PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Gay Rights Debates
     Homosexuality=Same-gender sex
       Gay Adoption

Topic Jump
Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

According to that liberal idiot dsadevil, homosexuality is sex between two adults of the same gender. He just cited ONE source written by a BIASED liberal feminazi! Homosexuality is properly defined as sex or sexuality between members of the same gender, irrespective of gender. Homosexual simply means in GREEK same gender attracton. Homo means "same"  and "sexual" means gender. Thus, a homosexual is one attracted to members of the same gender.

Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary (1998 ed.) has this definition of homosexuality:

ho·mo·sex·u·al·it·y (ho/ me sek/ shoo al/ i te, -mo-) n. sexual desire or behavior     directed toward a person or persons of the same sex. [HOMO- + SEXUALITY]

Unless dsadevil does not consider children to be PERSONS then a sexual attraction to young boys is homosexuality. Also the below source from a pro-homosexuality webpage clearly states that homosexuality is a sexual attraction between members of the same gender and more. Note the term PERSONS and not adult is used.

In the dictionary, the word refers to nothing more than sexual attraction. Indeed, the one and only thing that all homosexuals have in common is a sexual attraction to members of the same sex. But there's more to it than that . . . most homosexuals are not only physically and sexually attracted to members of the same sex, but homosexuals also fall in love with and are emotionally fulfilled in relationships with members of the same sex. (Click here to see my theories on love.)

http://www.geocities.com/super_tenor/gay.html

Here is another dictionary definition of the term.

homosexuality
1 entries found.

From WordNet (r) 1.7 [wn]

homosexuality
    n : a sexual attraction to (or sexual relations with) persons of
        the same sex [syn: {homosexualism}, {homoeroticism}, {gayness}]

http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/homosexuality

Again, attraction to persons of the same gender. No distinctions based on age differences are made. Again, unless you want to deny children are people, then a Pedophile that is attracted to boys is a homosexual. PERIOD! Below is from Oxford University Press:

This phenomenon, erotic interaction between people of the same sex, was condemned by both Christianity and ancient Greek philosophy.

http://www.xrefer.com/entry/552329

Homosexuality is when a person is attracted to people of the same sex as them self physically, emotionally, sexually and socially.

http://members.aol.com/ts1change/homosexu.htm

The dictionary defines homosexuality as "feeling or involving sexual attraction to persons of the same sex; concerning homosexual relations or people; and relating to the same sex"(8) .

http://www.nine9.ukshells.co.uk/cgi-bin/galva-idx.pl?node=galva-language

Thus, homosexuality is what it is. A sexual attraction to or sexual interaction with a member of the SAME gender. Thus, if a Pedophile lusts after little boys he's a homosexual. Facts are facts, when a grown man fondles a little boys penis or performs fellatio on the kid, these are HOMOSEXUAL acts. Since the Pedophile and child BOTH belong to the SAME (ie. Homo) gender (ie. sex) that means homosexuality is involved. Like it or not those of homosexual orientation and/or tendency molest children at a grossly greater rate than those of heterosexual orientation do.

As for Kinsey, I already presented documented evidence he was a fruad and monster. Your liberal sources OF COURSE do not mention him. And there is a BIG DIFFERENCE between your sources (which quote DIRECTLY from what Kinsey wrote) and my sources (which have nothing to do with Paul Cameron, other than he quoted from them). So IT'S NOT the same thing. Cameron did not write my sources, he simply quoted from them for his purposes, as I am quoting from them for mine.

The question of whether homos molest at a higher rate than heterosexuality's indeed rests upon the definition of homosexuality. And the key is in the word HOMO and SEXUALITY itself! I have shown more than one source which back the fact homosexual means same-sex attraction irrespective of age differences. Either way gays and their liberal friends are simply changing the definition of homosexuality in order to get gays off the hook for their CRIMES against children!

As for only a small part of gay literature being devoted to pedophilia, that's wrong. At Nifty Erotica Cafe there is AN ENTIRE SECTION devoted in the homosexual and bisexual sections, dedicated to stories of grown men molesting little boys.

As for your comparison of fundamentalists to Christianity, I fail to see a worthwhile comparison. I don't think any Christians see anything wrong with Robertson or Falwell. But heterosexuals DO see something wrong with an adult man seducing a young girl. Free speach or no free speach it's NOT tolerated amongst straights. If any bookstore such as Coles carried a book on a sexual relationship between an adult man and an adolescent girl, I will assure you child advocacy groups will burn the store down! Heteros DO NOT tolerate child molestation (real and fictional aline). And besides when Jefferson et al inacted the Fourth Amendment they had no idea that fags would use it to have the right to fantasize about sexually abusing children!

And AGAIN pedophile groups have membership in ILGA and smaller nation gay organizations. All the proof is there, homosexuals condone sexual abuse of kids. Fact remains homosexuals are a DANGER to kids. They should NOT be allowed to adopt children, teach them, not serve in ANY position in which they will come in contact with children.


 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 04:39 AM on January 18, 2003 | IP
dsadevil

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

For God sakes man, would you post these messages in reply to the ones I already wrote? It is impossible to follow the debate otherwise.

You are either blind or illiterate, I'm not sure. I quote two sources to support my SCIENTIFIC (to be distinguished from dictionary) definition, Dr. David Newton and Dr. Jenny Carole. You first refer to them both as gay, when Dr. Carole can't be gay. Then you just ignore Dr. Newton entirely and call Dr. Carole a femninazi. Sure man, whatever. Your credibilty has been shot to hell.

The difference between my definitions and yours are that mine are scientific, and yours are not. The dictionary does not give scientific definitions for scientific terms. They simplify. Not to mention in common speak, most people would use "homosexual" the way you do, so it makes sense for the dictionary to define it that way. But for an argument based on laws, on how to treat a class of citizens, it is scientific definitions that must be used whenever possible. So if you wish to ban pedophiles from adopting children, then I support you, regardless of whether they are hetero or homosexual in their adult relationships. But to ban a class of people from becoming parents, from even INTERACTING with children because you refuse to accept or even rebut a scientific definition with scientists of your (undoubtedly b/c none exist) is ludicrious. Its not the children aren't persons, its just that in every formal class of definition, children are held as to be outside the normal class of "person" IE "person" is shorthand for "adult." This is why, despite the constitutions guarentee that all PERSONS are guarenteed the rights protected in the bill of rights, we can still censor the speech of children to an extent, parents can still deprive them of their liberty, we can still compel them to attend school, etc.. In virtually every formal environment (legal, scientific, professional) "person" does not include "children" not because children arent people but because we necessarily restrict any of the conclusions we make in this field to actions between mature adults. Otherwise, all of law, philosophy, and science gets thrown out the window.

Meanwhile, your constant use of NIFTY is somewhat precarious, as generally erotic story rings are not the best way to get a feel for the ideologies of a people as a whole. But even still, as I said, even if gays are more likely to write stories of inter-generational sex/tolerate it, heterosexuals are more likely to tolerate killing gays, and they don't see a problem with it. All that has been shown here is that every group has its idiotic stances. Congrats.

Now onto the source argument. What makes you think my sources quote from Kinsey? The world book stats I mentioned gave no mention of him. By contrast, Cameron was the SOURCE of most of the stats against gays. He didn't quote the sources you used, rather the reverse, much of his research influenced them. But regardless, the key sources of the debate, Drs. Newton and Jenny, don't quote either one. So its irrelevant.

Btw, for all you all who are just joining us, this argument really started in another forum "Pedophilia and Homosexual adoption"
Check out our guests psychological problems and his losing arguments there (and you can find out exactly what we are talking about here)


-------
"If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?" -Will Rodgers<br><br><br>"Neither man nor nation can prosper unless in looking at the present, thought is steadily taken for the future." -T. Roosevelt<br><br>"Might I remind you that extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice, is no virtue." -Barry Goldwater<br><br>

Respect through Excellence only
 


Posts: 789 | Posted: 11:55 AM on January 18, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"I quote two sources to support my SCIENTIFIC (to be distinguished from dictionary) definition, Dr. David Newton and Dr. Jenny Carole."

I reject the scientific definition. I go by the DICTIONARY definition. Most people do. Your scientific definition is biased and silly, and just a means of tap dancing around the overwhelming evidence gays are a danger to kids.

" You first refer to them both as gay, when Dr. Carole can't be gay."

Gay or pro-gay, fact is they are BOTH funded by the gay agenda and cater to it.

"Then you just ignore Dr. Newton entirely and call Dr. Carole a femninazi."

They are both pro-gay and CONVENIENTLY redifined homosexuality to suit their agenda. But according to their redifining MANY people who consider themselves gay aren't really gay. For instance, a 20 year old man is as radically different from a 50 year old man, as he is to an 11 year old. So is a 50 year old man who lusts only after 20 year old guys not gay? This is the problem your scientific definition runs into. Not all adults are the same. Indeed aesthetically and physically speaking, a 20 year old has more in common with a fifteen year old, than he does with a 50 year old. The line between adult and minor is arbitrary. The legalistic definition does not account for biological variations. So the dictionary definition is the most appropriate one.

"Sure man, whatever. Your credibilty has been shot to hell."

Only amongst leftist morons like you that have already made up their minds to begin with. Either way anyone with common sense who seeks truth, can see I am right and you are wrong!

"The difference between my definitions and yours are that mine are scientific, and yours are not."

TWO FUCKING SOURCES FROM THE SAME INSTITUTE!!! That's NOT a UNANIMOUS scientific opinion. I quoted MORE THAN TWO peer reviewed sources! That plus you ignroe THE FACT many Boylovers who have ZERO attractions to adult males, still consider themselves gay!

