Mynd44:

I wish I had half the time to reply the so called rebuttal but considering whoever lifted that did it without permission and the genius who wrote the rebuttal did not see the sense (semi serious) nature of the article leaves much to imagination. So much for intelligence these days.

Arguing on NL these days have proven to be a waste of time and most people just don't get it.

*takes another drag of weed*

The lifter lifted it to prove a point about men's weakness

No one could have known you were making a satirical piece... no need for the jab on intelligence

Arguing can be fun at times though

---

TV01

Christian feminist - can I hear oxymoron

BlackLeopard:


You learn to read, Coogar. I was talking about adults/adults, adults/children. Nowhere in the post I talked teens, where so much is blurred, and the only one bringing incest into all of this is you. Derailing for newbies.

don't play smart, kiddo!
you said the only difference between what is moral & immoral is consent.

i gave you a scenario where consent was given & i asked you if its moral & you are starting to choke on your own vomit.

how old are you, 4?

TV01:

A lot - not all?

Exceptions exist to every rule, that doesn't really prove the average of something is invalid.

TV01:
Adult brains aren't fully developed till around 24 on average.

Homosexuals are notorious for campaigning for a reduction of the statutory age of consent

You're using manipulative rhetorics here, in which statement A is true, statement B is entirely unrelated to the issue and untrue, and the supposed conclusion you make of that should be 'true', but logic doesn't work that way. Truth implying falsehood means the whole implication is untrue, in other words, try again, what you're doing here is bad logic and argumentation.

Homosexuals continue to push for increasing sexualisation of our children - I posted liinks earlier - legally consent is merely a statutory concept, not a biological one . Who are you tryong to dribble

You're also shifting focus here.
The only people who fetishize children are sexual predators.
Which may or may not be homosexuals, but on average? Most are heterosexual men (look up the average statistics, the figures speak rather clearly on this globally.) Not closeted homosexuals. Not even pedophiles (as in oriented toward children.)

Consent, choices, word sophistry does not make the deviant right, or the immoral good.

You're arguing 'right' and 'moral' based on bad science. I could well tell you that on itself is wrong.

Show us the studies. Is it the same one that says people who are disgusted by homosex are closeted gays . I guess in lieu of a moral compass, sound science, or intellectual honesty, tropes must suffice .

It's not really tropes, it's common sense.
Besides, you're using wellbeing of children as a straw man here. I doubt you care for well being of children, you're using children as objects in your hypothetical debates when you need to shut someone else up.

TV01:

Go and find yourself an anus to rummage around in - your choice
TV

Which further proves my point, so thank you for showing me talking with you, reasonable people are just losing their precious time, because you cling to your own hate and bad science like a life rope

pickabeau1:


The lifter lifted it to prove a point about men's weakness

No one could have known you were making a satirical piece... no need for the jab on intelligence

Arguing can be fun at times though

---

TV01

Christian feminist - can I hear oxymoron

...sometimes without "oxy" sef !

I went to the blog and read that piece - granted it may have been a little tongue-in-cheek, but it seemed to be making a serious point.

Whatever the case, the bible is clear;

1 Corinthians 11:3 But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.


TV

TV01:


...sometimes without "oxy" sef !

I went to the blog and read that piece - granted it may have been a little tongue-in-cheek, but it seemed to be making a serious point.

Whatever the case, the bible is clear;

1 Corinthians 11:3 But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.


TV

Hahaha....

I get the sentiments of the piece really but if you look at it really

God held Adam accountable... How did u know you were naked
The seed is counted through the men

I really wonder how feminism and xtianity can mix
confuddlement extraordinaire

pickabeau1:

Hahaha....

I get the sentiments of the piece really but if you look at it really

God held Adam accountable... How did u know you were naked
The seed is counted through the men

I really wonder how feminism and xtianity can mix
confuddlement extraordinaire

christianity + feminism = femistian

coogar:


don't play smart, kiddo!
you said the only difference between what is moral & immoral is consent.

i gave you a scenario where consent was given & i asked you if its moral & you are starting to choke on your own vomit.

how old are you, 4?

Because you're only derailing to something that's totally unrelated to our discussion. The talk wasn't focused on peer relations or families, but on wide age caps and if it's possible children can consent. Yet you derailed.

Moralcy is always relative to culture and time and also subjective; speaking in terms of biology and other factors like learning would make more sense if we want to make comparisons. Not subjective assesments. Not religion, either.

But with those two teens? They're of the same age, assuming they're of similar experience, and both agreeing with what they're doing? Then yes, it's moral. It may seem despicable to some because they're siblings, but from the age/power/consent balances? They're good to go.

coogar:


christianity + feminism = femistian

funny breed

BlackLeopard:
Exceptions exist to every rule, that doesn't really prove the average of something is invalid.

Implying that "consent" is almost always equal to morality is not a rule.

BlackLeopard:
The only people who fetishize children are sexual predators.

Meaning nothing more than most homosexuals are also sexual predators. Something else the homosexual lobby has fought hard to hide and shut down debate on

BlackLeopard:
Which may or may not be homosexuals, but on average? Most are heterosexual men (look up the average statistics, the figures speak rather clearly on this globally.) Not closeted homosexuals. Not even pedophiles (as in oriented toward children.)

Nope. Clearly evidenced and presented in the link I provided. Homosexuals are 6-20 times more likely to molest children than normal men and when it's male children alone, that figure is over 85%. Pederasty has always been a key theme of homosexuality. There is a youth fetish amongst homos.

BlackLeopard:
Besides, you're using wellbeing of children as a straw man here. I doubt you care for well being of children, you're using children as objects in your hypothetical debates when you need to shut someone else up.

No, I absolutely care about children being the father of 2 lovely ones. No one is shutting anyone up. State the case for legitimising homosexuality, normalising it, and embedding it into the culture. There is simply no case. I will rebutt any case you try to make point for point- with no fuss. Keep calling me a closet gay or secret pedo all you want .

Elton John - a 67 year old man - artificially concieves a child and then willfully removes him from his mothers care so he can play vanity families with his rent boy - he cares about children abi Child abuse!!!! Child services here would never let a 67 year old man (as part of a normal couple) adopt a child.


TV

BlackLeopard:

Because you're only derailing to something that's totally unrelated to our discussion. The talk wasn't focused on peer relations or families, but on wide age caps and if it's possible children can consent. Yet you derailed.

Moralcy is always relative to culture and time and also subjective; speaking in terms of biology and other factors like learning would make more sense if we want to make comparisons. Not subjective assesments. Not religion, either.

you don't have a prayer......
i dònt give a rat about the history of the argument. you said the the difference between morality & immorality is consent. that's the only part i wanted you to defend. the history of the debate is irrelevant to me.

But with those two teens? They're of the same age, assuming they're of similar experience, and both agreeing with what they're doing? Then yes, it's moral. It may seem despicable to some because they're siblings, but from the age/power/consent balances? They're good to go.

so you wouldn't see anything wrong if your kids at age 22 and 20 are having consensual sex? you see - when you people try to be smart, you get caught out.

just because 2 adults consent to do something doesn't necessarily make it right. your point that consent is the only difference between morality & immorality is highly flawed.

Feminism can mix with christianity; if you don't like it, drink an acid.

I've come to understand that you men have a warped definition of feminism.

Vickybee:

Was devil himself not a man who once had the same thought?

And that thought led to his downfall. The same rebellious thoughts women have nowadays concerning marriage. The truth is, if it was all about fairness and equal rights, feminism wouldn't have been all bad. But now y'all want to usurp the man, usurp his God-given (nature-given) right to rule. This is where the problem lies. Most feminists come off as if they hate feminist and anything that makes them womanly. They want to be men. They want to sit with their legs apart. And that's not just their nature. They rebel against their very innate make-up, the thing that makes them female. They are in constant rebellion with themselves all the days of their lives. And that is what makes them sad.

I think true Christian women should drop the idea of education for the girl child, rights to vote and be voted for, equal pay for equal work, or equal respect as any man of the same social status in order to be considered really Christian.

