Do philosophical theories

[diwana]

Re: Do philosophical theories

@TLK

Incest may be, but child porn and bestiality are not a victim less crime. So you cant gel that in this example.

Bestiality also has no real victim if done ‘properly’. One has to prove if animal was indeed a victim and did not ‘enjoy’ the act.

The term which is used to make bestiality wrong is ‘animal cruelty’ by those who oppose it. But what if the animal actually did not get ‘abused’ or harmed? What then?

I am not saying bestiality is right. I am saying why the selective support for homosexuality and be against bestiality? Plain and simple inconsistency.

In regards to child porn, or pedophilia, as well as bestiality if done without harming the counterpart, homosexuality is indeed similar to these acts since the common reason to be engaged in these perverted and horrible acts is getting pleasure out something without thinking if the other counterpart is suitable for the act.

I did post a link in which there are people who do not bellieve bestiality is wrong and homosexuality is approved by them too.

Again: I am against child porn, pedophilia, bestiality as well as homosexuality.

@goodname

True that. It is always sad to see people peddling hatred and false equivalences that make absolutely no sense. How difficult is it to understand that unlike bestiality or pedophilia, homosexuality entails consent and involves two adults who actually harm nobody? It’s hardly rocket science. A person may not agree with homosexuality as a practice but it’s nothing short of bigotry to compare homosexuality with something as perverted as pedophilia, or to denigrate gays or lesbians.

Read above.

The hatred is against the act not to those who are affected by this disease.

[diwana]

Re: Do philosophical theories

@TLK

Oh yaar khuda ke waastay, tum tou aqalmand aadmi ho. Cross breeding tou oss waqt hoti hai if you already have a dog and a wolf. Two wolves cannot “crossbreed” and produce a dog

I did not talk about timeline. All I said was that these three different kinds of animals share similar characteristics enough to be grouped together.

All of these can crossbreed. Hence belong to same group. The group stayed as a group and did not change to another.

Hence no proof of evolution by citing dogs coming in existence from whoever crossbred and made dogs.

[diwana]

Re: Do philosophical theories

your posts are getting more and more hilarious... I am misguided yet you are making more illogical claims that make no sense. comparing homosexuality to pedophiia and all other horrendous crimes!?! i mean really, this has to be the world's lamest argument. Most advanced countries donot consider it a crime, and you know this very well. so many countries in europe have legalized gay marriage and thats a fact. you're giving example of china, india, pakistan where NO one has rights. you really want to talk about human right situation in those countries?? how many modern advanced countries have made it illegal? very few. US, Uk, canada, most of S.america, ALL of europe (including muslim majority countries such as Turkey and the Balkans) have all legalized it. most of the countries where it is not legal are mainly the ones that already rank very low in terms of human rights.

it's also quite interesting how these 'confused', 'misguided' countries that consider homosexuality as perfectly legal and normal, are the ones where MOST people from ALL over the world want to migrate to.. hmmm i wonder why that is.. welcome to reality :)

So why these are hurrendous crimes when real reason for these acts is to obtain pleasure out of norm?

Why selectively make these as wrongful acts when homosexuality is based ONLY and ONLY on getting pleasure out of normal or usual object i.e. opposite sex person?

Opposite sex people have their bodies made for each other. And you consistently have denied this fact due to your ignorance. This does not change the fact that:

Homosexuals are anomalous human being with completely wrong idea of what is considered compatible and what is not.

Forget about being advanced or human rights.

Those are ludicrous claims to support homosexuality.

Advanced in what way? Materialistic way? Sure. But that does not prove all ideolgies adapted by advanced countries actually are to be considered right.

Human rights? You gotta be kidding. many countries where homosexuality is considered acceptable have committed heinous crimes against humanity.
We are not discussing politics here by the way.

Learn to argue for once please. Think before you make large claims.

[diwana]

Re: Do philosophical theories

interesting that you think lesbians have anal sex. after all they are half teh homosexuals you hate so much.

also interesting you dont think heterosexuals have anal sex.

surprising no. it is you after all.

