You come home early one afternoon and you find your 14 y/o son making out with another boy in his room

>MFW my son got his first kiss before I did

Fuck his bf in the ass and then force my son to lick my cock clean.

Shoot him for breaking into my house and sexually assaulting my son

Jerk off and ask them if they could ganbang my wife

be as awkward and weird as possible...

"Hey... you guys uh... practicing cpr? Or is that the new sex thing going around, homoblows i think they call it?"

Straight or gay, I'm going to torture them with awkwardness. Being an awkward guy my whole life, I've been preparing for this shit.

Or just mime at them like the gif and give a questioning shrug

Join in.

Too old, but I'd still fuck 'em, or give them some condoms.

Don't bother them because it's my wifes son.

they did say in legends past:

first post, best post

This is the only true answer. Plus, it might accomplish 2 things, the dominance part and we all also know that teens think their parents are lame, so if your son sees you balls deep in a dude he'd think "wow being gay is fucking gay, my dad is lame, I like pussy now."

>hehe i guess your practising for your oral exam

and then i close the door.

fuck both of them

So do people on Cred Forums just assume their are no men on here who like dicks?

Hey son, remember when I caught you smoking and made you smoke the whole pack? Well I would like for you to meet the residents of cell block D...

>you insemination a girl but never kissed her

to be seriously honest its not gay to experiment, its what teens during puberty do. I sucked off a few guys during secondary school and -all- of them turned out to be straight

well, except me....

Why would you kiss a girl that you raped? What are you, gay?

Walk out of the room.
Fistbump him later at dinner.

>i obviously already told him about using protection and STDs and shit
>i obviously monitored who he became friends with and who seem like good or bad influences
>i obviously won't try to influence him in the matters of his own sexuality
>he obviously already has either a maturity certificate, or we are in a country where sexual actions are allowed at 14
>or if not i certainly won't be the one to ruin their lives by making a fuss about it

People need to start being rational.

this is beautiful

gg I hope you don't have kids or mature a bit. Because right now i think that the hypothetical 14 year old son would be at about this level of maturity.

You guys do realize that that's kinda rape-y no matter how you look at it since you were not asked to join in.

faggot

When my one son was younger him and these other kids the smallest weakest kid in their group dress up as a girl and be their girlfriend. They'd take turns taking "her" on dates and everything. It was fine because they had him be a girl wgen yhey did it so it wasn't gay.

Drop trou and start jerking off. That'll show him.

Say "guess you're preparing for your prostate exams haha" then do a 360 and fly away.

In all seriousness I'd walk out the room and close the door.

Dude those kids were genderfluid trannies. That's way worse than gay. At least gays get double the masculinity (well, maybe not quite double).

While I don't care what literalfaggots do in their own time, I'd disown the fuck out of my own kin over it.

Don't know about those others guys but I said I'd join in, meaning if they wanted, not that I'd rape em.

ask him why he feels the way he does. tell him that having gay thoughts is normal, but acting on them is degenerate and may lead the destruction of Western Civilization

Pic related

Long talk about proper anal and risks of doing it wrong.

I'll either terrify them from experimenting OR I'll save them from a real pain in the ass.

>ants

Kinky.

How come Rome collapsed after Christianity, not during the height under Hadrian, who fucked younger men in the butthole?

I never said anything about joining I asked if the wanted my wife while I jerk it

why not help his issue? his environment or your shitty genetics caused the problem

EXACTLY THIS

youtube.com/watch?v=4S7QARslq74

that picture makes me rage
it basiacly implies a 60 yr old can fuck a 2 yr old
yet liberals would still try to defend it as love is love

it's not the only reason civilization could fall. look at white birthrates though. Betaness and Homosexuality

...

The laws in most countries prohibit parents from having sexual contact with their children when they are under 18, because they could use their position of power over them to coerce them.
I don't know how to feel about this.

I guess ideally this would only be persecuted on demand, but there is a difference between knowing what you want to do sexually and being able to resist people in positions of power, so the law itself is valid.

Didn't see the asking part.

Oh..... OH!
That's a new way of looking at it.

>leave room
>come back in 10 minutes silently sliding in a bag full of bondage supplies through the door.

>it basiacly implies a 60 yr old can fuck a 2 yr old
What's wrong with that?

Beat the shit out of them.

>Now, assuming that you are a mature and responsible adult, what do you do?
Disown him and send him to an orphanage.

MOOODS

Beat the shit out of him.

why are you replying to everything you gigantic fagget?

Do you mean genetics correlated with need for novel behavior, such as that which build Western Civilization?

personal.lse.ac.uk/kanazawa/pdfs/JBS2012.pdf

Why would someone who loves a 2 year old fuck them? That would cause pain, you sicko.

Homosexuals are a very small proportion of the population. What does that have to do with birthrates? Many gay men have kids. The problem is age of consent laws and feminism, not fags.

can someone post that thread? I must've lost it

>The laws in most countries prohibit parents from having sexual contact with their children when they are under 18
Yeah, it's total fucking bullshit. Father/daughter is the purest form of love; a man should be able to start doing his daughter as soon as he thinks she's doable.

take my belt off and beat the gay out of him

I can't tell if this is bait or some dumb tumblr cunt wandered in here. No one wants a faggot for a son.

ah pa is old alr, how can you do this to meee.

What is a son?

If I found my apprentice taking part in pursuits of the flesh, I would disown him and cast him away.

And that's only because it wasn't with a succubus, in that case I would strike them both down

>Looks like you've got a bit of a boner, eh son?

Be obnoxiously awkward about it. Not in a "homophobic" way (because that will make him want to be more gay), but in a "I caught you with your pants down" sort of way.

If he doesn't grow out of it, then I'll throw him out of the house at 18 and not pay for college.

because i wanted to tell everyone in the thread to fuck off because joking about being horrible parents is not funny

and because i reply to everyone replying to me

that's wrong though.
It's not proven beyond reasonable doubt that unconsented sexual actions aren't harmful. There has only been one study which implied that consent wasn't really relevant.
And if someone is in a position of power over someone else consent will always be difficult to determine.

Go fuck yourself.
i bet you're one of those newfags who thinks pol is actually a safe haven for white supremacists.

The law doesn't work. All it does is make it taboo, causing more sadists to fuck their kids, and demonizes relationships where there isn't coercion.

saint micheal school mascot 2005. nice

Suggest something better?

Would rather have a faggot than a cunt daughter.

As long as he's a top I don't mind too much. It would be a bit hypocritical of me to punish him for trying things out a bit.

Reduce/eliminate AoC laws, maintain rape laws applicable to underage people just like to everyone else. Just estimate coercion based on real metrics and reason, not emotion and outdated morality.

This is the only reasonable answer,but to add to monitor and ensure he doesn't fall into faggot culture and stays a normal human who happens to be gay/bi.
Half the pricks on this site would shy away and then cry to their wife who is more manly than they are or shitpost on here about how fags are evil, they wouldn't actually do anything about their son though.

Why do you guys use a Hungary proxy so often?
Let me guess, it's because Hungary has Orban, whom people respect. So in order to make it seem like Hungary isn't the nationalist, right-wing country it is, faggots like you throw on a proxy and act like literal faggots.

Really gave my synapses a shake, I'm #WithHer now
.

>i bet you're one of those newfags who thinks pol is actually a safe haven for white supremacists.

Ah, okay, it is bait. Thanks for clarifying.

BEAT THE SHIT OUT OF HIM AND RAPE HIS BF IN FRONT OF HIM

Man you're such a fag for replying to jokes with actual replies

How is that bait? Cred Forums is supposed to be for free speech, libertarians have been here longer than reddit fascists, and some liberals have been here for a long time as well. I'm a race realist and nativist, but I'm not a dumb fuck that wants to censor others opinions.

>Reduce/eliminate AoC laws
Have an AoC test instead is my position.
That protects everyone too dumb to know where to put their private parts and where not to.
And allows everyone who knows how things are done to actually have a say about their body.

>Just estimate coercion based on real metrics and reason,
Yes but how.
I mean if someone forced their offspring to perform sexual actions through coercion they can also force them to say that it was consensual.

sure hope so.

Nem használok proxit te szerencsétlen kanadai segg.
And besides. A lot of people from hungary are
a) trolls so they flaunt hyperleftist nonsense
b) actually functionally retarded like the kétfarkú kutya párt who sabotaged the democratic process in the referendum
c) actually rational people capable of forming an opinion without having to resort to "lol gas all kikes racewar now xD" mentality.

Well fuck me then.

>Sure hope so

I am bi and I can confirm this is true. Nobody even knows that I am bi since I have lived by life basically as a "straight" guy and I feel my sexuality has literally nothing to do with me as a person. I can't even imagine being some lispy sissy.

I told you before your test is even more fascistic than the current laws. Its makes sex some super serious thing that you have to get to state to okay you for. That's sick. The state doesn't "allow" you to do something as basic as sex, everyone is already allowed to do that. Sex isn't that complicated, even toddlers figure out where to put stuff. "Protection" by the state is nefarious, its a protection racket.

>Yes but how.
>I mean if someone forced their offspring to perform sexual actions through coercion they can also force them to say that it was consensual.
We'll figure it out. The police already break children who loved their partners and don't want to give them up to the cops, don't you think that causes more trauma? Anything is better than that.

nah, was from mixed school

i was out during secondary school though, maybe that made it easier for curious guys to ask me for a BJ when they conveniently invite me over to do "school projects"

>How is that bait? Cred Forums is supposed to be for free speech

Exactly, and this includes speech from white supremacists, speech that gets censored on most of the rest of the internet. This effectively makes Cred Forums a safe haven for white supremacists.

Damn you're the worst

Its also a safe haven for people discussing age of consent, government conspiracy, Syria, etc, etc, so top trying to push out others who need safe havens as well, stupid twat.

wow go back to roddit and stop trying to bluepill us

you're on the wrong side of history and our sons and daughters are going to wonder why we ever put up with this mental illness known as homosexuality along with idiots like you

Light rhem on fire

not sure if you're joking or not, but i do know that feel

No i mean i sure hope that>they wouldn't actually do anything about their son though.
is true

>Its makes sex some super serious thing that you have to get to state to okay you for. That's sick
Well it fucking IS serious.
You can get diseases from it and you can end up ruining your life with it by getting knocked up or knocking someone up.
Also, how is it any more restrictive than the system now?

Right now people are NEVER allowed to fuck if they don't meed the ARBITRARY state mandated criteria.
With my system people would ONLY be prohibited from fucking if they are actually a danger to themselves and others.

>protection by the state is nefarious
okay disband the police then.
People need protection. That is why we have society. And the state.
Because otherwise the "strongest wins" would fuck everyone over including the strongest.

How is this any worse than the current system?

>Anything is better than that.
Well the same being done by the people breaking them to say that they wanted it would not be better.

>t. scientifically illiterate american

>psycholgy is a science
don't pretend to be smart ever again

Kek

This faggot shitpost is getting old.
Doesn't matter how you word it, faggots aren't welcome here

close the door, go to my room, masturbate furiously

This is the 4th board you've posted this on you cancerous piece of shit. Kys op

Make sure he's using protection and allow them to express their first amendment rights.

>psychology
>being gay is only investigated by psychology.
well i guess all those theories about prenatal hormonal and genetic influences in twin studies and whatnot to determine the biological origins of homosexuality, and all the sociology and politology studies that were conducted to determine if it was harmful were all just psychologists disguising themselves very cleverly.

also
>psychology is not a science
yeah go back to your scientology chuch

Anyone have that screenshot of an user posting his actual experience with this and he's like, "studying for the prostate exams?"

Kill them both and bury them in the rose garden.

fine with it so long as my son is the top.

Groin kick.

wut

>Well it fucking IS serious.
Not really. Basic biological function. Its only serious because of safety, which is easily taught, and morality, which is irrational.
>You can get diseases from it and you can end up ruining your life with it by getting knocked up or knocking someone up.
>Also, how is it any more restrictive than the system now?
The state doesn't need to teach everyone what venereal diseases are, its a basic understanding that can be taught to young people just like everything else about life. Parents need to teach their kids, not state schools and whatever committee you want. I didn't say it was more restrictive, I said it was fascistic. The state has no business determining if someone can have sex or not.

>Right now people are NEVER allowed to fuck if they don't meed the ARBITRARY state mandated criteria.
People do it constantly. Most relationships aren't even "caught".
>With my system people would ONLY be prohibited from fucking if they are actually a danger to themselves and others.
You're assuming that the state is somehow interested in reason instead of projecting power and controlling populations.

>People need protection. That is why we have society. And the state.
Yes, and I'm libertarian not anarchist. Too many laws and restrictions make it hard for police to do their jobs anyway, and make society function much slower.

Coercion is evident in every single aspect of society, including the central notion of present civilization, capital. You'd have to apply your system universally, or else its logically inconsistent. Sex isn't something incredibly dangerous that it needs its own special committee to determine if you can have sex.

>Well the same being done by the people breaking them to say that they wanted it would not be better.
No doubt, but I don't want that either.

I find it funny how every board shits on us and nothing happens but we shit on them, we get banned. It's time for a raid

...

>theories
you mean psuedoscience?

there is absolutely zero
repeat after me
ZERO
concrete evidence for homosexuality being anything but psychological
but idiots like you who pretend to be enlightened don't need real scientific findings do you?
no just some whackjob theory with nothing substantial is more than enough for you as long as it's paraded as "science"

there is no evidence of a gay gene
there is no evidence of it being herditary or a physical component of the environment
it is 100% learned behavior you ignoramus

and just so i can really drive in how stupid you are
you just tried to claim that sociology and politology are sciences
anything that has to do with the words "social" or anything regard human behavior is not science
it is observation and labeling and nothing more

Drop my pants and tell the boys to come over and start licking. Then I'd fuck my son while his bf is tied up in a chastity, so he's never doing anything with his dick to my property.

Would you rather have:
Homosexual son that turns out to be right-leaning just like you and disapproves of degeneracy and BLM bullshit
or
Straight daughter that rebels against your racist republican ways and ends up becoming a coalburner and all-around degenerate

underrated

GREATEST ALLY

personal.lse.ac.uk/kanazawa/pdfs/JBS2012.pdf
>Fags are more likely to be intelligent
>Intelligence has a major genetic factor
Be smart.

You sound like a faggot

I'd pretend to be supportive, live the rest of my life knowing I failed and die with great shame.

oh look its the
>if you hate faggots you're a faggot
meme

truly top tier arguments here

You put me in a spot here, can I just shoot them both?

Theres a thinker

>sites study linking genetics to intelligence to prove that studies linking homosexuality to genetics are legetimate

>which is easily taught
How do you know you are actually effective in teaching people that safety if you never test for it because it would be oppressive.

Either you set an age limit which will always be arbitrary and thus irrational, or you have to have SOME way of knowing that the people in question know basic safety.

>its a basic understanding that can be taught to young people just like everything else about life
So people should get their drivers licenses after attending a course without any test right?
Surely nothing could go wrong.
Also when would the teaching occur?
If you do it at a certain age you are artificially excluding people under that age, and force people over that age to deal with the topic even if they have no desire to.

>Parents need to teach their kids
AHAAHAHahAHAHHA
Oh yeah because THAT has worked out so well for you americans with your SKY HIGH teen pregnancy rate.

>People do it constantly. Most relationships aren't even "caught".
Which just means that the current laws are shit because they force people to constantly violate them
Also it would STILL BE THE SAME with the new laws. You could still do it without being allowed to and not get caught.
But at least if you DO get caught you have an option to NOT GET JAILED.
>You're assuming that the state is somehow interested in reason instead of projecting power and controlling populations.
You're assuming that
>the state is interested in controlling populations. it's not. it cares about the economy only which is why everything in the USA is going to shit
>the government would have any say in WHO gets to pass the exam. they would not. the exam would be conducted by independent doctors. just like abortion advising sessions nowadays. Those are also not used to 'control populations' by the government

>Sex isn't something incredibly dangerous that it needs its own special committee to determine if you can have sex.
But it is. Not a special committee but a doctor.

>homosexual son against degeneracy
that's an oxymoron if i've ever seen one

Gay son, I ain't haven no niglet grandchildren

legitimate*

I would disown him.

