View Single Post
Old 05-21-2008, 08:25 PM   #300 (permalink)
hot dragon
Community Leader
 
hot dragon's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: adelaide, australia
Gender: Male
Posts: 564
Country:
Points: 7,419, Level: 57
Points: 7,419, Level: 57 Points: 7,419, Level: 57 Points: 7,419, Level: 57
Level up: 35%, 131 Points needed
Level up: 35% Level up: 35% Level up: 35%
Activity: 0%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
hot dragon is offline
Reply With Quote
 
fxashun;

Quote:
How are pedo and homosexuality biologically different without using "legal" constructs?
by using other constructs, such as psychological and evolutionary constructs, or the effect it has on society and other individuals within it. but wait, these are just theories arent they, so they dont count !!

biological differences were the major argument for the inferiority of blacks for centuries. and there ARE biological differences between blacks and whites. but this does not mean one is normal and one is degenerate. the concept of variety being the norm rather than a specific ideal individual being the norm appears to be beyond your grasp.

Quote:
If homosexuality is just a human variation, I don't see how pedo can not be one as well.
because the evidence shows that the underlying drives and psychology is different, that the impact on society and individuals is vastly different, that the genetics and evolutionary support for one does not follow to the other.

Quote:
It's quite a compelling urge.
urges can be compelled by very different things

Quote:
It's been accused of making men create entire societies like the FLDS to support it.
societies have been created for many reasons, natural or unnatural.

Quote:
It happens in nature.
nature is very variable. different animals have evolved in different ways. among some animals, sex with their offspring is quite normal and quite healthy. among others it is not. some species are able to reproduce with themselves. the argument regarding nature is not that "it happens in nature therefore it must be the right thing to do". if this were the argument, we would be able to say humans should be eating their own children, having dozens of kids in each litter and never seeing one child again once the next child comes along. the argument is sex in nature is not as simple as something we do to make babies. particularly among social species, evolution uses sex for multiple reasons. we are a naturally evolved species, and this applies to us too. get your mind around this idea.

Quote:
It has a LONG and stories human history.
not quite sure what you mean here. sordid, perhaps?

Quote:
It seems quite pervasive among humans.
there are lots of biological and social phenomena that are pervasive among humans. some are natural, some are abnormalities, some are biologically determined variations, some are social constructions.

you seem to be saying that if it is widespread but uncommon it is abnormal and dysfunctional every time. life is more complicated than that. how many times do i have to tell you this??

Quote:
I fail to see the biological difference between the two aberrant sexual orientations.
you fail to see lots of things. they have been illuminated for your benefit, but your failure seems to be something you are actively fostering.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to hot dragon For This Useful Post:
AlicornsPrayer (05-21-2008), forester814 (05-22-2008), tristanrobin (05-21-2008), waitingtables (05-22-2008)