Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In

Quote# 54360

"What is disturbing about this advert - 'Some people are gay. Get over it'?"

I’ve followed this Q with astonishment. How can so many intelligent people fail to understand a Q? The only answer I have to that dilemma is that advertising is so subtly powerful, intelligent people cannot detect the extent of its influence over them. Hardly anyone here thinks there’s anything disturbing about this advert, yet there would have been public outrage 20 years ago.

If, 20 years from now an ad appears saying “Some people are paedophiles. Get over it,” few would object. Oh they’d object right now! All those who think homosexuality harms no-one and it’s perfectly okay for consenting adults to do what they like, protest that paedophilia is very different because it harms children. But what if a minority group decide to bombard the media with messages about those people having a faulty gene that can be ‘fixed’ and if they’re just accepted and helped, the harm will be eliminated? Or what if sex education teaches five-year-old children that paedophilia is only harmful if they resist adult advances; that if they treat it as a game they will quite enjoy it and no harm will be done? You think I’m off my trolley? Watch this space. There are sexual predators out there who know how to manipulate intelligent people. They are well on their way to getting rid of ALL sexual taboos. Homosexuality is now accepted by the majority (so they would have us believe). Anyone who questions it is instantly labeled a homophobe, as evidenced by most of these answers. Twenty years hence they will be labeling all of us as paedophobes. Exactly the same tactics will be employed for that as have worked with homosexuality. Mark my words.

Sasi, Yahoo! Answers 46 Comments [12/17/2008 1:14:30 PM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Jax
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1 2
Mister Spak

"But what if a minority group decide to bombard the media with messages about those people having a faulty gene that can be ‘fixed’ and if they’re just accepted and helped, the harm will be eliminated? Or what if sex education teaches five-year-old children that paedophilia is only harmful if they resist adult advances;"

Or what if the Flying Spaghetti Monster is the real god, or what if aliens decide to beam people up at random, or what if the Flintstones weally existed, or what if Hogwarts is a real place that you can get to by running into a brick wall in a train station?

Or what if you can't distinguish fantasy from reality?

12/17/2008 1:18:25 PM

aaa

Sigh...

12/17/2008 1:18:26 PM

Paschal Wagner

You think I’m off my trolley?

However did you guess? Maybe you DO have prophetic powers.

12/17/2008 1:19:24 PM

Nihlum

"Informed consent" Does that mean anything to you? No, I didnt think so.

12/17/2008 1:23:40 PM

Siberia

Actually back in your so-adored religious days, they probably wouldn't object to pedophilia as strenuously as we do now. Marrying a 14-year-old? Ok-doky. Having sex with another (fe)male? HERESY!

Now we do have a shiny concept named 'informed consent'. Get over it.

Most sexual taboos are stupid, anyway.

12/17/2008 1:33:20 PM

kingoftheheavies

I have marked your words.

Under "Trivial, moronic stupidity."

12/17/2008 1:38:27 PM

Doctor Whom

There are two minor details about consenting adults that you've overlooked: They're consenting, and they're adults.

12/17/2008 1:45:30 PM

GreenEyedLilo

Because, you know, sex with another adult and sex with a child who doesn't even know what sex really is are THE EXACT SAME THING!

12/17/2008 1:52:57 PM

Seigi no Mikata

Hardly anyone here thinks there’s anything disturbing about this advert, yet there would have been public outrage 20 years ago.

If, 20 years from now an ad appears saying “Some people are paedophiles. Get over it,” few would object. Oh they’d object right now!


And 400 years ago, during those nice Christian days, it was perfectly fine to bring the whole family to watch a person get decapitated in the middle of a public square. That didn't cause outrage back then, but would definitely today.

Mores change. Get over it.

12/17/2008 1:55:51 PM

Philbert McAdamia

What if, what if, what if . . .

12/17/2008 2:02:20 PM

colonel catastrophe

ACH!!!! Homosexuality has nothing to do with being a pedophile!!! I don't know anyone, gay or straight, that would ever, in twenty years or a lifetime, agree with what you said/ I won't mark your words asshole.

12/17/2008 2:05:21 PM

Illuminatalie

The world is going to end in, um, two weeks. Mark my words!

