Sedaka
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,597
Location: In the recesses of my mind
10 Aug 2007, 3:32 pm
Sedaka
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,597
Location: In the recesses of my mind
10 Aug 2007, 3:35 pm
10 Aug 2007, 3:35 pm
10 Aug 2007, 3:35 pm
10 Aug 2007, 3:35 pm
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
But people don't suddenly turn into a man when they reach a particular age,
Well, depends on where you draw the line, I guess.
Women get more masculine and men get more feminine as they age.Masculine... feminine... whatever. They don't turn into a man. However masculine they are, they still can't marry each other.
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Everyone at some point in their life is a kid and (assuming they reach the average life expectancy etc.) becomes an adult. Different.
Yes, "different", but these differences are merely circumstantial.
The differences between paedophilia and homosexuality are 'circumstantial' are they?
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
I wasn't allowed to marry when I was 8, neither were you. You can marry the woman you want to be with. I never will be able to. The age law is there to protect kids from perverts.
So, who judges them to be perverts? Why are they perverts if, like a woman's lust for a woman, it's just always been natural to them? You're being awfully judgmental of perversions for someone advocating what most people still think is.
Because they're harming kids.
On what atheistic basis, when its consentual? I do believe it harms kids, but I believe that because of my Christian views. I don't see where you can get that true belief from your atheism.
Sopho wrote:
Just like rape is wrong, it's wrong to f**k a child.
Not the same, when the latter is consentual. Both are still wrong, but not because they are identical, as you claim.
Sopho wrote:
Those laws preventing adults from marrying kids are designed to PROTECT people (children). Who needs protecting from gay marriage?
Everyone else.
1. It harms kids because it's getting them involved in something they're too young to understand. An 8 year old shouldn't be having sex. The only adults that children should have relationships with are their family and teachers etc., that kind of relationship, not a sexual one. And I don't get any of my morals from atheism. I get them from myself. I don't follow atheism like a religion or set of rules.
And getting that moral from yourself is humanism. Good, I'm glad we've found that you're a humanist. Atheism has no moral code, but humanism most definitely does, to the extent that it's a religion. So here we are, religion against religion.
Sopho wrote:
2.It's non consensual though. Kids can't consent. And I never said they were identical. I made the point that they're both sex with someone who isn't consenting.
As defined by law. The law also defines marriage as between one man and one woman.
Sopho wrote:
3. How does me marrying a woman in any way harm you? And if it does, then I can just as easily say that you marrying a woman harms me. But I'm not stupid enough to do that, because I know other people's relationships don't have any affect on me.
In various ways, but that's not the point, since you've already stated that your own rights are important enough to you to tread down on Christian rights. So you're clearly a narcisist, and thereby unconsidering of any harm to others so long as it means you're getting what you want.
1. I'm not religious. I don't follow humanism. I don't sit here reading up on what humanists say I should do and then go out and do it. Wow, you're even more ignorant than I had previously thought. I'm not religious in the slightest. lol I know atheism has no moral code. That's exactly what I was saying. I don't follow a moral code. I work out as best I can what I think is 'right' or 'wrong' myself.
2. I've already addressed this. The law has changed regarding marriage before. And kinds not being able to consent is to protect them. I don't need protecting from women.
3. I'm not pissing on your rights. You, as a Christian, can go to church, pray, believe in your god, do all your Christian sh** and follow your religion as much as you like, to the extent that it doesn't infringe on anyone else's rights. ie. you have the right to believe being gay is wrong, but you don't have the right to enforce that on others. Likewise I want to legally get married, but I don't want to force a priest to marry me and my wife in a church (as much as I like a lot of churches).
I'm not a narcasist for wanting the same right that you have.
I meant that you follow a religion unaware. I know you think you don't; that's immaterial. The 9/11 attackers were serving Satan; even though they got his name wrong, they were still successful at serving him. So you can easily be in a belief system unaware.
10 Aug 2007, 3:37 pm
Hadron wrote:
greenblue wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
We're unconvinced because you haven't provided any decent arguments in support of your position.
No, you decide by feelings rather than by truth.
That's not true actually. Even if I was straight I would have this exact same view. I arrived at this conclusion logically. It is discrimination. If you weren't allowed to marry anyone you would ever want to be with then I would think that was wrong as well. Again, please stop making unfounded assumptions about me or anyone else who disagrees with you.
I am straight, if anyone wants to really know
and I have the same view, so thise feelings rather than truth, doesn't apply to me, and I believe Sopho's arguments are a lot more reasonable and logical than Ragtime's and Hadron's views.
Because you are choosing to be totally biased... You are not even considering myselfs and Ragtimes arguements. Do you have nothing better to do that snip innanely at the sidelines?
I am being honest and I am being just and I am trying to be as open minded as I can about sexuality and these people's rights, which clearly neither of you are, I support Sopho's and Sedaka's arguments because it is the right thing to do, my head tells me that gay people deserve to be seen as equals in this world, why is this so hard to comprehend?
