Psychology Today: disguised “NAMBLA-like” author trying to sabotage age-of-consent laws

Reflections, Reflections by Alessandra

Many very good comments on this thread at this Psychology Today site. I copied them here to save them and think about some points further.

They were in response to an extremely irresponsible article promoting teenagers to have sex and wanting to abolish age-of-consent laws (or bring them down) by Marina Adshade. As you know, liberals who normalize homosexuality are the new NAMBLA light. They haven’t begun to advocate for sex with 2 yr olds yet, but they want to sexually exploit everyone teenager. Now they claim legal protections against sex at an early age are terrible and creates great injustices. Her main grotesque claim:

Age-of-consent laws impose high costs in terms of the personal hardship on the youth caught up in that enforcement (on both sides of the courtroom). So there must be pretty good evidence that younger teens are less capable of making healthily sexual decisions than…

View original post 6,650 more words

Advertisements

About aquarianmist

I am a retired admin officer. My interests include supernatural phenomena, tarot cards, movies, social activities and more.
This entry was posted in Political. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Psychology Today: disguised “NAMBLA-like” author trying to sabotage age-of-consent laws

  1. snowylocks says:

    Uhm….you might want to read up on the country with the lowest age-of-consent laws in europe.
    You might be surprised.

    As for the rest of it, well, if after all this time you’re STILL trying to connect homosexuality to anything inherently negative you can find, without bothering with facts, then I’m not sure what all this is in aid of.
    I mean, people who are seriously interested in facts can invalidate the opinions in that blogpost in a matter of seconds, thanks to the wealth of information we all have at our fingertips these days.

    So unless your trying to cater to frustrated and unhappy people who are looking for a scapegoat, then this is kind of pointless.

    Heck, even blogging about “supernatural phenomena, tarot cards, movies, social activities” would make more sense.

    • aquarianmist says:

      snowylocks

      Of course I am still citing mother nature because we are all nature’s creatures. Biologically, human beings are heterosexual: the male carries the sperm, the female carries the eggs. The sperm delivery system evolved by nature is an erect penis inserted into a receptive vagina. This is normal and natural and is the most intimate and pleasurable activity a man and a woman can share; and is a key factor in the continuation of our species.

      Children born of these normal and natural sexual relationships usually remain with their biological parents until they reach maturity. This is a key factor in the survival of human offspring. These long term natural family units are the bedrock upon which civilizations have been built over hundreds of thousands of years. This has nothing to do with religion or politics but is an integral part of human nature.

      What homosexuals are doing is bringing children into the world with the specific intention of depriving these children of one or both of their biological parents as an accessory to support the fantasy that homosexuality is normal and natural which it is obviously not. These children have the right to grow to maturity with their biological parents and to deprive them of this right should be considered a crime against humanity. I am also certain that children brought up in an unnatural sexual environment will grow up confused and dis-functional just like their adoptive homosexual fathers. I am also sure that some of these unfortunate children will be sexually abused as well.

      As far as I am concerned, gay, sexual orientation, homophobia, heterosexism, equal love and marriage equality are all meaningless homosexual propaganda words and phrases, invented in an attempt to brain wash heterosexuals into believing that homosexuality is as normal as heterosexuality. To state that this is a load of bullshit or horseshit would be an insult to bulls and horses so, let me just state that it is a load of human shit.

      I also believe that no man in his right mind would pass up the opportunity to enjoy a sexual relationship with the most delightful, loving and caring female on this planet simply to stick his dick into another man’s ass hole.

      aquarianmist

      • snowylocks says:

        You are not the creator of humankind. You do not get to decide what is “normal” and “natural”. That is nature’s job, and it disagrees with you, as any biologist will gladly explain to you. I will also remind you that you are no biologist either, and have no expertise or apparently even basic knowledge of this huge scientific field, never mind actual factual knowledge of the very subject you seem so interested in.

        And yet this does not keep you from making one bizarre claim after another, or draw even stranger conclusions from utterly irrelevant statements. I mean, why the continued obsession with anal sex ? For the life of me, I can’t figure it out. I have told you again and again why that doesn’t even begin to make sense, but you don’t appear to be listening. Do I have to tell you AGAIN ???

        I mean, some of these sentences you typed don’t even make any sense, like this one, for example :
        “What homosexuals are doing is bringing children into the world with the specific intention of depriving these children of one or both of their biological parents…”
        Excuse me, what ??? Why do you keep accusing innocent people of things they never did ? Again, what is the point of this ? To convince yourself your irrational hatred is justified ? Seriously, what is the point of your unfounded, bizarre accusations ? For pete’s sake, why ???

        And I have to say, I’m getting a little tired of you hiding your hatred behind children. To me, that is the summit of cowardice. I have already linked you the available date on that subject. Cold hard, data, free from “emotional argumentation”, because only you get to appeal to emotions to get your point across, I guess. But you seem interested in neither statistics or personal testimony, which makes a person wonder what exactly that leaves you to base your opinion on. Just sheer repetition ?

        I also note your increased vulgarity. I hope that means you’re starting to recognize, and disapprove, of your own dishonesty here.

        (As always, I will stress again that I am not claiming you are a dishonest person in general. Just that this subject is obviously, painfully obviously, your moral blind spot)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s