ROME (Reuters) - An Italian court has ruled the government must pay 100,000 euros (79,981 pounds) in damages to a man who was told to retake a driving test because he was homosexual.

LOL, I often wonder what is going through people's minds when they decide he must retake his test. I want whatever they are smoking, it must be some good grenola.

That's farked up. Crazy eyetalians.

/I got nothin.

He likea da cock!

/Got nothin'

Because there's obviously a link between sexual orientation and driving ability?

Seriously, why can't people accept that there are people who like people of the same sex and that they're not going to hurt you/you're not going to catch teh ghey from them?

Sono Pazzi Questi Romani

What sense does that even make? At least come up with retarded, outdated homophobic policies that makes sense. I'm ashamed of my Italian half today.

I'm sure by gay they meant blind.

/meh

Italy.

We're pricks. We don't care.

They just didn't like that he was shifting with his ass.

Wait, aren't all Italians gay? Or am I confusing them with the Greeks?

I shake-a the cock-a-tail!

/Mr. Humphries
//Better not be obscure!

Texas with a Dollarsign:Because there's obviously a link between sexual orientation and driving ability?

Maybe they were concerned that he'd be unable to read a map AND unwilling to stop and ask for directions?

Good thing the guy wasn't a gypsy.

My favorite quote has become:

"Billions of people can be wrong [about something]."

I hate to sound like a broken record and constantly blather on about logical fallacies, but people just commit them so damned often. It's really striking!

What are responsible in large part for homophobia (and religion in general) is: argumentum ad populum and the cognitive bias of social proof.

Argumentum ad populum goes something like this: The majority does/believes it, therefore it must be good/proper/right/correct/moral/advantageous.

There's actually no objective reason to hate gays, since there in nothing that inheres in a gay man that necessarily makes him a threat to anyone, except perhaps that he may disgust, but people are socialized to have this reaction. Just as we find grubs and various insects revolting which Africans find delectable, so too do homophobes find revolting something which if viewed in the proper light and frame of mind they wouldn't find so; it certainly isn't the case that revulsion to homosexuals and homosexual acts is innate and genetically programmed in the way aversion to fecal matter is.

I think on some level even some of the staunchest of homophobes questions the propriety of his hatred but upon reflection concludes that there must indeed be something wrong with it since so many believe so.

Wich someome will promptly reply 'what stick? The car's got no stick shift!'

Texas with a Dollarsign:Because there's obviously a link between sexual orientation and driving ability?

I think the logic is something like this:
A: Women cannot drive
B: Women like the peen
(Logical Fallacy)
C: Liking the peen means you cannot drive

then it's very simple to say
D: Homosexicle men like the peen
therefore
E: Homosexicle men cannot drive

Interestingly enough, it would then follow that

F: Lesbians do not like the peen
G: Therefore lesbians can drive
H: But only big pickup trucks

Texas with a Dollarsign:Seriously, why can't people accept that there are people who like people of the same sex and that they're not going to hurt you/you're not going to catch teh ghey from them?

Maybe the instructors are gay too and just wanted another chance to hit on him. Ever think of that??

stpickrell:Good thing the guy wasn't a gypsy.

Seriously, what is up with europeans throwing the hate at gypsies?.

mepiget:My favorite quote has become:

"Billions of people can be wrong [about something]."

I hate to sound like a broken record and constantly blather on about logical fallacies, but people just commit them so damned often. It's really striking!

What are responsible in large part for homophobia (and religion in general) is: argumentum ad populum and the cognitive bias of social proof.

Argumentum ad populum goes something like this: The majority does/believes it, therefore it must be good/proper/right/correct/moral/advantageous.

There's actually no objective reason to hate gays, since there in nothing that inheres in a gay man that necessarily makes him a threat to anyone, except perhaps that he may disgust, but people are socialized to have this reaction. Just as we find grubs and various insects revolting which Africans find delectable, so too do homophobes find revolting something which if viewed in the proper light and frame of mind they wouldn't find so; it certainly isn't the case that revulsion to homosexuals and homosexual acts is innate and genetically programmed in the way aversion to fecal matter is.

I think on some level even some of the staunchest of homophobes questions the propriety of his hatred but upon reflection concludes that there must indeed be something wrong with it since so many believe so.

