Homosexuals

Was this supposed to be a comeback...? If so it was piss poor. Besides I believe you learn this shit in high school, and I was hoping I was debating with someone with high school level intelligence.

I won't agree with that either, and I'm willing to bet neither will nashrakh. That strawman you set up was pretty blatant and I'm disappointed in nashrakh for going along with it.

But fuck that, let's go back to your initial question:

For the sake of argument, let's go along with the assumptions made. It's not the same in all situations because of the circumstances and consequences. Homosexual shit happening between consenting adults really shouldn't be frowned upon because if you're not a bigoted prick, you'll just see two consenting adults doing their thing. When it comes to incest, we have evidence that the consequences of pregnancy in such a situation just isn't nice for the little bastard 9 months away from birth. Frowning upon such bullshit is understandable. Then, the pedophilia thing involves circumstances such as having sex with minors. There are many reasons why that isn't right, and even if the kid also consents to it while still understanding what this means in the end, it's still understandable why this isn't right or "frowned upon" because the kid's underdeveloped.

I just can't understand homophobic people. Why do YOU care? In what way, in what possible dimension are their sexuality even a slight part of your business?

The only argument with a hint of actual reason would be that homosexuality is unnatural because it's an animals instinct to try and reproduce and spread your linage on. But this is still not entirely true and it definitely don't make it wrong.

Well, with that logic women above ~40 shouldn't be allowed to have sex since the chance that something will be wrong with the baby from an "old" female is a lot higher then from incest. And since people will generally disagree with this i think the incest argument is moot.

@PersonDude, Homosexuality was illegal, people thought it was sick and it would probably still be illegal and viewed that way if there were less gay people, but since there are so many people that are gay everyone was more or less forced to accept it and unlike pedophilia noone get's hurt in the process.

True. Reminds me of the story of the pregnant seventy-year-old. That is just irresponsible. Not only is it dangerous for the old hag, but especially dangerous to the child. They clearly have no regard for human life. I mean for heaven's sake adopt a child at that age.

I didn't say shit about banning anything, so you can call that argument moot when someone actually makes it. If people want to frown upon 40+ year olds pumping out units, that's their problem.

Part of my paragraph was aimed at everyone who argue for homosexuality. Their main argument in being okay with gay practices is that love is uncontrollable, therefore they have no choice in the matter of being gay or being straight.

I guess Nash was included when I wrote the statement especially since it was written while writing a reply to him, and if it was a wrong assumption, then I apologize.




Incest: No one is talking about having a child. We're talking about sex.

Pedophilia: Although you make a good point that children do not understand what is going on, I used a hypothetical analogy to figure out Nash's standings.

But I found this statement interesting.



This really doesn't have any reasoning behind it. Care to explain?



Lol, someone's butthurt.

Welp, since you already got 7 pages, i'll just put this out there.

Man+man or woman+woman doesn't equal a child. So if you want to continue the human race DON'T BE A HOMO.

lulz, but all joking aside i don't got a problem with em, they are annoyin sometimes, but let them marry or w/e.


Just letting them have kids is kinda....iffy. it really depends on the couple.

In the name of LOVE and Freedom the Pink Gundam of Fabulous will punish all homophobic!!!!! YAAAAA



edit: btw sjwho2 the earth is overpopulated as it is so, reverse your logic and we would actually have a pretty good solution to the problem XD

Just to be clear, I wasn't arguing for or against anything, I was simply answering:

So, if you look at my post in context,
^Irrelevant statement.


^Irrelevant


No, as I don't see how that doesn't have some reasoning behind it in the context of my answer to your question.

Since the detail is already in my other post, I'll answer the questions again with an excerpt:

No:



Also this can be subjective.



Actually...



...relevant.



If you are allowed to use the excuse of appearance and biology as a reasoning to "frown upon" sex, then why are people who use the same type of excuse of biology, except against homosexuality called "bigoted pricks"?



Subjective, as I and many other reasonable people believe these examples are delving into similar sexual ethics.

An example: A person decides to steal an object because his family is starving. Another decides to steal just because he wants the item. In both cases, some people will say they're both ethically wrong and is a related crime although circumstances and consequences might be different.

