If sharia law ruled in Britain would gays be hung??

Ben_Reilly wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

bull shit

the sodomy laws would have been applied equally according to the letter

under those laws it would have been irrelevant if the people involved were straight or gay, since the law only stipulates "sodomy" not homosexual sodomy

you sunk your own argument

That would be the letter of the law, but can you prove it was applied even-handedly?

Ben_Reilly wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

bull shit

the sodomy laws would have been applied equally according to the letter

under those laws it would have been irrelevant if the people involved were straight or gay, since the law only stipulates "sodomy" not homosexual sodomy

you sunk your own argument

That would be the letter of the law, but can you prove it was applied even-handedly?

Ben_Reilly wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

bull shit

the sodomy laws would have been applied equally according to the letter

under those laws it would have been irrelevant if the people involved were straight or gay, since the law only stipulates "sodomy" not homosexual sodomy

you sunk your own argument

That would be the letter of the law, but can you prove it was applied even-handedly?

smelly_bandit wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

bull shit

the sodomy laws would have been applied equally according to the letter

under those laws it would have been irrelevant if the people involved were straight or gay, since the law only stipulates "sodomy" not homosexual sodomy

you sunk your own argument

That would be the letter of the law, but can you prove it was applied even-handedly?

that's not what is being discussed

no laws are ever applied evenly since the judges are human beings with their own prejudices

but the letter of the law is what korben didn't take into account when he thought he was being clever

im not interested in his speculation

In early Medieval years, homosexuality was given no particular penance; it was viewed like all the other sins. For example, during the eighth century, Pope Gregory III gave penances of 160 days for lesbian-like acts and usually one year for males who committed homosexual acts.[15] During the Inquisition itself, it is unlikely that people were brought up for homosexual behavior alone; it was usually for publicly challenging the Church's stance against homosexuality. Those who did not back down would be severely punished.[16]

As time went on, punishments for homosexual behavior became harsher. In the thirteenth century, in areas such as France, male homosexual behavior resulted in castration on the first offense, dismemberment on the second, and burning on the third. Lesbian behavior was punished with specific dismemberments for the first two offenses and burning on the third as well. By the mid-fourteenth century in many cities of Italy, civil laws against homosexuality were common. If a person was found to be homosexual, the city's government was entitled to confiscate the offender's property.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

that's not what is being discussed

no laws are ever applied evenly since the judges are human beings with their own prejudices

but the letter of the law is what korben didn't take into account when he thought he was being clever

im not interested in his speculation

In early Medieval years, homosexuality was given no particular penance; it was viewed like all the other sins. For example, during the eighth century, Pope Gregory III gave penances of 160 days for lesbian-like acts and usually one year for males who committed homosexual acts.[15] During the Inquisition itself, it is unlikely that people were brought up for homosexual behavior alone; it was usually for publicly challenging the Church's stance against homosexuality. Those who did not back down would be severely punished.[16]

As time went on, punishments for homosexual behavior became harsher. In the thirteenth century, in areas such as France, male homosexual behavior resulted in castration on the first offense, dismemberment on the second, and burning on the third. Lesbian behavior was punished with specific dismemberments for the first two offenses and burning on the third as well. By the mid-fourteenth century in many cities of Italy, civil laws against homosexuality were common. If a person was found to be homosexual, the city's government was entitled to confiscate the offender's property.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_medieval_Europe#Punishment_in_medieval_times

smelly_bandit wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_medieval_Europe#Punishment_in_medieval_times

irrelevant waffle

the law that korben posted states S O D O M Y not H O M O S E X U A L I T Y

would you like me to draw it in crayon for you??

smelly_bandit wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_medieval_Europe#Punishment_in_medieval_times

irrelevant waffle

the law that korben posted states S O D O M Y not H O M O S E X U A L I T Y

would you like me to draw it in crayon for you??

Korben Dallas wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

irrelevant waffle

the law that korben posted states S O D O M Y not H O M O S E X U A L I T Y

would you like me to draw it in crayon for you??

FFs your as dense as a neutron star
H O M O S E X U A L I T Y AS A WORD DID NOT EXSIT WHEN THAT WAS THE LAW
But i see you have deflected and avoid providing proof that the law was applied evenly because it wasn`t

you know you posting hear is depriving a village somewhere of an idiot.

smelly_bandit wrote:

Korben Dallas wrote:
FFs your as dense as a neutron star
H O M O S E X U A L I T Y AS A WORD DID NOT EXSIT WHEN THAT WAS THE LAW
But i see you have deflected and avoid providing proof that the law was applied evenly because it wasn`t

you know you posting hear is depriving a village somewhere of an idiot.

you're the one who posted it up you retard

now you're trying to backtrack and drop it like a hot potato

the law YOU posted up said sodomy

not sodomy only between men

Korben Dallas wrote:

heavenly father wrote:It seems in many countries that sharia law has power homosexuals are hung according to that law, would the same happen in Britain.

