Better Off: Homosexual or Necrophile?

[b.k. barunt]

I'm serious as a heart attack. I myself wouldn't have to think twice - i'd start looking for a bigass microwave.

How is it that necrophilia is against the law and homosexuality is ok? Could someone explain the morality here?


Honibaz

[Johnny Rockets]

Well, for starters you really shouldn't f*ck anything that really does not have the ability or the decision making wherewithal to say "No"

This includes animals, children, and corpses.

JRock

[b.k. barunt]

Well, for starters you really shouldn't f*ck anything that really does not have the ability or the decision making wherewithal to say "No"

This includes animals, children, and corpses.

JRock

And you base this authoritative judgement on . . .
I'll agree with you on the children, but what makes necrophilia or bestiality worse than homosexuality? Animals can and do say no btw, though it doesn't seem to stop them from being occasionally raped and/or frequently eaten. As far as the children go, evidently you're ignorant of the fact that NAMBLA marches proudly in the New York City gay parade every fooking year.

Honibaz

[pimpdave]

I thought it had more to do with the high risk of communicable disease than moral considerations like being able to say "no". So, to back bk here for a second, I can see the link he's making, because the fact is, homosexual sex is the highest risk sexual activity for STD infection.

Not that I have any real problem with homosexuals (well, aside from not sharing their interest in men's butts), but if they deny the fact that their behavior is high risk, they're being naive. I really hope efforts are made to explain and remind homosexuals of the risk on a regular basis, but I'm not sure that's really done.

[AAFitz]

I'm serious as a heart attack. I myself wouldn't have to think twice - i'd start looking for a bigass microwave.

How is it that necrophilia is against the law and homosexuality is ok? Could someone explain the morality here?


Honibaz

Perhaps because the dead woman has no say in the matter, and homosexuality is a choice between two consenting adults.

As far as making the choice, I would choose to abstain.

[Titanic]

How long dead is the women? Someone hot who is still warm might be better in this scenario.

[muy_thaiguy]

How long dead is the women? Someone hot who is still warm might be better in this scenario.

Depends on how you view Rosie O'Donnell.

[BigBallinStalin]

Well the question really hinges on the physical beauty of the corpse, does it not?

Did the woman recently die? If yes, is the body in good condition?

Does the corpse have an unsatisfying odor?

And how hot is this corpse?

I demand to have the situation fully explained before making such a crucial decision.

EDIT: DAMNIT, y'all beat me to it..

[Frigidus]

Live man, assuming it's BK. <3

[b.k. barunt]

Live man, assuming it's BK. <3

[b.k. barunt]

Well the question really hinges on the physical beauty of the corpse, does it not?

Did the woman recently die? If yes, is the body in good condition?

Does the corpse have an unsatisfying odor?

And how hot is this corpse?

I demand to have the situation fully explained before making such a crucial decision.

EDIT: DAMNIT, y'all beat me to it..

As far as i'm concerned these various considerations are irrelevant. What it would come down for me is what i'd have to live with after the fact. A corpse would be much more impersonal.


Honibaz

[Snowgun]

Well the question really hinges on the physical beauty of the corpse, does it not?

Did the woman recently die? If yes, is the body in good condition?

Does the corpse have an unsatisfying odor?

And how hot is this corpse?

I demand to have the situation fully explained before making such a crucial decision.

EDIT: DAMNIT, y'all beat me to it..

As far as i'm concerned these various considerations are irrelevant. What it would come down for me is what i'd have to live with after the fact. A corpse would be much more impersonal.

Honibaz

You could always put a bag over the corpse's head....

[Army of GOD]

You could use the blood as lubricant!

[nagerous]

I always knew people on the internet were messed up, but seriously suggesting that you'd rather sleep with a dead person than a man is one of the most disturbing things I've read in a while.

[Ronaldinho]

How is the Honibaz thing still going?

[Johnny Rockets]

Well, for starters you really shouldn't f*ck anything that really does not have the ability or the decision making wherewithal to say "No"

This includes animals, children, and corpses.

JRock

And you base this authoritative judgement on . . .
I'll agree with you on the children, but what makes necrophilia or bestiality worse than homosexuality? Animals can and do say no btw, though it doesn't seem to stop them from being occasionally raped and/or frequently eaten. As far as the children go, evidently you're ignorant of the fact that NAMBLA marches proudly in the New York City gay parade every fooking year.

Honibaz

Nambla marches in the NYC-GP?
I know that there are several gay groups that have legal wise struggles to keep them out of gay pride marches. Most gay activists are vhelmently against Nambla as pedophilia isn't what most homosexuals feel is a moraly correct issue. Stating that it is, which you seem to be suggesting, would that mean you feel that all hetrosexuals are attracted to fucking little girls?


As far as i'm concerned these various considerations are irrelevant. What it would come down for me is what i'd have to live with after the fact. A corpse would be much more impersonal.

Honibaz

Well a corpse wouldn't talk about it, thats for sure. But are you that homophobic that if you were exposed, you'd rather have your friends, family , co-workers and community know that you fucked a dead body instead of a dude?

I'm no fan of the sausage....but I do live and let live. Gay sex is consentual.
Corpse sex is just creepy.

Johnny Rockets

[oddzy]

lmao...remembering the "assrape the corpse" legend on yahoo, back in the day.

