Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. Dewey wrote a book!

Dewey wrote a book!

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
187 Posts 18 Posters 3.4k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • KlausK Klaus

    @89th said in Dewey wrote a book!:

    @Jolly said in Dewey wrote a book!:

    @Axtremus said in Dewey wrote a book!:

    @Klaus said in Dewey wrote a book!:

    Judge people by their character, not by their sexual preferences.

    Ironically, sexual preferences used to be a character issue not that long ago.

    Do pedophiles have character issues?

    It's been the easiest argument when I mention that homosexuality is a form of a sexual preference disorder. Yes... a disorder. Similar to other physical or mental disorders, and not to be directly judged (seriously). But being attracted to the same sex is the milder version on the spectrum of sexual urge disorders, the more extreme side of the spectrum including attraction to children, animals, and family. I'm not equating them, but I do think there is a spectrum of sexual deviation from the standard (attraction to an unrelated adult of the opposite sex... you know, how we survive as a species).

    No, you have your boundary wrong.

    The boundary is at "consenting adults". It's nobody's business what consenting adults do with each other.

    Something is a disorder if something is not alright with it. If something causes pain, for instance. There's no victim in homosexuality. There has always been homosexuality, and it exists in basically all higher species. Just because it is not conducive to procreation does not mean anything. You could also call a woman on contraceptives s "disorder". 99% of all sex is not for procreation. Let them have their fun. It's none of your business.

    89th8 Offline
    89th8 Offline
    89th
    wrote on last edited by
    #93

    @Klaus said in Dewey wrote a book!:

    @89th said in Dewey wrote a book!:

    @Jolly said in Dewey wrote a book!:

    @Axtremus said in Dewey wrote a book!:

    @Klaus said in Dewey wrote a book!:

    Judge people by their character, not by their sexual preferences.

    Ironically, sexual preferences used to be a character issue not that long ago.

    Do pedophiles have character issues?

    It's been the easiest argument when I mention that homosexuality is a form of a sexual preference disorder. Yes... a disorder. Similar to other physical or mental disorders, and not to be directly judged (seriously). But being attracted to the same sex is the milder version on the spectrum of sexual urge disorders, the more extreme side of the spectrum including attraction to children, animals, and family. I'm not equating them, but I do think there is a spectrum of sexual deviation from the standard (attraction to an unrelated adult of the opposite sex... you know, how we survive as a species).

    No, you have your boundary wrong.

    The boundary is at "consenting adults". It's nobody's business what consenting adults do with each other.

    Something is a disorder if something is not alright with it. If something causes pain, for instance. There's no victim in homosexuality. There has always been homosexuality, and it exists in basically all higher species. Just because it is not conducive to procreation does not mean anything. You could also call a woman on contraceptives s "disorder". 99% of all sex is not for procreation.

    I'm talking about sexual attraction. Ok sexual attraction disorder, or sexual attraction impairment, or sexual attraction disease, or whatever you want to call the deviation from the normal sexual attractions of human beings. If being bipolar is a disorder, I think abnormal sexual attractions (e.g., to the same sex) could be considered as such (again there is a spectrum of extremes).

    Let them have their fun. It's none of your business.

    So you're good with a 40 year old man banging his 63 year old mom? That's within your normal boundary?

    Man this gives me deja vu from 2007 debates lol

    KlausK M 2 Replies Last reply
    • 89th8 89th

      @Klaus said in Dewey wrote a book!:

      @89th said in Dewey wrote a book!:

      @Jolly said in Dewey wrote a book!:

      @Axtremus said in Dewey wrote a book!:

      @Klaus said in Dewey wrote a book!:

      Judge people by their character, not by their sexual preferences.

      Ironically, sexual preferences used to be a character issue not that long ago.

      Do pedophiles have character issues?

      It's been the easiest argument when I mention that homosexuality is a form of a sexual preference disorder. Yes... a disorder. Similar to other physical or mental disorders, and not to be directly judged (seriously). But being attracted to the same sex is the milder version on the spectrum of sexual urge disorders, the more extreme side of the spectrum including attraction to children, animals, and family. I'm not equating them, but I do think there is a spectrum of sexual deviation from the standard (attraction to an unrelated adult of the opposite sex... you know, how we survive as a species).

      No, you have your boundary wrong.

      The boundary is at "consenting adults". It's nobody's business what consenting adults do with each other.

      Something is a disorder if something is not alright with it. If something causes pain, for instance. There's no victim in homosexuality. There has always been homosexuality, and it exists in basically all higher species. Just because it is not conducive to procreation does not mean anything. You could also call a woman on contraceptives s "disorder". 99% of all sex is not for procreation.

      I'm talking about sexual attraction. Ok sexual attraction disorder, or sexual attraction impairment, or sexual attraction disease, or whatever you want to call the deviation from the normal sexual attractions of human beings. If being bipolar is a disorder, I think abnormal sexual attractions (e.g., to the same sex) could be considered as such (again there is a spectrum of extremes).

      Let them have their fun. It's none of your business.

      So you're good with a 40 year old man banging his 63 year old mom? That's within your normal boundary?

      Man this gives me deja vu from 2007 debates lol

      KlausK Offline
      KlausK Offline
      Klaus
      wrote on last edited by
      #94

      @89th said in Dewey wrote a book!:

      I'm talking about sexual attraction. Ok sexual attraction disorder, or sexual attraction impairment, or sexual attraction disease, or whatever you want to call the deviation from the normal sexual attractions of human beings. If being bipolar is a disorder, I think abnormal sexual attractions (e.g., to the same sex) could be considered as such (again there is a spectrum of extremes).

      In what sense is it an "impairment" or a "disease"?

      All of this is only based on it being less frequent than heterosexual attraction?

      Then you could just as well call red hair an impairment and a disease. Your whole argument is based on it occurring less often ("abnormal").

      It's a little concerning that someone your age is still holding such views.

      89th8 1 Reply Last reply
      • bachophileB Offline
        bachophileB Offline
        bachophile
        wrote on last edited by
        #95

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_the_DSM

        Leaving this here without comment, let you folks fight it out.

        But I don’t think anything written will convince anyone out of their own convictions.

        1 Reply Last reply
        • Doctor PhibesD Offline
          Doctor PhibesD Offline
          Doctor Phibes
          wrote on last edited by Doctor Phibes
          #96

          Diversity in a biological context rather than its woke meaning is important for natural survival. If everyone was the same the entire species would be much more likely to get wiped out by some type of event. People describing anybody who doesn’t fit the norm as being in some way inferior, which the term impairment implies, kind of misses the point, as well as being a bit silly, and obviously pretty offensive to anybody who doesn’t fit within their definition of ‘normal’. Every characteristic has a spectrum.

          And before somebody says their can’t be an evolutionary advance to being homosexual, because they can’t breed, then answer why it occurs so frequently in nature. Unless of course God made them like that, which creates a whole different bunch of questions.

          I was only joking

          KlausK George KG Aqua LetiferA 3 Replies Last reply
          • Doctor PhibesD Doctor Phibes

            Diversity in a biological context rather than its woke meaning is important for natural survival. If everyone was the same the entire species would be much more likely to get wiped out by some type of event. People describing anybody who doesn’t fit the norm as being in some way inferior, which the term impairment implies, kind of misses the point, as well as being a bit silly, and obviously pretty offensive to anybody who doesn’t fit within their definition of ‘normal’. Every characteristic has a spectrum.

            And before somebody says their can’t be an evolutionary advance to being homosexual, because they can’t breed, then answer why it occurs so frequently in nature. Unless of course God made them like that, which creates a whole different bunch of questions.

            KlausK Offline
            KlausK Offline
            Klaus
            wrote on last edited by
            #97

            @Doctor-Phibes said in Dewey wrote a book!:

            And before somebody says their can’t be an evolutionary advance to being homosexual, because they can’t breed, then answer why it occurs so frequently in nature.

            Of course homosexuals can breed, and they do. They just enjoy it less. The vast majority of homosexuals has had heterosexual intercourse at some point.

            AxtremusA JollyJ Doctor PhibesD 3 Replies Last reply
            • KlausK Klaus

              @Doctor-Phibes said in Dewey wrote a book!:

              And before somebody says their can’t be an evolutionary advance to being homosexual, because they can’t breed, then answer why it occurs so frequently in nature.

              Of course homosexuals can breed, and they do. They just enjoy it less. The vast majority of homosexuals has had heterosexual intercourse at some point.

              AxtremusA Away
              AxtremusA Away
              Axtremus
              wrote on last edited by
              #98

              @Klaus said in Dewey wrote a book!:

              Of course homosexuals can breed, and they do. They just enjoy it less. The vast majority of homosexuals has had heterosexual intercourse at some point.

              Like most cat people have petted a dog at some point.

              1 Reply Last reply
              • Doctor PhibesD Doctor Phibes

                Diversity in a biological context rather than its woke meaning is important for natural survival. If everyone was the same the entire species would be much more likely to get wiped out by some type of event. People describing anybody who doesn’t fit the norm as being in some way inferior, which the term impairment implies, kind of misses the point, as well as being a bit silly, and obviously pretty offensive to anybody who doesn’t fit within their definition of ‘normal’. Every characteristic has a spectrum.

                And before somebody says their can’t be an evolutionary advance to being homosexual, because they can’t breed, then answer why it occurs so frequently in nature. Unless of course God made them like that, which creates a whole different bunch of questions.

                George KG Offline
                George KG Offline
                George K
                wrote on last edited by
                #99

                @Doctor-Phibes said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                it occurs so frequently in nature

                Interesting read:

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

                "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

                The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

                JollyJ 1 Reply Last reply
                • Doctor PhibesD Doctor Phibes

                  Diversity in a biological context rather than its woke meaning is important for natural survival. If everyone was the same the entire species would be much more likely to get wiped out by some type of event. People describing anybody who doesn’t fit the norm as being in some way inferior, which the term impairment implies, kind of misses the point, as well as being a bit silly, and obviously pretty offensive to anybody who doesn’t fit within their definition of ‘normal’. Every characteristic has a spectrum.

                  And before somebody says their can’t be an evolutionary advance to being homosexual, because they can’t breed, then answer why it occurs so frequently in nature. Unless of course God made them like that, which creates a whole different bunch of questions.

                  Aqua LetiferA Offline
                  Aqua LetiferA Offline
                  Aqua Letifer
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #100

                  @Doctor-Phibes said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                  People describing anybody who doesn’t fit the norm as being in some way inferior, which the term impairment implies, kind of misses the point, as well as being a bit silly, and obviously pretty offensive to anybody who doesn’t fit within their definition of ‘normal’. Every characteristic has a spectrum.

                  I'd be more impressed with this even-handed and measured approach to tolerance if it was universally applied, and not just to the wokes' greatest hits.

                  Please love yourself.

                  JollyJ 1 Reply Last reply
                  • Aqua LetiferA Aqua Letifer

                    @Doctor-Phibes said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                    People describing anybody who doesn’t fit the norm as being in some way inferior, which the term impairment implies, kind of misses the point, as well as being a bit silly, and obviously pretty offensive to anybody who doesn’t fit within their definition of ‘normal’. Every characteristic has a spectrum.

                    I'd be more impressed with this even-handed and measured approach to tolerance if it was universally applied, and not just to the wokes' greatest hits.

                    JollyJ Offline
                    JollyJ Offline
                    Jolly
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #101

                    @Aqua-Letifer said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                    @Doctor-Phibes said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                    People describing anybody who doesn’t fit the norm as being in some way inferior, which the term impairment implies, kind of misses the point, as well as being a bit silly, and obviously pretty offensive to anybody who doesn’t fit within their definition of ‘normal’. Every characteristic has a spectrum.

                    I'd be more impressed with this even-handed and measured approach to tolerance if it was universally applied, and not just to the wokes' greatest hits.

                    Or even just the flavor of the day, regardless of political orientation at the time.

                    “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                    Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    • KlausK Klaus

                      @Doctor-Phibes said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                      And before somebody says their can’t be an evolutionary advance to being homosexual, because they can’t breed, then answer why it occurs so frequently in nature.

                      Of course homosexuals can breed, and they do. They just enjoy it less. The vast majority of homosexuals has had heterosexual intercourse at some point.

                      JollyJ Offline
                      JollyJ Offline
                      Jolly
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #102

                      @Klaus said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                      @Doctor-Phibes said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                      And before somebody says their can’t be an evolutionary advance to being homosexual, because they can’t breed, then answer why it occurs so frequently in nature.

                      Of course homosexuals can breed, and they do. They just enjoy it less. The vast majority of homosexuals has had heterosexual intercourse at some point.

                      Then, are they homosexual or bisexual?

                      “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                      Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                      AxtremusA 1 Reply Last reply
                      • George KG George K

                        @Doctor-Phibes said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                        it occurs so frequently in nature

                        Interesting read:

                        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

                        JollyJ Offline
                        JollyJ Offline
                        Jolly
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #103

                        @George-K said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                        @Doctor-Phibes said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                        it occurs so frequently in nature

                        Interesting read:

                        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

                        In essence, it's down to sheep and humans.

                        “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                        Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        • JollyJ Jolly

                          @Klaus said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                          @Doctor-Phibes said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                          And before somebody says their can’t be an evolutionary advance to being homosexual, because they can’t breed, then answer why it occurs so frequently in nature.

                          Of course homosexuals can breed, and they do. They just enjoy it less. The vast majority of homosexuals has had heterosexual intercourse at some point.

                          Then, are they homosexual or bisexual?

                          AxtremusA Away
                          AxtremusA Away
                          Axtremus
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #104

                          @Jolly said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                          @Klaus said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                          @Doctor-Phibes said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                          And before somebody says their can’t be an evolutionary advance to being homosexual, because they can’t breed, then answer why it occurs so frequently in nature.

                          Of course homosexuals can breed, and they do. They just enjoy it less. The vast majority of homosexuals has had heterosexual intercourse at some point.

                          Then, are they homosexual or bisexual?

                          Review my "cat person petted a dog" comment a few posts prior and think: if a cat person petted a dog, is the cat person still a cat person?

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          • JollyJ Offline
                            JollyJ Offline
                            Jolly
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #105

                            Lot of difference between petting one and fucking it.

                            Beastiality is another subject, if you wish to start your own thread.

                            “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                            Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            • AxtremusA Away
                              AxtremusA Away
                              Axtremus
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #106

                              Lots more where that came from ...

                              If a Republican voted for a Democrat, is he still a Republican?

                              If a coffee person drank tea, is he still a coffee person?

                              If a redhead lover had sexual intercourse with a brunette, is he still a redhead lover?

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              • JollyJ Offline
                                JollyJ Offline
                                Jolly
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #107

                                Trying to trivialize and deflect aren't you?

                                “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                                Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                • HoraceH Offline
                                  HoraceH Offline
                                  Horace
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #108

                                  I couldn't care less what people do with consenting adults. But if you want to claim oppressed minority status after choosing those bedroom behaviors as a middle aged adult, I might be skeptical. Especially if you're blatantly excited about all the rhetorical benefits thereof, in your lifestyle as a professional virtue leader. He gets to carry the banner of the world's most popular religion and all the virtue behind it, alongside the banner of contemporary social justice. He's maximized his virtue signaling position on a number of fronts, almost as if that's the algorithm he's following. It's amazing that some of you don't even think twice about it. It's all so completely on the nose for a narcissist who wants to be considered a shining beacon of goodness in this world.

                                  Education is extremely important.

                                  KlausK 1 Reply Last reply
                                  • HoraceH Horace

                                    I couldn't care less what people do with consenting adults. But if you want to claim oppressed minority status after choosing those bedroom behaviors as a middle aged adult, I might be skeptical. Especially if you're blatantly excited about all the rhetorical benefits thereof, in your lifestyle as a professional virtue leader. He gets to carry the banner of the world's most popular religion and all the virtue behind it, alongside the banner of contemporary social justice. He's maximized his virtue signaling position on a number of fronts, almost as if that's the algorithm he's following. It's amazing that some of you don't even think twice about it. It's all so completely on the nose for a narcissist who wants to be considered a shining beacon of goodness in this world.

                                    KlausK Offline
                                    KlausK Offline
                                    Klaus
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #109

                                    @Horace said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                                    I couldn't care less what people do with consenting adults. But if you want to claim oppressed minority status after choosing those bedroom behaviors as a middle aged adult, I might be skeptical.

                                    Agreed, but these are two very different things.

                                    Gays don't need some kind of special status or protection.

                                    JollyJ George KG 2 Replies Last reply
                                    • KlausK Klaus

                                      @Horace said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                                      I couldn't care less what people do with consenting adults. But if you want to claim oppressed minority status after choosing those bedroom behaviors as a middle aged adult, I might be skeptical.

                                      Agreed, but these are two very different things.

                                      Gays don't need some kind of special status or protection.

                                      JollyJ Offline
                                      JollyJ Offline
                                      Jolly
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #110

                                      @Klaus said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                                      @Horace said in Dewey wrote a book!:

                                      I couldn't care less what people do with consenting adults. But if you want to claim oppressed minority status after choosing those bedroom behaviors as a middle aged adult, I might be skeptical.

                                      Agreed, but these are two very different things.

                                      Gays don't need some kind of special status or protection.

                                      Actually, they do. At least in some forms of discrimination, such as housing, hiring, etc. The level can vary from 0 on up, depending.

                                      “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                                      Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      • MikM Away
                                        MikM Away
                                        Mik
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #111

                                        They’ve certainly sought it enthusiastically.

                                        “I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        • JollyJ Offline
                                          JollyJ Offline
                                          Jolly
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #112

                                          No, I think they've passed the point of equality back down the road.

                                          “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                                          Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups