Fury is a role model

First topic message reminder :

Loved this interview.

[spoiler="https]

Just beat the greatest and now world champ, and the whole team still down to earth and cool guys. I don't know why he gets so many haters...

tunes666 wrote:

Dipper Brown wrote:Tunes, you're an apologist clutching at straws.

That would indicate I think he done something wrong, I don't.  He has hurt no one.

Fury's views aren't in accordance with his faith, they're his own interpretation.

No they are not, they are of his faith and its ridiculous to tell them its not.  Yes religions do have differing interpretations, it does not mean everyone must be forced to follow one. There is the free church where gays/lezbains can be priests, as friend of mine used to be one.  Then there is Catholicism who believe in the pope as a clergy while not all Christians do, But it does not make any of them wrong, just the ones they follow...

Furthermore, this wouldn't be a defence either way. You're accountable for your own thoughts so he shouldn't hide behind his 'faith'.
I see the man as a lost little boy who's found a sense of belonging as a God fearing man. He's decided to take his new found notoriety as an opportunity to spout his nonsense.  

For many people their religious code is the way to live by, you have certain values you promote and certain ones you don't, as a Christian you believe in the code he has set forth for you, and there for you do use it as a bases on how to think and live. Again some people mock it and do not respect it. But people have a right to their religion.  And while putting aside Gay peoples human rights and freedoms being respected, everyone is entitled to a view on the nature of it, as science it yet to really explain it fully.

I wouldn't ask anyone to think any differently than they do but to preach is another matter entirely. He's asked us to change the channel if we don't like hearing him. Noted. I'll do the same for you.

Well, you would not want to learn anything would you..

If their religious code is the way they live and the bible is omnipotent then why aren't they out stoning people and killing anyone who takes his name in vain...

They aren't because they know they'll go to jail because it's wrong......Just like they know saying gays are like paedophiles is wrong...

Unless you're an idiot..

Don't try to justify something unjustifiable...Makes you look thicker than him..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:What you mean is...

That it's spot on in your opinion....

Surely posting on a forum with a personalised user name indicates that everything I post is my opinion. It's sort of how these things work....

hazharrison wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:What you mean is...

That it's spot on in your opinion....

Surely posting on a forum with a personalised user name indicates that everything I post is my opinion. It's sort of how these things work....

Nope you said "This article is spot on...."

What you should have wrote is ......"It's spot on in my opinion !!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:What you mean is...

That it's spot on in your opinion....

Surely posting on a forum with a personalised user name indicates that everything I post is my opinion. It's sort of how these things work....

Nope you said "This article is spot on...."

What you should have wrote is ......"It's spot on in my opinion !!  

Are you asking people to add disclaimers to their posts? You've been reduced to this? Dear oh deary me....

*All views are strictly my opinion

You're not going to start throwing your toys out are you ??.....

tunes666 wrote:Attacking Religious views and practice based on ones own opinions is Draconian.

Not really. There are certain morals or principles that we have as a society, and we can't outlaw criticism of them because they are based in faith. Society moves on, religious texts don't.

"But your honor it says stoning is okay in the bible...."

"I find the defendant Not guilty"....

Reminds me of a good scene from West Wing:

"President Josiah Bartlet: Good. I like your show. I like how you call homosexuality an abomination.
Dr. Jenna Jacobs: I don't say homosexuality is an abomination, Mr. President. The Bible does.
President Josiah Bartlet: Yes, it does. Leviticus.
Dr. Jenna Jacobs: 18:22.
President Josiah Bartlet: Chapter and verse. I wanted to ask you a couple of questions while I had you here. I'm interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. She's a Georgetown sophomore, speaks fluent Italian, always cleared the table when it was her turn. What would a good price for her be? While thinking about that, can I ask another? My Chief of Staff Leo McGarry insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or is it okay to call the police? Here's one that's really important 'cause we've got a lot of sports fans in this town: Touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean. Leviticus 11:7. If they promise to wear gloves, can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point? Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother John for planting different crops side by side? Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads? Think about those questions, would you? One last thing: While you may be mistaking this for your monthly meeting of the Ignorant Tight-Ass Club, in this building, when the President stands, nobody sits."

To be fair, NFL uses cow leather now and has for a while.

