Added: 4 years ago
From: Trenholmes
Views: 2,155
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (240)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I have a suggestion to make an organization and burn all churches/mosquest etc. and kill all pastors/priests, this is the only way the world will be a better place.

    All dehumanizing and disgusting religions must die.

  • YO trenholmes! you are fricken awesome. I love your vids, keep it up dude :)

  • Well put!

  • i am not homosexual, but i believe in equal rights for everyone, no matter what sexuality, race or religion we are all God's children.

  • homosexual is natural, nothing else to say about that

  • As natural as a round peg into a square hole shairaptor.. lol. No offense but the deception turned delusion that has overtaken you to assert that hoomosexuality is biologically natural, and do so with a straight face, must be immense.

  • It is natural say what you want. Scientists found out a long time ago. It's a fact honey. So shout all what you want, if you need to make a fool out of yourself.

  • No they didn't. But you obviously believe they did. I don't know why you believe something that's not true because you're not sharing your evidence instead resorting to personal attacks something I've noticed "gay" people default too when their sexual immorality and justifications for it are refuted.

  • You will have no luck in convincing millions and millions of gay people around the world to "stop" their "behaviour" only because YOU say that (lol).

    You're born with it, it's no choice, animals are gay. Live your (obviously) boring heterosexual life and leave the gays alone will ya.

  • Not to mention that people can become addicted to certain sexual activities due to what happens in the brain. David Carradine's death appears to be an example of someone deeply addicted to a dangerous type of sexual behavior. These are reversable btw.. as many happily married ex-homosexuals can attest to despite the modern liberally run state media's false assertions to the contrary. This video leaves a lot out and also has a great deal of misinformation.

  • u speak with great intellect how ever this intellect has blinded u for u discriminate don't we have the right to be ourselves? if so then being gay is a good thing but it doesn't matter what u think for we are ready to move into the future when u are stuck in the past

  • No sir, that is your own bias guiding your reaction to intelligent people expressing educated opinions. The future is what we decide to make it. A future of sexually immoral, marijuana addicted, godless atheists who rage against Christians because they don't cosign that behavior is not a good future but exactly where the homosexual community wishes to steer the ship.

  • actually the future is tolerance and love for one another a world where love knows no gemder a world where even gays have a chance to get a married and start a family

  • Heterosexual sex is well designed. Form a purely anatomical standpoint, nothing else makes sense. The woman's acidic vaginal secretions help her not only to ward off pathogenic bacteria and yeast, but also comes from probiotic bacteria that help establish this barrier by contributing lactic acid and the secretions continually sweep away . The large intestine is not desgined to do this. Anal sex is unhealthy and anatomically unsuited. Vaginal sex is hygenic.

  • We don't live in a vaccum. Someone's rights are going to be restricted when opposing worldviews come into conflict and choices have to be made. I side with parent rights to restrict an atheist state from forcing the indoctrination of sexually immoral values on their children for example something homosexuals very much want to force upon the entire populace via the modern liberal public education system.

  • It is obvious that Homosexuality is natural(if natural means "part of nature" but not as in, what nature's organisms' functions are designed to do, or, that all beings are meant to be Heterosexual).

    The question no one is asking is, is Homosexuality needed?

    That would hurt a lot of feelings.

  • This is reading from a script

  • your powers of perception are incredible.

  • men were supposed to be with men ***

  • men were suppose to be with women.

  • Some men were meant to be with women. Other men were meant to be with men. Some women were meant to be with women. Some men and women were meant to be with both sexes. It's time you move on and get out of your moral straightjacket and intellectual cocoon.

  • why therefore if do that then i will become immoral. and that shouldn't happen.

  • This may seem baffling to you, and there isn't enough room to explain why, but those who accept homosexuality are on higher moral ground than those who condemn it. The former is enlightened, fair-minded, with a sense of justice, and sophisticated enough to see that sexuality can't be compartmentalized into a single mold. The former see the issue on its own merits and questions entrenched beliefs. They look at the Bible and science honestly. They don't feel threatened by differences of others.

  • No, if you abandon your homophobic beliefs, you will become MORE moral.

