₦airaland Forum

Migurl:
OP I do not think a woman MUST be married to gain respect. This is because respect by definition is "a feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements"

And a successful marriage does not take ability, demand certain qualities and count as an achievement - and is hence worthy of respect and admiration

Does a woman - or a man - need to be married to be respected? No.
Does a good marriage accord with not only respect, but also prestige, honour, joy and fulfillment. Absolutely!

It underpins all flourishing societies, it is the lifeblood of healthy communities, all religions commend it, and those who have successfully achieved it will always testify, and it wil be evidenced by their generations after them.

If you don't get it or don't want it fine - but nothing can tarnish it's essence or reduce it's benefits if properly practiced. The OP' questions demands only a 1 word answer, but begs a whole heap of questions - which I hope I've touched upon somewhat in my two posts on this thread.


TV<sup>MIC

Find any 2 similarly situated people; one successfully married and one not - then tell me if you considere them to be exactly the same in terms of achievement or success.</sup>

Ewuro4:
Not saying oil and gas isn't the best career goal as suggested but does it really matter to US what she does as long as she's not IDLE, has something going for her and the ultimate she's happy?? Pleaseee

No please - all that should "matter to US" is that she and hers are happy with their choices/situation.

Spoken as the proud husband of a SAHM who spends a lot of time lunching with her friends and causing commotion in the town centre with her SAHM' gang !


TV

kittykat1:
It's not tribal sentiments. Cominng from similar tribal, religious and social backgrounds goes a long way in eliminating some misunderstanding.

Well said - and very true

Everyone has the right to their preferences - and responsibility for the attendant consequences. If she misses out due to the restictions she places, that's her fault and burden. And if the shared background helps her have a smooth marital journey, well done to her.

bellong:
What is your definition of gainfully employed?
You didn't include your personality trait and your complete bio.
You are 25, why becoming desperate?

'Sup Bellong - I think this is known as the "A stitch in time saves 9" approach . Why wait until desperation sets-in? Then you have to read all Woged2005 threads on marriage "adjustments" for the over 30's !


TV

mutter:
Every where in the world a woman has more respec when she is married.
This aso goes for men- They have more respect when they are married.

In Nigeria a man also has more respect when he is married. A family man is seen as more responsible and more maure.
This is also so in the western world.

Some things never change!

Well said Mutter.

Getting married indicates - or certainly should - a willingness to take on a greater responsibility to others and a larger stake/role in society. Society acknowledges that action by according you a different type of, or more respect. And so it should.

No one is forced into marriage, and everyone is free too make the lifestyle choices they prefer. Marriage is rated exactly as it should be - as pivotal. It's society' basal building block/institution, and best framework for passing on heritage, traditions, securing legacies and raising the next generation. All the howling by those who don't get that - or childishly demand that their choices be accorded the same respect will not change a thing - thankfully .


TV^MIC

Timbuktou:
Story book-marked for future reference. This fool will be dusting his CV in no time. The wife will soon grow tired of his beta ass and will move to get someone more worthy. This family has five years max to survive.

If that is indeed the situation, he can probably alleviate that by only doing it for a few years and then getting back to work when she starts school - she's already 2 years old. It's not as instinctive in men - he'll do well not to get bored before 2 years sef .


In the "Liberal West", men are becoming ever more feminised, with women making the reverse journey - so this kind of thing is to be increasingly expected, and to be honest more workable. Even if it's not what I would advise "generally", there is no reason why an individual couple could not make this work - and work well.

I note some peculiarities about their situation though, particulalrly the fact that they appear to have no financial strain as a result of this decision. If that "stash" his "his-theirs", or "theirs-theirs", as opposed to "hers-theirs", their should be no extra burden on her or feeling of resentment that she is funding this.

Interesting that he's younger? Maybe nothing in that - although Western men are increasingly shamed into marrying women their own age - but it's also possible the relationship is wife-led or more egalitarian anyway.

Also, he appears more advanced in his career and more likely to have a stake in any former employers - speaks to the finance thing. It may also be that she's on the cusp of bigger things in here career, so it makes sense for her to attain, instead of possibly regressing, which can happen when women take time out.

I wonder if they are planning more children? And if so when? Again, the trend is for smaller families now. I do think many families would be making plans with a second child as the focus; that would suggest the smart move would be for her to take in again - she is 36 after all - and him to keep working.

Wish them all the best, but generally women prefer their men to be active and situation usually demand it's the woman that does the stay-at-home-thingy. Only try it after due consideration.


TV

Evening Martinosi,

I'm interested in knowing the reasons which you you are alluding too. I initially posted without looking -assuming it was a "religion" thread - I am actually more interested in pursuing a discussion on the religious implications.

Having said that, what is it you are insinuating? Politically it's clearly a great strategy to influence the "religious" vote - Sikh temple the day after, with probably more Temples/Synagogues/Mosques to come . And he so obviously stroked their "blab it and grab it mentality" - it was so cringe worthy (but like a lot of the aspirational sermons they undoubtedly hear every week.

Slightly more codedly, the Government already "owns" any religious body that registers as a charity anyway - hence no outspoken opposition to Camerons "Gay charter" - they simply can't, whatever they feel.

So what else is there? I'm always happy to be fed on occasion

Thanks
TV

musiwa94:
Every church should spport him and come out to vote for him

Could you kindly explain why?


TV

I hardly ever watch OH TV, but I just flicked on in passing and I raised an eyebrow when Pastor Agu (sic?) introduced The Conservative party chairman - all na vote collection I thought. But when he introduced The Prime Minister, the tiredness left my eyes in a flash - just eaten after a heavy spin class - I couldn't believe it.

Cameron is just ending his speech now and I can scarce grasp what I'm watching. I can't even begin to unpick the spiritual implications of this. Oya Redeemers, before I comment further, what do you all have to say about this .


TV

Superleo2:
Heterosexualism is the biggest fraud among the "Ism".

Cc TVO1

OK, I'll take it...please explain how and I'll respond.

If this is just attention whoring or hissy-fit type passive aggression please cease and desist as;

1. I am not a reconstructive surgeon
2. I do not require the services of a rent boy
3. I find your "trailing" me quite creepy


TV

Superleo2:
Fùck mankind! It's my business who my feelings is directed to. I didn't develop it overnight.
I was born that way
You bashed me sotay? You must be jonzing. I took a break from Nairaland to attend some school issues.
Gay? I'm actually bisexual not gay. I'm proud of myself.
Alright; just be trolling around but keep "gay" outta your hand.

We couldn't care less how - or to whom - you direct your feelings.

Nobody is born gay

I see you are gay and confused.

Superleo2:
A piece for you all bunch of homophobes

Don't flatter yourself thinking gays like all men.
Each and every gay guy has his SPEC except sex-starved and classless ones.

Au revoir !

A piece for all you deviants.

We don't care about your "SPEC" - we know your lifestyle is harmful to yourselves and society.


TV

Superleo2:
All these silly straight men are still obsessed with gays.

TV01, tread lightly.
Last time we met, after my final "knock-out" you ran away.

Just mind how you demean gays inorder not to get your ass whooped once more.

https://www.nairaland.com/2086280/gay-wants-commit-suicide-advice/3#29722448

Why does it feel like the annual gay-shame parade round here ?

See this one I bashed so tey he de-activated .

Actually, "gays" demean themselves and denigrate mankind by their perverted behaviour I'll be back to tear you another anus tomorrow (you probably need one).


TV

rudebouy:
Am annoying attracted to big boobs, and I get easily turned on just by d sight of it. D way I lust afta dose oranges scares d hell out of me sometimes. Day are so fvcking irresistible. My love for big boobs is like an alter ego - I just cant explain it.

Am thinking of getting married in a year or two, and am scared dat I will most likely cheat on my wife with someone with bigger boobs, cos all d wifeable girls around me have small boobs. I can only date someone I can reason with, love her personality, someone who's teachable and someone I enjoy her company, but it seems d boobs part which I've been surpressing for some years now is becoming indispensable.

For example, I was at a friend's shop and I was just staring at her boobs cos she has added a lot of weight and I cdnt just take my eyes off them. I had to tell her dat her cowbell milk satchets are so inviting. She almost slapped me. I was watching the Wendy show on BET TV and began to wish I was her husband. I began to wish I cd find a beautiful woman with such a wonderful personality and brains and with such perfect boobs. Now I hardly watch her shows becos her boobs will be distracting me. Men! Its dat bad.

