Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 149
  1. #61
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    9,571
    Rep Power
    0
    Rep Level
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Scat View Post
    Fixed.
    What use are they if they only tempt you but can never be used?

  2. #62
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Metro East, St. Louis
    Posts
    8,000
    Rep Power
    40
    Rep Level
    7171
    Quote Originally Posted by franklin View Post
    For now I guess I'm limited to asking if there is a distinguishing boundary between male-male pedophelia and male-male adult attraction like there is in heterosexual attraction.
    Absolutely. I've read homosexuals using terms like "jailbait", there is the whole bear culture (men with lots of body hair), etc. While I hate to overgeneralize, mature homosexual men generally want an adult partner. Male homosexuals run the gamut, or course. Some of them into teens, just like some heterosexual men are into teens.
    http://lifetheuniverseandonebrow.blogspot.com/

    Isaiah 1:18 -- Come now, and let us reason together

    Any habitual action, such as eating or dressing, may be performed on the appropriate occasion, without any need of thought, and the same seems to be true of a painfully large proportion of our talk. -- Bertrand Russell

  3. #63
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Metro East, St. Louis
    Posts
    8,000
    Rep Power
    40
    Rep Level
    7171
    Quote Originally Posted by colton View Post
    Why did you answer my question with a question? Is this that Whose Line game?
    No. I was honestly confused by your answer, and was seeking clarification. It was not rhetorical. You seemed to be focusing on the sex aspect, as opposed to the gender aspect, and that did not seem to comport withyou previous positions.

    Quote Originally Posted by colton View Post
    More seriously, you and I have already gone over this at least once in my memory, and maybe even twice. I find your arguments very uncompelling. You find my arguments very uncompelling. Enough said.
    I would appreciate if you would respond to my original questions to you, with non-questions. I'll amend. Of course, if the answer is "religion" or the like, I agree there is nothig more to argue about, expect whether we should allow religion to dictate law.

    If two (possibly but not necessarily) gay men are raising a child together, being married allows them to provide better resources, better security, and better support to their family, in areas like health insurance, chronic illness, and estate planning. What better reason do you need? What better reason do you use to justify heterosexual marriage?
    http://lifetheuniverseandonebrow.blogspot.com/

    Isaiah 1:18 -- Come now, and let us reason together

    Any habitual action, such as eating or dressing, may be performed on the appropriate occasion, without any need of thought, and the same seems to be true of a painfully large proportion of our talk. -- Bertrand Russell

  4. #64
    Senior Member franklin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Drinkin haterade, ridin the hate train through hateville
    Posts
    12,751
    Rep Power
    115
    Rep Level
    29668
    Quote Originally Posted by One Brow View Post
    Absolutely. I've read homosexuals using terms like "jailbait", there is the whole bear culture (men with lots of body hair), etc. While I hate to overgeneralize, mature homosexual men generally want an adult partner. Male homosexuals run the gamut, or course. Some of them into teens, just like some heterosexual men are into teens.
    So how do psychologists draw that prepubescent-postpubescent line?

    I get your analogy with male hetero running attraction down through the female teen ages (& how ethics are relative across cultures) but have never thought or read about it with male specific homo interaction. Female changes seem so much more pronounced to me. Maybe that's just because I'm a guy, I don't know.
    No Mediocrity

  5. #65
    Admininstrator colton's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    6,144
    Rep Power
    150
    Rep Level
    10456
    Quote Originally Posted by One Brow View Post
    No. I was honestly confused by your answer, and was seeking clarification. It was not rhetorical. You seemed to be focusing on the sex aspect, as opposed to the gender aspect, and that did not seem to comport withyou previous positions.
    The sex aspect was important to you. Otherwise you wouldn't have started your scenario with "If two gay men are raising a child together...". Or so it seemed to me.

    I would appreciate if you would respond to my original questions to you, with non-questions. I'll amend. Of course, if the answer is "religion" or the like, I agree there is nothig more to argue about, expect whether we should allow religion to dictate law.

    If two (possibly but not necessarily) gay men are raising a child together, being married allows them to provide better resources, better security, and better support to their family, in areas like health insurance, chronic illness, and estate planning. What better reason do you need? What better reason do you use to justify heterosexual marriage?
    As I mentioned, we've had this exact same discussion at least once before, so this will probably be my last post along these lines in this thread.

    Your question is operating from the assumption that I think two men should be allowed to adopt children together, an opinion I do not necessarily share. So it just doesn't make much sense.

    To reiterate the point I was making, if you take heterosexual sex out of the marriage equation (something that I feel certainly *does* belong in marriage, and has since time immemorial, to the extent that having a non-consummated marriage is grounds for annulment in most states), then why leave sex in the equation at all? You might be one of the few who believe that two non-gay roommates should be allowed to marry, but even if so, most don't share that view.
    The word you are looking for is very probably "complement", not "compliment". As in "Favors and Kanter will likely complement each other nicely". Although... depending on how impressive a given play is, they may compliment each other nicely as well.

  6. #66
    Lazy Nate505's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Lakewood, CO
    Posts
    5,300
    Rep Power
    41
    Rep Level
    7437
    Quote Originally Posted by Beantown View Post
    One of my good friends growing up in California's father was a gay LDS member. He was actually on an episode of Geraldo Rivera back in the day talking about it, though I was too young to know or care about what he felt about the church. My mom knew more, I may ask her about it sometime. IIRC he wasn't much of a churchgoer but I think his mother took my friend and their siblings to church.

