FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Should the rights of
Should the rights of
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?"
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?"
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
There was an ex policeman in court last week for spouting transphobic bile on facebook or somewhere, the judge said he was within his rights to express his opinions through free speech |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I'm not sure what you are asking here. Are you asking if laws that are not in place should be, or laws that are in place shouldn't be? Or something else? More background to your question would be helpful.
As far as I'm concerned you should be free to do what you want and be who you are as long as you are not harming yourself or anybody else. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it "
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?"
What? No! That's a stupid argument |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?"
Ignorance |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument "
Is it? But they were born that way... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way..."
Paedophiles bring harm to children. It's a lot different to being in a same sex relationship with another adult |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way..."
Yes of course it is. Those things are rightly illegal for a reason.
They are meant to protect people, obviously any sexual activities should only happen between consenting adults where nobody is being abused or taken advantage of.
To lump being LGTB+ with such things is ridiculous! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
Paedophiles bring harm to children. It's a lot different to being in a same sex relationship with another adult "
Absolutely. Amazing though that there are those that see them as part of the LGBTQ community. LGBTQP, is trying to become "a thing" using these very arguments of "they were born that way", watch out for it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
Yes of course it is. Those things are rightly illegal for a reason.
They are meant to protect people, obviously any sexual activities should only happen between consenting adults where nobody is being abused or taken advantage of.
To lump being LGTB+ with such things is ridiculous! "
Yes indeed. But not beyond possibility. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *hickennchipsWoman
over a year ago
up above the streets and houses |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?"
Ridiculous trying to even make this comparison  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
Yes of course it is. Those things are rightly illegal for a reason.
They are meant to protect people, obviously any sexual activities should only happen between consenting adults where nobody is being abused or taken advantage of.
To lump being LGTB+ with such things is ridiculous!
Yes indeed. But not beyond possibility. "
Trolling again I see. You just love to stir up a bit of controversy don't you. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way..."
From a purely logical perspective, I can see how people could make that argument.
However... Some people like to torture animals, because they were born that way. Some people like to murder other people, because they were born that way.
We as a society decide what is and isn't acceptable behaviour. That's the basis of our justice system. What we seem harmful or criminal will change over time, as society changes.
FWIW, the line for me comes with causing harm or hurt to others. Other than that, you should be free to do whatever you please!
Mrs TMN |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
Ridiculous trying to even make this comparison "
100 years also they would have said the same about all sorts of things we think of as normal today. The "They were born that way" is a dangerous mitigation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
From a purely logical perspective, I can see how people could make that argument.
However... Some people like to torture animals, because they were born that way. Some people like to murder other people, because they were born that way.
We as a society decide what is and isn't acceptable behaviour. That's the basis of our justice system. What we seem harmful or criminal will change over time, as society changes.
FWIW, the line for me comes with causing harm or hurt to others. Other than that, you should be free to do whatever you please!
Mrs TMN "
Indeed. However, society and our laws are often influenced by "the squeaky wheel". |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
From a purely logical perspective, I can see how people could make that argument.
However... Some people like to torture animals, because they were born that way. Some people like to murder other people, because they were born that way.
We as a society decide what is and isn't acceptable behaviour. That's the basis of our justice system. What we seem harmful or criminal will change over time, as society changes.
FWIW, the line for me comes with causing harm or hurt to others. Other than that, you should be free to do whatever you please!
Mrs TMN
Indeed. However, society and our laws are often influenced by "the squeaky wheel". "
What do you mean, "the squeaky wheel"? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
From a purely logical perspective, I can see how people could make that argument.
However... Some people like to torture animals, because they were born that way. Some people like to murder other people, because they were born that way.
We as a society decide what is and isn't acceptable behaviour. That's the basis of our justice system. What we seem harmful or criminal will change over time, as society changes.
FWIW, the line for me comes with causing harm or hurt to others. Other than that, you should be free to do whatever you please!
Mrs TMN
Indeed. However, society and our laws are often influenced by "the squeaky wheel".
What do you mean, "the squeaky wheel"? "
You must know the phrase? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
From a purely logical perspective, I can see how people could make that argument.
However... Some people like to torture animals, because they were born that way. Some people like to murder other people, because they were born that way.
We as a society decide what is and isn't acceptable behaviour. That's the basis of our justice system. What we seem harmful or criminal will change over time, as society changes.
FWIW, the line for me comes with causing harm or hurt to others. Other than that, you should be free to do whatever you please!
Mrs TMN
Indeed. However, society and our laws are often influenced by "the squeaky wheel".
What do you mean, "the squeaky wheel"?
You must know the phrase? "
If I did, I wouldn't have asked  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
From a purely logical perspective, I can see how people could make that argument.
However... Some people like to torture animals, because they were born that way. Some people like to murder other people, because they were born that way.
We as a society decide what is and isn't acceptable behaviour. That's the basis of our justice system. What we seem harmful or criminal will change over time, as society changes.
FWIW, the line for me comes with causing harm or hurt to others. Other than that, you should be free to do whatever you please!
Mrs TMN
Indeed. However, society and our laws are often influenced by "the squeaky wheel".
What do you mean, "the squeaky wheel"?
You must know the phrase?
If I did, I wouldn't have asked "
The squeakiest wheel gets the most oil. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
From a purely logical perspective, I can see how people could make that argument.
However... Some people like to torture animals, because they were born that way. Some people like to murder other people, because they were born that way.
We as a society decide what is and isn't acceptable behaviour. That's the basis of our justice system. What we seem harmful or criminal will change over time, as society changes.
FWIW, the line for me comes with causing harm or hurt to others. Other than that, you should be free to do whatever you please!
Mrs TMN
Indeed. However, society and our laws are often influenced by "the squeaky wheel".
What do you mean, "the squeaky wheel"?
You must know the phrase?
If I did, I wouldn't have asked "
The squeaky wheel gets the grease. Basically if enough people kick up a fuss they can be taken seriously. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
From a purely logical perspective, I can see how people could make that argument.
However... Some people like to torture animals, because they were born that way. Some people like to murder other people, because they were born that way.
We as a society decide what is and isn't acceptable behaviour. That's the basis of our justice system. What we seem harmful or criminal will change over time, as society changes.
FWIW, the line for me comes with causing harm or hurt to others. Other than that, you should be free to do whatever you please!
Mrs TMN
Indeed. However, society and our laws are often influenced by "the squeaky wheel".
What do you mean, "the squeaky wheel"?
You must know the phrase?
If I did, I wouldn't have asked
The squeaky wheel gets the grease. Basically if enough people kick up a fuss they can be taken seriously. "
But the number kicking up against this will far out way the ones for it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
Paedophiles bring harm to children. It's a lot different to being in a same sex relationship with another adult "
I agree children should not be sexualised or exposed to anything overtly sexual. Which is why I was surprised people seemed so pleased when footage of the child being given a lap dance at school was all over social media. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
From a purely logical perspective, I can see how people could make that argument.
However... Some people like to torture animals, because they were born that way. Some people like to murder other people, because they were born that way.
We as a society decide what is and isn't acceptable behaviour. That's the basis of our justice system. What we seem harmful or criminal will change over time, as society changes.
FWIW, the line for me comes with causing harm or hurt to others. Other than that, you should be free to do whatever you please!
Mrs TMN
Indeed. However, society and our laws are often influenced by "the squeaky wheel".
What do you mean, "the squeaky wheel"?
You must know the phrase?
If I did, I wouldn't have asked
The squeaky wheel gets the grease. Basically if enough people kick up a fuss they can be taken seriously. "
Ah, I see. I'd be very surprised if I saw this issue garnering huge support though. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
From a purely logical perspective, I can see how people could make that argument.
However... Some people like to torture animals, because they were born that way. Some people like to murder other people, because they were born that way.
We as a society decide what is and isn't acceptable behaviour. That's the basis of our justice system. What we seem harmful or criminal will change over time, as society changes.
FWIW, the line for me comes with causing harm or hurt to others. Other than that, you should be free to do whatever you please!
Mrs TMN
Indeed. However, society and our laws are often influenced by "the squeaky wheel".
What do you mean, "the squeaky wheel"?
You must know the phrase?
If I did, I wouldn't have asked
The squeaky wheel gets the grease. Basically if enough people kick up a fuss they can be taken seriously.
But the number kicking up against this will far out way the ones for it. "
Well let's hope so. But is it their human right to be attracted to whom ever they like?
Dangerous times. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
From a purely logical perspective, I can see how people could make that argument.
However... Some people like to torture animals, because they were born that way. Some people like to murder other people, because they were born that way.
We as a society decide what is and isn't acceptable behaviour. That's the basis of our justice system. What we seem harmful or criminal will change over time, as society changes.
FWIW, the line for me comes with causing harm or hurt to others. Other than that, you should be free to do whatever you please!
Mrs TMN
Indeed. However, society and our laws are often influenced by "the squeaky wheel".
What do you mean, "the squeaky wheel"?
You must know the phrase?
If I did, I wouldn't have asked
The squeaky wheel gets the grease. Basically if enough people kick up a fuss they can be taken seriously.
But the number kicking up against this will far out way the ones for it.
Well let's hope so. But is it their human right to be attracted to whom ever they like?
Dangerous times. "
I is about now you are supposed to say "Nark my words"? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
From a purely logical perspective, I can see how people could make that argument.
However... Some people like to torture animals, because they were born that way. Some people like to murder other people, because they were born that way.
We as a society decide what is and isn't acceptable behaviour. That's the basis of our justice system. What we seem harmful or criminal will change over time, as society changes.
FWIW, the line for me comes with causing harm or hurt to others. Other than that, you should be free to do whatever you please!
Mrs TMN
Indeed. However, society and our laws are often influenced by "the squeaky wheel".
What do you mean, "the squeaky wheel"?
You must know the phrase?
If I did, I wouldn't have asked
The squeaky wheel gets the grease. Basically if enough people kick up a fuss they can be taken seriously.
But the number kicking up against this will far out way the ones for it.
Well let's hope so. But is it their human right to be attracted to whom ever they like?
Dangerous times. "
To be attracted to, yes. To act on it and cause potential harm, no. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
From a purely logical perspective, I can see how people could make that argument.
However... Some people like to torture animals, because they were born that way. Some people like to murder other people, because they were born that way.
We as a society decide what is and isn't acceptable behaviour. That's the basis of our justice system. What we seem harmful or criminal will change over time, as society changes.
FWIW, the line for me comes with causing harm or hurt to others. Other than that, you should be free to do whatever you please!
Mrs TMN
Indeed. However, society and our laws are often influenced by "the squeaky wheel".
What do you mean, "the squeaky wheel"?
You must know the phrase?
If I did, I wouldn't have asked
The squeaky wheel gets the grease. Basically if enough people kick up a fuss they can be taken seriously.
But the number kicking up against this will far out way the ones for it.
Well let's hope so. But is it their human right to be attracted to whom ever they like?
Dangerous times.
I is about now you are supposed to say "Nark my words"?"
I would literally never say that..  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
Yes of course it is. Those things are rightly illegal for a reason.
They are meant to protect people, obviously any sexual activities should only happen between consenting adults where nobody is being abused or taken advantage of.
To lump being LGTB+ with such things is ridiculous!
Yes indeed. But not beyond possibility.
Trolling again I see. You just love to stir up a bit of controversy don't you. "
Asking a thought provoking question is not trolling.
Calling someone a troll is.
Starting a discussion is not an argument. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
Yes of course it is. Those things are rightly illegal for a reason.
They are meant to protect people, obviously any sexual activities should only happen between consenting adults where nobody is being abused or taken advantage of.
To lump being LGTB+ with such things is ridiculous!
Yes indeed. But not beyond possibility.
Trolling again I see. You just love to stir up a bit of controversy don't you.
Asking a thought provoking question is not trolling.
Calling someone a troll is.
Starting a discussion is not an argument."
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I am disgusted and repulsed by the attempt here to associate the lgbt communities with paedophilia and child abuse. The troll will say "oh i didn't mean anything by it, just following a logical argument". It's not smart, it's not funny, it is just vile. OP, please keep your homophobic and transphobic thoughts to yourself. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I am disgusted and repulsed by the attempt here to associate the lgbt communities with paedophilia and child abuse. The troll will say "oh i didn't mean anything by it, just following a logical argument". It's not smart, it's not funny, it is just vile. OP, please keep your homophobic and transphobic thoughts to yourself."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I am disgusted and repulsed by the attempt here to associate the lgbt communities with paedophilia and child abuse. The troll will say "oh i didn't mean anything by it, just following a logical argument". It's not smart, it's not funny, it is just vile. OP, please keep your homophobic and transphobic thoughts to yourself.
"
To be fair to the OP I am not sure that is what he was doing. I think the way he has said whatever he is trying to say has been a bit clumsy.
I THINK the point is that if we are accepting of everyone's sexuality and sexual preferences, then where do we draw the line and who decides what is acceptable?
Not sure what the point of the debate is but I am pretty sure OP is not saying that LGBT and paedophiles are comparable.
At least I hope not. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I am disgusted and repulsed by the attempt here to associate the lgbt communities with paedophilia and child abuse. The troll will say "oh i didn't mean anything by it, just following a logical argument". It's not smart, it's not funny, it is just vile. OP, please keep your homophobic and transphobic thoughts to yourself.
"
It isn't trolling its playing Devils Advocate, an accepted form of philosophical debate. If your only counter argument is that he is a troll than its pretty weak.
My argument would be that the LGBT community as a whole would never allow its self to be tagged with paedophilia and that in its self would stop it happening. As to the human rights issue, you cannot have a right unless it's balanced by a responsibility and it's difficult to argue their rights over responsibility to child welfare. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?"
There was a study that found some of the paedophiles, were born that way and could not help themselves. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
There was a study that found some of the paedophiles, were born that way and could not help themselves. "
The children they abuse aren't "born that way" though.
I'm struggling with the argument being presented here which surrounds consensual same gender sex (LGBT+) and seems to be attempting to link this to non-consensual sex. They are very different things. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
There was a study that found some of the paedophiles, were born that way and could not help themselves.
The children they abuse aren't "born that way" though.
I'm struggling with the argument being presented here which surrounds consensual same gender sex (LGBT+) and seems to be attempting to link this to non-consensual sex. They are very different things. "
Trouble is different societies have different ideas of at what age consent can be given. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I am disgusted and repulsed by the attempt here to associate the lgbt communities with paedophilia and child abuse. The troll will say "oh i didn't mean anything by it, just following a logical argument". It's not smart, it's not funny, it is just vile. OP, please keep your homophobic and transphobic thoughts to yourself.
To be fair to the OP I am not sure that is what he was doing. I think the way he has said whatever he is trying to say has been a bit clumsy.
I THINK the point is that if we are accepting of everyone's sexuality and sexual preferences, then where do we draw the line and who decides what is acceptable?
Not sure what the point of the debate is but I am pretty sure OP is not saying that LGBT and paedophiles are comparable.
At least I hope not."
That's exactly what he's saying, but he's doing it in such a way as to make his question appear ambiguous. He's done this type of thing before and basically he's just a bigoted troll. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *essie.Woman
over a year ago
Serendipity |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
There was a study that found some of the paedophiles, were born that way and could not help themselves. "
People still know what is right and what is wrong.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The lgbt community be upheld because they were born that way?
No
They should be upheld because its nobody else's fucking business
Dangerous policy that. "
How?
What is so very dangerous about lgbt people that requires special consideration in law? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The lgbt community be upheld because they were born that way?
No
They should be upheld because its nobody else's fucking business
Dangerous policy that.
How?
What is so very dangerous about lgbt people that requires special consideration in law?"
Because it depends on whom wants to jump onto the letter list. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I am disgusted and repulsed by the attempt here to associate the lgbt communities with paedophilia and child abuse. The troll will say "oh i didn't mean anything by it, just following a logical argument". It's not smart, it's not funny, it is just vile. OP, please keep your homophobic and transphobic thoughts to yourself.
To be fair to the OP I am not sure that is what he was doing. I think the way he has said whatever he is trying to say has been a bit clumsy.
I THINK the point is that if we are accepting of everyone's sexuality and sexual preferences, then where do we draw the line and who decides what is acceptable?
Not sure what the point of the debate is but I am pretty sure OP is not saying that LGBT and paedophiles are comparable.
At least I hope not.
That's exactly what he's saying, but he's doing it in such a way as to make his question appear ambiguous. He's done this type of thing before and basically he's just a bigoted troll. "
You know nothing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The lgbt community be upheld because they were born that way?
No
They should be upheld because its nobody else's fucking business
Dangerous policy that.
How?
What is so very dangerous about lgbt people that requires special consideration in law?
Because it depends on whom wants to jump onto the letter list. "
The "letter list" refers to sexualities and genders. Straight people are "born this way" too. Someone that abuses children sexually could be straight, lesbian, gay, etc but I can't understand our paedophilia could be considered as something to put on the "letters list" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The lgbt community be upheld because they were born that way?
No
They should be upheld because its nobody else's fucking business
Dangerous policy that.
How?
What is so very dangerous about lgbt people that requires special consideration in law?
Because it depends on whom wants to jump onto the letter list. "
If you were to draw a diagram of 2 sets of people - lgbt people and non-lgbt people. Which set do the paedos fall into?
But we don't see the rights of heterosexuals being abrogated because of who might claim membership of that group |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I am disgusted and repulsed by the attempt here to associate the lgbt communities with paedophilia and child abuse. The troll will say "oh i didn't mean anything by it, just following a logical argument". It's not smart, it's not funny, it is just vile. OP, please keep your homophobic and transphobic thoughts to yourself.
To be fair to the OP I am not sure that is what he was doing. I think the way he has said whatever he is trying to say has been a bit clumsy.
I THINK the point is that if we are accepting of everyone's sexuality and sexual preferences, then where do we draw the line and who decides what is acceptable?
Not sure what the point of the debate is but I am pretty sure OP is not saying that LGBT and paedophiles are comparable.
At least I hope not.
That's exactly what he's saying, but he's doing it in such a way as to make his question appear ambiguous. He's done this type of thing before and basically he's just a bigoted troll.
You know nothing. "
You knew exactly what you were doing.
You started a thread about the LGBT community then lumped it in with illegal activities.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I am disgusted and repulsed by the attempt here to associate the lgbt communities with paedophilia and child abuse. The troll will say "oh i didn't mean anything by it, just following a logical argument". It's not smart, it's not funny, it is just vile. OP, please keep your homophobic and transphobic thoughts to yourself.
To be fair to the OP I am not sure that is what he was doing. I think the way he has said whatever he is trying to say has been a bit clumsy.
I THINK the point is that if we are accepting of everyone's sexuality and sexual preferences, then where do we draw the line and who decides what is acceptable?
Not sure what the point of the debate is but I am pretty sure OP is not saying that LGBT and paedophiles are comparable.
At least I hope not.
That's exactly what he's saying, but he's doing it in such a way as to make his question appear ambiguous. He's done this type of thing before and basically he's just a bigoted troll.
You know nothing.
You knew exactly what you were doing.
You started a thread about the LGBT community then lumped it in with illegal activities.
"
Which is also my own community... one that im worried could become a vehicle for awful people to gain acceptance. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I am disgusted and repulsed by the attempt here to associate the lgbt communities with paedophilia and child abuse. The troll will say "oh i didn't mean anything by it, just following a logical argument". It's not smart, it's not funny, it is just vile. OP, please keep your homophobic and transphobic thoughts to yourself.
To be fair to the OP I am not sure that is what he was doing. I think the way he has said whatever he is trying to say has been a bit clumsy.
I THINK the point is that if we are accepting of everyone's sexuality and sexual preferences, then where do we draw the line and who decides what is acceptable?
Not sure what the point of the debate is but I am pretty sure OP is not saying that LGBT and paedophiles are comparable.
At least I hope not.
That's exactly what he's saying, but he's doing it in such a way as to make his question appear ambiguous. He's done this type of thing before and basically he's just a bigoted troll.
You know nothing.
You knew exactly what you were doing.
You started a thread about the LGBT community then lumped it in with illegal activities.
Which is also my own community... one that im worried could become a vehicle for awful people to gain acceptance. "
That makes no sense at all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I am disgusted and repulsed by the attempt here to associate the lgbt communities with paedophilia and child abuse. The troll will say "oh i didn't mean anything by it, just following a logical argument". It's not smart, it's not funny, it is just vile. OP, please keep your homophobic and transphobic thoughts to yourself.