Where was it evident in my post that I was trying to prove that? I wouldn't try to prove something as obvious. If you think its illegitimate, discuss its flawed methodology.

I swear a few months ago I saw a poster from Singapore make a thread about this same situation except he was telling the story about he was the 14y/o a while ago and that he got caught by his dad. Are you the same gay Singapore man from a few months ago?

>gay
>is a virgin
>hates race traitors and niggers
>wants the wall built
>etc
Not hard

>Sex isn't something incredibly dangerous that it needs its own special committee to determine if you can have sex.
It is dangerous as i said above lots of risks involved, and you can not know whether your teaching was actually effective unless you make a test.
And if you don't know whether the teaching was effective you're back at square zero with letting potentially dangerous people do dangerous things.

>but I don't want that either.
But that's what you'd be forcing.
If you say "it's legal but only if they consent" every rapist would coerce their underage victims to say it was consensual.

>you mean psuedoscience?
Yeah you actually have never read anything scientific most likely or are baiting as fuck

>but idiots like you who pretend to be enlightened don't need real scientific findings do you?
Yeah obviously. Which is why i didn't know about the partly genetic partly prenatal hormonal influences that have been found to correlate strongly with homosexuality.

>you just tried to claim that sociology and politology are sciences
>it is observation and labeling and nothing more

BREAKING NEWS: BIOLOGY IS NOT A REAL SCIENCE.
EXPERIMENTAL PHYSICS IS NOT A REAL SCIENCE
ASTROPHYSICS IS NOT A REAL SCIENCE

Literally all of science is observation, labelling, and creating theories based on these.
You fucking moron.

I join in on the gay sex that would ensue

Whip out my big black dick and teach him a lesson in respect

Close the door, grab a box of condoms, come back and throw it at them.

That's what my dad did, anyways.

I've this thread a good 10 times now, are you gay or somthing
youtube.com/watch?v=IXqeGy-yPWk

It's okay as long as the boy isn't being a total faggot about it. I'll also tell him if he doesn't have biological children of his own, he is disowned. I had to go through that bullshit to have him, he will do the same. His new nickname will probably be princess to top it off.

quads confirm it
also

>uses anime reaction image to hammer his point about something being degenerate home

le epic XDD

>How do you know you are actually effective in teaching people that safety if you never test for it because it would be oppressive.
What? Its not oppressive to teach it, its oppressive for a state system to determine if someone is ready for sex.

>Either you set an age limit which will always be arbitrary and thus irrational, or you have to have SOME way of knowing that the people in question know basic safety.
Why? Tons of teenagers don't know basic safety, because they have shit parents, and we don't feel the need to step in and prevent them from having sex. Its not hard to teach kids how to be safe, that state shouldn't be making laws about sexuality, period, only about force, i.e. rape.

>So people should get their drivers licenses after attending a course without any test right?
Driving is not a basic function of humanity, wrapped up in identity and the very notion of freedom. False equivalence.
>Also when would the teaching occur?
Whenever the parent/partner feels its necessary.
>If you do it at a certain age you are artificially excluding people under that age, and force people over that age to deal with the topic even if they have no desire to.
No, I'm allowing both partners to determine if its okay, not the state.

>Oh yeah because THAT has worked out so well for you americans with your SKY HIGH teen pregnancy rate.
That's been decreasing I believe, no? Also this is also centered around our retarded ideas sexuality. Teens are taught by the state about sexuality. Its inadequate.

>Also it would STILL BE THE SAME with the new laws. You could still do it without being allowed to and not get caught.
No, it would be a new system with different veins of oppression. Just eliminate the laws, create education, revamp rape, attempt to determine coercion and rape if a party complains, etc.

>But it is. Not a special committee but a doctor.
Saying if someone can experience mutual pleasure isn't medicine.

Jesus man, I can't respond to this much.

The Shariah police has to be good for something, right?

What monster did i create?!

niece.

>people defend pedophilia
But that's wrong, you fucking moron.

laugh and call him a fag then turn 360 degrees and walk away

>rejecting your son because of his sexuality

Talk him into not becoming a gay parade faggot and to not associate with such people in public.

