Open Relationships: Could you/Have you?
- Thread starter HK
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
-
258Replies
-
6KViews
-
1Participant count
-
Participants list
-
So Retro was correct on the ignorant comment he made ???
Geez I love to stir shit
I made an ignorant comment? Or I was correct by stating that there were ignorant comments made here.
Alien Allen
Froggy the Prick
Sorry for the confusion
I was agreeing with the latter
If you said something ignorant I would call you out on it better than that
I've never been in an open relationship. It's sounds like something that would work. I'm not the jealous type. My wife flirts with other guys and it's never bothered me. Actually I like women who flirt.
Whether my wife and I ever try it or not, I admire Butterfly and her husband. It's good to see people live their own convictions rather than just follow the crowd.
Whether my wife and I ever try it or not, I admire Butterfly and her husband. It's good to see people live their own convictions rather than just follow the crowd.
FreightTrain
Active Member
I also like non-conformists. Pedophiles don't conform. Some would say they're not normal, but we should applaud them for being different. Just because our society doesn't really condone adults having sex with children mean it's wrong now does it?? We should admire their differences. Kids need love, too.
:sarcasm
:sarcasm
that's right! and these geniuses here who make it very clear that we canNOT have an opinion on the matter unless we've tried it, have no place saying this is wrong either
Not really a strong debate here. I see the point you're trying to make, but no, sorry. Adults abusing minors is no where near the realm of two (or more) full-grown, consenting adults.
Fail.
Perhaps it would be easier to explain that the human brain best understands something if it has encountered it before.
If it has been betrayed in the past it will look for betrayal, hurt or let down again it will search for this to happen again regardless of the situation..
If one of the two partners has been in such a position and does not tell the truth it is true that this is a doomed relationship..
However, if both are honest, have no fear of the other, little reason to distrust each other and have never been betrayed I doubt the odds would be high..
That said, standard marriage odds are not very good today for a "normal" couple so what do you attribute this fact do ?
Peter Parka
Well-Known Member
Wtf have paedo's got to do with people in open relationships? People in open relationships are adults chosing to live that way and dont hurt anyone else unlike dirty old men who force kids into sex against their will.
It's a sure sign of fail when people randomly start comparing something to child abuse in a debate, it's just as bad as invoking Godwins law, imo.
Last edited by a moderator:
FreightTrain
Active Member
From a logical standpoint, my argument is right on track. Several have stated that they approve of those who don't "follow the crowd" or have experienced things counter to civilized society. Pedophilia is a growing behavior and still isn't accepted in society. If one admires another's honesty in sharing an experience or belief he/she has counter to civilized society, then where does one draw the line? Pedophiles act upon their feelings much the same as one engaging in extramarital affairs. It feels good and this is why they do it. Some people think it feels good to beat people up. If one admires another for doing what feels good and sharing it, then what's the difference? Some adults think they're progressive because they are engaging in forbidden love. Again, if we're dealing in a logical argument here, then defend yourself using logic. If we're just choosing sides, as is the case in many other debates here, then I'm not interested. Logical people are much more fascinating and respectable. Sheep aren't so much.
Paedophilia hurts another human being. Open relationships do not.
Paedophilia is done without consent. Open relationships are not.
Paedophilia is against the law. Open relationships are not.
To argue that if you can support an open relationship then you must be for all kinds of sexual expression is not logical, it's trying to make the world black and white when it is clearly shades of grey, especially in terms of relationships. A relationship between two consenting adults is in no way comparable to the rape of a child. Your idea that since paedophiles and those in open relationships are both acting on their desires rather than 'conforming' they must be of the same ilk is flawed - all humans act on desires. That doesn't mean you can lump all wants into the same boat and say 'this is a sexual desire and so is this, so they are comparable and equal'.
Paedophilia is done without consent. Open relationships are not.
Paedophilia is against the law. Open relationships are not.
To argue that if you can support an open relationship then you must be for all kinds of sexual expression is not logical, it's trying to make the world black and white when it is clearly shades of grey, especially in terms of relationships. A relationship between two consenting adults is in no way comparable to the rape of a child. Your idea that since paedophiles and those in open relationships are both acting on their desires rather than 'conforming' they must be of the same ilk is flawed - all humans act on desires. That doesn't mean you can lump all wants into the same boat and say 'this is a sexual desire and so is this, so they are comparable and equal'.
The big difference is that BOTH parties are consenting ADULTS.
Sure, beating someone up might be fun... and in S&M circles, with CONSENT you can beat someone up.
