It seems the loony right Abbott supporters wish to go down the road of exploring the personal sexuality of people in politics, or any people associated with them.

If that is really what they want to do, then it would be hard to find a better starting point than discussing the sexual beliefs of devout Catholics and evangelical Christians who seem to share very similar views on the subject.

We have very many devout religious folk on both sides of politics, and whether they have the ability to maintain a separation of their personal beliefs and their political duties is possibly a question that the public wishes to know.

Now that the loony right have cracked this particular egg  should we stir it, rather than trying to get it back in it's shell?

We know there are Religious beliefs that demand that things like contraception, masturbation, numerous types of foreplay, etc. be considered as perversions. This may seem unlikely in the 21st century, but that is the case for devout christians and catholics whose religious beliefs demand they consider almost everything apart from genital intercourse intended to result in procreation, as sexual perversions.
Even heterosexual genital intercourse is permissable, only if the couple are married in the church of their faith, outside of marriage even straight sex is a sin worthy of earning them eternal damnation.

We have heard people asserting that muslim politicians would seek to have polygamy allowed under australian law, as a natural extension of respecting an individuals right to pursue religious freedom. Is it not logical to assume the same freedom to pursue religious teachings of devout christians might also be expected?

So, with this in mind, does that mean we need to convene a star chamber to interrogate our politicians to find out where they stand on matters of sexuality?

Is it in the public's interest to determine if politicians personal sexuality will impact upon the laws and regulations that we are all expected to abide by?

Since humanity is interwoven with many aspects, the political decisions are most definitely influenced by sexual experiences and beliefs and so should be transparent to voters so they can make an informed decision about candidates.


Take Mr Abbott as an example. He spent 3 years full on in a renowned homosexual hotbed priesthood.

Then he makes a statement that he does not trust gays.

A logical conclusion is Mr Abbott was sodomised either via gang raped and or consent during these three years.

Mr Abbott should come clean about his sexual experience within this homosexual priesthood. Was it rape or was it consensual ?

It’s mainly Bobbie and Andrei, Mozzoak. They want to see them getting it on on the news. You can’t blame them. They spend all day looking at internet porn, of course they confuse things from time to time.

Still, I agree. It would make a nice change from all the crap they go on about now. We could watch Bob Carr getting fisted, Mr Abbott getting hot in the sauna, JuLiar’s boyfriend scatting, Anthony Pyne feltching his boyfriend. It would be much more interesting than Question Time.

They could mix and match - get into some B&D with the opposite team. Bob Carr and Julie Bishop is an obvious choice. Bronwyn Bishop and that Labor Tasmanian bear with the long beard. Mind you, JuLiar and Kevin would be nice too. They could have a make-up gangbang.

Thoughts?

____ wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 11:26am:

Since humanity is interwoven with many aspects, the political decisions are most definitely influenced by sexual experiences and beliefs and so should be transparent to voters so they can make an informed decision about candidates. Take Mr Abbott as an example. He spent 3 years full on in a renowned homosexual hotbed priesthood. Then he makes a statement that he does not trust gays. A logical conclusion is Mr Abbott was sodomised either via gang raped and or consent during these three years. Mr Abbott should come clean about his sexual experience within this homosexual priesthood. Was it rape or was it consensual ?

I agree, Greens. Mr Abbott should come clean on this. It would set a good example for the youth of today.

What positions did they use? Did they use condoms? Were the priests filming them?

We need to know more here - it’s the public’s right to know.

____ wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 11:26am:

Since humanity is interwoven with many aspects, the political decisions are most definitely influenced by sexual experiences and beliefs and so should be transparent to voters so they can make an informed decision about candidates. Take Mr Abbott as an example. He spent 3 years full on in a renowned homosexual hotbed priesthood. Then he makes a statement that he does not trust gays. A logical conclusion is Mr Abbott was sodomised either via gang raped and or consent during these three years. Mr Abbott should come clean about his sexual experience within this homosexual priesthood. Was it rape or was it consensual ?

that's probably very libelous Greens...

