nanaimogold's opinion on homosexuality

[JeffK]

nanaimogold is an awful person, hth

[Bimmerhead]

When I see a pair of female breasts, I'm instantly attracted to them. Sometimes it's hard to think about anything else but those lovely breasts. It's not something I've decided on. I didn't wake up one morning and say "Hey, I think I'll give breasts a try." It's just how I was born. The same thing applies to homosexuals. If they see a hairy ass or some muscular dude or whatever, and are instantly attracted, there's nothing they can do about it. Obviously, they don't have to act on those attractions, just like I don't have to motorboat titties, but being heterosexual is just as automatic as being homosexual. It's not a sin. It's not a choice. It wouldn't even be something worth commenting on if people like nanaimogold didn't exist. If heterosexuals wouldn't make such a big deal about it, neither would homosexuals. You wouldn't have all this "we're here, we're queer" stuff. It would be unremarkable. That's all I really wanted to say. Carry on.

We hear this all the time.  Like having automatic attraction that 'isn't a choice' somehow makes it o.k.

So are you asserting that if someone feels an attraction "without choice", it's fine for them to act on that attraction and live their life in that way?

I'll bite.. and assert it within the constraints placed by consent. 
Consent being something society quite rightly decides can only be given by those above a certain age.

Are you asserting it's somehow not ok for consenting partners to act on their attraction in whatever way they enjoy that doesn't harm others?

Bitcoin2cash said nothing about consent, he spoke only about inbred attraction.  I'm trying to establish what his position is, just as he is trying to determine nanaimogold's position.

[NghtRppr]

So are you asserting that if someone feels an attraction "without choice", it's fine for them to act on that attraction and live their life in that way?

No. Murder is wrong. Therefore an impulse to murder isn't fine for them to act on. What two consenting adults do to each other isn't wrong. Therefore an impulse to act on that is fine for them.

Julz, nailed it. Consent is the key. The reason I didn't mention consent is because it's irrelevant. Being a homosexual isn't about who you have sex with. It's about who you are automatically attracted to. You can be a virgin and still be a homosexual.

[Bimmerhead]

So are you asserting that if someone feels an attraction "without choice", it's fine for them to act on that attraction and live their life in that way?

No. Murder is wrong. Therefore an impulse to murder isn't fine for them to act on. What two consenting adults do to each other isn't wrong. Therefore an impulse to act on that is fine for them.

Julz, nailed it. Consent is the key. The reason I didn't mention consent is because it's irrelevant. Being a homosexual isn't about who you have sex with. It's about who you are automatically attracted to. You can be a virgin and still be a homosexual.

I see.  Because initially it sounded like you were justifying homosexuality because it isn't a choice.  You were just defining homosexuality as being outside of choice.

So what you're saying now is that as long as there is consent, something is morally fine in your eyes.

I assume that you therefore endorse voluntary polygamy.  Are you also o.k. with voluntary incest?  Is there any activity between consenting adults that you do not endorse?

[NghtRppr]

Is there any activity between consenting adults that you do not endorse?

Condone, not endorse. I condone any actions between two adults as long as they both consent. You completely and absolutely own your body, so you can do anything you want with it.

[Bimmerhead]

Is there any activity between consenting adults that you do not endorse?

Condone, not endorse. I condone any actions between two adults as long as they both consent. You completely and absolutely own your body, so you can do anything you want with it.

So you condone polygamy, incest, even cannibalism?

[NghtRppr]

Is there any activity between consenting adults that you do not endorse?

Condone, not endorse. I condone any actions between two adults as long as they both consent. You completely and absolutely own your body, so you can do anything you want with it.

So you condone polygamy, incest, even cannibalism?

Yes, as long as it's voluntary between all parties involved. You also forgot slavery. If you want to sell yourself into slavery, that's your right.

[Bimmerhead]

Is there any activity between consenting adults that you do not endorse?

Condone, not endorse. I condone any actions between two adults as long as they both consent. You completely and absolutely own your body, so you can do anything you want with it.

