AJ as many things in life, there are so many varying views and opinions. As much as I hate to admit, what Josephus is saying is old news. The story was aired about a year or more ago, when all this SSM rubbish began. Apparently there are people who are in love with, wait for it, 'children'. There is a name for it, but as I was disgusted with this whole new world we seem to be embracing without any thought or consequence for the future and the people there-in, I chose to not retain any details. Suffice to say, these people have a name and demand that they be heard and supported otherwise it will be seen as discrimination and all those pathetic words the SSM camp used to make their point. I warned of things to come, let's see how many sicko's are going to get down in the gutter on this one. These people are serious they openly admit that they are in love with children and therefore are just as entitled to seek happiness as anyone else. Funny is it not pedophilia no matter how you try to twist it?

ALTRAV,

Are you talking about NAMBLA? Yes, groups like that are disgusting. But comparing them to gay people is fallacious, and for the reason I’ve already highlighted in my posts to Josephus.

<<… these people have a name and demand that they be heard and supported otherwise it will be seen as discrimination and all those pathetic words the SSM camp used to make their point.>>

The difference being, of course, that the supporters of same-sex marriage have a case. Groups like NAMBLA don’t. Apples and oranges. The comparison is fallacious.

AJ you see, here is a prime example of a point I have been trying to make. To me and others of my persuasion, we 'don't' see a big difference in the two. We dislike them both equally. But because you favour the Gaiz, you find reason to justify their stance. The NAMBLA will come up with as many reasons, probably more to justify THEIR stance. It is no different for straight people making an argument against ALL of these groups. So how can YOU justify the SSM thing and reject NAMBLA? This new paradime has now set the cat amongst the pidgeons and in doing so has given the NO camp a very strong point in their favour. I did say that now the bill has passed we will be seeing things that will ultimately chip away at SSM.

Dear AJ,

We've heard it all before - the arguments that all
gays are pedophiles, all lesbians hate men, or that the
next thing we know they'll all be marrying dogs and horses.

That homosexuality is disgusting argument is an age old ploy
of dehumanizing people by stirring up feelings of disgust
for them. They tried it with the Jews. Now Muslims are
the flavour of the month next to gays.

The blatant tactic of painting these people,
especially gays as depraved creatures rife with
infectious disease who enjoy
wallowing in each other's faeces and smelly butts is
alarmingly effective at keeping anti-gay bigots from seeing
these people as fellow human beings.

It also shields them from the realization that they are, in fact,
bigots and not heroes who alone have the courage to protect
us and our society from an infiltration of moral degenerates.

But hey, anal sex is not limited to gays. Not all gays have
anal sex. Straight people can acquire HIV through intravaginal
sex. Condoms exist. Vaginas don't always smell of roses
either. Gay people are no less repulsed by faeces than are
any other human beings.

They want people to believe that lofty emotions such as
love and romance are only for actual straight human beings
(like them) and not for filthy animals fornicating and
spreading disease.

As I said - we've heard it all before - over, and over, again.

FOXY, ANYONE,ANYONE who engages in any form of filth is not a 'normal', 'healthy' human being. That obviously includes the degenerate heterosexuals as well. You have to soften your stance a little on this SSM thing. Just because a few people are born with a dis-order only means we can feel sorry for them but to push this wheelbarrow of shame and vilification at anyone who thinks that SSM is wrong, IS WRONG! I for one don't care about being called whatever because I look at whose doing the name calling. In this case I expected exactly what I got. Nothing surprising there. You have made argument after laborious argument in favour of SSM. We get it enough already. What we don't get is why you don't get the negatives of this SSM. God knows I've thrown enough out there. And furthermore my views as well as any other NO camper are of equal value to the YES mob. So just because the bill has passed does not suddenly make the NO camp become believers, quite the opposite. Just ask the anti Trump brigade about the acceptance of their US election result.

Speak for yourself, ALTRAV.

<<To me and others of my persuasion, we 'don't' see a big difference [between paedophiles and homosexuals].

Because there are plenty of homophobes who are still capable of understanding that there is a big difference between paedophilia and homosexuality. I just mentioned a difference earlier.

<<But because you favour [gay people], you find reason to justify their stance.>>”

How about you tell me why my reasoning is not sound then?

But, yes, I do favour them, and for the reason I mentioned earlier. You make it sound like there's some sort of a subjective bias going on here.

<<The NAMBLA will come up with as many reasons, probably more to justify THEIR stance.>>

The difference being, of course, that none of them are sound.

<<So how can YOU justify the SSM thing and reject NAMBLA?>>

The fact that one is rape and the other isn’t. I was discussing precisely this with Josephus.

<<This new [paradigm] has ... given the NO camp a very strong point in their favour.>>

And that is...?

Anyway, I’ve told you why homosexuality cannot be equated with paedophilia; I was going to ask you how exactly you justify equating the two, but I can see now from your post to Foxy that you have no objective or rational reason for doing so. Your entire position is one big fallacious appeal to disgust.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_fastidium