Sen. Hirono grills Amy Coney Barrett for describing sexual orientation as a ‘preference’

Status
Not open for further replies.

Oompa Loompa

Against both police brutality and cop killing.
Jun 4, 2020
5,460
2,418
40
Louisiana
✟143,012.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I don't know if anyone else has thought about this. But I am suspecting that making the phrase "sexual preference" offensive to LGBT because they feel their sexual orientation isn't a choice is one more progressive step towards the normalization of pedophilia. Now hear me out. If sexual orientation isn't a choice, wouldn't pedophiles therefore fall into a protected class if they cannot control their sexual orientation towards children? Why or why not? What if the child consents?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/10/14/sexual-preference-coney-barrett-hirono/

“I have no agenda,” Barrett replied. “I do want to be clear that I have never discriminated on the basis of sexual preference and would not discriminate on the basis of sexual preference.”

That choice of words prompted swift pushback from some critics, who said that the phrase “sexual preference,” as used by Barrett, suggested that same-sex attraction is simply a choice — one that can be changed under enough pressure.
 

CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN

My dad died 1/12/2023. I'm still devastated.
Jul 1, 2007
17,258
5,042
Native Land
✟321,432.00
Country
United States
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I don't know if anyone else has thought about this. But I am suspecting that making the phrase "sexual preference" offensive to LGBT because they feel their sexual orientation isn't a choice is one more progressive step towards the normalization of pedophilia. Now hear me out. If sexual orientation isn't a choice, wouldn't pedophiles therefore fall into a protected class if they cannot control their sexual orientation towards children? Why or why not? What if the child consents?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/10/14/sexual-preference-coney-barrett-hirono/
Except kids can't consent to being sexually abused. So pedophiles need to stay away from children. Or be kept somewhere, so they cant rape kids. I do think there's something wrong with child molester.
 
Upvote 0

Desk trauma

Front row at the dumpster fire of the republic
Supporter
Dec 1, 2011
20,190
16,169
✟1,173,012.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I honestly cant stand the lgbt!! Its like 2 sins in one because pride is also a sin. And they have disturbing side agendas

Its not anything against gays, i have my problems with sexual immorality and im no better. Barrett said nothing wrong
You can’t stand them but have nothing against them. Pick one.
 
Upvote 0

plain jayne

Active Member
Aug 11, 2020
253
366
Louisiana
✟58,891.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
What if the child consents?

You didn't really just say that, did you? Children cannot consent to adult sexual activity. Their brains are not developed fully and that's critical. They have no idea of the physical, social, and mental ramifications of a sexual relationship. Their limited cognitive development is such that their "consent" is not an informed one nor a legal one nor a adult one.

A child may even give permission, but that does not constitute LEGAL consent. For example, a kindergarten boy may be asked by the police, "Did you want to touch him [adult man] down there?" The boy may say yes. But ask him why and he may say, "He said he would come to my house and kill my puppy if I didn't."

Even if a child says they consented - such as a 14-year-old girl in a "relationship" with a 32-year-old man. She has NO IDEA of the risk involved and the jail time this man will serve. She cannot fully comprehend the absolute inappropriateness of what this man is doing to her. All she knows is he likes her, he gives her presents, makes her feel good, and makes her feel grown-up.

Children cannot give legal and informed consent.
 
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,474
18,454
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,090.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
The old "gays are pedophiles" canard. Charming.

And you all wonder why more and more Americans don't find American Evangelicals credible moral authorities?
 
Upvote 0

St_Worm2

Simul Justus et Peccator
Supporter
Jan 28, 2002
27,246
45,333
67
✟2,915,768.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Hello @Oompa Loompa, I don't believe that "Sexual Preference" became an offensive phrase until October 14th this year. Until that day, I heard it used regularly as a descriptive phrase by gay and straight alike, including Vice President Biden (who used it again on air on 10/13), and by many, many others recently as well, like Clinton appointed SCOTUS member, Ruth Bader Ginsburg).

