Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson: The Latest Victim of the PC Police

bigfatfurrytexan
You don't know what "sexual preference" is. You are still trying to argue that molesting a child is a "preference", and that they are able to consent. and yes, that last part WAS an insult.

Let's see if you can follow along:

Straight: Sexual preference for those of the opposite sex.
Gay: Sexual preference for those of the same sex.
Paedo: Sexual preference for children.
Bestial: Sexual preference for animals.

Am I missing anything important there?

TheWrightWing
Children and animals have and can consent, so, just as valid?

Incorrect!

Legal consent is 18 years of age. Now, if you are only interested in sexual consent, the ages vary from 16-18, but there is also other caveats attached, ie: consent at 16 to another person under 18, etc.

Animals can not consent under any known US law.

TheWrightWing
Let's see if you can follow along:

Straight: Sexual preference for those of the opposite sex.
Gay: Sexual preference for those of the same sex.
Paedo: Sexual preference for children.
Bestial: Sexual preference for animals.

Am I missing anything important there?

2 of these can ask, and receive legal consent...2 can not.

Did I miss the important part?

How did we ever get from Duck Dynasty to child consent issues?

(sends out a hunting party to find the topic)...it seems to be lost?

TheWrightWing

bigfatfurrytexan

No one is moving the goal post. You just need glasses.

You said homosexuality is valid because its been accepted in the past.

So has paedophilia & bestiality, so they're just as valid?

Then you claimed Consent! was the qualifier.

Children and animals have and can consent, so, just as valid?

So if gays are valid because 'they're born that way' does that also not apply to other deviations?

So far, not one point you've made in their defense does not also apply to any deviation.

No, i said it was accepted in the past because you seem to think that it is "just now" being accepted. Talk about moving goal posts. You assert that the times are changing and it is relevant. I show you how the times haven't really changed, and you assert that it is irrelevant?

I already said gays aren't "born that way". I have explained it and will not redo that.

It does apply, because I assert that a child and an animal cannot consent. You seem to think they can.

peck420

TheWrightWing
Children and animals have and can consent, so, just as valid?

Incorrect!

Legal consent is 18 years of age.

This has nothing to do with law, unless you agree with the laws that made homosexuality a criminal offense.

Well, did you?

Wrabbit2000
How did we ever get from Duck Dynasty to child consent issues?

(sends out a hunting party to find the topic)...it seems to be lost?

Yep, the whole thread went bye bye down the toilet!

At least 20 or so pages were interesting...

TheWrightWing

bigfatfurrytexan

You think that is an insult? Allow me to correct you: i was making fun of how stupid what you are saying is. The insult was in me making fun of you, not calling you gay.

In other words, an insult.

bigfatfurrytexan
How hard to you choke back your homosexual urges so that you can continue choosing to be straight?

Accusing someone of having homosexual urges is not calling someone gay, in your weird little world, eh?

What a twisted Dali-esque universe leftists must dwell in.

There is your problem. You seem to think that everyone is in the "either/or" category of the false political dichotomy. Yeah...let me introduce myself. I am bfft, and I am a conservative libertarian.

I do not "accuse" people have having homosexual urges. Because there is nothing to accuse. I just asked, since you seem to think that homosexuality is a choice, when you made your choice.

reply to post by TheWrightWing


Yes. 2 consenting adults.

Wrabbit2000
How did we ever get from Duck Dynasty to child consent issues?

(sends out a hunting party to find the topic)...it seems to be lost?

via homophobic nonsense.

I would recommend that moderators just start removing posts that link homosexuality to pedophilia, and the problem would be solved. THere isn't room for that nonsense on a site that denies ignorance.

bigfatfurrytexan

No, i said it was accepted in the past because you seem to think that it is "just now" being accepted. Talk about moving goal posts. You assert that the times are changing and it is relevant.

According to nothing I have ever said. Your assumption, stop listening to those voices in your head.

I show you how the times haven't really changed, and you assert that it is irrelevant?

I already said gays aren't "born that way". I have explained it and will not redo that.
It does apply, because I assert that a child and an animal cannot consent. You seem to think they can.

Animals and children, legally or not, can and do consent.

Does this make it right? According to your qualifiers and defense of homosexuality; yes.

To reinforce ignorance, one must reject facts, a reliable feature of leftist nonsense.

bigfatfurrytexan
via homophobic nonsense.

I would recommend that moderators just start removing posts that link homosexuality to pedophilia, and the problem would be solved. THere isn't room for that nonsense on a site that denies ignorance.

Homosexuality is just a sexual preference, as is other sexual deviations from the biological norm.

No one is irrationally fearful of homosexuals, hence, no phobia. Another dishonesty offered by the left.

I understand your desire to silence factual dissent, which is the whole point of this entire thread.

bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by TheWrightWing

 

Yes. 2 consenting adults.

Which was not an accepted qualifier before, but it is now.

How soon until that changes ('evolves') into something more, um, "inclusive"?

TheWrightWing

According to nothing I have ever said. Your assumption, stop listening to those voices in your head.

Here is what you posted:

It wasn't always, so how long until bestiality, incest and paedophilia also become "generally accepted"?

In response to towncryer stating:

Homesexuallity is generally accepted, in most parts of the world. It IS a sexual prefference.

Ill let you and the reader draw their own conclusions to what you said, and what you are trying to backpeddle on now.

Animals and children, legally or not, can and do consent.

Does this make it right? According to your qualifiers and defense of homosexuality; yes.

To reinforce ignorance, one must reject facts, a reliable feature of leftist nonsense.

Like the fact that you omit what is legally acceptable, and want to talk more about morals?

bigfatfurrytexan
I do not "accuse" people have having homosexual urges.

Which would explain this, am I right?

bigfatfurrytexan
How hard to you choke back your homosexual urges so that you can continue choosing to be straight?

Call yourself whatever you like, you share a major trait with leftists: Reflexive Dishonesty.

TheWrightWing

bigfatfurrytexan
via homophobic nonsense.

I would recommend that moderators just start removing posts that link homosexuality to pedophilia, and the problem would be solved. THere isn't room for that nonsense on a site that denies ignorance.

Homosexuality is just a sexual preference, as is other sexual deviations from the biological norm.

No one is irrationally fearful of homosexuals, hence, no phobia. Another dishonesty offered by the left.

I understand your desire to silence factual dissent, which is the whole point of this entire thread.

Homosexuality IS the biological norm. If you dispute that, prove it.

It seems this thread has devolved into a gay /straight argument rather than discussing Phil's comments and what's happened. Can we get back on topic?

TheWrightWing

bigfatfurrytexan
I do not "accuse" people have having homosexual urges.

Which would explain this, am I right?

bigfatfurrytexan
How hard to you choke back your homosexual urges so that you can continue choosing to be straight?

Call yourself whatever you like, you share a major trait with leftists: Reflexive Dishonesty.

I call it a question, which you have failed to answer.

TheWrightWing
This has nothing to do with law, unless you agree with the laws that made homosexuality a criminal offense.

Well, did you?

Did you throw every colour, except black and white, out of your crayon box?

Well?

bigfatfurrytexan
Homosexuality IS the biological norm. If you dispute that, prove it.

How many births from homosexual sex have occurred, again?

So straight sexual preference is the deviation is it, in Salvador Dali-land?