Dark God Heart
Banned
Let's lower the voting age to twelve while we're at it SunnyC.
Of course because of the social stigmas we do not know the true number of homosexual people alive today and defiantly alive in the past. But even we where without the social stigmas there would not be more homosexuals, we would just know the true ration. And they would still be a small part of the entire population. And a homosexual who had children because he was being pressured to marry and have children, because he suppressed his homosexuality isn't disproving my statement. To produce a child he had to perform a heterosexual act. Our body, our hormones, have not kept up with our understanding of our self as an animal. Sex feels good so we want to have it, cause the more we have it the higher the chance we produce offspring. And we are attracted to the other gender because to produce offspring it has to be heterosexual sex. Other animal special to not have the understanding that offspring requires 1 man 1 woman (not including the species for which it doesn't) so there brains have evolved to stimulate heterosexual behavior. This makes homosexuality bluntly put faulty "programming" (and I know that saying that makes me look very wrong but I'm certain you can read behind what seems like a discriminating remark to get my scientific argument). With our increasing intelligence have outgrown the need for the "program" but evolution doesn't go nearly as quick as scientific progress. Which brings me to my next point.I don't think you're taking into account the social stigmas that have been in place (and still are) that keep the homosexual/heterosexual ratio so disproportionate. Homosexuality doesn't render your reproductive organs obsolete, up until maybe this recent period in time, 1960's and onward, I'd venture to say that most homosexuals did in fact have children because of the sheer force of social pressure. I would also disagree that love is a chemical reaction, though infatuation could be construed as such. Though, my disagreement here most likely comes from the fact that we likely have very different definitions of "love"
It may very well be history but when it comes to analyzing how our subconscious brain works, how our body works as an animal specie we must ignore the brilliant ways our intellect can manipulate it.I was speaking to our current situation as evolutionary history is just history at this point. While it is true surrogacy and IVF are modern innovations that have assisted any and all couples with giving birth to their own children, it is also true that this is now a part of our society and will not go away.
Of course because of the social stigmas we do not know the true number of homosexual people alive today and defiantly alive in the past. But even we where without the social stigmas there would not be more homosexuals, we would just know the true ration. And they would still be a small part of the entire population. And a homosexual who had children because he was being pressured to marry and have children, because he suppressed his homosexuality isn't disproving my statement. To produce a child he had to perform a heterosexual act. Our body, our hormones, have not kept up with our understanding of our self as an animal. Sex feels good so we want to have it, cause the more we have it the higher the chance we produce offspring. And we are attracted to the other gender because to produce offspring it has to be heterosexual sex. Other animal special to not have the understanding that offspring requires 1 man 1 woman (not including the species for which it doesn't) so there brains have evolved to stimulate heterosexual behavior. This makes homosexuality bluntly put faulty "programming" (and I know that saying that makes me look very wrong but I'm certain you can read behind what seems like a discriminating remark to get my scientific argument). With our increasing intelligence have outgrown the need for the "program" but evolution doesn't go nearly as quick as scientific progress. Which brings me to my next point.
As for the rest of your argument dewey911p, your orientation has nothing to do with the possible success of the relationship. A real relationship with between an adult and a child (same definition as you used) is of course not possible. But that doesn't make the feelings of the pedophile, whose brain does not draw the line between a ripe body and a unripe body correctly, less true. For someone to be heterosexual he or she does not need to be or have been in a relationship, he or she just needs to feel an attraction to the opposite gender. Also, a pedophile can be a parent without being in a relation with a child. I feel like I did not bring across correctly that I meant a single parent pedophile instead of one in a relation with a child. A pedophile as a person can still produce a child in the same ways you mentioned a homosexual couple can.
There's no difference between children and adults. The only real observable difference is size. Anyone who says that children aren't every bit as smart, emotionally complex, and sexually competant as adults is just a child hater who thinks that children are stupid. In fact, we should just stop calling them children, and just call them all people. Everyone knows that the label 'child' is just a method of controlling regular, capable people who just happen to be young, and will be young forever, just like those people who have brain damage. It's a shame children have to put up with all this bigotry.
I will disagree with you Mario. I feel that people under 16 do not fully understand what is required to be part of a romantic relationship. It why just about all childhood romances end. Those involved aren't stupid, but they are immature and growing up changes the values we are looking for in a partner.Who says that a child can't fully understand a romantic relationship? Because they're stupid kids? That's like saying that retarded people will have to be forever alone, because their intelligence is too low. I say that children should be able to choose for themselves if they want to date or not. The age of consent is a bunch of rubbish, because it's not preventing minors from having sex.
Let's lower the voting age to twelve while we're at it SunnyC.
I don't know if you're serious or if you're parodying mattj's "everyone is a fetus" logic.
I will disagree with you Mario. I feel that people under 16 do not fully understand what is required to be part of a romantic relationship. It why just about all childhood romances end. Those involved aren't stupid, but they are immature and growing up changes the values we are looking for in a partner.
Age of Consent may not be working... but the failure is a good indicator that guidance is in fact needed. For instance my Niece (age 17), became a mother last Christmas, She wanted to be a mom. So she CHOSE to have sex to get pregnant. She has a absolutely beautiful daughter, and now she is regretting her choice/actions. She has a child and she isn't even done being a child yet. Her childhood is over thanks to her making an irrational choice she was not ready to make.
Just because she made a bad decision doesn't mean it was her young mind's fault. Adults also do things that they later regret.
I don't see anything wrong with a 14 year old dating or having sex with a 20 year old. What's that like a six year difference? No harm really.
Did you even read anything in this thread? An accurate comparison would be an 9 year old having sex with a 15 year old. It's only a six year difference.
That involves a kid, who's not likely sexually developed, and a teenager so that's actually worse.
I don't see anything wrong with a 14 year old dating or having sex with a 20 year old. What's that like a six year difference? No harm really.
Wait until that 14 year old is your child... I think your opinion may change.I don't see anything wrong with a 14 year old dating or having sex with a 20 year old. What's that like a six year difference? No harm really.
That's not pedophilia. You're talking about ebebephilia (sp?) which is an adult being attracted to a young teenager. Pedophiles are attracted to prepubescent kids, such as 9 year olds like marioguy said. 14 is far too old already.
I don't see anything wrong with a 14 year old dating or having sex with a 20 year old. What's that like a six year difference? No harm really.
Wait until that 14 year old is your child... I think your opinion may change.