No one meant any harm when they used it (and apparently, no one knew it was offensive either, until the Senator from Hawaii let us know, that is). In fact, I've heard that phrase used over and over again, both in print and on air, for several years, but I cannot remember a single time that it was ever used in a derogatory manner.

--David
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,474
18,454
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,090.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
Hello @Oompa Loompa, I don't believe that "Sexual Preference" became an offensive phrase until October 14th this year. Until that day, I heard it used regularly as a descriptive phrase by gay and straight alike, including Vice President Biden (who used it again on air on 10/13), and by many, many others recently as well, like Clinton appointed SCOTUS member, Ruth Bader Ginsburg).

No one meant any harm when they used it (and apparently, no one knew it was offensive either, until the Senator from Hawaii let us know, that is). In fact, I've heard that phrase used over and over again, both in print and on air, for several years, but I cannot remember a single time that it was ever used in a derogatory manner.

--David

"Sexual preference" is archaic language at best. Depending on the context, it can be highly offensive (and I personally find the use of the term by VP Biden or the late justice Ginsberg's cringeworthy, but excusable due to them belonging to a generation where it commonly existed alongside pervasive homophobia). Sen. Hirono is within her rights to point out how Barret's use of language is problematic, to discern whether it indicates some relevant personal bias that would render her incapable of impartially judging a case involving LGBT persons.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: john23237
Upvote 0

St_Worm2

Simul Justus et Peccator
Supporter
Jan 28, 2002
27,246
45,333
67
✟2,915,768.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
"Sexual preference" is archaic language at best. Depending on the context, it can be highly offensive (and I personally find the use of the term by VP Biden or the late justice Ginsberg's cringeworthy, but excusable due to them belonging to a generation where it commonly existed alongside pervasive homophobia). Sen. Hirono is within her rights to point out how Barret's use of language is problematic, to discern whether it indicates some relevant personal bias that would render her incapable of impartially judging a case involving LGBT persons.
Hello FireDragon, I'm not denying that the term may be offensive to some, but if that's been true for years now, it's been one of the best kept secrets that I know of :preach: Like me, most never realized that it was considered to be an offensive phrase by some (it was certainly never intended as such in my reading/hearing, as I said above) until we heard Senator Hirono's recent comments concerning it, that is.

Now we know :oldthumbsup:

--David
 
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,474
18,454
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,090.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
Hello FireDragon, I'm not denying that the term may be offensive to some, but if that's been true for years now, it's been one of the best kept secrets that I know of :preach: Like me, most never realized that it was considered to be an offensive phrase by some (it was certainly never intended as such in my reading/hearing, as I said above) until we heard Senator Hirono's recent comments concerning it, that is.

Now we know :oldthumbsup:

--David

It's more commonly understood as an offensive dog whistle in the LGBT community or by those who associate or ally with the LGBT community.

Sen. Hirono lives in a state that has a great deal of gay acceptance in its culture and the religion she was brought up in (Shin Buddhism) has a longer, and stronger, history of affirming the dignity of LGBT persons than most Christian churches, so that's probably why she in particular focused on Judge Barrett's questionable choice of phrase.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,474
18,454
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,090.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
[STAFF EDITED DELETED QUOTE]

It would indeed be hard, and I haven't met any actual "liberals" that favor lowering the age of consent beyond what it currently is, so please stop it with this irrelevant argument.

And about brain development, the progressive movement has already redefined and ignored enough science to convince the world there are more than two genders.

