The Forum > Article Comments > Gay rights activists deny our moral agency > Comments
Gay rights activists deny our moral agency : Comments
By Shimon Cowen, published 10/8/2016According to this traditional understanding of the human being, homosexuality does not define the essential dimension – which is the soul or conscience – of any person.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Page 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- ...
- 26
- 27
- 28
-
- All
Posted by interactive, Thursday, 11 August 2016 2:18:47 PM
| |
ttbn,
I don’t “merely” provide “online references” either (you say that is if they lose their value when they’re not on paper). <<…you merely list online references (endlessly, if you don't mind me saying it).>> Why, here’s a comment of mine where I briefly explain why your assumption that children with two parents of the opposite sex fare better is wrong: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=17371#306701 Most of my references are scholarly and peer-reviewed and are either linked to because we have word limits, or as evidence of my claims. I should hope that I do it "endlessly". <<For starters, you naturally refer only to things that support what you think.>> You make it sound like I’m cherry-picking. In fact, I’m not aware of any evidence to the contrary. I ask people like yourself to provide evidence of your claims and (not to my surprise) you never do. You see, not everyone forms an opinion and then looks for evidence to support it. On the contrary, I started off as a homophobic Christian and changed my mind because there was no evidence to support that position. <<I could do the same thing with references supporting what I think, if I could be bothered.>> So you could, but you just can’t “be bothered“? I haven’t heard that one since school. If you ever change your mind, please make sure that what you link to is scholarly/peer-reviewed/fully-referenced. <<The other thing is that anyone can put what they wish on the Internet, without proof or reason, totally unaccountable.>> Not if it’s peer-reviewed. Peer-reviewed papers require evidence and must pass a rigorous process. Which is why everything I have linked to on this thread so far is peer-reviewed. Don’t make the mistake of thinking this is merely a clash of opinions. The links I have provided demonstrate the truth of my claims. <<I read books by noted authors who find it harder to get away with untruths and waffle.>> There are electronic versions of all primary sources, so this is not an excuse. Furthermore, all the authors I have linked to are academics with reputations too. Posted by AJ Philips, Thursday, 11 August 2016 2:47:57 PM
| |
You see,
T.o t.he b.in. the ins and outs of homosexuality have been (exhaustively) peer reviewed and found to, stand up, when scrutinised, ;-) Posted by DreamOn, Thursday, 11 August 2016 5:19:04 PM
| |
//Why would you think that is the best possible experience of sex?//
Why would you think heterosexual intercourse is necessarily the best possible of experience of sex? A lot of women are crap in the sack - just starfish. I've had plenty of roots less pleasurable than time spent shaking sticky white coconuts from the veiny love tree. //To me the best possible experience is when both parties are experiencing maximum pleasure at the same time whilst also enjoying the emotional satisfaction of being with the person with whom you are having sex.// And homosexuals can't experience pleasure or the emotional satisfaction of being with the person with whom they are having sex? Huh? How does that work, phanto? They're gay, not androids. //nor can it ever happen for homosexual people.// Why not? And how can you be so certain in your knowledge? Have you personally polled them all, or do you have amazing powers of telepathy? Or are you just making unfounded assumptions? Posted by Toni Lavis, Thursday, 11 August 2016 6:32:41 PM
| |
//No I don't have evidence for any of my opinions//
Well that explains a lot. //but as I said it does not mean those opinions are wrong// No, it just means you have no reasonable metric to determine whether are correct on incorrect. Opinions not based on any sort evidence come under the heading of 'creative writing'. Posted by Toni Lavis, Thursday, 11 August 2016 6:48:25 PM
| |
Toni Lavis:
“Why would you think heterosexual intercourse is necessarily the best possible of experience of sex?” If you were designing the species and you wanted to make sure that it continued on by procreating wouldn’t you be sure to make certain that the method of procreation was the best of sexual behaviours? If there was some sexual behaviour that was better than the type of behaviour that leads to procreation then people would naturally gravitate towards that since we always go after what is best if we have that option. If you want to guarantee the continuation of the species you would steer people in the direction that leads to that outcome. Whilst every act of sexual intercourse may not be as enjoyable as you would like it does not mean that in general the most enjoyable sex is that which is designed to advance the species. “And homosexuals can't experience pleasure or the emotional satisfaction of being with the person with whom they are having sex? Huh? How does that work, phanto? They're gay, not androids.” They experience some pleasure but it will never be the best of pleasures because what they do will always be a poor simulation of the best sexual experience. It can never approach that sexual experience which is open to heterosexuals. In fact they have chosen never to be open to the best sexual experience. “how can you be so certain in your knowledge? “ I don’t need to be certain. It just seems logical to me but you may be able to show me where the logic does not add up. I am open to genuine argument. Posted by phanto, Thursday, 11 August 2016 8:49:20 PM
|
Perhaps this photo could be included in a kit that goes to all the primary schools, to teach primary school children about the oppression of homosexuals in Australia.
The photo shows a homosexual being pepper sprayed in a brutal display of oppression and savagery.
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/sites/sbs.com.au.news/files/styles/big_picture/public/mardi_gras_3.jpg?itok=Q-b-oOVr
Or perhaps this photo that shows a hapless homosexual being tied and ruthlessly beaten.
http://cdn.scahw.com.au/imagevaultfiles/id_52860/cf_8/sydney-mardi-gras-2011_13.jpg
Or perhaps this photo, that shows a gang of malicious thugs who are out to disrupt homosexual events, and destroy the hard won rights of homosexuals in Australia.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/61/43/e7/6143e71599ac53fae2f13b62b8ebc75b.jpg
With all this oppression, it is no wonder that homosexuals have issues, such as mental and health issues.
Or perhaps their g-strings are too tight.
But all will change with same sex marriage, and this photo shows how much homosexuals really do regard the sanctity of marriage.
http://www.tntdownunder.com/media/mardigras3.jpg
The concept that homosexuals are being oppressed in Australia is one of the greatest cons and pieces of BS being perpetrated on the public in Australia.