Last edited by greenblue on 10 Aug 2007, 3:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
10 Aug 2007, 3:37 pm
10 Aug 2007, 3:37 pm
10 Aug 2007, 3:37 pm
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sedaka wrote:
even kids with 180 IQ do not have the ability to rationalize these things anymore than the mentally ret*d.
Bwahahahaha!! !
Having a high IQ doesn't necessarily mean you are mature enough to get married. I have a high IQ, but I'm still very naive in a lot of ways, and apparently have a low awareness of danger.
Well, she deliberately left out my point (which she obviously couldn't deal with) that I added "also emotionally an adult", which would have blown her response out of the water. Still "running circles around" me, Sedaka?
10 Aug 2007, 3:41 pm
Sedaka
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,597
Location: In the recesses of my mind
10 Aug 2007, 3:42 pm
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Sedaka wrote:
not on the same points though........
i think the issue at hand affects her life moreso than yours....
and it's not like she's pretended to go be a christian in order to obtain some "enlightenment" and then parades the results of her experiment to say that there is no god and that that proves why gays should have rights. (her beliefs in god do happen to coincide with her side of the issue... but so do yours and that's not what we're talkin about here.... so dont even try to pull that card... you're both equal there)
that's what you effectively did with your homo experimentation.... playing it down and nullifying it
i think the issue at hand affects her life moreso than yours....
and it's not like she's pretended to go be a christian in order to obtain some "enlightenment" and then parades the results of her experiment to say that there is no god and that that proves why gays should have rights. (her beliefs in god do happen to coincide with her side of the issue... but so do yours and that's not what we're talkin about here.... so dont even try to pull that card... you're both equal there)
that's what you effectively did with your homo experimentation.... playing it down and nullifying it
And forcing himself to try and be attracted to men temporarily isn't being gay. I've always liked women and never liked men, even when I tried. That's different to trying to be attracted to people on a lower level.
I still don't understand why -- if it's due to some past bad experience with a man or what -- but we've already conclusively not answered that....
rag...
just because you can one day start daydreaming about cocks and transcend your sexual oreintation to become gay and enjoy the sexual attraction (without ever taking one up the bum/mouth...nor returning the favor) and then SOMEHOW repent pray to god and find your way back to hetero attraction....
doesnt mean that's how it works for everyone... i dont know how hard soph tried (like having sex or not)... but i somehow think she knew it wouldn't work and at least she isnt trying to pretend... and i get the impression she at least tried A LOT LONGER THAN YOU DID
for all the sex topics and things you've shared on WP....
this is the first we've ever heard of your homoerotica
10 Aug 2007, 3:43 pm
10 Aug 2007, 3:44 pm
greenblue wrote:
Hadron wrote:
greenblue wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sopho wrote:
We're unconvinced because you haven't provided any decent arguments in support of your position.
No, you decide by feelings rather than by truth.
That's not true actually. Even if I was straight I would have this exact same view. I arrived at this conclusion logically. It is discrimination. If you weren't allowed to marry anyone you would ever want to be with then I would think that was wrong as well. Again, please stop making unfounded assumptions about me or anyone else who disagrees with you.
I am straight, if anyone wants to really know
and I have the same view, so thise feelings rather than truth, doesn't apply to me, and I believe Sopho's arguments are a lot more reasonable and logical than Ragtime's and Hadron's views.
Because you are choosing to be totally biased... You are not even considering myselfs and Ragtimes arguements. Do you have nothing better to do that snip innanely at the sidelines?
I am being honest and I am being just and I am trying to be as open minded as I can about sexuality and these people's rights, which clearly neither of you are, I support Sopho's and Sedaka's arguments because it is the right thing to do, my head tells me that gay people deserve to be seen as equals in this world, why is this so hard to comprehend?
So you are biased then. You have taken a side because you feel it is right, and havent done it on rationality. So what is the point in you posting then. All you are doing is sniping. If you want to do that go to Intensity and call me out.
10 Aug 2007, 3:45 pm
Ragtime wrote:
Hadron wrote:
greenblue wrote:
Sopho wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Hadron wrote:
Again you miss the point.
She's good at that. Wait till she gets going!
I don't know who this was in reference to, although I'm guessing either me or Sedaka, probably me. I haven't missed any points. It would be difficult to miss them, as you only seem to have about two.
You know what, You and Sedaka are the only ones here who have the most common sense and most intelligence here on this bloody thread.
Good to see you excluded yourself from that definition. Am I still a troll, p**** wussy?
He's just in line for Sedaka's mostly-male harem. Not sure if she's officially recuiting yet...
... and not you either.
Last edited by greenblue on 10 Aug 2007, 3:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
10 Aug 2007, 3:45 pm
Sedaka
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,597
Location: In the recesses of my mind
10 Aug 2007, 3:46 pm