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that you have a college degree and that you work at Starbucks.

mjk42:Texas with a Dollarsign:Because there's obviously a link between sexual orientation and driving ability?

I think the logic is something like this:
A: Women cannot drive
B: Women like the peen
(Logical Fallacy)
C: Liking the peen means you cannot drive

then it's very simple to say
D: Homosexicle men like the peen
therefore
E: Homosexicle men cannot drive

Interestingly enough, it would then follow that

F: Lesbians do not like the peen
G: Therefore lesbians can drive
H: But only big pickup trucks

QED, imo.

mepiget:My favorite quote has become:

"Billions of people can be wrong [about something]."

I hate to sound like a broken record and constantly blather on about logical fallacies, but people just commit them so damned often. It's really striking!

What are responsible in large part for homophobia (and religion in general) is: argumentum ad populum and the cognitive bias of social proof.

Argumentum ad populum goes something like this: The majority does/believes it, therefore it must be good/proper/right/correct/moral/advantageous.

There's actually no objective reason to hate gays, since there in nothing that inheres in a gay man that necessarily makes him a threat to anyone, except perhaps that he may disgust, but people are socialized to have this reaction. Just as we find grubs and various insects revolting which Africans find delectable, so too do homophobes find revolting something which if viewed in the proper light and frame of mind they wouldn't find so; it certainly isn't the case that revulsion to homosexuals and homosexual acts is innate and genetically programmed in the way aversion to fecal matter is.

I think on some level even some of the staunchest of homophobes questions the propriety of his hatred but upon reflection concludes that there must indeed be something wrong with it since so many believe so.

You talk english real goodly. I is like all wow and stuff.

It's a good thing reuters has finally realized that italy is part of africa.

It's probably a safety thing. Not only would he be an Italian behind the wheel, but you know how women drive. He'd be batting .750 already.

Farking Canuck: Maybe they were concerned that he'd be unable to read a map AND unwilling to stop and ask for directions?

Ok, I'm gay and that made me lol.

Sorry that was Manfred J. Hattan

/half-sicilian
/there is truth there

I never understood homophobes either.
Hell, you should hope more men were gay. Less competition for the wimmins.

I hope they don't start this in the US. Congress would all have to take the bus.

kid_icarus:I hope they don't start this in the US. Congress would all have to take the bus.

And all the priests.
Public transit would be filled with congressmen, clergy, and hair stylists.

Soooo Igor....How you doin?

CygnusDarius:stpickrell:Good thing the guy wasn't a gypsy.

Seriously, what is up with europeans throwing the hate at gypsies?.

farkers stole the watch off my friends wrist

/I was personally impressed

ReverendJasen:kid_icarus:I hope they don't start this in the US. Congress would all have to take the bus.

And all the priests.
Public transit would be filled with congressmen, clergy, and hair stylists.

Hmm...sounds like a musical waiting to happen.

mepiget:...except perhaps that he may disgust, but people are socialized to have this reaction. Just as we find grubs and various insects revolting which Africans find delectable, so too do homophobes find revolting something which if viewed in the proper light and frame of mind they wouldn't find so; it certainly isn't the case that revulsion to homosexuals and homosexual acts is innate and genetically programmed...

I agree completely. We're trained from kids to think that gay is synonymous with "sick", "depraved", "immoral", etc.
I was not raised in a deeply religious environment, or by parents who were homophobic, and so grew up with no biased opinion on the subject. Even though the thought of being intimate with another man is kind of disgusting (in the same way thinking about sex with an 80 yr old woman, or 400lb woman is disgusting), seeing or thinking about other people doing it is not.
I didn't have it bashed into my head by my pastor and parents that I was supposed to be sickened them.

kid_icarus:ReverendJasen:kid_icarus:I hope they don't start this in the US. Congress would all have to take the bus.

And all the priests.
Public transit would be filled with congressmen, clergy, and hair stylists.

Hmm...sounds like a musical waiting to happen.

Sparkly and fabulous!

Giuffrida agreed to re-take his test, passed it for a second time, but the ministry renewed his licence for just one year rather than the usual 10 years because of his homosexuality.

It makes perfect sense to me. Everyone knows the gays get all flustered and giggly when they start driving.

kid_icarus:ReverendJasen:kid_icarus:I hope they don't start this in the US. Congress would all have to take the bus.

