RANT: Aqua-beowulf puts you in an Olive Garden

[im2manly]

Cliffs:
Vox & Hashish are moving to San Francisco.

[chazzy1864]

You are reaching again...my point was being black wasn't a choice and since sex itself isn't biologically required to live anything related to it is a choice. I decide to have sex, and I decide to do it with a woman. I did not decide to be white or to have blue eyes. That is all I was saying.

So the straights shouldn't be allowed to marry, because being straight is a choice and not a biological need.

[VoxExMachina]

Tomorrow's Debate: The Age of Consent: what should it be, and why does it vary so widely.

[VoxExMachina]

Cliffs:

I'll state my own opinions, thanks.

[Farley1324]

You are reaching again...my point was being black wasn't a choice and since sex itself isn't biologically required to live anything related to it is a choice. I decide to have sex, and I decide to do it with a woman. I did not decide to be white or to have blue eyes. That is all I was saying.

I am not reaching. That is why when I ask about your statements, instead of supporting or explaining them, you either ignore that I asked or use "you're reaching" as an excuse to avoid further discussion.

You tried to bring ****philes into this. Why? Can you explain why you used them as an example?

Here, I'll cut to the chase, since you won't. You brought ****philes in because you are trying to compare gay sex, which many believe should not be illegal, with sex with young children, which almost everybody believes should be illegal. That is why you are comparing "being a ****phile" as not being a choice with being gay as not being a choice.

Here is the problem with that. Making "being a ****phile", defined as "being attracted to young children", illegal isn't what happens. The ACTIONS associated with that, which as you say are a choice, and are controllable, are what we illegalize and punish (severely punish, whenever possible).

Cliffs: The actions are what are made illegal. Why? Because they harm others (the young children, specifically, are harmed). Gay sex between two consenting adults does not harm. They are consenting adults. Your argument sucks. Get a new one.

[Farley1324]

So the straights shouldn't be allowed to marry, because being straight is a choice and not a biological need.

Chazz, will you marry me? I know I already asked TAAB, but I'm a polygamist too.

[kvk1]

Thanks Obama. You ruined the rant.

[ThickAsABrick]

Chazz, will you marry me? I know I already asked TAAB, but I'm a polygamist too.

You're reaching again.

Around.










































Thanks.

[theshoupguy]

Chazz, will you marry me? I know I already asked TAAB, but I'm a polygamist too.

Why should the institution of marriage be limited to two people?

This injustice will not stand.

[Orlando1234977]

Missed a couple days of rant. Highly doubt I'll go back to page 84 and start reading. Probably just latch on to an ongoing debate and start zingin someone.

[Drekkor]

People are born a certain way (only idiots think it is a choice.)

Depriving them of something they want because of how they were born is wrong.

lol, not exactly

The generational gap has to do with the indoctrination of our youth in public education. We are very much so a product of our environment and upbringing. We've been good at doing this for atleast the past 800 years, most of it lead by the church until recently.

The Jesuits/Christians would make a better comparison than the black/white race, it is in most cases a mental construct (persona) rather than a genetic issue. "Give me a child before the age of 6 and I'll give you a believer for life."

[chazzy1864]

NSFW BUt wonderful side boobage inside:
http://thechive.com/2012/05/08/the-r...-photos/#close

[VoxExMachina]

Why should the institution of marriage be limited to two people?

This injustice will not stand.

Actually, that's a perfectly acceptable question. The whole debate about what we "allow" and what we don't is filled with hypocrisy. If we get right down to it (heh heh), making the age of consent 18(ish) is merely a random societal convention. Disallowing polygamy is pretty random as well. Either we're in favor of people legally making choices of what type of "union" they want or we don't.

[Hishiad]

Farley you are arguing I am sharing an opinion hth.

I disagree with homosectionality but I favor separation of religion from politics on a personal opinion level, I would prefer that marriage between same sex individuals be called something different.

It is simply that and if implying my opinion allows you the ability to belittle my intelligence to improve your argument then have at it.

[ThickAsABrick]

this is getting dumb.

im done.

[chazzy1864]

No clue what the video says. I'm only 1.5 minutes in, but lawled that this was her new video:

[Farley1324]

Why should the institution of marriage be limited to two people?