12/17/2008 2:11:17 PM

Rat of Steel

(Siberia)
"Actually back in your so-adored religious days, they probably wouldn't object to pedophilia as strenuously as we do now. Marrying a 14-year-old? Ok-doky. Having sex with another (fe)male? HERESY!"


First of all, as I've mentioned before in a recent thread here, pedophilia involves sex with someone who hasn't begun puberty yet. Therefore, unless she's a late bloomer, your hypothetical 14 year-old doesn't qualify. Secondly, back in the "so-adored religious days", life was much harsher even without counting the harshness of religion, so having children was more important to survival (not to mention that in that era, 14 was middle-aged for most people). It's only after the Industrial Revolution, when un-Godly modern science enabled so many of us to live so much longer, that the whole "teenagers should be sweet and innocent" meme took off like a jackrabbit on espresso.

"Now we do have a shiny concept named 'informed consent'. Get over it."

"Most sexual taboos are stupid, anyway."


You're spot-on here, though. 2 out of 3 isn't bad.

Also spot-on are the posters in this thread who've asserted that Sasi has trouble separating fantasy from reality.

12/17/2008 2:28:27 PM

rw23

> Twenty years hence they will be labeling all of us as paedophobes.

Labelling you as people who fear children? Maybe that's why you try to cram all sorts of fantastical gibberish in their heads before they're old enough to resist.

12/17/2008 2:37:30 PM



Pedophilia/bestiality =/= homosexuality. There's such a thing as 'consent' that NORMAL PEOPLE would know about.

12/17/2008 2:54:39 PM

John

If, 20 years from now an ad appears saying “Some people are paedophiles. Get over it,” few would object.

What is it about the concept of "consenting adults" that fundies never seem to grasp?

Godwin's Law, Corollary:

"As an Internet discussion about homosexuality grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving pedophiles or bestiality approaches one."

12/17/2008 3:21:26 PM

El Zorro

The problem with slippery slope arguments is that they never turn out to be true.

12/17/2008 4:26:32 PM

Average Guy

Homosexuality =/= pedophilia.

12/17/2008 4:39:10 PM

Nate!

Given current, wildly unsustainable, rates of global population growth, we'll be lucky if the majority of people are gay by, oh, 2100. And then they shall have *their* reign of terror! MWAHAHAHAHA!!

Sadly I'll be dead, and won't get to watch fundie heads pop like water balloons.

12/17/2008 4:45:07 PM

myheadhurts

really really REALLY bored with the pedophile crap

12/17/2008 4:52:40 PM

WMDKitty

Why, WHY do they keep conflating homosexuality with pedophilia?!

Plus, some people ARE gay -- GET OVER IT!

12/17/2008 5:00:07 PM



why do they always bring up paedophiles? do they think they can get to homosexuality by association? and anyway, they shouldn't hate pedo's. it is a diagnosable disorder in the DSM, which could be the fault of a randomly mutated gene. we don't know what causes it, but you shouldn't hate them for it. and "hate the sin, not the sinner" much?

12/17/2008 5:29:59 PM

Brenz

If the gene can be fixed, let's do it already so no more kids have to suffer.

Which obviously, it can't yet, I'm just using your own example. I wouldn't hold it against a guy who had the gene, had it removed, and never once molested a kid. I'd be like "Hey, great job joining the part of society that doesn't steal innocence and ruin lives. That was highly responsible of you."

12/17/2008 5:34:13 PM

Headache

From evolutionary point of view, sexual reproduction as soon as the body allows it, will ensure the greatest probability of passing your genes on to a new generation and to as many as possible. It also ensures the greatest probability of survival for the mom and for the offspring to grow up. This is how it works in every other animal.

12/17/2008 5:52:26 PM

Rhi

"But what if a minority group decide to bombard the media with messages about those people having a faulty gene that can be ‘fixed’ and if they’re just accepted and helped, the harm will be eliminated?"

Actually I am looking forward to the day when pedophiles feel safe asking for help with their mental disorder so that they DON'T hurt children, instead of staying in the closet and becoming criminals.

"Or what if sex education teaches five-year-old children that paedophilia is only harmful if they resist adult advances; that if they treat it as a game they will quite enjoy it and no harm will be done?"

THAT'S where you go off the deep end.

12/17/2008 6:05:44 PM
1 2