It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Nexttimemaybe
a reply to: Robert Reynolds
I'm not badgering anyone to death - don't be silly. I've asked some moral questions with follow-ups in order to create thought-provoking conversation. Can you really not understand this?
Not to sure why you are obbsessing about incest and badgering krazy to death about it.
How does this justify anything?
However in many points in history incest has been acceptable, especially among royality and high powered families, either to keep power or money in famalies.
I personally find that defense selfish, although you've undermined this declared perspective by involving yourself in the defense of someone else. You object to internet 'badgering', but defend incest?
doesnt hurt me so I dont care.
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: Robert Reynolds
a reply to: Krazysh0tSo your support of these once socially unnacceptable behaviours are just a fashionable perspective with no innate value?
What are you getting at? Are you trying to trap me in some word trap or something? I clearly spelled out that I only disapprove of incest because of scientific and legal reasons. I don't disprove of it for moral reasons. Why is this so hard for you to understand? It isn't a fashionable perspective. It is a perspective I came to after much thought, reflection, as well as applying standards for other things to this thing.
Why are we talking about incest anyway?
It probably happens a lot more then people think.
How does it really hurt anything? Except in a scientific way?
It's socially unacceptable simply because Man said it is.
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
Excuse me.....why are we talking about incest and pedophilia here? That is so far from the topic.....can we talk about people who believe they are something that they physically are not, instead? You know.....the topic of the thread?
Just curious.
originally posted by: Robert Reynolds
Being uncharacteristically relevant to the thread:- what about non-binary people - people that don't consider themselves male or female..
originally posted by: ReprobateRaccoon
a reply to: odzeandennz
If 'Trans' is the new gay. whats next?
Rather than find another class of people to mistreat, maybe it's time for our society to do something different, like amend the US Constitution to guarantee equal rights for EVERYONE, regardless of their differences, lifestyles, sins, or other ridiculous factors.
I'd be game for that. You guys?
my question is, if someone thinks something, is it right to say hey thats what they identify with. what if they are wrong and just need a simple examination. what makes people think Trans people are always right in saying they identify with whatever.
secondly, then, what is to keep say a pedo from saying they identify as a child... or other cases, dress as a child etc.
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: TinfoilTP
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.
let me help focus the topic on what the op is asking;
my question is, if someone thinks something, is it right to say hey thats what they identify with. what if they are wrong and just need a simple examination. what makes people think Trans people are always right in saying they identify with whatever.
secondly, then, what is to keep say a pedo from saying they identify as a child... or other cases, dress as a child etc.
they aren't talking about pedo's, other than in the example of someone who identifies as a child. what they are talking about are identity disorders. Furry's, arrested development, psychotic delusions....that kind of stuff. not nambla. im not sure that is the type of subject matter that would be appropriate on ATS, to be honest.As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.
originally posted by: TinfoilTP
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: Robert Reynolds
a reply to: Krazysh0tSo your support of these once socially unnacceptable behaviours are just a fashionable perspective with no innate value?
What are you getting at? Are you trying to trap me in some word trap or something? I clearly spelled out that I only disapprove of incest because of scientific and legal reasons. I don't disprove of it for moral reasons. Why is this so hard for you to understand? It isn't a fashionable perspective. It is a perspective I came to after much thought, reflection, as well as applying standards for other things to this thing.
Why are we talking about incest anyway?
It probably happens a lot more then people think.
How does it really hurt anything? Except in a scientific way?
It's socially unacceptable simply because Man said it is.
Wow, incest sympathizers.
originally posted by: clevargenuis
whats next? they are gonna get the children and its already started
youtube.com...
The idea of lgbt rights is just a smoke screen for something more sinister
originally posted by: clevargenuis
whats next? they are gonna get the children and its already started
youtube.com...
The idea of lgbt rights is just a smoke screen for something more sinister