Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I don't recall you asking me. But as I've already said....I am glad to see the age of consent trending UP and not down (except for in the bible belt). Of course I reject the adult pursuit of children for sexual gratification....and if you paid attention to my posting history, you would already have known that.A tiny group does. A minority does not a slippery slope make. Westboro Baptists anyone?
It literally does... because the minority is pushing the agenda.
There is no Christian acceptance of Westboro, unanimously the Christian community rejects them OVERTLY.
Such is not the case with the mouthy, would-be minority of the Militant sect of the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality cult.
In thread after thread, I have set forth the the request for the professed homosexuals participating in such, IF they rejected the Adult pursuit of children for sexual gratification... to this moment, I have not had a single one stand up against it.
You included...
But I sense that you're desirous to separate yourself from the pack...
Do you accept or reject the adult pursuit of children for sexual gratification?
If no, why not?
If so, on what basis do you reject it?
Furthermore, children are in much greater danger of being either physically or sexually assaulted by a hetero male family member or friend than any stranger.Fathers, step-fathers, and family friends in heterosexual relationships are the biggest danger to children sexually. And girls are victims way more....shall you blame that on gays too?None of his anything to do with same sex marriage. Nice red herring though.
They actually do, because they demonstrate the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality as a movement, thus demonstrating the nature of the slippery slope, as well as how the slope more closely resembles a cliff.
Those damn heteros....
Here's something interesting: List of pedophile activist organizations - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
USA
- [1]
- Childhood Sesuality Circle (CSC). Founded in 1971 in San Diego (California) by a student of Wilhelm Reich.[3] CSC closed down in the mid-1980s, when Valida Davila became too frail to continue with it.
- North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). 1978–present. Largely defunct.
- Pedophile Information Society. Defunct?
- Project Truth. One of the organizations which was expulsed from ILGA in 1994 as a pedophile organization.[14] Defunct.
- B4U-ACT Established in 2003 as a 501(c)(3) organization in Westminster, MD. Co-founder and Board Chair, Russell A. Dick. Website, B4U-ACT
Because by legal definition she isn't.
The other is an attempt to side track this into another argument.
Ah, right. The "social overlay" again.
No, this one is the legal overlay since we are, after all, arguing law
Isn't that subjective and therefore an insufficient reason to deny that 12 year old girl her 14th Amendment rights to sex with an adult?
Nope. Children have never had the same rights as adults.
And there was a time when women and blacks didn't have the same rights as men and white people. Amazing how all the Leftist arguments are backfiring. Maybe children and their adult lovers are the new Selma and Alice Paul that you're oppressing. Why are you to say their love is wrong? Why aren't their constitutional rights to asymmetrical sex being respected?
Children have never constitutionally had the same rights as adults. Why is that?
You forgot all the groups who don't advertise the fact that they are pro-pedophile. Such as GLSEN for starters
You may also recall that Mr. Obama appointed Kevin Jennings, founder of the “Gay Lesbian and Straight Education Network,” or GLSEN, to the post of “safe schools czar.” The position is now defunct, ostensibly due to national outrage over Jennings’ appointment.
In keeping with the thinly veiled goals of B4U-ACT, GLSEN seems to be “running interference” for pedophiles, having tacitly advocated adult-child sex through its “recommended reading list” for kids.
Ref: The homosexual Left 8217 s new crusade Normalizing adult-child sex Opinion LifeSite
Yeah it does -but that's not the entire content of the last dozen posts -which dealt with NAMBLA and "Shagging a Child" and slippery slopes etc.... Nice try at deflecting though -somehow I thought you were above that .
It really doesn't. It's that slippery slope fallacy attempting to tie in gay rights with pedophihlia. NAMBLA, in case you haven't realized it, is not an "elephant" but a tiny organization that at most consisted of a few thousand. Gay actovists don't have to demonstrate a "categorical rejection" of pedophilia any more than heterosexuals do.
I wonder if the first pro gay organizations were "but a tiny organization that at most consisted of a few thousand". I'm inspired to recall the famous saying, "Don't despise small beginnings."
NAMBLA is not new, yet it remains a few thousand, at most, marginalized and unsupported by the mainstream movement. The movement for gay rights and same sex marriage has grown exponentially into the mainstream over the past 30 or more years. NAMBLA has not.
So they're not the popular movement right now and have to wait their turn in line. Who's to say they can't use the same convoluted arguments the Left has used to find gay marriage "rights" in the Constitution? Why is their love so wrong? Maybe someday pedophobes will be the new haters, people like you who want to decide who can love who and who can marry who. What puritanical bigotry is it that drives your hate and your narrow view of morality?
Actually, NAMBLA is apparently defunct now. It couldn't even maintain it's thousand.
Actually, hetero adult male family members and friends are more closely related to pederasty. That's why when there is such a crime, fathers, step-fathers, grandfathers, uncles, cousins, brothers and family friends are suspects before all others.Well now. Now we know.Child abuse isn't a human right, even if the child 'likes it'.Not all child molesters are pedophiles, and even if they are pedophiles they can still be attracted to other adults.
So what are you saying..that if there's dual sexualities that's good reason to deny someone their rights?
Your backward, narrow, religiously dogmatic views of morality will have to give way to love. Who are you to decide their love is wrong? Aren't you the guys telling us that there are different kinds of love and they're all equal? What happened that you became such a repressed pedophobe?
That homosexuality is inextricably linked to pederasty? Yes, that's been known for many centuries.
I don't recall you asking me. But as I've already said....I am glad to see the age of consent trending UP and not down (except for in the bible belt). Of course I reject the adult pursuit of children for sexual gratification....and if you paid attention to my posting history, you would already have known that.A tiny group does. A minority does not a slippery slope make. Westboro Baptists anyone?
It literally does... because the minority is pushing the agenda.
There is no Christian acceptance of Westboro, unanimously the Christian community rejects them OVERTLY.
Such is not the case with the mouthy, would-be minority of the Militant sect of the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality cult.
In thread after thread, I have set forth the the request for the professed homosexuals participating in such, IF they rejected the Adult pursuit of children for sexual gratification... to this moment, I have not had a single one stand up against it.
You included...
But I sense that you're desirous to separate yourself from the pack...
Do you accept or reject the adult pursuit of children for sexual gratification?
If no, why not?
If so, on what basis do you reject it?
How many fathers actually walk around with a target on their back saying I molest my daughters?It really doesn't. It's that slippery slope fallacy attempting to tie in gay rights with pedophihlia. NAMBLA, in case you haven't realized it, is not an "elephant" but a tiny organization that at most consisted of a few thousand. Gay actovists don't have to demonstrate a "categorical rejection" of pedophilia any more than heterosexuals do.
I wonder if the first pro gay organizations were "but a tiny organization that at most consisted of a few thousand". I'm inspired to recall the famous saying, "Don't despise small beginnings."
NAMBLA is not new, yet it remains a few thousand, at most, marginalized and unsupported by the mainstream movement. The movement for gay rights and same sex marriage has grown exponentially into the mainstream over the past 30 or more years. NAMBLA has not.
So they're not the popular movement right now and have to wait their turn in line. Who's to say they can't use the same convoluted arguments the Left has used to find gay marriage "rights" in the Constitution? Why is their love so wrong? Maybe someday pedophobes will be the new haters, people like you who want to decide who can love who and who can marry who. What puritanical bigotry is it that drives your hate and your narrow view of morality?
Actually, NAMBLA is apparently defunct now. It couldn't even maintain it's thousand.
Get Real Coyote - Howe many Pedophiles do you think will actually walk around with a target on their back saying I'm a NAMBLA member.
There are certain things that are wrong because they cause genuine harm (rape, murder, theft) and certain things that are wrong because someone believes the are (pork, gays, cheeseburgers, working on sunday). We're rational enough in this day and age to glean that homosexuality is clearly in that latter camp.
Which begs the question, why should we give fuck? They're just people. Treat them like people and be done with it. Generally speaking, how a person gets their nut is about the least interesting thing about them.
Many people seem incapable of distinguishing between morality and social mores, and so accept the arbitrary social mores as representing morality even when they don't.
Morality is a product of reason, established from a baseline akin to the golden rule, whereas social mores are simply customs that have been passed down through the generations and accepted with no analysis.
I would refer people to Kohlberg's work in regards to moral reasoning here, as arbitrary taboos represent what he calls a "preconventional" morality, which is the most unevolved moral state.
It's going UP at the same time that gays are gaining more rights. Except for in the bible belt of course.I don't recall you asking me. But as I've already said....I am glad to see the age of consent trending UP and not down (except for in the bible belt). Of course I reject the adult pursuit of children for sexual gratification....and if you paid attention to my posting history, you would already have known that.A tiny group does. A minority does not a slippery slope make. Westboro Baptists anyone?
It literally does... because the minority is pushing the agenda.
There is no Christian acceptance of Westboro, unanimously the Christian community rejects them OVERTLY.
Such is not the case with the mouthy, would-be minority of the Militant sect of the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality cult.
In thread after thread, I have set forth the the request for the professed homosexuals participating in such, IF they rejected the Adult pursuit of children for sexual gratification... to this moment, I have not had a single one stand up against it.
You included...
But I sense that you're desirous to separate yourself from the pack...
Do you accept or reject the adult pursuit of children for sexual gratification?
If no, why not?
If so, on what basis do you reject it?
How long will the "age of consent" line hold sway against a waxing tide of depravity?
We could start a betting pool on that.
It literally does... because the minority is pushing the agenda.
There is no Christian acceptance of Westboro, unanimously the Christian community rejects them OVERTLY.
Such is not the case with the mouthy, would-be minority of the Militant sect of the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality cult.
In thread after thread, I have set forth the the request for the professed homosexuals participating in such, IF they rejected the Adult pursuit of children for sexual gratification... to this moment, I have not had a single one stand up against it.
You included...
But I sense that you're desirous to separate yourself from the pack...
Do you accept or reject the adult pursuit of children for sexual gratification?
If no, why not?
If so, on what basis do you reject it?
Aww shucks I'm sorry to hear that - I'd actually hoped she was a widow - but alas ..... C'est la VieI'm doing just fine. My wife, daughter and I had a lovely holiday.It seems we have to go to our hetero "anti-gay marriage" members to find out info about NAMBLA. I sure as hell don't look up anything about that group.It really doesn't. It's that slippery slope fallacy attempting to tie in gay rights with pedophihlia. NAMBLA, in case you haven't realized it, is not an "elephant" but a tiny organization that at most consisted of a few thousand. Gay actovists don't have to demonstrate a "categorical rejection" of pedophilia any more than heterosexuals do.
I wonder if the first pro gay organizations were "but a tiny organization that at most consisted of a few thousand". I'm inspired to recall the famous saying, "Don't despise small beginnings."
NAMBLA is not new, yet it remains a few thousand, at most, marginalized and unsupported by the mainstream movement. The movement for gay rights and same sex marriage has grown exponentially into the mainstream over the past 30 or more years. NAMBLA has not.
Bodecea - long time no see - How ya been ya slimy little shitsack ?
Actually, NAMBLA is apparently defunct now. It couldn't even maintain it's thousand.
And there is no question that homosexuality is replicated in every generation. It is part of Nature and has never threatened the continuation of mankind.
Now that depends. Every other generation didn't celebrate it.
Mark
And yet here it is. Now the question you have to ask yourself is.....so what?
There are certain things that are wrong because they cause genuine harm (rape, murder, theft) and certain things that are wrong because someone believes the are (pork, gays, cheeseburgers, working on sunday). We're rational enough in this day and age to glean that homosexuality is clearly in that latter camp.
Which begs the question, why should we give a fuck? They're just people. Treat them like people and be done with it. Generally speaking, how a person gets their nut is about the least interesting thing about them.
I posted this before. The left has cheapened marriage and family by the relaxation of societal rules concerning divorce, welfare, and single motherhood. In fact, the left HAS HARMED the family unit. Will gay marriage add another nail to the coffin? I don't know, but based on the past history of change, you have no basis to state that is will cause no harm. And again, based on past history, it is highly likely that homosexual marriage will fall in the former camp of your post.
Mark
It's going UP at the same time that gays are gaining more rights. Except for in the bible belt of course.I don't recall you asking me. But as I've already said....I am glad to see the age of consent trending UP and not down (except for in the bible belt). Of course I reject the adult pursuit of children for sexual gratification....and if you paid attention to my posting history, you would already have known that.A tiny group does. A minority does not a slippery slope make. Westboro Baptists anyone?
It literally does... because the minority is pushing the agenda.
There is no Christian acceptance of Westboro, unanimously the Christian community rejects them OVERTLY.
Such is not the case with the mouthy, would-be minority of the Militant sect of the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality cult.
In thread after thread, I have set forth the the request for the professed homosexuals participating in such, IF they rejected the Adult pursuit of children for sexual gratification... to this moment, I have not had a single one stand up against it.
You included...
But I sense that you're desirous to separate yourself from the pack...
Do you accept or reject the adult pursuit of children for sexual gratification?
If no, why not?
If so, on what basis do you reject it?
How long will the "age of consent" line hold sway against a waxing tide of depravity?
We could start a betting pool on that.
There are certain things that are wrong because they cause genuine harm (rape, murder, theft) and certain things that are wrong because someone believes the are (pork, gays, cheeseburgers, working on sunday). We're rational enough in this day and age to glean that homosexuality is clearly in that latter camp.
Which begs the question, why should we give fuck? They're just people. Treat them like people and be done with it. Generally speaking, how a person gets their nut is about the least interesting thing about them.
Many people seem incapable of distinguishing between morality and social mores, and so accept the arbitrary social mores as representing morality even when they don't.
Morality is a product of reason, established from a baseline akin to the golden rule, whereas social mores are simply customs that have been passed down through the generations and accepted with no analysis.
It depends on who you talk to. There are many who will argue that the only basis of morality is god. And if you use your reason, you're a relativist who is evil and believes in nothing. And that their faith is objective truth, as it comes directly from god. I'm not joking or inaccurately paraphrasing here. I can show you virtually exact quotes that say as much.
They're literally arguing that whatever they feel is objective truth. Which kinda fucks the concept of 'objective' and 'truth' right in the ass. And they will flat out ignore you if you don't accept their personal beliefs as axiomatic.
There's really not much you can do with people like that save pat them on the head and put them on a display to demonstrate various fallacies of logic on command.
I would refer people to Kohlberg's work in regards to moral reasoning here, as arbitrary taboos represent what he calls a "preconventional" morality, which is the most unevolved moral state.
I agree. Generally speaking those who follow such 'preconventional' moralities don't really examine them or ask questions about them.
Gays would not have to complain about their rights if it wasn't for big government that is taking their rights away in the first place.
The smaller the government the more rights all of us have.
Gays have been unfairly taxed with inheritance laws because of bigger government.
They can't see their loved ones because of hospital rules of only relatives.
That is not only for Gays rights but for all of us, just recently a littler girl who survived a plane crash wanted the man who helped her when she knocked on his door, to go to the hospital with her, but he couldn't because he was not a relative. Hospitals had to make that rule because of bid government.
That little girl had just lost her parents and all she wanted was a kind grownup with her for comfort.
If it wasn't for the stupid rules of big government for marriage licenses, gays could get married how ever they wished.
The bigger the government the more of all of our rights are being taken away.
The smaller the government the more rights we have for all of us as Americans.
Your conclusion is false, and the material above it does not lead to your conclusion.
Only through bigger government were the slaves freed, women enfranchised, segregation ended, older teens empowered, and soon gays will be able to marry everywhere just like all heterosexuals.
Slaves were freed because of the army run by the government.
The force by the law of bigger government enforced freedom for the slaves and rights for women, minorities, and older teens.
"Forcing American Churches to marry Gays is violating the 1st amendment.
Big government ran the army and enforced the laws that freed slaves and guaranteed the rights of women, minorities, and older teens. If smaller government could have done it, then they should have done it. They did not.
The OP is about "homosexual dilemma" not making churches marry gays.
It's going UP at the same time that gays are gaining more rights. Except for in the bible belt of course.I don't recall you asking me. But as I've already said....I am glad to see the age of consent trending UP and not down (except for in the bible belt). Of course I reject the adult pursuit of children for sexual gratification....and if you paid attention to my posting history, you would already have known that.A tiny group does. A minority does not a slippery slope make. Westboro Baptists anyone?
It literally does... because the minority is pushing the agenda.
There is no Christian acceptance of Westboro, unanimously the Christian community rejects them OVERTLY.
Such is not the case with the mouthy, would-be minority of the Militant sect of the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality cult.
In thread after thread, I have set forth the the request for the professed homosexuals participating in such, IF they rejected the Adult pursuit of children for sexual gratification... to this moment, I have not had a single one stand up against it.
You included...
But I sense that you're desirous to separate yourself from the pack...
Do you accept or reject the adult pursuit of children for sexual gratification?
If no, why not?
If so, on what basis do you reject it?
How long will the "age of consent" line hold sway against a waxing tide of depravity?
We could start a betting pool on that.
Children are being sexualized more than any other time in history, being literate in all kinds of sexual deviancy that wasn't even whispered about in the days of our grandparents. Child exposure to your sexual filth is on the increase, not the decrease....maybe less so in the Bible belt.
It really doesn't. It's that slippery slope fallacy attempting to tie in gay rights with pedophihlia. NAMBLA, in case you haven't realized it, is not an "elephant" but a tiny organization that at most consisted of a few thousand. Gay actovists don't have to demonstrate a "categorical rejection" of pedophilia any more than heterosexuals do.
I wonder if the first pro gay organizations were "but a tiny organization that at most consisted of a few thousand". I'm inspired to recall the famous saying, "Don't despise small beginnings."
NAMBLA is not new, yet it remains a few thousand, at most, marginalized and unsupported by the mainstream movement. The movement for gay rights and same sex marriage has grown exponentially into the mainstream over the past 30 or more years. NAMBLA has not.
So they're not the popular movement right now and have to wait their turn in line. Who's to say they can't use the same convoluted arguments the Left has used to find gay marriage "rights" in the Constitution? Why is their love so wrong? Maybe someday pedophobes will be the new haters, people like you who want to decide who can love who and who can marry who. What puritanical bigotry is it that drives your hate and your narrow view of morality?
Actually, NAMBLA is apparently defunct now. It couldn't even maintain it's thousand.
Get Real Coyote - Howe many Pedophiles do you think will actually walk around with a target on their back saying I'm a NAMBLA member.
Gays would not have to complain about their rights if it wasn't for big government that is taking their rights away in the first place.
The smaller the government the more rights all of us have.
Gays have been unfairly taxed with inheritance laws because of bigger government.
They can't see their loved ones because of hospital rules of only relatives.
That is not only for Gays rights but for all of us, just recently a littler girl who survived a plane crash wanted the man who helped her when she knocked on his door, to go to the hospital with her, but he couldn't because he was not a relative. Hospitals had to make that rule because of bid government.
That little girl had just lost her parents and all she wanted was a kind grownup with her for comfort.
If it wasn't for the stupid rules of big government for marriage licenses, gays could get married how ever they wished.
The bigger the government the more of all of our rights are being taken away.
The smaller the government the more rights we have for all of us as Americans.
Your conclusion is false, and the material above it does not lead to your conclusion.
Only through bigger government were the slaves freed, women enfranchised, segregation ended, older teens empowered, and soon gays will be able to marry everywhere just like all heterosexuals.
Slaves were freed because of the army run by the government.
The force by the law of bigger government enforced freedom for the slaves and rights for women, minorities, and older teens.
"Forcing American Churches to marry Gays is violating the 1st amendment.
Big government ran the army and enforced the laws that freed slaves and guaranteed the rights of women, minorities, and older teens. If smaller government could have done it, then they should have done it. They did not.
The OP is about "homosexual dilemma" not making churches marry gays.
Then you should have not said "and soon gays will be able to marry everywhere just like all heterosexuals".
That means forcing Churches to marry gays.
That's right...you're one of the christian posters here.Aww shucks I'm sorry to hear that - I'd actually hoped she was a widow - but alas ..... C'est la VieI'm doing just fine. My wife, daughter and I had a lovely holiday.It seems we have to go to our hetero "anti-gay marriage" members to find out info about NAMBLA. I sure as hell don't look up anything about that group.I wonder if the first pro gay organizations were "but a tiny organization that at most consisted of a few thousand". I'm inspired to recall the famous saying, "Don't despise small beginnings."
NAMBLA is not new, yet it remains a few thousand, at most, marginalized and unsupported by the mainstream movement. The movement for gay rights and same sex marriage has grown exponentially into the mainstream over the past 30 or more years. NAMBLA has not.
Bodecea - long time no see - How ya been ya slimy little shitsack ?
Again, I wouldn't know anything about NAMBLA without posters like you keeping us up to date.Actually, NAMBLA is apparently defunct now. It couldn't even maintain it's thousand.
Not even close... The Bush Administration took a hard line against NAMBLA, strongly pursuing its membership when much of their 'material' was found in several terrorist enclaves. (Yes it seems that Islamic piety is gets a little dicey once the tent flap closes.)
And there is no question that homosexuality is replicated in every generation. It is part of Nature and has never threatened the continuation of mankind.
Now that depends. Every other generation didn't celebrate it.
Mark
And yet here it is. Now the question you have to ask yourself is.....so what?
There are certain things that are wrong because they cause genuine harm (rape, murder, theft) and certain things that are wrong because someone believes the are (pork, gays, cheeseburgers, working on sunday). We're rational enough in this day and age to glean that homosexuality is clearly in that latter camp.
Which begs the question, why should we give a fuck? They're just people. Treat them like people and be done with it. Generally speaking, how a person gets their nut is about the least interesting thing about them.
I posted this before. The left has cheapened marriage and family by the relaxation of societal rules concerning divorce, welfare, and single motherhood. In fact, the left HAS HARMED the family unit. Will gay marriage add another nail to the coffin? I don't know, but based on the past history of change, you have no basis to state that is will cause no harm. And again, based on past history, it is highly likely that homosexual marriage will fall in the former camp of your post.
Mark
Well said Mark... But the evidence, as you noted, presents that the lowering of sexual propriety standards has harmed the culture and lowering them further will further harm the culture. All that is to be determined is the extent of the injury.
The fact that no country in the entire world, not a single fucking one, uses his solutions never seems to cross his tiny mind, nor does he wonder why that might be so. Color me shocked.He didn't say you were, he said you were like a born again Christian...a Born Again Libertarian.
From the ultimate one trick pony, every thread turns into a gay thread. Thanks for that clarification. It's not like you two geniuses consistently advocate liberalism, what a great point. LOL.
Save this thread actually is about gays.
Do try and keep up.
Right, and my answer, simpleton, is to give gays the greatest protection, the protection of the marketplace. Let the odd screwball who limits who they do business with harm themselves. Only government can enforce discrimination. A free market rewards those who don't discriminate.