Will these true Christian men start showing the example they think Christianity is by deny their daughters any chance of social advancement since being home and cooking meals is all that makes a woman happy?

Christ is the idea behind Christianity.
Jesus wasn't sexist.
I don't know why any of his followers should be even though some obviously were and still are.

Vickybee:
Feminism can mix with christianity; if you don't like it, drink an acid.

you are not a christian.

I've come to understand that you men have a warped definition of feminism.

perhaps because the definition keeps changing due to the fraudulent concept the whole movement seems to hinge on.

Vickybee:
Feminism can mix with christianity; if you don't like it, drink an acid.

I've come to understand that you men have a warped definition of feminism.

Warped doesn't even begin to define it.

Granted feminism and Christianity do not go together but is that the only thing the Bible is against? Christianity is against adultery yet I have read adulterous men say they are Christians. In this section, we read people insulting each other and even use the bible while insulting the other person. I ask is the bible or Christianity in support of insulting each other?

babygirlfl:
Granted feminism and Christianity do not go together but is that the only thing the Bible is against? Christianity is against adultery yet I have read adulterous men say they are Christians. In this section, we read people insulting each other and even use the bible while insulting the other person. I ask is the bible or Christianity in support of insulting each other?

you must be very intelligent!

TV01:
Dull of mind and body - stop drinking from that toxic ideological stream and feeding on spiritual detritus It makes exact sense. They are exactly alike, (deviant) paraphilias - afterall, y'all claim homosexual feelings are natural inclinations don't you?
1. A child can absolutely give consent - and the issue of consent regards children is a mere "statutory point"
2. And gay-homosexuals know this, hence the reason hy they are the main drivers in the campaign to keep lowering it.
3. And consent does not make a thing moral
Gay is typically used in reference to men - and lesbian to distinguish female homos.
Nope it's lezzas, then fairies. Can you imagine? It must be the rectal violence ! Who comes first from your sources? Bristling bull-dykes no?
Yes, fagtivists hate to talk about morality or the essence of what homos do physically. But we allhave consciences - no to mention the functional teleology of male/female is obviously beyond gainsaying.
There is a moral law and a Lawgiver. We shall all answer.

1.) That part of my post wasn't addressed to you, so I am just going to ignore the insult.

2.) It's silly to lump things you don't like into one category just because you don't like/approve of them. Bestiality is often considered a type of animal abuse. Pedophilia is non consenting in one party and is torture to the younger party.

"A child can absolutely give consent"?? How can a child that is not of age give consent? Yes, it is a statutory point and it shouldn't be dismissed.

3.) I didn't disagree that lesbians suffer from domestic violence more than any other group. I only corrected your claim that male homosexuals come next. So??

4.) The issue with morality is that there are different moral standards. Moral is influenced by culture, religion, society and family values, thereby making it subjective. There is nothing like an inborn conscience.

BTW, if you want to argue morality from a Christian standpoint, let me know so I can ignore your ass. If you agree with me that there is no objective morality, then EOD.

babygirlfl:
Granted feminism and Christianity do not go together but is that the only thing the Bible is against? Christianity is against adultery yet I have read adulterous men say they are Christians. In this section, we read people insulting each other and even use the bible while insulting the other person. I ask is the bible or Christianity in support of insulting each other?

Christainity and feminism do Actually go together if you practice the one golden rule of love "treating the other person as you would want to be treated"

Except we are saying Christianity excuses demanding respect and not giving any in return.

What I notice is that people will use any part of the bible to justify wrongs if it suits them.
Somehow some people's bibles support adultery if a man is the culprit

cococandy:


Warped doesn't even begin to define it.

I still find it hard to see where feminism is defined as an unsubmissiveness.

By the way, Bible only said, "be submissive to your husband" without saying an offender would attract punishment.

-Bible supports slavery.

-Stoning of adulterers.

-Hell condemnation to any woman or man that nuture a thought of lust etc

I wonder how many adulterers they have stoned.

coogar:


you don't have a prayer......

Quite the contrary, I've been praying for you for two months to wisen up. Alas, what even God(s) combined cannot do, cannot be done.

coogar:

so you wouldn't see anything wrong if your kids at age 22 and 20 are having consensual sex? you see - when you people try to be smart, you get caught out.