This injustice will not stand.

Hey, if they are all consenting adults...why the hell not?

[theshoupguy]

Actually, that's a perfectly acceptable question. The whole debate about what we "allow" and what we don't is filled with hypocrisy. If we get right down to it (heh heh), making the age of consent 18(ish) is merely a random societal convention. Disallowing polygamy is pretty random as well. Either we're in favor of people legally making choices of what type of "union" they want or we don't.

The age of consent thing I can see being tied with the accepted age that teens move out of their parents' house, and then have to / are allowed to make their own decisions.

Polygamy, though... I don't see why not. I mean aside from the jealousy thing, and running into issues where a pack of sorority girls decide to marry an old rich guy, divorce him and steal his money from a dozen different angles. Other than that though, it could totally work. If someone can unconditionally love more than one person, why not legally/spiritually bind them for the rest of their lives*?

[Farley1324]

Actually, that's a perfectly acceptable question. The whole debate about what we "allow" and what we don't is filled with hypocrisy. If we get right down to it (heh heh), making the age of consent 18(ish) is merely a random societal convention. Disallowing polygamy is pretty random as well. Either we're in favor of people legally making choices of what type of "union" they want or we don't.

I agree. And I am in favor of people legally making their own choices.

Yes, by people I mean adults, which requires a certain age of consent.

Farley you are arguing I am sharing an opinion hth.

I disagree with homosectionality but I favor separation of religion from politics on a personal opinion level, I would prefer that marriage between same sex individuals be called something different.

It is simply that and if implying my opinion allows you the ability to belittle my intelligence to improve your argument then have at it.

No, you don't. You favor using politics (writing of laws) to define what is and is not marriage based upon your religious beliefs! Total hypocrisy.

News flash: When you support the government telling people what they can and cannot do because of your belief, you are doing more than simply expressing an opinion on a topic, you are shoving your opinion down other people's throats and attempting to force them to act as you prefer.

[theshoupguy]

No clue what the video says. I'm only 1.5 minutes in, but lawled that this was her new video:

She's cool with people wanting to marry penguins and fcking Fruit Roll-Ups.

I'd marry her.

[theshoupguy]

Religion is entertaining, but I cannot take it (or people who rely on it) seriously.

[Farley1324]

Religion is entertaining, but I cannot take it (or people who rely on it) seriously.

Too often all logic and reason simply flies out the window.

Sometimes it comes down to "do as I want or I will hurt/kill you"

[VoxExMachina]

Take away the legal advantages / protections / status of being married, and most of the issue is moot. /problem

There's nothing stopping polygamist, gay, straight, or chia pet relationships today when it comes to living together or getting their freak on.

[Engineer_Guy]

I disagree with homosectionality but I favor separation of religion from politics on a personal opinion level

Lmao you "disagree" with homosexuality?

Marriage is a concept and it's not just limited to Christians. The problem is the U.S. was founded on Christian beliefs and therefore some laws still reflect that.

Being legally married should not depend on race, religious, or sexuality. Religious views and legal rights have no business being clumped together.

If your religious views do not agree with gay marriage then your church will not marry them. That's where it should end.

[Farley1324]

Lmao you "disagree" with homosexuality?

Marriage is a concept and it's not just limited to Christians. The problem is the U.S. was founded on Christian beliefs and therefore some laws still reflect that.

Being legally married should not depend on race, religious, or sexuality. Religious views and legal rights have no business being clumped together.

If your religious views do not agree with gay marriage then your church will not marry them. That's where it should end.

But Hishiad just said that he favors separation of religion from politics...lol

[Engineer_Guy]

But Hishiad just said that he favors separation of religion from politics...lol

Sorry really only the first sentence was targeted at him rest was a personal rant

[Hishiad]

I actually disagree with homosexuality because it promotes the end of our species procreating.

[therorschach]

homosexuality

it promotes the end of our species procreating.

It doesn't. Hope this helps.

[theshoupguy]

It doesn't. Hope this helps.

It certainly doesn't directly lead to population growth.

[darinaldi]

I actually disagree with homosexuality because it promotes the end of our species procreating.

Devil's advocate: a sexual orientation that an estimated 3-6% of the population professes to be is a threat to procreation?