52 Replies to “All Is Proceeding According To Plan”
Since when does sexual proclivity become sexual orientation? Since child molesters read the homosexual PR playbook.
All child molesters should be subject to a fourth trimester abortion.
I do not care what a person fantasizes about in their head, nor do I care if pedophilia is defined as “sexual orientation”. There is always going to be one major difference between heterosexuality, homosexuality, and pedophilia and that is the issue of consent.
Well we knew it was only a matter of time. History repeats – long live Rome!
Barnyard next.
Years ago, listening to the public radio station in my college town, I heard a program about pedophiles. This was back in the 70s, so the host and the psychiatrist who were discussing this agreed that pedophilia was a problem and harmful for children. It was a call-in show. What followed were numerous calls from pedophiles disputing the charge that pedophilia was bad for children. Person after person insisted that the children liked it, and even sought it out, that they weren’t raping anyone, that they had loving relationships with the children they molested, etc. I could hardly believe it.
Now, of course, it’s just another lifestyle choice that must have the same status as any other.
This is all about having more access to our kids, without any fear of penalty or social condemnation.
It must be OK since a Deputy Minister in the current Libel government of Ontario is on board with it.
The anything goes mentality of today is mind boggling. It is easier to disassociate but that is the reason why we are where we are.
The Sex-Ed guru of Ontario is being charged with making and distributing child porn. How long before someone like him is classified as a victim of “pedophilophobia”?
No not barnyard next. Ne will be polygamy, then sharia.
How long before someone like Benjamin Levin is classified as a victim of “pedophilophobia”?
Sorry for the repeat . . . the censor held up my first post and I thought it wouldn’t appear.
Hey, no fair!
Now the rapists (non-pedophiles) are being discriminated against!
Whenever someone makes “consent” the issue, I reply by asking, “So then you have no problem with necrophilia?”
Consent sure isn’t an issue there.
Call me a dinosaur, but I think there are some things that are just messed up. The bottom line is, there is a normal. Everything else is abnormal. The moral implications of those things that are abnormal is all that is left to decide. But we have to be ready to accept that some things are just weird.
I have NO problem with pedos or whatever trying to have their way with my grandkids. As long as I’m present to dish out some Ted Nugent style corrective action and forever change their sex and sexual orientation. BOOM! Problem solved.
If you are in fact born a homosexual. What about the many in prison who turn to homosexual acts while in prison? Are they reborn?
Polygamy is often linked with religion, has historical precedent grounded in biology and produces big hetero-normative families with a patriarch so is therefore verboten. Since the LBGTQWTFBBQ crowd is an anti-family, non-traditional, mainly atheist social movement they’re allowed to make stuff up as they go along and we all must cheer-lead or be persecuted. That’s the rules.
Another useless campaign to normalize the exploitation of children and approve of a wretched evil.
Barf…more moral relativism served up to corrupt the innocents.
You call them creeps because that is what it does; ‘creeps you out’. http://www.vevo.com/watch/weird-al-yankovic/do-i-creep-you-out/USZM20700004
Do I Creep You Out
Weird Al” Yankovic
Cheers
Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”
Actually bryceman, necrophilia would require the consent of the person who owned their body before they died. Just like we cannot use a person’s body for experimental reasons without their consent prior to death.
Not that I condone necrophilia but your argument is invalid.
As rat says, homosexuality is between consenting adults. Children cannot consent to sexual acts, hence the illegality in terms of the law. Psychologically it has also been shown to harm children.
You guys keep trying to ban homosexuality based on some slippery slope argument. You guys sound the same as the people pushing for Sharia law, you’re in the same boat as far as oppressing others is concerned.
“You guys keep trying to ban homosexuality based on some slippery slope argument. You guys sound the same as the people pushing for Sharia law, you’re in the same boat as far as oppressing others is concerned.”
Nobody here is trying to “ban” homosexuality. We just don’t want to see homosexuals as a protected class, immune from criticism. What homosexuals “do” is disgusting and unsanitary, and no amount of Leftist propaganda will alter that.
Well Forest, if you have declared the “argument” invalid, then I guess that’s that. You just can’t beat assertions like that.
I don’t know why it would be the same as using a body for experimental reasons. Haven’t the bodies of John Does and executed criminals been used since time immemorial?
Wasn’t there recently an edict out of some Muslim country that said a widower can have his wife’s body for sexual purposes up to six hours after death?
But, just to make you happy, let’s assume we had some sort of messed up kind of organ-donor card where you could place a checkmark indicating you give your consent to be used as a sex toy after death. Then that would be OK, right?
There was a time where we judged “crimes” based on the intent of the accused and not what the victim suffered. Along comes the likes of Forest, and nothing is weird – as long as consent is present. Brave new world.
Sorry…I’m just babbling. The court has already declared my argument invalid. There is just nothing that is weird or messed-up…as long as you have consent…as it is defined by Forest.
Since I said nothing about homosexuality or banning, I am going to disregard your last paragraph and assume you were lashing out at someone else.
So someone has an innate attraction to acts that are morally wrong. Welcome to the human race. Each of us has tendencies that we keep in check for the sake of others, and due to our own moral compasses. As a married man, I have lots of roads that I will not go down, even though I may have desires in that direction. Should individuals with hot tempers dish out beatings and worse and then claim “I was born that way”? We all have desires that we keep under control. It’s called Growing Up, and it tends to go hand in hand with another failing concept called “Civilization”. I know, according to “progressives”, anything involving an org#sm is protected by sacred rights.
But the people making the slippery slope argument are the crazy ones!
That’s an excellent point. We’re all ‘born this way’, aren’t we? Including serial killers, arsonists, rapists, etc… they’re just following their ‘inner self’!
“In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.” Judges 17:6
The problem with everyone following their own conscience, of course, is that people are basically evil. If leftists really wanted, they could open the Bible for a sneak peek at how that worked out.
first timer… well said
bryceman, Forest nailed you perfectly, and then you go and prove him rite. All the religious right whiners gave the “gay rites” movement a platform, and they used it very effectively. If left to their own devices they would have arrived at the same place(legally and socially) they are now, without the publicity the “extremists” got. There are those in here who would start denigration gays went the discussion was about knitting socks or something like that, so they loose in the end because they emotionalized a social issue(how liberal of them). As far as the topic goes, read first timers post, he/she nails it. It doesn’t matter what you feel you want to do, it’s what is morally and socially acceptable, and we have laws to back up these acceptable social constraints
I feel like I have stepped into a weird Twilight Zone episode.
I never said anything about gays or gay rights. What exactly did he nail me on? I only asserted that there are some things that people do that are just weird…and that consent cannot be the only standard for defining an act as acceptable. Holy crap. Are you and Forest at the same party smoking the same stuff?
And since when is something made morally acceptable only because it has been deemed socially acceptable? I would argue that slavery or running Jews out of your country are morally wrong – even if socially acceptable.
We used to have this thing called “common sense.” It was backed by a common moral understanding. And, while I am not the slightest bit religious, I must concede that that morality came from a religious source. That the religious part of it is gone is fine with me…but then on what do we base our common moral code. I say it has to be something more than simple questions of consent.
Are actions right or wrong because the law says so or do laws exist because certain things are right or wrong?
Sheesh. I’ll stop now before one of you decides that I just made an assertion about abortion.
first timer said: “Should individuals with hot tempers dish out beatings and worse and then claim “I was born that way”?”
Its fine, as long as he’s not a white male. Or a Christian.
You think I’m kidding. Sadly, not so much. Statistics on sentences given for assault vary by race. More severe for whites, less for all others.
Forest said: “You guys keep trying to ban homosexuality based on some slippery slope argument. You guys sound the same as the people pushing for Sharia law, you’re in the same boat as far as oppressing others is concerned.”
As much as it pains me, Forest has a valid point against some strains of social “conservatism”. They just want to use the government to make people do it their way. I don’t like those guys, they’re just like liberals.
However most of the people who post at SDA aren’t interested in “banning” homosexuality. Nobody cares, Forest. Do what you want. Just not in my driveway, alright?
We are however very interested in keeping homosexual activists OUT OF SCHOOLS. Kids can’t give consent, remember? We are also very interested in maintaining the meaning and -sanctity- of marriage. I have always maintained that this would be best accomplished by getting the government OUT of it, and leaving the issue entirely to churches. Its a religious thing, it needs to be decided by religious people. If the Catholic Church says one man and one woman, that’s the way it is dude. Switch to the United Church. They seen to be good with two men, or two women, or one woman and a pony, or… I don’t attend anymore, lets just say.