Disown him if he doesn't give me any biological children, then raise the kid myself to keep the family values alive into the next generation

Kick him out and tell him to start turning tricks in the big city, like any self-respecting young homosexual is supposed to be doing at that age.

>mental illness
Nice meme.

>But that's what you'd be forcing.
>If you say "it's legal but only if they consent" every rapist would coerce their underage victims to say it was consensual.
Child psychologists know tells, and they can determine what their mood is and if they're lying, without having to break the kids like they do now because of insane laws.

>What? Its not oppressive to teach it, its oppressive for a state system to determine if someone is ready for sex.
BUT YOU DON'T KNOW IF THE PERSON BEING TAUGHT HAS LEARNED ANYTHING YOU IDIOT.
For fucks sake why do you think we have driving tests instead of just telling people how to drive.

>and we don't feel the need to step in and prevent them from having se
But we do. You absolute moron.... I mean... are you illiterate? Sorry for the ad hominems but what the actual fuck man.
You have ridiculously high AoCs in the USA precisely because you're trying to do that.

The AoC are set that high PRECISELY because parents don't teach their kids about sexuality and thus abysmal teen pregnancy rates happen with the state is trying to counteract, and also pander to the "muh asexual children" meme.

>driving
driving is exactly as dangerous. you don't have tests for drivers licenses because THE MAN wants to oppress you. you have them because the state is trying to prevent people from hurting each other and themselves. your feelings are irrelevant
>Whenever the parent/partner feels its necessary.
Yeah so presumably never as this is the same way it has been handled in the south.
And would you look at that it lead to ridiculous bullshit teen pregnancy rates.

> Teens are taught by the state about sexuality. Its inadequate.
they are not. they are tiptoeing around the issue even at ages 16 when almost everyone is sexually active because MUH INNOCENT CHILDRUNS
in germany where it is taught from 4th grade the teen pregnancy rates have always always been lower.
same in hungary

>Saying if someone can experience mutual pleasure isn't medicine.
no but saying that they are fit or not fit to actually make rational decisions is one.

>tell him he can't have sex before marriage
>and then make sure there's no gay marriage

>denial intensifies

your life must be sad

>Walks in
>Is suprised
>leaves them alone
>Later at night we talk
You know son in every mans life comes a time where he has to admit his mistakes. So I will say this. Prepare for a baby brother.

>NOT rejecting degenerate children
>being this much of a cuck

>le cuck meme

I am an out homosexual and have been for years and that ad still angered me.

I do think it's important for young kids to know that it's ok to be gay/bi/whatever, I don't see that as indoctrination or anything like a lot of idiots do, but making them kiss for something like this was in really bad taste. I always found the FCK H8 campaign to be a waste of time anyway, it's very self-serving and doesn't really accomplish anything.

>No, it would be a new system with different veins of oppression. Just eliminate the laws, create education, revamp rape, attempt to determine coercion and rape if a party complains, etc.
You utter utter cunt.

It would literally be the exact same thing.
People could choose to ignore the laws just like they do now, but IF they get caught they would have a way to not go to jail if they take the test after the act.

>just eliminate the laws
that's literally the only reason why your teen pregnancy rate isn't even more abysmal and the abortion rate isn't worse
The laws are there to protect people.
No matter 'but my basic rights so and so' will change the fact that people sometimes do need protection from their own stupidity. Not because the government enjoys oppressing you but because letting everyone have tactical nuclear weapons as much as someone could consider it an immediate human right, would lead to lots of casualties.

Same with allowing uneducated people to have sex. It will lead to massive numbers of abortions and ruined lives.

>create education,
You just said you want parents to do that, but that's what they had been doing up to now.
They were free to do so nay even ENCOURAGED to do so. And you can see where that lead you.

>attempt to determine coercion and rape if a party complains
But you cannot do that for fucks sake. Why are you repeating things i already countered.
Any asshole parent who forced their kid to have sex with them could just force them to state that it was consensual with the same authority.

This is why the AoC to have sex with people in positions of authority over you is higher, because it's difficult to resist.