To be fair to the OP I am not sure that is what he was doing. I think the way he has said whatever he is trying to say has been a bit clumsy.
I THINK the point is that if we are accepting of everyone's sexuality and sexual preferences, then where do we draw the line and who decides what is acceptable?
Not sure what the point of the debate is but I am pretty sure OP is not saying that LGBT and paedophiles are comparable.
At least I hope not.
That's exactly what he's saying, but he's doing it in such a way as to make his question appear ambiguous. He's done this type of thing before and basically he's just a bigoted troll.
You know nothing.
You knew exactly what you were doing.
You started a thread about the LGBT community then lumped it in with illegal activities.
Which is also my own community... one that im worried could become a vehicle for awful people to gain acceptance. "
Don't you concern yourself Clem. I'm pretty certain no one else is even thinking this apart from you. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atenaWoman
over a year ago
Hyde |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
From a purely logical perspective, I can see how people could make that argument.
However... Some people like to torture animals, because they were born that way. Some people like to murder other people, because they were born that way.
We as a society decide what is and isn't acceptable behaviour. That's the basis of our justice system. What we seem harmful or criminal will change over time, as society changes.
FWIW, the line for me comes with causing harm or hurt to others. Other than that, you should be free to do whatever you please!
Mrs TMN "
Epic reply.....
Ditto that^^^^^^ |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Now, I think people miss a trick on this. The laws should protect everyone. When we split ourselves into group we only make it harder to achieve the greater goal of all people being treated fairly no matter what.
No 2 people are the same so we need to stop putting ourselves in boxes and see that we are all the same and all different at the same time. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
Yes of course it is. Those things are rightly illegal for a reason.
They are meant to protect people, obviously any sexual activities should only happen between consenting adults where nobody is being abused or taken advantage of.
To lump being LGTB+ with such things is ridiculous!
Yes indeed. But not beyond possibility.
Trolling again I see. You just love to stir up a bit of controversy don't you.
Asking a thought provoking question is not trolling.
Calling someone a troll is.
Starting a discussion is not an argument."
If he were asking a thought provoking question I would agree, but he's not, he's attacking the LGBT community, or parts of it through the use of ambiguity. He has form for it and he's a troll,and a rather unpleasant one at that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
Yes of course it is. Those things are rightly illegal for a reason.
They are meant to protect people, obviously any sexual activities should only happen between consenting adults where nobody is being abused or taken advantage of.
To lump being LGTB+ with such things is ridiculous!
Yes indeed. But not beyond possibility.
Trolling again I see. You just love to stir up a bit of controversy don't you.
Asking a thought provoking question is not trolling.
Calling someone a troll is.
Starting a discussion is not an argument.
If he were asking a thought provoking question I would agree, but he's not, he's attacking the LGBT community, or parts of it through the use of ambiguity. He has form for it and he's a troll,and a rather unpleasant one at that. "
Don't you appreciate the hypocrisy then? Clearly not. Just easier to label as a troll than face facts. Keep your head in the sand if it makes you feel better. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
Yes of course it is. Those things are rightly illegal for a reason.
They are meant to protect people, obviously any sexual activities should only happen between consenting adults where nobody is being abused or taken advantage of.
To lump being LGTB+ with such things is ridiculous!
Yes indeed. But not beyond possibility.
Trolling again I see. You just love to stir up a bit of controversy don't you.
Asking a thought provoking question is not trolling.
Calling someone a troll is.
Starting a discussion is not an argument.
If he were asking a thought provoking question I would agree, but he's not, he's attacking the LGBT community, or parts of it through the use of ambiguity. He has form for it and he's a troll,and a rather unpleasant one at that.
Don't you appreciate the hypocrisy then? Clearly not. Just easier to label as a troll than face facts. Keep your head in the sand if it makes you feel better. "
My head isn't in the sand, and you have no "facts". I've been dealing with people like you for a long time and I know the MO. You're far from the first person who would like society at large to get the perception that members of the LGBT community are nothing but a bunch of perverts, and you won't be the last. It's pure mischief making and you know it.
There will always be a tiny percentage of people on the fringe of any group in society, whose behaviour leaves something to be desired, but that fact does not mean that these individuals views are mainstream within that group, nor that they will hold any influence upon that group. If you don't understand that then you're not a troll you're an idiot.
Which is it, troll or idiot? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
Yes of course it is. Those things are rightly illegal for a reason.
They are meant to protect people, obviously any sexual activities should only happen between consenting adults where nobody is being abused or taken advantage of.
To lump being LGTB+ with such things is ridiculous!
Yes indeed. But not beyond possibility.
Trolling again I see. You just love to stir up a bit of controversy don't you.
Asking a thought provoking question is not trolling.
Calling someone a troll is.
Starting a discussion is not an argument.
If he were asking a thought provoking question I would agree, but he's not, he's attacking the LGBT community, or parts of it through the use of ambiguity. He has form for it and he's a troll,and a rather unpleasant one at that.
Don't you appreciate the hypocrisy then? Clearly not. Just easier to label as a troll than face facts. Keep your head in the sand if it makes you feel better. "
hypocrisy? you are being absurd.
Exchange lgbt for black and ask the question again. Here's how it goes.
Should the rights of black people be upheld because they were born that way?
Obvious answer: YES
Should the rights of black people be upheld even if some people claiming membership of that group turn out to be rapists?
Obviously the answer is still fucking yes.
Curtailing the rights of a minority group of people for the actions of a criminal few because they were born with the same traits? When those same criminal few also claim membership of the mainstream racial/sexual grouping?
THAT is fucking hypocrisy!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?"
Clem I do wander sometimes about your discussions, seriously? Both what you were saying are unwilling and illegal, are you comparing? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
Yes of course it is. Those things are rightly illegal for a reason.
They are meant to protect people, obviously any sexual activities should only happen between consenting adults where nobody is being abused or taken advantage of.
To lump being LGTB+ with such things is ridiculous!
Yes indeed. But not beyond possibility.
Trolling again I see. You just love to stir up a bit of controversy don't you.
Asking a thought provoking question is not trolling.
Calling someone a troll is.
Starting a discussion is not an argument.
If he were asking a thought provoking question I would agree, but he's not, he's attacking the LGBT community, or parts of it through the use of ambiguity. He has form for it and he's a troll,and a rather unpleasant one at that.
Don't you appreciate the hypocrisy then? Clearly not. Just easier to label as a troll than face facts. Keep your head in the sand if it makes you feel better. "
There is no hypocrisy
Trying to force equivalence between pedophilia and non binary sexuality is malevolent
Actually there is a philosophical debate that morally sex between siblings should be accepted provided they do not or cannot have children as beyond procreation no harm to either consenting adult occurs
If you really really really want to push this idiotic argument with regards pedophilia then
A human may indeed be naturally attracted to x
No law or condemnation of this is necessary inc an unfortunate attraction to children not their fault indeed give them help
Now still on this level playing field
If a man naturally attracted to women forces himself upon anyone, that is sexual assault
It's not his default sexuality it's his conduct of that sexuality that would be the crime
Accepting the persons right to be heterosexual does NOT mean they have any right to act upon it without adult concent
Same goes for a man who is innately drawn to children
Very very sad for them
But no hypocrisy they by law would have no right to indulge and in their case adult concent is an oxymoron
However I feel the subtleties and sensitivity of this will be beyond the black and white thinkers
Hey ho
But sorry to say blurting out that accepting sexually is innate and thus pedophilia (the act of doing the very vile) is no different, means it's right to condemn sexualities other than hetero to prevent a slippery slope towards acceptance or whatever your garbled logic dreamed
It simply malevolent nonsense
Or trolling take your pick
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Where we are now is that adults who recognise such things in a child's development are being given more responsibility in monitoring and managing, during the school years. So perhaps if there is a debate, it might be about that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?"
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago. "
No, you just haven't read it correctly. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?"
Yes and no, in that order.
Mr Icebreaker |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly. "
Sorry - hadn’t realised it was one of ‘those’ threads! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way..."
I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer I just gave.
Mr Icebreaker |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The lgbt community be upheld because they were born that way? yes, plus any other extra letters that get added over the years
Including P..  "
Of course you're entitled to think that. Why you think that, only you know. If you think that, or are just being an attention seeker who tries to frame the debate in a controversial way, only you know. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly.
Sorry - hadn’t realised it was one of ‘those’ threads! "
One that uses punctuation? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly. "
Then you need to articulate in an unambiguous manner 
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly.
Then you need to articulate in an unambiguous manner
"
How is this "Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?" Ambiguous? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly.
Then you need to articulate in an unambiguous manner
How is this "Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?" Ambiguous? "
Because we know you know as much as anyo
e else why it was a crime what we dont know is your angle and reason for asking such an irrelevant question
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly.
Then you need to articulate in an unambiguous manner
How is this "Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?" Ambiguous?
Because we know you know as much as anyo
e else why it was a crime what we dont know is your angle and reason for asking such an irrelevant question
"
Sometimes it's ok to say "I don't know". In many ways you'd garner more respect. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly.
Then you need to articulate in an unambiguous manner
How is this "Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?" Ambiguous?
Because we know you know as much as anyo
e else why it was a crime what we dont know is your angle and reason for asking such an irrelevant question
Sometimes it's ok to say "I don't know". In many ways you'd garner more respect. "
Not as much as saying
"I was wrong, I apologise, it was a stupid thing to say" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly.
Then you need to articulate in an unambiguous manner
How is this "Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?" Ambiguous?
Because we know you know as much as anyo
e else why it was a crime what we dont know is your angle and reason for asking such an irrelevant question
Sometimes it's ok to say "I don't know". In many ways you'd garner more respect. "
Why would we say that and seriously I certainly do not want your respect
But again you deflect and ad hominem
I asked what is your motive for the needless question
You seemed to have confusion over the legality regarding overt hate towards bisexuality
When that was clarified you went on a ridiculous tangent regarding why it was in the UK and still is across the world considered a crime
The answer is not I do not know the answer is narrow minded ignorance why that is relevant to your nonsensical thrust that a bisexual should not be protected from abuse because it's a slippery slope to condoning pedophilia is beyond me
Thus you will need to articulate more clearly
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I keep reading and re reading everything the O.P. has said.
To me he is questioning lines of thought.
He is questioning how we arrive at laws , rules etc.
He is questioning if the way we think about one section of society can have adverse affects on other groups.
No one has been attacked so far. Not by the O.P. anyway.
I'm interested in the Q because of groups with sociopathic tendencies.
Sociopaths are born......... can they be held responsible for the gross misdeeds they do to others.
You can't take me to court and find me guilty for walking upright.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly.
Then you need to articulate in an unambiguous manner
How is this "Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?" Ambiguous?
Because we know you know as much as anyo
e else why it was a crime what we dont know is your angle and reason for asking such an irrelevant question
Sometimes it's ok to say "I don't know". In many ways you'd garner more respect.
Why would we say that and seriously I certainly do not want your respect
But again you deflect and ad hominem
I asked what is your motive for the needless question
You seemed to have confusion over the legality regarding overt hate towards bisexuality
When that was clarified you went on a ridiculous tangent regarding why it was in the UK and still is across the world considered a crime
The answer is not I do not know the answer is narrow minded ignorance why that is relevant to your nonsensical thrust that a bisexual should not be protected from abuse because it's a slippery slope to condoning pedophilia is beyond me
Thus you will need to articulate more clearly
"
You seem to label everyone with this "ignorant" label, you attack attack attack and refuse to open your mind to the debate. It's a shame. There seems to be intelligence, but your anger at the world clouds it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I keep reading and re reading everything the O.P. has said.
To me he is questioning lines of thought.
He is questioning how we arrive at laws , rules etc.
He is questioning if the way we think about one section of society can have adverse affects on other groups.
No one has been attacked so far. Not by the O.P. anyway.
I'm interested in the Q because of groups with sociopathic tendencies.
Sociopaths are born......... can they be held responsible for the gross misdeeds they do to others.
You can't take me to court and find me guilty for walking upright.
"
You I think are genuine and I indeed am very interested in the anthropological nuance
I disagree with your take on the motive of the OP |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly.
Then you need to articulate in an unambiguous manner
How is this "Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?" Ambiguous?
Because we know you know as much as anyo
e else why it was a crime what we dont know is your angle and reason for asking such an irrelevant question
Sometimes it's ok to say "I don't know". In many ways you'd garner more respect.
Why would we say that and seriously I certainly do not want your respect
But again you deflect and ad hominem
I asked what is your motive for the needless question
You seemed to have confusion over the legality regarding overt hate towards bisexuality
When that was clarified you went on a ridiculous tangent regarding why it was in the UK and still is across the world considered a crime
The answer is not I do not know the answer is narrow minded ignorance why that is relevant to your nonsensical thrust that a bisexual should not be protected from abuse because it's a slippery slope to condoning pedophilia is beyond me
Thus you will need to articulate more clearly
You seem to label everyone with this "ignorant" label, you attack attack attack and refuse to open your mind to the debate. It's a shame. There seems to be intelligence, but your anger at the world clouds it."
Ad hominem |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly.
Then you need to articulate in an unambiguous manner
How is this "Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?" Ambiguous?
Because we know you know as much as anyo
e else why it was a crime what we dont know is your angle and reason for asking such an irrelevant question
Sometimes it's ok to say "I don't know". In many ways you'd garner more respect.