Inevitably the liberals of this world seek to get the church out of marriage and substitute bureaucracy. This is because liberals are short sighted control freaks who can’t stand dissent and pretty much hate everyone and everything. See social “conservative” above for comparison. Same dung pile, different side.
So, this Yank, a Canuck, and a Liberal were strolling down a country lane. They rounded a corner to see a sheep with its head caught in the fence, bleating away and rocking back and forth.
“Gawleee!” exclaimed the Yank. “I wish that it was Angelina Jolie stuck in that there fence!”
“Are you kidding?” said the Canuck. “I wish it was Shania Twain.”
“I just wish it was night”, said the Liberal.
Another example of liberals changing the very definition of things to make them acceptable; for political advantage, to the detriment of society(and those they claim to be helping).
The difference between homosexuality and pedophilia is that one is a victimless crime; but, that’s where the differences stop. Scientifically speaking, they are both deviant sexual behaviors that are a result of mental illness; and most often result in misery for the person affected. That said, many homosexuals manage to live fulfilling and productive lives, and are very comfortable in their own skin; but, they are the minority. The majority of homosexuals, and other sexual deviants live lives of depression and self-loathing, even if they will deny it to themselves and the public; regardless of the over the top facade. IMO this is why we should not be promoting such lifestyles as “normal”; because they are not normal, they are in fact personally destructive. JMO
Yeah well, I follow Andy Rooney on this.
“If I think homosexuality is wrong, that doesn’t make me a bad person. It means I have an opinion.”
Then ya got a basic problem. On a lotta things a line must be drawn in the sand…..and not crossed. Without that line, there is anarchy.
castrate child molesters
Two members of the same gender having consensual whatever (and frankly, I don’t want to know what they’re doing) is not the same as the brutalization of young children. And anybody who uses this argument self-identifies as being incapable of reason.
If pedos indeed are born that way (a contention I seriously doubt, by the way) then they represent a danger to society, and should not be trusted in it unless there’s a way to guarantee the rest of the world is safe from them.
The difference between homosexuality and pedophilia is that one is a victimless crime;…
Doesn’t seem to be so ‘victimless’ to me, we’re here talking about pedophilia being included under the umbrella of ‘orientation'(born that way), aren’t we?
If that umbrella called ‘orientation’ didn’t exist, we wouldn’t be talking about it.
Oh well, so long as nobody does it in your driveway, right? F’in idiots…
If they are born that way, it’s a birth defect. They have to find ways to live with it and we should tolerate those ways that don’t involve causing harm to others. Just as with people born blind -bad luck, birth defect. It’s good that we use public funds to equip the crosswalks with audible signals for the blind, but we don’t let them drive because they will run over other people, and we don’t let them use children for their sexual gratification.
Meanwhile in Ontario, Deputy Minister of Education Levin hasn’t been convicted of anything yet, but if he was blind and he put it in the phys. ed. curriculum that students should exercise their eyes by staring at the sun I think we’d know his expert idea wasn’t actually in the best interest of the kids.
Two members of the same gender having consensual whatever (and frankly, I don’t want to know what they’re doing) is not the same as the brutalization of young children.
Well yeah, but if they’re 15 and a half, instead of 16…maybe…15, instead of 15 and a half…maybe, 14 and a half, instead of 15…maybe. And so it goes…it’s only an arbitrary number, after all.
The people who control the leftists have you right where they want you, so you’re reduced to ‘just don’t do it in my driveway’. Not in my backyard. heh
Yeah, it’s all according to plan, but who’s plan? Politics, education, religion, and economy…the people at the top of the heap.
Where’s LAS to defend peodophilia again on this thread?
He’s late already.
Well, when CWII breaks out down heya in the States maybe we can take care of this.
ur taking one sentance from my comment(out of context btw) and projecting some kind of point on to me? what is your point exactly?
Having sexual desires for children is nothing but a defect in the human brain, hard wired and there is no cure.
Anyone who can’t contain their sexual desires within their own peer group (and adult range covers a lot of decades) are sexual deviants.