  7. #67
    Senior Member The Thriller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    On the Booz Cruise
    Posts
    9,443
    Rep Power
    45
    Rep Level
    8694
    I think more information and more support will do wonders for everyone involved.
    Lakers Suck.

  8. #68
    Senior Member The Thriller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    On the Booz Cruise
    Posts
    9,443
    Rep Power
    45
    Rep Level
    8694
    One of the guys on the website that the OP cited is named Ty Mansfield. He received a lot of hate mail from those seeking tolerance when he decided to get married to a woman. I think it's important that tolerance goes both ways, regardless of what your religious belief or sexual orientation is.
    Lakers Suck.

  9. #69
    Senior Member JAG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    112
    Rep Power
    7
    Rep Level
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by Gameface View Post
    Telling a gay person they can be gay all they want as long as they don't act on it is the same as telling a man he can be a man all he wants but his genitals will be removed. Tell me, men, sound like a fair bargain?
    Well, I think we can at least agree that the LDS church is fairly consistent on this issue. They understand it is human to have sexual desires but self control is one of the many values they try to teach their members. Unmarried members are taught to refrain from any sexual act until they enter into marriage and the members that cannot do this must go through the proper repentance process. So really the LDS church is not asking its homosexual members to do anything its other members are asked and taught.

  10. #70
    Oballin' BabyPeterzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,119
    Rep Power
    33
    Rep Level
    5153
    Quote Originally Posted by JAG View Post
    Well, I think we can at least agree that the LDS church is fairly consistent on this issue. They understand it is human to have sexual desires but self control is one of the many values they try to teach their members. Unmarried members are taught to refrain from any sexual act until they enter into marriage and the members that cannot do this must go through the proper repentance process. So really the LDS church is not asking its homosexual members to do anything its other members are asked and taught.
    Dude, come on. At least straight Mormons have a path to banging. Imagine never getting to make love because your eyes are blue.
    Freckle Liiiiiip.

  11. #71
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    ban tower
    Posts
    4,376
    Rep Power
    0
    Rep Level
    4763
    Interesting discussions guys. I find the angle from religious people interesting.
    What if there was a new prophet, and he was gay. I mean, let's just say there's a gay man who gay people start following as a leader.
    Kinda like Mohammad/Jesus in the middle east, Joseph Smith in Utah or Missouri or wherever it is, etc.
    Let's call him Fabulous Jesus from San Francisco. What if he and his followers establish their own gay religion, and their text includes marriage (of the gay variety). Then, would this gay religion kinda be on equal footing, since it's also a religion? It wouldn't be 'ruining' the institution of marriage any more, or would it? Or would the argument then shift to 'my institution craps on yo mama's institution'.


    Discuss.

  12.  

     

  13. #72
    Senior Member spycam1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Drinking your milkshake!
    Posts
    11,368
    Rep Power
    88
    Rep Level
    22338
    Quote Originally Posted by HeavenHarris View Post
    Interesting discussions guys. I find the angle from religious people interesting.
    What if there was a new prophet, and he was gay. I mean, let's just say there's a gay man who gay people start following as a leader.
    Kinda like Mohammad/Jesus in the middle east, Joseph Smith in Utah or Missouri or wherever it is, etc.
    Let's call him Fabulous Jesus from San Francisco. What if he and his followers establish their own gay religion, and their text includes marriage (of the gay variety). Then, would this gay religion kinda be on equal footing, since it's also a religion? It wouldn't be 'ruining' the institution of marriage any more, or would it? Or would the argument then shift to 'my institution craps on yo mama's institution'.


    Discuss.
    Well, there are religions that permit gay marriage. That's why the the Supreme Court overruled Prop 8 in California--because it was infringing on people's freedom of religion. At least, that's my understanding.

  14. #73
    Senior Member JAG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    112
    Rep Power
    7
    Rep Level
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by BabyPeterzz View Post
    Dude, come on. At least straight Mormons have a path to banging. Imagine never getting to make love because your eyes are blue.
    There are plenty of members that never get married for a variety of reasons but they are still all asked to live their life without participating in sexual acts.

  15. #74
    Senior Member spycam1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Drinking your milkshake!
    Posts
    11,368
    Rep Power
    88
    Rep Level
    22338
    Quote Originally Posted by JAG View Post
    There are plenty of members that never get married for a variety of reasons but they are still all asked to live their life without participating in sexual acts.
    Yes, but I think BabyPeterzz' main point was that the true injustice is taking away someone's opportunity to have sexual relations. The members you described at least have that, even if you're correct in that they experience the same struggle of going through life without sex due to their inability to find a spouse.

  16. #75
    Senior Member spycam1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Drinking your milkshake!
    Posts
    11,368
    Rep Power
    88
    Rep Level
    22338
    Quote Originally Posted by BabyPeterzz View Post
    Dude, come on. At least straight Mormons have a path to banging. Imagine never getting to make love because your eyes are blue.
    I don't think this comparison is valid. Although it is very clear that one's sexual orientation is not something derived by choice, you seem to be inferring that it is caused by genetics through your comparison to eye color. Just because it is not a choice, that does not necessarily mean it is genetic. That is not to say that it is not genetic either; there is simply not conclusive evidence to prove whether it is genetics, environment, or some combination of the two.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •