rockytriton Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 I think that a good compromise is to not allow men to be homosexual but to allow women. Besides, lesbians are totally hot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qfwfq Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 Q-you have offered nothing but your opinion as to why one might elect to consider gay behavior acceptable, and pedophilia less so. You are welcome to this opinion, and it is the "mainstream" opinion in the US today. But it is hard to contend that it is not arbitrary.I did not quite say "one's acceptable, the other less so" if you would only notice. I say pedophilia is an unacceptable crime, regardless of whether you consider gay acceptable or unacceptable. If you truly have difficulty to contend that it is not arbitrary and you aren't being deliberate, I can only feel sorry for your difficulty. Children are typically easier victims than adults, even easier than women often are for men. If you have any difficulty in seeing this, I'm not here to help you and I shall take no whatsoever notice of any further replies concerning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qfwfq Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 The obvious.What kind of lifestyle does a hetero couple subject their children to?The obvious. Do I think that every heterosexual relationship is perfect? Of course not. Do I think that because every heterosexual relationship is not perfect' date=' then that mandates that I should teach my children that it just might be better to be a homosexual? No.?[/quote']Call that logic? I try to help my children understand that it's their responsibility to work at their relationships, even at a young age, and that it's ok to dissagree. Thats what I'm doing now.?Why can't a gay couple adopt children and do the same? At what level should we establish an action as something that should be given to children for their experimentation? on Ripley's believe it or not, there are people who climb into tubs with rattlesnakes. Should I get a tub and fill it with rattlesnakes and put my five year old into it to see if he might like that lifestyle? - What if more people were doing it?I fail to remember having posted, here or elsewhere, that a gay couple ought to adopt children and subject them "experimentally" to homosexual experience. If you want to discuss what I post please avoid misreading it first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEAKER Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 I say pedophilia is an unacceptable crime,I personally consider this to be a great opinion! But it is still only an opinion. (arbitrary.) Based on your personal preference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qfwfq Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 How about kidnapping? How about bank robbing, how about murder? How about the lager and the gulag? You could argue these being "arbitrary" opinions that you agree with. So what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishteacher73 Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 Let's not equate love with sex, OK? I love my kids, my dad, and a whole bunch of my friends, but somehow sex doesn't enter the picture. I think this is an extrremely valid point. Love and sex are not the same. Is it wrong for someone to not allow love because you have a problem with how they have sex? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biochemist Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 I think this is an extrremely valid point. Love and sex are not the same. Is it wrong for someone to not allow love because you have a problem with how they have sex?Love is always good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bumab Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 Is it wrong for someone to not allow love because you have a problem with how they have sex? Not allowing adoption or marrage can hardly have an effect on people loving each other. You can't just "not allow" somebody to love somebody else. As far as I understand, the religious prohibition is against sex, not love. The cases being discussed deal with condoning sex, not condoning love. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockytriton Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 I think this is an extrremely valid point. Love and sex are not the same. Is it wrong for someone to not allow love because you have a problem with how they have sex? I think the biggest problem that people have isn't the fact that they have sex, it's the public display of affection. That's what really irks people I think. Most people could care less what you do privately but what you do publicly, especially in front of children, is a whole other issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qfwfq Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 The cases being discussed deal with condoning sex, not condoning love.Uhm, isn't it gay marriage that's illegal most places, while sex and even de facto couples aren't? They simply have less rights in most places. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishteacher73 Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 Most states have repealed their sodomy laws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockytriton Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 Most states have repealed their sodomy laws. Yea sodome laws suck (no pun intended :Alien: ). They shouldn't be able to tell people what they can do to each other behind closed doors. I think that the law makers wives were so boring that they made these laws under the "if I have to suffer, so do you" mentality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishteacher73 Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 I think the biggest problem that people have isn't the fact that they have sex, it's the public display of affection. That's what really irks people I think. Most people could care less what you do privately but what you do publicly, especially in front of children, is a whole other issue. In a country that proclaims freedom of expression, we seem to portray a truly red-neck back-woods good ol' boy front to the rest of the world. We support the moron's rights to burn crosses, vomit vitriolic diatribes against anyone that's not a WASP, ect., etc Yet you are concerned about a kid seeing two people kiss or hold hands...Gabriel sound the trump, the apocolypse is nigh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockytriton Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 In a country that proclaims freedom of expression, we seem to portray a truly red-neck back-woods good ol' boy front to the rest of the world. We support the moron's rights to burn crosses, vomit vitriolic diatribes against anyone that's not a WASP, ect., etc Yet you are concerned about a kid seeing two people kiss or hold hands...Gabriel sound the trump, the apocolypse is nigh. I'm talking about people in general. But yes, it can be a concern. Also, the cross burning morons are only allowed to do their protests in a controlled environment. They aren't allowed to just go around all over the place burning crosses in front of people. There has to be some limit to freedom of expression, you can't express yourself to where it harms other people. Whos to say that physical harm is any worse than mental harm, and who's to say what harms people mentally? I don't think there will ever be any resolve to this issue, at least not until we have world peace, and we will never have world peace as long as there are any religions in the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bumab Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 Uhm, isn't it gay marriage that's illegal most places, while sex and even de facto couples aren't? They simply have less rights in most places. Right, but in my experience, condoning marrage is seen as condoning sex, since nobody (or practically nobody) really thinks the government should regulate what you do in private with other consenting adults. But marrage still implies sex, thus condoning marrage condones sex. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishteacher73 Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 SO we cannot condone something that is legal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biochemist Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 SO we cannot condone something that is legal?Ooh. Good point. This reminds me of all of the noise reated to the "ethics" violations in the House riight now. These are actually trivial rule violations that have little to do with ethics (i.e., equally unethical activiities are not against the rules, and/or the rules are different in the House than in the Senate). It is useful to separate approval/propriety from legality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.