Jump to content
DetroitCity313

8/28 Rally in Washington

Recommended Posts

Here is my POV. I think that homosexuality and pederasty are comparable. I think they are comparable because the pederasts are following the roadmap that the homosexuals have laid out toward tolerance and acceptance. You have NAMBLA, with the support of the ACLU, working towards lowering the age of consent to 12 -- and since the age of consent has never been attached to adulthood, once you get past the eww! factor, they have a fairly good legal leg to stand on.

So before we decide that sexual orientation creates a protected minority, and we guarantee civil rights based upon the notion that we're born this way, and that it isn't a choice, that we ought to look at the long term effects of making such a decision. Because in my lifetime with regards to homosexuals, we've gone from homosexual sex being a crime to me being a bigot for holding the antiquated notion that marriage is the union of a man and a woman. So before we make all these grand sweeping societal changes, maybe we ought to at least consider the possibility that in fifty years from now, you might be considered a bigot for your disapproval of man-boy love. Of course, maybe I'm just crazy.

But by the same token then aren't homosexuality and race are comparable because homosexuals have followed the roadmap that black men and women laid out toward tolerance and acceptance?

In my grandparents lifetime we've gone from mixed race marriages being a crime to the antiquated view of mixed race relationships as anything other than acceptable being bigoted. And the antiquated view of black people being of inferior to white people as being bigoted. Lots of views on things have changed over the last 50-100 years.

Edited by qsilvr2531

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BetRivers Michigan Sports Betting

BetRivers Michigan $50 Launch Offer

Michigan online sports betting is launching in January 2021. Pre-register at BetRivers Sportsbook and get a free $50 bonus at their online sportsbook & casino with no deposit necessary.

Claim $50 at BetRivers Michigan Now

Paradoxically, twelve year olds a generation or two ago were much more mature than your average twenty year old today, at least in the USA. So they are considered more individuals with rights, yet are less responsible than at any time in the past.

I have to think that many of the things we do to protect them (and these things do protect them) also has the effect of keeping them from growing up. Not sure where the line should be drawn, but ... something seems not to be working.

Just out of curiosity but is there any actual research that supports this? On the surface it sounds like the kind of thing every generation says about the previous generation. Which of course doesn't mean it isn't true, but I know my grandparents have said this about my parents generation and my in-laws make comments like this basically every time I see them (while spoiling their grand kids rotten of course).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been studies done in the fields of sociology and psychology, which are unfortunately imperfect. For obvious reasons there are certain negative study conditions that can't be put into place for controlled studies of children, so a lot of it is based on observational studies. Much of the work would be found using search phrases as helicopter parents.

It is amusing to look at writings in which previous generations complain about the younger generation-one famous one goes back to ancient Greece. I'm in the middle of a vacation so I'm blanking on the person who said it. Socrates, perhaps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just out of curiosity but is there any actual research that supports this? On the surface it sounds like the kind of thing every generation says about the previous generation. Which of course doesn't mean it isn't true, but I know my grandparents have said this about my parents generation and my in-laws make comments like this basically every time I see them (while spoiling their grand kids rotten of course).

Not sure. Mostly anecdotal on my part. But I do a lot of genealogy, and it's common to see twelve or thirteen year olds showing up as "boarders" and "farmhands" with families that weren't their own well into the 20th century. And among the ones I see, they had family living and maintained a relationship with them throughout their lives. My great grandmother finished high school at the proper time (age 16) and went to college (normal school) at that age. Two years of normal school, and by 18 was teaching in Indian Territory for several years. She lived with a family, as was proper for an unmarried young woman. But she was very much an adult.

My husband's great grandmother married at 13 years old in 1874. She had something like 18 children and lived well into her 80s. (Interesting tidbit: her brother was Nolan Ryan's great grandfather. We only recently learned this.) It was not at all uncommon in that day. I look at my own kids at 13, and none of them would have been able to take care of themselves much less a family at that age.