They're adults. That it would have possibly other consequences - biological for their possible offspring, societal to strong tabboos, etc, is a different thing. We were weighting in solely the age difference and consent, and for THESE TWO factors pinned, it indeed isn't wrong. What you're doing here is black and white thinking for something that's an issue of all sorts of grey.

coogar:
just because 2 adults consent to do something doesn't necessarily make it right. your point that consent is the only difference between morality & immorality is highly flawed.

If you eliminate the need for consent entirely, you're in the lawless society. In which something like free will of an individual means nothing. It's not possible to simply shrug it off as irrelevant and social construct, because to the idea of consent tie in other crucial ideas - like freedom of choice.

BlackLeopard:
Actually yeah, the only difference between a lot of moral vs. immoral IS consent. (If I take someone's thing? It's theft. If they agree with me grabbing it? It's totally not.) So not only moral vs. not, but whole the legal basis from that point in most states as well.

Children cannot consent. It's not a question about wordz even. It's a question of biology. They brains aren't developed to grasp mature matters on adult level, therefore they cannot consent, period.

But continue equating choices between two adults to all the abominations like child rape.

(By the way, there was some studies out there the only people so obsessed with thoughts about what's pedophilia and not, are pedophiles themselves. The rest of the society don't give a flying Bleep. So, present gentlemen being all about kiddies? This speaks volumes about you.)

Preach brah!

Why do you have a problem with incest?? As long as it's not r*Ape and they do not intend to breed if heterosexuals, then what is the problem?

cococandy:

Christainity and feminism do Actually go together if you practice the one golden rule of love "treating the other person as you would want to be treated"

Except we are saying Christianity excuses demanding respect and not giving any in return.

What I notice is that people will use any part of the bible to justify wrongs if it suits them.
Somehow some people's bibles support adultery if a man is the culprit

Makes me remember a thread where Crackhaus was supporting an adulterous grandpa and got 9likes from his ilks.

cococandy:


Christ is the idea behind Christianity.
jesus wasn't sexist.
I don't know why any of his followers should be even though some obviously were and still are.

all his 12 disciples were men though. Coincidence?

babygirlfl:
Granted feminism and Christianity do not go together but is that the only thing the Bible is against? Christianity is against adultery yet I have read adulterous men say they are Christians. In this section, we read people insulting each other and even use the bible while insulting the other person. I ask is the bible or Christianity in support of insulting each other?

Can you school your fellow feminazis on this that bring bible to justify feminism?

That people commit adultery and profess to be Christians is not the issue here

We are talking about the equality vs the concept of male headship in marriage

cococandy
Treating others as you want to be treated is a divine principle but still does not negate headship in marriage

Shollypopzz:
2.) It's silly to lump things you don't like into one category just because you don't like/approve of them. Bestiality is often considered a type of animal abuse. Pedophilia is non consenting in one party and is torture to the younger party.

"Considered"? I group them all together as dysfunction in human sexuality. Parphilias and/or fetishes. Be it an animal, child, same sex - they are all disordered .

Shollypopzz:
A child can absolutely give consent! How can a child that is not of age give consent? Yes, it is a statutory point and it shouldn't be dismissed.

Homos know that - hence their continuing push for lowering the age of consent

Shollypopzz:
3.) I didn't disagree that lesbians suffer from domestic violence more than any other group. I only corrected your claim that male homosexuals come next. So??

Lezzas, then Lifters. And when we specify "marriage" as opposed to just "domestic", we have the safest type of domesticity for women and children. That warms the heart of NL's chieftest marriage advocate and purveyor of marital bliss ! Even without specifying marriage, it's still Lezzas then Lifters!

Shollypopzz:
4.) The issue with morality is that there are different moral standards. Moral is influenced by culture, religion, society and family values, thereby making it subjective. There is nothing like an inborn conscience.

Humans beings do not have conscience?
So, right or wrong is what we (majority) decide it is - at any given point?

Shollypopzz:
BTW, if you want to argue morality from a Christian standpoint, let me know so I can ignore your ass. If you agree with me that there is no objective morality, then EOD.

From a Christian point my position is fixed. If you want to do it in the abstract, shoot - you'll prolly miss there as well .

TV

BABE3:


all his 12 disciples were men though. Coincidence?

He revered an adulterous woman.

He had only earthly mother without father.

Three women were first to see him at the tomb.

A woman commanded him to his first miracle.

A woman was the source of our salvation.

You say?

cococandy:

Christainity and feminism do Actually go together if you practice the one golden rule of love "treating the other person as you would want to be treated"

Except we are saying Christianity excuses demanding respect and not giving any in return.

What I notice is that people will use any part of the bible to justify wrongs if it suits them.
Somehow some people's bibles support adultery if a man is the culprit

I personally think the bible is sexist and places the man higher than the woman but I totally understand what you mean and I am open to learn more from you.

Yes people use any part of the bible to suit and justify their wrong doings and define what is sin and what is not and yes sometimes I wonder if we all read the same bible with some peoples bible supporting a man who cheats. It's so acceptable that a christian defined adultery as a woman cheating and not a man cheating. I was so surprised that day.

BlackLeopard:

Quite the contrary, I've been praying for you for two months to wisen up. Alas, what even God(s) combined cannot do, cannot be done.

the phrase defly flew over your head.

They're adults. That it would have possibly other consequences - biological for their possible offspring, societal to strong tabboos, etc, is a different thing. We were weighting in solely the age difference and consent, and for THESE TWO factors pinned, it indeed isn't wrong. What you're doing here is black and white thinking for something that's an issue of all sorts of grey.

forget the consequences - they may be having a protected consensual sex. if you think 2 siblings above the age of consent should have consensual sex then you need deliverance.

If you eliminate the need for consent entirely, you're in the lawless society. In which something like free will of an individual means nothing. It's not possible to simply shrug it off as irrelevant and social construct, because to the idea of consent tie in other crucial ideas - like freedom of choice.

this is an idiötic sentence.
you were the one that used the only difference in your comment to separate what is moral or immoral. if anything, you were the one posting from a black & white position.

instead of you to admit using the word only was an error, you are busy dragging the atom of decency left in you in the mud. are you too big to admit you were wrong or is it until i force-feed you?

Shollypopzz:


1.) That part of my post wasn't addressed to you, so I am just going to ignore the insult.

2.) It's silly to lump things you don't like into one category just because you don't like/approve of them. Bestiality is often considered a type of animal abuse. Pedophilia is non consenting in one party and is torture to the younger party.

A child can absolutely give consent! How can a child that is not of age give consent? Yes, it is a statutory point and it shouldn't be dismissed.

3.) I didn't disagree that lesbians suffer from domestic violence more than any other group. I only corrected your claim that male homosexuals come next. So??

4.) The issue with morality is that there are different moral standards. Moral is influenced by culture, religion, society and family values, thereby making it subjective. There is nothing like an inborn conscience.

BTW, if you want to argue morality from a Christian standpoint, let me know so I can ignore your ass. If you agree with me that there is no objective morality, then EOD.

Lolzz, is bestiality wrong because it is animal abuse??
What is even animal abuse?
If slaughtering a cow for breakfast or throwing a live lobster into a pot of boiling water isn't, I wonder what other assault on the animals "sovereignty" is bigger to be termed so.....
Animals have no rights

njokusboy:


Lolzz, is bestiality wrong because it is animal abuse??
What is even animal abuse?
If slaughtering a cow for breakfast or throwing a live lobster into a pot of boiling water I wonder what other assault on the animals "sovereignty" is bigger to be termed so.....
Animals have no rights

some of them do have rights while others have no chance at all. you can go to a stream anywhere and kill a fish. you wouldn't get away with doing the same to a dog or a cat(whether stray or owned)

coogar:


some of them do have rights while others have no chance at all. you can go to a stream anywhere and kill a fish. you wouldn't get away with doing the same to a dog or a cat(whether stray or owned)

PETA on the loose
If they mark you... u are marked for life