I see.  And at what age do you believe a person is allowed to consent to these types of activities, and how do you establish that age?

[NghtRppr]

I see.  And at what age do you believe a person is allowed to consent to these types of activities, and how do you establish that age?

A person is an adult whenever they demand to be treated as one and take responsibility for their own survival.

[Bimmerhead]

I see.  And at what age do you believe a person is allowed to consent to these types of activities, and how do you establish that age?

A person is an adult whenever they demand to be treated as one and take responsibility for their own survival.

So if I'm not an adult, you believe I cannot consent to sexual contact, is that correct?

What can I consent to if not an adult?  For instance, can I consent to playing baseball or eating asparagus?

[NghtRppr]

So if I'm not an adult, you believe I cannot consent to sexual contact, is that correct?

What can I consent to if not an adult?  For instance, can I consent to playing baseball or eating asparagus?

You can't consent to anything. Your guardian has to consent for you and your guardian can only consent to things that you would consent to if you were capable of consenting. Think about it like this. There's a man lying unconscious bleeding on the sidewalk. Do you give him a blood transfusion to save his life? It depends. Is that what he would want if he were capable of consenting. If he is a Jehovah's Witness, then no. Otherwise, then probably yes.

[Stalin-chan]

So if I'm not an adult, you believe I cannot consent to sexual contact, is that correct?

What can I consent to if not an adult?  For instance, can I consent to playing baseball or eating asparagus?

You can't consent to anything. Your guardian has to consent for you and you guardian can only consent to things that you would consent to if you were capable of consenting. Think about it like this. There's a man lying unconscious bleeding on the sidewalk. Do you give him a blood transfusion to save his life? It depends. Is that what he would want if he were capable of consenting. If he is a Jehovah's Witness, then no. Otherwise, then probably yes.

Who gives out blood transfusions in the middle of the street to strangers??

[Bimmerhead]

So if I'm not an adult, you believe I cannot consent to sexual contact, is that correct?

What can I consent to if not an adult?  For instance, can I consent to playing baseball or eating asparagus?

You can't consent to anything. Your guardian has to consent for you and you guardian can only consent to things that you would consent to if you were capable of consenting. Think about it like this. There's a man lying unconscious bleeding on the sidewalk. Do you give him a blood transfusion to save his life? It depends. Is that what he would want if he were capable of consenting. If he is a Jehovah's Witness, then no. Otherwise, then probably yes.

So, you believe your guardian can consent to sex on your behalf if you are not an adult?

[NghtRppr]

So if I'm not an adult, you believe I cannot consent to sexual contact, is that correct?

What can I consent to if not an adult?  For instance, can I consent to playing baseball or eating asparagus?

You can't consent to anything. Your guardian has to consent for you and you guardian can only consent to things that you would consent to if you were capable of consenting. Think about it like this. There's a man lying unconscious bleeding on the sidewalk. Do you give him a blood transfusion to save his life? It depends. Is that what he would want if he were capable of consenting. If he is a Jehovah's Witness, then no. Otherwise, then probably yes.

So, you believe your guardian can consent to sex on your behalf if you are not an adult?

No, it's unlikely that once you are an adult you will look back and say "Damnit, you should have let me get molested!".

[Bimmerhead]

So if I'm not an adult, you believe I cannot consent to sexual contact, is that correct?

What can I consent to if not an adult?  For instance, can I consent to playing baseball or eating asparagus?

You can't consent to anything. Your guardian has to consent for you and you guardian can only consent to things that you would consent to if you were capable of consenting. Think about it like this. There's a man lying unconscious bleeding on the sidewalk. Do you give him a blood transfusion to save his life? It depends. Is that what he would want if he were capable of consenting. If he is a Jehovah's Witness, then no. Otherwise, then probably yes.

So, you believe your guardian can consent to sex on your behalf if you are not an adult?

No, it's unlikely that once you are an adult you will look back and say "Damnit, you should have let me get molested!".

