you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 9 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 3 fun -  (8 children)

“Why or why not?”

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (7 children)

Because people don’t have the right to have their preferences followed without first disclosing those preferences. Do people of jewish heritage have an ethical duty to disclose that heritage to all potential sexual partners on the chance that she might sleep with someone who wouldn’t want to sleep with jewish women?

[–]FlanJam 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Because people don’t have the right to have their preferences followed without first disclosing those preferences.

I dont want to dogpile, but it needs to be said: Lack of a 'NO' is not a 'YES"

edit for clarity

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (5 children)

I mean obviously

[–]FlanJam 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I'm glad you agree but your original post said otherwise, which is why I pushed back.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (3 children)

I did not say otherwise

[–]FlanJam 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

We can agree to disagree on that. I think your top post speaks for itself.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

Okay be as incorrect as you want

[–]FlanJam 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No need to be rude, I haven't been rude to you. If I'm incorrect then correct me, please clarify what you meant in the original post.

edit for brevity