How can love be wrong? [W:713]

[Wan]

Re: How can love be wrong?

Something being not normal doesn't automatically make it bad. At one point following Christ was not normal.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

Attitudes do change with time. Sometimes they change for the good, sometimes bad. And I think the way how our society is becoming more and more tolerant of homosexuality is a bad thing.

 

[AGENT J]

Re: How can love be wrong?

Attitudes do change with time. Sometimes they change for the good, sometimes bad. And I think the way how our society is becoming more and more tolerant of homosexuality is a bad thing.

and once again you are free to have those bigoted opinions but thats all they will ever be, you bigoted feelings.

 

[maquiscat]

Re: How can love be wrong?

Did I actually say these words, "I advocate rape"? No I didn't, so why did you ask this question?

At the time of my writing, you had not yet noted that you were not necessarily talking about sex. And indeed you did seem to be concentrating on sex. And since you were asking why consent was needed, it certainly seems as if you were advocating that consent was not needed. Hence why I specifically asked what you meant by love and noted that sex without consent was rape.

Laws aren't always right.

True enough. We had laws making slavery legal, after all.

But I never said gay sex caused me harm. I am just saying that I disapprove of homosexuality. This is allowed in a free society.

INdeed it is. And no one has said otherwise. Most people, however, making the arguments you are more often than not, are arguing that such things should be illegal. So it is not unusual for us to infer this from you, at least until recently when you cleared things up.

I did not ask what bad things could result from incest or what caused it or any of that. I am not even asking about the science of it. The reason I brought it up is because I want to show that just because two people love each other, that does not make what they do normal.

But what is normal, but a statistical value? Non-statistical normal changes in society for many things. For other things simply being not normal isn't automatically bad. Left handedness is not statistically normal, but we consider it normal non-statistically. So while you may be expressing your opinion, you are also presenting arguments to support your position that are easily shredded.

Thanks for this. At least you are a step above so many other people in this thread. Some people (in real life) actually try to stop me from airing my disapproval. Grand Mal even said I needed to be "reformed". Speaking of which, does this repulse you too, or you are only repulsed by "intolerant" folks like me?

I am most replused by people who would seek to limit the freedom of others, especially if it was out of a sense of religious beliefs. Without more of a context for Mal's comment, I can only say he is expressing his opinion as much as we are. I would object should he actually advocate for you to be forceably "reformed".

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

 

[Wan]

Re: How can love be wrong?

At the time of my writing, you had not yet noted that you were not necessarily talking about sex. And indeed you did seem to be concentrating on sex. And since you were asking why consent was needed, it certainly seems as if you were advocating that consent was not needed. Hence why I specifically asked what you meant by love and noted that sex without consent was rape.

I see. Well, I wasn't specifically talking about sex. I guess when I said what I said, I had homosexual relationships in mind.

True enough. We had laws making slavery legal, after all.

I agree. And public accommodation laws are yet another bunch of laws that are wrong. Of course, this is off-topic, I realize it.

INdeed it is. And no one has said otherwise. Most people, however, making the arguments you are more often than not, are arguing that such things should be illegal. So it is not unusual for us to infer this from you, at least until recently when you cleared things up.

Personally I would never advocate for a group of people to be deprived of their basic human rights just because I am put off by what they do. And yes, there are people who actually think they should, but those people don't speak for me.

But what is normal, but a statistical value? Non-statistical normal changes in society for many things. For other things simply being not normal isn't automatically bad. Left handedness is not statistically normal, but we consider it normal non-statistically. So while you may be expressing your opinion, you are also presenting arguments to support your position that are easily shredded.

Whether I consider something to be "abnormal" is not based on statistics. I have my own criteria (which you might or might not agree with).

I am most replused by people who would seek to limit the freedom of others, especially if it was out of a sense of religious beliefs.

I am not a Christian if that's what you are thinking of. I am agnostic. I am also not trying to limit people's freedoms. I just want to be able to express my disapproval at public forums without being intimidated or otherwise shouted down by angry liberals (not saying you are one).

Without more of a context for Mal's comment, I can only say he is expressing his opinion as much as we are. I would object should he actually advocate for you to be forceably "reformed".

I respect this. I wish more people would think like you. Just because someone holds politically incorrect thoughts that does not mean we should drag him off to a re-education camp. What Mal suggested was some truly scary stuff. Like straight out of the novel 1984.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Re: How can love be wrong?

And public accommodation laws are yet another bunch of laws that are wrong.



Personally I would never advocate for a group of people to be deprived of their basic human rights

Wow, what blindness.

 

[Daisy]

Re: How can love be wrong?

A little entertainment to lighten the mood...:2razz:

 

[jwzg]

Re: How can love be wrong?

Here's a few:

The studies supporting SSA were done over a very short period of time without random sampling. Although convenience sampling is acceptable in most cases, that factor along with short time period (1-5 years old for the Farr, Forssell, & Patterson, 2010, study) makes these studies very specious for supporting SSA. In fairness, there are a lot of heterosexual couples that shouldn't be procreating either. Just be careful that the studies you cite aren't so poorly conducted that they mask serious issues (see studies in the 1960s of children of no-fault divorce parents having equal well being to those of married couples).

 

[blarg]

Re: How can love be wrong?

Attitudes do change with time. Sometimes they change for the good, sometimes bad. And I think the way how our society is becoming more and more tolerant of homosexuality is a bad thing.

you ever going to give a reason for that?

 

[Lursa]

Re: How can love be wrong?

The studies supporting SSA were done over a very short period of time without random sampling. Although convenience sampling is acceptable in most cases, that factor along with short time period (1-5 years old for the Farr, Forssell, & Patterson, 2010, study) makes these studies very specious for supporting SSA. In fairness, there are a lot of heterosexual couples that shouldn't be procreating either. Just be careful that the studies you cite aren't so poorly conducted that they mask serious issues (see studies in the 1960s of children of no-fault divorce parents having equal well being to those of married couples).

There are a million out there.

 

[Port & Starboard]

Re: How can love be wrong?

Please tell me more. The opinion of a homo is very important to me.



Haha, you can't take the fact you and your homo relationships are gross.

OMG!


Hate much?

 

[roguenuke]

Re: How can love be wrong?

When you describe a dog, you don't talk about a furry animal with 4 legs that barks?

Which could describe other animals. Those things are not what makes a dog a dog. They are simplifying answers that do not encompass all potential ways a dog can still be a dog yet not meet that criteria.

 

[roguenuke]

Re: How can love be wrong?

Yet they account for 70% of new AIDS cases (despite being maybe 2% of the population). What does that tell you?

How much of the percent of the gay population has HIV? It doesn't matter how many new cases are them. That is a matter of understanding other factors, that you obviously don't understand, including disease spread through small, isolated (in some way) populations. Homosexuality itself does not cause HIV, it also is not a cause for its spread. Other things are. Homosexuality includes people who do not have sex or do not have sex in a way likely to spread HIV.

 

[Wan]

Re: How can love be wrong?

you ever going to give a reason for that?

Well, just off the top of my head: I think by becoming more accepting of the homosexual lifestyle and culture, we could be sending a wrong message to young people/children. They might think it's fine to become gay, and they might go on to become gay themselves and this would contribute to a further decline in birth rates, which are already too low in the West.

This is just one reason I can think of.

 

[roguenuke]

Re: How can love be wrong?

Maybe I should have said "homosexual relationships". I don't mean just sex. But anyway, my point is, just because two people love each other, it does not make what they do normal. Case in point: a father having sex with his consenting daughter. Maybe they too love each other, but this does not change the fact what they do is yucky.

It makes it normal for them.

"Yucky" is a subjective feeling. And if the daughter never had any contact with her father until later and didn't know he was her father until after they started dating especially, then the only problem should be potential offspring, which could be controlled for. Otherwise there are practical reasons to not allow those particular relationships which have to do with shown to be unhealthy relationships and the high potential for both genetic problems as well as influence in the establishment of a relationship prior to that age of consent (known as "grooming").

