Comments by "" (@pwillis1589) on "Andrew Bolt slams ‘homophobic, disgusting’ Mark Latham tweet" video.

@kaynine31 What is the bible?
5
Jeez whatever the comment was it must have been bad. Andy and Mark are normally as thick as thieves.
4
Well not really Howard thumped him in an election. The people were wise to him.
4
So you would have to explain and provide evidence of how homosexual behaviour is destroying society and why it is immoral, otherwise I can discount your comment as homophobic hate speech.
4
Factually wrong and demonstrably. So In 2017 only 6 years ago 61.60% of adults on the electoral role voted Yes to support same sex marriage. Mark is most definitely not saying what we think and the data supports me unquestionably.
4
@alibarber57 Who or what is this God thing?
3
You misspelt faeces.
3
@Leo555ZZZ What are you saying? People supported same sex marriage but abhor same sex sexual activity. By what crazy illogical thought practice are you working on. But please provide some evidence of your hypothesis.
3
@hangthecabal3778 No you are absolutely right my mother was homophobic. Did you know her personally?
3
@VH-gw3qi yes I’m dealing with one now.
3
@sejamstihm Sorry what is a god and what evidence do you have it created me. I have a birth certificate with my parents name on it. They created me.
2
@TomasFunes-rt8rd Yes I understand someone or anyone may find anal sex is not their cup of tea. I just find it strange that someone thinks that graphicly describing a sex act between two consenting adults and publicly on Twitter is the act of a mature responsible supposedly political leader. Seems more like the act of a 14 year spoilt brat.
2
@rods6405 I personally am not offended by the graphic nature of his comment, and yes if you seek out information on sex acts you will be able to find all manner of stuff I imagine, however there is a difference between seeking information on a particular sex act and being surprised when you find it, and having it pop up on your twitter feed unannounced. If you can't understand the difference then I'm wasting my time, that's your problem.
2
@rods6405 No of course not, only there will be consequences in doing so.
2
@johnmac333 what about the influence of the various religious organisations that continue to attempt to cover up the sexual assaults committed by their clergy?
2
@hangthecabal3778 Yes I understand you are trying to be as offensive as possible, however I don’t think you quite understand how YouTube comments work.
2
@deLappMedia I have no problem with people who are uncomfortable with homosexuals that is their personal right, and I call them homophobic, I can’t imagine any of them would find that offensive as it is an accurate statement. Fortunately we no longer live in a theocracy, we live in a democracy and in the context of such 61.60% was a thumping majority that was a credit to Australian society.
2
@deLappMedia On a secondary note what two consenting adults do is none or yours or my business.
2
Surely you mean you support the policies and ideas he professes. I mean you surely couldn’t align yourself with a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, hate filled white privileged moron. Trump proudly boasted he could of murdered someone in the middle of Times Square and the people would of still voted for me. Good to see you have joined the Latham ideologue club.
1
@dorianshadesofgray Hey eyes off my cheeks. Firm and muscular as they are. On a serious note do you have any data to support your claim most people on the planet think the same as Mark Latham. I freely admit many countries have quite severe laws regarding homosexuality, however my evidence for the vast majority of people and it’s something like 95% who most definitely do not think like Latham is the results from the recent NSW state elections. Happy to be fact checked on that % number. Once again stop perving on my bum.
1
@dorianshadesofgray Hysterical. I exist and the fact we are swapping posts on youtube proves it. Now send a YouTube post to whatever you think your god to be and let’s see how long it takes for it to reply. You are a crack up.
1
Hey god just getting in first before Dorian gets his two bob in. Your followers down here on earth are just so entertaining don’t stop creating them. They are too much fun.
1
Didn’t take long for the religious nutjobs to pop up.
1
@sejamstihm bad by what measure?
1
@lesliewilliam3777 Again by what measure. I understand you think anal sex is bad, but by what? What makes anal sex bad?
1
@lesliewilliam3777 I have no idea to what you are referring. What am I joking about?
1
@rachelg785 So by that logic a women who for medical reasons is unable to become pregnant and who engages is sexual activity is bad. Your argument is fallacious illogical nonsense.
1
@rachelg785 Plenty of women engage in sexual activity and have no intention of becoming pregnant. I'm not being obtuse I am being factual and logical. Your comment is just nonsensical gibberish.
1
@rachelg785 Seriously you need to read a book, your level of ignorance is astounding. The list of animals that display homosexual behaviour is extensive. Male Bisons have been observed engaging in anal sex. I mean this is 21 century and you are talking as if you’re trapped in some some of weird religious cult from the 15th century. Sex is only for procreation, where to you come up with this rubbish. Your argument lacks any substance or worth and I have proven it demonstratively wrong.