Wrong assumptions.

I do not hate homosexuals.

I never said lesbians engage in sodomy.

I never said heterosexuals don't have anal sex.

There: All of your post is thrown out in to garbage.

Now your assignment is find me any male homosexual who does not like anal sex, opposes it or has not been engaged in it. Until then my position wins fair and square.

[bella88]

Re: Do philosophical theories

So why these are hurrendous crimes when real reason for these acts is to obtain pleasure out of norm?

Why selectively make these as wrongful acts when homosexuality is based ONLY and ONLY on getting pleasure out of normal or usual object i.e. opposite sex person?

you make it seem like heterosexuals get no pleasure from their behavior??
please explain WHY heterosexuals should be allowed to use birth control since using that makes sex ONLY for pleasure. you have no answer for this because you know your theories make no sense.

[quote]
Opposite sex people have their bodies made for each other. And you consistently have denied this fact due to your ignorance. This does not change the fact that:
Homosexuals are anomalous human being with completely wrong idea of what is considered compatible and what is not.
[/quote]
what about heterosexuals who have oral sex then? how does that fit into your twisted theories?
and please get out of this ignorance, homosexuals are compatible for each other.

[quote]
Forget about being advanced or human rights.
Advanced in what way? Materialistic way? Sure. But that does not prove all ideolgies adapted by advanced countries actually are to be considered right.
Human rights? You gotta be kidding. many countries where homosexuality is considered acceptable have committed heinous crimes against humanity.
We are not discussing politics here by the way
[/quote]
you brought in politics here first of all. secondly, heinous crimes have been committed by many religious folks aswell, so lets not use that as an example of morality. why is homosexuality perfectly legal in ALL of europe, N.America and most of S.america as well? and more importantly, why is it not considered a disease or disorder in ANY medically advanced country?

[quote]
Learn to argue for once please. Think before you make large claims.
[/quote]

lol you cannot even differentiate between rape, murder and homosexuality, yet i am the one who should learn? i am not even arguing here, just presenting some facts which are too hard for you to understand I guess.

[diwana]

Re: Do philosophical theories

you make it seem like heterosexuals get no pleasure from their behavior??

what about heterosexuals who have oral sex then? how does that fit into your twisted theories? and please get out of this ignorance, homosexuals are compatible for each other.

clearly you dont believe in any! you brought in politics here first of all. secondly, heinous crimes have been committed by many religious folks aswell, so lets not use that as an example of morality. why is homosexuality perfectly legal in ALL of europe, N.America and most of S.america as well? and more importantly, why is it not considered a disease or disorder in ANY medically advanced country?

lol you cannot even differentiate between rape, murder and homosexuality, yet i am the one who should learn? i am not even arguing here, just presenting some facts which are too hard for you to understand I guess.

If heterosexuals are doing something wrong then it is wrong too. If they are engaged in anal sex then it is wrong. BUT, they do also act normally and get pleasure right way. Homosexuals get pleasure wrong way all the time.

Homosexuals are compatible to each other? Really? Lesbians with long tongues or toys or male homosexuals doing anal sex to another male? What are you talking about?

Sorry not buying your logic here.

Who told you I do not belive in human rights? Had a dream of me telling you?

Yes crimes have been committed by so called and false religious people but we are not talking about them. You talked about 'advanced' countries' stick to that.

I can differentiate among ALL the wrong acts, and you are the one who do not.

You are inconsistent all the way. You call some acts acceptable and some not despite they share same basic thought process.

You unfortunately cannot prove homosexuality right with limited and biased knowledge, not my fault.

[bella88]

Re: Do philosophical theories

If heterosexuals are doing something wrong then it is wrong too. If they are engaged in anal sex then it is wrong. BUT, they do also act normally and get pleasure right way. Homosexuals get pleasure wrong way all the time.

who gets to decide if this is right and wrong? there is no logical explanation for this to be wrong.

