When will we ban Homosexuality,Transexulism, and beastiality?

[JoeMoma]

The first two are life time choices that would be against human rights to ban as those people can't help who they're.

The last choice must be banned.

Oh'yess, you're a religious person and believe that your dumb beliefs should be forced on everyone.

This is why I don't believe in god anymore.

Why should the last be banned if both the human and animal consent? And don't tell me animals can't consent........they do with each other all the time.

Are you serious??? If so...on iggie you go.
ANIMALS CANNOT GIVE CONSENT!!!! Jeez

I'm being sarcastic. However, if we apply the anything goes logic that is applied by many lefties, then ....... well we all know where that leads.

I will disagree about one thing though.......animals can give consent. When I feed my dog, he is happy and wags his tail while eating his food. He might even growl and snap at someone who tries to take his food away. He is eating his food with consent......I am not forcing him to eat his food. So typing ANIMALS CANNOT GIVE CONSENT in capital letters dos not make it true.

And as I responed earlier, I had a dog try to hump my leg before. This is one of the rare times that I've ever kicked a dog because I was not the one consenting, but the dog certainly was. Yes animals can make simple decisions thus animals can consent.

That being said, I am against bestiality....I am not an anything goes type person. But their are some dogs that seem to find my leg very attractive for some reason I will never understand.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The first two are life time choices that would be against human rights to ban as those people can't help who they're.

The last choice must be banned.

Oh'yess, you're a religious person and believe that your dumb beliefs should be forced on everyone.

This is why I don't believe in god anymore.

Why should the last be banned if both the human and animal consent? And don't tell me animals can't consent........they do with each other all the time.

Are you serious??? If so...on iggie you go.
ANIMALS CANNOT GIVE CONSENT!!!! Jeez

I'm being sarcastic. However, if we apply the anything goes logic that is applied by many lefties, then ....... well we all know where that leads.

I will disagree about one thing though.......animals can give consent. When I feed my dog, he is happy and wags his tail while eating his food. He might even growl and snap at someone who tries to take his food away. He is eating his food with consent......I am not forcing him to eat his food. So typing ANIMALS CANNOT GIVE CONSENT in capital letters dos not make it true.

And as I responed earlier, I had a dog try to hump my leg before. This is one of the rare times that I've ever kicked a dog because I was not the one consenting, but the dog certainly was. Yes animals can make simple decisions thus animals can consent.

That being said, I am against bestiality....I am not an anything goes type person. But their are some dogs that seem to find my leg very attractive for some reason I will never understand.

Um, hey genius...when you claim to be sarcastic, and then admit you really meant it....you were not actually being sarcastic.

By the way, you're not great at logic. Not even good, really.

 

[Avatar4321]

The first two are life time choices that would be against human rights to ban as those people can't help who they're.

The last choice must be banned.

Oh'yess, you're a religious person and believe that your dumb beliefs should be forced on everyone.

This is why I don't believe in god anymore.

Why should the last be banned if both the human and animal consent? And don't tell me animals can't consent........they do with each other all the time.

Why shouldn't a belief in a god be banned?

Two adult people should be able to have sex and marry. If you don't believe that then you're a big government asshole.

People should be able to choose their gender as it is biological based on research.

You're no different then the taliban or isis. Get out out of my fucking country! I'd support droning your ass.

So unless we let the government regulate same sex relationships, we are big government?

Do you guys think this stuff though ever?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The first two are life time choices that would be against human rights to ban as those people can't help who they're.

The last choice must be banned.

Oh'yess, you're a religious person and believe that your dumb beliefs should be forced on everyone.

This is why I don't believe in god anymore.

Why should the last be banned if both the human and animal consent? And don't tell me animals can't consent........they do with each other all the time.

Why shouldn't a belief in a god be banned?

Two adult people should be able to have sex and marry. If you don't believe that then you're a big government asshole.

People should be able to choose their gender as it is biological based on research.

You're no different then the taliban or isis. Get out out of my fucking country! I'd support droning your ass.

So unless we let the government regulate same sex relationships, we are big government?

Do you guys think this stuff though ever?

