A question for both sides of the spectrum on the "gay debate"

[opebo]

To quote a Thai 'friend' of mine - "A hole is a hole". 

[opebo]

Greeks wern't bisexual- they were gay, specifically the Spartans. The Spartan army would take children away from their homes at a young age, and implant homosexuality into them through statutory rape, so that the boys wouldn't have families to want to go back to during war.

It can't be 'statutory' rape if there is no statute against it.. which there was not in those enlightened days. 

[opebo]

Opedophile, we're very aware of your views. You can stop posting them now.

The first part of my post was a correction of Brambilla's misuse of the term 'statutory rape'.  Only the latter portion was my view.

[opebo]

Opebo, it was considered bizarre by most of the world. If a few hundred people from Nebraska decided to brainwash and sleep with little children, would that make it right because it was their statute?

No, nor does the current statute make it 'wrong'.  There is no objective morality, only subjective preferences.

[opebo]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You're contradicting yourself. You're agreeing with me that those people from Nebraska who sleep with children are doing something wrong, and yet you say that stuff like that is subjective. Make up your mind!

No, I don't agree, nor did I say, that it was 'wrong'.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No.  Nor wrong.  As I said objective right or wrong does not exist, only subjective preference.

[opebo]

Around. I got a little overwealmed this year with school.

Opebo, define subjective preference in your words.

It is what you like; what you prefer.  Ultimately decisions on valuations are always done by individuals.

So in your mind opebo, it wouldn't be wrong at all to brutally rape a five year old child.

No.  But certainly most people would prefer to prevent it.  Subjective preference demonstrably exists, whereas objective morality does not.