A choice or a curse?

Ok well the not having sex thing that you mentioned is a pretty big topic in 1984, orwell would say that not having sex is taking away a mans freedoms. BUt where do we draw the line on what is right or wrong. How far will humans go in arguing that they can have sex with anything they want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone. Let me show you what i mean. While you may accept homosexual sex then is ok for humans to have sex with animals. In your views expressed earlier it is. Because its not harming anyone. Who cares if a farm girl wants to marry her horse right? BUt wait are some of you disgusted at this thought like i am about homosexuality....hmm interesting maybe your views will eventually change and you will come to accept humans having sex with animals. I know it will get some viewers on the Jerry Springer show. My boss slept with my cat would be the topic and all the ignorant americans would be cheering for their own stupidity.

Not a fact just a thought

Discreet, I must say you make me laugh!

Okay, good point.

The difference I would say there is that the homosexuals are consenting adults. The animal *may* not be consenting to the sex.

I do not believe in doing anything like that with a being that does not consent. Thus, I would draw the line with minors, children, animals, plants, etc.

If it could be proven that the animal was capable of consenting to said actions, I might consider it okay....? hmmm....?

Dolphins. So now whata have to say?

The thought of my parents having sex utterly repulses me.

Now whaddya say?

Should someone's repulsion be the standard by which it is judged right or wrong?

What standard SHOULD there be?

Can you prove the dolphin is consenting?

I know dolphins are smart, but I don't think we've established good enough communication with them to determine whether they want to be intimate with us!

But mermaids are a different story!

So your saying that sex with animals is ok. And people should not be opposed to it because they find it repulsive.

Im glad we do not live in your world. I don't know if i could handle a society according to your theory. "should someones repulsion be the standard by which it is judged right or wrong?"

I guess people should be allowed to masturbate in public and crap in the streets. Some people may find it repulsive but who cares right sozobe?

Discreet, what you are doing is called a Strawman Argument. A decent debate technique for the uninitiated, but this is the Debate Board and you aren't going to get away with chump techniques like this. In case you don't know Strawman and you are not aware of what you are doing: this is when you misrepresent and exaggerate someone's point of view to a ridiculous extreme, then attack that argument which you have created, (not the more reasonable argument of the person you are debating).

***

I easily do the same with your arguments. Take them the other direction:
Homosexuality repulses you so you are saying it should be banned.

Okay.

Well, some of this stuff on able2know repulses some people so able2know and the internet should be banned too.

or: You yourself might say or write something that repulses someone someday somewhere, so perhaps you should be locked up and kept out of view of society?

Em they actually proved that dolphins and humans are the only one that have sex for pleasure. And i enjoyed reading about your strawman argument

But i thought sozobe's statement had a lot of flaws in it. So i commented on it. I know what his point was but i think its incorrect still he brought up the issue of how your parents having sex is gross but thats not banned which i think is a good comment.

this is what i didn't like
Should someone's repulsion be the standard by which it is judged right or wrong?

Maybe he was just asking the general public cause he didn't know but it seems he was saying it in a sarcastic way to me

Okay, I'll accept that.

But have they been able to determine when a particular dolphin wants to be intimate with a particular human?

Until they are able to communicate that 100% foolproof, I think its off limits for sure.

When (if) they are able to reach this level of communication with dolphins, perhaps we'll need to vote on this, discuss it with the dolphin community, give the dolphins a vote on it, etc.

We'd have to learn from the dolphins what they consider their age for minors, what constitutes consent, etc.

So, I guess, perhaps your & my reincarnation can discuss this issue in a few thousand years from now. Unless one or both of us is reincarnated into an ant or beetle or something, then it may take eons for us to discuss it at the appropriate time again.

This doesn't really have to do with our topic but i read a funny article recently that kinda has to deal with communicating with marine life.....i wrote about it for my school newspaper

Whale Song
By Adam*I don;t like giving out last names =)*

Recently I read an article on http://www.space.com/astronotes/astronotes.html, discussing the fact that humpback whale songs are going to be broadcasted into outer space. The Deep Space Communications Network, which is a private organization, intends to use a large dish antenna, to blast the whale songs out to an estimated 3.5 light years into deep space, a distance of 18 trillion miles.

Besides the fact that this is a waste of money, the only explanation of why someone would do this is because they are a die hard star trek fan. Episode IV of Star Trek was about Captain Kirk discovering a space probe that appears over a futuristic Earth. The probe gives off unknown sounds, and seems to be waiting for something. The probe starts to create major storms on earth and threatens the safety of Earth's inhabitants. Kirk and his crew discover that the noises are actually the calling of a humpback whale, unfortunately that species has been hunted to extinction. So Kirk and his crew must time travel back to the 20th century, find a humpback whale and bring it back to reply to the probe. (Read from summary of Colin Tinto)

What bothers me even more is that the nearest star is an estimated 4.22 light years away, but if by some random chance alien life forms do get this message then what? Are they going to come back here after studying this whale song and communicate about the outcomes of earth with humpback whales? I think this is just a big waste of tax dollars for a pointless event.

This will probably bring Earth as we know it to a dooms day now that Captain Kirk isn't around anymore to save us. I guess it's up to the whales now.

I wasn't being particularly sarcastic, just trying to find out what standard except your own repulsion you have for thinking homosexuality is wrong.

What I was saying is that repulsion, itself, doesn't work as a standard, or else my parents would never have had sex, which would be kind of a bummer for my own existence.

There are standards other than repulsion for other things you mentioned.

What is your standard for why you think homosexuality is wrong OTHER than your own repulsion?

What I was saying is that repulsion, itself, doesn't work as a standard, or else my parents would never have had sex, which would be kind of a bummer for my own existence.

Lol i don't mean to pick on you but in theory if you wernt around to feel repulsive towards you parents having sex then they still would have sex. If you were born and started feeling grossed out by them then they might stop resulting in no younger siblings. But you would have still been born.

If homosexuality is allowed whats to stop hearing more of these kinds of articles

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050503/D89REJ481.html

Loving an animal seems just as wrong as loving another man to me....

If heterosexuality is allowed what's to stop rapists?

You have to demonstrate some link besides your own repulsion for that to work, Discreet.

We can stop rapists by punishing them. In homosexuality you would have rapists just theyd be raping the same race. I guess that would lower abortion rates...

And by race i did mean sex lol.....

Also i mentioned earlier how kids supporting gay rights wore shirts saying "What are you going to do about it." Recently i read a story about kids that wore anti gay rights and look what happened



Student Threatened with Suspension for Wearing "Homosexuality is Wrong" T-Shirt
LifeSiteNews.com ^ | 04/14/05


Posted on 04/17/2005 5:48:58 PM PDT


RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA, April 14, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A high school student wearing a t-shirt that stated: (front) "Tolerance is the virtue of believing in nothing", and (back) "Truth is truth - homosexuality is wrong" was threatened with suspension. The 'A' student, with no history of discipline problems, was removed from class and sent to the principal's office where she was told to change shirts or leave campus.

Her parents called the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI). "It is regrettable when parents have to choose which right their child will be deprived of - free speech or a public education," said Kevin Snider, Chief Counsel for PJI. One of PJI's attorneys immediately called the school and faxed a letter that same day explaining how students have First Amendment rights which follow them when they step onto a school campus.

Ironically, the school asserted that the censorship was based on "tolerance" and "diversity." A school official explained that a homosexual will be offended by a shirt that says "homosexuality is a sin." "One-way tolerance is not tolerance, but tyranny," said Brad Dacus, President of the Pacific Justice Institute. "Intolerance of students with religious or moral convictions should have no place in public education."

PJI informed school officials that the student will continue to wear that shirt, and other shirts expressing her values and beliefs, at her discretion. The school has since stopped harassing this student.

Students who have been disciplined or otherwise been denied their right to religious-based speech are encouraged to immediately contact the Pacific Justice Institute. PJI provides all of their legal assistance without charge.








Keep in mind
Tinker vs. Des Moines, 1969, established that students "do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate".

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/apr/05041401.html

The same race?

You're acknowledging there are heterosexual rapists. If that's a reason to that homosexuality shouldn't exist, heterosexuality shouldn't either.

Eh, not worth it, you're not acknowledging basic logical points. Good luck with the intellectual thing.

Ok heres another reason homosexuality shouldn't exist
Darwin's natural selection? Homosexual couples can not pass on their genes so they are naturally selected for extinction. All the homo coddling disrupts this natural process known as natural selection

Google "aunt effect".