And all the priests.
Public transit would be filled with congressmen, clergy, and hair stylists.

Hmm...sounds like a musical waiting to happen.

Or Ark B

meddleRPI

think the logic is something like this:
A: Women cannot drive
B: Women like the peen
(Logical Fallacy phallusy)
C: Liking the peen means you cannot drive

/all I have

mjk42:Texas with a Dollarsign:Because there's obviously a link between sexual orientation and driving ability?

I think the logic is something like this:
A: Women cannot drive
B: Women like the peen
(Logical Fallacy)
C: Liking the peen means you cannot drive

then it's very simple to say
D: Homosexicle men like the peen
therefore
E: Homosexicle men cannot drive

Interestingly enough, it would then follow that

F: Lesbians do not like the peen
G: Therefore lesbians can drive
H: But only big pickup trucks

That doesn't really explain the Chinese though.

wh0mprat:That doesn't really explain the Chinese though.

They're inscrutable.

CygnusDarius:stpickrell:Good thing the guy wasn't a gypsy.

Seriously, what is up with europeans throwing the hate at gypsies?.

Because they deserve everything they get. Filthy gypsies.

mepiget:My favorite quote has become:

"Billions of people can be wrong [about something]."

I hate to sound like a broken record and constantly blather on about logical fallacies, but people just commit them so damned often. It's really striking!

What are responsible in large part for homophobia (and religion in general) is: argumentum ad populum and the cognitive bias of social proof.

Argumentum ad populum goes something like this: The majority does/believes it, therefore it must be good/proper/right/correct/moral/advantageous.

There's actually no objective reason to hate gays, since there in nothing that inheres in a gay man that necessarily makes him a threat to anyone, except perhaps that he may disgust, but people are socialized to have this reaction. Just as we find grubs and various insects revolting which Africans find delectable, so too do homophobes find revolting something which if viewed in the proper light and frame of mind they wouldn't find so; it certainly isn't the case that revulsion to homosexuals and homosexual acts is innate and genetically programmed in the way aversion to fecal matter is.

I think on some level even some of the staunchest of homophobes questions the propriety of his hatred but upon reflection concludes that there must indeed be something wrong with it since so many believe so.

Being that it relates to the discussion at hand, I found it apropos to let it be known that you talk like a fag and your shiats all farked up.

Kyosuke:wh0mprat:That doesn't really explain the Chinese though.

They're inscrutable.

No, they have lots of babies.

wh0mprat:Kyosuke:wh0mprat:That doesn't really explain the Chinese though.

They're inscrutable.

No, they have lots of babies.




/yes, I know

Fark_On_My_Friend:apropos

There's that fag talk again.

Texas with a Dollarsign:Because there's obviously a link between sexual orientation and driving ability?

The thinking is simpler than that:

A:Crazy people are "crazy" (nothing more nuanced than "crazy vs. not crazy")
B: Crazy people cannot be trusted to drive.
C: Man-lust is a mental disease.
D: Anyone with man-lust cannot be trusted to drive.

End of line.

As for why they think man-lust is mental disease...they are Europeans (More bigoted than America, despite what they say) and they are most likely Catholic. Need I say more?

How could they tell he was gay? Was he driving one of these?

Maybe he had one of these on his bumper

Psumek:How could they tell he was gay? Was he driving one of these?

(picture of a scooter)


If thats the case nobody in that country would have a liscense

Kyosuke:wh0mprat:That doesn't really explain the Chinese though.

They're inscrutableinscrotable

/if we're continuing the penis puns...

mjk42:A: Women cannot drive
B: Women like the peen
(Logical Fallacy)
C: Liking the peen means you cannot drive

then it's very simple to say
D: Homosexicle men like the peen
therefore
E: Homosexicle men cannot drive

Interestingly enough, it would then follow that

F: Lesbians do not like the peen
G: Therefore lesbians can drive
H: But only big pickup trucks

Not quite, you just made the same fallacy you pointed out above.

All people who like the peen can't drive.
Lesbians don't like the peen.

Can't infer anything from that.

Asmor:Lesbians don't like the peen.

Oh, they like the peen alright. They just can't handle the responsibility that comes with liking it.