Gender isn't a scientific category in the first place, it's a philosophical category so you're attacking a strawman. Nobody that supports transgender rights questions legitimate science. The issue has more to do with the philosophy of science, metaphysics, and even epistemology, which is a philosophical and not a scientific domain.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Agree
Reactions: Leet
Upvote 0

GoldenBoy89

We're Still Here
Sep 25, 2012
23,802
25,693
LA
✟551,683.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I don't know if anyone else has thought about this. But I am suspecting that making the phrase "sexual preference" offensive to LGBT because they feel their sexual orientation isn't a choice is one more progressive step towards the normalization of pedophilia. Now hear me out. If sexual orientation isn't a choice, wouldn't pedophiles therefore fall into a protected class if they cannot control their sexual orientation towards children? Why or why not? What if the child consents?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/10/14/sexual-preference-coney-barrett-hirono/
Preference implies it’s a choice. Gays don’t choose their orientation any more than straights choose theirs. I’m sure you would take offense to someone implying you only choose or prefer to be straight.
 
Upvote 0

Jonathan Walkerin

Well-Known Member
Feb 12, 2019
3,720
2,772
44
Stockholm
✟72,396.00
Country
Sweden
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
If sexual orientation isn't a choice, wouldn't pedophiles therefore fall into a protected class if they cannot control their sexual orientation towards children? Why or why not? What if the child consents?

Hardly.

Pyromaniacs can’t legally burn your house down, Kleptomaniacs can’t steal merchandise and homicidal people are not allowed by the law to murder you even if they are so wired.

Person having a psychological or biological tendency to do something that is against the law doesn’t exempt them from having to follow that law.
 
Upvote 0

KCfromNC

Regular Member
Apr 18, 2007
28,632
15,950
✟484,106.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
The old "gays are pedophiles" canard. Charming.

And you all wonder why more and more Americans don't find American Evangelicals credible moral authorities?
I mean, nothing against them of course, but I wish they'd keep their religious lifestyle choices to themselves rather than flaunting them in public. It is fine to have their preferences, but I really don't need to be constantly reminded of it.
 
Upvote 0

Oompa Loompa

Against both police brutality and cop killing.
Jun 4, 2020
5,460
2,418
40
Louisiana
✟143,012.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Preference implies it’s a choice. Gays don’t choose their orientation any more than straights choose theirs. I’m sure you would take offense to someone implying you only choose or prefer to be straight.
And pedophiles will tell you their perversion towards children isn't a choice and cannot control it. So I believe it is only a matter of time before pedophiles become the new hero of the progressive left like "Kaitlyn Jenner" and start having their own pride month.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,474
18,454
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,090.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
I mean, nothing against them of course, but I wish they'd keep their religious lifestyle choices to themselves rather than flaunting them in public. It is fine to have their preferences, but I really don't need to be constantly reminded of it.

And some of them... I assume, are good people.
 
Upvote 0

RestoreTheJoy

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jul 13, 2018
5,088
1,643
Passing Through
✟449,757.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I don't know if anyone else has thought about this. But I am suspecting that making the phrase "sexual preference" offensive to LGBT because they feel their sexual orientation isn't a choice is one more progressive step towards the normalization of pedophilia. Now hear me out. If sexual orientation isn't a choice, wouldn't pedophiles therefore fall into a protected class if they cannot control their sexual orientation towards children? Why or why not? What if the child consents?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/10/14/sexual-preference-coney-barrett-hirono/
It's fine when Joe Biden says it. But not fine when anyone appointed by Trump says it.
 
Upvote 0

RestoreTheJoy

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jul 13, 2018
5,088
1,643
Passing Through
✟449,757.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Children cannot give legal and informed consent.
Right now. You do realize there are groups actively working to change this consent age and push it downward. Sounds unthinkable today. In 10-20 years, will sound "normal" if properly pushed by those with that agenda.

Child trafficking sounded unthinkable a couple decades ago. Now rings are being busted regularly.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Oompa Loompa
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,625
81
St Charles, IL
✟347,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
It's fine when Joe Biden says it. But not fine when anyone appointed by Trump says it.
Because when someone appointed by Trump says it it is more likely to carry the implication that homosexual orientation is 'nothing but a wicked lifestyle choice.'
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Status
Not open for further replies.