Now on to one of the sub questions. Is it natural? Well, someone mentioned that it wasn't natural only for humans. Now, why this discrimination? If the Gods of various religions keep throwing and creating people who are homosexual, either a) They're bad factory operators or b) Something is fishy with whatever anti-gay talk religious conservatives swear is sacred.
There's a fallacy afoot in this. Think about the specific grounds of the objection in your specific example. You would probably say "Hey, stop having sex with my relative's corpse" but you need to realise that you would probably react the same way if you found said undertaker had been mistreating the corpse in any other way. The real issue, in your example, is a breach of trust and the violation of something that you had great attachment to when the person was alive. Not, as you might initially think, that said violation was a sexual act
I disagree. If I saw an undertaker mistreating the corpse of one of my loved ones, I would understandably be upset, but if I was aware that undertaker had taken to having sex with the corpse of my loved one, I wouldn't just feel the same as if they'd dropped the corpse or half-inched some jewelry.
So no, I do not accept that my issue would be a breach of trust at all.
Necrophilia can be viewed casually, but only when it happens to someone elses family. Much the same was as paedophilia, you can look it more logically when it hasn't occurred in your own circle.
My original point was, you can't compare homosexuality in the same arena and I really do find it hard to understand how this conversation has skewed so much that a discussion of something perfectly normal and acceptable being compared to sicknesses of the mind.
My original point was, you can't compare homosexuality in the same arena and I really do find it hard to understand how this conversation has skewed so much that a discussion of something perfectly normal and acceptable being compared to sicknesses of the mind.
it hasnt because those arent sicknesses of the mind.
honestly i think the only difference is that homosexuality NEEDS the same gender to have a relationship while the philia is just an add to the passion someone feels. the fact that someone has necrophilia doesnt mean he cant have a healthy normal relationship with a living person.
though this said there exist several special cases in which the court has recognised that the child was a) the aggressor b) precocious c) an active agent who acted meaningfully, making the would-be perpetrator the victim instead, in these cases the "sexual assault of a minor" conviction was overturned.
I don't think I've heard of cases like this. Any case of presenting examples?
honestly i think the only difference is that homosexuality NEEDS the same gender to have a relationship while the philia is just an add to the passion someone feels. the fact that someone has necrophilia doesnt mean he cant have a healthy normal relationship with a living person.
No, the difference is, one type is a normal relationship. Just two humans interacting and getting along, and yes, probably a bit of sex mixed in.
The others are sick minds, whether medically sick or not.
You're still attempting to show some parity between them. It doesn't exist.
A homosexual is no different to a heterosexual. Both involve a human being who is attracted to another human being. What is the difference other than the sexes of the humans involved? And is that really that big of a deal?
"Both heterosexual behavior and homosexual behavior are normal aspects of human sexuality. Both have been documented in many different cultures and historical eras. Despite the persistence of stereotypes that portray lesbian, gay, and bisexual people as disturbed, several decades of research and clinical experience have led all mainstream medical and mental health organizations in this country to conclude that these orientations represent normal forms of human experience. Lesbian, gay, and bisexual relationships are normal forms of human bonding. Therefore, these mainstream organizations long ago abandoned classifications of homosexuality as a mental disorder."
Now compare this description of homosexuality to the definition of a paraphilia.
from wiki "Paraphilia is a biomedical term used to describe sexual arousal to objects, situations, or individuals that are not part of normative stimulation and that may cause distress or serious problems for the paraphiliac or persons associated with him or her. A paraphilia involves sexual arousal and gratification towards sexual behavior that is atypical or extreme."
No, the difference is, one type is a normal relationship. Just two humans interacting and getting along, and yes, probably a bit of sex mixed in.
I don't think he was trying to bring down homosexuality to the level of paraphillia, just trying to justify paraphillia.
One thing to note with the current discussion.
Intresting. Well, I think I agree with thebluerabbit. These people are just sexually aroused to different things. I don't think that makes them a bad person, and its not their fault they are attracted to what they are. As long as they don't hurt others, or act upon their sexual desires with others who don't consent, then whats the problem. I suppose it is a biomedical condition that we could develop a "cure" to. But one wouldn't be needed if that person could simply follow societies guildlines. They're attractions don't determine the relationships they can have or the type of person they are. They're into younger girls/boys? Why not have you partner dress up as one? People play dress up all the time. This way, the person can be satisfied and no one is hurt, everyone wins. Now if this person's obsession is too strong, and they do hurt others, then sure, maybe they are sick and do need medication. Maybe some therapy would help. But don't just dismiss them. They're just like homosexuals, they're just like hetrosexuals, their only problem is making it work so that no one gets hurt.
See, social exception of gays is not asking everyone to be gay or even claiming that gay is good. It's like being pro-choice. It's not saying that women should have abortions, its just saying that they should be allowed to if they wanted one.
A male is not really meant to be with another man, and ditto for girls. I mean, really. If we were all gay, we'd all be DEAD.
Why do you assume that making homosexuality completely socially acceptable would lead to everyone suddenly deciding to be with someone of the same sex? Perhaps it speaks volumes about your own latent homosexual tendencies but I, for one, wouldn't immediately go out and hook up with the next guy I found.
A male is not really meant to be with another man, and ditto for girls. I mean, really. If we were all gay, we'd all be DEAD.
and if we were all jewish/muslims/any other religion in which its considered great to hav many children we would all be dead too. so its wrong to be jewish/muslim too?
if we were all birds then humans wouldnt exist. we should kill all birds then.
with the speed of population growth, gays actually help us survive longer because even though they arent such great in numbers (im guessing) they still decrease child rate and increase adoption. so without them, we would die faster. still, that doesnt mean we should all become gay or all be streight. there is nothing in which too much of it will not result in a bad ending... except for eating lattace maybe
and if we were all jewish/muslims/any other religion in which its considered great to hav many children we would all be dead too. so its wrong to be jewish/muslim too?
Why?
if we were all birds then humans wouldnt exist. we should kill all birds then.
If we were all birds, who would there be to kill all the birds?
with the speed of population growth, gays actually help us survive longer because even though they arent such great in numbers (im guessing) they still decrease child rate and increase adoption. so without them, we would die faster. still, that doesnt mean we should all become gay or all be streight. there is nothing in which too much of it will not result in a bad ending... except for eating lattace maybe