1
@petesmitt Thanks for that. Yes it was reasonably graphic.
1
Look up homophobic in any dictionary. Reference that dictionary and quote the meaning.
1
@TomasFunes-rt8rd You obviously didn't. So here it is the word homophobic and I checked half a dozen dictionaries means both fear of or hate and disgust. So not only is it accurate it is appropriate to use. A perfectly accurate statement is "Mark Latham is a homophobic bigot" there is nothing in that statement that is libellous or false. It is a accurate and precise statement of fact.
1
@cactusjack4813 Are not heterosexuals capable of this act as well?
1
@TomasFunes-rt8rd Yeah right, to the almost universal condemnation by just about everyone in the country, and I'm the one out of step.
1
@hangthecabal3778 Fine by me, as long as all those Latham lovers out there just admit they are bigoted homophobic hate mongers.
1
@Dancing With Fools Which bible and why?
1
@lesliewilliam3777 So pedophilia has been around since the beginning of human history. It is not a recent phenomenon. It has come under closer attention and research since the late 19th century. While predominantly affecting men It is be no means limited to homosexual men as heterosexual men and even women are affected. Your comment is just illogical nonsense, it wasn’t even pithy.
1
@lesliewilliam3777 That’s your argument! Are you sure you want to hang your hat on that. I’ll give you a chance to come up with something else, but if you insist this is going to be a cakewalk.
1
@lesliewilliam3777 So the research has shown there is a consistent proportion of the population that is homosexual and it is around 5 to 10%. So the suggestion that human reproduction is at risk is just nonsensical. Women's fertility ratea vary however the CDC has about 19% of women in the US are unable to get pregnant within 12 months of trying and of that 25% are unable to carry the pregnancy to term. So this idea of yours that it is unnatural because there is no chance of reproduction is just illogical nonsense. Not all women can reproduce and of course some men are infertile as well. Following is a short list of species that in scientific studies have displayed homosexual behaviour 1.Bonobo 2.Common Dolphin 3. Horses 4. Fox 5. Koala 6. King Penguins The list is more extensive however the point is made homosexual behaviours ar not limited to humans. It appears in many other species and appears to be perfectly normal natural behaviour but obviously not universal and in the minority. Science and research continues but there is a hypothesis that homosexual behaviour has evolved as a survival technique and that in our past history when resources where limited through drought or whatever a tribe was better equipped to survive with a gay element as the didn't reproduce and hence were able to conserve their resources better than tribes who didn't and keep on giving birth and consuming extra resources. Again I'm not suggesting this as fact and there are other theories as to why the proportion of homosexuals in a society is fairly constant. Your argument that homosexual behaviour is unnatural because they can't reproduce is just illogical nonsense, apart from the fact quite a few homosexual men do reproduce with women in arrangements. So wants your next line of argument.
1
@mrman1536 So the various church’s efforts in hiding and protecting the clergy who have committed these sexual assaults that’s OK.
1
So I'll cite some research here. Groth & Birnbaum 1978 Dr C. Jenny 1992 Dr N McConagy 1998 In short the empirical research does not show that gay or bisexual men are any more likely than heterosexual men to molest children. This is not not argue that homosexual and bisexuality men never molest chidren. But there is no scientific basis for asserting that they are more likely than heterosexual men to do so.
1
@grannyannie2948 Complete and utter rubbish without the remotest wiff of evidence or data to support a hate filled and bigoted comment. Just unsubstantiated bigoted rubbish.
1
@grannyannie2948 Considering homosexual behaviour is documented as far back as 3200 BCE your comment is just mindless claptrap. Hate mongering of the finest. I don't think there is a minority group you don't hate.
1
@grannyannie2948 So there are numerous reasons historians have theorised as to the fall of the Roman empire and homosexual behaviour is most definitely not one of them. In fact the claim is comical. You are a crack up Grannie.
1
What truth?
1
@Tom R WTF seriously did you just say 61% is hardly a majority. 51% is a majority. Look to save yourself any further ridicule just delete your comment and I’ll delete my reply. Otherwise others might read this and realise what a dill you are.
1
@hangthecabal3778 OMG, how thick are you. Read my reply to V H. You obviously didn't understand my last comment to you. So I will make it clear. You can't possibly offend me.
1
I tried to warn you. Now others have read your comment it’s too late. The stupidity is out there.
1