BUTT SEX!!!!

[Violet]

As for you, violet, stop playing around. I'll make the move if you don't. Prepare your body, babe.

Which movie would that be?

I prepare my body every day... just in case I get lucky.

...

That's actually probably the only way someone could get me to take care of myself

[Something completely different]

I did not strawman him!

He said he was against homosexuality - someone asked him why he was interested in peoples private sexlifes - he replied everyone is, and gave as example that people are also concerned about the sexlifes of those who commit sexual offences such as childrape.

Hence he compared homosexuality with childrape by stating that they both should require a public interest to determine who was doing it, as if homosexuality was a criminal offence.

[Mystical]

I'm not averse to stalking roid heads who call me dirty names Wouldn't mess with Violet tho. She says she'll kill you and I believe everything that comes outta that nice little mouth of hers

[Gilgamesh]

I did not strawman him!He said he was against homosexuality

Maybe he is. He hasn't states thus in this thread, however.

someone asked him why he was interested in peoples private sexlifes - he replied everyone is, and gave as example that people are also concerned about the sexlifes of those who commit sexual offences such as childrape.

Nobody asked him why he was interested in others sex lives in this thread, either. Anyway, what actually happened:

1. Quoting a post that put forward a rhetorical question, "Why are religious people so obsessed with what others do with their genitals?" Idealogue said "So is everyone else (most of them at least)...not just religious people." Those are exact quotes.

2. Idealogue was asked to provide evidence for the previous claim. He gave examples where people are often concerned about the sexual going-ons of others. Of the two examples, child rape was one.

That's it. That is exactly what happened. He did not compare homosexuality with child rape. He did not infer that homosexuality should be a criminal offence. You are indeed strawmanning him. Stop.

---

I'm not averse to stalking roid heads who call me dirty names Wouldn't mess with Violet tho. She says she'll kill you and I believe everything that comes outta that nice little mouth of hers

Being accused of steroids is the highest compliment someone who doesn't take steroids can receive, by the way.

[Something completely different]

1. Quoting a post that put forward a rhetorical question, "Why are religious people so obsessed with what others do with their genitals?" Idealogue said "So is everyone else (most of them at least)...not just religious people." Those are exact quotes.

2. Idealogue was asked to provide evidence for the previous claim. He gave examples where people are often concerned about the sexual going-ons of others.

That's it. That is exactly what happened. He did not compare homosexuality with child rape. He did not infer that homosexuality should be a criminal offence. You are indeed strawmanning him. Stop.

"sexual going-ons"?????

As far as I remember sex with a minor is a criminal offence. I know you feel differently about this and think it should be legal, but that doesnt change the law. Other than that, he compare the two as having the same reason why the public should be interested in who is doing that. Meaning that he sees them as similar activities.

[Mystical]

He did say he agreed that homosexuality is a sin though. So we sorta know why he's concerned with others sex lives.

[Gilgamesh]

"sexual going-ons"?????

Yes?????????

As far as I remember sex with a minor is a criminal offence.

Never even hinted that it wasn't.

I know you feel differently about this and think it should be legal

Never even hinted that this is how I feel.

he compare the two as having the same reason why the public should be interested in who is doing that. Meaning that he sees them as similar activities.

He didn't compare homosexuality to anything. I've said this at least four times in this thread. I'm saying it because it's the truth, by the way. You can go to the fist page and see that he did not even mention homosexuality other than that it is a sin.

I've also asked if you and missluckie could stop misrepresenting what people have actually said a couple times now. Again, stop.

[littleendian]

He did say he agreed that homosexuality is a sin though. So we sorta know why he's concerned with others sex lives.

God again... God must've known that would happen when he created sailors... put a bunch of guys on confined space without any femals around and nature will just run its course, even God must have seen that one coming! Now he's bitching that that's against His will? Oh come on.

[Mystical]

Go read the first page. He did mention homosexuality as being a sin in his opinion. Just sayin. Oh and I still assert the correlation was purposeful. Oh yes, there was a correlation, oh yes. In any case he's MIA so why do u care? Not like we can get a straight answer as to his intentions, can we?

[Gilgamesh]

Oh yes, there was a correlation

Stop. Please, please stop. There wasn't. He gave an example of child-rape being something sexual that people who are not involved would be concerned with. Then, German quoting that example, asked why idealogue thought homosexuality was the same as child-rape. Then, in the same post, Germans made the jump from questioning, straight to asserting; asking idealogue why he categorises homosexuality with illegal offences. That is exactly what happened. Stop. Stop being dishonest.

oh yes. In any case he's MIA so why do u care? Not like we can get a straight answer as to his intentions, can we?

Because him not currently being online is relevant. You're disgusting, bro.