maybe black power or some triad gangs have a website, lets go inform them ;p

sorry to break out the stereo types.

//make sure your well armoured - Protests like these will also attract lefty liberals protesting against Chinas Human Rights Record.

got to love this sentiment

They should all be hurled into Prison and the NF banned.

I think it's more of a paranoid attempt at racial exclusivity than a celebration of Eauropean/Pakeha culture.

Additionally, channeling pro-European sentiment through anti-anything else sentiment is fairly destructive.

Yeah, for cure... just pointing out to Koe why I didn't think it was hypocritical to dislike these guys protesting.

The national front could get a following sam. Put it this way, the influx of qualified non english speaking residents will directly effect your, and unqualified people's lione of work (working in box factories...)

You are kidding me right? Members of gangs like black power openly advertise their membership, and everyone with half a brain knows the meaning behind their patches, etc. Yes, they are promoting a political message, and yes they are promoting racial ideas.

yeah, he didn't even know kinch had a radio hidden in the coffee pot all along !

You sound like someone who would shout down anyone in order to shut down opinions that differ to your own.

It's a faux camparison, race and sexual preference, one is physical apperarence, the other is a behaviour, and behaviour can be judged by morals. If your morals differ from that of conservative christians then fine, but let them have their own beliefs without stupid labels.

//It's a faux camparison, race and sexual preference, one is physical apperarence, the other is a behaviour, and behaviour can be judged by morals.

However, if both appearance and behaviour are in part governed by biology, then that's a faux distinction.

Much like it's okay for you to be a wankered bigot in your head, as long as we don't have to hear/see the crap that you churn out?

//it's a religeon, it's not supposed to conform to what we want...

I totally agree, but you have to distinguish between the topic at hand, and, say, gay people trying to become ministers. I'm talking about the imposition of a belief system not shared by the gay / immigrant / whatever minority community on the state, which is the main goal of the national front. Ideally the state *is* supposed to conform to the needs of its population - not just the religious right.

When it comes to personal choice and its associated freedoms and rights, those wishing to restrict freedoms of others must take responsibility for proving that it's for the greater good of society, rather than the oppressed minority having to battle against an aggressive mainstream to prove that they're not a threat.

This whole discussion has gotten sidetracked, but basically my point is that although I totally believe in freedom of speech/religion, my problem is with those people that shout long and loud to restrict the freedoms of others with little, if any, concrete evidence that it will benefit the whole of society. The very name "national front" has a long history of iron-fisted aggression and as such I think shouting them down with greater numbers is a fitting message to send to them, and a very good message of reassurance to send to those benign minorities whose basic rights are threatened by their fascist policies.

//I'm talking about the imposition of a belief system not shared by the gay / immigrant / whatever minority community on the state, which is the main goal of the national front. Ideally the state *is* supposed to conform to the needs of its population - not just the religious right.

When it comes to personal choice and its associated freedoms and rights, those wishing to restrict freedoms of others must take responsibility for proving that it's for the greater good of society, rather than the oppressed minority having to battle against an aggressive mainstream to prove that they're not a threat.
//

Oh no, this has nothing to do with those people, don't think that I would like to see homosexuality criminalised, because I don't, and I'm only speaking from a hypothetical religiouse viewpoint annway.

The Catholic church unofficially allows homosexuals to be ordaned as long a they abstain from homosexual practices, including thoughts...... which might sound ridiculous to you, but it is also required from heterosexual priests aswell - to be celibate in both mind and body.

// I think "one who is intolerant of those who is differ" is a pretty bad thing, and b) the way that you have been expressing your beliefs across the board is the issue with me//

last time I looked my dictionary said something like a bigot = someone who cannot/will not change their opinion/belief. happens to describe religiouse thought pretty well. Nothing about intolerance though that's what I guess most people would think of it as....

although i was being an idiot before, gays I've met tend to fall into two categories

*Genuinly effeminate/slightly androgenous people- which i don't have a problem with...
or
* Bisexual guys who for some reaosn like the look of other mens wangs. (why?)

Yes I realize that I sound like an wanker, and worse - a conservative wanker, but I think that boats already sailed

"Trepadation"? the Lord he covet my ass may go down in NZMcom history.

//Oh no, this has nothing to do with those people, don't think that I would like to see homosexuality criminalised, because I don't, and I'm only speaking from a hypothetical religiouse viewpoint annway.

Ah! Well, then I'm glad we understand each other. ;)

//The Catholic church unofficially allows homosexuals to be ordaned as long a they abstain from homosexual practices, including thoughts...... which might sound ridiculous to you, but it is also required from heterosexual priests aswell - to be celibate in both mind and body.

Just as a matter of interest, the modern Catholic church is possibly more lenient than other orthodox churches on these matters. One of my (gay) flatmates is catholic, and he's told me that different congregations vary a great deal in their consideration of even such issues as homosexuality, the use of contraceptives, abortion, what-have-you. I imagine they're still pretty careful as to whom they choose to ordain; like you said, celibacy is at the top of their list, but in general the stances traditionally associated with the church are very flexible - some congregations are quite staunch, others are very liberal.

I think their stances appear etched in stone due to the unity the church maintains through their belief of the infallibility of the pope. However, the pope only dictates matters of faith. I think basically that means that the pope, through official proclamations, dictates what catholics believe in direct relation to the nature of God. Actual conduct and disciplinary matters are not in his mandate as the infallible head of the church.

//You didn't think that I wasI was a racist homophobe skinhead sitting hear with my collarless jacket and doc walkers on, romper stomper style, spewing out hateful garbage. Because that would be funny.

If I'd thought that I wouldn't have bothered responding. To be honest I thought you took up the debate just because you like arguing. :-P

; )

//no, dwelling on sinful thoughts is. There is a difference. I don't think a christian god expects absolute purity of mind anyway

As far as I'm aware absolute purity of mind is expected. The failure to do this was what necessitated sacrifice (Old Testament: sacrifices; New Testament: the sacrifice of Jesus, followed by believing that Jesus died for your sins).

//Technically good christians aren't supposed to think of bonking as anything more than a reproductive thing

I'd like to see some evidence for this. I think it's a crock. Just because some Christians are repressed, doesn't mean they're supposed to be that way. There's quite a bit of raunch in bits of the bible.

And to heather:
//the modern Catholic church is possibly more lenient than other orthodox churches on these matters.

I think most of the old churches (ie, Anglican, Presbyterian etc.) have fairly liberal branches (but there is a great deal of variation within each of these labels). I would argue that Catholics are the most conservative of the old school churches, they still don't ordain women, for example (and I think that is still part of the pope's ruling). Liberal catholics are more underground, I think.