So I wanna ask the truthful married men in the house whose wifes have big boobs, two funny questions:

1. Was ur wife's boobs one of d tins or d main tin dat attracted to her?

2. Do you still find ur wife's boobs attractive (afta childbirth and all)?

I know dis sounds kinda awful but I wd really appreciate sincere answers. U just mite help someone avoid marrying the wrong person. Rite now am seriously considering marrying a woman with big boobs in addition to the other qualities I mentioned above.

Call it a silly thread, but am not kidding here.

Thanks in advance.

I wasn't planning on posting this evening, but had to rush in to drop a few lines before the urinal destroyers arrived to browbeat or shame you into questioning or going against your natural inclinations.

Firstly - you dey craze? A well set rack is important to you and you don't already consider it a "quality". Let me tell you this; if you do marry a woman with a decent rack and you don't let her know by constant verbal reference and indiscriminate groping - in addition to dedicated "appreciation slots" - that you find it amongst her foremost qualities you are dulling.

If big b00bs (how quaint) mean a lot to you, don't you by any means choose someone who doesn't have a set that will put your eye out if she executes a right turn to quickly.

There is nothing wrong with you or your desire; if it's marvellous mammaries that you desire, it's the least you deserve for the hard work you are going to put into building a home and providing for your wife and any children you may have. What may I ask is wrong with having something to look forward to at the end of a long hard day at work ?

I am serious, if you marry someone without them, you'll never be satisfied and the risk of straying will be greatly amplified. The only exception is if you meet someone who presents such a compelling case, that her lack of the chest size you would ideally like makes absolutely no difference to your desire to marry her - even then, give it time so that your eyes can clear, just in case.

If you do get what you want, know that there are potential downsides, be sure to mentally consider and fully embrace that possibility. And it might be an idea to carry out some discreet checks .

To answer your questions; yes & yes !


I'm off upstairs


TV

5minsmadness:
Witnesses say they heard loud "animal-like screeching"

...just like our resident feminists/feminazis/femenians here on the family section then !


TV

^{...and please, no denouncing them as loonies, ill, mad or non-feminsts.}

cococandy:
Ok there are moral and ceremonial laws in the bible.

I specifically referenced the OT

cococandy:
What's immoral about a woman teaching in the church? We agree it is one the ceremonial laws that's based on culture.

It may happen contextually, but it's men that should generally lead - and no, we don't agree, not least because it's in the NT

cococandy:
Thank you.

You are always welcome. We once discussed and I suggested you read and get to know the bible for yourself. Be that because you want to understand it or engage in debate about it's content. Reverb.

cococandy:
You just helped me make my point.

You didn't actually make one.

cococandy:
As for your other points, at the risk of sounding like I'm insulting you, I will say that is naive. No offense.

None taken


@BlackLeopard, your pathetic, plaintive, whiney, mewling - and as someone mentioned "insincere" - post was noted. I like to respond as far as possible, but you don't desrve a whole post for that


TV

Shollypopzz:
I wanted to reply you but I changed my mind.

It's the internet - I know the rules, unlike some who post up in here !

Shollypopzz:
This has absolutely nothing to do with the argument of yesterday. When you have the time to reply my post, let me know.

I'm not sure which post you are refering to? I thought I'd responded to everything. Let me know - I won't pass up the chance to bash you !

And you did not respond to my question re the origins of men - but it's the internet and I know the rules !


TV

Shollypopzz:
Are there any feminists that aren't self proclaimed feminists?? Explain yaself

In the sense that the ones here claim they are, but are clearly not. Other possible qualifiers, Crypto, Pseudo, Ersatz, Bogus !

Shollypopzz:
1.) Bullsh1t! Except you are trolling and you are taking equality to an insane level where it has to be tit for tat with an obsession for recording who gives and takes. I consider my relationship to be egalitarian.

Someone regardless of sex usually "wears the pants" in a relationship - In a Lesbian relationship with two "nurturing, empathetic and low-testosterone women", you'd expect it to be an atmosphere of mutual support and supplication - total peace. But no, not only are they the least enduring of relationships, they are also the most violent.

"Your relationships" - not to be unkind - are mostly of the transitory kind. Those are more likely to be egalitarian. You both satisfy a single need, no real pressure, demands or support needed. They are little more than feel good times. Like marriage with the honeymoon, but without the baby sick, bills, ill-health etc.

Shollypopzz:
2.) Link!

