by Designer Stubble 174 Replies latest watchtower bible
The word 'allow' in the definition would suggest that you tolerate things you have the power or ability to influence
You, me, or 'Scotsman' don't have the ability to stop or influence such things. But the West's armed forces certainly do.
Therefore, to support military action means having zero tolerance.
Being against such military action means having some tolerance.
Military action is not necessary and would result in far more innocent deaths. Trying to suggest that support for military intervention should be set as the standard for whether someone is *not* homophobic is ridiculous.
Better to have standards for trade and not supply these countries with arms. No need for yet another ill-conceived war.
Remember too that until recently, homosexuality was illegal in many western countries and people were subject to imprisonment or chemical castration for their 'crime'. Also, racism was alive and thriving and people were routinely killed with little protection under law - yes, within living memory, in some of our countries.
Should other countries have invaded to stop those things?
Being against such military action means having some tolerance
Is Pink News against military action?
You make a good point, I can and should be more active about such matters. But, as I said, I'm a biologist. Politicians get paid handsomely (c. £70,000pa in UK, basic pay!) to deal with such issues. It's their full-time job.
Politicians respond to voters, if you don't talk to them they don't have to do anything. If you're not actively doing anything LUHE, surely, by your own reasoning you are tolerating atrocities.
I find"being a biologist" a rather hilarious excuse for inaction.
Military action is not necessary ... Better to have standards for trade and not supply these countries with arms - regarding those established countries that discriminate against homosexuals, I agree. The West could also make it a rule that these countries stop their homophobia or they won't receive any Western aid.
I didn't make myself clear. I'm talking about supporting military action against homophobic extremists - Al-Nusra, ISIS, Taliban - that hold areas of land but aren't recognised as countries.
Is Pink News against military action? - is it for it?
If you're not actively doing anything LUHE, surely, by your own reasoning you are tolerating atrocities - no. As I've already explained, by supporting military action against homophobic extremists, I've shown that I have zero tolerance of their homophobic atrocities.
I find"being a biologist" a rather hilarious excuse for inaction - and I find western gay activists' excuses for inaction (too busy pushing for gay marriage?; cataloguing microaggressions? Gays For Palestine?) sad but sadly predictable.
