs are stupid, but again, I actually watched the interview. What you dont hear is he also indicates that he is a sinner as well, and certainly not perfect. There's far more there than just the few words that some find offensive.
 
Again, context. He wasnt referring to a 'group' but to a 'behavior'. Lets at least keep what he said in its correct context instead of making it something he never said.
Just as if I said "Judaism undermines the foundation of society" says nothing about Jews.
 
I disagree his beliefs are stupid, but again, I actually watched the interview.
So believing the laws of some bronze-age mystics is the literal word of a cosmic jewish zombie isn't a special belief?
 
Top Bottom