First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
Post Reply Controversial Child Sex Dolls
10970 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / People's Republic...
Offline
Posted 6/11/17 , edited 6/11/17

DevinKuska wrote:

Although i guess I should have seen this sort of thing coming. The biggest defense offerered in fed vs DOMA was that homosexuality should be protected because people of said orientation cannot change their sexual orientation, and that it was natural. I said then and I say now they should have NEVER put it as such. Its a giant bandwagon for every "sexual deviation" to hop on to.


Well, that and the whole "Born that way; can't change" is, well, a bunch of lies.

But they knew that. It's not about what's true or not. It's about forcing as much degeneracy on society as possible... because THAT'S power, baby! I mean, come on, look at this article: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22730310-100-sexuality-is-fluid-its-time-to-get-past-born-this-way/

"Sexuality is fluid – it’s time to get past ‘born this way’". Well DUH it's time to "get past" the "born this way" lie ... it's outlived it's usefulness. Now that we've duped a dimwitted Supreme Court into forcing this onto Americans we can dispense with the lie. It's not like the SCOTUS can just say "Oh really? I guess our conclusions were wrong because they were based on a faulty premise" and just scrap the thing. There was never any substance to the "born that way" BS, but a lie repeated often enough will be treated as truth.
6895 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Temple of Yaoiism
Offline
Posted 6/11/17

karatecowboy wrote:


DevinKuska wrote:

Although i guess I should have seen this sort of thing coming. The biggest defense offerered in fed vs DOMA was that homosexuality should be protected because people of said orientation cannot change their sexual orientation, and that it was natural. I said then and I say now they should have NEVER put it as such. Its a giant bandwagon for every "sexual deviation" to hop on to.


Well, that and the whole "Born that way; can't change" is, well, a bunch of lies.

But they knew that. It's not about what's true or not. It's about forcing as much degeneracy on society as possible... because THAT'S power, baby! I mean, come on, look at this article: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22730310-100-sexuality-is-fluid-its-time-to-get-past-born-this-way/

"Sexuality is fluid – it’s time to get past ‘born this way’". Well DUH it's time to "get past" the "born this way" lie ... it's outlived it's usefulness. Now that we've duped a dimwitted Supreme Court into forcing this onto Americans we can dispense with the lie. It's not like the SCOTUS can just say "Oh really? I guess our conclusions were wrong because they were based on a faulty premise" and just scrap the thing. There was never any substance to the "born that way" BS, but a lie repeated often enough will be treated as truth.


Oh look, a straight person trying to tell queer people how they think. What a surprise.



4309 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 6/11/17
Video games makes me more likely to go on a murder spree, so this child-like sex doll makes me more likely to be a pedophile.


karatecowboy wrote:


DevinKuska wrote:

Although i guess I should have seen this sort of thing coming. The biggest defense offerered in fed vs DOMA was that homosexuality should be protected because people of said orientation cannot change their sexual orientation, and that it was natural. I said then and I say now they should have NEVER put it as such. Its a giant bandwagon for every "sexual deviation" to hop on to.


Well, that and the whole "Born that way; can't change" is, well, a bunch of lies.

But they knew that. It's not about what's true or not. It's about forcing as much degeneracy on society as possible... because THAT'S power, baby! I mean, come on, look at this article: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22730310-100-sexuality-is-fluid-its-time-to-get-past-born-this-way/

"Sexuality is fluid – it’s time to get past ‘born this way’". Well DUH it's time to "get past" the "born this way" lie ... it's outlived it's usefulness. Now that we've duped a dimwitted Supreme Court into forcing this onto Americans we can dispense with the lie. It's not like the SCOTUS can just say "Oh really? I guess our conclusions were wrong!" and just scrap the thing. There was never any substance to the "born that way" BS, but a lie repeated often enough will be treated as truth.


Explains the experimentation phase many people go through. I never exactly liked the born this way argument. I had a friend that wasn't always a lesbian. I'm not saying that homosexuality is a choice, just that your sexual preferences can change.
10970 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / People's Republic...
Offline
Posted 6/11/17 , edited 6/11/17

Dogempire wrote:


Oh look, a straight person trying to tell queer people how they think. What a surprise.





Oh look, a vapid, sophomoric platitude from the uneducated.. What a surprise.
10970 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / People's Republic...
Offline
Posted 6/11/17

DarthRutsula wrote:


Explains the experimentation phase many people go through. I never exactly liked the born this way argument. I had a friend that wasn't always a lesbian. I'm not saying that homosexuality is a choice, just that your sexual preferences can change.


You've summed it up pretty well.They're still trying to understand the genesis of preference. It's a complex thing that has not gotten the attention it deserves.
6895 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Temple of Yaoiism
Offline
Posted 6/11/17

karatecowboy wrote:


Dogempire wrote:


Oh look, a straight person trying to tell queer people how they think. What a surprise.





Oh look, a vapid, sophomoric platitude from the uneducated.. What a surprise.


>Calls me uneducated
>Says sexuality is a choice

Ironic.



19835 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / B.C, Canada
Offline
Posted 6/11/17

Damien27 wrote:



This is the right question to ask boys and girls and the answer is a big fat NO, there is no research showing more increased likelihood of committing sexual crimes from owning these dolls..


And that right there is the problem , there is virtually no research date on this matter that can be used to support either side of the argument. Why something like paedophile has not been researched to the same depth as say the link between violence and media is somewhat disturbing. And so without a firm backing to use as a reference I think supporting this issue is morally wrong if nothing else.
6895 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Temple of Yaoiism
Offline
Posted 6/11/17

DarthRutsula wrote:

Video games makes me more likely to go on a murder spree, so this child-like sex doll makes me more likely to be a pedophile.


karatecowboy wrote:


DevinKuska wrote:

Although i guess I should have seen this sort of thing coming. The biggest defense offerered in fed vs DOMA was that homosexuality should be protected because people of said orientation cannot change their sexual orientation, and that it was natural. I said then and I say now they should have NEVER put it as such. Its a giant bandwagon for every "sexual deviation" to hop on to.


Well, that and the whole "Born that way; can't change" is, well, a bunch of lies.

But they knew that. It's not about what's true or not. It's about forcing as much degeneracy on society as possible... because THAT'S power, baby! I mean, come on, look at this article: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22730310-100-sexuality-is-fluid-its-time-to-get-past-born-this-way/

"Sexuality is fluid – it’s time to get past ‘born this way’". Well DUH it's time to "get past" the "born this way" lie ... it's outlived it's usefulness. Now that we've duped a dimwitted Supreme Court into forcing this onto Americans we can dispense with the lie. It's not like the SCOTUS can just say "Oh really? I guess our conclusions were wrong!" and just scrap the thing. There was never any substance to the "born that way" BS, but a lie repeated often enough will be treated as truth.


Explains the experimentation phase many people go through. I never exactly liked the born this way argument. I had a friend that wasn't always a lesbian. I'm not saying that homosexuality is a choice, just that your sexual preferences can change.


She was a lesbian who simply decided to hide it. Plenty of gay guys or girls had girlfriends or boyfriends because they didn't want to accept their sexuality.

You can choose who you date, but you can't choose who you're attracted to.



runec 
36037 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Online
Posted 6/11/17 , edited 6/11/17
Creepy as fark, but if having them bang a piece of plastic stops them from going after actual human beings then who am I to argue.



RidiculousName wrote:
The article mentioned some organization called Sexpo claimed international studies found that the sex dolls reduced the chance of rape. Anyone know of any of these studies?


Oddly enough, increased access to porn does seem to decrease sexual assault rates. This has been shown in Japan, Europe and North America in a number of studies so far. It even appears to decrease the rates of child abuse.