That makes zero sense. Banning those marriages requires bigger government, not allowing them. Restricting gender identity requires bigger government , not leaving it alone. How freaking stupid.

 

[JoeMoma]

The first two are life time choices that would be against human rights to ban as those people can't help who they're.

The last choice must be banned.

Oh'yess, you're a religious person and believe that your dumb beliefs should be forced on everyone.

This is why I don't believe in god anymore.

Why should the last be banned if both the human and animal consent? And don't tell me animals can't consent........they do with each other all the time.

That question is too fucking stupid to even try to answer. I suppose that you also think that children can consent to sex?? Or maybe that consent is not necessary?? Adult humans have power over both animals and children . I can't believe that anyone is so stupid as to not get that.

Put a 200 lb adult male in a room with a 100 lb adult female. The 200 lb male could in most cases force himself on the female and that would be rape. In other words, the male has the ability to exercise power over the female. However, that does not take away the ability of the female to have sex consentually with the male. The female may even initiate it.

While I agree with it being against the law for adults to have sex with children, if you think that many horny 14 year old boys would not jump at the opportunity of having sex with a hot adult female, you are crazy. So saying that children cannot give consent is more of a legal claim than an actual claim. I know that when I snuck and lusted at my uncle's playboy magazines as a young teen (a child), I was doing so willfully.......with consent.

 

[Gracie]

The first two are life time choices that would be against human rights to ban as those people can't help who they're.

The last choice must be banned.

Oh'yess, you're a religious person and believe that your dumb beliefs should be forced on everyone.

This is why I don't believe in god anymore.

Why should the last be banned if both the human and animal consent? And don't tell me animals can't consent........they do with each other all the time.

Are you serious??? If so...on iggie you go.
ANIMALS CANNOT GIVE CONSENT!!!! Jeez

I'm being sarcastic. However, if we apply the anything goes logic that is applied by many lefties, then ....... well we all know where that leads.

I will disagree about one thing though.......animals can give consent. When I feed my dog, he is happy and wags his tail while eating his food. He might even growl and snap at someone who tries to take his food away. He is eating his food with consent......I am not forcing him to eat his food. So typing ANIMALS CANNOT GIVE CONSENT in capital letters dos not make it true.

And as I responed earlier, I had a dog try to hump my leg before. This is one of the rare times that I've ever kicked a dog because I was not the one consenting, but the dog certainly was. Yes animals can make simple decisions thus animals can consent.

That being said, I am against bestiality....I am not an anything goes type person. But their are some dogs that seem to find my leg very attractive for some reason I will never understand.

Oy. You have no clue about animals. And you kick your dog.
On iggie you go.
I feel sorry for any animal you have control of.
And for your information, dogs wags their tails because they love you and are happy to see you. Whether you have a bowl of food in your hands or not. They want love and pets and kind words towards them more than the food you hold. IF you were familiar with animal awareness, you would know that. And why they hump a leg.

Meh. Toodles.

 

[JoeMoma]

The first two are life time choices that would be against human rights to ban as those people can't help who they're.

The last choice must be banned.

Oh'yess, you're a religious person and believe that your dumb beliefs should be forced on everyone.

This is why I don't believe in god anymore.

Why should the last be banned if both the human and animal consent? And don't tell me animals can't consent........they do with each other all the time.

Are you serious??? If so...on iggie you go.
ANIMALS CANNOT GIVE CONSENT!!!! Jeez

I'm being sarcastic. However, if we apply the anything goes logic that is applied by many lefties, then ....... well we all know where that leads.

I will disagree about one thing though.......animals can give consent. When I feed my dog, he is happy and wags his tail while eating his food. He might even growl and snap at someone who tries to take his food away. He is eating his food with consent......I am not forcing him to eat his food. So typing ANIMALS CANNOT GIVE CONSENT in capital letters dos not make it true.

And as I responed earlier, I had a dog try to hump my leg before. This is one of the rare times that I've ever kicked a dog because I was not the one consenting, but the dog certainly was. Yes animals can make simple decisions thus animals can consent.

That being said, I am against bestiality....I am not an anything goes type person. But their are some dogs that seem to find my leg very attractive for some reason I will never understand.

Um, hey genius...when you claim to be sarcastic, and then admit you really meant it....you were not actually being sarcastic.

By the way, you're not great at logic. Not even good, really.

I'm being sarcastic in that beastially is gross and wrong. However, I'm simply not being PC about what consent means. It means to do something willing or with permission.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The first two are life time choices that would be against human rights to ban as those people can't help who they're.

The last choice must be banned.

Oh'yess, you're a religious person and believe that your dumb beliefs should be forced on everyone.

This is why I don't believe in god anymore.

Why should the last be banned if both the human and animal consent? And don't tell me animals can't consent........they do with each other all the time.

That question is too fucking stupid to even try to answer. I suppose that you also think that children can consent to sex?? Or maybe that consent is not necessary?? Adult humans have power over both animals and children . I can't believe that anyone is so stupid as to not get that.

Put a 200 lb adult male in a room with a 100 lb adult female. The 200 lb male could in most cases force himself on the female and that would be rape. In other words, the male has the ability to exercise power over the female. However, that does not take away the ability of the female to have sex consentually with the male. The female may even initiate it.

While I agree with it being against the law for adults to have sex with children, if you think that many horny 14 year old boys would not jump at the opportunity of having sex with a hot adult female, you are crazy. So saying that children cannot give consent is more of a legal claim than an actual claim. I know that when I snuck and lusted at my uncle's playboy magazines as a young teen (a child), I was doing so willfully.......with consent.

No, it's an actual claim. Children do not have the tools to make that decision.

 

[ScienceRocks]

The first two are life time choices that would be against human rights to ban as those people can't help who they're.

The last choice must be banned.

Oh'yess, you're a religious person and believe that your dumb beliefs should be forced on everyone.

This is why I don't believe in god anymore.

Why should the last be banned if both the human and animal consent? And don't tell me animals can't consent........they do with each other all the time.

Why shouldn't a belief in a god be banned?

Two adult people should be able to have sex and marry. If you don't believe that then you're a big government asshole.

People should be able to choose their gender as it is biological based on research.

You're no different then the taliban or isis. Get out out of my fucking country! I'd support droning your ass.

So unless we let the government regulate same sex relationships, we are big government?

Do you guys think this stuff though ever?

That makes zero sense. Banning those marriages requires bigger government, not allowing them. Restricting gender identity requires bigger government , not leaving it alone. How freaking stupid.

Only when it helps people do they believe in small government. They think people should fucking die if they're not part of the top 1%. when it comes to religious fascism = they're big fucking fascist government. Their war on the drugs is the biggest cluster fuck ever but they support it as it hurts the little guy.

 

[JoeMoma]

The first two are life time choices that would be against human rights to ban as those people can't help who they're.

The last choice must be banned.

Oh'yess, you're a religious person and believe that your dumb beliefs should be forced on everyone.

This is why I don't believe in god anymore.

Why should the last be banned if both the human and animal consent? And don't tell me animals can't consent........they do with each other all the time.

That question is too fucking stupid to even try to answer. I suppose that you also think that children can consent to sex?? Or maybe that consent is not necessary?? Adult humans have power over both animals and children . I can't believe that anyone is so stupid as to not get that.

Put a 200 lb adult male in a room with a 100 lb adult female. The 200 lb male could in most cases force himself on the female and that would be rape. In other words, the male has the ability to exercise power over the female. However, that does not take away the ability of the female to have sex consentually with the male. The female may even initiate it.

While I agree with it being against the law for adults to have sex with children, if you think that many horny 14 year old boys would not jump at the opportunity of having sex with a hot adult female, you are crazy. So saying that children cannot give consent is more of a legal claim than an actual claim. I know that when I snuck and lusted at my uncle's playboy magazines as a young teen (a child), I was doing so willfully.......with consent.

No, it's an actual claim. Children do not have the tools to make that decision.

Let's simply agree that it's morally wrong for adults to have sex with children and for humans to have sex with animals.

I have reached a point in this discussion where even if I'm technically right about what it means to consent, I am still "wrong".

 

[ScienceRocks]

You will not take my fucking freedom. Step on my land and I won't say what happens to you.

