LBGT TerrorismFollow

Judging from your half-assed logic, my guess is that you hold this "belief" because the GOP does and you need to rationalize it somehow to yourself.

Gbaji holds his positions because his GOP masters tell him to.

It's almost a perfect textbook example of a slippery slope fallacy. Do we need to have that talk about how you don't understand how fallacies work again?

You want a rabbut? I can get you a rabbit, believe me. There are ways, dude. You don't wanna know about it, believe me. Hell, I can get you a rabbit by 3 o'clock this afternoon... with nail polish.

Just to be a pedant, once again it's not illegal for people under a certain age to have sex, it's illegal to have sex with people who are under a certain age. It's an important distinction.

Lie #29381747492.

Depends. I think it's rare, but possible, that a 15 year old could consent to sex with a 35 year old. I've said that. It all depends on her maturity. I just think it's more likely that a sexually active 15 year old ******* a 35 year old isn't mature enough to consent. I don't have statistics on it, but growing up the younger sexually active girls all seemed a bit damaged already, because they had sex before they were mature enough.



No, it depends on the maturity of the child.


You don't? What kind of perv are you? A 35 year old is mature enough to know better, which is why he'd do more jailtime than a 15 year old would if it wasn't consensual.


Using your logic, I could use the african american civil rights movement to justify kiddie fucking. See how they don't equate?



No, we use legal reasons to ban kiddie *******. Sure, how people feel about it certainly comes into play, but that isn't the legal justification for it. The legal justifications for banning kiddie ******* aren't the same as the one's denying homosexuals equal rights, nor were they similar justifications for the civil rights movement. The latter two (Civil rights, gay rights) are quite similar.



I know what it's function is, just like you "know" sitting on your thumb is "wrong" but it feels so good.... (It's not wrong. We're problem solving, tool using apes)




Of what, coward?

Legally, one is considered a child if they are under the age of 18. The reason for this, is because most people mature, both physically & emotionally, by that age. For those that mature, both physically & emotionally, before the age of 18, I'm ok with them banging whomever they want & see little difference between them banging another 15 year old or a 35 year old as they can consent (depending on how young, & the jurisdiction, the parents need to consent too though). This is also how minors can get charged as adults, depending on the crime, if the prosecution can prove they're mature enough to make adult decisions.



Go fuck yourself you cowardly bitch.

I could be wrong, but I think this is the most retardedly disgusting thing you've ever said.

Seriously, you should be put down.

And this is why we're confident the reason you think homosexuality is "wrong" is a bigoted one. It's criminal for adults to **** children because children can't consent- not if they or their parent can. It isn't criminal for blacks & whites to **** anymore, provided everyone can consent. It used to be illegal, for purely bigoted reasons (gotta protect them white woman from the naggers!). In most places, it's legal for homosexuals to **** (And in the places it isn't, I'd argue sodomy laws are in place for mostly bigoted reasons).

There's zero bigotry involved in laws involving molesting children, those laws are in place to protect kids. I'd argue most laws against homosexual rights, much like the various anti-black laws before the civil rights movement in the past, are rooted in bigotry & religion while not protecting anyone, but rather treating people as 2nd class citizens, in this case, because of what they do in the bedroom & not who they are.

Cite? I can assure you "creepy" isn't mentioned anywhere in any child protection laws..


This is like the friar blaming those slutty alter boys for seducing priests. Just because a 15 year old is sexually active doesn't mean she's necessarily mature enough emotionally to consent to it. If she and/or her parents can, then I don't have an issue with it though.


Awesome. Now why do you think it should be different if they are gay?



Let's look at Loving v Virginia, where the Supreme Court struck down the miscegenation laws of the day. Here's why the judge found them guilty of it (because of the laws on the books)



Religion being the justification, right? It's not a bigoted reason (although he could be using religion as an excuse, but that's purely speculation).

Can you tell me religion isn't the primary justification again gay marriage? We guarantee equal rights for all people, of all races, & sexes, yet are doing the same thing to homosexuals NOW that we did to african americans then. And even more similarly, the argument that since both partners (the black & the white partner), suffered the SAME consequences for intermarrying (before Loving v Virginia) therefore weren't in violation of the equal protection clause in the 14th amendment is the SAME one anti-gay rights folks use to justify "one man one woman" (Gays are free to arry opposite sex partners so its equal protection! /sarcasm off)

You not liking the comparison because you are black & dislike gays is bigotry, dude.



They're not effected "worse" if they're able to consent. If they aren't able to consent, the older man does more time because he is mature, knows its wrong to take advantage of a child, & chose to do it anyway. A slutty, sexually active 10 year old could throw herself at an 18 year old & I'd argue there's no way in hell she'd ever be emotionally able to consent, even if she was physically mature & "wanted it". The onus is on the 18 year old, being he is "mature" enough to make adult decisions & know right from wrong, to not take her up on it. If he decides to go through with it anyway, he his knowingly & willingly using his advantages as an adult to fuck a child. If she throws herself at another 10 year old, he's not mature enough to consent so he bears little responsibility for it.



Yup.



Maybe yes, maybe no.



If you were really man enough, you'd just admit to your homosexual prejudices & be done with it.



Anythings possible, dude.

Why?



Fair enough.



No, it doesn't, hence the whole gay rights movement that started in the 60's & was encouraged due to the civil rights movement.



How does one "disagree" with homosexuality exactly?