Is this the new blasphemy?
There is nothing more to discuss about homosexuality, it has been discussed over and over thousands of times and it’s the same old story every time.
I was using it as an analogy, not trying to start a whole new debate or have people discuss their sexual experiences.
It’s an insulting, irrelevant analogy that holds no merit
We know you can…
“You are bothering me right now. I came here to discuss drugs, made a comparison to how sodomy went from being a criminal offence to protected by law, and now you are coming out of the closet and going on about homophobia and gay rights. This is totally off topic, and I don’t want to hear about it.“
I also talked about my sexual experience with a woman… You only picked up on the homosexual experience, stated “don’t want to hear this”
Which is fine. But somebody did that whether you wanted them to or not. The point is not to say “I shouldn’t have to read that” it’s to not respond if you don’t want it discussed.
It was more as if he was stating this shouldn’t have occured
Anal sex is a common occurrence between straight and homosexual couples now… A sex act between consenting adults shouldn’t be illigal.
The comparison between raping kids and being gay was what got to me though
3.5% of the US populace is gay/bisexual. I find it incredibly insulting to say all these are people (about 8 million) are no better than those who rape children/stick their dick in animals…gay people aren’t savages on the basis of being homosexual
Some gay people are savages, just as some straight people are savages
It is relevant for the reasons I discussed before. Now you are trying to start an argument about an argument, which just doesn’t make sense.
I didn’t want to hear about that either, but it was the gay one you keep going on about.
I know you are but what am I?
Nobody said anything about raping kids except you
No… I mentioned it once, then again after you made an “we don’t need confessions on here”… So twice… I didn’t go on about anything besides you’re discriminatory ideologies
Uhuh
By pedophelia I assume you mean having sex with children rather than the mere attraction to given we were talking about why consensual sex between two adults should be made illigal
You’re still going on about it now, and you said repeatedly that you are intolerant of people who don’t approve of homosexuality.
I am intolerant of those who openly discriminate against against it
You can dislike it… But make an analogy between same sex interaction and sticking my dick in a dog/horse/child and I’ll get pissed off
It’s like trying to defend disliking muslims, Jews on the basis of their religion
Non-penetrative bestiality was legalized in Canada a few years ago.
Here are some people fighting for the right for grown men to have sex with little boys:
Where do you draw the line?
Good God… What the fuck, I saw this in South Park
I thought it was a joke. Neurologically a child can’t really consent… A grown man can
Secondly, children typically don’t have adequate libido to want sex unless groomed prior to puberty. Even at which case one can’t consent to sexual interaction with a grown man/woman prior to say the age of 16… At least that’s what it is here… (immature, easily open to manipulation etc)
In Aus an organisation like NAMBLA would be shut down quickly
That is disgusting… I don’t accept this
An animal can’t consent… I consider the bring of my argument to be on the basis of choice and consent.
So which is it? You want to discuss drugs and you shouldn’t have to read anything that offends your senses or you want to discuss this. The dude tried to get back on topic and you didn’t let him. Now you’re determined to discuss items you said you weren’t interested in and that you shouldn’t have to read about.
@chris_ottawa if you want a truce can be called… We will drop the entire homosexual subtopic and we can talk about drug law/consequence of said law
Or you can leave if you so wish
Once again
What do you propose we realistically should do to curb and/or minimise harm induced via these pills.
I’m tempted to actually buy a few test kits for the next party I go to… Ask to test the samples my friends/peers have on them. I’m sure the results would be interesting… Perhaps it would even convince some to throw out the pills!
Then again if all the samples come out as being MDMA I wouldn’t be surprised either. Purity has been rising as of lately… To the extent that pills are coming out with MDMA… but 4x the specified dosage… Given say 6-20x rec dose is typically enough to overdose this can stem dangerous for those who take large amounts.
@H_factor do you want in on this convo lol
Honestly I don’t have great knowledge on a lot of the drug debate. Not something I follow too closely. In general I would say a balance needs to be struck between penalties and free for all. I’d prefer we focused on treating addiction as the health problem it is and not simply lock up a lot of people for the crime of being addicted. I do think at the minimum it would be far cheaper. Might not be quite as profitable though for the people who make good money off prison. For them treatment simply doesn’t pay well.
@unreal24278 I’m not sure you got the post in the other thread in which I recently got jammed up with my time and that I’d like to answer them when I get a chance. To answer your question of why I became more conservative (though I don’t like that word much) it is simply because I’ve witnessed enough of some behaviors in my life to see where it goes nowhere and in some cases leads to death and severe pathologies. And they’re not effectively dealt with by simply individuals not partaking in them or “turning off their TV/computer/radio” because they “don’t have to listen/watch/use” or “controlling their kids”.
Anyway, a said twice already in PWI, whether your way or my way is right is right or wrong, getting a certain groups way is a matter of force and imposing will on others. That is, if you want certain drugs legalized, then powerful people will have to get that done for you, and force everyone else to deal with that legalization. The same goes for what I want socially and politically too.
And I’ve often seen much talk about Islam when speaking of rights or lack thereof, especially when speaking of women’s rights and female subordination while people completely overlook the environment in which Islam was founded. That is, a brutal, low-trust environment in which there were scarce resources and short lives. People can say whatever they want while living a comfortable life in a high-trust society in 2020, but if they wanted to survive on the Arabian Peninsula on a desert in the 7th century I doubt They would be playing Mr. Nice Guy!
Inb4 “are you saying you sympathize with strict Islam?” No, I’m talking context.
If what they have to deal with is being offended, I don’t have much sympathy for them. I don’t count being offended as an actual harm.
This is BS IMO. This is akin to rationalizing slavery in the US 200 hundred years ago. We now realize people had some fucked up thinking back then, but does not justify the actions they took they took on black people.
Context provides the rationalization, it doesn’t make the action correct. With what they know now they should change course.
Many have, while some haven’t. I can’t see any rationalization for slavery in any context Besides inhumane people wanting to profit even if there’s mistreatment of people.
Edit: Low-trust societies still exist in this world, many actually. Can people imagine themselves and what they’d rationally do in these societies? Say one lives in a society in which unrelated men aren’t to be trusted and stranger men don’t feel it’s wrong to violate unchaperoned women. Would he feel comfortable with his woman walking around in Gymshark pants?
Personally I’m grateful I don’t have to live like that.