Comments
-
@I Are Lebo, I down voted you because you get cranky like a little child just because someone disagrees with you. I don't think we should dictate who someone sleeps with, but we have the right to disagree with it. And according to your own quote it's fine for adults to have sex with children as long as the child consents.
-
@Mike Oxhuge, ahh the old child molestation argument. People who use it to argue against homosexuality have both a smutty mind and no concept of what the difference between consenting adults, and age of consent are. Children are no and do not have the same rights as adults. For both mentally sound and biological reasons. They are incapable of making sound judgements which is also why any document they sign has no real legal standing for any important matter.
-
@Mike Oxhuge, I'm asking what's wrong with you because you're pulling shït out of thin air and acting like it's proving your point. I never dictated who you can and cannot have sex for, but at the same time, rape is not okay. If you choose to have sex with someone and they don't want to have sex with you, but you do it anyway, you are raping them. That's a very bad thing. Only a psychopath could argue otherwise. Rape is bad. Secondly, at no point did I ever say anything even approaching the idea that my opinions are more valid than someone else's. In fact, I argued the opposite point. "You have the right to disagree with someone else's lifestyle". That's what I said. What I also said is that you don't have the right to harass someone else for having a differing opinion. Again stating that nobody's opinion is intrinsically more valuable than someone else's. So what are you even arguing about? Because at no point have you countered anything that I actually said.
-
@I Are Lebo, I did counter your point about you have no right to dictate who someone can have sex with. I brought up the point about an adult having sex with a consenting child. And I said who are you to judge wether a child can have sex or not? Obviously I believe there needs to be an age of consent, but my point being that children are people too, so why in your mind is it evil to say who some people can have sex with but not others? So obviously you agree that somewhere there's a moral line we are allowed to dictate for people, and yet earlier you said that we don't have the right to do so.
-
@Mike Oxhuge, no. I didn't. The law does. Personally, I think there are plenty of early bloomers who are physically and emotionally prepared for sex before they turn 18 (or whatever the local age of consent is). And if they're going to have sex it has to be with people their own age. Otherwise it's a felony known as statutory rape. I am not, and have never attempted to dictate who people can have sex with. That was never a point that I made. If you actually read my comments instead of assuming what I'm saying so you could argue against it, you would already know that. There is something seriously wrong with you. You do not have the right to dictate who someone else can have sex with, beyond rape. Having sex with children is rape. Please tell me you aren't trying to defend child rape. Because that would make you not just evil, but sick in the head.
-
@I Are Lebo, if you read anything that I said, you would know that I'm against child rape, but you keep ignoring my point. You're saying it is in fact okay for some people to dictate love but for others it's not okay. And by your own words, if someone believes that they can dictate love then they're evil and ignorant. I don't personally believe in dictating marriage between adults, my point was that your beliefs aren't as cut-and-dry as you really think they are. Another question I was raising is what gives you the right to say what's evil or wrong. Other people surely believe you're wrong and evil, but of course from your view they're just mistaken. And also if "it's the law" is a good enough excuse for you, then you'll have to admit that up until last year, gay marriage was wrong too.
-
@Mike Oxhuge, again, putting words in my mouth. I will simplify this for you, because it is apparently necessary. 1. Excepting rape, nobody has the right to dictate who can love who. 2. The definition of rape can vary slightly depending on where you live. SLIGHTLY. As in, the difference between 14 or 16 or 18 years of age. 3. Homosexual marriage was only illegal because of intolerant, evil people in the government. Law isn't automatically right. Marijuana is still illegal, and it has more reasons to be legal than alcohol. 4. I don't think the issue is cut and dry, but in general, anyone who thinks their religion gives them the right to dictate how people not in that religion love their lives is intolerant, ignorant, and an asshole. Maybe evil is too strong a word but many of them are. 5. I have the right to my own opinion. That's what gives me the right to say that people who meddle and try to control other people's lives are evil. It's an opinion.
-
@Mike Oxhuge, no. I didn't. Not once did I ever, at any point, make any claim that other people aren't entitled to their opinions. This is now the fifth time you have made this claim. Here's the thing: opinions can be wrong. You are entitled to your opinions even when they're wrong. That's the beauty of Freedom of Speech. Somebody could make the statement that, just as an example, that if a woman is dressed provocatively that they are asking to be raped. That's an opinion. It's also wrong. If you had the opinion that it is wrong for two men to have sex, it would be your opinion, and you'd be entitled to that opinion. This is where you think I say that's wrong. It's not wrong to feel what you feel. What is wrong is picketing a gay wedding. What is wrong is publicly shaming someone for living differently than you. It's wrong because it's harassment. It's wrong because it's none of your business. Who someone else loves has nothing to do with you. It's arrogance to think otherwise.
-
@I Are Lebo, but what if it's someone's opinion that it is their right to picket a wedding? I'll agree that its wrong, my point was never about gay marriage, it's about the idea of what constitutes an opinion, and whether someone has the right to have one. You seem to believe you have some cosmic power to decide what is opinion and what isn't. And since you bring up freedom of speech, you have to acknowledge the fact that picketing and protesting is a form of freedom of speech. Just as gay people would have the right to do so to a straight wedding. The biggest point I've been making is that what is different about you calling some people evil who would also call you evil? What makes you inherently right?
-
@Mike Oxhuge, I'm not inherently right. But an opinion isn't an action, it's a belief. Picketing is harassment. Difference of opinion is why we have conflict. Radical Islam believes that it's okay to murder non believers. That's not okay because it fails to consider the other persons perspective. In fact, it fails to consider that the other side are even people. It's hypocrisy, which is why I don't have a problem with calling out the evil for what it is. If I, as a Jew, led a picket against a heterosexual Catholic wedding, people would be horrified. Many of the same people who would denounce a gay wedding and picket it. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Unless you don't have a problem with people harassing you for the 'crime' of being you, don't do it to others.
-
@I Are Lebo, I agree with everything you just said. But your original statement is still an opinion, and others have their radically different opinions. But the way you presented it wasn't as if it was an opinion, but a matter of fact, which is exactly what the people you're against also do. If you want to distinguish yourself from them you should acknowledge that there's no way of knowing exactly what is really right or wrong for us.
That cop on the left knows what's up