Your arguments are wrapped up in all kind of inconsistencies and blind spots. There are tons of potentially dangerous things kids do that don't need a doctor to determine if they can do them. Riding a bike, climbing a tree, rafting, etc, etc, are potentially many times more dangerous than sex. Your positions are based on an emotional, and an irrational position of morality, saying that sex is alone among potential dangers, and pleasures, and basic biological functions, that should be okayed by by state law. Its irrational. I don't have time to reply anymore, and you're getting angry, and we're talking around each other at this point, so its time to stop I think.

>"le x meme"

This isn't even nu-Cred Forums cancer anymore, this is what happens when cancer metastasizes and hits the lymph nodes and lungs.

Not an argument.

applaud him and go and shoot a Christian

>tfw the Hungarian autist is back

Come on man, you're making so many logical fallacies to support your arguments, and not even responding when I bring them up.
Why do you think they made them kiss? and if they did, is it wrong if they asked them to kiss for an ad they support, if they already kiss normally?

Neither is "le x meme".

>literally ejecting your own children
>because they don't conform to your expectations
>calling anyone else a cuck.

Oh mein Neger.

>There are tons of potentially dangerous things kids do that don't need a doctor to determine if they can do them. Riding a bike, climbing a tree, rafting, etc, etc, are potentially many times more dangerous than sex.
No.
None of those are associated with contagious diseases that are spreading rapidly through the country.
None of them are associated with ruined lives if someone does something wrong, because physically children are tough.

Also, if someones kid DOES manage to get themselves hurt when riding a bike, or climbing a tree people get jailed.
Especially many lols for the rafting thing, because the trainers in the rafting camp i went to this summer were almost paranoid about ensuring everyone was taught everything because if something happened they would have been jailed.

>present rational arguments for the betterment of all of mankind
>get called an autist
>"muh liberties"

Such is life for Hungarians.

>raising a child that's not like the one you're expecting
That's what the poor sods that get visited by a cuckoo do.

Yes, if my child doesn't turn out how I want it, I'd remove it from my life.

>Come on man, you're making so many logical fallacies to support your arguments, and not even responding when I bring them up.
Point out even one.

let me rephrase that
>lowering the procreational chances of your own genetic offspring
>by preferring a NOT EVEN EXISTING (thus not your offspring) child

I call you an autist because you type like you just arrived from reddit and actually have a holier than thou complex while posting on this shit site.

>lowering the procreational chances of your own genetic offspring

If it's a faggot it highly doubtful that he'll procreate.

Just have several children in the first place, that way you can get rid of the few who are a waste and focus your time and resources on the rest.

actually in retrospect the kiss in the ad is only for a second, it just looks longer because of the screenshot. there isn't really much wrong with it, I'm sure those kids were on board, I just really don't like when adults bring children into any sort of issue they're pushing (I feel the same way when you see videos of the Westboro people making their kids stand on the street with signs). Like every now and then you'll see a new viral video shared on social media where a young child says something "super progressive" about an issue and it's presented as an incidental moment, yet when you listen/watch closely you can tell the kid is waiting for off-camera cues from the parent and that the whole thing was rehearsed. I just don't like watching kids be appropriated.

>holier than thou
I engage with every single person that replies to me and try to be civil and present arguments unless they are borderline retarded or blatantly baiting.

And that other person and i had been arguing in a different thread before, so we have history. We both agree that the current AoC laws are needlessly oppressive, but he thinks that we don't need any safety given to us by those while i think that we need more safety while at the same time being less oppressive.

He also thinks that having a test you pass at a doctors instead of an arbitrary age you pass is somehow more oppressive.

>it highly doubtful that he'll procreate.
a) surrogate mothers
b) biological offspring from two males in the near future (already done with mice)

>Just have several children in the first place, that way you can get rid of the few who are a waste and focus your time and resources on the rest.
>being a literal scum of the earth R strategist nigger
Welcome to post 19th century europe Ahmed. Here we like to take care of our offspring, and not deliberately harm people who are not conforming to our expectations. Because we know that everyone has some unique talent to contribute to civilization. Now i know that over there in the middle east this has been very different, but we discriminate based on what's good for society, not what's good for your religious beliefs or feelings.

Just have more than one son.
The odds of them both being gay are very, very, very small, unless you're a terrible fucking parent. And in that case, you're the one that should be ashamed.

