16Dec/0914
BBC Have Your Say: Genocide, why not?
The question asked is the family-friendly public-service debate: should homosexuals face execution?
Chris in Guildford agrees that this should be imposed in the UK. He also says that gay people should be taken away to a remote island to die out.
That's my licence fee paying for him to say that and have it broadcast nationally. And that's the most recommended comment. Oh, how proud I am of the BBC, and the British public, right now.
*update* That comment has gone now, which is something I suppose, although it did pas through moderation in the first place, despite appearing to break the house rules on homophobia. This one is still there, to keep the state-funded hatred going:
No related posts.
Buy my book, it’s great
Switch site
Donate
Recent Posts
- Cheerio, cheerio, cheerio…
- Children died
- The letters you never get around to sending
- Applying again
- I just sent Robin round – 2
Most Commented On
Recent Comments
- Iain on Applying again
- Roger on The letters you never get around to sending
- Dave Hodgkinson on The letters you never get around to sending
- droid on The letters you never get around to sending
- Rogue_Leader on The letters you never get around to sending
About Me
Hello. I'm a Bristol-based writer and soon-to-be-redundant journalist. You can read more about me and the Enemies site here, or follow me on Twitter. Email me if you like - antonvowl at live dot co dot uk
If you're struggling to read the site please use the drop down box below to increase the text size.
December 16th, 2009 - 13:24
What Chris forgot to mention is that he would also like to be taken to this island. Just to keep an eye on things.
December 16th, 2009 - 13:28
That is the singularly most repulsive bit of public comment that I have read in a long time. Suddenly I am ashamed to belong to the same planet as these people.
December 16th, 2009 - 13:39
Typical poor downtrodden majority whining comment "they wouldn't let me organise a straight pride march, boo hoo". Yawn.
December 16th, 2009 - 13:39
I have read some ridiculous comments on the HYS boards over the years, but this one trumps them all. And it's recommended 51 times at the moment – wtf?! I'm surprised they didn't moderate it. I'm going to report it but doubt anything will be done.
December 16th, 2009 - 13:39
Taken from the BBC's very own rules on the HYS section;
"Do not post messages that are unlawful, harassing, defamatory, abusive, threatening, harmful, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, homophobic or racially offensive."
The irony is that if they'd have refused to post that comment, citing the above rule, they'd have been accused of suppressing freedom of speech.
And people wonder why I despise humanity.
December 16th, 2009 - 13:49
That one appears to have been deleted.
It does beg the question, if these are the comments that got through moderation, what was deleted?
December 16th, 2009 - 13:52
Yes, unfortunately democracy means cunts are allowed to say what they want, and more are allowed to click on the "I liek this!" button. Just as I'm allowed to call them cunts.
You've got to love his theory that homosexuals are a species, and that by quarantining them, they'd die out as no more could possibly exist elsewhere in the world at a later date. Like he actually believes that Gay Pride is about 'recruitment', or maybe they're making more in a factory somewhere. How about he supervises the operation to steralise the parents of homosexuals? In case they have more! A small part of me dies every time I realise that people like this are in our society and allowed to procreate and vote.
Apologies for the cunt-word by the way, but Chris from Guildford is a cunt. And so are at least 48 other people, for sure.
December 16th, 2009 - 14:01
Oh right, so something's ability to reproduce itself is an indication of how natural and OK it is. So those reproducing immigrants must be totally cool then, right?
December 16th, 2009 - 14:16
I complained about that comment too. I expect more people complained about it than recommended it. It breached the guidelines because it did not just answer the question (should Uganda execute homosexuals?) but also urged the UK to execute homosexuals. That, by anyone's standards, is a homophobic comment and arguably a hate crime.
December 16th, 2009 - 14:34
Oh no. I clicked the link. I read the comments. Why did I do that? Why didn't I take the quote above as a social barometer reading of the page? To be fair, there ARE some sensible comments there, but they're being drowned out by the idiots.
Apparently homosexuality is destroying family values and degrading society. So Karen Matthews, Ian Huntley, Amanda Knox, Harold Shipman, Fred West, the gangs of hoody-kids who hang around in my town centre and make anyone over the age of 40 wary of going out after dark, the drug-dealers who've been stabbing each other to death over in Oxford, the politicians skimming money to pay for non-essential items, the religious fundamentalists killing civilians and the politicians starting full-blown wars over oil on the backs of those fundamentalist atrocities… they must all be homosexuals.
Down with this sort of thing, indeed.
(And yes, I'm aware that I should probably register over at the BBC and post it there, but at least here I know people will READ the post).
December 16th, 2009 - 18:12
It's nearly as bad as Harry's Place…
December 16th, 2009 - 20:28
I have alerted the moderator on that last comment which is STILL up but fat lot of good that will do
@kayamana, equally if you take his argument that something's ability to reproduce itself as an indication of how natural and therefore good it is – what about deadly viruses and bacteria? they reproduce themselves. You've got to laugh at the stupidity but then you just want to cry at the amount of people that recommend that sort of thing on HYS
December 17th, 2009 - 00:38
The comment I reported (about sending them to an island) was taken off within five minutes. Was pretty impressed, but why was it published in the first place?
March 4th, 2010 - 13:24
I know this was all a couple of months ago now but I’ve been having a good read on a lazy day. Re: Why was it published i.e. it’s against the ‘rules’.
Well hopefully not just to remind us how ‘good’ we are? Not publishing or censorship doesn’t make the issue go away – it pushes it elsewhere. I’m glad they did publish it, which obviously isn’t the same as glad to have read it. Otherwise it doesn’t give the opportunity for it to be challenged for what it is.
I’d be disappointed to think that outright censorship only exists to give the lazy self-righteous a bit of crafty smug wank and that they’d rather this than stand up and actually dissect or demonstrate how illogical someone’s argument is “face-to-face”. You may not be able to change someone’s mindset but I’d rather witness good challenges and feel relieved that I’m not in the minority than be deprived of the choice because it’s too unpleasant to read for some people. I almost want to apologise but feel that I oughtn’t to actually feel sorry for feeling like this.
As much as it may pain me sometimes to share the same air as those who are tormented enough to type this kind of drivel – and relate to it under the heading of “good family values” I’d rather I could have them out in the open. To drive people to dark whispering corners where their veiwpoint is only shared amongst similar individuals, who go on to spread it in the same way – unchallenged, isn’t what I’d like to see. If I have to read (as I did today) that supposedly gay’s have “a look about them similar to those with cerebral palsy” (which is how this person tells *them* apart – then perhaps my “pain threshold” is different when I read that someone thinks that gays can be made extinct by putting the existing ones all on the one island.
EOR is a comfort blanket for me – a chance to breathe fresh air – and then get back out there and challenge them (not forgetting to come back here for a good chuckle and the sake of sanity).