[quote]
Homosexuals are compatible to each other? Really? Lesbians with long tongues or toys or male homosexuals doing anal sex to another male? What are you talking about?
[/quote]
how is oral sex okay for heterosexuals then?

[quote]
Sorry not buying your logic here.
Who told you I do not belive in human rights? Had a dream of me telling you?
[/quote]
homophobia usually doesn't go with human rights.

[quote]
Yes crimes have been committed by religious people but we are not talking about them. You talked about 'advanced' countries' stick to that.
I can differentiate among ALL the wrong acts, and you are the one who does not.
[/quote]

please explain then is birth control right or wrong since it makes sex only for pleasure?

[queer]

Re: Do philosophical theories

Now your assignment is find me any male homosexual who does not like anal sex, opposes it or has not been engaged in it. Until then my position wins fair and square.

are you for real pal.. your position "wins"? adorable..

[diwana]

Re: Do philosophical theories

are you for real pal.. your position "wins"? adorable..

Have you fulfilled your assignment as I described above?

[psyah]

Re: Do philosophical theories

you just made the case for homosexuals being beneficial. they contribute to society, contribute to the next generation, and bring benefit to others.

but a couple of general trends -

1. including "brings benefit" as a requirement for "beneficial" - there is that circular logic again.

2. optimizes sustainability of the race - this sounds like you are making a case to kill off all the disabled and old people. the coldbloodedness of your "logic" to discredit humanity isnt apparent when seen with the eyes of a homo-hater though.

Peace queer

You are being obtuse ... My responses were not circular, but rather they were the context of my general point ... The benefit is not in their behaviour as homosexuals I.e. In either sexual activity pertaining to lesbians or gays... I was never questioning their contribution as people in a society for economic ends ... That part of them has nothing to do with their sexual orientation.

[queer]

Re: Do philosophical theories

Have you fulfilled your assignment as I described above?

i dont know if even you realize how many subliminal gay messages you are scattering in my direction each time you talk to me.

"my position" wins. "ass"ignment. "fullfilled"

introspection time, diwanab. they say hitler had jewish blood.

[diwana]

Re: Do philosophical theories

i dont know if even you realize how many subliminal gay messages you are scattering in my direction each time you talk to me.

"my position" wins. "ass"ignment. "fullfilled"

introspection time, diwanab. they say hitler had jewish blood.

Ignoring your sick mind.

You cannot bring any example of a gay man who opposes, denies or is against anal sex aka sodomy.

[psyah]

Re: Do philosophical theories

You are really not going to argue that, are you? Pedophilia and all others Phelias in the world can be natural and not justifiable as long as another human being is getting harmed while acting out their tendencies. Some say serial killers are born killers, they can't help themselves. This doesn't mean we should let them kill. Homosexuality involves consenting adults. No harm is done to either one.

Peace Theorist

'natural' is not defined by that what 'harms' others or not ... And it is not tied in to consent either ... One can consent to taking drugs, people go off and commit suicide or sexually there are people who are nailing their own genitalia to the walls or the doors of their houses ... Nature should be defined by what is purely tied in to the cyclical biological benefit of life. Any of these including homosexual acts or any other sexual acts that do not fit biological end result are in fact abominations.

I whole heartedly agree that we should not let killers kill ... Also consent gets a bit odd when it comes to some animals who are probably more than happy to take the lead in sexual conduct with humans ... Two consenting adults outside marriage is just another problem for society even in the heterosexual sense. I would not be considered cool for having many female consenting relationships ... Most people can't even overcome the 4 marriages ... But consent is easier to obtain than marriage which means there is an increase in sexual promiscuity if we rely on consent as a moral marker.

So rather than argue in parallel to the norms of today ... Look carefully and honestly and group the things in accordance with how they belong. Consent is an arbitrary thing made up for the law ... It is not the demarcation for what is natural ... Biologically beneficial or harmful in the evolutionary sense.

[psyah]

Re: Do philosophical theories

question for those who are against homosexuality for reproductive reasons:

please answer

what if the whole society starts using birth control? there are plenty of straight people who choose not to have children. should birth control also be considered unnatural then?

*using this 'reproductive hindrance' logic, birth control and sterility procedures should be banned because WHAT IF everyone uses it? *

will a day come when everyone wants to use birth control and never have babies? NO wil a day come when everyone is homosexual? no.

lets not get into hypothetical scenarios of "what if" when they have no logical basis. there have been homosexuals since the early humans on Earth and they have always been a small minority and will always be that way. and the way heterosexuals are reproducing, we are far far from having an 'underpopulation'. if anything, homosexuals are benefiting this over populated planet.

The 'what if' helps us define moral markers bella88 ... Total promiscuity will be harmful to society and likewise totally engaging in homosexual acts will too ... But if people remain largely devoted to a single member of the opposite gender for their lives ... Then healthy growth is possible to extrapolate after n cycles ... But for the same in either extreme is going to lead to decline.

[goodname]

Re: Do philosophical theories

@diwana

Bestiality also has no real victim if done ‘properly’. One has to prove if animal was indeed a victim and did not ‘enjoy’ the act.

The term which is used to make bestiality wrong is ‘animal cruelty’ by those who oppose it. But what if the animal actually did not get ‘abused’ or harmed? What then?

I am not saying bestiality is right. I am saying why the selective support for homosexuality and be against bestiality? Plain and simple inconsistency.

In regards to child porn, or pedophilia, as well as bestiality if done without harming the counterpart, homosexuality is indeed similar to these acts since the common reason to be engaged in these perverted and horrible acts is getting pleasure out something without thinking if the other counterpart is suitable for the act.

I did post a link in which there are people who do not bellieve bestiality is wrong and homosexuality is approved by them too.

Again: I am against child porn, pedophilia, bestiality as well as homosexuality.

Read above.

The hatred is against the act not to those who are affected by this disease.

Let me break it down into simple sentences: Homosexuality is when two men or two women engage in sexual behavior with each other. They do it consensually i.e. willingly and happily. There know what they are doing. There is no coercion involved. Both partners benefit. And no one gets harmed. Which is why their intimate life should be none of anyone else’s concern.

In stark contrast, in the case of bestiality, a person engages in a sexual activity with an animal. The animal does not give its consent. The animal does not have any say in the sexual act being performed. That is why bestiality is cruel and abuse. Likewise, in case of pedophilia or child pornography, there is clear exploitation of a child. The age of consent in most societies is 16. And any pervert who abuses a child deserves to be fully punished and thrown into the jail.

Recap: Unlike bestiality and other perverted behavior, homosexuality like heterosexuality involves two adults who do the deed consensually with each other. Because of the consent and the fact that both partners are adults and competent to make decisions, neither of the partners nor anyone else gets adversely affected or harmed. Therefore no need for hatred or vitriol in this case.

Hope that helps.

[diwana]

Re: Do philosophical theories

Let me break it down into simple sentences: Homosexuality is when two men or two women engage in sexual behavior with each other. They do it consensually i.e. willingly and happily. There know what they are doing. There is no coercion involved. Both partners benefit. And no one gets harmed. Which is why their intimate life should be none of anyone else's concern.

In stark contrast, in the case of bestiality, a person engages in a sexual activity with an animal. The animal does not give its consent. The animal does not have any say in the sexual act being performed. That is why bestiality is cruel and abuse. Likewise, in case of pedophilia or child pornography, there is clear exploitation of a child. The age of consent in most societies is 16. And any pervert who abuses a child deserves to be fully punished and thrown into the jail.

Recap: Unlike bestiality and other perverted behavior, homosexuality like heterosexuality involves two adults who do the deed consensually with each other. Because of the consent and the fact that both partners are adults and competent to make decisions, neither of the partners nor anyone else gets adversely affected or harmed. Therefore no need for hatred or vitriol in this case.

Hope that helps.

As I said earlier, I do not agree with any of the acts in question.

I made argument of why some acts are considered right and some acts wrong.