My daughter told me that during the first week at school, there were parents walking their college freshman to class to help them find the proper buildings. What the HECK? If I was inclined to do this, she wouldn't let me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
so policy should be dictated based on something that might happen 50 years from now? if that's not a ringing endorsement for global warming legislation, i don't know what is.

I guess then if I wanted some oranges, I should send you for the store for some apples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But by the same token then aren't homosexuality and race are comparable because homosexuals have followed the roadmap that black men and women laid out toward tolerance and acceptance?

In my grandparents lifetime we've gone from mixed race marriages being a crime to the antiquated view of mixed race relationships as anything other than acceptable being bigoted. And the antiquated view of black people being of inferior to white people as being bigoted. Lots of views on things have changed over the last 50-100 years.

Okay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But by the same token then aren't homosexuality and race are comparable because homosexuals have followed the roadmap that black men and women laid out toward tolerance and acceptance?

In my grandparents lifetime we've gone from mixed race marriages being a crime to the antiquated view of mixed race relationships as anything other than acceptable being bigoted. And the antiquated view of black people being of inferior to white people as being bigoted. Lots of views on things have changed over the last 50-100 years.

As a society we can't give any markers of formal acceptance to interracial couples because if we let our standards slide with that group pressing for change, we might just allow ALL GROUPS that want change to get their way. How could we ever justify allowing interracial couples while still not allowing adults to molest children?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure. Mostly anecdotal on my part. But I do a lot of genealogy, and it's common to see twelve or thirteen year olds showing up as "boarders" and "farmhands" with families that weren't their own well into the 20th century. And among the ones I see, they had family living and maintained a relationship with them throughout their lives. My great grandmother finished high school at the proper time (age 16) and went to college (normal school) at that age. Two years of normal school, and by 18 was teaching in Indian Territory for several years. She lived with a family, as was proper for an unmarried young woman. But she was very much an adult.

My husband's great grandmother married at 13 years old in 1874. She had something like 18 children and lived well into her 80s. (Interesting tidbit: her brother was Nolan Ryan's great grandfather. We only recently learned this.) It was not at all uncommon in that day. I look at my own kids at 13, and none of them would have been able to take care of themselves much less a family at that age.

My daughter told me that during the first week at school, there were parents walking their college freshman to class to help them find the proper buildings. What the HECK? If I was inclined to do this, she wouldn't let me.

I agree kids are less independent now than they were at the same age a generation or two ago (and I do tend to think that is where the perception that the current generation is less mature than previous ones). I guess I'm not sure that really represents maturity though. I guess it depends on what that word means. We've progressed to the point that we don't have to marry kids off at 13 or put them to work as soon as we can or get them out on their own right away. I'm not sure the fact that we did so in the past represented maturity on the children's part or necessity on the parents part.

Not that it matters, I'm sure I'll be telling my kids about how wikipedia didn't exist when i was in grade school and I needed a quarter to call home because cell phones didn't exist.

I do find the parents walking their kids around at college very annoying. My wife does advising for mechanical engineers and it seems like every week she talks about prospective students who come to visit UC and never say a word while their parents grill her on the school and the program.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Incidentally, I notice you specifically refer to man-boy "love," and don't mention man-girl "love"-is there a reason for this?

Because it is the North American Man-Boy Love Association that is working toward these ends. Man-girl, woman-boy, woman-girl are all possibilities, I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As a society we can't give any markers of formal acceptance to interracial couples because if we let our standards slide with that group pressing for change, we might just allow ALL GROUPS that want change to get their way. How could we ever justify allowing interracial couples while still not allowing adults to molest children?

If there was a more sinister way to misinterpret my position, I'm sure you would have said that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tell me where my interpretation is mistaken? We can't give formal acceptance to a long forbidden coupling (interracial/homosexuals) because another long forbidden coupling (pedophiles) would then be able to take advantage of our sliding standards, even though the first coupling did not by itself challenge the rationale of the other coupling (i.e. if we allow interracial couples or homosexuals acceptance, we're not opening the door for pedophiles in the same way we might think that lowering the age of consent from 18 to 16 would be opening the door ["If we make it 16, what's to keep it from being 14? 12? ..."]).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say this extremely tongue in cheek but...

No one ever became black on a weekend at summer camp with a fifth of SoCo.

On a more serious note, regardless of one's natural proclivity to homosexuality (or pederasty, for that matter), it is still a choice to commit the acts of homosexuality.

Who DOESN'T have a natural proclivity to sin? We each have our own, it doesn't excuse us. My father was biologically prone to alcoholism and died 20+ years sober. Others have a natural weakness to heterosexual sex...doesn't mean that one-night-stands are OK for that person.

Race is different, completely and utterly different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because it is the North American Man-Boy Love Association that is working toward these ends. Man-girl, woman-boy, woman-girl are all possibilities, I suppose.

Ah, true. Fair enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So can you? Can you tell me why the two are not comparable? Can you tell me that say that they are goes beyond mere disagreement to offensiveness?

Can you tell me the difference between consensual sex and rape? Can you? :ponder:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can you tell me the difference between consensual sex and rape? Can you? :ponder:

I think the argument is a little more complex than you're framing it. Does an arbitrary age automatically imply consent while the day before automatically implies rape?

I have a niece around 12 and--while it is incredible and horrible to think of her "in that way"--I can assure you if Justin Bieber was offering, there would be consent.

Lest anyone feel I am arguing FOR NAMBLA...I'm not, their position is reprehensible, but--legally and logically speaking--it is arguable. The comparison (for those of us of a religious persuasion) is that there are certain "rules" for what sex was intended for. Man-boy love is NOT one of them. Neither is sex with someone who doesn't consent. Man-Man love (or woman-women) also breaks the rules set forth in the Bible.

Again, I find it much MORE intellectually honest to say (as some of implied). "I don't care about the rules."

Edited by Mschottey1985

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the argument is a little more complex than you're framing it. Does an arbitrary age automatically imply consent while the day before automatically implies rape?

I have a niece around 12 and--while it is incredible and horrible to think of her "in that way"--I can assure you if Justin Bieber was offering, there would be consent.

No, the argument is simple. An adult and a child is rape. An adult and an adult is not. That is where we draw the line. An adult and a child harms the child emotionally and psychologically- possibly physically. Homosexual sex does not do that.

Besides a few sickos in NAMBLA no one wants the age of consent at 12 and no one will make it 12.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I imagine it depends on the statutory (sp?) rape laws where they are. In some states it depends on the age difference between the two parties, correct? I have no idea how old Justin Bieber is and am too lazy to look right now, though. And isn't the law more severe if one party is 12 instead of 16?

I see a big difference between consensual sex and rape between two teens, personally.

Edited by Lousluggage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, the argument is simple. An adult and a child is rape. An adult and an adult is not. That is where we draw the line. An adult and a child harms the child emotionally and psychologically- possibly physically. Homosexual sex does not do that.

Besides a few sickos in NAMBLA no one wants the age of consent at 12 and no one will make it 12.

So an 18 year old "woman" who has sex with a "boy" one day prior to his 18th birthday is rape? He will be harmed emotionally and psychology but give it 24 hours and he won't be? Something magical happens?

Alrighty then......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So an 18 year old "woman" who has sex with a "boy" one day prior to his 18th birthday is rape? He will be harmed emotionally and psychology but give it 24 hours and he won't be? Something magical happens?

Alrighty then......

No law is perfect. If you want to analyze every law like that we would have none. Theres also a reason we dont let 20 year olds drink but let 21 year olds...will 1 year make a huge difference? Probably not. But 15 and 21 is a huge difference so we set guidelines...and there is no movement suggesting 15 year olds be allowed to buy alcohol just like there is no movement pushing for 12 years of age to be the age of consent.

Overall, the age of consent works and is necessary to prevent extremely harmful and damaging relations. No one is hurt from homosexuality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, the argument is simple. An adult and a child is rape. An adult and an adult is not.

An adult can't ever rape an adult...alert the presses.

You're taking a look at the situation, ignoring the actual points of the debate (that, framed within the religious parameters...it is a slippery slope) and then oversimplifying terms.

No one has ever and will ever say that sex between an adult and a child is ok (consensual) What others have said (and you seemingly don't care to acknowledge) is that the terms "adult" and "child" are not static terms. What is an adult? 16? 18? 21? 25? 30?

I am an adult, but at 24 I can't drive a rental car! 18-year-old adults can die in the military but not buy alcohol! A 15-year-old girl is almost routinely considered a child but in many states a 15-year-old boy can consent to sexual acts with an older woman!

You've taken one small part of this argument and think you've won it with (ironically) childish logic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An adult can't ever rape an adult...alert the presses.

You're taking a look at the situation, ignoring the actual points of the debate (that, framed within the religious parameters...it is a slippery slope) and then oversimplifying terms.

No one has ever and will ever say that sex between an adult and a child is ok (consensual) What others have said (and you seemingly don't care to acknowledge) is that the terms "adult" and "child" are not static terms. What is an adult? 16? 18? 21? 25? 30?

I am an adult, but at 24 I can't drive a rental car! 18-year-old adults can die in the military but not buy alcohol! A 15-year-old girl is almost routinely considered a child but in many states a 15-year-old boy can consent to sexual acts with an older woman!

You've taken one small part of this argument and think you've won it with (ironically) childish logic.

We can play the slippery slope with anything. Lets ban marriage because it will lead to gay marriage which will lead to pedophilia....see how easy this is? Lets go back to prohibition...it will lead to a push to make cocaine legal. Don't let health inspections occur in restaurants, the health inspectors will come into your house next!

Who besides NAMBLA has moved to make the age of consent anything less than 16? There is no movement. So we can play the slippery slope game of absurdity all day with everything and get nowhere. Even though I have yet to hear any evidence that homosexuality is harming anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In your opinion...

I would love to see any evidence of the harm that comes from homosexuality. Specific evidence. Not like last time when everyone said "biology" but offered no substantial proof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No law is perfect. If you want to analyze every law like that we would have none. Theres also a reason we dont let 20 year olds drink but let 21 year olds...will 1 year make a huge difference? Probably not. But 15 and 21 is a huge difference so we set guidelines...and there is no movement suggesting 15 year olds be allowed to buy alcohol just like there is no movement pushing for 12 years of age to be the age of consent.

Overall, the age of consent works and is necessary to prevent extremely harmful and damaging relations. No one is hurt from homosexuality.

that's kind of the point of the discussion we're having. It helps to read the rest of the thread before responding to a point right away.

What I quoted contradicts what you said here:

No, the argument is simple. An adult and a child is rape. An adult and an adult is not. That is where we draw the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Michigan Sports Betting Offer

Michigan is launching online sports betting and casino apps in January 2021. These top Michigan sportsbooks have pre-launch bonus offers. No deposit is required. Terms and conditions apply.

BetRivers Michigan - If you sign up at BetRivers Michigan now, you will receive $50 in free bets to use one their online sportsbook & casino

Click Here to claim $50 at BetRivers Michigan For Signing Up Now

FanDuel Michigan - If you register now before FanDuel launches in January, you will receive $100 to use at their sportsbook app & online casino.

Click Here to claim $100 at FanDuel Michigan For Registering Now

BetMGM Michigan - If you sign up early at BetMGM Michigan before launch, you will receive $200 in free bets to use at their online casino & sportsbook

Click Here to claim $200 at BetRivers Michigan For Signing Up Early

   


×
×
  • Create New...