And there IS a difference between that and going out to a club and beating some random person up.
Sure, beating someone up might be fun... and in S&M circles, with CONSENT you can beat someone up.
And there IS a difference between that and going out to a club and beating some random person up.
Wow... open relationships are the same as pedophilia or beating someone up? Give me a break. Sounds like someone is getting desperate and using absolutely idiotic and inane arguments to try and back up their own ignorance now.
FreightTrain
Active Member
Here is where you are incorrect:
"Those persons, therefore, who have no legal capacity in point of intellect, to make a contract, cannot legally marry, as idiots, lunatics, and infants; males under the age of fourteen, and females under the age of twelve; and when minors over those ages marry, they must have the consent of their parents or guardians."
Adults can marry girls as young as 12 and boys as young as 14. It is legal in the US and elsewhere with the consent of parents or guardians. Also, pedophilia is not always committed without consent. Many actors and singers have taken brides under the age of 16 with the childs' parents' consent.
Furthermore, adultery is illegal in many US states and across the globe. Adultery is an extramarital affair--regardless of consent. Marriages are considered nullified when it occurs. Therefore, adulterers are not married. Marriage is a legal matter and thereby follows laws of the land, less it be considered void.
Last edited by a moderator:
Swinging didn't end my first marriage and isn't hurting my present one. We are still in love and have known each other for 9 years, married for going on 5.
My first hubby didn't swing with his first wife and their marriage lasted 16 years w/2 kids. Our marriage lasted 8 years. He's with a mail order bride, just a few years older than his daughter, don't know if it's working as I am happy two have no contact with him. Swinging didn't end our marriage, incapatibility did.
My first hubby didn't swing with his first wife and their marriage lasted 16 years w/2 kids. Our marriage lasted 8 years. He's with a mail order bride, just a few years older than his daughter, don't know if it's working as I am happy two have no contact with him. Swinging didn't end our marriage, incapatibility did.
If they are married, two persons in an exclusive marriage, that is legal, then it is no longer pedophilia, and is simply marital duty.
You've killed your own argument.
Bit of a difference between getting the consent of the parents, who are probably making some sort of monetary gain, and getting the consent of the child themselves. Just because someone cannot legally make their decisions does not mean it's okay to sell them off to other people. That's not 'with their consent', that's with the consent of someone who probably doesn't have their best interests at heart if they're willing to sell their own child.
That's also hardly the most likely form of paedophilia either - most of it is not done through the legal marriage of a minor and an adult, because most sane parents would not let their 12 year old marry their 50 year old friend of the family. Additionally, most cases of child abuse are committed by someone related to them. You're far more likely to be abused by your own father than a stranger.
What does this have to do with open relationships? Proving that paedophilia can sometimes be fit into the law, in extremely dubious circumstances, still doesn't mean you can put an adult, consensual relationship in the same box.
The desire to have sex with children is not healthy and it damages children. Who does an open relationship harm exactly? There is a reason some desires are against the law and against human decency, and some are perhaps different from what the majority practices but still completely acceptable both within the law and within our own sense of morality. Because it might be a bit different, but no one is getting hurt.
That's also hardly the most likely form of paedophilia either - most of it is not done through the legal marriage of a minor and an adult, because most sane parents would not let their 12 year old marry their 50 year old friend of the family. Additionally, most cases of child abuse are committed by someone related to them. You're far more likely to be abused by your own father than a stranger.
What does this have to do with open relationships? Proving that paedophilia can sometimes be fit into the law, in extremely dubious circumstances, still doesn't mean you can put an adult, consensual relationship in the same box.
The desire to have sex with children is not healthy and it damages children. Who does an open relationship harm exactly? There is a reason some desires are against the law and against human decency, and some are perhaps different from what the majority practices but still completely acceptable both within the law and within our own sense of morality. Because it might be a bit different, but no one is getting hurt.
FreightTrain
Active Member
Again, you are wrong. Here is the true defintion, not one made up:
As a medical diagnosis, pedophilia (or paedophilia) is typically defined as a psychiatric disorder in adults or late adolescents (persons age 16 and older) characterized by a primary or exclusive sexual interest in prepubescent children (generally age 13 years or younger, though onset of puberty may vary).
Meaning, just because one is married, this 'disorder' does not disappear. Does a crazy person become sane by marriage?? Hardly.
Also, it would be helpful if people stated facts instead of talking out of their asses. Many debates are so boring because of inept debaters.
Last edited by a moderator:
80,464Threads
2,194,415Messages
5,013Members