Sounds like change is coming...

[Flash]

So that makes it acceptable for a 33 year old teacher to fuck their 18 yr old student? Really?

No, not really. How the hell did you read that out of what I said? Quit talking out of your ass.

There are many situations where two adults of age cannot or should not have sexual relations, like some people in the military or a school teacher with a student among others. And shockingly enough there are rules and laws against that. I believe with the exception of the military, there are no laws or rules that forbid homosexuality anymore in this country. Figure that.

 

[ThreeGreen]

At CWJones411:

I was thinking socially more so than legally. I was just acknowledging that it is illegal. I think your right on the state by state though...

 

[scoober78]

Who draws the line to what is acceptable and where is it drawn? In 20 years is it going to be okay to have sex with dogs?

Society does...150 years ago, it was considered a normal occurence to buy and sell black people on the auction block. Guess what...people identified this as a part of their "morality" too. That has changed. Is that some sort of slippery slope as well? The problems with "slippery slope" logic are too numerous to count. Anything can be phrased in slippery slope terms. It is a worthless argument.

Oh wait! A gay guy can control himself when berthing with a strait male. Guess what? A straight guy can control himself when berthing with a female too. If one is acceptable so is the other.

I agree 100%, and this is a valid logical argument. What that means in most of the world is that men and women can berth together. Many modern and effective militaries have co-ed berthing.

If I was still on active duty, I would refuse to share a berthing compartment or stateroom with a gay. I believe I would win this battle too.

Well...not if the CinC said you wouldn't. Why do you think that you would win. I guarantee that hundreds, if not thousands, said this when racially integrated berthing happened...and guess what...they lost.

Call me a bigot but if nature had intended gay sex, then oral and anal sex would result in pregnancies and males would be able to get pregnant too.

If nature had intended gay sex for procreation it would. I'm pretty sure that most people on this board, male and female, don't participate in oral sex because they are hoping to procreate however...most just think its pretty darn enjoyable. I'm sure that many gays feel the same way.

Second, gay sex is not explicitly a human behavior. MANY species of animals participate. It is NOT therefore, un-natural.

 

[Slammer2]

...What that means in most of the world is that men and women can berth together. Ask half of Europe...

I think EVENTUALLY we'd be ok with the coed thing. The problem would be the first few months/years. Sort of like when a kid leaves home for the first time and goes to college. They're going to do all the "bad" shit until it no longer becomes a novelty.

 

[red_ryder]

Ok. The teacher/student thing...that's a frat issue, not an adult preying on minors issue. It is not illegal by any means; 18 year olds can legally make up their own mind about consensual sex. The problem is that it's highly unprofessional on the teacher's part and as a workplace policy the teacher should be fired/resign, and did-case closed.

As for gays...gays aren't animals, don't even start that comparison about "slippery slopes". They are as capable of controlling themselves as we are and should be recognized as such, and be subject to the same standards of professionalism with the same consequences.

 

[HAL Pilot]

I believe with the exception of the military, there are no laws or rules that forbid homosexuality anymore in this country. Figure that.

Not now but there used to be sodomy laws that were aimed at homosexuals. They were changed. Who's to say bestiality laws can't be changed too? The dog fuckers obviously think it's okay and want the law changed. After all, they can't help it that their sexual orientation is for 4 legs and a cute wagging tail.

 

[navy09]

I knew a pilot who's sexual preference was different than mine....he perferred 7th grade girls. You're saying he should have spent 5 years in the military instead of prison?

I've got a ton of respect for you and it really surprised me to read this. I get that it's (largely) a generational thing, but talk about being behind the times.

People used to say the same thing about blacks, women, jews, and probably every other minority out there.

 

[Flash]

And what about polygamy? Why is homosexuality accepted by so many, while polygamy is generally frowned upon, and illegal? If all the members are of legal age (I know, rare...), consenting, and human, what's the big deal?

Partially because it is not sociably accepted, often difficult to determine if it consensual and a legal marriage is just the official stamp on a long-standing cultural custom.

And there is often nothing wrong with a guy living with a few women and calling them his 'wives', as long as they are all consenting. Happened all the time in hippie communes, how do you think all those kids got called Skylar and Moon Beam? It is the legal part that gets a bit sticky, so to speak.

 

[HueyCobra8151]

And there is often nothing wrong with a guy living with a few women and calling them his 'wives', as long as they are all consenting. Happened all the time in hippie communes, how do you think all those kids got called Skylar and Moon Beam? It is the legal part that gets a bit sticky, so to speak.

So when consenting homosexuals choose to live together under their own terms, our society is repressive because they can't get married.

But when polygamists do the same thing, the legal part gets sticky and we should stick to shunning them in hippie communes and...Utah...

Also, people keep talking about consent, but what consent do service members have in their berthing? Sometimes they might be able to switch, sure, but can the government guarantee that it will always be that way? No.

 

[Flash]

Not now but there used to be sodomy laws that were aimed at homosexuals. They were changed. Who's to say bestiality laws can't be changed too? The dog fuckers obviously think it's okay and want the law changed. After all, they can't help it that their sexual orientation is for 4 legs and a cute wagging tail.

Actually sodomy laws were overturned by the Supreme Court in Lawrence v. Texas.

As for the bestiality laws, it is going to be hard to get the 'other' half to agree. At least with homosexuality both parties do so, and are legally able to consent.

 

[HercDriver]

Not now but there used to be sodomy laws that were aimed at homosexuals. They were changed. Who's to say bestiality laws can't be changed too? The dog fuckers obviously think it's okay and want the law changed. After all, they can't help it that their sexual orientation is for 4 legs and a cute wagging tail.

Most sodomy laws (including the UCMJ) do not delineate whether it is gay or straight sex. Here is hoping everyone on the board has stuck with the missionary position, lest they run afoul of the law!

Also, people keep talking about consent, but what consent do service members have in their berthing? Sometimes they might be able to switch, sure, but can the government guarantee that it will always be that way? No.

You didn't consent to raise your right hand? Once you did that, your ability to bitch lessened greatly.

 

[bubblehead]

..there used to be sodomy laws that were aimed at homosexuals..

That's right! Because homosexuals are the only ones to engage in sodomy

This is not directed at you HAL, but at the idiots who come up with these stupid laws.

 

[Flash]

So when consenting homosexuals choose to live together under their own terms, our society is repressive because they can't get married.

But when polygamists do the same thing, the legal part gets sticky and we should stick to shunning them in hippie communes and...Utah...

Life ain't fair sometimes. That, and society has found polygamy unacceptable in this country.

Also, people keep talking about consent, but what consent do service members have in their berthing? Sometimes they might be able to switch, sure, but can the government guarantee that it will always be that way? No.

They signed some of their legal rights away when they put their John Hancock on the dotted line. Bad analogy.

 

[HueyCobra8151]

You didn't consent to raise your right hand? Once you did that, your ability to bitch lessened greatly.

Well shit, why did we spend all that money segregating our barracks by sex?

I mean, those women CONSENTED to join the military, so why don't we just throw 'em in with the rest of the guys in the open squad bays?

The Submarine community will be thrilled to know their pool of applicants just increased.

 

[MasterBates]

This is kind of my point.

It's one thing to work with someone of a different sexual precedent.

It's another thing to have to sleep 18 inches from someone when their sexual preference is YOU.

Yes, the average gay man probably doesn't desire my ogre ass. Just like most women. But when you room with someone who is a "meat gazer" it make it VERY uncomfortable.

90% of us would be able to room with the other sex on cruise and be OK. But there's always that % that is a creeper. And I suggest YOU bring "my roomate watches me when I change" to your COC. They will laugh you right out of the XOs office.