Fact.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The first two are life time choices that would be against human rights to ban as those people can't help who they're.

The last choice must be banned.

Oh'yess, you're a religious person and believe that your dumb beliefs should be forced on everyone.

This is why I don't believe in god anymore.

Why should the last be banned if both the human and animal consent? And don't tell me animals can't consent........they do with each other all the time.

That question is too fucking stupid to even try to answer. I suppose that you also think that children can consent to sex?? Or maybe that consent is not necessary?? Adult humans have power over both animals and children . I can't believe that anyone is so stupid as to not get that.

Put a 200 lb adult male in a room with a 100 lb adult female. The 200 lb male could in most cases force himself on the female and that would be rape. In other words, the male has the ability to exercise power over the female. However, that does not take away the ability of the female to have sex consentually with the male. The female may even initiate it.

While I agree with it being against the law for adults to have sex with children, if you think that many horny 14 year old boys would not jump at the opportunity of having sex with a hot adult female, you are crazy. So saying that children cannot give consent is more of a legal claim than an actual claim. I know that when I snuck and lusted at my uncle's playboy magazines as a young teen (a child), I was doing so willfully.......with consent.

No, it's an actual claim. Children do not have the tools to make that decision.

Let's simply agree that it's morally wrong for adults to have sex with children and for humans to have sex with animals.

I have reached a point in this discussion where even if I'm technically right about what it means to consent, I am still "wrong".

Yes, but for the reason I stated. Which is why it is immoral, with which you agree. So on what basis do you agree? I'm stumped.

 

[JoeMoma]

The first two are life time choices that would be against human rights to ban as those people can't help who they're.

The last choice must be banned.

Oh'yess, you're a religious person and believe that your dumb beliefs should be forced on everyone.

This is why I don't believe in god anymore.

Why should the last be banned if both the human and animal consent? And don't tell me animals can't consent........they do with each other all the time.

That question is too fucking stupid to even try to answer. I suppose that you also think that children can consent to sex?? Or maybe that consent is not necessary?? Adult humans have power over both animals and children . I can't believe that anyone is so stupid as to not get that.

Put a 200 lb adult male in a room with a 100 lb adult female. The 200 lb male could in most cases force himself on the female and that would be rape. In other words, the male has the ability to exercise power over the female. However, that does not take away the ability of the female to have sex consentually with the male. The female may even initiate it.

While I agree with it being against the law for adults to have sex with children, if you think that many horny 14 year old boys would not jump at the opportunity of having sex with a hot adult female, you are crazy. So saying that children cannot give consent is more of a legal claim than an actual claim. I know that when I snuck and lusted at my uncle's playboy magazines as a young teen (a child), I was doing so willfully.......with consent.

No, it's an actual claim. Children do not have the tools to make that decision.

Yet the LGBTQ community thinks children have the "tools" to decide their sexual identity and become trainies.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The first two are life time choices that would be against human rights to ban as those people can't help who they're.

The last choice must be banned.

Oh'yess, you're a religious person and believe that your dumb beliefs should be forced on everyone.

This is why I don't believe in god anymore.

Why should the last be banned if both the human and animal consent? And don't tell me animals can't consent........they do with each other all the time.

That question is too fucking stupid to even try to answer. I suppose that you also think that children can consent to sex?? Or maybe that consent is not necessary?? Adult humans have power over both animals and children . I can't believe that anyone is so stupid as to not get that.

Put a 200 lb adult male in a room with a 100 lb adult female. The 200 lb male could in most cases force himself on the female and that would be rape. In other words, the male has the ability to exercise power over the female. However, that does not take away the ability of the female to have sex consentually with the male. The female may even initiate it.

While I agree with it being against the law for adults to have sex with children, if you think that many horny 14 year old boys would not jump at the opportunity of having sex with a hot adult female, you are crazy. So saying that children cannot give consent is more of a legal claim than an actual claim. I know that when I snuck and lusted at my uncle's playboy magazines as a young teen (a child), I was doing so willfully.......with consent.

No, it's an actual claim. Children do not have the tools to make that decision.

Yet the LGBTQ community thinks children have the "tools" to decide their sexual identity and become trainies.