  • according to your standards but not God's.

  • Your God hasn't said anything impressive, insightful, or logical. He has a moral obligation to show me. People believe homosexuality is wrong solely because the Bible says so. You Christers will have to do better than that.

  • sorry you view it that way but His Law is His Law. His Word is His Word. you may not like it, but thats what it is. stop trying to challenge Him and let Him come in your life. in the end you need Him.

  • I need him like a fish needs a bycicle. I am better qualified to articulate my needs than you or your God. Not needing your God is a virtue of resourcefulness and common sense. The need for a God to worship is for the weak.

  • no the need for God is everything. He gives us a purpose. He loves you beatbuddy don't turn your back on Him. it's not too late.

  • "Not too late" is a benign way of saying "you'll burn in hell." Where is the love here? The threat of eternal damnation is a control device for the weak, and on me it doesn't work.

    You have strayed from the topic at hand. The goal of this video is to dispense with superstition, that is, discuss homosexuality on a rational, scientific level. One cannot discuss it seriously without someone interjecting that the Bible is in any way an authoritative text on the subject.

  • that's not what i was trying to say. i was saying it is not too late to accept Christ's love and let Him guid you. He will lead you in the right direction. i'm not going to argue with you b/c i feel that i don't have to villify anyone to stand for what i believe. i believe homosexuality is wrong b/c my faith teaches me so. i hope you come to realize that and accept God in your heart. I will pray for you.

  • Nothing wrong wirh being inspired by words attributed to Jesus, but the error Christians make is that he is superlatively wise. I cannot use him as a guide because he was very myopic in some areas. His admonition against sexual urges that he made on the Mount is an invitation to sexual repression. It's totally unrealistic and impossible on human nature. The misery and cruelty that sexual repression brought into the world is breathtaking. Never mind what faith "teaches" you; think for yourself.

  • sometimes you have to let go, and LET GOD!!!

  • Sorry pal, but the humanist approach to homosexuality is morally, ethically, and rationally superior to what your God has to offer. You might reduce this video to man's reasoning, but you fail to comprehend that the Biblical passages are based on man's ignorance.

  • it's not about religion, but a relationship with God.

  • I have an invisible friend too. He's a six-foot tall rabbit and his name is Harvey.

  • but it could never amount to the relationship you could have with God.

  • I like my lovers to be visible.

  • some things you see w/your eyes, others you see with your heart.

  • That does not prove there is a God.

  • that does not prove that there isn't a God.

  • Your statement is a specious one. You cannot prove there is no Odin either. You make the claim there is a God, it's up to you to provide the proof.

  • you're right b/c it's my belief. i can't prove that God exists but i can speak on what He has done for me and my family. plus Christianity makes sense to me. i don't believe i am here in vein. i believe God put me here for a purpose just like you. there are many things in this world that i have not seen but it exists.

  • The things you have not seen but know exists are testable. God is not testable.

    How do you know there's a purpose to life? Once the human race becomes extinct, what difference will it make to the universe whether man existed or not?

    BTW, a vein is a vessel in which your blood flows. What you meant to say is "vain."

  • yes im sorry i meant "vain". i believe there is a purpose for everybody. maybe i have come off wrong and i think i do this a lot. i don't have all the answrs only God does. this is not a religious conversation and im sorry if you had bad experiences in the past but let God speak to you. He may not speak to you in an audible voice but He speaks through His word and circumstances and through different people.

  • So there's a prerequisit! Believe first and then God will show himself? Doesn't work that way. You give a pretty speech, but it's nonsense because there is no way of knowing if it's true. Telling me to have faith isn't an answer; it's a cop out, a substitute for lack of discernment.

  • yes there is. you have to know by your heart. some things are not meant to see with our eyes.

  • And many things are seen through the prism of self-deception and wishful thinking.

  • but this isn't a deception. don't let man run you, let God run you. He will forgive you for all yours sins. He loves you.

  • If you knew anything about the early foundations of Christianity and the Church, you would realize you have been deceived.

    You're against homosexuality. This is the result of collective social programming, mostly induced unconsciously. You have no solid basis for your claims, as Trenholms does. You are deceived.

