: Ahem, I seem to recall in other debates mention of the orgasm produced by stimulation of the prostate during anal sex, perhaps a matter of design. Once more for the record- it is natural for humans to do whatever humans can do. Normal or abnormal is not a value judgement, its a statistical fact- or are you going to claim that being of abnoirmal hieght is a disgusting perversion next?no I'm not so dont be so infantile. In my advocation of anarchist personal freedom I have always insisted that behaviour that can not be policed, such as sexuality, and as a result state or authority action only criminalises people should not be policed.
However the right to do something in my opinion never makes it instantaniously right.
: Further, what if homosexuality is a choice, who gives a damn if its in yer genes or not, whats teh problem? Who are they hurting? Why should you care?
Now here is the problem. Red to me Socialism has had an unhappy marriage with certain issues EG Abortion, homosexuality and I'm trying to correct that myself through my own persuasion.
They're not hurting me, I'm not going to hurt them, I'm not arguing as a fundamentalist christian or a nazi just someone who thinks that matters such as sexuality are:
A) Private matters, homosexuals should conduct themselves in public in accordance with the conventions that heterosexuals EG dont dress up as women or in bondage gear and rave through the streets.
B) A matter of choice therefore certain attention should be given as to whether or not certain choices are wise. You can choose to torture people in other fashions it isnt wise either.
: Why shouldn't people be masochists? Are you claimning some form of arbitrary authority over the bodies of others?
Now where did that come from? Just the way that you immediately assume that socialism etc. involves defending abortion, homosexuality etc. as part and parcel you also make the assumption that people impose their views by force if they disagree with you.
The power of persuasion is the only force I've ever appealed to.
:Heterosexual activity can lead to disease or death, vaginal intercourse can be the cause of cervical cancer- is vaginal intercourse therefore sdisgusting brutal and perverted?
Well that depends, it's not generally but it could be.
:Given that the majority of queers fdo *not* engage in buggery does that lifestyle still become dangerous and degrading?
Yeah and I might add that I'm not discrimating on Buggery, it is as terrible between a man and women as between two men.
:As a libertarian I dmeand my right to sleep with anything with a spine should it and I so choose.
Here we go as a libertarian, trying to suggest I'm not a libertarian or not as good a libertarian as you then? Anyway that right is yours but allow homosexuality to be accepted and what grounds do you have for outlawing peadaphilia?
: But if your position were to be proven to be not just irrational, but also, further, brutal and unkind, would you change it?
I would consider doing so yes, I have not seen conclusive proof that I'm wrong yet. My opinion is harming no one however. My original objections to homos EG extraverted sex centric lifestyles still stand.
: I dunno, provide me with a logical justification for:
: 'the normal is superior to the abnormal' which is the crux of your argument.
I would have thought this obvious. If you try to hammer a nail in with an axe you'll risk grave injury. I think the same goes for human sexual relations.
: Also, again I ask- who 'designed' our sexual organs to do anything, am I being brutal and perverted by mixing cocktails with my penis?
No but at the same time you cant suggest that was the purpose evolution/the creator had in mind when it put it there now can you? Does it say "for mixing cocktails with" in scentific textbooks? Incidentally is that true Red? That's pretty gross.
: I mean this in a comradely way, but I suggest that you are seriously mistaken Lark.
Fine, opinions never hurt no one Red and I would attest any accusations of authoritarianism or gay bashing, I've support the uni LGB society when a religious faction attacked it and attempted to with draw funding, I'd be the first to defend them and the last to give up the defence but where do you draw the line in matters of sexuality when this type of behaviour is viewed natural rather than choosen?