Who even knows why you started this crap Mozza.
certainly not me.

Karnal wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 11:37am:

____ wrote on Jun 15th, 2013 at 11:26am: Since humanity is interwoven with many aspects, the political decisions are most definitely influenced by sexual experiences and beliefs and so should be transparent to voters so they can make an informed decision about candidates. Take Mr Abbott as an example. He spent 3 years full on in a renowned homosexual hotbed priesthood. Then he makes a statement that he does not trust gays. A logical conclusion is Mr Abbott was sodomised either via gang raped and or consent during these three years. Mr Abbott should come clean about his sexual experience within this homosexual priesthood. Was it rape or was it consensual ? I agree, Greens. Mr Abbott should come clean on this. It would set a good example for the youth of today. What positions did they use? Did they use condoms? Were the priests filming them? We need to know more here - it’s the public’s right to know.

Of course it is the public's right to know.

It wasn't pleasant hearing about how Tony threw punches at women and was charged with groping women when he was at Uni - but now we know and we can draw our own conclusions.  Margie says Tony is OK - so that is OK by me too.  And if Margie says it is OK that Tony used to hang around with pedophiles - well, who can argue with Margie? 

Just because he may have groped women, thrown punches at their heads and hung around with pedophiles doesn't mean he won't STOP THE BOATS!!!!!

Grendel wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 11:41am:

____ wrote on Jun 15th, 2013 at 11:26am: Since humanity is interwoven with many aspects, the political decisions are most definitely influenced by sexual experiences and beliefs and so should be transparent to voters so they can make an informed decision about candidates. Take Mr Abbott as an example. He spent 3 years full on in a renowned homosexual hotbed priesthood. Then he makes a statement that he does not trust gays. A logical conclusion is Mr Abbott was sodomised either via gang raped and or consent during these three years. Mr Abbott should come clean about his sexual experience within this homosexual priesthood. Was it rape or was it consensual ? that's probably very libelous Greens... Who even knows why you started this crap Mozza. certainly not me.

Excuse me, it’s in the national interest. How dare you try to silence our demokratic right to know.

Your type belongs in communist Russia, not the free and open society we have in Australia today.

So typical of these leftards to try to silence freedom of information.

When will you queers finally understand that homophobia is a made up word purely to attack normal humans. There is no link to hidden desires of gay acts or being gang raped by gays. Hetro's that dislike gays is not a fear as the made up word homophobic states. Hetro's that dislike gays particularly gay men is because of the disgusting act homo's enjoy doing ie having sex with the same sex, gays just try to justify the act by using the word love, and mutual consent.
The fact is natures law goes against gays. You can debate all you like using words such as politically correct, humanitarian, and love, but a fact is a fact and natures way is the only way which is scientifically  supported. Homosexuality should be treated as a disease just like cancer, a cure should be priority to rid the human race of this filthy sickening act.

Abbott is clean, his is hetero, Dillard has Dike written all over her. Dillard is in a relationship with a male..........reminds me of when Elton John got married to a female.

mozzaok wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 11:08am:

We know there are Religious beliefs that demand that things like contraception, masturbation, numerous types of foreplay, etc. be considered as perversions. This may seem unlikely in the 21st century, but that is the case for devout christians and catholics whose religious beliefs demand they consider almost everything apart from genital intercourse intended to result in procreation, as sexual perversions.

That is a massive misrepresentation of Christian relationships and views on sex.

Grendel wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 11:41am:

____ wrote on Jun 15th, 2013 at 11:26am: Since humanity is interwoven with many aspects, the political decisions are most definitely influenced by sexual experiences and beliefs and so should be transparent to voters so they can make an informed decision about candidates. Take Mr Abbott as an example. He spent 3 years full on in a renowned homosexual hotbed priesthood. Then he makes a statement that he does not trust gays. A logical conclusion is Mr Abbott was sodomised either via gang raped and or consent during these three years. Mr Abbott should come clean about his sexual experience within this homosexual priesthood. Was it rape or was it consensual ? that's probably very libelous Greens... Who even knows why you started this crap Mozza. certainly not me.