Actual the question is
could it happen AGAIN in Britain

Sodomy was historically known in England and Wales as buggery, and is usually interpreted as referring to anal intercourse between two males or a male and a female. In England and Wales buggery was made a felony by the Buggery Act in 1533, during the reign of Henry VIII. The punishment for those convicted was the death penalty until 1861. James Pratt and John Smith were the last two to be executed for sodomy in 1835

Korben Dallas wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

irrelevant waffle

the law that korben posted states S O D O M Y not H O M O S E X U A L I T Y

would you like me to draw it in crayon for you??

FFs your as dense as a neutron star
H O M O S E X U A L I T Y AS A WORD DID NOT EXSIT WHEN THAT WAS THE LAW
But i see you have deflected and avoid providing proof that the law was applied evenly because it wasn`t

you know you posting hear is depriving a village somewhere of an idiot.

BigAndy9 wrote:

Korben Dallas wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

irrelevant waffle

the law that korben posted states S O D O M Y not H O M O S E X U A L I T Y

would you like me to draw it in crayon for you??

FFs your as dense as a neutron star
H O M O S E X U A L I T Y AS A WORD DID NOT EXSIT WHEN THAT WAS THE LAW
But i see you have deflected and avoid providing proof that the law was applied evenly because it wasn`t

you know you posting hear is depriving a village somewhere of an idiot.

All the village idiots I know can put the correct "here" in a sentence.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:

All the village idiots I know can put the correct "here" in a sentence.

Lurker's the grammar police here, not you  :<:i}: :<:i}: :<:i}: 

BigAndy9 wrote:

Korben Dallas wrote:
FFs your as dense as a neutron star
H O M O S E X U A L I T Y AS A WORD DID NOT EXSIT WHEN THAT WAS THE LAW
But i see you have deflected and avoid providing proof that the law was applied evenly because it wasn`t

you know you posting hear is depriving a village somewhere of an idiot.

All the village idiots I know can put the correct "here" in a sentence.

Korben Dallas wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:

All the village idiots I know can put the correct "here" in a sentence.

well as i have mentioned on numerous occasions i am dyslexic and rely on a spell checker

but how nice of you to notice

smelly_bandit wrote:

Korben Dallas wrote:
FFs your as dense as a neutron star
H O M O S E X U A L I T Y AS A WORD DID NOT EXSIT WHEN THAT WAS THE LAW
But i see you have deflected and avoid providing proof that the law was applied evenly because it wasn`t

you know you posting hear is depriving a village somewhere of an idiot.

you're the one who posted it up you retard

now you're trying to backtrack and drop it like a hot potato

the law YOU posted up said sodomy

not sodomy only between men

PhilDidge wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

you're the one who posted it up you retard

now you're trying to backtrack and drop it like a hot potato

the law YOU posted up said sodomy

not sodomy only between men

Yes so which women were prosecuted for sodomy, bit hard to now, you catch and female and male naked together, how do you know they have had anal sex? Is not even going to cross your mind, however find two naked men together what are you going to think they have done?
Sodomy, penny starting to finally drop yet?

smelly_bandit wrote:

Korben Dallas wrote:
Actual the question is
could it happen AGAIN in Britain

Sodomy was historically known in England and Wales as buggery, and is usually interpreted as referring to anal intercourse between two males or a male and a female. In England and Wales buggery was made a felony by the Buggery Act in 1533, during the reign of Henry VIII. The punishment for those convicted was the death penalty until 1861. James Pratt and John Smith were the last two to be executed for sodomy in 1835

here is what YOU said mongo
 ::smthg:: ::smthg:: ::smthg:: ::smthg:: 

Joy Division wrote:Sometimes I wonder if those who are so anti- gay were to have a son or daughter who were gay, then would they still speak of gays in such a demeaning manner?

PhilDidge wrote:://?roflmao?/: 

A sodomy law is a law that defines certain sexual acts as crimes. The precise sexual acts meant by the term sodomy are rarely spelled out in the law, but are typically understood by courts to include any sexual act deemed to be "unnatural" or immoral.[1] Sodomy typically includes anal sex, oral sex and bestiality.[2][3][4] In practice, sodomy laws have rarely been enforced against heterosexual couples.[5]

BigAndy9 wrote:

Korben Dallas wrote:
well as i have mentioned on numerous occasions i am dyslexic and rely on a spell checker

but how nice of you to notice

Yeah,  spell checkers don't correct stupidity.

However,  I do!

smelly_bandit wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:://?roflmao?/: 

A sodomy law is a law that defines certain sexual acts as crimes. The precise sexual acts meant by the term sodomy are rarely spelled out in the law, but are typically understood by courts to include any sexual act deemed to be "unnatural" or immoral.[1] Sodomy typically includes anal sex, oral sex and bestiality.[2][3][4] In practice, sodomy laws have rarely been enforced against heterosexual couples.[5]

"In practice, sodomy laws have rarely been enforced against heterosexual couples"

rarely means rare not never

Korben Dallas wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

here is what YOU said mongo
 ::smthg:: ::smthg:: ::smthg:: ::smthg:: 

My my i am a mongo now ....not really very creative are you,
just personal insults dear me how very neanderthal of you  

as i have pointed out in reply to HF OP  "could it happen again"

And it is of no doubt that in England sodomy aka in modern terms, but not exclusively homosexuality was a death sentence
and heterosexual sodomy was rarely enforced or indeed reported  so as i also said
it Targeted mainly  what we call homosexuals (although the  term did not exist at the time )
keep up there's a good chap

BigAndy9 wrote:

Korben Dallas wrote:
FFs your as dense as a neutron star
H O M O S E X U A L I T Y AS A WORD DID NOT EXSIT WHEN THAT WAS THE LAW
But i see you have deflected and avoid providing proof that the law was applied evenly because it wasn`t

you know you posting hear is depriving a village somewhere of an idiot.

