Again, you're not understanding. But I suppose it's not a real problem for me. Call yourself the winner and go on with it.
Again, this wasn't a "win" or "lose" scenario. You're trying extra hard to not look like a tool. Surely you remember the "discrimination isn't inherently wrong" argument? The "Separate but Equal" counters?
Look, if you really
want to say your counter that you had brewing up, just say it. I'll play along so you can "win". You hit a new low.
Depends on the nature of relationship. If the 15 year old can legally marry a 35 year old with parental consent wherever this hypothetical situation is happening, & all parties are for it, then there may not be any harm in it (Google Courtney Stodden & let me know if you think she hasn't been harmed by her marriage). However, if the parents don't consent, or if they do & it's illegal, or if the 15 year old isn't mature enough to make those decisions (which is the case, psychologically, most of the time)- the 35 year old would be sexually abusing the 15 year old & go to jail. This harms both parties.
I stated that I wasn't talking about "7 year olds", but teenagers that are ALREADY in sexual relationships. You haven't you haven't explained how that 15 year old is in any MORE harm with the 35 year old than another 15 year old. Heck, you still haven't explained what harm.
In this hypothetical scenario, the law can not be used to support either side. That's the point of me asking YOU what YOU think. So, you can't say that the 35 year old would "go to jail" or it's "illegal for the two to be together" or "the two need consent" unless that is what YOU WANT to happen. I'm asking about YOUR PERSONAL beef with Tom (35) and Sarah (15) being together and how it is different than John (15) and Sarah (15) being together. Once you define the problem, then you create laws to address those problems.
If it's consensual, there's usually no harm in it provided the same "safe sex" practices (& some extra lube) are used. Accidents can happen, but that applies to vanilla sex too.
I was actually referring to the tearing of tissues, but lets not go down that tangent.
I answered it depends on why one thinks homosexuality is wrong & then I gave examples of some situations where people could find homosexuality is wrong & not necessarily be a bigot. I then asked you why you felt homosexuality is wrong.
You've actively not answered for 4 pages, again, because you are a coward.
I'm still trying to get a straight answer from you on your beef with a 35/15 year old couple vs a 15/15 year old couple. You keep saying harm, but you never mention what this harm is and how other relationships are immune to it. You avoid questions and answer what you like.
We've been at this for so long, I'm starting to forget how we even got here in the first place.
If you can't wait to start another tangent.... Then go read it yourself. +1