One of your problems is that you appear not to haven't engaged in a L/T commited relationship. For what is essentially FWB, you are looking for fitness based on 1 criteria. For a L/T relationship, a woman needs decidedly more. In general women will only couple L/T with a man they can look up to (higher status). Otherwise the attraction wanes and the woman is left feeling dissatisfied - ask Cococandy . Or ask your soi-disant feministas on this thread that are forming equality in marriage if their husbands are Alphas?

Shollypopzz:
You always talk with both sides of your mouth. *Let me pretend I have no issues with the Alpha and Beta bullshit in a civilized society and bite*

If a man is supposedly superior to a woman based on her gender alone; then why can't an Alpha male deal with an Alpha female, Is he scared? You are making Alphas look like men with really fragile egos who can't take a lil competition from an "inferior" gender.

Men are not superior - they are equipped and wired for a complimentary - not a competing - role. Not to say there isn't a lot of overlap or that both can't be proficient in areas the others are more naturally inclined to.

Todays lesson;
First, it's better to think of Alpha/Beta in a neutral sense (not pejoratively), and then as behaviours, not inbuilt characteristics or personality types (otherwise all hope would be lost for FrancisTony ). So any man can exhibit Alpha or Beta behaviours. And for a successful L/T relationship, men need to know how to blend the two.

Secondly A/B behaviours are not the same across sexes or even something that really pertains to women. Hence your first false assumption. Men don't view women in those terms or using the same criteria.

What you call an Alpha female is to a man simply another man. If he hangs with her at all, it's because she probably passes on other "fitness criteria".

An Alpha status male who has sufficient wealth/income is not looking for that as a fitness measure in a mate. I hear women wail al lthe time "I have umpteen degrees, a high flying career, my own place and car, subscribe to - insert name of trendy liberal rag here - have on-point conversational skills..etc. etc., but I can't get or keep a man - at least not the type I feel I deserve/want.

Sorry y'all that's all secondary. If you are not "fit" with it, you are losing out to the giggling bimbo with the pretty face and the figure 8. Yes, we are that shallow !

No charge Sholly - just invite me to your wedding


TV

Timbuktou:
All the "Family Section men" are not responsible for your unfortunate childhood and upbringing. Perhaps, you were rejected by both parents, perhaps, you lost them to death; fact is you lack/lacked the benefit of a male influence growing up. The "Family Section Men" is not to blame for that. You can't come and tell us what your grandma taught you about men, when we had brothers, uncles, fathers and grandfathers in our lives.

Watch and learn boy.

Morning T, perhaps we should offer to mentor FrancisTony - he's a real danger - mostly to himself - if left unschooled in the arts of manliness. Maybe informally? Coogar, Crackhaus, Pickabeau1, Njokusboy, Kabonic etc. perhaps the occassional pointer when he's fumbling !

@FrancisTony; never whine. It demonstrably unmanly. You ran to the mods. Thats so "entitlement princessy" or plainly speaking a beesh move . If you can't take the heat or haven't the appetite for the fight, simply bounce (Shollypopz does that so well ). Pick your battles - count the cost as the bible would say. All you've done is introduce rancour into the thread - Todays lesson.


TV

Shollypopzz:
We were talking about objective morality and I answered your questions, don't run away. Besides, you agreed to remove Christianity/religion from the argument.

https://www.nairaland.com/2251479/why-modern-woman-sad/12#32721801


Feminism demands equal rights to the opposite gender in all aspects, even socially, and that's where the family institution comes into play. The basis of feminism boils down to women overcoming oppression and discrimination but also women having the choice to do things that their male counterparts can.

A feminist that doesn't vote in a particular election would not lose her feminist card, would she? We want the choice to do whatever we want with our bodies, we want the choice to education, we want sexual freedom.

Telling women what to do goes against the core of feminism since all we do as feminists is tell the society not to dictate what we should do as women.
I am not saying we would not side-eye a feminist that chooses to let her husband be the head in the family but we cannot debate it because she has a right to do so and we want to champion freedom, rights and choices as feminists.

The feminist that spoke against Beyonce never said she wasn't a feminist, she only called her lukewarm and that is what a passionate feminist would do because she can't defend her point otherwise.

Make friends with feminists in real life, it helps you understand how we think.



When you are getting your a*ss whooped, right??

...'morrow. I need to go and tend to my garden !


TV

BlackLeopard:
Thing is you're missing people on the internet are real people. Hence also real feminists. (OR that in the age of social sites, what happens on the internet is often faster influencial in many areas than what is reported via other means.) So in many ways you're just following a very out of reality logic.

Attacking a poster is the only thing you can do? Not responding to thought out arguments?
But sure, continue talking about The Gayz.

If you're so curious, why don't you join the club?
And while we're at it and you're airing everything of your verbal vomit publicly, tell us who of your brilliant trained parrots you're meeting and where? I'm sure we could make a criminal case out of it, and you'd get enough of the ass you so crave as sitting in jail. Though I doubt you'd get any even there. Gays are said to have a style in who they pick.

Hissy fit !

Pele


TV

FrancisTony:
He gave you a smack down!

Ndo! Pele ma ti e

www.nairaland.com/attachments/1836641_jere_jpeg4bd759bbded4f8a4018ae12dfbd5248d

Au contraire. I even liked your post - good gif, lousy argument.


TV

cococandy:
Oh.
Ok.
How else do you understand the parts where war was waged on neighboring countries and children killed to make space for Israelites to expand?

Is there a different spirituality to understand that such is violence and was sanctioned by the (prophets) bible who spoke for God based on what they understood?

Weren't those real events and not mere words.

Ok there's a different way to understand those parts but it is fine to interprete verbatim the parts that say women shouldn't teach in a gathering of men? classic.



If you won't kill your neighbor for cursing God, I rest my case.
Not every Christian can follow bible teachings verbatim.
Such would be locked up and keys thrown away forever

Cococandy knows fully well that not everything in the Bible is prescriptive for Christians. Coco is well aware of the the distinction between the moral and ceremonial laws of the OT, and the commandment to love God and neighbour in the new.

Coco also knows that loving God means keeping his commandments - as laid down by Christ and His apostles, and that loving your neighbour does not mean endorsing their every action.

But Cococandy, like many of the other soi-disant feminists around these parts, struggle to reconcile their progressive inclinations with their love for piety ! And so like to form like they have equality in their relationships.

But as I've pointed out before

1. No human intimate relationship is ever egalitarian - note we touched on lesbians having the most violent relationships.
2. Women do not want men they can't look up to. Ultimately they won't respect them, cannot love them and won't be happy to stay with them.

So we either have lots of Femininists married to Betas or we have Coco !


TV

BlackLeopard:
Actually not, BlackLeopard is sitting by, having fun watching you go in circles that don't make any sense
All your happy 'screwing with feminists', you should tell that to people like Admiral Grace Murray Hopper, because weren't it for her, there wouldn't be computer and internet like we have now on which you spout your 'women are so pathetic' nonsense. But sure, women like her and Ada Lovelace don't mean a thing to you, oh masculine connoissaeurs of history?

Women, and femininity, aren't pathetic. We'd be a screwed kind, weren't it for intelligent, brave, helpful, compassionate, and great women y'all keep dissing as terrible feminists.

I wouldn't have the cojones to mess with a real feminist. Only the unseeded NL types ! Have you given up making the case for homsexuality?

FrancisTony:
Best post over.
One million likes.

...why are you pleasuring yourself with his effete post - awon rent boy corps !


TV

Stillfire:
So it now a matter of first position? Hahahaha According to the bible the first shall be the last!!!!! Hahahaha

Stilly, you struggle when it comes to Bible. You're better with standard social discourse. Not to be prescriptive - just trying to help !


TV

FrancisTony:
Are you the same as Mranony

No. Are you repentant?


TV

Stillfire:
TV, TV
The plan of living together, side by side as equals in the garden, k-i-s-s-i-n-g.

H-E-L-P-ME-E-T!


TV

^{Kissing ke? Pa Adam was Alpha & Ma Eve was a babe - he woulda hit that !}

Stillfire:
God's initial plan was never to create an hierarchy. It was a curse. And all curses shall be broken through the blood of Jesus Christ!

Stilly, Stilly, Stilly, ah, ah! Please tell us what God original plan was?

My take;
Adam was always to be the head - hence, he was held accountable when he hearkened to Eve's voice and sinned. If they were to be considered equals, then it was clearly the woman who fell into transgression and would have bourne the consequences alone. Women - creating situations since the garden .

Shollypopzz:
@TV01: Respond to my post, so I don't have to engage this mor0n anymore.

Sholly, Sholly, Sholly, I've answered you now? Abi?? I believe in a Lawgiver and one who has given us a conscience that knows broadly right from wrong - even if it is learned to a degree. Plus you didn't answer my question about the origins of mankind?

Feminism demands a minimum of equality - a woman that chooses to let her man lead has denied feminism in it's essence - and not revoking her card is a sign of your desperation to keep your numbers up, not ideological fidelity.

Toying with feminists is getting boring !

I see BlackLeopard has flounced off in a hissy fit. Where's that mangina called FrancisTony? Let me knock his little head !


TV

crackhaus:
Should I go on?

Please do jor...give them headache Let's see them contort some more...it's fun.

crackhaus:
LOL...
TV01, are you reading this?

TV

cococandy:
so Christianity is not sexist?
Good.
We agree.

It's not sexist to me. I see leadership along with greater responsibility - and burden and accountability - assigned to men.

Feminism decries that, and views it as oppressive and misogynistic - "sexist" is a polite way of stating it from a feminist view.

So if you agree with me, then yes !


TV

crackhaus:
Love your neighbor as yourself is not equality, it's equity.

Equality aims to promote fairness and justice, but
it can only work if everyone starts from the same place and needs the same things.

Equity aims to promote fairness and justice, despite our obvious differences and needs.

Equality is used to force outcomes and make different things the same.

Case in point is SSM. An opposite sex couple can never be equal to a same sex couple. But forcing the narrative to make them equal means they have to have marriage. And then they have to have children. So wombs for rents, forced separation of children from mothers (children rights out of the window) all has to be legitimised to ensure equality.

Equality is treating things that are situational alike in the same way. It should never mean compromising the rights of one set (children) to indulge the desires of another (gays). It should not require huge amounts of social re-engineering or come at great cost.


TV

crackhaus:
Lol, why does it matter if you use KJV or not?

KJV can give people headache and it's not as amenable to sophistry as some of the more recent translations .

We all all equally heirs of grace, equal in a creational sense, but men are charged with leadership in the home and church - this should by some readings extend to civil leadership, but I'll leave that - feminism cannot abide any sense of being led by men.

Indeed they consider marriage oppressive to women and many would like it dismantled. It's clearly stated within the first few paragraphs of the wiki definition.


TV

cococandy:
@bold, all thanks to feminists.

Even little is too bad And the few remaining countries where women are still in chains will keep breathing the air of feminism blowing their way until they are liberated.

Au contrairé Coco - thanks to Christianity. And I want fundamental human rights for all.


TV

BlackLeopard:
Dude stop equating homosexuality with pedophilia, it's tiring. Child abuse is, I think we can agree on, wrong. Regardless of who does it to children.

I don't equate them - homosexuality is worse. Given cultural norms and traditions, the age of consent/marriage can be debated. And where that is so young as to be considered paedophilia is by degrees (not paedophilia in the sense of babies/toddlers 0). I consider homosexuality more or less bracketed with bestiality.

BlackLeopard:
Legitimising homosexuality? Let me see. For one, most of the civilized world respecting human rights moved on. Homosexuality isn't harming anyone, and legitimizing it doesn't really increase sexual abuse cases because plain, abusers aren't by majority homosexuals.

Speaking in a purely civil manner, one can make a case for tolerating it. But as we've seen, discussing and negotiating with sin - let alone compromising with it - merely gives it more headroom (it abounds). And it will continue to force it's way to totally colouring the social discourse. I actually see nothing wrong with zero tolerance towards homosexuality.

And Homosexuals are 6-20 times more likely to abuse minors; and at rates over 85% for minor boys.

BlackLeopard:
And in fact, I wasn't calling you either of these. I was just saying it's a thing each should consider on their own when being so strongly against at least one of those issues (homosexuality, the pedophilia is I think we can agree a different basket of fruits.)

As above. I honestly pay no heed to ad hominem and it makes no difference to me. I may even confess to enjoying it a little. In all, I cut to the heart of issues. Some issues can be discussed civilly, but I've come to see that some evils must be confronted head on and without recourse to bogus niceties.

When the talk here is now of charging people who don't give their children a positive portrayal of homosexuality . That actually implies children taken into care, and then possibly fostered out to...yeah, think about that.

No to homosexuality, no to same sex marriage, no to same sex adoption. No and thrice no.


TV