• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should we legalize sexual freedom?

Should we legalize all sex between consenting adults?

  • Yes

    Votes: 32 78.0%
  • No

    Votes: 9 22.0%

  • Total voters
    41
You are not worried that tv shows and talk shows will try to normalize incestuous relationships like they do with homosexuals and trannys and the consequences inbreeding could have on society?

normalizing?
LMAO
this always makes me life because it irrelevant and subjective.

also nobody said they want "inbreeding"




Thats why we have over million abortions a year and a high rate of stds because people are careful about using protection

THIS is your reply to the statement "Most sex happens with birth control and no intent for offspring."

not sure about the birth control part but its absolutely true that most sex happens with no INTENT for off spring

a million abortions a year is PROOF of that on two levels.
one obviously a million people had no intent for a child and choose to abort
two im quite sure the 350million in the US have sex more than just a million times every year, hell myself alone im good for at least 600.

In general people ARE careful on avg.
 
Homosexuality is wrong and should be classified as a criminal act.

It is Un-Normal.

It is a Mental and Health Sickness that needs to be addresed and delt with.

Have we forgotten about the Aides Desease?....Or has it been just swept under the rug?

Todays society has made Homosexuality part of the norm, not realizing the severe problem it will have in future society.
 
Homosexuality is wrong and should be classified as a criminal act.

It is Un-Normal.

It is a Mental and Health Sickness that needs to be addresed and delt with.

Have we forgotten about the Aides Desease?....Or has it been just swept under the rug?

Todays society has made Homosexuality part of the norm, not realizing the severe problem it will have in future society.

what is Un-normal
what is addresed
what is delt
what is Aides
what is a desease?

There will be no problem in the future. In the future there will be less bigotry and discrimination and more equality, thats what America is all about. I cant wait :D
 
Last edited:
Again, with a gay man (famous for being macho) for an avatar, I just cannot take this weak sauce seriously.

Gay? - Far from that genious...... John Wayne was married twice in his lifetime.

Actress Barbara Stanwick was one of his wives for many years.
Had children with both wives. today his grown kids are very wealthy decent American citizens.

You just say those king of things about him, because of his outspoken ways, and the way he felt about queers and blacks.
 
Gay? - Far from that genious...... John Wayne was married twice in his lifetime.

Actress Barbara Stanwick was one of his wives for many years.
Had children with both wives. today his grown kids are very wealthy decent American citizens.

You just say those king of things about him, because of his outspoken ways, and the way he felt about queers and blacks.

Look up the term "beard", as it relates to homosexuals.
 
Gay? - Far from that genious...... John Wayne was married twice in his lifetime.

Actress Barbara Stanwick was one of his wives for many years.
Had children with both wives. today his grown kids are very wealthy decent American citizens.

You just say those king of things about him, because of his outspoken ways, and the way he felt about queers and blacks.

What is a genious?
Elton john was married does that mean he isnt gay?
 
We are not sexually free. All sex between consenting adults is not legal. I favor legalizing human sexuality. It should be very simple. Any kind of sex is made legal as long as it's done in privacy and all involved are consenting adults. End of story. It should not matter whether they're of the same or opposite sex, if money is involved, if some people think the acts are strange. If they consent -- if they're adults -- if it's in a privacy, it's legal.

Btw, strong emphasis on adults. No pedophilia is allowed.

I find your topic kind of funny. Not in a bad way though. Here's what I find funny. In the world there are sexual standards which are all socially constructed. Sexual Act A is a good type of sex, Sexual Act B is not as widely accepted as Sexual Act A, Sexual Act C is grudgingly condoned but not really encouraged, Sexual Act D is frowned up but not illegal, Sexual Act E is illegal, etc.

What you want to do is wipe out all of the social construction that surrounds sex. What you don't want to do is wipe out the social construction which surrounds the concept of age of consent. Now that's funny. It's like a person who is hallucinating declaring that the pink bunny is real, the polka dotted elephant is real, but the donkey wearing a pin-stripped suit is just a figment of his imagination. A completely arbitrary delineation between what social constructions to abandon and what social constructions to treat as a Writ from God.

If you're prepared to overturn social constructions on sexual behavior, then why not on age of consent? Is a person who is 18 years and one day old a fully functioning adult who is capable of deciding for themselves what is in their best interests with regards to the types of sex that they want to enjoy but a person two days younger, a person who is 17 years and 364 days old is a minor who is not capable of deciding for themselves what is in their best interests with regards to the types of sex that they want to enjoy.
 
normalizing?
LMAO
this always makes me life because it irrelevant and subjective.

also nobody said they want "inbreeding"

If you want inbreeding legal you might as well be condoning it and therefore wanting it.




THIS is your reply to the statement "Most sex happens with birth control and no intent for offspring."

not sure about the birth control part but its absolutely true that most sex happens with no INTENT for off spring

a million abortions a year is PROOF of that on two levels.
one obviously a million people had no intent for a child and choose to abort
two im quite sure the 350million in the US have sex more than just a million times every year, hell myself alone im good for at least 600.

In general people ARE careful on avg.

More than a million abortions a year is proof that people do not use protection,for every one million that are too stupid to use adaquate protection and have an abortion there are almost four million babies a year born in this country and I seriously doubt most of those were planed pregnancies .. The amount of people with STDs in this country isalso proof that people do not use adequate protection.A lot of people stupid they believe in little myths that only having sex in one position can get them pregnant or that if they pull out in time they can't get the woman pregnant or that infected people look a certain or just lie about not having a STD. And if you are going to normalize inbreeding then those people would see nothing wrong with producing offspring because you are telling them that it is okay to inbreed and that it is no different than homosexuality. Do you honestly think in-breeders are going to be smart enough to use adequate protection?
 
We are not sexually free. All sex between consenting adults is not legal. I favor legalizing human sexuality. It should be very simple. Any kind of sex is made legal as long as it's done in privacy and all involved are consenting adults. End of story. It should not matter whether they're of the same or opposite sex, if money is involved, if some people think the acts are strange. If they consent -- if they're adults -- if it's in a privacy, it's legal.

Btw, strong emphasis on adults. No pedophilia is allowed.

I wanted to vote yes, but then I thought about... and I am not sure what you mean exactly.

Necrophilia should be illegal...
Sex in public places should be illegal...
Prostitution, it's fine to legalize by me.
What goes on between two consenting adults is none of my business.
 
I don't have a problem with prostitution in general. I have a problem with it being in the public view, and we all know that if it's legalized it's going to become MORE visible, not less. I could even be convinced to accept homosexuality on some level IF it could be forced into PRIVATE SETTINGS ONLY. The problem is that we cannot do that. Until we find a way to move the less socially acceptable forms of these acts into private settings only, they need to be regulated.

Three words... red light district.

The keyword is... district

Legal prostitution doesn't mean prostitution legally occurs anywhere and everywhere.
 
Again, with a gay man (famous for being macho) for an avatar, I just cannot take this weak sauce seriously.

Is there any actual unbiased proof to support this claim of yours?
 
It's awkward that the same people who say others can't be trusted to make the right sexual decisions are some of the most adamant defenders of people purchasing guns and being trusted to make the right decisions.
 
Is there any actual unbiased proof to support this claim of yours?

It usually boils down to 1.) his real name was Marion, and 2.) he starred in a movie with Rock Hudson.
 
If you want inbreeding legal you might as well be condoning it and therefore wanting it.






More than a million abortions a year is proof that people do not use protection,for every one million that are too stupid to use adaquate protection and have an abortion there are almost four million babies a year born in this country and I seriously doubt most of those were planed pregnancies .. The amount of people with STDs in this country isalso proof that people do not use adequate protection.A lot of people stupid they believe in little myths that only having sex in one position can get them pregnant or that if they pull out in time they can't get the woman pregnant or that infected people look a certain or just lie about not having a STD. And if you are going to normalize inbreeding then those people would see nothing wrong with producing offspring because you are telling them that it is okay to inbreed and that it is no different than homosexuality. Do you honestly think in-breeders are going to be smart enough to use adequate protection?

WRONG you assume that, sometimes protection fails LMAO

not to mention you arent good with percentages are you? like I said a million PERCENTAGE wise to sex is very low

also nobody is condoning inbreeding no matter how bad you want that to be true.
 
Three words... red light district.

The keyword is... district

Legal prostitution doesn't mean prostitution legally occurs anywhere and everywhere.

You know what will be funny? When prostitution is legalized and state employment agencies send women to whorehouses for job interviews. Then when the women refuse to take the offered job, (remember, being a whore is now a legal type of employment) these women will be cut off from unemployment benefits because they refused to work in a legal job. Same situation, of course, would apply to homosexual men for work in homosexual bordellos and of course, heterosexual men for work as gigolos.
 
You know what will be funny? When prostitution is legalized and state employment agencies send women to whorehouses for job interviews. Then when the women refuse to take the offered job, (remember, being a whore is now a legal type of employment) these women will be cut off from unemployment benefits because they refused to work in a legal job. Same situation, of course, would apply to homosexual men for work in homosexual bordellos and of course, heterosexual men for work as gigolos.

you really believe this will happen? WOW
 
You know what will be funny? When prostitution is legalized and state employment agencies send women to whorehouses for job interviews. Then when the women refuse to take the offered job, (remember, being a whore is now a legal type of employment) these women will be cut off from unemployment benefits because they refused to work in a legal job. Same situation, of course, would apply to homosexual men for work in homosexual bordellos and of course, heterosexual men for work as gigolos.

You mean like happens now with pornography? Oh wait, that doesn't happen at all, ever, does it?
 
You mean like happens now with pornography? Oh wait, that doesn't happen at all, ever, does it?

I said it would be funny, didn't I? I didn't say it would happen.

Your point about porn actresses is a good one actually. The reason that my scenario doesn't play out is, I think, because state employment bureaus don't accept job requests for porn actresses. I don't know this for a fact, but I suspect that this is what is going on. If this is so, then this leads to the question of why they're not advertising legal jobs.
 
normalizing?
LMAO
this always makes me life because it irrelevant and subjective.

also nobody said they want "inbreeding"


THIS is your reply to the statement "Most sex happens with birth control and no intent for offspring."

not sure about the birth control part but its absolutely true that most sex happens with no INTENT for off spring

a million abortions a year is PROOF of that on two levels.
one obviously a million people had no intent for a child and choose to abort
two im quite sure the 350million in the US have sex more than just a million times every year, hell myself alone im good for at least 600.

In general people ARE careful on avg.

Well said. I would add that some people are incapable of reproducing. People who have had a hysterectomy or a vasectomy cannot. The elderly cannot. People cannot reproduce from gay sex. In all these cases, there is no danger of pregnancy. Even in the case of related and fertile males and females having sex with no birth control, they're still more likely to produce healthy offspring than genetically defective ones. And the risk goes down the more distantly they're related. There's less risk with cousins than with siblings, for example. Again, I'm not recommending that related people have sex. I'm only saying the government should not make it illegal.

Homosexuality is wrong and should be classified as a criminal act.

It is Un-Normal.

I think you mean "abnormal." And it's not. No one's being sick simply by being gay.

... Have we forgotten about the Aides Desease?....Or has it been just swept under the rug?...

AIDS is caused by a virus, not by homosexuality.

I find your topic kind of funny. Not in a bad way though. Here's what I find funny. In the world there are sexual standards which are all socially constructed. Sexual Act A is a good type of sex, Sexual Act B is not as widely accepted as Sexual Act A, Sexual Act C is grudgingly condoned but not really encouraged, Sexual Act D is frowned up but not illegal, Sexual Act E is illegal, etc.

What you want to do is wipe out all of the social construction that surrounds sex. What you don't want to do is wipe out the social construction which surrounds the concept of age of consent. Now that's funny. ...

If you're prepared to overturn social constructions on sexual behavior, then why not on age of consent? Is a person who is 18 years and one day old a fully functioning adult who is capable of deciding for themselves what is in their best interests with regards to the types of sex that they want to enjoy but a person two days younger, a person who is 17 years and 364 days old is a minor who is not capable of deciding for themselves what is in their best interests with regards to the types of sex that they want to enjoy.

Someone who has sex with a ten year-old does irreparable harm to that person's psyche. Sex with a child can rob it of a quality sex life later as an adult. It's all about harms. Gay people having sex harms no one. Paid adult sex harms no one. Non-reproductive adult incest doesn't either. The rape of a child causes tremendous harm.

You've shown an example where an age of consent law is arguably too high. That doesn't mean we shouldn't have any age of consent laws. If we didn't, someone could legally have sex with a five year-old. We have to have a reasonable standard.

I'm not saying there should be no legal standards governing human sexuality. I'm saying “consenting adults in privacy” should be the standard.

I wanted to vote yes, but then I thought about... and I am not sure what you mean exactly.

Necrophilia should be illegal...
Necrophilia is not sex between consenting adults. A dead person cannot consent at the time of the act.

Sex in public places should be illegal...
I agree. That's also not a case of consenting adults in privacy.

Prostitution, it's fine to legalize by me.
What goes on between two consenting adults is none of my business.
Agreed.

You know what will be funny? When prostitution is legalized and state employment agencies send women to whorehouses for job interviews. Then when the women refuse to take the offered job, (remember, being a whore is now a legal type of employment) these women will be cut off from unemployment benefits because they refused to work in a legal job. Same situation, of course, would apply to homosexual men for work in homosexual bordellos and of course, heterosexual men for work as gigolos.

That's silly. People aren't currently forced to take a sex worker job. No one is forced to work as a stripper or as a porn star. No one's going to be forced to be a prostitute if it's legalized. That's not happening in Nevada.
 
Someone who has sex with a ten year-old does irreparable harm to that person's psyche. Sex with a child can rob it of a quality sex life later as an adult. It's all about harms. Gay people having sex harms no one. Paid adult sex harms no one. Non-reproductive adult incest doesn't either. The rape of a child causes tremendous harm.

You've shown an example where an age of consent law is arguably too high. That doesn't mean we shouldn't have any age of consent laws. If we didn't, someone could legally have sex with a five year-old. We have to have a reasonable standard.

I'm not saying there should be no legal standards governing human sexuality. I'm saying “consenting adults in privacy” should be the standard.

What is so special about the socially constructed meanings of "consenting adults" in your proposal? How come out of all of that social construction about sexuality that you want to throw out of the window, you're clinging to this as the iron-fast rule?

If it's OK for an adult daughter to have sex with her father then why is it wrong for a 16 year old girl to have sex with a 30 year old man or a 15 year old boy to have sex with a 35 year old woman? Plenty of people used to get married at 15 and 16. They used to get married even younger. Why are you socially restricting these people from the world of "consenting adults" when they are, in fact, giving consent for these older people to have sex with them?

If you're throwing away social construction with regards to sex then why are you clinging to the social fiction that age determines ability to give informed consent. There very well could be some 12 year olds who want to have sex with a 25 year old family friend that they have a crush on and who have thought about this long and hard, who understand that older people often take advantage of younger people in order to have sex with them, etc and has weighed the pros and cons and decided that she wants to have sex. Your social construction that you impose on this 12 year old girls is that she is not mature enough to decide for herself that she can consent to sex. You don't know her, you're applying a made-up social construction to her. However, if you deny her sanction to have sex with her 25 year old love object, she can still have sex with 12 year old Bobby across the street.

There are pretty good reasons why society shouldn't encourage fathers and daughters, even in adulthood, and mothers and sons, from getting it on. You're happy to throw those reasons out the window, so why not do the same for children or do the same for children who can get parental permission to have sex. (I'd love to be a fly on the wall for that conversation, but anyway . . )

If the issues devolves to harms, then how do you balance these two scenarios:

1.) An adult daughter decides to get it on with her father. Afterwards she is horrified by the memories of that encounter.
1.) An adult woman is date raped by a man she was going to have sex with, but not just yet. She's angry that he took advantage of her in a non-violent way but she decides to continue seeing him.

Which situation produces the greatest harm? The one where the adult consented or the one where the adult didn't consent?

If the concern for minors is that harm will befall them, what special harm comes to a 15 year old girl who has a committed relationship with a 30 year old man that doesn't befall her from being pumped and dumped by the high school quarterback? The point here is that we can conceive of circumstances where same-age sexual encounters between minors produce more harm than minor-adult sexual encounters.

Again, I don't understand why you're clinging to the age-of-consent social construction when you're prepared to jettison every other social taboo regarding sex?
 
It's awkward that the same people who say others can't be trusted to make the right sexual decisions are some of the most adamant defenders of people purchasing guns and being trusted to make the right decisions.

The right to keep and bear arms is a constitutional right. Sleeping with someone of the same gender, your sister, a minor, a prostitute or who ever else is not a constitutional right. Citizens exercising their their 2nd amendment rights keeps the government on their toes and in check.
 
Is there any actual unbiased proof to support this claim of yours?

Snazzy dresser, walks funny and talks funny. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and talks like a duck...
 
Back
Top Bottom