How far have we come with homosexuality?

[SnakeTongue]

And what are you qualifications and reasons for doing so?

There's been a hundred years of psychiatric research, discovery and progress since Freud.

This is a forum in the cyberspace. My qualifications or reasons for doing so do not matter at all to the debate.

There been thousands of years of philosophic "research, discovery and progress since" Plato...

...and still Plato is very applicable to our reality.

 

[Darat]

In no part.

...snip...

So where did your claim that "He is just proposing a change in the law to let people like him do not be criminalized when caught in intercourse with young boys." come from since it is not in what he said?

Still do not change the fact that such change in the law would free people of any age or sexual orientation from being criminalized in a consensual sexual activity with a young person of 14 or more.

Then you cannot have read what he actually said since he explicitly rules out such behaviour being legalised.

This include the gay community, reinforced by the fact he is a gay activist.

Do you think 14 years old is an appropriate age to an young person have sexual relationships with any person older than 13?

I can draw few moral issues from such question, but this would be extensive...

So, I think not. What do you think?

It seems that you are in agreement with the "gay activist" you accuse of wanting to change "your" laws so he can legally have sex with 14 year olds.

 

[Darat]

...snip...

Yes, it is about the gay community. He is a gay activist. He represent the gay community.
What else he should represent?

He does not represent me.

 

[Pardalis]

This is a forum in the cyberspace. My qualifications or reasons for doing so do not matter at all to the debate.

Yes it does. You say homosexuality is a paraphilia, professional psychiatrists and psychologists all over the world disagree with you.

The fact that we're in cyberspace doesn't give you special permission to say nonsense, and it doesn't give your personal opinion more weight than the scientific community.

 

[Darat]

Is this debate a scientific work to be presented in a university?

Yes, I do not accept the "American Psychiatric Association definition" of such term.

I am not even close to USA.

If I just want to use Freud's definition, what is the matter?

Perhaps because his definitions have been shown to not only be false but also were never based on sound evidence.

 

[I Am The Scum]

No, I cannot.

Thanks for admitting that.

In the interest of intellectual integrity, I would advise that you review the things you post, so as not to spread false information.

 

[SnakeTongue]

So where did your claim that "He is just proposing a change in the law to let people like him do not be criminalized when caught in intercourse with young boys." come from since it is not in what he said?

By "people like him" I mean an homosexual.

So "people like him", homosexuals, will be not criminalized when caught in intercourse with young boys older than 13 years.

I understand that he proposes only a difference of three years to not be a crime.

That means a 18 years old boy - "like him" - will be not any more considered a criminal if this boy have consensual sexual intercourse with another 15 years old boy.

Then you cannot have read what he actually said since he explicitly rules out such behaviour being legalised.

This include the gay community, reinforced by the fact he is a gay activist.

Yes, correct. I made a mistake in my statement.

It seems that you are in agreement with the "gay activist" you accuse of wanting to change "your" laws so he can legally have sex with 14 year olds.

You are seem in dim light... I do not own any laws.

 

[SnakeTongue]

The fact that we're in cyberspace doesn't give you special permission to say nonsense...

Oh, really.... Stop me if you can, oh preacher of Themis.

and it doesn't give your personal opinion more weight than the scientific community.

I am here to balance my personal opinion with the weight of the JREF community knowledge, not to trade my moral beliefs with the heavy gold of the scientific community.

 

[bookitty]

That means a 18 years old boy - "like him" - will be not any more considered a criminal if this boy have consensual sexual intercourse with another 15 years old boy.

It also means that an 18 year old boy will not be considered a criminal if he has consensual sex with a 15 year old girl. Do you have a problem with that?

 

[Darat]

By "people like him" I mean an homosexual.

So "people like him", homosexuals, will be not criminalized when caught in intercourse with young boys older than 13 years.

I understand that he proposes only a difference of three years to not be a crime.

That means a 18 years old boy - "like him" - will be not any more considered a criminal if this boy have consensual sexual intercourse with another 15 years old boy.

...snip...-

So when you said people "like him" you did not mean people like him since he falls outside the examples you have been making. Also the definition you are using for "people like him" is not founded on the facts in discussion at this point since his article is not about the homosexual age of consent but age of consent for everyone, homosexual, heterosexuals, bisexuals and so on so.

Yes, correct. I made a mistake in my statement.

You make mistakes in many of your statements. For example you were mistaken when you claimed to have read what he had actually said.

You are seem in dim light... I do not own any laws.

I merely read what you post, that you have difficulty to remember the content of your own posts is your problem.

 

[PS13]

Of course he do not encourage young people to have sex.

He is just proposing a change in the law to let people like him do not be criminalized when caught in intercourse with young boys.

Being gay activist do not change the fact that gay people also look after sex with partners of different ages.

You should really take that big, bolded part back. You lied, on purpose, about what he said because you personally don't like Gay people in society.


The law he's proposing makes perfect sense. You just need to get past your hatred of homosexuals to understand that.


You have some nerve to accuse this of being a 'conspiracy of the gay community' to loosen sex laws with teens.
You are wrong on understanding the contents of the article in question & I for one think you are purposely trying to incite anger in other members here. It's an activity on the internet known as 'flaming' (ironic, I know).

 

[HansMustermann]

This is a forum in the cyberspace. My qualifications or reasons for doing so do not matter at all to the debate.

There been thousands of years of philosophic "research, discovery and progress since" Plato...

...and still Plato is very applicable to our reality.

Maybe, but Freud turns out to have been a Fraud, and basically made up stuff. Most of the patients whose problems he cleverly solves fall squarely in one of the categories (A) his own imaginary cameos, and (B) people he lied about. E.g., he knew that one patient actually ended up in a mental institution when he was writing about how he cured her.

But anyway, yes, some things may still be appliable nowadays. That means the things still considered valid, not the things long discredited.

You wouldn't apply Flat Earth ideas to calculate a ballistic missile trajectory, or really anything that matters. You wouldn't do entomology by Aristotle's ideas that flies have 4 legs. You wouldn't treat asthma in women by the old and discredited "hysteria" theories. You wouldn't predict weather or a battle by consulting the sacred chicken. Etc.

Get it? Old is one thing, already proven bogus is another.

And that you have to base your BS on stuff that falls in the latter category... it says something.

 

[HansMustermann]

Oh, really.... Stop me if you can, oh preacher of Themis.



I am here to balance my personal opinion with the weight of the JREF community knowledge, not to trade my moral beliefs with the heavy gold of the scientific community.

Oh, got it. You just want to preach woowoo and won't let such things as science, or apparently even honesty, get in the way of that.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

There are a lot of LGBT in games and not all poorly treated.

Haha, reminds me of when I played MGS2

"By the way, he calls himself Vamp because he's bisexual, not because he resembles a vampire."
"Oh."

That was like a glass of water in my face. I don't think I'd ever played a game that explicit about LGBT before.

 

[SnakeTongue]

It also means that an 18 year old boy will not be considered a criminal if he has consensual sex with a 15 year old girl. Do you have a problem with that?

Yes, I have.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

It also means that an 18 year old boy will not be considered a criminal if he has consensual sex with a 15 year old girl. Do you have a problem with that?

Interestingly, the girl is probably closer to complete sexual maturity than the boy in this case.

 

[Skwinty]

Yes, I have.

What problem would that be?

 

[bikerdruid]

Yes, I have.

then you would be shocked by the reality.
i was a teacher for many years.
it was not the 15 and 18 years olds that were our greatest concern.
children 11 and 12 are having sex.
should we criminalize them too?

 

[SnakeTongue]

So when you said people "like him" you did not mean people like him since he falls outside the examples you have been making. Also the definition you are using for "people like him" is not founded on the facts in discussion at this point since his article is not about the homosexual age of consent but age of consent for everyone, homosexual, heterosexuals, bisexuals and so on so.

Yes, I mean "people like him", homosexuals. He fall outside the age, but he do not fall outside the sexual orientation.

The article is about homosexuals. The inclusion of other sexual orientations in the proposal do not free homosexuals of being benefited from it.

You make mistakes in many of your statements. For example you were mistaken when you claimed to have read what he had actually said.

No, not many.

I misunderstand the age limit which he is proposing.

I merely read what you post, that you have difficulty to remember the content of your own posts is your problem.

You made a statement. If you cannot support, do not blame my memory.

 

[SnakeTongue]

You should really take that big, bolded part back. You lied, on purpose, about what he said because you personally don't like Gay people in society.

Yes... Of course. People like him, homosexuals, are not included in the proposal. I am really sorry if I made such horrible mistake. I did not know that Peter Tatchell was just promote his political activism to benefit the heterosexual community....

The law he's proposing makes perfect sense. You just need to get past your hatred of homosexuals to understand that.

Do not make perfect sense to me.

You have some nerve to accuse this of being a 'conspiracy of the gay community' to loosen sex laws with teens.
You are wrong on understanding the contents of the article in question & I for one think you are purposely trying to incite anger in other members here. It's an activity on the internet known as 'flaming' (ironic, I know).

Yes, I have nerves to use my critical thinking. I learned from this people:

The authors, Marshall Kirk, a noted author and researcher in neuropsychiatry and Hunter Madsen, a Harvard-trained social scientist, both self-confessed homosexuals, set out a blueprint with which to enhance the respectability of homosexuality in the face of criticism. They viewed negative stereotypes of homosexuality as a misrepresentation and were unabashed in using lies to counter them. They intended to psychologically attack the average American’s mind, emotions and will through the use of propaganda via the media.

What they proposed was powerful propaganda in the form of a public relations strategy that involved three elements.

• Desentisitization - This involved flooding straight America with advertising presenting gays in the least offensive manner.

• Jamming - Equate the fear of gays with hatred of Jews, blacks and women.

• Conversion - Presenting images of gay as normal.