By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - "Anti-gay" bill passed in St. Petersburg

 

What do you think of this?

This is ridiculous, it's 2012! 73 25.26%
 
Backwards and ignorant 64 22.15%
 
This makes me sick 24 8.30%
 
I support this 84 29.07%
 
This poll is slightly biased 26 9.00%
 
I'd go gay for Andrespetmonkey 18 6.23%
 
Total:289
osamanobama on 01 March 2012
RolStoppable said:
osamanobama said:

as seece said homophobe has evolved from its dictionary defintion, to something much different. it means almost the samething as racism does now days, which is to say it means nothing, it is simply a word casual thrown out there to try to dismiss one who disagrees with you and you can not debate on the merits. its used to shut down conversation, it has little to no meaning whatsoever.

heres an example:

person 1: "i believe affirmative action is wrong, people should be viewed equally"

close minded person: "your a racist, bigot, homophobe"

person 1 "but..."

close minded person: "there is no debate, i have labeled you a bigot, therefore i win"

...

You should have used a better example, one that actually supports your point. Filling in the blanks immediately leads to a contradiction:

"I believe homosexuality is wrong, people should be viewed equally."

Yup, there's only two kinds of people I dislike more than you: Racists and black people.

i should have said "treated equally" but nonetheless i still view homosexuals as equals, and feel they have the right to lead whatever lifestyle they want.



Around the Network
Seece on 01 March 2012
osamanobama said:
Seece said:

You just need to use common sense.

Beastiality and peadophilia is against the participants (animal/child) will.

child can consent, teenagers have sex all the time, and the consent all the time. We just have set an arbitray age of 18. that means nothing. if a ten year old "loves" a 40 year old, why is it wrong for them to have sex?

Again, common sense is needed here, the majority under 16 are mature enough to handle sex (especially with 40 year olds)

furthermore, did pets give consent to being owned? did they agree to you having them? what about removing their genitalia, or having them mate? did they consent to that? im sure you support owning pets, spaying and neutering them, and having them mate, no? so if you can do all that, why cant you "love" your pet?

This is just a stupid argument, you're clutching at straws


Incest (between two consenting adults, is none of your business)

So, you think incest is fine? at least you are consistant on one issue.

Between consenting adults, ya, I find it icky obviously, but i've no reason to argue against it or voice my opinion on it.

How you can compare having sex with an animal, to an adult consenting male having sex with another (which is closer to hetro sex) shows no common sense, clearly.

furthermore, im sure you support gay marriage. So what about polygamy? say 3 dudes and 2 chicks marrying each other, or better yet, 2 brothers marry their sister, and 2 other people. is that fine too?

Yup, fantastic, imagin the after party!







 

Blacksaber on 01 March 2012
osamanobama said:
RolStoppable said:
osamanobama said:

as seece said homophobe has evolved from its dictionary defintion, to something much different. it means almost the samething as racism does now days, which is to say it means nothing, it is simply a word casual thrown out there to try to dismiss one who disagrees with you and you can not debate on the merits. its used to shut down conversation, it has little to no meaning whatsoever.

heres an example:

person 1: "i believe affirmative action is wrong, people should be viewed equally"

close minded person: "your a racist, bigot, homophobe"

person 1 "but..."

close minded person: "there is no debate, i have labeled you a bigot, therefore i win"

...

You should have used a better example, one that actually supports your point. Filling in the blanks immediately leads to a contradiction:

"I believe homosexuality is wrong, people should be viewed equally."

Yup, there's only two kinds of people I dislike more than you: Racists and black people.

i should have said "treated equally" but nonetheless i still view homosexuals as equals, and feel they have the right to lead whatever lifestyle they want.

Except to marry and to adopt children. 



Former something....

Cirio on 01 March 2012

Okay this thread is starting to go out of topic and out of hand.



Seece on 01 March 2012
Cirio said:
Okay this thread is starting to go out of topic and out of hand.


Apart from room's distasteful comments (which will be dealt with) it's actually a lot better than most gay threads.



 

Around the Network
Salnax on 01 March 2012
room414 said:
do we ask consent from animals when we slaughter and eat them? who said we can't fuck them too?

you guys are bestialityphobes


Ooh, you brought up the omnivore's dilemna!

Long story short, the current resolution in our society goes like this: eating animals is okay provided we're the chief reason they're alive AND we give them a fairly humane existence. Even when we slaughter animals, we try to do it painlessly. Basically, both sides get something out of the arrangement. We give pigs life by raising them in farms, they give us life by becoming bacon. It's sort of a bargain. Fucking the pigs in this case would be a violation, since it goes against the whole "humane" thing.

In case you couldn't guess, I take everyday activities in my life seriously.



My friend is a Vtuber, check him out.

osamanobama on 01 March 2012
Seece said:
osamanobama said:
Seece said:

You just need to use common sense.

Beastiality and peadophilia is against the participants (animal/child) will.

child can consent, teenagers have sex all the time, and the consent all the time. We just have set an arbitray age of 18. that means nothing. if a ten year old "loves" a 40 year old, why is it wrong for them to have sex?

Again, common sense is needed here, the majority under 16 are mature enough to handle sex (especially with 40 year olds).

im guessing you meant people under 18 ARENT mature enough? anyway what about 16 and 17 years old, why have some arbitrary age. So because you feel those under 16 cant make that decision, that it is wrong? Why stop people from loving, because you feel it is wrong, people under 16 have sex all the time and get pregnant, im guessing you feel that is wrong to right?

furthermore, did pets give consent to being owned? did they agree to you having them? what about removing their genitalia, or having them mate? did they consent to that? im sure you support owning pets, spaying and neutering them, and having them mate, no? so if you can do all that, why cant you "love" your pet?

This is just a stupid argument, you're clutching at straws

No its not, and all you are doing is proving you cant come up with a valid reason why beastility is wrong, while things like homosexuality is right. Why do we get to kill, own, eat, remove genitalia, mate animals, yet not have sexual relations with them?


Incest (between two consenting adults, is none of your business)

So, you think incest is fine? at least you are consistant on one issue.

Between consenting adults, ya, I find it icky obviously, but i've no reason to argue against it or voice my opinion on it.

good, you are consistant on something.

How you can compare having sex with an animal, to an adult consenting male having sex with another (which is closer to hetro sex) shows no common sense, clearly.

furthermore, im sure you support gay marriage. So what about polygamy? say 3 dudes and 2 chicks marrying each other, or better yet, 2 brothers marry their sister, and 2 other people. is that fine too?

Yup, fantastic, imagin the after party!  









Cirio on 01 March 2012
Seece said:
Cirio said:
Okay this thread is starting to go out of topic and out of hand.


Apart from room's distasteful comments (which will be dealt with) it's actually a lot better than most gay threads.

So far it is. But typically when someone throws in unrelated topics like beastiality and inscest in gay threads, things go out of control fast.



Seece on 01 March 2012
osamanobama said:
Seece said:
osamanobama said:
Seece said:

You just need to use common sense.

Beastiality and peadophilia is against the participants (animal/child) will.

 

im guessing you meant people under 18 ARENT mature enough? anyway what about 16 and 17 years old, why have some arbitrary age. So because you feel those under 16 cant make that decision, that it is wrong? Why stop people from loving, because you feel it is wrong, people under 16 have sex all the time and get pregnant, im guessing you feel that is wrong to right?

Because it's the law and they can't base things on a case by case basis if the law didn't exist.


No its not, and all you are doing is proving you cant come up with a valid reason why beastility is wrong, while things like homosexuality is right. Why do we get to kill, own, eat, remove genitalia, mate animals, yet not have sexual relations with them?

I don't need to have an argument for it, 2 men having sex is closer to a man and a woman having sex than a man and an animal having sex. It doesn't even need an argument from me. Like I said, you're desperately clutching at straws.

 











 

Seece on 01 March 2012
Cirio said:
Seece said:
Cirio said:
Okay this thread is starting to go out of topic and out of hand.


Apart from room's distasteful comments (which will be dealt with) it's actually a lot better than most gay threads.

So far it is. But typically when someone throws in unrelated topics like beastiality and inscest in gay threads, things go out of control fast.

If they want to get themselves banned making stupid comparisons so be it.