Edit: I realized I've been doing it wrong. After some contemplation, it seems that the entire argument stems from a false premise.


You see, the part that I didn't pay close attention to until now is when you say, "...love is a behavior that cannot be helped," which is what you disagree with, and I agree with you. The behavior is a choice. What isn't a choice, however, is sexual attraction/orientation.

I quote from "Royal College of Psychiatrists: Submission to the Church of England’s Listening Exercise on Human Sexuality",


With this clarification, you see why the choice of adults of the same gender to fuck wouldn't be seen the same as the choice a pedophile makes to fuck a minor.

I'm glad we're on the same track now (debate-wise).



If I were to agree with the study, I don't see what's stopping me from accepting pedophilia as a "normal" behavioral case as well. If certain biological factors of the brain don't allow us to choose who we are to fall in love with, then why are we punishing people who are sexually attracted to children seeing as how they have no choice?

If you're going to argue that pedophilia is an experience based sexual attraction, then I won't argue since I have no knowledge of how it's formed, but I can present you another case that is not experience based. Genetic sexual attraction (GSA) is a psychological term for people who fall in love with close relatives. They can't help but love each other, so if we are allowing homosexuality to continue, why stop incest? If it's just about screwed up children, things can be "fixed", then the two incestuous couples can live happily ever after, no?

Which brings me to a similar question I asked earlier; why allow one group while barring the other? Is it some sociological ethical boundary we know shouldn't be crossed? But again, why cross one line because it is widely accepted, while keeping behind another similar line?

I am okay with it although I have a hard time not laughing when it comes to humor like this.

If you realized the context of my whole argument, then we might not have been having a debate, as we're arguing about developing tendencies that form without experiences through livelihood.

But even so, if I were to treat it as a behavior a person was born with, then I'd say that kleptomania was hurting another party, therefore it should be punishable anyway.

Of course the argument might switch to, "well then isn't pedophilia hurting the child?" My argument is that there could be consent from the child. Although everyone waives it off by saying there is no likelihood of it happening, before the the enlightenment, most every culture practiced marriage with what we would consider under-aged children. Back in those days, arranged marriage was prominent, but even if few, there were probably cases of both parties consenting.



No you have not, and this is my point. They do have a choice in taking it in the ass unlike what most gay-rights activist argue. My main theme for argument why force other "fetishes" to take it "in the ass" from the legal system, while allowing this one? Because I'm sure most everyone would feel disgusted at incest and pedophilia, but they suffer from the same problems as homosexuals. A biological factor in the brain that forces them to be attracted to a certain physical/biological attribute.

Are people punishing because of their attraction to children, or because of their behavior which leads them to fuck children? If the former, I disagree with such punishment, if the latter, it is legitimate.

Something I wrote before my edit which stresses that you have to take into account the differences between homosexuality and pedophilia, because saying they have similar biology behind them and just leaving it at that is oversimplifying the situation:



Actually, I have nothing against incest. I cringe when I hear that incest is illegal. The point about 40+ year old women is something that comes to mind in this case.

I only believe that there are two original gender classification in this world but since there are many homophobic nowadays then I can't do anything about it. I don't have the right to discriminate people for being homosexual and I also respect on whom they are.

Obviously, for the latter. But using a hypothetical case, why shouldn't we allow child to adult relations if both consent? It seems to be a bit unfair for those who like children (in an exaggerated way) if we deny them of their sexual preferences while allowing homosexuals to live out their fantasies. I know I'm doing a horrible job debating (sorry I'm an ESL), but I hope to let you understand a little better on my next answer below.



I was actually picking and choosing the statement you wrote:



You say it should be frowned upon just because underdevelopment (and I took it as physical appearance and biological immaturity).

Of course I know the situation is wrong because children don't quite understand what they're getting into, but I'm excluding this fact to see how many people -who are accepting of homosexuality- will be able to look pedophilia as "okay" if children suddenly had the capability to understand the situation. Will they still disagree with it? Then it is a good example to use to letting them understand how anti-homo people feel.



I realize incest is a horrible example to use on Fakku since it's such a widely fapped to fetish (I included), but I was hoping people would realize this fetish only works because they subconsciously know this is an act of taboo. In fact, I fapped heavily to lesbians back in the day.