Let me see if I understand you correctly: you believe no minors want to have sex, but if they did want to have sex, their guardian should let them do so.

And you're accusing nanaimogold of what, exactly?

[JohnDoe]

What's most disconcerting to me is that he doesn't expect his opinions will hurt his business. I'm sure that everyone who has read his posts about gays now refuses to trade in Nanaimo Gold. Well, not that anyone actually traded there cause the fees were outrageous last time I checked.

[evolve]

hating on gays is wrong. no matter what type of BS way you try to swing it.

[Gerken]

hating on gays is wrong. no matter what type of BS way you try to swing it.

Indeed.  Bimmerhead would make a good politician with his wordplay bullshit.

[Bimmerhead]

hating on gays is wrong. no matter what type of BS way you try to swing it.

Indeed.  Bimmerhead would make a good politician with his wordplay bullshit.

Just because you have an indefensible position on some issues doesn't mean I've been using 'wordplay'.

The truth is you believe homosexuality is 'good' and paedophilia is wrong and you can't articulate why.  You can't articulate it because you don't know.  Your positions are based on emotions.  You feel homosexuality is no problem because that is what the wider society is telling you, and because you think nobody gets hurt because it's consensual.

You are repulsed by paedophilia and rightly so.  But the only argument you have against it is consent.  Every other argument used in favour of homosexuality ("It's inbred!", "Everyone has the right to love whomever they want!") can also be applied to every other type of activity.  So you're confused by your own position.

Nanaimogold may not be the most polite poster when sharing his views, and it may not be good for his business (or maybe it is, what do you care?  Mind your own business).  But he does hold a position that is consistent with almost every non-declining society in history and almost every major world religion.  I realize that means nothing to you because you create your own morality and defer to no outside authority, but it at least means that within the scope of human history you are in the minority, so there is more onus on you to explain your innovative morality than on him to defend his.

And when we have posts like this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=41627.msg511058#msg511058, bitcoin2cash reveals his true colours.  He mocks people who have been abused as children, and sub-consciously connects nanaimogold's pretend victimhood with his current opinion on homosexuality.  If nanaimogold himself had asserted that was the origin of his views all you liberals would have been climbing all over him.

[Gerken]

hating on gays is wrong. no matter what type of BS way you try to swing it.

Indeed.  Bimmerhead would make a good politician with his wordplay bullshit.

Just because you have an indefensible position on some issues doesn't mean I've been using 'wordplay'.

The truth is you believe homosexuality is 'good' and paedophilia is wrong and you can't articulate why.  You can't articulate it because you don't know.  Your positions are based on emotions.  You feel homosexuality is no problem because that is what the wider society is telling you, and because you think nobody gets hurt because it's consensual.

You are repulsed by paedophilia and rightly so.  But the only argument you have against it is consent.  Every other argument used in favour of homosexuality ("It's inbred!", "Everyone has the right to love whomever they want!") can also be applied to every other type of activity.  So you're confused by your own position.

Nanaimogold may not be the most polite poster when sharing his views, and it may not be good for his business (or maybe it is, what do you care?  Mind your own business).  But he does hold a position that is consistent with almost every non-declining society in history and almost every major world religion.  I realize that means nothing to you because you create your own morality and defer to no outside authority, but it at least means that within the scope of human history you are in the minority, so there is more onus on you to explain your innovative morality than on him to defend his.

And when we have posts like this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=41627.msg511058#msg511058, bitcoin2cash reveals his true colours.  He mocks people who have been abused as children, and sub-consciously connects nanaimogold's pretend victimhood with his current opinion on homosexuality.  If nanaimogold himself had asserted that was the origin of his views all you liberals would have been climbing all over him.

That's a lot of words to say you hate gays.  And who exactly do you think gets hurt in a consenting relationship between two adult men? 

And I'm not going anywhere near your pedo argument cause that's just creepy.  It's clear you just have vastly different views than the civilized world.