Hardly the point though?

I understood the point. But you can't use incorrect statements to point out the ridiculousness of something.

Reminds me of when someone said all New York cops were corrupt...

Can't remember who that was ??

Could you help me out Raf ??

OK, so trim the quote in your head. It's rhetoric from a TV show.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

tunes666 wrote:

Dipper Brown wrote:Tunes, you're an apologist clutching at straws.

That would indicate I think he done something wrong, I don't.  He has hurt no one.

Fury's views aren't in accordance with his faith, they're his own interpretation.

No they are not, they are of his faith and its ridiculous to tell them its not.  Yes religions do have differing interpretations, it does not mean everyone must be forced to follow one. There is the free church where gays/lezbains can be priests, as friend of mine used to be one.  Then there is Catholicism who believe in the pope as a clergy while not all Christians do, But it does not make any of them wrong, just the ones they follow...

Furthermore, this wouldn't be a defence either way. You're accountable for your own thoughts so he shouldn't hide behind his 'faith'.
I see the man as a lost little boy who's found a sense of belonging as a God fearing man. He's decided to take his new found notoriety as an opportunity to spout his nonsense.  

For many people their religious code is the way to live by, you have certain values you promote and certain ones you don't, as a Christian you believe in the code he has set forth for you, and there for you do use it as a bases on how to think and live. Again some people mock it and do not respect it. But people have a right to their religion.  And while putting aside Gay peoples human rights and freedoms being respected, everyone is entitled to a view on the nature of it, as science it yet to really explain it fully.

I wouldn't ask anyone to think any differently than they do but to preach is another matter entirely. He's asked us to change the channel if we don't like hearing him. Noted. I'll do the same for you.

Well, you would not want to learn anything would you..

If their religious code is the way they live and the bible is omnipotent then why aren't they out stoning people and killing anyone who takes his name in vain...

They aren't because they know they'll go to jail because it's wrong......Just like they know saying gays are like paedophiles is wrong...

Unless you're an idiot..

Don't try to justify something unjustifiable...Makes you look thicker than him..

I think my explanation is not thick, and he is clearly not thick, I think you might be thick for not understanding my points.

There is nothing in the bible that demands that you must stone people... The bible was written in days were law was diforent and tolerance of law was difference. Back in those days they may have stoned people for being gay, Today they dont do that, they simply do not approve and feel it is caused by negative forces, thats the view they hold.   And if its such a disgrace for Christians to view Gays as sinners then why are we not offended by those who view eating pork as a sin? this is no different?. Or feel they can marry 3 wives?, its funny that does not get the same scrutiny.

It seems you support the thought Police.. You have not commented on modern politicians supporting convicted pedos working with children, the person in question funny enough also responsible for the HOP pedo inquiry, or the age of consent pushing down to 10yo.

Do you support those things? Or do you think that maybe things are moving into a direction that might not be good for children, Have you even bothered to listen to Furys main point or are you to busy being a politically correct idiot?

It was said in jest Scottie.

Truss I think this is what you're referring to...
" ... with respect to speeding
charges brought by FPD, the
evidence shows not only that
African Americans are
represented at
disproportionately high rates
overall, but also that the
disparate impact of FPD’s
enforcement practices on
African Americans is 48%
larger when citations are
issued not on the basis of radar
or laser, but by some other
method, such as the officer’s
own visual assessment.
These disparities are also
present in FPD’s use of force.
Nearly 90% of documented
force used by FPD officers was
used against African
Americans. In every canine
bite incident for which racial
information is available, the
person bitten was African
American.
... African Americans are 68%
less likely than others to have
their cases dismissed by the
court, and are more likely to
have their cases last longer and
result in more required court
encounters. African Americans
are at least 50% more likely to
have their cases lead to an
arrest warrant, and accounted
for 92% of cases in which an
arrest warrant was issued by
the Ferguson Municipal Court
in 2013. Available data show
that, of those actually arrested
by FPD only because of an
outstanding municipal
warrant, 96% are African
American.
Our investigation indicates that
this disproportionate burden
on African Americans cannot
be explained by any difference
in the rate at which people of
different races violate the law.
Rather, our investigation has
revealed that these disparities
occur, at least in part, because
of unlawful bias against and
stereotypes about African
Americans. We have found
substantial evidence of racial
bias among police and court
staff in Ferguson. For example,
we discovered emails circulated
by police supervisors and court
staff that stereotype racial
minorities as criminals,
including one email that joked
about an abortion by an
African-American woman
being a means of crime
control."

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2015/03/ferguson-as-a-criminal-conspiracy-against-its-black-residents-michael-brown-department-of-justice-report/386887/


As for New York cops... Well I mean how could they be racist?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ui46aPahjhg

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It's part of my religion to point out you are a complete f>ckwit.

I highly doubt you have enough intelligence to get through a "Where's Wally" book, let alone educate your self on religion.

tunes666 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

tunes666 wrote:

Dipper Brown wrote:Tunes, you're an apologist clutching at straws.

That would indicate I think he done something wrong, I don't.  He has hurt no one.

Fury's views aren't in accordance with his faith, they're his own interpretation.

No they are not, they are of his faith and its ridiculous to tell them its not.  Yes religions do have differing interpretations, it does not mean everyone must be forced to follow one. There is the free church where gays/lezbains can be priests, as friend of mine used to be one.  Then there is Catholicism who believe in the pope as a clergy while not all Christians do, But it does not make any of them wrong, just the ones they follow...

Furthermore, this wouldn't be a defence either way. You're accountable for your own thoughts so he shouldn't hide behind his 'faith'.
I see the man as a lost little boy who's found a sense of belonging as a God fearing man. He's decided to take his new found notoriety as an opportunity to spout his nonsense.  

For many people their religious code is the way to live by, you have certain values you promote and certain ones you don't, as a Christian you believe in the code he has set forth for you, and there for you do use it as a bases on how to think and live. Again some people mock it and do not respect it. But people have a right to their religion.  And while putting aside Gay peoples human rights and freedoms being respected, everyone is entitled to a view on the nature of it, as science it yet to really explain it fully.

I wouldn't ask anyone to think any differently than they do but to preach is another matter entirely. He's asked us to change the channel if we don't like hearing him. Noted. I'll do the same for you.

Well, you would not want to learn anything would you..

If their religious code is the way they live and the bible is omnipotent then why aren't they out stoning people and killing anyone who takes his name in vain...

They aren't because they know they'll go to jail because it's wrong......Just like they know saying gays are like paedophiles is wrong...

Unless you're an idiot..

Don't try to justify something unjustifiable...Makes you look thicker than him..

I think my explanation is not thick, and he is clearly not thick, I think you might be thick for not understanding my points.

There is nothing in the bible that demands that you must stone people... The bible was written in days were law was diforent and tolerance of law was difference. Back in those days they may have stoned people for being gay, Today they dont do that, they simply do not approve and feel it is caused by negative forces, thats the view they hold.   And if its such a disgrace for Christians to view Gays as sinners then why are we not offended by those who view eating pork as a sin? this is no different?. Or feel they can marry 3 wives?, its funny that does not get the same scrutiny.

It seems you support the thought Police.. You have not commented on modern politicians supporting convicted pedos working with children, the person in question funny enough also responsible for the HOP pedo inquiry, or the age of consent pushing down to 10yo.

Do you support those things?  Or do you think that maybe things are moving into a direction that might not be good for children, Have you even bothered to listen to Furys main point or are you to busy being a politically correct idiot?

............Makes ONETWO look like Einstein..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

tunes666 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

tunes666 wrote:

Dipper Brown wrote:Tunes, you're an apologist clutching at straws.

That would indicate I think he done something wrong, I don't.  He has hurt no one.

Fury's views aren't in accordance with his faith, they're his own interpretation.

No they are not, they are of his faith and its ridiculous to tell them its not.  Yes religions do have differing interpretations, it does not mean everyone must be forced to follow one. There is the free church where gays/lezbains can be priests, as friend of mine used to be one.  Then there is Catholicism who believe in the pope as a clergy while not all Christians do, But it does not make any of them wrong, just the ones they follow...

Furthermore, this wouldn't be a defence either way. You're accountable for your own thoughts so he shouldn't hide behind his 'faith'.
I see the man as a lost little boy who's found a sense of belonging as a God fearing man. He's decided to take his new found notoriety as an opportunity to spout his nonsense.  

For many people their religious code is the way to live by, you have certain values you promote and certain ones you don't, as a Christian you believe in the code he has set forth for you, and there for you do use it as a bases on how to think and live. Again some people mock it and do not respect it. But people have a right to their religion.  And while putting aside Gay peoples human rights and freedoms being respected, everyone is entitled to a view on the nature of it, as science it yet to really explain it fully.

I wouldn't ask anyone to think any differently than they do but to preach is another matter entirely. He's asked us to change the channel if we don't like hearing him. Noted. I'll do the same for you.

Well, you would not want to learn anything would you..

If their religious code is the way they live and the bible is omnipotent then why aren't they out stoning people and killing anyone who takes his name in vain...

They aren't because they know they'll go to jail because it's wrong......Just like they know saying gays are like paedophiles is wrong...

Unless you're an idiot..

Don't try to justify something unjustifiable...Makes you look thicker than him..

I think my explanation is not thick, and he is clearly not thick, I think you might be thick for not understanding my points.

There is nothing in the bible that demands that you must stone people... The bible was written in days were law was diforent and tolerance of law was difference. Back in those days they may have stoned people for being gay, Today they dont do that, they simply do not approve and feel it is caused by negative forces, thats the view they hold.   And if its such a disgrace for Christians to view Gays as sinners then why are we not offended by those who view eating pork as a sin? this is no different?. Or feel they can marry 3 wives?, its funny that does not get the same scrutiny.

It seems you support the thought Police.. You have not commented on modern politicians supporting convicted pedos working with children, the person in question funny enough also responsible for the HOP pedo inquiry, or the age of consent pushing down to 10yo.

Do you support those things?  Or do you think that maybe things are moving into a direction that might not be good for children, Have you even bothered to listen to Furys main point or are you to busy being a politically correct idiot?

............Makes ONETWO look like Einstein..

I dunno Truss, "Lezbain" is a pretty good attempt at spelling "Lesbian". Onetwo would probably only manage "Les Brian".

Tunes wrote:And if its such a disgrace for Christians to view Gays as sinners then why are we not offended by those who view eating pork as a sin? this is no different?.

Perhaps the difference is that people can choose to eat pork (or not) whereas homosexuality is not a choice.

Don't normally wander over to the boxing section but some quality arguments. Being homosexual compared to eating bacon!

tunes666 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It's part of my religion to point out you are a complete f>ckwit.

I highly doubt you have enough intelligence to get through a "Where's Wally" book, let alone educate your self on religion.

If you are going to make a jibe about intelligence at least make sure your spelling is correct; it's yourself not your self.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Don't normally wander over to the boxing section but some quality arguments. Being homosexual compared to eating bacon!

I'd love to tell you this is merely an unfortunate low point... but it's generally the quality of debate

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

tunes666 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

tunes666 wrote:

Dipper Brown wrote:Tunes, you're an apologist clutching at straws.

That would indicate I think he done something wrong, I don't.  He has hurt no one.

Fury's views aren't in accordance with his faith, they're his own interpretation.

No they are not, they are of his faith and its ridiculous to tell them its not.  Yes religions do have differing interpretations, it does not mean everyone must be forced to follow one. There is the free church where gays/lezbains can be priests, as friend of mine used to be one.  Then there is Catholicism who believe in the pope as a clergy while not all Christians do, But it does not make any of them wrong, just the ones they follow...

Furthermore, this wouldn't be a defence either way. You're accountable for your own thoughts so he shouldn't hide behind his 'faith'.
I see the man as a lost little boy who's found a sense of belonging as a God fearing man. He's decided to take his new found notoriety as an opportunity to spout his nonsense.  

For many people their religious code is the way to live by, you have certain values you promote and certain ones you don't, as a Christian you believe in the code he has set forth for you, and there for you do use it as a bases on how to think and live. Again some people mock it and do not respect it. But people have a right to their religion.  And while putting aside Gay peoples human rights and freedoms being respected, everyone is entitled to a view on the nature of it, as science it yet to really explain it fully.

I wouldn't ask anyone to think any differently than they do but to preach is another matter entirely. He's asked us to change the channel if we don't like hearing him. Noted. I'll do the same for you.

Well, you would not want to learn anything would you..

If their religious code is the way they live and the bible is omnipotent then why aren't they out stoning people and killing anyone who takes his name in vain...

They aren't because they know they'll go to jail because it's wrong......Just like they know saying gays are like paedophiles is wrong...

Unless you're an idiot..

Don't try to justify something unjustifiable...Makes you look thicker than him..

I think my explanation is not thick, and he is clearly not thick, I think you might be thick for not understanding my points.

There is nothing in the bible that demands that you must stone people... The bible was written in days were law was diforent and tolerance of law was difference. Back in those days they may have stoned people for being gay, Today they dont do that, they simply do not approve and feel it is caused by negative forces, thats the view they hold.   And if its such a disgrace for Christians to view Gays as sinners then why are we not offended by those who view eating pork as a sin? this is no different?. Or feel they can marry 3 wives?, its funny that does not get the same scrutiny.

It seems you support the thought Police.. You have not commented on modern politicians supporting convicted pedos working with children, the person in question funny enough also responsible for the HOP pedo inquiry, or the age of consent pushing down to 10yo.

Do you support those things?  Or do you think that maybe things are moving into a direction that might not be good for children, Have you even bothered to listen to Furys main point or are you to busy being a politically correct idiot?

............Makes ONETWO look like Einstein..

And being more offended by Christians views on Gays is more an issue than their correct views on pedo apologists gaining ground in modern society.. Its interesting how the media kind of smeared that part of his statement (The main part) and how bright sparks like you don't notice.

Pedo apologists ???

You're rambling on like an idiot...

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

tunes666 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It's part of my religion to point out you are a complete f>ckwit.

I highly doubt you have enough intelligence to get through a "Where's Wally" book, let alone educate your self on religion.

If you are going to make a jibe about intelligence at least make sure your spelling is correct; it's yourself not your self.

See, you are good at spotting space bar hits!, well done!, now to the next page...

I notice you refrain from talking about religion though, too many pages and not enough pictures.

People who distance themselves from religion tend to know more about the bible than most religious types....

Does anybody really believe Fury has ever read a book let alone the bible ??

Why as an atheist would I talk about religion on a boxing forum nor do I have any interest in reading the ramblings of mad men, reading your posts is bad enough.

kingraf wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Don't normally wander over to the boxing section but some quality arguments. Being homosexual compared to eating bacon!

I'd love to tell you this is merely an unfortunate low point... but it's generally the quality of debate

yep we're more eyebrow than highbrow on the boxing board.

Tomorrow we'll be discussing juan manuel marquez' habit of drinking his own urine in preparation for fights, and how that impacts on climate change. Do drop by.

He's said something that might offend some people. They should get over it. Pathetic.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:People who distance themselves from religion tend to know more about the bible than most religious types....

Not really, unless you are talking about those who think they have the right to kill for "god" ... As long as your faith does not actively look to oppress others path then as far as I am concerned they are fine.

The issue is, while many people do take religious scripture too literally, Atheists also do the same.

And some use it to justify biogtry as well of course.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Why as an atheist would I talk about religion on a boxing forum

Well, only you can answer that one.

The subject is relevant while assessing what he said and if the slander and punishment from Liberal extremists is merited.

nor do I have any interest in reading the ramblings of mad men, reading your posts is bad enough.

I think Fury was right in addressing the pedo friendly rubbish going on in political circles, And unlike many men out there, Fury has the balls to point it out... We need more men like him and not the liberal spineless twerps who cry when people say something they don't like.

I think everybody has a right to be stupid.....However I think you abuse that privilege.

tunes666 wrote:Fury has the balls to point it out... We need more men like him and not the liberal spineless twerps who cry when people say something they don't like.

he's invited 90,000 liberal spineless twerps to suck them , so he must have a fair set of nads on him

Are you referring to the private comments that Hewitt made back in the 70's?

I see the police are investigating our friend...Those kind of comments come under "Hate crimes".....

Apparently Johnny Nelson highlight dvds fall under the same category...

... maybe Fury will learn that its better to remain silent and be thought an idiot, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

No 7&1/2 wrote:And some use it to justify biogtry as well of course.

Ok, The word Bigot means a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions.

Please show me where Tyson has shown intolerance?? I think you will find he has done nothing but express his Christian views and distastes at where society was heading regarding families and sexuality... thrown in with a tongue and cheek comment about his wife, while she was present.

Then show me who has been intolerant?, its actually the extreme Liberals (as always) and the media.
So there for, THEY are the bigots who are intolerant to his VIEW... And they very clearly dragged comments up from weeks before the fight in an attempt to tarnish his success..

I don't think Tyson is the Bigot.

Stop using religion as an excuse, you really are embarrassing yourself now.

milkyboy wrote:... maybe Fury will learn that its better to remain silent and be thought an idiot, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

The thing is, when people remain silent from fear of the reaction, this is called oppression. The best remedy is for more people to speak out and hence stand up to the oppression. This is a free society, free speech and a democracy. Free speech does not only count when someone says things you like.

milkyboy wrote:... maybe Fury will learn that its better to remain silent and be thought an idiot, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

The thing is, when people remain silent from fear of the reaction, this is called oppression. The best remedy is for more people to speak out and hence stand up to the oppression.  This is a free society, free speech and a democracy. Free speech does not only count when someone says things you like.

I am sick of all this political correctness. It will get to the point soon where you can't write racist abuse on the walls of your Asian neighbours houses in excrement without some sandal wearing, tofu eating Guardianista reporting you to Claire Short or some such.

Rowley wrote:I am sick of all this political correctness. It will get to the point soon where you can't write racist abuse on the walls of your Asian neighbours houses in excrement without some sandal wearing, tofu eating Guardianista reporting you to Claire Short or some such.

I cannot comprehend the level of stupidity it requires to try and justify the comments that Fury has made.

milkyboy wrote:

tunes666 wrote:Fury has the balls to point it out... We need more men like him and not the liberal spineless twerps who cry when people say something they don't like.

he's invited 90,000 liberal spineless twerps to suck them , so he must have a fair set of nads on him

awww, I bet that offended them.

Rowley wrote:I am sick of all this political correctness. It will get to the point soon where you can't write racist abuse on the walls of your Asian neighbours houses in excrement without some sandal wearing, tofu eating Guardianista reporting you to Claire Short or some such.

Don't be silly, for a start that would be be illegal and classed as vandalism. Also it would be going out of your way to intimidate and harass another in their house.

Hardly the same as honestly answering questions during an Interview.

But feel free to lump em together, if it helps defend political correctness..

The anti politcal correctness card, the last resort of a beaten man.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

Rowley wrote:I am sick of all this political correctness. It will get to the point soon where you can't write racist abuse on the walls of your Asian neighbours houses in excrement without some sandal wearing, tofu eating Guardianista reporting you to Claire Short or some such.

I cannot comprehend the level of stupidity it requires to try and justify the comments that Fury has made.

In fairness to Fury (four words I thought I'd never utter...much like "I killed them all") I agree with his comments regarding Jessica Ennis however, I'd have been inclined to be a tad more diplomatic when describing how attractive she is. But yeah, apart from that, he's a homophobe. He's used the word "gay" in a derogatory manner previously when embarking on a little Twitter rant a while back which, in my tiny unenlightened mind, marks him out as homophobic. He uses the word "gay" as an insult to imply weakness and inferiority in those he's attacking. When he's not hiding behind "religion" as justification for it, he puts it down to being bi-polar or having depression or, when famously taping his mouth shut, persecution.

Poor Fury!

As the comedian Reginald D Hunter says though, "You can say whatever you like, just be prepared to accept the consequences!"

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

Rowley wrote:I am sick of all this political correctness. It will get to the point soon where you can't write racist abuse on the walls of your Asian neighbours houses in excrement without some sandal wearing, tofu eating Guardianista reporting you to Claire Short or some such.

I cannot comprehend the level of stupidity it requires to try and justify the comments that Fury has made.

There is much you cant comprehend, But you really should understand my justification.

Do you or do you not look down on the recent comments on pedophilia made by government peeps? .. or do you except them?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Don't normally wander over to the boxing section but some quality arguments. Being homosexual compared to eating bacon!

If it had been compared to eating sausages.......

Tunes, no offence my friend but you really shouldn't be taking digs at peoples intelligence when you've made numerous simple spelling mistakes in this thread