[breakem]

Rope, now study Clint's technique. Misrepresent your opponents view over and over even after numerous explanations and then you can get the thread to last a really long time.

Make stupid remarks like equating beastiality and pedophilia with consentual sex between adults and you can get another 5 or 6 replies out of it. BTW the last point is a favorite technique of the "slippery slope" crowd and lazy posters. So you'll want to get it into some of your early replies.

[Clint N. Suhks]

Sorry, what was my hypocricy again?

[Clint N. Suhks]

SORRY? What was your answer for the 10th on legally differentiating the difference between your blow-up doll and animals again?

[Clint N. Suhks]

consentual sex between adults

From the Office of Redundancy for the Department of Redundancy, either the clinical/legal definition for “capacity” for consent MEANS adult or your hypocritical defense of the 9th is moot.

[LanPB01]

I'll tell you one of my personal favorite tactics of the people you're talking about. They'll rant for 10 straight posts about how, since sexual activity is not an inherent characteristic (like race), it deserves no attention at all when talking about discrimination.

Then, a few posts later, they'll start complaining about how someone is discriminating against them based on their religion. Gee, I didn't realize people were born with religious characteristics! Clearly, people don't choose their religion; they're just born that way, so you can't discriminate. However, it's OK to discriminate against those dang queers, since they've chosen their immoral lifestyle.