Riahlize's Waterfall
What I believe is the exact same oversimplified arguments homosexuals use to justify their behavior can be used by a lot of other groups
Including heterosexuals.
we all agree are immoral.
We don't all agree it's immoral.
A victory for homosexuality is an indirect victory for feminism,
That's not even a sexual identity....
transsexuals,
Possible.
bestiality,
Nope.
polygamy,
Possible.
pedophilia,
Nope.
and perverts of every kind.
And nope.
Do you support neutering and spaying because they can't give consent to that but we do it anyway
I support the owner in legally neutering or spaying their animals. It does not require consent in a court of law to do so. Where as, if the issues were to arise about rape or consensual sex between humans and animals, that cannot be established in a court of law.
but let me guss you will say there is a difference because "neutering is not as bad as rape"
No actually, it's not as bad, but that is definitely not my reason. Don't get me wrong, I don't like neutering, but I realize if I want to have animals and they have territorial issues, I just might have to.
so before you say that
Yeah I wasn't going to.
there are still both wrong and until you take action at banning neutering and spaying
Way to convince me. They're wrong, so believe it.
your just a hypocritical.
Again, I didn't argue for that reason, you assumed. But even if I did, it's not hypocritical.
And anyway animals can give consent
Prove it.
and your are getting yourself into a argument that you don't even know much about like I do.
Certainly doesn't sound like you do.
Isn't it a little hypocritical to support homosexuality but not bestiality...
Nope. Not even in the slightest.
As he says his partners consent just like gay partners? Why are you judging his lifestyle, he isn't hurting anyone.
His desired partners, being non-human animals, cannot give consent. Hypothetically, let's pretend that objectively, the non-human animals wants to consent to sex. Humans have no way of verifying this. They are not able to tell us whether or not they give consent. Consensual sex is all about ethical law and non-human animals cannot contribute to that.
Not a whole lot
Aside from the person arguing for Zoophilia being an orientation, does it have anything to do same-sex couples being allowed to adopt?
except they are using the exact same argument as homosexuals to de-criminalize their actions. Goodmale has even gone so far as to tell me it is an "orientation
And I certainly will not support Goodmale's argument on it, he is in the wrong and I could refute his arguments if necessary. I absolutely disagree with his opinion on the subject.
With that said, is there is another reason?
Marriage in not inherently "hard". It's the decisions that you make that would cause it to be harder or easier.
Incorrect. The concept of marriage is not naturally hard.... until it's applied to humans. Life events that come from various sources, people from various sources, decisions and opinions from two different minds who have agreed to share one path; that makes marriage inherently "hard". And perhaps that's not the right word, it's worthy hard work. Worthy effort. I have only objected to the term due to it's implications that hard = hard work/effort and easy = effortlessness/not having to try.
I have seen plenty of marriages between friends of mine who thought marriage was "easy" (used synonymously for effortless as previously stated). Two human beings (and think about the sheer nature of a human and all of it's dramas, opinions, emotions, mistakes and bonds) who agree to share one path together. No, it's not going to be an easy road, but it shouldn't be so difficult that you are unhappy and you do not find it worth it. And that is the key.
Things don't just fall into place when married. It's not effortless.
The BOND between a married couple is(or should) be easy. But marriage is not, marriage is work. You have to put in effort to keep your bond, and to be legally binding to one path. Marriage is hard, but it should be hard work that you're happy to work for and worth it.
I don't like polygamy, but I don't have a valid reason to keep it illegal that also isn't found in monogamous marriage issues; aside from polygamy making it easier for those issues to rise.
I would like to point out just as a side note that I've also noticed a lot of people think bisexuality has to come with polyamory, bisexuality does not define whether one is monogamous or otherwise, neither do any of the other sexual orientations.
I sort have just learned not to take any argument or debate you post seriously. >_>
But I almost always will swallow hook, line and sinker for religion debates, it's my thing, I love to debate it.
Also, CONGRATULATIONS on your point achievement, you deserve it Joe! =D
