[Chuck the plant]

Originally posted by Triton@Jul 1 2005, 04:01 PM
I can't even begin to comprehend the ignorance I read here.

Self-awareness, bla-bla-bla...

Pedofilia can be compared to homosexuality. [...] My point is that if adults can feel attraction to other adults of the same gender as a result of nature, then adults having an attraction to children is just as natural.* If homosexuals can marry, then children should be able to have sex with adults if they consent to it.

You didn't quite catch the meaning of "consent", did you?

Have you not read "Lolita" by Nabokov?* Dolores Haze resented Humbert Humbert near the end, but only because he went about things the wrong way.* She did start to fall in love with him at first, though.

Wow, a fictional novel as evidence...

I never said homosexuality was a conscious choice;

I'll get back to THAT...

As I said before, anal sex is a very dangerous practice, even with lubricants and protection.

Not anymore dangerous than eating hot chili, which can indeed damage one's anus just as well. Or are you trying to get to that "greater chance of getting/spreading AIDS"-stuff here? Newsbreak, we're talking about homosexual MARRIAGE as in "two people sharing their lives and NOT f*cking around like crazy with everyone they meet", so itss rather a zero-arguement. You don't get AIDS from sleeping with someone who doesn't have it just because you MIGHT severe a small artery. And I certainly never heard anyone dying from a bleeding anus...
And one more thing: Just like there are MANY heterosexuals who enjoy anal-sex (gosh, even WOMEN! ), there are many homosexuals who don't have sex that includes penetration at all. And lesbians do indeed "have the means", did you ever hear of sextoys?

You don't tell someone who thinks they see a telephone pole in his room that it really is there.

I still don't get THAT. Care to explain?

Homosexuals do not want to become heterosexual, so they'll say anything to justify themselves.

I never said homosexuality was a conscious choice;

You don't mind me laughing now, do you? Allthough I rather feel like crying... :not_ok:

@ horseman: So what about all those heterosexuals that "don't participate in evolution" because they are infertile etc? According to your logic, they shouldn't be allowed to adopt children as well. And what about those heterosexuals that simply don't WANNA have children? Deny them marriage?

Wrong again. Norms like that has been long established in the development of human society. Homosexuals are deliberately intending to mock them.

Besides that I would have punched you right in the face for that last sentence if we were only talking face to face, there were indeed "human societies" that found NOTHING wrong about homo- or bisexuality.

Think of it like that. A child growing in any family does slowly adopt its parents opinions and positions on various subjects, psychological traits if you like.

That seems to happen only in republican families LOL
Seriosuly, if children and teens were so easily and oftenly adopting their parent's views and ebven more LIFESTYLE, how do you explain the omnipresent "generation gap"?

When raised by a homosexual pair, it will similarily adopt what it sees around as being absolutely normal.

And GOD help us if we actually start accepting homosexuality instead of condemning it

To that child, a heterosexual family will be a deviation and a homosexual one norm.

Only if the child would never leave the house or grow up in an all-gay-community.
BTW, do black people see white families as deviation and vice versa? Do children that grew up with only one parental part see families with a mum AND a das as "deviation?