Bullshit. The only people equating gender identity to sexual preference are people trying to build a case that all lgbtq are immoral. And they use this idiotic conflation because they have nothing else. By "they", I mean you.

 

[JoeMoma]

Why should the last be banned if both the human and animal consent? And don't tell me animals can't consent........they do with each other all the time.

That question is too fucking stupid to even try to answer. I suppose that you also think that children can consent to sex?? Or maybe that consent is not necessary?? Adult humans have power over both animals and children . I can't believe that anyone is so stupid as to not get that.

Put a 200 lb adult male in a room with a 100 lb adult female. The 200 lb male could in most cases force himself on the female and that would be rape. In other words, the male has the ability to exercise power over the female. However, that does not take away the ability of the female to have sex consentually with the male. The female may even initiate it.

While I agree with it being against the law for adults to have sex with children, if you think that many horny 14 year old boys would not jump at the opportunity of having sex with a hot adult female, you are crazy. So saying that children cannot give consent is more of a legal claim than an actual claim. I know that when I snuck and lusted at my uncle's playboy magazines as a young teen (a child), I was doing so willfully.......with consent.

No, it's an actual claim. Children do not have the tools to make that decision.

Let's simply agree that it's morally wrong for adults to have sex with children and for humans to have sex with animals.

I have reached a point in this discussion where even if I'm technically right about what it means to consent, I am still "wrong".

Yes, but for the reason I stated. Which is why it is immoral, with which you agree. So on what basis do you agree? I'm stumped.

We are operating off of different definitions of consent. If consent is simply giving permission, then.....well do I really want to go there again.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

That question is too fucking stupid to even try to answer. I suppose that you also think that children can consent to sex?? Or maybe that consent is not necessary?? Adult humans have power over both animals and children . I can't believe that anyone is so stupid as to not get that.

Put a 200 lb adult male in a room with a 100 lb adult female. The 200 lb male could in most cases force himself on the female and that would be rape. In other words, the male has the ability to exercise power over the female. However, that does not take away the ability of the female to have sex consentually with the male. The female may even initiate it.

While I agree with it being against the law for adults to have sex with children, if you think that many horny 14 year old boys would not jump at the opportunity of having sex with a hot adult female, you are crazy. So saying that children cannot give consent is more of a legal claim than an actual claim. I know that when I snuck and lusted at my uncle's playboy magazines as a young teen (a child), I was doing so willfully.......with consent.

No, it's an actual claim. Children do not have the tools to make that decision.

Let's simply agree that it's morally wrong for adults to have sex with children and for humans to have sex with animals.

I have reached a point in this discussion where even if I'm technically right about what it means to consent, I am still "wrong".

Yes, but for the reason I stated. Which is why it is immoral, with which you agree. So on what basis do you agree? I'm stumped.

We are operating off of different definitions of consent. If consent is simply giving permission, then.....well do I really want to go there again.

No, it's that one of is considering informed consent versus uninformed consent, and the other is not. If you consented to me giving you a million dollars, and I then proceeded to bury you alive in one million dollars of pennies...did you consent? By your definition, yes.

 

[JoeMoma]

Why should the last be banned if both the human and animal consent? And don't tell me animals can't consent........they do with each other all the time.

That question is too fucking stupid to even try to answer. I suppose that you also think that children can consent to sex?? Or maybe that consent is not necessary?? Adult humans have power over both animals and children . I can't believe that anyone is so stupid as to not get that.

Put a 200 lb adult male in a room with a 100 lb adult female. The 200 lb male could in most cases force himself on the female and that would be rape. In other words, the male has the ability to exercise power over the female. However, that does not take away the ability of the female to have sex consentually with the male. The female may even initiate it.

While I agree with it being against the law for adults to have sex with children, if you think that many horny 14 year old boys would not jump at the opportunity of having sex with a hot adult female, you are crazy. So saying that children cannot give consent is more of a legal claim than an actual claim. I know that when I snuck and lusted at my uncle's playboy magazines as a young teen (a child), I was doing so willfully.......with consent.

No, it's an actual claim. Children do not have the tools to make that decision.