I also mentioned there are arguments for bestiality being right and places where this act is considered acceptable.

I do know what homosexuality is and what it entails. You did not tell me anything different.

What I said and asked was:

What if in pedophilia or bestiality other partner is not harmed?

The** issue of consent** also has double standard and selectively over-rated, since where homosexuality and bestiality is allowed, polygamy is not allowed despite the fact that adults with full consents are involved.

Now, I brought the issue of polygamy since I do know at least one opposite view member did say polygamy is unacceptable.

Let me simplify here:

It is not about pleasure or attraction. Since the act of homosexuality will be wrong if pleasure or attraction is used as arguments to support it.

It is not about not having choice since pedophiliacs, animal sex lovers, alcoholics, smokers, obese binge eaters, and drug addicts can and have brought same argument.

It is not about compatibility since there IS no anatomical compatibility between homosexual couples.

It is not about freedom, since a whole lot of wrong doers can claim freedom including smokers wanting to smoke in a restauant to those who may want to have incestuous acts legitimize.

**
It is about the combination of ALL factors.

Heterosexuality by all means at all accounts is correct and right act. Homosexuality is wrongful act as it can be.**

[psyah]

Re: Do philosophical theories

who gets to decide if this is right and wrong? there is no logical explanation for this to be wrong. how is oral sex okay for heterosexuals then? homophobia usually doesn't go with human rights.

please explain then is birth control right or wrong since it makes sex only for pleasure?

Peace bella88

Well you see this is how religion trumps atheism ... For us moral markers are given by God.
Even in oral sex ... Flatly in religion it is considered wrong, but concession has been made for it in some interpretations ... Otherwise it is still not considered a moral thing and never will be. the reason why it has been argued as allowed, is because it can lead on to the normal natural act as a precursor ... So foreplay for the intent of the final correct act has been given permissible status.
Again many people have questioned the morality of birth control ... Although the act is natural ... If not done for the intent of having babies is it right? However, other things such as desire and sexualised behaviour can be pacified if sexual outlets are there within confined relationships ... So the end result should be normal and within this some have argued it's purpose is to not only have babies but to pacify our urges too ... So we don't end up getting in to many situations where promiscuity becomes high ... It provides relief in a confined way ... But this is secondary ... So birth control will remain a moral issue ... And should always be looked into with caution, especially when it comes to abortion.

[Monk]

Re: Do philosophical theories

Let me break it down into simple sentences: Homosexuality is when two men or two women engage in sexual behavior with each other. They do it consensually i.e. willingly and happily. There know what they are doing. There is no coercion involved. Both partners benefit. And no one gets harmed. Which is why their intimate life should be none of anyone else's concern.

In stark contrast, in the case of bestiality, a person engages in a sexual activity with an animal. The animal does not give its consent. The animal does not have any say in the sexual act being performed. That is why bestiality is cruel and abuse. Likewise, in case of pedophilia or child pornography, there is clear exploitation of a child. The age of consent in most societies is 16. And any pervert who abuses a child deserves to be fully punished and thrown into the jail.

Recap: Unlike bestiality and other perverted behavior, homosexuality like heterosexuality involves two adults who do the deed consensually with each other. Because of the consent and the fact that both partners are adults and competent to make decisions, neither of the partners nor anyone else gets adversely affected or harmed. Therefore no need for hatred or vitriol in this case.

Hope that helps.

seriously ???

if I over smart a financial institute no one is harmed. Its pure intellectual exercise, yet in west I could be thrown in jail for life.
What you think why that is????????

Let me break it down.
Every society have its bases with which society never let any one mess with!!
For west its stability of its financial institutes.
For us its stability of family structure.

Many liberal here are in translation period as compare to pure westerners, once my desi liberals are thorough and find them selves were west is now, then I like to know their opinion no "no one harm--mutual consent " theory.

[psyah]

Re: Do philosophical theories

Bro Monk ... That was profound !

[Monk]

Re: Do philosophical theories

i know