[bradleybadly]

These are some older pics I found with NAMBLA marching alongside in homosexual pride parades.

[lgoasklucyl]

Consent laws exist for a reason. Stating "Yeah, a corpse cannot consent, but ten year old Timmy could! How come NAMBLA does not have the right to have consensual sex with children, while I cannot have sex with a corpse?!" is beyond ignorant. If you honestly think a child is developmentally ready to consent to sexual relations and can fully understand the potential ramifications of said behavior, you know nothing of human development.

When, exactly, an individual can rightfully consent is not fully understood, hence varying consent laws per state. Using that as a defense for consent not being an applicable reason to keep a certain type of sexual interaction illegal, however, does not even remotely begin to make sense. It's an ignorant cop out to an already pointless argument. In fact, even if the child is incredibly understanding or what is happening and can "developmentally give consent", sex is still physically and emotionally harmful for children (yes, regardless of the age or relationships of the individual they are having sex with or consent).

Reading material for all of you sick bastards who think that consent is not applicable due to "children being able to consent":
Sex With Children Is Abuse : Comment on Rind, Tromovitch, and Bauserman (1998)
"...the APA's position that children cannot consent to sexual activity with adults, and emphasized that sexual activity between adults and children should never be “considered or labeled harmless or acceptable.”
-I mean, they're only the APA. Why would they know anything about development or potential psychological ramifications.

(on Child Sexual Assault)"It is a moral and legal term, and as such its definition should have a sociological rather than an empirical foundation (Barnett, Manly, & Cicchetti, 1993). Finkelhor (1979) has argued cogently that the inability of children to provide full and informed consent is the proper basis on which sexual acts with children are appropriately described as abusive."
-Grab the two quoted articles also, if you would prefer even more empirical data.

The Finkelhor is titled "What's wrong with sex between adults and children? Ethics and the problem of sexual abuse", in case you would like to grab a copy.

I don't really feel the need to provide more literature, as the statement is blatantly ignorant even before research is handed out. It honestly sickens me that people will jump to use the defense of "child consent" in any context, that's why I have provided what I have. Animals and corpses cannot consent, as they are incapable of communicated. Just because your cat doesn't take off when you bend it over, BK, does not mean it is consenting. Normal homosexual sex is between two consenting adults. Since consent is fully possible, there is no legal reason for opposition.

Throw pedophilia and homosexuality in the same boat all you want, all you're doing is pathetic fear mongering. Legalizing homosexuality does not equal legalizing adult-child sex as they are entirely different concepts. One which is perfectly acceptable and harmless developmentally (homosexuality, before you make a smartass comment), the other which is obviously not. The bulk of gay rights groups openly oppose NAMBLA, regardless.

Regarding your preference of corpses, I'll just leave you to fester being a miserable, sick bastard.

[lgoasklucyl]

Well, for starters you really shouldn't f*ck anything that really does not have the ability or the decision making wherewithal to say "No"

This includes animals, children, and corpses.

JRock

And you base this authoritative judgement on . . .
I'll agree with you on the children, but what makes necrophilia or bestiality worse than homosexuality? Animals can and do say no btw, though it doesn't seem to stop them from being occasionally raped and/or frequently eaten. As far as the children go, evidently you're ignorant of the fact that NAMBLA marches proudly in the New York City gay parade every fooking year.

Honibaz

Yeah, every fooking year prior to '95 when them and a handful of other organization that are not accepting by gay rights groups were banned from the parades.

[bradleybadly]

What the hell, if we're going to base sexual relationships on consent then let's just make incest a civil right.

Mommy can wait until junior turns 18 and then bang away. Daddy waits until Jane turns 18 and it's off to boinkety-boink the night away.

It's all about consent.

[mpjh]

No it is not all about consent. Respect is another ingredient. Power is another. People who hold the power should not take sexual advantage of those who are without power and thus vulnerable. Parents and children are an example, even when the children are of age to give consent. Such relationships would not be healthy or acceptable in a just society.

However, consent between two adults who love and respect each other, and who are independent and able to make free decisions, should not be barred simply because of their sex.

[GabonX]

No it is not all about consent. Respect is another ingredient. Power is another. People who hold the power should not take sexual advantage of those who are without power and thus vulnerable. Parents and children are an example, even when the children are of age to give consent. Such relationships would not be healthy or acceptable in a just society.

However, consent between two adults who love and respect each other, and who are independent and able to make free decisions, should not be barred simply because of their sex.

I think you would be hard pressed to find someone who would argue that they should be barred.

[Uncle Death]

I'm serious as a heart attack. I myself wouldn't have to think twice - i'd start looking for a bigass microwave.

How is it that necrophilia is against the law and homosexuality is ok? Could someone explain the morality here?


Honibaz

You are an ugly homophobe and make me sick.

[lgoasklucyl]

What the hell, if we're going to base sexual relationships on consent then let's just make incest a civil right.

Mommy can wait until junior turns 18 and then bang away. Daddy waits until Jane turns 18 and it's off to boinkety-boink the night away.

It's all about consent.

Yeah, the biological ramifications of incest have nothing to do with it. Why would that make sense?

Seriously... if you're going to make morning comments like this, just keep out of the forums. I'm entirely opposed to your POV and that comment was so ridiculous even I'm embarrassed for those on your side.