 

[roguenuke]

Re: How can love be wrong?

Well, just off the top of my head: I think by becoming more accepting of the homosexual lifestyle and culture, we could be sending a wrong message to young people/children. They might think it's fine to become gay, and they might go on to become gay themselves and this would contribute to a further decline in birth rates, which are already too low in the West.

This is just one reason I can think of.

People do not "become" gay. They either are or aren't. And gay people can still have children. Either people want children or they don't. I'd much rather have a gay couple who then decide to have a child together than a straight couple simply having sex and making a baby by accident that they don't want.

 

[calamity]

Re: How can love be wrong?

Well, just off the top of my head: I think by becoming more accepting of the homosexual lifestyle and culture, we could be sending a wrong message to young people/children. They might think it's fine to become gay, and they might go on to become gay themselves and this would contribute to a further decline in birth rates, which are already too low in the West.

This is just one reason I can think of.

If they are gay, then we should make it "fine to become gay." Would you prefer they pretend to not be gay?

Oh, wait. Are you one of those people who believes people become gay because it's swanky?

 

[TheGoverness]

Re: How can love be wrong?

Well, just off the top of my head: I think by becoming more accepting of the homosexual lifestyle and culture, we could be sending a wrong message to young people/children. They might think it's fine to become gay, and they might go on to become gay themselves and this would contribute to a further decline in birth rates, which are already too low in the West.

This is just one reason I can think of.

People do not "become" gay. It is not a choice that you can make. It's not like I woke up one day and told myself, "Hey, I think I'm gonna like girls." That would be silly.

And so what if birth rates are declining? There's too many people on this planet already.

 

[roguenuke]

Re: How can love be wrong?

Look, I don't have a problem with you personally. Its just like I think homosexuality is abnormal. If you can grind your ***** against your girlfriend's *****, I dont see why I can't air my opinion to the public. Live and let live.

Abnormal is not bad or wrong though, as you are trying to prevent it.

Should those who think interracial couples being together in public is disgusting (which there are people who do, I knew some my age when I was in Hawaii) be able to "air" their opinion to the public without any sort of backlash on their opinion? People seem to miss that part where airing your opinion on something means others get to also air their own opinion on your opinion.

 

[roguenuke]

Re: How can love be wrong?

There are only two real concerns when it comes to incest. The obvious is the genetic issue, but that is only actually an issue if there is repeted inbreeding over multiple generations. First generation incest has an only slightly higher risk, one that is about equivalent to a woman over 40 giving birth. Secondly there is the Westermark Effect. This has nothing.to.do with actual blood relationship, but with growing up with each other. It normally affect parent/child and siblings, or those raised similarly. This has been a cause of problems in the mid to far east in areas where arranged marriages still occur. It is common practice for the young bride to be housed with the groom's family until the two children are old enough to marry. But, despite being unrelated, the couple view themselves as sibling, due to being raised together. While trying to breech the Effect can cause mental and/or emotional damage, if the pair are not together to form that repualsion of sex between them, then there is unlikely to be such trauma. Regardless, as long as they are two consenting adults, that is between them. I don't have to like it, approve it, and it doesn't matter whether I am repulsed by it or not. I am replused by much of what you and those like you have to say, but it doesn't mean I will try to stop you from saying it.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

While I agree with you on most of the rest of the post and the basic concepts behind incest being an issue, where did you get the info for first generation incest? 40% of children born from incest have severe birth defects. This is much higher than those born from women over 40. The normal risk of birth defects is about 1.4%, whereas the risk for women over 40 is only about 2.7%. It only about doubles. It is similar to at least 3rd generation incest and slightly lower than 2nd gen incest (which I believe is about 4%). I've posted these before. When you share 1/2 your genes though with your mate, the risk is pretty large for actual birth defects.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/animals-and-us/201210/the-problem-incest

https://www.health.com/health/article/0,,20411699,00.html

When it comes to incest being compared to homosexuality, the real argument is easy to make in just that incest has evidence to support us being against it, at least 1st gen incest, while there is no similar objective evidence to show for being against homosexuality.

 

[jwzg]

Re: How can love be wrong?

There are a million out there.

No there are not.

Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk

 

[maquiscat]

Re: How can love be wrong?

While I agree with you on most of the rest of the post and the basic concepts behind incest being an issue, where did you get the info for first generation incest? 40% of children born from incest have severe birth defects. This is much higher than those born from women over 40. The normal risk of birth defects is about 1.4%, whereas the risk for women over 40 is only about 2.7%. It only about doubles. It is similar to at least 3rd generation incest and slightly lower than 2nd gen incest (which I believe is about 4%). I've posted these before. When you share 1/2 your genes though with your mate, the risk is pretty large for actual birth defects.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/animals-and-us/201210/the-problem-incest

https://www.health.com/health/article/0,,20411699,00.html

When it comes to incest being compared to homosexuality, the real argument is easy to make in just that incest has evidence to support us being against it, at least 1st gen incest, while there is no similar objective evidence to show for being against homosexuality.

I would have to go.dig that source up again. I remember that as part of the research I did several years back for a similar debate. It is also when I learned about the Westermark Effect.

The actual first gen risk, IIRC, also has a lot to do with family medical history. If your family run high risk of something to begin with, of course even 1st Gen incest is higher than normal. Part of the lower risk of 1st gen is the possibility of the two not sharing any common genes. There have been cases recently where siblings, separated at birth, meet not knowing they're siblings, fall in love, marry and have had perfectly normal kids.

Mind you, regardless of what the risk for breedable pairs, it is zero for same sex pairs or where one or both are sterile. In addition, given the effectiveness of BC today, the risk of a birth defect child is greatly deminished. While most objection is "ick factor" the only real issue to contend with re:incest sex, is that birth defect risk. So any objections to non pregnancy pairings is moot. Now I know some of your arguments already. Any coersion or grooming is simply wrong and whether or not they are blood related is moot. If fact, outside of the birth defect argument for those fertile, there isn't, I believe, any valid argument that is unique to being blood related. If I missed one in my head I will be willing to entertain and discuss it.

And all of this is before we go into the ideas of legal marriage as well as laws that target legal relationships that are not blood related.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

 

[blarg]

Re: How can love be wrong?

Well, just off the top of my head: I think by becoming more accepting of the homosexual lifestyle and culture, we could be sending a wrong message to young people/children. They might think it's fine to become gay, and they might go on to become gay themselves and this would contribute to a further decline in birth rates, which are already too low in the West.

This is just one reason I can think of.

i cant quite bring myself to believe you mean this

 

[maquiscat]

Re: How can love be wrong?

Well, just off the top of my head: I think by becoming more accepting of the homosexual lifestyle and culture, we could be sending a wrong message to young people/children. They might think it's fine to become gay, and they might go on to become gay themselves and this would contribute to a further decline in birth rates, which are already too low in the West.

This is just one reason I can think of.

I want you to think about this as an argument. Because the counter is, if you are worried about a low birth rate, then we should be encouraging single mothers.


Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

 

[phattonez]

Re: How can love be wrong?

How much of the percent of the gay population has HIV? It doesn't matter how many new cases are them. That is a matter of understanding other factors, that you obviously don't understand, including disease spread through small, isolated (in some way) populations. Homosexuality itself does not cause HIV, it also is not a cause for its spread. Other things are. Homosexuality includes people who do not have sex or do not have sex in a way likely to spread HIV.

Name them, and explain why they're found nearly exclusively among homosexual men.

 

[phattonez]

Re: How can love be wrong?

Which could describe other animals. Those things are not what makes a dog a dog. They are simplifying answers that do not encompass all potential ways a dog can still be a dog yet not meet that criteria.

But they are part of how you would describe it. You wouldn't say that they sometimes have three legs. You'd say they have 4 legs because you know that's the nature of a dog.