I know, Abbott should not of stereotyping all gays as being not trustworth.

The more one thinks about it, the less likely the homosexual gang bangs were consensual since Abbott could of left the homesexual hotbed of a priesthood long before the three years he spent there.


This possible guilt he now feels for the homosexual sex period could reflect on his views in many areas ~ like fertility treatment, marriage equality, and STD prevention spending.

De-registered User wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 11:51am:

When will you queers finally understand that homophobia is a made up word purely to attack normal humans. There is no link to hidden desires of gay acts or being gang raped by gays. Hetro's that dislike gays is not a fear as the made up word homophobic states. Hetro's that dislike gays particularly gay men is because of the disgusting act homo's enjoy doing ie having sex with the same sex, gays just try to justify the act by using the word love, and mutual consent. The fact is natures law goes against gays. You can debate all you like using words such as politically correct, humanitarian, and love, but a fact is a fact and natures way is the only way which is scientifically  supported. Homosexuality should be treated as a disease just like cancer, a cure should be priority to rid the human race of this filthy sickening act. Abbott is clean, his is hetero, Dillard has Dike written all over her. Dillard is in a relationship with a male..........reminds me of when Elton John got married to a female.

Abbott could be clean considering AIDs or other STDs Abbott flirted with during his sexually loose hay days prior to wedding that person who proclaims to being female, so would of been picked up in the children. That's if they are not adopted. 

There again, it is mostly wedded men who frequent toilet blocks around children park areas, so ACON says.

Do people think would be PMs should be STD tested before elections?

____ wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 12:07pm:

De-registered User wrote on Jun 15th, 2013 at 11:51am: When will you queers finally understand that homophobia is a made up word purely to attack normal humans. There is no link to hidden desires of gay acts or being gang raped by gays. Hetro's that dislike gays is not a fear as the made up word homophobic states. Hetro's that dislike gays particularly gay men is because of the disgusting act homo's enjoy doing ie having sex with the same sex, gays just try to justify the act by using the word love, and mutual consent. The fact is natures law goes against gays. You can debate all you like using words such as politically correct, humanitarian, and love, but a fact is a fact and natures way is the only way which is scientifically  supported. Homosexuality should be treated as a disease just like cancer, a cure should be priority to rid the human race of this filthy sickening act. Abbott is clean, his is hetero, Dillard has Dike written all over her. Dillard is in a relationship with a male..........reminds me of when Elton John got married to a female. Abbott could be clean considering AIDs or other STDs Abbott flirted with during his sexually loose hay days prior to wedding that person who proclaims to being female, so would of been picked up in the children. That's if they are not adopted.  There again, it is mostly wedded men who frequent toilet blocks around children park areas, so ACON says. Do people think would be PMs should be STD tested before elections?

I think someone that has spent a long length of time in a known homosexual environment, as Abbott has, should be questioned on whether he is STD free.

You want to talk about Abbott's religious beliefs but failed to bring up Rudd's or Gillard's orientations

Maqqa wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 12:40pm:

You want to talk about Abbott's religious beliefs but failed to bring up Rudd's or Gillard's orientations

Did Rudd and Gillard spend three years in a known pedophilia environment ? Evidence. Or it's a lie?

Mozz

You mean 1 weird radio commentator in WA ?

Bit of storm in a tea cup, but maqqa is right why does Abbott's religion needs looking into as opposed to Gillard's sexuality ?

If you can address that to start with and then you need to address Gillard's desire to create phoney personal attacks ...... somewhere down the track you might be talking about something that might count politically.

Bashing Abbott has been going on for over a decade, no one cares.

skippy. wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 12:43pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 15th, 2013 at 12:40pm: You want to talk about Abbott's religious beliefs but failed to bring up Rudd's or Gillard's orientations Did Rudd and Gillard spend three years in a known pedophilia environment ? Evidence. Or it's a lie?

According to you anyone within the same continent is deemed to be in a known pedo environment

Maqqa wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 12:45pm:

skippy. wrote on Jun 15th, 2013 at 12:43pm: Maqqa wrote on Jun 15th, 2013 at 12:40pm: You want to talk about Abbott's religious beliefs but failed to bring up Rudd's or Gillard's orientations Did Rudd and Gillard spend three years in a known pedophilia environment ? Evidence. Or it's a lie? According to you anyone within the same continent is deemed to be in a known pedo environment

Thanks for confirming you lied.sucker.

skippy. wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 12:46pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 15th, 2013 at 12:45pm: skippy. wrote on Jun 15th, 2013 at 12:43pm: Maqqa wrote on Jun 15th, 2013 at 12:40pm: You want to talk about Abbott's religious beliefs but failed to bring up Rudd's or Gillard's orientations Did Rudd and Gillard spend three years in a known pedophilia environment ? Evidence. Or it's a lie? According to you anyone within the same continent is deemed to be in a known pedo environment Thanks for confirming you lied.sucker.

No

You lied

De-registered User wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 11:51am:

When will you queers finally understand that homophobia is a made up word purely to attack normal humans. There is no link to hidden desires of gay acts or being gang raped by gays. Hetro's that dislike gays is not a fear as the made up word homophobic states. Hetro's that dislike gays particularly gay men is because of the disgusting act homo's enjoy doing ie having sex with the same sex, gays just try to justify the act by using the word love, and mutual consent. The fact is natures law goes against gays. You can debate all you like using words such as politically correct, humanitarian, and love, but a fact is a fact and natures way is the only way which is scientifically  supported. Homosexuality should be treated as a disease just like cancer, a cure should be priority to rid the human race of this filthy sickening act. Abbott is clean, his is hetero, Dillard has Dike written all over her. Dillard is in a relationship with a male..........reminds me of when Elton John got married to a female.

Gen X

There is some evidence of gay behaviour in nature but relative to the number of species, the human cause on genetics is doubtful, otherwise you would see a significant evidence in nature.

Its interesting that gays want to hijack a term that comes from the religions that oppose what they do ....... its cherry picking.

My view on this topic is that the marriage act needs to be removed as its a religious construct.

Why should governments care if your married or not, once you live together the law interprets you as de-facto.

If you find Abbott on Abbott sex within the priesthood disgusting, then what of women on women sex outside the priesthood.

Would the knowledge of Tony Abbott being sodomised by a group of priests with Tony's consent really put you off voting for him. 

If so, no wonder he hasn't gone public.

____ wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 1:16pm:

If you find Abbott on Abbott sex within the priesthood disgusting, then what of women on women sex outside the priesthood. Would the knowledge of Tony Abbott being sodomised by a group of priests with Tony's consent really put you off voting for him.  If so, no wonder he hasn't gone public.

Based purely on your assertions here - how do you know Gillard's not given permission for Tim to be sodomised by Swannie

mozzaok wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 11:08am:

It seems the loony right Abbott supporters wish to go down the road of exploring the personal sexuality of people in politics, or any people associated with them. If that is really what they want to do, then it would be hard to find a better starting point than discussing the sexual beliefs of devout Catholics and evangelical Christians who seem to share very similar views on the subject. We have very many devout religious folk on both sides of politics, and whether they have the ability to maintain a separation of their personal beliefs and their political duties is possibly a question that the public wishes to know. Now that the loony right have cracked this particular egg  should we stir it, rather than trying to get it back in it's shell? We know there are Religious beliefs that demand that things like contraception, masturbation, numerous types of foreplay, etc. be considered as perversions. This may seem unlikely in the 21st century, but that is the case for devout christians and catholics whose religious beliefs demand they consider almost everything apart from genital intercourse intended to result in procreation, as sexual perversions. Even heterosexual genital intercourse is permissable, only if the couple are married in the church of their faith, outside of marriage even straight sex is a sin worthy of earning them eternal damnation. We have heard people asserting that muslim politicians would seek to have polygamy allowed under australian law, as a natural extension of respecting an individuals right to pursue religious freedom. Is it not logical to assume the same freedom to pursue religious teachings of devout christians might also be expected? So, with this in mind, does that mean we need to convene a star chamber to interrogate our politicians to find out where they stand on matters of sexuality? Is it in the public's interest to determine if politicians personal sexuality will impact upon the laws and regulations that we are all expected to abide by?

So on the one hand, you (we) want the government to stay out of your bedroom, but on the other hand, you want to subject their personal sexual habits to scrutiny?

Maqqa wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 1:30pm:

____ wrote on Jun 15th, 2013 at 1:16pm: If you find Abbott on Abbott sex within the priesthood disgusting, then what of women on women sex outside the priesthood. Would the knowledge of Tony Abbott being sodomised by a group of priests with Tony's consent really put you off voting for him.  If so, no wonder he hasn't gone public. Based purely on your assertions here - how do you know Gillard's not given permission for Tim to be sodomised by Swannie

There is bases to Abbott's homosexual tendencies in that he joined a particular priesthood that was well known to be a homosexual hotbed. Abbott settled in for a long three years of whoops I dropped my bible.

Afterward the gult strickend Abbott doesn't trust gays.

Did the priests later reject him and so hurt his feelings?

I don't trust the gays who pretend to be straight because they don't want to lose votes.

Lying pr1cks.
Be yourself.

mozzaok wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 11:08am:

It seems the loony right Abbott supporters wish to go down the road of exploring the personal sexuality of people in politics, or any people associated with them. If that is really what they want to do, then it would be hard to find a better starting point than discussing the sexual beliefs of devout Catholics and evangelical Christians who seem to share very similar views on the subject. We have very many devout religious folk on both sides of politics, and whether they have the ability to maintain a separation of their personal beliefs and their political duties is possibly a question that the public wishes to know. Now that the loony right have cracked this particular egg  should we stir it, rather than trying to get it back in it's shell? We know there are Religious beliefs that demand that things like contraception, masturbation, numerous types of foreplay, etc. be considered as perversions. This may seem unlikely in the 21st century, but that is the case for devout christians and catholics whose religious beliefs demand they consider almost everything apart from genital intercourse intended to result in procreation, as sexual perversions. Even heterosexual genital intercourse is permissable, only if the couple are married in the church of their faith, outside of marriage even straight sex is a sin worthy of earning them eternal damnation. We have heard people asserting that muslim politicians would seek to have polygamy allowed under australian law, as a natural extension of respecting an individuals right to pursue religious freedom. Is it not logical to assume the same freedom to pursue religious teachings of devout christians might also be expected? So, with this in mind, does that mean we need to convene a star chamber to interrogate our politicians to find out where they stand on matters of sexuality? Is it in the public's interest to determine if politicians personal sexuality will impact upon the laws and regulations that we are all expected to abide by?

Are you saying that Howard Sattler representes ALL righties?

I can't recal any Liberal politician discussing the sexuality of any Labor politician. I do, however, remember Gillard calling Christopher Pyne a 'mincing poodle'.

Don't do it Matty, don't tell the public of your virginity. Those vile leftards will only try to use it to discredit you. They'll come up with something like 'how can he make policy regardling sex if he has never experienced it'... just don't tell them Matty . Rest assured, your secret is safe with me.


(your encounters with Alan in the public toilets don't count, after all, in the bum is not real sex now is it .... Alan was simply cleaning out your pipework and testing your microphone)

I agree, Matty. Best keep it under wraps for now. If an insistent broadcaster or journalist asks, just say, no further questions at this stage, thanks. Or better still, I’ll have to check my diary for the dates - I’ll get back to you on that.

Never trust off the record. Never tell. Never let them buy you a drink unless you want to leak.

If all else fails, send them to Uncle Karnal.

De-registered User wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 11:51am:

When will you queers finally understand that homophobia is a made up word purely to attack normal humans. There is no link to hidden desires of gay acts or being gang raped by gays. Hetro's that dislike gays is not a fear as the made up word homophobic states. Hetro's that dislike gays particularly gay men is because of the disgusting act homo's enjoy doing ie having sex with the same sex, gays just try to justify the act by using the word love, and mutual consent. The fact is natures law goes against gays. You can debate all you like using words such as politically correct, humanitarian, and love, but a fact is a fact and natures way is the only way which is scientifically  supported. Homosexuality should be treated as a disease just like cancer, a cure should be priority to rid the human race of this filthy sickening act. Abbott is clean, his is hetero, Dillard has Dike written all over her. Dillard is in a relationship with a male..........reminds me of when Elton John got married to a female.

;) ;),  generation X , quite well articulated. i doubt that will be teachable under the national curiculum but i was feeling i must have a problem as the thought of feces on my foreskin makes me gag. i thought i must be like those women terrified of spiders and was wondering if i should seek expensive counselling for my phobia but now realise, there is just a "chance' i am normal ;)
i am so hoping i dont have to confront my irrational fears of rimming and felching.  again, these practices scare me and i am comforted that at least ther is a chance that my repugnence at the thought of doing them may be acceptable in todays society.
you have given a voice to white males like myself who like vaginas and nipples. as a minority group, can we thank you for speaking up for us.

skippy. wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 12:23pm:

____ wrote on Jun 15th, 2013 at 12:07pm: De-registered User wrote on Jun 15th, 2013 at 11:51am: When will you queers finally understand that homophobia is a made up word purely to attack normal humans. There is no link to hidden desires of gay acts or being gang raped by gays. Hetro's that dislike gays is not a fear as the made up word homophobic states. Hetro's that dislike gays particularly gay men is because of the disgusting act homo's enjoy doing ie having sex with the same sex, gays just try to justify the act by using the word love, and mutual consent. The fact is natures law goes against gays. You can debate all you like using words such as politically correct, humanitarian, and love, but a fact is a fact and natures way is the only way which is scientifically  supported. Homosexuality should be treated as a disease just like cancer, a cure should be priority to rid the human race of this filthy sickening act. Abbott is clean, his is hetero, Dillard has Dike written all over her. Dillard is in a relationship with a male..........reminds me of when Elton John got married to a female. Abbott could be clean considering AIDs or other STDs Abbott flirted with during his sexually loose hay days prior to wedding that person who proclaims to being female, so would of been picked up in the children. That's if they are not adopted.  There again, it is mostly wedded men who frequent toilet blocks around children park areas, so ACON says. Do people think would be PMs should be STD tested before elections? I think someone that has spent a long length of time in a known homosexual environment, as Abbott has, should be questioned on whether he is STD free.

Okay. some of you are saying he spent time in a paedophilia environment others say homosexual - which was it?

SOB

RightSadFred wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 12:44pm:

Mozz You mean 1 weird radio commentator in WA ? Bit of storm in a tea cup, but maqqa is right why does Abbott's religion needs looking into as opposed to Gillard's sexuality ? If you can address that to start with and then you need to address Gillard's desire to create phoney personal attacks ...... somewhere down the track you might be talking about something that might count politically. Bashing Abbott has been going on for over a decade, no one cares.

Uhhh pretty obvious. Gillards sexuality (even if it was newsworthy) wouldn't effect the country. Abbotts religious crap would.

SOB