Not as much as saying
"I was wrong, I apologise, it was a stupid thing to say""
Who was wrong? And what was a stupid thing to say. Homosexuality is illegal in Iran. Are they out of touch? Yes probably. Are we in a place to criticise their laws? Tricky. If their age of consent was 9, would they look at ours and think we were backward and oppressing the rights of the individual? Laws are not consistent, neither are excepted norms. We use "we were born this way" as justification for our sexual freedom. But is this argument indisputable? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly.
Then you need to articulate in an unambiguous manner
How is this "Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?" Ambiguous?
Because we know you know as much as anyo
e else why it was a crime what we dont know is your angle and reason for asking such an irrelevant question
Sometimes it's ok to say "I don't know". In many ways you'd garner more respect.
Not as much as saying
"I was wrong, I apologise, it was a stupid thing to say"
Who was wrong? And what was a stupid thing to say. Homosexuality is illegal in Iran. Are they out of touch? Yes probably. Are we in a place to criticise their laws? Tricky. If their age of consent was 9, would they look at ours and think we were backward and oppressing the rights of the individual? Laws are not consistent, neither are excepted norms. We use "we were born this way" as justification for our sexual freedom. But is this argument indisputable?"
Do "WE" only use "born this way" as justification or are there a multitude of joined up factors used
Seems you are erroneously using a single factor that obviously does not work on it's own merits bit in conjunction with a more complex "and" structure
What is wrong with
Born that way AND causes no harm
I do not mind moral exploration as noted sex amongst siblings
But when there is a battle between shallow minded people beating up people of innocent sexual persuasion then I'll air on the side of non provocative caution and protect their rights
Very nasty people try to link non binary sexual practices with pedophilia and that must not be perpetuated
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly.
Then you need to articulate in an unambiguous manner
How is this "Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?" Ambiguous?
Because we know you know as much as anyo
e else why it was a crime what we dont know is your angle and reason for asking such an irrelevant question
Sometimes it's ok to say "I don't know". In many ways you'd garner more respect.
Not as much as saying
"I was wrong, I apologise, it was a stupid thing to say"
Who was wrong? And what was a stupid thing to say. Homosexuality is illegal in Iran. Are they out of touch? Yes probably. Are we in a place to criticise their laws? Tricky. If their age of consent was 9, would they look at ours and think we were backward and oppressing the rights of the individual? Laws are not consistent, neither are excepted norms. We use "we were born this way" as justification for our sexual freedom. But is this argument indisputable?
Do "WE" only use "born this way" as justification or are there a multitude of joined up factors used
Seems you are erroneously using a single factor that obviously does not work on it's own merits bit in conjunction with a more complex "and" structure
What is wrong with
Born that way AND causes no harm
I do not mind moral exploration as noted sex amongst siblings
But when there is a battle between shallow minded people beating up people of innocent sexual persuasion then I'll air on the side of non provocative caution and protect their rights
Very nasty people try to link non binary sexual practices with pedophilia and that must not be perpetuated
"
Absolutely, let's hope it isn't. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Adult in cest is a better example. Why should that be illegal between consenting adults other than the fact that most people, including me, have a disgust reaction to it?
The risk of inbreeding is the usual justification given, but if that were the real justification all non vaginal in cestuous sex would be legal as would vaginal sex with post menopausal women.
It really is illegal only because the vast majority of people find the idea repulsive. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Adult in cest is a better example. Why should that be illegal between consenting adults other than the fact that most people, including me, have a disgust reaction to it?
The risk of inbreeding is the usual justification given, but if that were the real justification all non vaginal in cestuous sex would be legal as would vaginal sex with post menopausal women.
It really is illegal only because the vast majority of people find the idea repulsive. "
Is it a hang-over from more "biblical" laws I wonder..? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I keep reading and re reading everything the O.P. has said.
To me he is questioning lines of thought.
He is questioning how we arrive at laws , rules etc.
He is questioning if the way we think about one section of society can have adverse affects on other groups.
No one has been attacked so far. Not by the O.P. anyway.
I'm interested in the Q because of groups with sociopathic tendencies.
Sociopaths are born......... can they be held responsible for the gross misdeeds they do to others.
You can't take me to court and find me guilty for walking upright.
"
Your definition of sociopathy is probably a little simplistic, since acquired sociopathy is also a thing. This probably isn;t the place for a debate about volitional insanity versus cognitive insanity (in the legal sense) although I suspect that's what you're stumbling towards. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I keep reading and re reading everything the O.P. has said.
To me he is questioning lines of thought.
He is questioning how we arrive at laws , rules etc.
He is questioning if the way we think about one section of society can have adverse affects on other groups.
No one has been attacked so far. Not by the O.P. anyway.
I'm interested in the Q because of groups with sociopathic tendencies.
Sociopaths are born......... can they be held responsible for the gross misdeeds they do to others.
You can't take me to court and find me guilty for walking upright.
Your definition of sociopathy is probably a little simplistic, since acquired sociopathy is also a thing. This probably isn;t the place for a debate about volitional insanity versus cognitive insanity (in the legal sense) although I suspect that's what you're stumbling towards."
Why you gotta be like that? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly.
Then you need to articulate in an unambiguous manner
How is this "Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?" Ambiguous?
Because we know you know as much as anyo
e else why it was a crime what we dont know is your angle and reason for asking such an irrelevant question
Sometimes it's ok to say "I don't know". In many ways you'd garner more respect.
Not as much as saying
"I was wrong, I apologise, it was a stupid thing to say"
Who was wrong? And what was a stupid thing to say. Homosexuality is illegal in Iran. Are they out of touch? Yes probably. Are we in a place to criticise their laws? Tricky. If their age of consent was 9, would they look at ours and think we were backward and oppressing the rights of the individual? Laws are not consistent, neither are excepted norms. We use "we were born this way" as justification for our sexual freedom. But is this argument indisputable?"
You know fine well what you said - please don't employ that tired alt-right tactic of implying something and then refusing to stand by it when challenged. Its cowardly and dishonest.
Arguing moral relativism is also daft. Ancient Aztecs practiced human sacrifice - are we in a position to criticise them? Of course we can, and we can criticise Iran - because their practices are barbaric within the context of our own moral framework. In the same manner we can also criticise previous legislation within our own culture which has historically persecuted minorities.
That being said - can "born this way as an argument" be disputed.Yes - absolutely - I disputed it in my very first post on this thread. "Born that way" is not a particularly robust position in the defence of lgbt rights. But the reverse is also true - its not a good reason to curtail them either.
The implication that because the lgbt community is inclusive, it means that we should logically be welcoming of all minority sexual behaviours is flat wrong though - and offensive to boot.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly.
Then you need to articulate in an unambiguous manner
How is this "Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?" Ambiguous?
Because we know you know as much as anyo
e else why it was a crime what we dont know is your angle and reason for asking such an irrelevant question
Sometimes it's ok to say "I don't know". In many ways you'd garner more respect.
Not as much as saying
"I was wrong, I apologise, it was a stupid thing to say"
Who was wrong? And what was a stupid thing to say. Homosexuality is illegal in Iran. Are they out of touch? Yes probably. Are we in a place to criticise their laws? Tricky. If their age of consent was 9, would they look at ours and think we were backward and oppressing the rights of the individual? Laws are not consistent, neither are excepted norms. We use "we were born this way" as justification for our sexual freedom. But is this argument indisputable?
You know fine well what you said - please don't employ that tired alt-right tactic of implying something and then refusing to stand by it when challenged. Its cowardly and dishonest.
Arguing moral relativism is also daft. Ancient Aztecs practiced human sacrifice - are we in a position to criticise them? Of course we can, and we can criticise Iran - because their practices are barbaric within the context of our own moral framework. In the same manner we can also criticise previous legislation within our own culture which has historically persecuted minorities.
That being said - can "born this way as an argument" be disputed.Yes - absolutely - I disputed it in my very first post on this thread. "Born that way" is not a particularly robust position in the defence of lgbt rights. But the reverse is also true - its not a good reason to curtail them either.
The implication that because the lgbt community is inclusive, it means that we should logically be welcoming of all minority sexual behaviours is flat wrong though - and offensive to boot.
"
Yes, I'm certainly offended. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly.
Then you need to articulate in an unambiguous manner
How is this "Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?" Ambiguous?
Because we know you know as much as anyo
e else why it was a crime what we dont know is your angle and reason for asking such an irrelevant question
Sometimes it's ok to say "I don't know". In many ways you'd garner more respect.
Not as much as saying
"I was wrong, I apologise, it was a stupid thing to say"
Who was wrong? And what was a stupid thing to say. Homosexuality is illegal in Iran. Are they out of touch? Yes probably. Are we in a place to criticise their laws? Tricky. If their age of consent was 9, would they look at ours and think we were backward and oppressing the rights of the individual? Laws are not consistent, neither are excepted norms. We use "we were born this way" as justification for our sexual freedom. But is this argument indisputable?
You know fine well what you said - please don't employ that tired alt-right tactic of implying something and then refusing to stand by it when challenged. Its cowardly and dishonest.
Arguing moral relativism is also daft. Ancient Aztecs practiced human sacrifice - are we in a position to criticise them? Of course we can, and we can criticise Iran - because their practices are barbaric within the context of our own moral framework. In the same manner we can also criticise previous legislation within our own culture which has historically persecuted minorities.
That being said - can "born this way as an argument" be disputed.Yes - absolutely - I disputed it in my very first post on this thread. "Born that way" is not a particularly robust position in the defence of lgbt rights. But the reverse is also true - its not a good reason to curtail them either.
The implication that because the lgbt community is inclusive, it means that we should logically be welcoming of all minority sexual behaviours is flat wrong though - and offensive to boot.
"
I've never understood the arguments against moral relativism. We believe that each individual should have complete freedom to express themselves sexually with other consenting adults.
In Iran they say that in the interests of social cohesion sexual mores should be governed by what the majority believe to be right.
So the issue is whether you view individual self expression or social cohesion as more important. You and I believe the former. Other people believe the latter and I can't see on what basis one can say one is right and the other wrong other than on the basis of one's personal preference. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *sGivesWoodWoman
over a year ago
ST. AUSTELL, CORNWALL |
"I am disgusted and repulsed by the attempt here to associate the lgbt communities with paedophilia and child abuse. The troll will say "oh i didn't mean anything by it, just following a logical argument". It's not smart, it's not funny, it is just vile. OP, please keep your homophobic and transphobic thoughts to yourself.
To be fair to the OP I am not sure that is what he was doing. I think the way he has said whatever he is trying to say has been a bit clumsy.
I THINK the point is that if we are accepting of everyone's sexuality and sexual preferences, then where do we draw the line and who decides what is acceptable?
Not sure what the point of the debate is but I am pretty sure OP is not saying that LGBT and paedophiles are comparable.
At least I hope not.
That's exactly what he's saying, but he's doing it in such a way as to make his question appear ambiguous. He's done this type of thing before and basically he's just a bigoted troll.
You know nothing.
You knew exactly what you were doing.
You started a thread about the LGBT community then lumped it in with illegal activities.
Which is also my own community... one that im worried could become a vehicle for awful people to gain acceptance. "
Too late for that comment. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I keep reading and re reading everything the O.P. has said.
To me he is questioning lines of thought.
He is questioning how we arrive at laws , rules etc.
He is questioning if the way we think about one section of society can have adverse affects on other groups.
No one has been attacked so far. Not by the O.P. anyway.
I'm interested in the Q because of groups with sociopathic tendencies.
Sociopaths are born......... can they be held responsible for the gross misdeeds they do to others.
You can't take me to court and find me guilty for walking upright.
Your definition of sociopathy is probably a little simplistic, since acquired sociopathy is also a thing. This probably isn;t the place for a debate about volitional insanity versus cognitive insanity (in the legal sense) although I suspect that's what you're stumbling towards."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly.
Then you need to articulate in an unambiguous manner
How is this "Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?" Ambiguous?
Because we know you know as much as anyo
e else why it was a crime what we dont know is your angle and reason for asking such an irrelevant question
Sometimes it's ok to say "I don't know". In many ways you'd garner more respect.
Not as much as saying
"I was wrong, I apologise, it was a stupid thing to say"
Who was wrong? And what was a stupid thing to say. Homosexuality is illegal in Iran. Are they out of touch? Yes probably. Are we in a place to criticise their laws? Tricky. If their age of consent was 9, would they look at ours and think we were backward and oppressing the rights of the individual? Laws are not consistent, neither are excepted norms. We use "we were born this way" as justification for our sexual freedom. But is this argument indisputable?
You know fine well what you said - please don't employ that tired alt-right tactic of implying something and then refusing to stand by it when challenged. Its cowardly and dishonest.
Arguing moral relativism is also daft. Ancient Aztecs practiced human sacrifice - are we in a position to criticise them? Of course we can, and we can criticise Iran - because their practices are barbaric within the context of our own moral framework. In the same manner we can also criticise previous legislation within our own culture which has historically persecuted minorities.
That being said - can "born this way as an argument" be disputed.Yes - absolutely - I disputed it in my very first post on this thread. "Born that way" is not a particularly robust position in the defence of lgbt rights. But the reverse is also true - its not a good reason to curtail them either.
The implication that because the lgbt community is inclusive, it means that we should logically be welcoming of all minority sexual behaviours is flat wrong though - and offensive to boot.
I've never understood the arguments against moral relativism. We believe that each individual should have complete freedom to express themselves sexually with other consenting adults.
In Iran they say that in the interests of social cohesion sexual mores should be governed by what the majority believe to be right.
So the issue is whether you view individual self expression or social cohesion as more important. You and I believe the former. Other people believe the latter and I can't see on what basis one can say one is right and the other wrong other than on the basis of one's personal preference. "
We absolutely can say that our western cultural morals are the correct ones - in fact - to do otherwise would be dishonest.
However - we should also recognise that our truths are subjective and avoid the Randian trap of assuming our truths are universal and should be applied universally.
There is no fault in my opinion in criticising another culture's laws and customs if we find them to be morally dubious. What we shouldn't do, however is coerce other cultures and force them to accept our way of thinking.
I guess you could say I'm more of a moral pluralist
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly.
Then you need to articulate in an unambiguous manner
How is this "Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?" Ambiguous?
Because we know you know as much as anyo
e else why it was a crime what we dont know is your angle and reason for asking such an irrelevant question
Sometimes it's ok to say "I don't know". In many ways you'd garner more respect.
Not as much as saying
"I was wrong, I apologise, it was a stupid thing to say"
Who was wrong? And what was a stupid thing to say. Homosexuality is illegal in Iran. Are they out of touch? Yes probably. Are we in a place to criticise their laws? Tricky. If their age of consent was 9, would they look at ours and think we were backward and oppressing the rights of the individual? Laws are not consistent, neither are excepted norms. We use "we were born this way" as justification for our sexual freedom. But is this argument indisputable?
You know fine well what you said - please don't employ that tired alt-right tactic of implying something and then refusing to stand by it when challenged. Its cowardly and dishonest.
Arguing moral relativism is also daft. Ancient Aztecs practiced human sacrifice - are we in a position to criticise them? Of course we can, and we can criticise Iran - because their practices are barbaric within the context of our own moral framework. In the same manner we can also criticise previous legislation within our own culture which has historically persecuted minorities.
That being said - can "born this way as an argument" be disputed.Yes - absolutely - I disputed it in my very first post on this thread. "Born that way" is not a particularly robust position in the defence of lgbt rights. But the reverse is also true - its not a good reason to curtail them either.
The implication that because the lgbt community is inclusive, it means that we should logically be welcoming of all minority sexual behaviours is flat wrong though - and offensive to boot.
I've never understood the arguments against moral relativism. We believe that each individual should have complete freedom to express themselves sexually with other consenting adults.
In Iran they say that in the interests of social cohesion sexual mores should be governed by what the majority believe to be right.
So the issue is whether you view individual self expression or social cohesion as more important. You and I believe the former. Other people believe the latter and I can't see on what basis one can say one is right and the other wrong other than on the basis of one's personal preference.
We absolutely can say that our western cultural morals are the correct ones - in fact - to do otherwise would be dishonest.
However - we should also recognise that our truths are subjective and avoid the Randian trap of assuming our truths are universal and should be applied universally.
There is no fault in my opinion in criticising another culture's laws and customs if we find them to be morally dubious. What we shouldn't do, however is coerce other cultures and force them to accept our way of thinking.
I guess you could say I'm more of a moral pluralist
"
But what does "correct" mean here other than "I strongly prefer moral system A to moral system B"
That's not "correct" in the same sense that 2+2=4 is correct.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im bisexual(sort of), should my right to be bisexual be protected under law?
Is anything stopping you being bisexual?
Should i be protected from abuse because of whom i find attractive?
I'm probably wrong but I thought homophobia was already a hate crime?
It is. Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?
Is this a joke?
It was very much a crime until a couple of generations ago.
No, you just haven't read it correctly.
Then you need to articulate in an unambiguous manner
How is this "Why was homosexuality illegal in the past?" Ambiguous?
Because we know you know as much as anyo
e else why it was a crime what we dont know is your angle and reason for asking such an irrelevant question
Sometimes it's ok to say "I don't know". In many ways you'd garner more respect.
Not as much as saying
"I was wrong, I apologise, it was a stupid thing to say"
Who was wrong? And what was a stupid thing to say. Homosexuality is illegal in Iran. Are they out of touch? Yes probably. Are we in a place to criticise their laws? Tricky. If their age of consent was 9, would they look at ours and think we were backward and oppressing the rights of the individual? Laws are not consistent, neither are excepted norms. We use "we were born this way" as justification for our sexual freedom. But is this argument indisputable?
You know fine well what you said - please don't employ that tired alt-right tactic of implying something and then refusing to stand by it when challenged. Its cowardly and dishonest.
Arguing moral relativism is also daft. Ancient Aztecs practiced human sacrifice - are we in a position to criticise them? Of course we can, and we can criticise Iran - because their practices are barbaric within the context of our own moral framework. In the same manner we can also criticise previous legislation within our own culture which has historically persecuted minorities.
That being said - can "born this way as an argument" be disputed.Yes - absolutely - I disputed it in my very first post on this thread. "Born that way" is not a particularly robust position in the defence of lgbt rights. But the reverse is also true - its not a good reason to curtail them either.
The implication that because the lgbt community is inclusive, it means that we should logically be welcoming of all minority sexual behaviours is flat wrong though - and offensive to boot.
I've never understood the arguments against moral relativism. We believe that each individual should have complete freedom to express themselves sexually with other consenting adults.
In Iran they say that in the interests of social cohesion sexual mores should be governed by what the majority believe to be right.
So the issue is whether you view individual self expression or social cohesion as more important. You and I believe the former. Other people believe the latter and I can't see on what basis one can say one is right and the other wrong other than on the basis of one's personal preference.
We absolutely can say that our western cultural morals are the correct ones - in fact - to do otherwise would be dishonest.
However - we should also recognise that our truths are subjective and avoid the Randian trap of assuming our truths are universal and should be applied universally.
There is no fault in my opinion in criticising another culture's laws and customs if we find them to be morally dubious. What we shouldn't do, however is coerce other cultures and force them to accept our way of thinking.
I guess you could say I'm more of a moral pluralist
But what does "correct" mean here other than "I strongly prefer moral system A to moral system B"
That's not "correct" in the same sense that 2+2=4 is correct.
"
I don't think strongly prefer one method over another is quite right.
In the context of your analog we could say 2+2=4 is correct - and we could say 1+3 is correct. The method of getting to 4 would be a matter of preference.
But what I'm getting at is that for another culture... 5 may be a desirable outcome.
It's not so much a matter of preference but more a matter of faith I think
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The lgbt community be upheld because they were born that way?"
No
The rights of all human beings should be upheld because they are human beings
To paraphase Califia amd Foucault I don't want my rights bestowed as a charity fuck. I am not "born this way" (despise the phrase and concept) I proudly choose to be queer - I am not a medical problem to be solved but as good as you and as deserving of equality
Ms Icebreaker |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sexuality is a protected characteristic I think.
It shouldn't matter who you find attractive, you shouldn't my be treated unfairly because of it
Should we rethink the laws on insestuous relationships and paedophiles then?
What? No! That's a stupid argument
Is it? But they were born that way...
Paedophiles bring harm to children. It's a lot different to being in a same sex relationship with another adult
Absolutely. Amazing though that there are those that see them as part of the LGBTQ community. LGBTQP, is trying to become "a thing" using these very arguments of "they were born that way", watch out for it. "
No, that's a troll started by 4chan
Ms Icebreaker |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
This is another fun thread 
