Marc Guehi

[TheBrownBottle]

3 minutes ago, madras said:

I'm tempted to go to the match tomorrow wearing a rainbow captains armband on which I've scrawled in marker pen "just don't be a cunt"

Yep.  ‘Divvunt be a cunt’ is a mantra to live life by

[TheBrownBottle]

7 minutes ago, madras said:

Which is another sin. 

Was Onan really condemned for spilling his seed?   

[madras]

5 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Was Onan really condemned for spilling his seed?   

If it hits the bog wall is it spilled ?

[El Prontonise]

6 minutes ago, J7 said:

I actually hate what’s going on here. It should be an optional thing for one week or something. Those deciding to wear them should be actively making a decision to do it to show support. Because of the way the Premier League play it, with the media then pointing fingers and trying to get debate going around it, it just means that the statement is NOT wearing it, rather than people wearing it to show support. I’ve no idea what Bruno thinks and if he’s actually showing support for example.

 

I have no issue with what the Ipswich lad is doing. Nobody should be forced to show support for anything. I do think Guehi is being a bit of a prick though. Just don’t wear it if you don’t want to show support. It’s petulant and pathetic. 
 

Anyway, the most annoying thing here for me is because it looks like this campaign is being forced on players rather than it being a choice, it becomes another one of these culture way/identity politics issues. It’s hardly a wonder there’s a backlash to this kind of thing when people are being shamed for not toeing the line expected of them. 

 

100% this

 

 

[SAK]

55 minutes ago, Conjo said:

 

I'd be totally fine with it if he managed to squeeze in "I am for inclusion of LGBTQ+ people in football, but personally due to the way I interpret my religion, I could never be anything other than a straight CIS male" with really small text. 

 

That could of course be what he means with his messaging, but making these statements and not elaborating on them he opens himself up to scrutiny.

I was referring to the Ipswich captain in my comment but agree Guehi has left himself open to criticism, should have grown a pair and declined than write an ambiguous message.

[St. Maximin]

35 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

There is all sorts of stuff that's is either explicitly a sin or can be interpreted as such from the old testament in particular that people do every day, including the gambling his shirt has two adverts for on. The reason some people chose to ignore all of that yet see fancying people of the same sex a sin is homophobia and nothing else.

This isn’t remotely true mate, sorry. The Bible doesn’t even say fancying someone of the same sex is a sin. 

[St. Maximin]

32 minutes ago, J7 said:

I actually hate what’s going on here. It should be an optional thing for one week or something. Those deciding to wear them should be actively making a decision to do it to show support. Because of the way the Premier League play it, with the media then pointing fingers and trying to get debate going around it, it just means that the statement is NOT wearing it, rather than people wearing it to show support. I’ve no idea what Bruno thinks and if he’s actually showing support for example.

 

I have no issue with what the Ipswich lad is doing. Nobody should be forced to show support for anything. I do think Guehi is being a bit of a prick though. Just don’t wear it if you don’t want to show support. It’s petulant and pathetic. 
 

Anyway, the most annoying thing here for me is because it looks like this campaign is being forced on players rather than it being a choice, it becomes another one of these culture way/identity politics issues. It’s hardly a wonder there’s a backlash to this kind of thing when people are being shamed for not toeing the line expected of them. 

I agree with this in general, but who said Guehi doesn’t want to show support? The fact he’s wearing it suggests maybe he does. In fact nothing else in his career suggests he wouldn’t condemn homophobic abuse towards gay footballers. He just also happens to be Christian and may well be dealing with his own personal conflicts over how rainbows are interpreted and how he feels he should view certain biblical passages. Perhaps as a Christian he is also wary of how he might be seen in his community. That doesn’t mean he can’t support the cause still. 
 

I do think it’s a bit of a weird and foolish way of handling the situation mind, whatever his reasoning. I’m certainly not advocating it. But his intentions behind it might not be what it seems. 

[McDog]

Just now, St. Maximin said:

This isn’t remotely true mate, sorry. The Bible doesn’t even say fancying someone of the same sex is a sin. 

 

 

I think there was one line in the whole book that *could* be interpreted as "That's naughty". It is not spelled out. The church also constantly moves the goalposts too. Didn't the Catholics after hundreds of years threating people with "Limbo" if they were not baptized then the Pope said you could still end up in heaven. Which is it?

[McDog]

Have to change the title thread and I'm as bad as anyone. Well, maybe not quite.

[St. Maximin]

7 minutes ago, McDog said:

 

 

I think there was one line in the whole book that *could* be interpreted as "That's naughty". It is not spelled out. The church also constantly moves the goalposts too. Didn't the Catholics after hundreds of years threating people with "Limbo" if they were not baptized then the Pope said you could still end up in heaven. Which is it?

I think I phrased that wrongly actually - the Bible says lust is a sin, but that’s any lust and not just homosexual. Any sex outside of marriage was also deemed sinful in the OT and still is today. Same with many, many other ‘sins’. Homosexuality is repeated often in the Bible and mentioned in the NT too. None of the Christian views about it being sinful I agree with, but the idea that people care about that and not many other sins is purely due to homophobia isn’t remotely true. 

[TheBrownBottle]

1 minute ago, St. Maximin said:

I think I phrased that wrongly actually - the Bible says lust is a sin, but that’s any lust and not just homosexual. Any sex outside of marriage was also deemed sinful in the OT and still is today. Same with many, many other ‘sins’. Homosexuality is repeated often in the Bible and mentioned in the NT too. None of the Christian views about it being sinful I agree with, but the idea that people care about that and not many other sins is purely due to homophobia isn’t remotely true. 

That’s right, it’s about adultery.  Which is why all churches were so pro-gay marriage.  They had a problem with it being outside marriage because of what the Bible said.  Been to any gay marriages in church recently?

[BlueStar]

7 hours ago, Pablo123 said:

Guehi can do whatever he wants. If people choose to get offended, then that's their problem. 

 

People can say whatever they want about Guehi's behaviour, and if people get offended, that's their problem. 

[St. Maximin]

5 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

That’s right, it’s about adultery.  Which is why all churches were so pro-gay marriage.  They had a problem with it being outside marriage because of what the Bible said.  Been to any gay marriages in church recently?

Not sure what you’re trying to say here. I was saying a lot of old things in the Bible are still deemed sinful as well as practicing homosexuality. This includes straight sex outside of marriage. If they decided to ignore all the teachings apart from the stuff about homosexuality then that would clearly be a case of homophobia, but evidently that’s not the case. 
 

People believe what they’re told anyway. If you’re raised up in an environment that says one sin matters more than the other, maybe that has something to blame rather than everyone taking part being homophobic. Nature vs nurture etc. 

[Jackie Broon]

8 hours ago, St. Maximin said:

This isn’t remotely true mate, sorry. The Bible doesn’t even say fancying someone of the same sex is a sin. 

 

There are obviously a lot of christians who interpret the bible to say that practicing homosexuality is a sin. I'm not saying I agree with that, I'm not religious and not straight, but it's clearly some people's interpretation, and choosing to.interpret it that way is bourn out of homophobia.

 

 

Edited December 4, 2024 by Jackie Broon

[TheBrownBottle]

10 minutes ago, St. Maximin said:

Not sure what you’re trying to say here. I was saying a lot of old things in the Bible are still deemed sinful as well as practicing homosexuality. This includes straight sex outside of marriage. If they decided to ignore all the teachings apart from the stuff about homosexuality then that would clearly be a case of homophobia, but evidently that’s not the case. 
 

People believe what they’re told anyway. If you’re raised up in an environment that says one sin matters more than the other, maybe that has something to blame rather than everyone taking part being homophobic. Nature vs nurture etc. 

It is Christianity's excuse for its innate homophobia that I'm referring to.  The standard argument by Christians who don't want to sound like bigots is 'oh, the Bible doesn't say homosexuality is a sin - just sex outside of marriage'.  Then it refuses to allow same-sex marriage - meaning that any homosexual couple are living in sin as they are living a sexual life outside of marriage.  It is moral cowardice.

[Disco]

An OG and this. Fair play to him trying to get the Saudis on side and intent on lowering his fee. The man is gasping for a move north. 
 

:safety:

[Heron]

Who'd have thought story books would be open to perception... 

 

 

[Nobody]

7 hours ago, St. Maximin said:

None of the Christian views about it being sinful I agree with, but the idea that people care about that and not many other sins is purely due to homophobia isn’t remotely true

Howay man

[St. Maximin]

8 hours ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

There are obviously a lot of christians who interpret the bible to say that practicing homosexuality is a sin. I'm not saying I agree with that, I'm not religious and not straight, but it's clearly some people's interpretation, and choosing to.interpret it that way is bourn out of homophobia.

 

 

 

Yeah I clarified below I phrased that wrong as 'practicing homosexuality' is a sin rather than simply being gay. But that doesn't mean it's bourn out of homophobia. People are brought up to believe the teaching is true and as I have said earlier, people don't actually want to think that but have to because they feel the Bible is the word of God and unlike other things it;'s mentioned many times in the Bible including the New Testament, so seen as something important. If that was the only sin they cared about then yes it's bourn out of homopohobia, but that isn't the case.

 

These things are way more complex than people make out and like I said I grew up in a conservative Christian environment (that I have thankfully left) so I'm in a good place to comment here on what goes on in people's heads.

[St. Maximin]

1 hour ago, Nobody said:

Howay man

Go on then, please explain. I notice you removed the sentence before that sheds some light on it. Also the stuff I wrote about nature vs nurture is pretty key too - people are conditioned to think in such a way and perhaps they aren't seeing the bigger picture as a result, rather than just being homophobic people.

 

Also the vast majority just happen to see it as a sin, along with many other things in the Bible, including things they themselves know they do. Granted there are no shortage of  homophobic religious people in religion, but those are the ones you should go after and not the people who quietly hold a silly opinion but don't treat people differently because of it.

 

 

Edited December 4, 2024 by St. Maximin

[BlueStar]

Gonna shout hermaphurb at him next game just cos it's a fun word to say in Geordie. 

[Dr Jinx]

19 hours ago, Pablo123 said:

"This cunt" how fucking disrespectful. Bringing negativity because of his Christian beliefs in a supposed Christian country. You sound like a complete and utter wanker

 

Yes, this cunt! Scribbling a message over a pride armband to basically tell gay people that he doesn't agree with them being a part of football is a cuntish move.

 

If i'm a wanker for believing that then so be it.

[Dr.Spaceman]

"Hey folks, welcome to bible studies."

[Dr.Spaceman]

4 hours ago, Heron said:

Who'd have thought story books would be open to perception... 

 

 

 

As someone who goes to church every Sunday this is exactly what I think their original intention was, stories that are open to perception. Anyone who lives 100% by the teachings in the bible is a fucking mental case.

 

 

Edited December 4, 2024 by Dr.Spaceman

[St. Maximin]

34 minutes ago, Dr Jinx said:

 

Yes, this cunt! Scribbling a message over a pride armband to basically tell gay people that he doesn't agree with them being a part of football is a cuntish move.

 

If i'm a wanker for believing that then so be it.

It would be, if that's what he did. But there's no evidence that's his intentions whatsoever