Potemkin wrote:Then you should know that Joseph did not become pharaoh of Egypt.
Then what did he become?
DanDaMan wrote: And there is no difference between homosexuality and pedophiles when homosexuals argue for rights based on a platform that they were "born that way".
Actually, only homosexuals and sexual orientation variants argue they are born that way and for good reasons because they are born that way. Pedophiles don't, many pedophiles become like that for psychological reasons, and they need help, if not sterilization. Many become pedophiles because they were sexually molested, had a mental illness of sorts, or were sexually deprived for too long (becuase of abstinence for years) like in the cases of some priests.
Telling me pedophilia is illegal doesn't mean much when sodomy was illegal too 30 years ago.
It's best not to use sodomy, its still illegal in some states, and it no longer means gay sex in those states. I just happen to live in one of the states that has sodomy as gay rape and not homosexual sex.
And it usually is used to mean butt raped, and can happen to girls as well. So in other words, sodomy in the sense it is used in my state, can also be heterosexual.
And to clarify... child molesters can also be homosexual.
Duh........
The majority rape little girls, and they are heterosexual......
Case in point.. the priests were homosexual pedophiles.
There is also a chance they were straight. Men in prison were noted to have changed to gay simply for being sexually deprived for so long that they went after everything that moved. It is not a gay issue, its a mental illness caused by mental issues going on in your head causing changes.
Godstud wrote: Yes, and some priests were heterosexual pedophiles.
Pedophilia is wrong regardless of sexual orientation.
Exactly right.
DanDaMan wrote: And to do so would mean pedophiles "born that way" are equals to homosexuals.
No, because that would be them lying. Pedophiles aren't born that way, and all had serious psychological issues that made them become that way. As for being equals to homosexuals, that is like me saying that you are like pedophiles because you were born heterosexual.
[]The difference is that adults can give consent, children can't. That's why one is alright and the other isn't.[]
For arguments sake..OK.
Aside from that infraction of the law can pedophiles have access to existing child pornography?
What would anyone want with that? There is a huge difference between child pornography and homosexuality. Trust me. I can explain the difference.
The difference, pedophilia and child pornography exploit and harm children, and whether they are born that way or not is truly irrelevant, because homosexuality exploits and harms no one.
Laws are meant to protect people, that is why they made child abuse (such as pedophilia and porn of children) illegal. homosexual and bisexual sex harm no one. They have no victoms. Just rape, child abuse and other abuse. That is why its no longer illegal to have those kinds of relations. Not because of any other reasons.
What you are saying is that since I was not born a soda drinker, and since its far less natural to drink soda than to have homosexual sex, that I should not drink it? If not, the "born that way" arguement is only a side thing, it has nothing to do with homosexuals and bisexuals wanting to live their lifestyle, it only is an answer to the question "how did you get that way?"
TheClockworkRat wrote: Dude. What the fuck?
You never cease to surprise me with hilariously fucked up ideas of Liberalism.
And I, Cheney, and other conservatives are exactly why he is wrong thinking that this is just "Liberalism".
I am not a Liberal by any stretch of the imagination, and since he is calling me a liberal by supporting homosexuality, why even bother with what he said?
I agreed with DDM at times when it came to economics, but once you start getting into social issues, its hard to agree, if not impossible.
Todd D. wrote:[]Homosexuality does not have a victim.[]
More appropriately, it doesn't have a victim that didn't consent. That doesn't mean that it's "victimless", any more than one can say that Heroin use or Prostitution is "victimless", when of course neither are.
Victom:
1 : a living being sacrificed to a deity or in the performance of a religious rite
2 : one that is acted on and usually adversely affected by a force or agent <the schools are victims of the social system>: as a (1) : one that is injured, destroyed, or sacrificed under any of various conditions <a victim of cancer> <a victim of the auto crash> <a murder victim> (2) : one that is subjected to oppression, hardship, or mistreatment <a frequent victim of political attacks> b : one that is tricked or duped <a con man'
And how does this tie into homosexuality victimizing others?
Godstud wrote: [] What else can be the goal of teaching our children that in our schools if not for access to sexually educated children?[]
Ummm to prevent teen pregnancies which are so damned common despite what the great religions preach? Religion doesn't seem to be doing anything, so education is the next step. How do you read this sort of crap into things? Liberalism is not about hurting children. Freedom to hurt someone is something nobody wants, regardless of ideology.
Why bother? You aren't going to get across to him. He's hopeless.
DanDaMan wrote:[]Ummm to prevent teen pregnancies which are so damned common despite what the great religions preach? []
Then why does Obama think five year old children need sex ed in the video below?
Why would you be against teaching 5 year olds the difference between bad touch and good touch? To not go with strangers and whatnot? That's what sex education in that age consists of. Don't know any conservatives that wouldn't teach their children that if their school didn't, except pedophile ones but they aren't against pedophilia.
As for NAMBLA, never heard of it prior to today. And if they are for pedophilia being legalized if "consentual", I bet most homosexuals, bisexuals and most of everyone would disagree with legalizing it so it wont happen, dont worry.
Godstud wrote: I notice they cut Obama off in the video and don't let him continue to finish his statment. Propaganda, pure bullshit and taking what people say out of context.
As always.
DanDaMan wrote: A world with no morals.
Morals are social constructs made by people and can be destroyed by people. It's not a world without morals that's coming. Some people think what used to be moral is immoral. Take for instance the killing of homosexuals, that was seen as moral and as an honor killing, and in some parts of the world it still is. But many others see that as immoral. And I see all oppression as immoral. Your morals are yours alone, and they are going to be a fossil someday.
As for liberal's education system, trust me, this is not a liberal vs. conservative issue, and besides the fact that many gays and bis are conservative, there are as many conservatives as there are liberals that support LGB rights, I am sure. Our former vice president, Dick Cheney, he is for gay marriage. Ron Paul is for letting people make their own decisions and for getting government out of the marriage buisness. If the government stopped being in charge of it, then do you realize how many weddings would be performed for them? There is no government limit. They can marry then. Though he is a wimp and wants states to decide, I say keep the government out all together.
Trust me, your (mix of conservatives and liberals) side that wants to stop this (conservative and liberal) agenda, is on the wrong side of history and on the losing side.
Godstud wrote:[] Contrary to what you might think in your blatant right wing bias and conservative extremism, []
That is a controversial part of this, it's not just conservatives, he is with Obama on this one. DDM agrees with Obama that gays shouldn't marry, but disagrees with neocons like Cheney who say otherwise. Why use Obama and Cheney. One is a extreme neoliberal and the other an extreme neocon. Trust me, its just christian and other religious extremists, no different than Bin Ladin and those we are fighting abroad. Except, they kill with guns instead of suicide bombings.
While Obama isn't part of that crowd, DDM agrees with the liberal side that wants a more peaceful ban on this stuff. while the same group on the right wants to compete with islamic extremists like the Taliban.
DDM, most liberals aren't raving lunatics, but normal people who are, probably, more concerned about morals than you. If you took a few moments to actually discuss things with liberals on this forum instead of falling back on your tired Glenn Beck rhetoric, you might actually discover this. There are extremist liberals, but they are the minority. As in the cases with most minorities, they tend to be the loudest and most noticed.
And that minority is what DDM has most in common with, the liberal Minorities that think that gay marriage should be illegal but not do it violently.
Like Obama, he doesnt want to legalize gay marriage, he wants what many conservatives want, same sex "unions"/"partnerships"
DanDaMan wrote:[]Regarding the relationship between pedophilia and homosexuality, there is none. []
Sure there is. Pedophiles are born that way too and deserve equal protections and rights like homosexuals. []
Ummm.......no. First off, cite where you find that you are born a pedophile?
Also, that is like saying you are born mentally ill so you should be able to go crazy and not take drugs because you are born that way and its the voices that make you do bad things.
No one is victomized by homosexuality itself, just rape and pedophilia are the sexual things that cause victims.
And just because homosexuals and bisexuals are born the way they are, it doesn't justify their lifestyle. What justifies their lifestyle is that it is harmless, pleasureful, and is a great thing for them. That is how they choose to live their life, the way they were born to live it, because it is pleasureful. But that is not their justification, the justification is that there is nothing wrong with it.
One cannot discriminate one deviance from another just because it's illegal.
Except when one violation of the cultural norm is harmful and the other isn't.
I am a social deviant because I am pagan. Paganism is a social deviance, it violates the norm of being christian. It harms no one, homosexuality is on the side of the spectrum that paganism is on, and not on the same side as pedophilia.
Laws aren't meant to prevent social deviance, just legal deviance. so in this regard, homosexuality is not a deviance.
See... this is what happens when deviants are given rights...
[]Next on Senate agenda? 'Pedophile Protection Act'
'Hate crimes' law definitions would protect 547 sex 'philias'
Philia means love in greek, pedo- meaning child. There is a difference between the philias, and as for protecting pedophiles from being hated on, well that's not a bad thing. While certainly I am not for what they do, and I want them to be castrated humanely and prevented from being around children, I wouldn't want things happen to them that don't fit the crime.
Now to the law which is irrelevant to pedophilia:
Posted: May 04, 2009
9:08 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
The leader of a pro-family organization says families across the nation need to contact their U.S. senators now to try to derail a legislative plan that already has passed the U.S. House and is being awaited by President Obama – after a Democrat confirmed it would protect "all 547 forms of sexual deviancy or 'paraphilias' listed by the American Psychiatric Association."
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=97115
[]
Paraphilia not pedophilia. You are a heterophile, so what do you care?
Nice playing with words, but an epic failure to realize what the bill was about. It was moreless against hatecrimes.
O yeah, and my likeing african american women is paraphilia, it deviates from the normal white male to white female philia, and recently in my state someone got killed for that heterophilia. So I really really support this law. You may just be a heterophile who likes white women, but there are alot of deviances from that norm.
By the way, heterophile means the same thing as homosexual, they just said it so they don't sound strange by saying sexualities instead of philias. Why? I really don't know and don't care.
Understand that the fight for gay rights is the fight for all forms of sexual deviants. PERIOD.
When lawmakers make a law to protect a class of citizens they must protect all within that class. That is why pedophiles would be protected too.
Why are you against interracial sex? what's wrong with that? That's a sexual deviance, and a paraphilia. Well maybe its not considered a paraphilia but it can be.