How far have we come with homosexuality?

[SnakeTongue]

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.

You poor analogy did not convince me that Freud or Plato knowledge is bogus...

 

[SnakeTongue]

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?

If they do without the consent of the parents, yes.

 

[TragicMonkey]

If they do without the consent of the parents, yes.

.....that's much, much worse than them doing it on their own, can't you see that?

 

[SnakeTongue]

.....that's much, much worse than them doing it on their own, can't you see that?

No, I cannot see that.

 

[TragicMonkey]

No, I cannot see that.

So if a pair of 11 year olds wanted to have sex with each other, and asked their parents, and the parents said "okay", you think that's acceptable?

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

You poor analogy did not convince me that Freud or Plato knowledge is bogus...

Right. And presumably you're not able to read the parts which weren't an analogy.

But that's ok. It hardly comes as a surprise that someone who's a dishonest bigot needs to base his self-righteous BS on already disproven pseudoscience.

 

[bikerdruid]

If they do without the consent of the parents, yes.

parents cannot consent to their 11 or 12 year olds having sex.
are you being purposefully obtuse, or are you really that far gone?

 

[Darat]

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.

Again you show that you did not read the article.

No, not many.

I misunderstand the age limit which he is proposing.

And other things - I would recommend that if you want to discuss what he said (as is evidence by your many statements about what he said) you should read the article.

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

I am not blaming your bad memory.

 

[Emet]

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.

Critical thinking? By reading a site like this (I'm sure there are others), where the above came from:

http://gayconspiracy.info/page78.html

The book was written in 1989. Have you read it? Do you believe it is representative of the sooper seekret gay conspiracy that all homosexuals participate in?

 

[Jono]

I tried to read the pages and get an idea of what is being debated, but then my head started to hurt and decided I wouldn't bother.

How far have we've come with homosexuality? Ultimately impossible to answer, since it implies equality exists as a practical reference, which it doesn't. But down to the colloquially-framed musing, I'd say there's a long way to go before homosexuality is as equally accepted as women.

 

[Mirrorglass]

But down to the colloquially-framed musing, I'd say there's a long way to go before homosexuality is as equally accepted as women.

Yeah, but that's only because the only people who'd want to make femaleness illegal are homosexuals.

 

[bikerdruid]

Yeah, but that's only because the only people who'd want to make femaleness illegal are homosexuals.

you might want to re-think this ridiculous statement.
why on earth would you think this?

 

[Mirrorglass]

you might want to re-think this ridiculous statement.
why on earth would you think this?

That would be a joke. Can't hit a homerun with every swing.

ETA: Although in my opinion, the statement is perfectly logical, if also very silly.

 

[bikerdruid]

That would be a joke. Can't hit a homerun with every swing.

ETA: Although in my opinion, the statement is perfectly logical, if also very silly.

you believe that homosexual men dislike women?

 

[Mark6]

That would be a joke. Can't hit a homerun with every swing.

ETA: Although in my opinion, the statement is perfectly logical, if also very silly.

I understood it was a joke. And yes, it is logical.

For those who still are not getting the joke: females would never want to outlaw femaleness. Neither would heterosexual males. The only ones who conceivably might want to do such ridiculous thing would have to be either gay males or eunuchs.

 

[Mirrorglass]

you believe that homosexual men dislike women?

No, I just believe heterosexual men like them. I can provide anecdotal evidence.

 

[SnakeTongue]

parents cannot consent to their 11 or 12 year olds having sex.
are you being purposefully obtuse, or are you really that far gone?

I am being obtuse... I did not know the parents cannot consent.

So here is an interesting part.

If the parents always will not consent, the children always will hide the experience.

If the children are caught in intercourse and are handled to the police, they will face criminal charges.

That means sex for young children will always be something thrilling to do...



In UK, the parents can just consent at the age of consent?

 

[Dr. Keith]

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....



Do not make perfect sense to me.

This whole conversation is odd to me because I grew up in a state with very reasonable "Romeo and Juliet" laws, as we called them. In fact, they are better than having the age of consent at 16, if you are being honest.

Our law was if one participant in a sexual act was under eighteen then the other participant could not be more than 24 months older. It kept older people from preying on the young and impressionable while not criminalizing those things that happen between minors.

So under your current law a 16 year old can have sex with a 40 year old, but a 15 year old would be committing a crime by having sex with another 15 year old, even if they were both within days of being 16. That seems entirely arbitrary and leading to far worse problems.

 

[Dr. Keith]

That means sex for young children will always be something thrilling to do...

Yeah, but not for the reason you stated.

Are you unfamiliar with the particulars?

 

[Dr. Keith]

That would be a joke. Can't hit a homerun with every swing.

ETA: Although in my opinion, the statement is perfectly logical, if also very silly.

I have to agree with the bikerdruid, neither funny nor logical.

And please don't try to explain. I've told enough bad jokes to know that the explanations never help. I think we can just move on . . .