>it's the current year
>if you do x you're group y

See, no amount of shaming is going to stop me from removing my children from my life if they're not like how I want them to be.
They have no right to my resources and should be happy that I don't just kill them like the people who you're associating me with would.

? You yourself said you were using ad homs.

>None of those are associated with contagious diseases that are spreading rapidly through the country.
School already teaches about STDs. Parents should teach about them too. Contagious diseases don't mean we need to police sexuality.
>None of them are associated with ruined lives if someone does something wrong, because physically children are tough.
Rind et al. (and followup) determines that many kids who consented didn't experience harm.

>Also, if someones kid DOES manage to get themselves hurt when riding a bike, or climbing a tree people get jailed.
Only if they're at some youth camp or something. Playing around normally is just an accident, and if they get hurt in a camp or rafting or something, its not the parents who are jailed because they allowed their kids to perform the activity.

The reason making laws about sexuality is oppressive is because sexuality is such a massive part of our identity and biology, the state uses it to prolong ignorance and keep kids in brainwashing schools for longer. Doctors determining if someone can have sex is dangerous.

I agree with being unnnerved with parents push their kids for ideology or ulterior motives, but if they're enthusiastic like that its usually the opposite: kids pushing their parents.

>correlate strongly with homosexuality
there is no evidence nor will there ever be for homosexuality being linked to physical influences
if you can't accept that than you're simply an idiot, I'm sorry
ofc they keep shilling that there is because they have an agenda
>convince everyone that homosexuality isn't a choice
>once everyone thinks homosexuality isn't a choice then everyone who is against it will be labeled a bigot homophobe
they're grasping at straws and if you would actually look at the studies you would realize this

and i wasn't using observation to point out that it isn't science
but it's pretty fucking hilarious that you would compare sociology to astrophysics

there is 0 evidence that there is any physical differences between a homosexual person and a straight person
or any physical stimuli that could possibly cause this
that means that we have to assume the default explanation, that it's psychological

those who say otherwise already have the answer in mind and are trying to find evidence for their answer
that is not science
with scienceyou ask a question and you find the answer
not give an answer to a question and then try to find evidence for it

>begin the thread by mass replying to posts with his holier than thou complex
>I'm not trying to be better than anyone I'm just debating
at least be honest here

until there is even a shred of evidence for homosexuality being anything but psychological
then I'm going to assume that anyone who says otherwise is a buttpirate

Send him off to a strict Catholic boarding school. Although it's probably already too late by that stage cos the Jew has already ruined him. Might be better off kicking him out. He's useless to the family now.

>He's useless to the family now.
He can still go to school, become successful, make money, and help take care of you when you grow old and senile.
That is IF you raised him not to be a retarded liberal degenerate.

>The odds of them both being gay are very, very, very small, unless you're a terrible fucking parent.
Being gay has been linked to genetic factors though.

>current year
what
never said that
>if you do x
never said that either, but if you literally abandon your own offspring for some "Ideal" that is not your own offspring you are definitely a cuck, and an R strategist like fucking insects.

>See, no amount of shaming is going to stop me from removing my children from my life if they're not like how I want them to be.
And this makes you a despicable human being.
I hope you know that.
You would cause your own flesh and blood pain and sorrow, because they didn't conform to your expectations.
You would lower their chances that they might contribute to a society, because they didn't conform to your expectations and thus hurt your feelings.

You are literally objectively hurting society.

Ad homs are not logical fallacies, they are just not nice to use in a debate, because it detracts from the legibility.
>School already teaches about STDs. Parents should teach about them too. Contagious diseases don't mean we need to police sexuality.
And is it effective?
No it is not.
Especially not if you would let everyone have sex BEFORE school has taught them about STDs

>Rind et al. (and followup) determines that many kids who consented didn't experience harm.
That's actually wrong. That study did not check whether it was consensual or not, and it was not many, it was the overwhelming majority to an extent that the deviation from the norm in being damaged was no measurable for the whole group.

This is not what i have been talking about though.
I meant that people should know what what is. If you agree to a gangbang because what the hell it can't be that bad and in the end have rectal damage, that was because of your inability to make rational decisions.

>boarding school
>gay teenager

use your head man