Yet the LGBTQ community thinks children have the "tools" to decide their sexual identity and become trainies.

Bullshit. The only people equating gender identity to sexual preference are people trying to build a case that all lgbtq are immoral. And they use this idiotic conflation because they have nothing else. By "they", I mean you.

Then why do we have the LGBT community, not the LGB community? I'm not the one that added the T. (And recently the Q has bee added also).

 

[Slyhunter]

The first two are life time choices that would be against human rights to ban as those people can't help who they're.

The last choice must be banned.

Oh'yess, you're a religious person and believe that your dumb beliefs should be forced on everyone.

This is why I don't believe in god anymore.

Why should the last be banned if both the human and animal consent? And don't tell me animals can't consent........they do with each other all the time.

Are you serious??? If so...on iggie you go.
ANIMALS CANNOT GIVE CONSENT!!!! Jeez

A dog humping your leg is not consent?

 

[JoeMoma]

That question is too fucking stupid to even try to answer. I suppose that you also think that children can consent to sex?? Or maybe that consent is not necessary?? Adult humans have power over both animals and children . I can't believe that anyone is so stupid as to not get that.

Put a 200 lb adult male in a room with a 100 lb adult female. The 200 lb male could in most cases force himself on the female and that would be rape. In other words, the male has the ability to exercise power over the female. However, that does not take away the ability of the female to have sex consentually with the male. The female may even initiate it.

While I agree with it being against the law for adults to have sex with children, if you think that many horny 14 year old boys would not jump at the opportunity of having sex with a hot adult female, you are crazy. So saying that children cannot give consent is more of a legal claim than an actual claim. I know that when I snuck and lusted at my uncle's playboy magazines as a young teen (a child), I was doing so willfully.......with consent.

No, it's an actual claim. Children do not have the tools to make that decision.

Yet the LGBTQ community thinks children have the "tools" to decide their sexual identity and become trainies.

Bullshit. The only people equating gender identity to sexual preference are people trying to build a case that all lgbtq are immoral. And they use this idiotic conflation because they have nothing else. By "they", I mean you.

Then why do we have the LGBT community, not the LGB community? I'm not the one that added the T. (And recently the Q has bee added also).

Put a 200 lb adult male in a room with a 100 lb adult female. The 200 lb male could in most cases force himself on the female and that would be rape. In other words, the male has the ability to exercise power over the female. However, that does not take away the ability of the female to have sex consentually with the male. The female may even initiate it.

While I agree with it being against the law for adults to have sex with children, if you think that many horny 14 year old boys would not jump at the opportunity of having sex with a hot adult female, you are crazy. So saying that children cannot give consent is more of a legal claim than an actual claim. I know that when I snuck and lusted at my uncle's playboy magazines as a young teen (a child), I was doing so willfully.......with consent.

No, it's an actual claim. Children do not have the tools to make that decision.

Let's simply agree that it's morally wrong for adults to have sex with children and for humans to have sex with animals.

I have reached a point in this discussion where even if I'm technically right about what it means to consent, I am still "wrong".

Yes, but for the reason I stated. Which is why it is immoral, with which you agree. So on what basis do you agree? I'm stumped.

We are operating off of different definitions of consent. If consent is simply giving permission, then.....well do I really want to go there again.

No, it's that one of is considering informed consent versus uninformed consent, and the other is not. If you consented to me giving you a million dollars, and I then proceeded to bury you alive in one million dollars of pennies...did you consent? By your definition, yes.

no. By my definition, I did consent to give you a million dollars. Having a million dollars in pennies used to bury me would be a separate event that I did not consent to.

 

[JoeMoma]

The first two are life time choices that would be against human rights to ban as those people can't help who they're.

The last choice must be banned.

Oh'yess, you're a religious person and believe that your dumb beliefs should be forced on everyone.

This is why I don't believe in god anymore.

Why should the last be banned if both the human and animal consent? And don't tell me animals can't consent........they do with each other all the time.

Are you serious??? If so...on iggie you go.
ANIMALS CANNOT GIVE CONSENT!!!! Jeez

A dog humping your leg is not consent?

You are going to be iggied.