Guest MattP Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Love is love eh Windsor? Nothing like a teenager being buggered to within an inch of his life.
Windsorfox Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 What about Lesbians? Rug munching is obviously ok? Anyway, like Furtive says, someone just think of the children!
leicsmac Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Age of consent (whether hetero or homosexual) should remain at 16, but that's another debate entirely.
Windsorfox Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Why should it be 16 though? I'm sure a fair few of us got our nuts wet before we were 16.
Rincewind Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 I also agree with some previous posters about gays bringing up kids. What chance do the kids have to develop their own opinions. If people want to be gay fine but they should be allowed to develop normally first without being brought up and brainwashed into thinking something unnatural is in fact normal. I think that could be said by many upbringings. People tend to gain their views from their surroundings and people they grow uo with. Religion, prejudices and political views. They are either 'brainwashed' from an early age or develop when with friens at school or in the workplace. I would say that with a mixed couple, be it religion, race, politics or sex their would be more free will as to how the child develops and they would have a choice and free will of their own.
FurtiveFox Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 What about Lesbians? Rug munching is obviously ok? Anyway, like Furtive says, someone just think of the children! The problem is the wrong kind of people are thinking of the children. Jimmy Saville anyone? In the old days what gays there were just lived their lives quietly. We now live in a heathen world.
indierich06 Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 I'm not even going to touch any of this shit, I'm done with you ****ing neanderthals, you've got to be on a wind-up. Ta-ta for now.
The Doctor Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 The big debate should be the age gay sexual consent. Teenage years can be very confusing and getting into something trendy without being a fully devolved person can have far reaching consequences. I'd go as far as to say the age of consent should be 25. Give our youngsters time to breath away from sexual predators before plunging into an alternative lifestyle. What? So, all gays are sexual predators eh? Bullshit. Oh, and your sexuality is in your genetics, it has nothing to do with being trendy.
FurtiveFox Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Some would argue AIDS is God's way of saying there are certain things you really shouldn't be doing. Personally I think this is a trifle severe but can understand the viewpoint.
leicsmac Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Why should it be 16 though? I'm sure a fair few of us got our nuts wet before we were 16. Good question. Guess you could apply some sort of proportional rule regarding age...two 15-year olds shouldn't get a criminal record for getting down to it, but a 40-year old going after a 15-year old is clearly wrong. Problem with that is who decides what the proportional rule should be and how far does it extend? Anyway, we're veering off topic here.
FurtiveFox Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 What? So, all gays are sexual predators eh? Bullshit. Oh, and your sexuality is in your genetics, it has nothing to do with being trendy. Without wishing to be patronising you are a tad naive. Of course in a large number of cases there is a degree of it being trendy as all of a sudden something that was previously now taboo now isn't and that will attract impressionable, vulnerable young people.
The Doctor Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Some would argue AIDS is God's way of saying there are certain things you really shouldn't be doing. Personally I think this is a trifle severe but can understand the viewpoint. And those people would be morons. AIDS is a result of the HIV, which can be transmitted by blood transfusions, kissing or really any exchange of bodily fluids - so, unless you want to say we shouldn't kissing (which, btw, is how we find a good choice of mate) then it's a ****ing retarded view-point.
Windsorfox Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Good point General, You can't tar all people with the 'jingle jangle' brush. People are always going to be small minded on this subject, it's always going to be open to debate.
The Doctor Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Without wishing to be patronising you are a tad naive. Of course in a large number of cases there is a degree of it being trendy as all of a sudden something that was previously now taboo now isn't and that will attract impressionable, vulnerable young people. Bullshit - it's nothing to do with being trendy, your sexuality is based within your genetics. You can no more choose to be gay than you can to be black, or blonde. So it won't attract young people, at most it'll make young people in the closet (so to speak) more willing to be open about their orientation.
FurtiveFox Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 And those people would be morons. AIDS is a result of the HIV, which can be transmitted by blood transfusions, kissing or really any exchange of bodily fluids - so, unless you want to say we shouldn't kissing (which, btw, is how we find a good choice of mate) then it's a ****ing retarded view-point. AIDS is far more prevalent in the gay population. For those with religious convictions it could be a compelling argument. Unfortunately it does not appear to be one you are open minded to.
FurtiveFox Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Bullshit - it's nothing to do with being trendy, your sexuality is based within your genetics. You can no more choose to be gay than you can to be black, or blonde. So it won't attract young people, at most it'll make young people in the closet (so to speak) more willing to be open about their orientation. Indeed and subject to the attentions of vile sexual predators who capture them when they are impressionable and could easily just be going through what would otherwise be a passing stage. The genetics argument is very convenient.
Leicester Piggott Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Some would argue AIDS is God's way of saying there are certain things you really shouldn't be doing. Personally I think this is a trifle severe but can understand the viewpoint. Fine, until someone (me) points out that God doesn't exist and is a human construct. There are several ways of looking at it. If we consider evolution and the progress of some species over others, humans have flourished due to our ability to adapt to our surroundings, solve problems, innovate and to continue to reproduce. If heterosexuality were to be wiped out, the human race wouldn't last very long. This is an extreme viewpoint, but moving it away from mumbo-jumbo, what someone wrote down in a book thousands of years ago and decided to be gospel, in to an area of established scientific fact, homosexuality goes against the grain somewhat. It doesn't bother me though and it doesn't affect me, but if we're going to look at something objective to measure this against or consider, why not science as opposed to the inconsistent and ridiculous ravings of 'christians' 2,000 years ago?
Windsorfox Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Don't forget Chimps, they started all this AIDS stuff.
Leicester Piggott Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Bullshit - it's nothing to do with being trendy, your sexuality is based within your genetics. You can no more choose to be gay than you can to be black, or blonde. So it won't attract young people, at most it'll make young people in the closet (so to speak) more willing to be open about their orientation. I don't think you are 'born' gay and until someone can show me a 'gay' gene, I won't believe otherwise. You compare it to being black or having blonde hair. These are clearly genetic traits! It's like saying I can't choose to be a Leicester City fan anymore than I can choose to be a Caucasean male.
FurtiveFox Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Don't forget Chimps, they started all this AIDS stuff. Gay chimps to gay humans? Was this all started by bestiality? Would explain a lot.
Windsorfox Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 If heterosexuality were to be wiped out, the human race wouldn't last very long. How do you come to that conclusion?
Leicester Piggott Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 If heterosexuality were to be wiped out, the human race wouldn't last very long. How do you come to that conclusion? I'm not going to spell it out for you. If you are unfamiliar with the human method of reproduction, we are at two different intellectual levels and you need to spend some time learning about the birds and the bees. I knew reading this thread was a mistake. Jumped up nobber.
Windsorfox Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 'Jumped up nobber'?? That's a bit un called for.
FurtiveFox Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 I'm not going to spell it out for you. If you are unfamiliar with the human method of reproduction, we are at two different intellectual levels and you need to spend some time learning about the birds and the bees. I knew reading this thread was a mistake. Jumped up nobber. Birds and bees? More bestiality. Where will it all end?
leicsmac Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 I'm not going to spell it out for you. If you are unfamiliar with the human method of reproduction, we are at two different intellectual levels and you need to spend some time learning about the birds and the bees. I knew reading this thread was a mistake. Jumped up nobber. The majority of people will remain heterosexual as they are that way inclined. The human race will continue to perpetuate. And there is more freedom of choice for people to live their lives with a partner, irrespective of gender. What's the downside here?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.