Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by US Army Retired, Mar 10, 2010.
coughs okay buddy.
I gotta say bullshit. The terms "nature" and "natural" are designed to mask our collective ignorance of what we are surrounded by yet do not grasp on any level of authority. I used those terms in response to posts simply to show what is deemed unnatural is insufficient for evidence of condemnation but to me nature does not exist.
Saying monogamy is not natural is an attempt, albeit not consciously, to assuage the guilt we feel for sexual fantasies with those we are not committed to. In a healthy relationship both parties should be able to acknowledge physical attractions to others without striking a tsunami of insecurities under the thin veneer of trust. I too once believed it was natural to want to pierce every rosy garden I walked by but then realized it wasn't about sex as much as it was about affirmation. The first ten years or so of dating I was never faithful and loved relying on the "natural" inclinations until I manned up and admitted I was really just a selfish asshole seeking a scapegoat.
Prodigies are said to be "naturally" gifted but what is really being said is:
"Nobody can explain the ability of symphony writing 12 year old."
Our choices are our own but we often lease out the most embarrassing ones.
Well, if he returned from the dead, I'd expect erectile dysfuction was the least of his worries.
Technically, it is a felony to discriminate against those girls based on them going as a same gender couple, because they are a state funded school. Federal laws are in place to eradicate this kind of practice.
PLUS if republicans are hellbent on claiming that underage teenagers cannot consent to SEX then how can any republican take a sexual orientation claim made by ANY minor seriously?? I am not saying that because I want to see the age of consent be lowered, either, I am just saying it because in principle, it is illogical.
What a great thread title!
You should get that Checked...
That was my attempt to be polite so since it was wasted let me say what I should have said. You're a lying shitbag.
Wow... You took that Poorly... I even 'd at ya...
You have Issues.
If you believe that bit of untruth. The rising from the dead myth is entirely derivative from other cultures and has been shown to be, at the very least, unlikely.
If you care to read up, here you go: here
Sex discrimination gets intermediate scrutiny...not strict scrutiny like race if memory serves. That is to say it must be shown that the law or policy being challenged furthers an important government interest in a way that is substantially related to that interest. This applies to laws of course.
What do my issues have to do with you ignoring posts?
Separate names with a comma.