All the village idiots I know can put the correct "here" in a sentence.

BigAndy9 wrote:

Joy Division wrote:Sometimes I wonder if those who are so anti- gay were to have a son or daughter who were gay, then would they still speak of gays in such a demeaning manner?

We'll said JD and I suspect they wouldn't.

However,  maybe a muslim family would just throw their son in the local canal - it's not so easy for them.

Korben Dallas wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

"In practice, sodomy laws have rarely been enforced against heterosexual couples"

rarely means rare not never

and therefore targets mainly homosexuals
I am glad you finally agree

Korben Dallas wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:


Yeah,  spell checkers don't correct stupidity.

However,  I do!

stupidity....in what way ? Are you saying dyslexics are stupid?

smelly_bandit wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:://?roflmao?/: 

A sodomy law is a law that defines certain sexual acts as crimes. The precise sexual acts meant by the term sodomy are rarely spelled out in the law, but are typically understood by courts to include any sexual act deemed to be "unnatural" or immoral.[1] Sodomy typically includes anal sex, oral sex and bestiality.[2][3][4] In practice, sodomy laws have rarely been enforced against heterosexual couples.[5]

"In practice, sodomy laws have rarely been enforced against heterosexual couples"

rarely means rare not never

BigAndy9 wrote:

Joy Division wrote:Sometimes I wonder if those who are so anti- gay were to have a son or daughter who were gay, then would they still speak of gays in such a demeaning manner?

We'll said JD and I suspect they wouldn't.

However,  maybe a muslim family would just throw their son in the local canal - it's not so easy for them.

SEXY MAMA wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:

All the village idiots I know can put the correct "here" in a sentence.

He is dyslexic!

SEXY MAMA wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:

All the village idiots I know can put the correct "here" in a sentence.

He is dyslexic!

Joy Division wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:


We'll said JD and I suspect they wouldn't.

However,  maybe a muslim family would just throw their son in the local canal - it's not so easy for them.

Sadly that would be true with some Muslim family's Andy, but not with all Muslim family's ...some are less religious than others.

I hate these honour killings we hear of Andy, young lassies killed by an OTT religious family.

smelly_bandit wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

He is dyslexic!

Poor darling

BigAndy9 wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

He is dyslexic!

And I haven't confirmed whether he is or isn't.

He can call other posters idiots, he can handle being called one himself.

Korben Dallas wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

Poor darling

Well, thanks for that smelly my darling
Fortunately, it doesn`t bother me in the slightest
And it keeps someone happy looking for mistakes in what I may type

smelly_bandit wrote:

Korben Dallas wrote:
Well, thanks for that smelly my darling
Fortunately, it doesn`t bother me in the slightest
And it keeps someone happy looking for mistakes in what I may type

good for you

it doesn't bother me either

at least you have an excuse, but i think you should be aware that you mate didge thinks people like you shouldn't be using spell check because its "cheating"

Joy Division wrote:Yeah, this is true, KD does have dyslexia, it would be poor at best to pick at hi. For having that ffs,

I don't bother much about grammar goofs anyway, they usually point out grammatical errors to take attention off themselves for whatever reason....

Small pecker?

Korben Dallas wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

good for you

it doesn't bother me either

at least you have an excuse, but i think you should be aware that you mate didge thinks people like you shouldn't be using spell check because its "cheating"

I did not think it did bother you as i am sure they have been many mistakes i have made that you did not feel the need to point out and that is one thing to your credit

But it's not an excuse, it's just a fact, one I have no control over

if i did not use a spelchecker this is what my writing would look like it can be very disconserting as when i do type i do so phoneticaly
i can spell long words a lot esialy that i can spell short words and words like hear heer witch witch is whitch ect ect are a perticual bug bear


not pretty

smelly_bandit wrote:

Korben Dallas wrote:
I did not think it did bother you as i am sure they have been many mistakes i have made that you did not feel the need to point out and that is one thing to your credit

But it's not an excuse, it's just a fact, one I have no control over

if i did not use a spelchecker this is what my writing would look like it can be very disconserting as when i do type i do so phoneticaly
i can spell long words a lot esialy that i can spell short words and words like hear heer witch witch is whitch ect ect are a perticual bug bear


not pretty

Didn't ask for your life's story

Well I suggest you take it up with didge, he thinks people who use things like spell checker and calculators are "cheating" in life

If it's any consolation your spelling is better than his without spell checking it

PhilDidge wrote:Being able to spell is not a sign of intelligence Andy and judging by many of your posts it is clear you lack intellect, which is funny because now every time you make an absurd claim I shall call you thick, I shall do as you do with people who make an error.