  • yes i do, you may not like the claims but they are solid.

  • It's only stupid people who never have doubts. You will find that the brightest and the best are riddled with doubts many times. It's the key to honest inquiry.

  • well i wish you the best beatbuddy and i will pray for you.

  • Prayer has no efficacy and is a waste of energy.

  • it does in my life and many others.

  • Don't forget, I used to be a Christian. I once prayed to St. Anthony after I lost my wallet. It was found the following day. A couple of years later I lost my wallet again and prayed to St. Anthony. This time, no wallet showed up. Had I not prayed the first time, my wallet would have been retrieved anyway.

  • God's time is not our time. He may not answer the way we want Him too. But He never forsakes us.

  • No need to be concerned, anymore than I'm concerned what Allah thinks.

  • I'd rather you spend your time doing something constructive.

  • i am even if you don't see it that way.

  • Pray if you wish, but I prefer to spend my time watching The Three Stooges.

  • alright

  • *Chuckles*

  • Sperm and sperm? or sperm and egg? What makes life? If men were supposed to be with me we would have an egg inside of us. Think.

  • Are you saying that everyone is expected to reproduce every time they have sex? Heaven forbid!

  • not every single time but God intended for people to reproduce and multiply.

  • And what about those, gay or straight, who have no desire to reproduce? Mandatory reproduction is a bit irrational, especially in this modern world, don't you think? Ever examine the pitfalls of docility?

  • im sorry i wasn't clear in my last post. what i was saying is that not every single person has to reproduce. i personally am happy with just marrying my future wife and i don't want any children. but God wants people to multiply the earth. thats why He created adam and eve.

  • Did it ever occur to you that the Adam and Eve myth was overturned by the science of evolution?

  • no b/c it wasn't. it may overturned your personal beliefs among others bout like my last statement, thats why God created Adam and Eve.

  • Even a child with a rudimentary knowledge of science can see that Genesis is a collection of fairy tales.

  • if thats what you teach them.

  • The is correct. I don't want my children imbued with your superstitious nonsense. Come on, man! Have some integrity!

  • Did you miss the whole point of the video? I think you did-- you fail, Slawturd05.

  • Priests like little boys bums so not all Christians disagree with it

  • Homosexuality is all natural and found in nature as opposed to its opposite value homophobia which is unnatural, unGodly and never found in nature but only in churches. Churches that are used to hypocritically worship the Christian evangelists, and religious leaders.

    Curse is the entire world for putting the words of God below the religious leaders who take the scripture out of context to harm minority. God guarantees that world peace will never happen.

  • what happened to homsexuality being a perversion?

  • "perversion" is a moral claim, not a medical claim. Medically, there's nothing wrong with the orientation of homosexuality or with same-sex intercourse per se. Morally, people disagree. I don't think there's any moral problem with the orientation or the behavior.

  • Arsenic is natural. Those turkey and balloon fetishes are akin to same sex sexual acts. Christian don't fear homosexuality rather it repulses them just like pedophilia still repulses some atheisits.

  • homosexuality is not a fetish and isn't analogous to pedophilia. Both of those are sexual orientations, but the latter is pathological.

  • Up until recently homasexuality was considered by science to be pathological. We keep defining deviancy down until deviancy becomes accepted. Eventually pedophiles will be out of the closet saying things like "I remember when society treated us like perverts".

  • false analogy. at least 70 separate studies (many of which used personality tests with inherent sfae guards against deception) have conclusively proven that homosexuals are just as mentally/emotionally healthy as heterosexuals. Therefore, homosexuality is not a psychopathology. In contrast, pedophiles do not score this well and are well below the average. So no, pedophilia will never be viewed as healthy by western science.

  • Until homosexuals were accepted and even embraced by the culture they were persecuted, descriminated against and even worse. Do you honestly believe that they were mentally/emotionally well then. The world is dominated by moral relativism some day some guy on youtube will being saying how wonderful it is that pedophiles are finally accepted.

  • First, yes actually. The first testng began in the 1950s when homosexuals were viewed as monsters and were equated with child molestors. The first series of testing showed the majority to be mentally sound. Second, physically expressing homosexuality (per se) can be done healthily. In contrast, physically expressing pedophilia is always harmful. Third, there is no such thing as a long-term pedophiliic relationship (oxymoron). Again, no comparison. false analogy. please retract it. best wishes.

  • additionally, some of these personality tests detect pathologies that aren't directly related to societal oppression. And just to clarify, there were certainly more depressed homosexuals in the 1950s than there are now, but the testing showed the majority of them to be mentally-sound and just as well-adjusted as the average heterosexual. Also, pedophiles have the desire to do something that will result in a child being traumatized. No such thing as a long-term adult-child relationship. etc.

  • My analogy is based upon societal acceptance of abhorrant behavior. Homosexuals have higher rates of drug abuse, alcoholism, and domestic violence than heterosexuals.

    I personally do not accept the pathological explanation I think that it is sin.

  • thanks for the reply. The sin issue is separate from pathology, so if you want to talk about that then we can. The higher rates of drug abuse are irrelevant because the vast majority of homosexuals don't have that problem. But getting into higher porportionality arguments is really irrelevant (men are 90% more likely than women to be serial killers, but that doesn't mean there's something inherently wrong with being a man). So, do you want to talk about the sin aspect of it?

  • Sure. I can only speak from a Christian perspective in regard to sin. Romans Chapter 1 makes it clear that man after exchanging the truth with a lie are given over to their sin and become deceived and pratcice the sin of homosexuality. So the knowingly surrender to what is wrong then they begin to believe that it is ok. I also sin I just don't try and justify it and call it natural and good.

  • The idea that same-sex relationships are wrong isn't the only Christian perspective. I don't think the Bible actually forbids same-sex intercourse *per se*. Go to jeramyt dot org slash gay dot html. Then scroll down to "Romans 1.18-32: God's Wrath on Idolaters (long argument)". Make you you click on the "long arument". Best wishes.

  • I read it and I found it interesting but unconvincing. The practice is forbidden in Leviticus and just as clearly denounced in Romans 1:18-32. Read it yourself and see what you come away with. If you are not a Christain then it does not matter anyway I say go for it I just hope that if you are not that you repent and turn to the Lord. By the way I am not one to rate the sins I am a sinner and unworthy of Christ and his Grace thank God he loves me

  • let's slow down and not get to Leviticus just yet. Can you rebut Townsley's article on Romans 1?

  • To start by saying there is something new sexually is aragant and nieve - By evolution standards of survival there should no homo's today. Sexual divience is a problem but to call it natural is mere tollerence and blind acceptence. No science behind it all. To say the body controls your actions - Humans have no instinks. ( except maybey to survive ) everything else is learned.

  • You have it all backward. Those who call it unnatural are guilty of blind acceptance; all they have going for them is an ambiguous phrase in the Bible. It's OPINION that is no less susceptible to scrutiny than any other source. It's those who assert it's natural who are challenging entrenced belief. Trenholm's thesis withstands vigorous challenge. Sexuality is more than just the product of genes; estrogen, androgen and other factors shape a person's orientation.

  • evolution is 100% compatible with homosexuality. Homosexuality could be caused (at least in some cases) by silent genes that get expressed every few generations (maybe something in the prenatal hormonal environment or something else "wakes" the genes up, at which point they have an effect on the brain). We still don't know the exact cause(s) of homosexuality, so we can't say it's incompatible with evolution. Additionally, evolution could select homosexuality to help regulate the population.

  • Something that I found interesting is that amongst homosexual males many if not most stick to a particular role. By role I mean pitcher or catcher. I always assumed they both played both roles at different times. It does make sense though considering you have both manly homosexual males and femine homosexual males.

  • Huh?! Where have you been hanging out? It's a known fact that gay men are overwhelmingly attracted to masculine men. They are turned off by queens. Any effeminate gay male can vouch for that. Role playing is considered antiquated and limiting. The butch/femme dichotomy is a thing of the past. You often hear from gay men in response to feminine guys: "If I wanted a woman I'd look for one."

  • What are you smoking? - I have yet to see or meet a gay couple that did not role play. I have no judgement about gays - God will decide not me - but lets be real here and stop the fantasy talk.

  • How many gay couples do you know? The number of gays I have known in the course of my life run high into the hundreds. Just go to the gay ads; you see all the time phrases like "straight acting" and "no femmes." Go to the video called GAY PEOPLE posted by ItsChrisCrocker. He's a queen who'll tell you how frustrated he is with masculine gay men who seek out masculine gay men.

  • My old room mate was Gay & we lived together for 3 years and are still good friends today. I understand the plight and the fixation but get real there is always a pitcher & reciever and all the characteristics of a Male Female relationship being portrayed.

  • You're judging the entire population by the tastes of your roommate. This butch/femme dichotomy is archaic, and if you bring it up today, it's greeted with ridicule. Visit a leather bar and you'll see what I mean.

  • I am not Judging anything or anyone - Just making observations - YOU are obviously Gay and Young & clueless.

  • I'm more of the school of thought that the male human sub-conscious instinct is to release sperm not procreate, if so, how do you explain masterbation?

  • I love being a man, was never raped, a had extremly loving parents, And had very happy childhood, I am Firefighter, Father , Partner and a gay man.

  • Did you play with dolls as a little boy? That must be the cause!

  • no ,,but I used to torture my sister by painting a mustache on her dolls with majic markers.

  • LOL

  • We are not dealing with Natural instinct. We are spirit beings. We either deal with The Creator, or the fallen Angel.

  • Are you saying that gay people are without spiritual values? There are those who define spirituality as an allegiance to their specific Gods. I define it as an aesthetic in relation to something meaningful or cathartic. Then you look at all of great art produced by gay people. Are you saying they lack spirit?

  • Faceless bBuddy, I don't debate. God is Spirit. Satan is Spirit. We either serve and love the Fruit of the Holy Spirit, or the Carnal natural spirit, natural and demonic, the sad thing is we think we are ruling ourself. Additions are never satisfied, the boastful pride of life, lust of the eyes, and the lust of the flesh. Personally I really don't like to be addicted to anything, there is so much more satisfaction in life when we are at liberty to feel free and clean. As always, Carol

  • I was never one to see much conflict between the spirit and the flesh, so the claims made by Nikos Kazantazkis (Zorba the Greek, The Last Temptation of Christ), or St. Augutine, or Origen is bogus to me. There's a dynamic spirit in Walt Whitman, who calls for full integration of the self, a celebration of the self, not the divorce from oneself that Christianity so perversely demands.

  • the thing is... same-sex relatioships often bear wonderful fruit: generosity, selflessness, interpersonal growth, happiness, greater contribution to society, and even closer relationships to Jesus. These are incredible fruit that shouldn't be dismissed as easily as they have been.

  • Another genius argument. I cant beleive you arent #1 on youtube Athiests.

  • Would you say the other tastes, such as, red hair, black hair, short, tall, ect ect is also "All natural baby"?

  • Are the acts of pedophilia, bestiality and necrophilia natural? Do you accept that the purpose of all vertebrate life is procreation and therefore any psychological aberration that interferes with this behavior is a defect.

  • I believe that some seemingly psychosomatic attractions are unfortunate genetic defects. Pedophilia is arguably genetic. I think bestiality and necrophilia are likely psychosomatic.  I can't percieve one being genetically attracted to procreate cross species or with dead bodies. There is most probably at least a slight genetic factor.

  • In my view, procreation is *one* purpose of intercourse, but not the only purpose. Sex can also bind people emotionally, relieve stress and anxiety and guilt, and overall just feels good. Most animals engage in non-reproductive sexual behavior, so from an evolutionary perspective, procreation is not the only purpose of sex.

  • Splendidly stated.

  • Thanks, Trenholmes. You do what you do so very well.

    Have you heard that female sharks have been found to both lay and fertilize their own eggs? Asexual reproduction in sharks should scare Christians a lot more than some homosexual hanky-panky in the neighbor's house.

  • I have not heard of those sharks! Fascinating. Biodiversity is wondrous and beautiful!

  • OMG i love your anus arguement.. it was hilarious and TRUE!!! GREAT JOB!

  • Your comments about the radio dial echo my comments about the human sexual spectrum

  • Thanks! It's nice to have another reaffirm similar thoughts. =)

  • The male g-spot: is it only gay men who know about it?

    Are straight men totally missing out?

  • There are many straight men that have anal intercourse with their female partners.  It's not uncommon.

  • Yes, but nothing stimulates the male g-spot like another penis.

    I think straight men are missing out!

  • Though I think the thought is funny, I believe you're missing the point. For a truly heterosexual male, this is beyond their instinct and nature. There would be no arousal and really it would just be an uncomfortable moment for everyone. If this weren't true then everyone would be bi.

  • That's EXACTLY what I was getting at: I think everyone has the potential of being gay or at least bi.

  • girls are fine to have sexual experience with each other but males is a no no ur penetrating an arse hole where u shit ffs that ent right thats why females have pussies.

  • That's quite possibly the most ignorant thing I've read concerning this subject in response to either of my homosexual videos. I wish you well in your intellectual endeavors. I hope you find tons of enlightening knowledge on your path to wisdom.

  • Man, tren, I don't know whether to laugh or cry!

  • I could only cry scoutie at the ignorance we all have to shoulder. I damn the unmotivated who refuse to learn new things! =)

  • guy who made this vid prob got bullied by girls as a kid, if ur straight then do u give a fuck about how ppl think about gays its our choice and as far as i know more are against homosexuality than for because some of us know the difference between right and wrong unlike you.

  • Yeah, you figured me out. Am I that transparent? I thought my secret was protected but whoa to my inability to hide my true self.

    I was attacked by a horde of girls wearing clown suits. Ever since I've only been able to get aroused by clowns.

    You're a genius.

  • LOL! Aroused by clowns- *snickers*

  • If homosexuality is such a natural phenomenon then why does it not arise in other species?

  • it does. there's lots of documented evidence for homosexuality in many species including apes.  this is a common phenomenon that farmers have discussed for years among sheep, dogs, cows, etc.

  • dude stfu humans are intellegent enough to know better than animals like animals mate with there own offspring and brothers and sisters but do humans do that and if they do we think of it as morally wrong, u have no argument here stop comparing it to animals u retard.

  • We are animals jackass. You happen to be the stupid kind, but you and I are animals nonetheless. Get used to it.

  • ok u justify another male penetrating another males arse hole gd for you hope u die a meserible death you confused individual.

  • Likewise.

  • Actually it does. There are penguins in the Antarctic that mate for life with same sex partners. There are pods of porpoises that consist of 4-5 males and 1-2 females. The mostly engage in sex play with each other and only mate with the females to reproduce. There are many more examples of homosexuality in non-human species.

  • ho·mo·phobic =fear ,most people who are opposed to homosexuality are not opposed to it because it frightens them, this is recycled trash did you read all that from wikipedia?

  • That's the normal word for an attitude of hatred against homosexual, as far as I know.

  • sounds exactly like John Wayne Gacys public defender

  • Veg1ta - Your argument isn't even an argument it's just lame. You offer nothing to support your claims. You use your "ideas" as a way to justify hatred. Hatred = Ignorance = you're stupid fucking prick. I hope you wise up or never have children. If so, you passing your beliefs to them is child abuse. Ass. Pick up a book sometime.

  • Im sorry I havent responded to you last video but I have been getting a massive amount of comments and responses to my video. I dont understand how you can say rape is not morally wrong? I will try to put together a response to your last video soon (hopefully)

  • goldengun- He was saying that all actions is inherently neutral when it comes to morality and ethics. Essentially, what defines the immorality of something such as rape is found it's transgression against another's free will.

  • This distinction is important, as by defining an action as having any particular morality - without any regard to the results of that action - is fallacious, and sometimes dangerous.

  • Exactly what winterxl said. I agree rape is repugnant. However, rape doesn't presuppose to inherit any actual moral quality such as good or evil. In and of itself rape is neutral.

  • "I dont understand how you can say rape is not morally wrong?"

    It's very simple: like any other evangelistic degenerate, he has abandoned his common sense. The dark spirit which gains purchase through that abandonment gives him access to a sort of artificial intelligence which allows him to argue logically from premises which are self-evidently idiotic.

    So do yourself a favor, kid: don't dumb yourself down by trying to appeal to that which they have abandoned, and which they hate.

  • charlietcc: Did you seriously just skip over my and trenholmes' comments? To be clear, nobody even said "rape is not morally wrong". And what in the world are you talking about with "that which they hate"? Bizarre.

  • <i>To be clear, nobody even said "rape is not morally wrong"</i>

    He said it isn't inherently wrong. You don't think it's an equivalent claim, but that's because you think morality is a construct of the human mind - which it isn't.

    <i>And what in the world are you talking about with "that which they hate"?</i>

    Common sense.

  • "you think morality is a construct of the human mind - which it isn't."

    that's your assertion. plenty of people disagree.

    and...hate common sense? wtf are you talking about?

  • "that's your assertion. plenty of people disagree."

    Your point being...?

    "and...hate common sense? wtf are you talking about?"

    You've either forgotten it or you hate it. There is no other explanation for haroboring such patently idiotic views as "rape is not inherently wrong".

  • *harboring

  • "Your point being...?"

    that you think morality isn't rational, which is a bit silly.

    we all agree it's immoral. you clearly just don't have the capacity to understand what was meant when he said "rape is not inherently wrong".

  • "that you think morality isn't rational"

    That is, of course, not what I said.

    "you clearly just don't have the capacity to understand what was meant when he said"

    Please. You think I started debating this last week or something? You REALLY think I haven't heard this moral subjectivist drivel a thousand times before?

  • "That is, of course, not what I said."

    Sorry, I left it a bit vague. :) I meant "isn't rational" as "not borne of rationale" rather than "not sensible".

  • <i>I meant "isn't rational" as "not borne of rationale"</i>

    All spoken truths rest on unprovable, uspeakable truths. Thus, there is no proposition which is not logically deconstructable so that it appears to be baseless, whether it is objectively true or not.

  • "Thus, there is no proposition which is..."

    Ad nauseum reduction, eh?

  • "You think I started debating this last week or something"

    Well, it seems natural to me: action is neutral, and consequence begets morality. the varied violations of the victim in rape is effectively a universally accepted immorality.

    the rationale behind all this is that ascribing morality to action without any regard for consequence is fallacious.

    do you seriously disagree with that? :|

  • "the rationale behind all this is that ascribing morality to action without any regard for consequence is fallacious."

    You think attempted murder should not be considered a crime, then? Or that it's not immoral?

  • "You think attempted murder should not be considered a crime, then?"

    Sure I think it should be criminal activity. Depriving another of life was the consequence, so it's immoral. As the consequence wasn't fully realized, the punishment should be correspondingly adjusted.

  • "Depriving another of life was the consequence"

    Not in the case of <i>attempted</i> murder, it isn't.

    "As the consequence wasn't fully realized, the punishment should be correspondingly adjusted."

    OK, so somebody lays a booby trap intented to kill me, but I smell it out and don't get a scratch, and the guy is apprehended. By your reasoning, he should be charged for the court costs and let go, right?

  • Ah.. there's also the intent component. So far we've established intent, action and consequence in the mix.

    As far as the guy setting a booby trap, isn't that the attempted murder example again? I think we can agree that this behavior is dangerous (intent to deprive you of life), and something needs to be done. But, I think discussing punishment is getting a bit off course (we probably have similar opinions anyway).

  • "As far as the guy setting a booby trap, isn't that the attempted murder example again?"

    Do you find some ambiguity in the phrase "intended to kill"??

    "I think discussing punishment is getting a bit off course"

    Fine. Is attempted murder that produces no physical injury immoral or not?

  • "Do you find some ambiguity in the phrase "intended to kill"??"

    I'm not sure what you're getting at... But the deathtrap example was decidedly vague to begin with. Presumably the trap would've had a high probability of success, i.e. comparable to directly attacking with a weapon or something. In this sense it's effectively attempted murder... unless you're trying to say something else?