forum Debate. Debate. Debate.

Started March 14, 2019 by Deleted user

tune

Edit topic

…eris…

I know it was a weird point to make, but I mean….He left it open for that!!!

You dirty minded Lol.

"But I have hand!"
"Good, you're gonna need it!"

I really hope someone gets this reference lol

You dirty minded Lol.

Consider I'm 14 and I automatically got the joke

You dirty minded Lol.

If I had been speaking out loud when I brought up that comment, I would have said it with a straight face. One hundred percent not realizing what I said was completely dirty. XD

I'm going to leave now before I reread that to try to understand it… I'll be back shortly.

Back to the topic at hand. What evidence is there for the "gay gene" or other reason to believe in born with it.

I think that people just like what they like. It's not really about evolution anymore, don't you think?

So not born with in your opinion?

No, I think it kinda develops over time. There are people who are happy being straight at first but then develop feelings for the same sex. I don't think that there's anything wrong with that. People act like lgbt+ is a new thing but people have been feeling it for thousands of years.

And may I ask what your sexual preference is? If you are or are not straight I mean?

Not 100% sure. Straight as far as I know which maybe makes me less "knowledgeable" on the subject. I really just believe that humans change and develop and they shouldn't be judged for it. Love is love.

Unfortunately I'm not sure that makes you able to make a considered valid statement. (By lbgt peeps) Also I wouldn't go with the "love is love" line because pedophilia and such.

Pedophilia isn't love, it's lust and a mental disorder.

But there's a line between romantic love, and just love in general. So love is still love, but there are definitely boundaries and such to where and when it should be considered romantic or not.

Pedophilia is not love. It's not love if it's just about sex.

Good point.

Well I'm sure plenty of adults thought they were in love with the kid while the kid believed the same.

"Love is love" is a statement used by the lgbtq+ community. Again, please don't group the lgbtq+ community with pedophiles.

Okay okay, wait I just thought about this more. Are you seriously putting love into this equation? This horrible horrible equation? I know you're only saying its perceived love, but no. I understand that you like to debate but that was taken too far in my opinion. Whether or not there is love when a pedophile r*pes a child is not something we should be debating.

I would definitely not be the first to use that saying to promote pedophiles. Plus, what if it was consensual? Yeah I see the flaws but I want to see what you say. If I answered all the questions myself I would get bored.

Dude children are not legally old enough to give consent

IT IS

WRONG

there is no love, because in the eyes of the law, there is no love! It's fucking harassment! It can harm a child's mind!

Also even if the child did consent, it's still statuary rape.
'Love sees past age' means that two middle-aged people can fall in love, not a 40 year old and a 13 year old.
It's simple logic.

I would definitely not be the first to use that saying to promote pedophiles. Plus, what if it was consensual? Yeah I see the flaws but I want to see what you say. If I answered all the questions myself I would get bored.

Well get ready to become real bored son, cuz that shit is wrong and absolutely disgusting and you know it. And the fact that you'd rather uphold debate instead of your own morals is questionable at best and psychotic at worst.

So dude, do us all a favor and just drop the subject. You took it way too far.

Just because you're not the first person to use it, doesn't mean it's right or okay. Racist people nowadays aren't the first people to be racist, but does that make modern racism okay? Are you asking if the pedophilia was consensual? That's . . . not how it works. Dude if you're bored then read a book or come up with a new topic or something, don't debate the technicalities whether or not pedophilia is love. You have to see how thats wrong

Go read The Opposite Of Innocent by Sonya Sones if you want to see how a child is not capable of consent and realizing what they're getting into. It's a first person pov told by the child, and it sure as hell doesn't leave a grey area, because pedophilia isn't a grey area matter, it's disgusting and wrong.
And if anyone actually does think pedophilia is okay, well…

Whoa my peeps. Chill out. I'm the really strict Christian dude. I just like to hear what people think. And see how they work.
But anyways, to comment.
The law has nothing to do with love. Also yes it will seriously harm children.
Gotta agree with you Jyn. Except for the simple logic part. Excuse my pettiness but common sense would work better. Wow I am petty.
For Red. What do you mean by "uphold debate instead of morals" if I only ever argued from my perspective I would be very limited. I think learning to defend all sides is the best way to both find fault and empathy with the position.
Very true Moxie. Yeah I know it's wrong. And books are awesome. But humans are even better.
Honestly Jyn I probably don't have the stomach to read it, but I am sure it tells the tale excellently.

For Red. What do you mean by "uphold debate instead of morals" if I only ever argued from my perspective I would be very limited. I think learning to defend all sides is the best way to both find fault and empathy with the position.

I've never seen you argue for the LGBTQ+ community. I've never seen you argue for women. I've never seen you argue for atheists. I could go on and on, but the fact is you're saying you find more empathy for rapists, murderers, manipulators, and abusers more than you find empathy for regular people who haven't committed any of those horrible atrocities.
So at this point you have to ask yourself.
"Have I taken this too far?"

Spoiler alert: the answer is yes. No one wants to argue with you because we are all fucking disgusted.

For Red. What do you mean by "uphold debate instead of morals" if I only ever argued from my perspective I would be very limited. I think learning to defend all sides is the best way to both find fault and empathy with the position.

I've never seen you argue for the LGBTQ+ community. I've never seen you argue for women. I've never seen you argue for atheists. I could go on and on, but the fact is you're saying you find more empathy for rapists, murderers, manipulators, and abusers more than you find empathy for regular people who haven't committed any of those horrible atrocities.
So at this point you have to ask yourself.
"Have I taken this too far?"

Spoiler alert: the answer is yes. No one wants to argue with you because we are all fucking disgusted.

Woah. That's the only way I can react. Holy crap.