Homosexuality - paving the way for ALL abnormal sexuality.

God help the person who goes after my 10-12 yr old son or daughter. There will be no safe place for them to hide.

 

At least he can spell "ought."

 

Why, yes, he does.

 

Complete and total bull(*)(*)(*)(*). A homosexual being attracted to their same sex is and never will be the gateway to all the bull(*)(*)(*)(*) you are spouting.

 

To quote a great movie:

Ditto.

RIP Patrick!

- - - Updated - - -

We know this. This a disgusting spinoff of the other thread.

 

If that's true then why do leftists want to hand underage girls birth control and teach them sex ed in 3rd grade?

 

So they don't get pregnant or contract an STD. It's pretty much objectively proven that comprehensive sex ed and contraception are the only ways to reliably lower teen pregnancies and STD rates.

Abstinence only education is massively counterproductive. When kids hit puberty, they're going to have sex no matter what you tell them. The adolescent libido is a force of nature that cannot be stopped, so you might as well focus on harm reduction.

 

Oh Im sorry I thought you were the one that said it was rape. Im wondering why people who say its rape would then condone the behavior.

 

Is it just me or is this (*)(*)(*)(*) insane?

I mean I'm not a homosexual, but to equate homosexuality to child molestation is just stupid.

What is the cognitive disconnect that is at play here?

I don't get it.

 

If homo is such a slur then why do gays use it --- like all the time --- calling people "HOMO-Phobes." Homo is a latin word. Shouldn't you and the Leftist PC crowd be burning latin dictionaries?

Animals are under the absolute control of their masters. They are beasts of burden and so forth. I don't see how a small person having sex with a similar or larger sized mammal could be any more painful than among their own genus- species. Animals can be trained, and just like Pavlov's dogs---they could probably be conditioned to "enjoy" the beastial acts. Perhaps you are a PETA person that thinks animals have the same rights as humans. Who knows.

Is your morality the same now as it was 30 years ago? Did you champion gay marriage back then?

As far as "baby killers" go, they are all liberal dems that think the "unborn" don't become human until the cord is cut.

 

Why do you entertain such fancies, and how are you personally adversely impacted by ending gender discrimination in marriage contracts?

It has been legal for couples in most jurisdictions in the US, starting in 2004, without any societal disruptions, has not occasioned moral collapse anywhere, or led to any of the imaginary scenarios that frighten you.

Given the empirical reality, you may be upsetting yourself unnecessarily.

 

Nah, bestiality and pedophilia aren't an innate part of one's sexuality, they're related to larger psychiatric dysfunctions such as anti-social personality disorder; basically from what I've read they're part of a general pattern of social deviance, the same way that rapists enjoy rape (even when they have legal options for sex) because of the feeling of power it gives them - no one's born with an "exclusive attraction to rape".

Equating them with a sexuality is silly - for example some men get turned on to the thought of having sex with their teacher, but that doesn't mean that any boy is born with an innate and exclusive attraction to teachers.

Plus rights end where others begin so it's irrelevant anyway. By the same logic, allowing freedom of religion logically means that Islamic terrorists will eventually be granted a "right" to blow up infidels in the name of Allah.

And polygamy again? Polygamy was accepted in cultures long before monogamy was; monogamy in the West wasn't accepted until the early Catholic Church changed the rules. Even God in the Bible didn't have much of a problem with Solomon's 700 wives.

Who? What scientists?

Name one society in history where pedophilia (marrying pre-pubescent children) or zoophilia was accepted, I can't think of any - even including ancient cultures which were gay friendly.

Hell if anything, cultures which were the most xenophobic and authoritarian were the most tolerant of child abuse, as can be seen in the Islamic world where 11 year old girls are still forced to marry 40 year old men.

 

How would that be "progressive", since lower ages of consent typically correlate with authoritarian nations like Saudi Arabia? I'm pretty sure consent laws aren't a political issue anyway.

Hell, back in 1900 the legal age of consent in parts of the US was only 10 years old.

All of this scare rhetoric is dumb, because even ignoring the science about disorders like pedophilia, you'd have to do away with parental legal rights, consent laws, etc as well.

Ideally though I'd prefer marriage not to be a "right" just because two people love each other, I'd prefer it to be granted to any couple who legally is raising a kid, since I think the laws were designed based on the idea that the couple was giving back to the state by raising productive offspring - it wasn't designed as an "entitlement" to any two people who were in love.

The only-semi legit argument here is the incest argument; even if blood relations aren't currently a protected class, if marriage is defined as an entitlement to two people who love each other, rather than as an incentive from the state to promote raising children in a stable environment, then I can see a court eventually declaring incest marriage a right, even if it's completely dysfunctional to the intended purpose of the legal marriage benefits.

 

Come on. Don't play dumb. There's the slur, then there's the abbreviation.

 

MOD EDIT - Off Topic

- - - Updated - - -

So they don't get pregnant at 14.

 

I'll support not handing birth control to 14 year olds, as soon as you agree to pay $1000-2000 a month to raise their kids from age 1-18 - instead of shelling out $6 on a box of cheap birth control. The majority of 14 year olds get pregnant not through rape, but through sex with another adolescent - are you really this ignorant on the subject of sex?

If you want 14 year olds having kids that they can't support, then feel free to pay for it yourself - don't expect taxpayers like me to fit the bill.

 

Why should I pay? Im not the one having sex with them nor the one impregnating them, nor am I the failed parent of the rape victim. How about their parents pay for their own parenting failure? That thought ever cross your mind?

MOD EDIT - Off Topic

 

Yeah... how about she pay for it?

[video]www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fj7y-_aIbNw[/video]

The majority of teens get pregnant because they sleep around with other teens; even good parents can't prevent it 100% of the time - and of course a lot of these teens have irresponsible, parents like this - who don't even work to pay for their own kids let alone their grandkids

 

Uh, I was defending giving young girls birth control. Not the rape of young girls.

Like I said, there is no reason to make (*)(*)(*)(*) up and pretend that's what I said.

 

Well....this doesn't happen very often, but after watching this heartfelt video, I understand now that a women with 15 children and another on the way, is my fault. Ill begin month payments immediately for kiki and shaneequa. That's all the money I have left though.

 

Then why did you quote me when I was clearly having a conversation with someone else if you didn't want to talk about it?

 

Adolescents having sex with one another isn't rape. I was under the impression that most people would have the good sense to realize that the age of consent only applies when those above it (after a certain threshold. a 17 year old having sex with a 19 year old is perfectly fine) have sex with those below it.

And giving contraception and education is not condoning anything. It's harm reduction. It's practical.

- - - Updated - - -

The word homophobe is different from the word homo because one uses a latin root meaning same and one is a slur that happens to be a homonym of that latin root derived from a word that uses the said root. And you're seriously bringing up latin? Negro is spanish for black, but every person with good sense understands that the cultural context is completely different when the same word is used in english.

Bestiality: That's not about pain. It's about the fact that animals are on the same mental level as children and aren't capable of consenting to sex with an adult human being. They lack the intelligence.

On my morality: I'm younger than 30, so I don't think that question really works.

 

so.....a 16 year old having sex with a 8 year old is not rape according to you?

 

I seem to have made an oversight in my theoretical law.

Maybe a 3-4 year buffer for the underage? As in, it's okay as long as the age difference is pretty small.

 

MOD EDIT - Off Topic
- - - Updated - - -

Why? underage is underage. You support giving birth control to a 14 yr old why not a 8 yr old?