Though, thinking about it logically, if you have someone incapable of controlling their sexual impulses ( whatever they might be ) the more outlets they have for it that don't involve other people the better.
6823 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / Pacific North West
Offline
Posted 6/11/17 , edited 6/11/17

karatecowboy wrote:

Well, that and the whole "Born that way; can't change" is, well, a bunch of lies.

But they knew that. It's not about what's true or not. It's about forcing as much degeneracy on society as possible... because THAT'S power, baby! I mean, come on, look at this article: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22730310-100-sexuality-is-fluid-its-time-to-get-past-born-this-way/

"Sexuality is fluid – it’s time to get past ‘born this way’". Well DUH it's time to "get past" the "born this way" lie ... it's outlived it's usefulness. Now that we've duped a dimwitted Supreme Court into forcing this onto Americans we can dispense with the lie. It's not like the SCOTUS can just say "Oh really? I guess our conclusions were wrong because they were based on a faulty premise" and just scrap the thing. There was never any substance to the "born that way" BS, but a lie repeated often enough will be treated as truth.


For the record I am not saying one way or another in regard to LGBT community, I have yet to come to a decision on the matter. My point was winning a federal case with the basis of your argument being "They cant change who they are sexually attracted" to IMO was a slippery slope. I have seen other cases(not necessarily federal) where normally societal taboos were legalized because of some broad defense made by a previous case. It can be argued either way regarding "slippery slope" but based on how today's legal proceedings go. I just feel it was a very iffy defense

. I would rather they just asked for HUMAN rights. If the courts decided marriage was not a right that all people are entitled to. One could simply sue the (your name vs federal govt.) to outlaw marriage. You may think that's silly but this is exactly how some of our most current laws come about. Whether relevant or not I am reminded of history, such as the Roman empire where same sex relations were not all that taboo neither was relations between men and young boys/girls. My concern is our society degrades because current immoral acts are rationalized and legalized because there is legal precedent and some special rights group screaming discrimination. Perhaps I am just some paranoid nutcase... hard to say when my opinion of myself is rather biased
55079 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
101 / M
Offline
Posted 6/11/17
Creepy, and you know whoever made it are very sick person.
55079 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
101 / M
Offline
Posted 6/11/17 , edited 6/11/17

trmjkd989 wrote:

Creepy, but I'd rather they get off to sex dolls vs going after real people.


True, but still.. They got no place in this world! I mean who the hell be thinking about Children that way?
55079 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
101 / M
Offline
Posted 6/11/17

Dear_1nsanity wrote:

Dem cops look disgusted. I would be too


Same.. I would stare at that guy who had it on him.. I would look into him just in case he got child porn on his computer or kidnap some kids at home.
55079 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
101 / M
Offline
Posted 6/11/17

Ranwolf wrote:

Why , why ,WHY...does humanity insist on lowering my already non-existent faith in it . It's almost like you people want me to climb a clock tower with Cassandra in hand.


I got Assignment for you! Go Assassinate the known Child Molesters!
7268 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / CA
Offline
Posted 6/11/17 , edited 6/11/17

Ranwolf wrote:
And that right there is the problem , there is virtually no research date on this matter that can be used to support either side of the argument. Why something like paedophile has not been researched to the same depth as say the link between violence and media is somewhat disturbing. And so without a firm backing to use as a reference I think supporting this issue is morally wrong if nothing else.


Fair enough, but deciding the moral wrongness of something that is none of your business & doesn't hurt anyone based on the lack of evidence is rather asinine don't you think? All that tells me is that there needs to be more research and they need to release and translate the research already made, and so I need put aside my disgust and keep an open mind until it becomes available.

Because using the law to ban something out of fear, disgust and hatred without any evidence to back up criminal behavior & causality of its consumption is a much greater moral crime imo.

I'd personally really like to see the research that the Sexpo executive director Tommi Paalanen was talking about in the letter that was quoted in that article "Both Sexpo services and international studies have shown that the risk of a sexual offense against a child can be reduced by providing a pedophile with a channel for their desires.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.