[a fool in paradise]

The point is that it is not necessary to “explain” the behaviors of the animal kingdom to find any justification for making a moral stand AGAINST certain behaviors in the civilized world of humans.

The sex positive agenda seeks to end ALL moral judgments over ALL sexual pairings regardless of sex, age, relation, marital status, number, or species of partner(s). Talk of “scientific evidence” for a genetic component et al are just blather to make the medicine go down. Ultimately, sex positive advocates don't care “why”, it's just another excuse to make it palatable, ultimately they don't think ANYTHING should be “off limits”.

[TomOnTheRun]

Ok. I'm still not sure how what you are saying has anything to do with anything I said. You responded to me in particular - not a general response to the thread - so I'm working with the assumption that what you are saying has something to do with what I said.

My confusion comes from the fact that you appear to be responding to and refuting points I never made, never brought up, and don't personally believe. The only thing I said was that animals have a wide variety of reasons to do the things they do - a statement so vague that it could be read as being in agreement with just about anything.

[LomanBill]

>>seeks to end ALL moral judgments

 

Nothing new.

 

"Praised be he who permits the forbidden"
--Tsvi Sabbatai, Jewish Appostate and false messiah, circa 1660

 

"Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law"
--Aleister Crowley, founder of modern Satanism, circa 1908

 

"[A community] organizer... does not have a fixed truth -- truth to him is relative and changing. ... To the extent that he is free from the shackles of dogma"

--Saul Alinsky, circa 1973