"So if you wish to ban pedophiles from adopting children, then I support you, regardless of whether they are hetero or homosexual in their adult relationships."

I want to ban all male homosexuals and other males with homosexual tendencies from adopting or serving in ANY roles as caretakers!

"But to ban a class of people from becoming parents, from even INTERACTING with children because you refuse to accept or even rebut a scientific definition with scientists of your (undoubtedly b/c none exist) is ludicrious."

TWO FUCKING SCIENTISTS from the SAME INSTITUTE!!! Something is WRONG with that! And I don't need to rebuttal it, since it's common sense male on male sex is homosexuality. Since a male Pedophile and his boy victim belong to the same gender, it's homosexuality! And a heterosexual is a person that is EXCLUSIVELY attracted to human females.

"Its not the children aren't persons, its just that in every formal class of definition, children are held as to be outside the normal class of "person" IE "person" is shorthand for "adult."

Person=human being. Since chidlren are human beings, they are persons. PERIOD!

"This is why, despite the constitutions guarentee that all PERSONS are guarenteed the rights protected in the bill of rights, we can still censor the speech of children to an extent, parents can still deprive them of their liberty, we can still compel them to attend school, etc.."

And why is attending school a bad thing? Especially when we compare the success in the market place, between those with no education and those with ample education? It's for their own good!

"Meanwhile, your constant use of NIFTY is somewhat precarious, as generally erotic story rings are not the best way to get a feel for the ideologies of a people as a whole."

Of COURSE it it! It's the largest and most popular gay erotic fiction website on-line. Virtually every homo site has links to it. The fact it has a bisexual and homosexual category dedicated entirely to intergenerational sex, and there are literally HUNDREDS of stories each, shows it's a major gay predilection.

" But even still, as I said, even if gays are more likely to write stories of inter-generational sex/tolerate it, heterosexuals are more likely to tolerate killing gays, and they don't see a problem with it. All that has been shown here is that every group has its idiotic stances. Congrats."

I don't deny many heterosexuals are likely to tolerate killing of gays. I tolerate it. Why is it such a bad thing? Especially when fags are raping our kids, molesting people in prison, and force-feeding their agenda down our throats? Fact remains a significant percentage of fags are pedophiles or have pedophile tendencies, and I don't want them anywhere near my son. That's why if I find out when I take my kids to school any of their teachers are gay, I will remove them from that school immediately!

"Now onto the source argument. What makes you think my sources quote from Kinsey?"

You said it has roots with Kinsey's research. You said how can I argue against someone like Kinsey?

"The world book stats I mentioned gave no mention of him. By contrast, Cameron was the SOURCE of most of the stats against gays."

Cameron did not WRITE THEM so he is NOT my source. And between you and me, I got them off of various websites that have nothing to do with this Cameron person. So no, my sources do not come from Cameron.

"He didn't quote the sources you used, rather the reverse, much of his research influenced them."

WRONG!!! The studies have NOTHING to do with Cameron. Some of my stats came from homosexual researchers THEMSELVES!!! Stop trying to tap dance around the issue!

"But regardless, the key sources of the debate, Drs. Newton and Jenny, don't quote either one. So its irrelevant."

They both come from THE SAME INSTITUTE which right there shoots their credibility! If they came from different institutes and institutes that have NOTHING to do with liberalism, I would be open to them. And besides, the fact a male Pedophile molests boys, defies conventional wisdom when you say he is 100% pure heterosexual. He OBVIOUSLY is NOT a heterosexual. A heterosexual is a person with an EXCLUSIVE attraction to the opposite sex and ZERO homosexual tendencies. A heterosexual by nature finds any form of male on male sex disgusting and repungent. Therefore, if a pedophile molests boys HE IS NOT straight, regardless of what his adult sex life is like. And besides, many homosexuals are still in the closet. Just because a person lives a pure heterosexual life does not mean they are straight. Many homosexuals are in the closet still, and numerous bisexuals conveniently choose to ignore their gay tendencies and only go with women. Just as some bisexuals ignore their heterosexual tendencies and only go with men. Fact remains, heterosexuals DO NOT molest boy children. END OF STORY!!!!


ps. I STILL will not let any fag near my son! And if any of my sons friends have gay brothers or parents, while I will not forbid them from playing with such kids, I will NOT allow them to go to their friends' house!
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 1:41 PM on January 18, 2003 | IP
dsadevil

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

From now on I am only responding to you in that one thread "pedophilia and homosexuality"

but for clarification, Dr. Newton and Jenny are not from the same institute.


-------
"If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?" -Will Rodgers<br><br><br>"Neither man nor nation can prosper unless in looking at the present, thought is steadily taken for the future." -T. Roosevelt<br><br>"Might I remind you that extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice, is no virtue." -Barry Goldwater<br><br>

Respect through Excellence only
 


Posts: 789 | Posted: 5:06 PM on January 18, 2003 | IP
    
[ Single page for this topic ]

Topic Jump
Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.