Mentally defected in that area of the brain.
Should this come to pass( I don’t think it will), then; since I’m born with an strong instinct to protect children from this sort of sick harm, I will remove these predators of children and EXPECT to be given equal rights as well.
Can’t fault me, was born this way – forced buggery (for example) on a baby/child and I’ll want to kill you.
How easy it is to manipulate a child by a sexually deviant JUST to get their little thrills in their groin…they should be shot on sight. Serial rapists next.
I do love the imaginative “born this way” arguments, like, “if I was born with a violent temper…” Consent is the issue, and I quote, “Your right to swing your arms ends just where the other man’s nose begins.” A corpse cannot consent to sex, just as an unconscious person cannot. Nor can an animal consent. I will admit that I define a human body, deceased as it may be, holds more dignity to me than another inanimate object. Call me irrational if you like. Certainly we can argue about when a child can consent and we here in Canada recently raised the age from 14 to 16 years. 16 seems reasonable to me. I could be convinced otherwise, I am sure, but not to an extent that would make a pedophile happy.
As for some of the other whacky moral arguments, I especially love the guy who says that us adults should only be sexually active inside a set few decades of age and anything else is a mental illness. Well, call me a sicko ’cause I will always find young women attractive, whether I am their age, in my forties, or on my deathbed in my 90s. And if I find a young women willing to consent and my own morality does not prevent me (perhaps I am married…) then I’m gonna go for it.
“As rat says, homosexuality is between consenting adults. Children cannot consent to sexual acts, hence the illegality in terms of the law.”
Of course you’re oblivious to the fact the Homo/pedophile lobby have been working on removing the age of consent from 16 to preteen. The slippery slope argument is in believing in the resistance of legal statute to change for the worse – remember there was a time when consentual homosexuality was legally “sodomy” or “buggery” From Confederation to 1969, under Canada’s criminal law, homosexuality was punishable by up to 14 years in prison. In 1969 the law was amended by exempting from prosecution 2 consenting adults of at least 21 years of age who engaged in these “indecent acts” in private. Since then, the speed of legal change toward homosexuality has accelerated because of re-defining and readin into the law things that are either fallacious or non existant – methinks by homosexuals IN the jurocracy.
Certainly we can argue about when a child can consent and we here in Canada recently raised the age from 14 to 16 years. 16 seems reasonable to me. I could be convinced otherwise…
Yeah, there’s no ‘slippery slope’…heh
Like reeds, waving in the wind…
I’ll have to agree with those that said the slope was about to get greasy- if they quoted the bible or not – they where right.
These days I’ll take someone that hates something other than a bunch of neanderthals, and a moral code over the “nice” people who in a way scare the sh– out of me, in a body snatchers sort of way.
Paedophiles should have the same rights as homosexuals ie free to do as they please so long as it does not harm another person. And if either category of person molests a child they should get the same treatment: the death penalty.
Yes, gays were born that way. That is what all the scientific evidence indicates. Life is so unfair to you guys. I know contards are all angry that they keep losing the debate and the rest of the world won’t indulge homophobia but, you know…tough sh*t.
Actually, most of the world does indulge homophobia. It’s only because of our relative civility that you are allowed to exist at all.
“Paedophiles should have the same rights as homosexuals ie free to do as they please so long as it does not harm another person” :LAS
A non-sequitur if there ever was one! WTF do you think the definition of a ‘paedophile’ is?? – At least in your world?
Why yes, Canada’s position as a civilized society does tend to involve the social discouragement of barbarous cultural remnants like homophobia. Glad we agree. A non-sequitur if there ever was one! WTF do you think the definition of a ‘paedophile’ is?? – At least in your world?
Paedophilia implies being into diddling small children but it does not imply actual child molestation. Be careful with the specific meaning of words.
“Paedophilia implies being into diddling small children but it does not imply actual child molestation”…LAS
You are one sick bastard!
But.. but… what about equal rights for polygamists? And what about sibling marriage? Doesn’t everybody get to become part of a protected class?
/sarc
Don’t ever kid yourself that we agree. The civility is a very thin veil…
Since when does sexual proclivity become sexual orientation? Since child molesters read the homosexual PR playbook.
All child molesters should be subject to a fourth trimester abortion.
I do not care what a person fantasizes about in their head, nor do I care if pedophilia is defined as “sexual orientation”. There is always going to be one major difference between heterosexuality, homosexuality, and pedophilia and that is the issue of consent.
Well we knew it was only a matter of time. History repeats – long live Rome!
Barnyard next.
Years ago, listening to the public radio station in my college town, I heard a program about pedophiles. This was back in the 70s, so the host and the psychiatrist who were discussing this agreed that pedophilia was a problem and harmful for children. It was a call-in show. What followed were numerous calls from pedophiles disputing the charge that pedophilia was bad for children. Person after person insisted that the children liked it, and even sought it out, that they weren’t raping anyone, that they had loving relationships with the children they molested, etc. I could hardly believe it.
Now, of course, it’s just another lifestyle choice that must have the same status as any other.
This is all about having more access to our kids, without any fear of penalty or social condemnation.
It must be OK since a Deputy Minister in the current Libel government of Ontario is on board with it.
The anything goes mentality of today is mind boggling. It is easier to disassociate but that is the reason why we are where we are.
The Sex-Ed guru of Ontario is being charged with making and distributing child porn. How long before someone like him is classified as a victim of “pedophilophobia”?
No not barnyard next. Ne will be polygamy, then sharia.
How long before someone like Benjamin Levin is classified as a victim of “pedophilophobia”?
Sorry for the repeat . . . the censor held up my first post and I thought it wouldn’t appear.
Hey, no fair!
Now the rapists (non-pedophiles) are being discriminated against!
Whenever someone makes “consent” the issue, I reply by asking, “So then you have no problem with necrophilia?”
Consent sure isn’t an issue there.
Call me a dinosaur, but I think there are some things that are just messed up. The bottom line is, there is a normal. Everything else is abnormal. The moral implications of those things that are abnormal is all that is left to decide. But we have to be ready to accept that some things are just weird.
I have NO problem with pedos or whatever trying to have their way with my grandkids. As long as I’m present to dish out some Ted Nugent style corrective action and forever change their sex and sexual orientation. BOOM! Problem solved.
If you are in fact born a homosexual. What about the many in prison who turn to homosexual acts while in prison? Are they reborn?
Polygamy is often linked with religion, has historical precedent grounded in biology and produces big hetero-normative families with a patriarch so is therefore verboten. Since the LBGTQWTFBBQ crowd is an anti-family, non-traditional, mainly atheist social movement they’re allowed to make stuff up as they go along and we all must cheer-lead or be persecuted. That’s the rules.
Another useless campaign to normalize the exploitation of children and approve of a wretched evil.
Barf…more moral relativism served up to corrupt the innocents.
You call them creeps because that is what it does; ‘creeps you out’.
http://www.vevo.com/watch/weird-al-yankovic/do-i-creep-you-out/USZM20700004
Do I Creep You Out
Weird Al” Yankovic
Cheers
Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”
Actually bryceman, necrophilia would require the consent of the person who owned their body before they died. Just like we cannot use a person’s body for experimental reasons without their consent prior to death.
Not that I condone necrophilia but your argument is invalid.
As rat says, homosexuality is between consenting adults. Children cannot consent to sexual acts, hence the illegality in terms of the law. Psychologically it has also been shown to harm children.
You guys keep trying to ban homosexuality based on some slippery slope argument. You guys sound the same as the people pushing for Sharia law, you’re in the same boat as far as oppressing others is concerned.
“You guys keep trying to ban homosexuality based on some slippery slope argument. You guys sound the same as the people pushing for Sharia law, you’re in the same boat as far as oppressing others is concerned.”
Nobody here is trying to “ban” homosexuality. We just don’t want to see homosexuals as a protected class, immune from criticism. What homosexuals “do” is disgusting and unsanitary, and no amount of Leftist propaganda will alter that.
Well Forest, if you have declared the “argument” invalid, then I guess that’s that. You just can’t beat assertions like that.
I don’t know why it would be the same as using a body for experimental reasons. Haven’t the bodies of John Does and executed criminals been used since time immemorial?
Wasn’t there recently an edict out of some Muslim country that said a widower can have his wife’s body for sexual purposes up to six hours after death?
But, just to make you happy, let’s assume we had some sort of messed up kind of organ-donor card where you could place a checkmark indicating you give your consent to be used as a sex toy after death. Then that would be OK, right?
There was a time where we judged “crimes” based on the intent of the accused and not what the victim suffered. Along comes the likes of Forest, and nothing is weird – as long as consent is present. Brave new world.
Sorry…I’m just babbling. The court has already declared my argument invalid. There is just nothing that is weird or messed-up…as long as you have consent…as it is defined by Forest.
Since I said nothing about homosexuality or banning, I am going to disregard your last paragraph and assume you were lashing out at someone else.
So someone has an innate attraction to acts that are morally wrong. Welcome to the human race. Each of us has tendencies that we keep in check for the sake of others, and due to our own moral compasses. As a married man, I have lots of roads that I will not go down, even though I may have desires in that direction. Should individuals with hot tempers dish out beatings and worse and then claim “I was born that way”? We all have desires that we keep under control. It’s called Growing Up, and it tends to go hand in hand with another failing concept called “Civilization”. I know, according to “progressives”, anything involving an org#sm is protected by sacred rights.
But the people making the slippery slope argument are the crazy ones!
That’s an excellent point. We’re all ‘born this way’, aren’t we? Including serial killers, arsonists, rapists, etc… they’re just following their ‘inner self’!
“In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.” Judges 17:6
The problem with everyone following their own conscience, of course, is that people are basically evil. If leftists really wanted, they could open the Bible for a sneak peek at how that worked out.
first timer… well said
bryceman, Forest nailed you perfectly, and then you go and prove him rite. All the religious right whiners gave the “gay rites” movement a platform, and they used it very effectively. If left to their own devices they would have arrived at the same place(legally and socially) they are now, without the publicity the “extremists” got. There are those in here who would start denigration gays went the discussion was about knitting socks or something like that, so they loose in the end because they emotionalized a social issue(how liberal of them). As far as the topic goes, read first timers post, he/she nails it. It doesn’t matter what you feel you want to do, it’s what is morally and socially acceptable, and we have laws to back up these acceptable social constraints
I feel like I have stepped into a weird Twilight Zone episode.
I never said anything about gays or gay rights. What exactly did he nail me on? I only asserted that there are some things that people do that are just weird…and that consent cannot be the only standard for defining an act as acceptable. Holy crap. Are you and Forest at the same party smoking the same stuff?
And since when is something made morally acceptable only because it has been deemed socially acceptable? I would argue that slavery or running Jews out of your country are morally wrong – even if socially acceptable.
We used to have this thing called “common sense.” It was backed by a common moral understanding. And, while I am not the slightest bit religious, I must concede that that morality came from a religious source. That the religious part of it is gone is fine with me…but then on what do we base our common moral code. I say it has to be something more than simple questions of consent.
Are actions right or wrong because the law says so or do laws exist because certain things are right or wrong?
Sheesh. I’ll stop now before one of you decides that I just made an assertion about abortion.
first timer said: “Should individuals with hot tempers dish out beatings and worse and then claim “I was born that way”?”
Its fine, as long as he’s not a white male. Or a Christian.
You think I’m kidding. Sadly, not so much. Statistics on sentences given for assault vary by race. More severe for whites, less for all others.
Forest said: “You guys keep trying to ban homosexuality based on some slippery slope argument. You guys sound the same as the people pushing for Sharia law, you’re in the same boat as far as oppressing others is concerned.”
As much as it pains me, Forest has a valid point against some strains of social “conservatism”. They just want to use the government to make people do it their way. I don’t like those guys, they’re just like liberals.
However most of the people who post at SDA aren’t interested in “banning” homosexuality. Nobody cares, Forest. Do what you want. Just not in my driveway, alright?
We are however very interested in keeping homosexual activists OUT OF SCHOOLS. Kids can’t give consent, remember? We are also very interested in maintaining the meaning and -sanctity- of marriage. I have always maintained that this would be best accomplished by getting the government OUT of it, and leaving the issue entirely to churches. Its a religious thing, it needs to be decided by religious people. If the Catholic Church says one man and one woman, that’s the way it is dude. Switch to the United Church. They seen to be good with two men, or two women, or one woman and a pony, or… I don’t attend anymore, lets just say.
Inevitably the liberals of this world seek to get the church out of marriage and substitute bureaucracy. This is because liberals are short sighted control freaks who can’t stand dissent and pretty much hate everyone and everything. See social “conservative” above for comparison. Same dung pile, different side.
So, this Yank, a Canuck, and a Liberal were strolling down a country lane. They rounded a corner to see a sheep with its head caught in the fence, bleating away and rocking back and forth.
“Gawleee!” exclaimed the Yank. “I wish that it was Angelina Jolie stuck in that there fence!”
“Are you kidding?” said the Canuck. “I wish it was Shania Twain.”
“I just wish it was night”, said the Liberal.
Another example of liberals changing the very definition of things to make them acceptable; for political advantage, to the detriment of society(and those they claim to be helping).
The difference between homosexuality and pedophilia is that one is a victimless crime; but, that’s where the differences stop. Scientifically speaking, they are both deviant sexual behaviors that are a result of mental illness; and most often result in misery for the person affected. That said, many homosexuals manage to live fulfilling and productive lives, and are very comfortable in their own skin; but, they are the minority. The majority of homosexuals, and other sexual deviants live lives of depression and self-loathing, even if they will deny it to themselves and the public; regardless of the over the top facade. IMO this is why we should not be promoting such lifestyles as “normal”; because they are not normal, they are in fact personally destructive. JMO
Yeah well, I follow Andy Rooney on this.
“If I think homosexuality is wrong, that doesn’t make me a bad person. It means I have an opinion.”
Then ya got a basic problem. On a lotta things a line must be drawn in the sand…..and not crossed. Without that line, there is anarchy.
castrate child molesters
Two members of the same gender having consensual whatever (and frankly, I don’t want to know what they’re doing) is not the same as the brutalization of young children. And anybody who uses this argument self-identifies as being incapable of reason.
If pedos indeed are born that way (a contention I seriously doubt, by the way) then they represent a danger to society, and should not be trusted in it unless there’s a way to guarantee the rest of the world is safe from them.
The difference between homosexuality and pedophilia is that one is a victimless crime;…
Doesn’t seem to be so ‘victimless’ to me, we’re here talking about pedophilia being included under the umbrella of ‘orientation'(born that way), aren’t we?
If that umbrella called ‘orientation’ didn’t exist, we wouldn’t be talking about it.
Oh well, so long as nobody does it in your driveway, right? F’in idiots…
If they are born that way, it’s a birth defect. They have to find ways to live with it and we should tolerate those ways that don’t involve causing harm to others. Just as with people born blind -bad luck, birth defect. It’s good that we use public funds to equip the crosswalks with audible signals for the blind, but we don’t let them drive because they will run over other people, and we don’t let them use children for their sexual gratification.
Meanwhile in Ontario, Deputy Minister of Education Levin hasn’t been convicted of anything yet, but if he was blind and he put it in the phys. ed. curriculum that students should exercise their eyes by staring at the sun I think we’d know his expert idea wasn’t actually in the best interest of the kids.
Two members of the same gender having consensual whatever (and frankly, I don’t want to know what they’re doing) is not the same as the brutalization of young children.
Well yeah, but if they’re 15 and a half, instead of 16…maybe…15, instead of 15 and a half…maybe, 14 and a half, instead of 15…maybe. And so it goes…it’s only an arbitrary number, after all.
The people who control the leftists have you right where they want you, so you’re reduced to ‘just don’t do it in my driveway’. Not in my backyard. heh
Yeah, it’s all according to plan, but who’s plan? Politics, education, religion, and economy…the people at the top of the heap.
Where’s LAS to defend peodophilia again on this thread?
He’s late already.
Well, when CWII breaks out down heya in the States maybe we can take care of this.
ur taking one sentance from my comment(out of context btw) and projecting some kind of point on to me? what is your point exactly?
Having sexual desires for children is nothing but a defect in the human brain, hard wired and there is no cure.
Anyone who can’t contain their sexual desires within their own peer group (and adult range covers a lot of decades) are sexual deviants.
Mentally defected in that area of the brain.
Should this come to pass( I don’t think it will), then; since I’m born with an strong instinct to protect children from this sort of sick harm, I will remove these predators of children and EXPECT to be given equal rights as well.
Can’t fault me, was born this way – forced buggery (for example) on a baby/child and I’ll want to kill you.
How easy it is to manipulate a child by a sexually deviant JUST to get their little thrills in their groin…they should be shot on sight. Serial rapists next.
I do love the imaginative “born this way” arguments, like, “if I was born with a violent temper…” Consent is the issue, and I quote, “Your right to swing your arms ends just where the other man’s nose begins.” A corpse cannot consent to sex, just as an unconscious person cannot. Nor can an animal consent. I will admit that I define a human body, deceased as it may be, holds more dignity to me than another inanimate object. Call me irrational if you like. Certainly we can argue about when a child can consent and we here in Canada recently raised the age from 14 to 16 years. 16 seems reasonable to me. I could be convinced otherwise, I am sure, but not to an extent that would make a pedophile happy.
As for some of the other whacky moral arguments, I especially love the guy who says that us adults should only be sexually active inside a set few decades of age and anything else is a mental illness. Well, call me a sicko ’cause I will always find young women attractive, whether I am their age, in my forties, or on my deathbed in my 90s. And if I find a young women willing to consent and my own morality does not prevent me (perhaps I am married…) then I’m gonna go for it.
“As rat says, homosexuality is between consenting adults. Children cannot consent to sexual acts, hence the illegality in terms of the law.”
Of course you’re oblivious to the fact the Homo/pedophile lobby have been working on removing the age of consent from 16 to preteen. The slippery slope argument is in believing in the resistance of legal statute to change for the worse – remember there was a time when consentual homosexuality was legally “sodomy” or “buggery” From Confederation to 1969, under Canada’s criminal law, homosexuality was punishable by up to 14 years in prison. In 1969 the law was amended by exempting from prosecution 2 consenting adults of at least 21 years of age who engaged in these “indecent acts” in private. Since then, the speed of legal change toward homosexuality has accelerated because of re-defining and readin into the law things that are either fallacious or non existant – methinks by homosexuals IN the jurocracy.
Certainly we can argue about when a child can consent and we here in Canada recently raised the age from 14 to 16 years. 16 seems reasonable to me. I could be convinced otherwise…
Yeah, there’s no ‘slippery slope’…heh
Like reeds, waving in the wind…
I’ll have to agree with those that said the slope was about to get greasy- if they quoted the bible or not – they where right.
These days I’ll take someone that hates something other than a bunch of neanderthals, and a moral code over the “nice” people who in a way scare the sh– out of me, in a body snatchers sort of way.
Paedophiles should have the same rights as homosexuals ie free to do as they please so long as it does not harm another person. And if either category of person molests a child they should get the same treatment: the death penalty.
Yes, gays were born that way. That is what all the scientific evidence indicates. Life is so unfair to you guys. I know contards are all angry that they keep losing the debate and the rest of the world won’t indulge homophobia but, you know…tough sh*t.
Actually, most of the world does indulge homophobia. It’s only because of our relative civility that you are allowed to exist at all.
“Paedophiles should have the same rights as homosexuals ie free to do as they please so long as it does not harm another person” :LAS
A non-sequitur if there ever was one! WTF do you think the definition of a ‘paedophile’ is?? – At least in your world?
Why yes, Canada’s position as a civilized society does tend to involve the social discouragement of barbarous cultural remnants like homophobia. Glad we agree.
A non-sequitur if there ever was one! WTF do you think the definition of a ‘paedophile’ is?? – At least in your world?
Paedophilia implies being into diddling small children but it does not imply actual child molestation. Be careful with the specific meaning of words.
“Paedophilia implies being into diddling small children but it does not imply actual child molestation”…LAS
You are one sick bastard!
But.. but… what about equal rights for polygamists? And what about sibling marriage? Doesn’t everybody get to become part of a protected class?
/sarc
Don’t ever kid yourself that we agree. The civility is a very thin veil…
Muslims seem to love children too. The new frontier. Watch for the NAMBLA float coming to a Pride parade near you. Like I keep repeating, Nature abhors a vacuum and Europe is bending over backwards to appease Muslims.
http://islamversuseurope.blogspot.ca/2013/07/incest-is-rampant-in-turkey-400000.html