|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
klinton said:
The kind of damage you are indicating is not a risk to the average person (anymore than permanent vaginal damage is to a hetero woman). Again, don't take my word, do your reading. The anus is more than well equipped to handle the penetration (it's an incredibly maleable piece of muscle).
No. It's not. The asshole wasn't specifically designed to heal from forced entry. Vaginal areas, however, are, and they do so with greater eficciency(sp) than the sphincter. They're also far more resistant to the more severe STDs (without condom). A penis entering a vagina (granted it is well lubricated--By its own secretions) is in no way unhealthy, even for a virgin--Hell, for some virgins, with enough foreplay, it doesn't even hurt. A penis entering the ass, however, is, in every way, unhealthy.
Quote:
You were trying to justify that marriages exist for the security of families. I'm saying that's just not true. Marriages have served many purposes in history. The foremost historical purpose of a marriage is a legal contract providing for the aquisition of property and wealth.
But that's not issue because you're already offered that through CIVIL UNIONS.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
|
|
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
No. It's not. The asshole wasn't specifically designed to heal from forced entry. Vaginal areas, however, are, and they do so with greater eficciency(sp) than the sphincter. They're also far more resistant to the more severe STDs (without condom). A penis entering a vagina (granted it is well lubricated--By its own secretions) is in no way unhealthy, even for a virgin--Hell, for some virgins, with enough foreplay, it doesn't even hurt. A penis entering the ass, however, is, in every way, unhealthy.
This is so ridiculous, it's not even amusing anymore. Cite me two reputable sources that will support you on your crusade.
Quote:
But that's not issue because you're already offered that through CIVIL UNIONS.
Then what is your hang up with marriage?
If karma's a bitch, it will be my bitch!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
klinton said:
This is so ridiculous, it's not even amusing anymore. Cite me two reputable sources that will support you on your crusade.
It's basic sexual physiology for fuck's sake!
Quote:
Then what is your hang up with marriage?
I could ask you th same question if you already have civil unions.
I don't feel marriage should be changed on account of a civil rights movement shelling for special rights. Marriage wasn't designed for what you want to use it for and the invention is more appropriately fitted for straight couples.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
|
|
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
It's basic sexual physiology for fuck's sake!
It's assumed 'basic' physiology. The risks you are implying, and the subsequent ban on gay marriage, are not to be presented based on assuptions. Show me a medical paper (and not a church endorsed piece of shit) that explains severe noteworthy 'health risks' and I will accept your argument.
Quote:
I don't feel marriage should be changed on account of a civil rights movement shelling for special rights. Marriage wasn't designed for what you want to use it for and the invention is more appropriately fitted for straight couples.
What the hell...you just danced around in a circle. You said civil unions are adaquate. I told you marriage as a concept is not what you are saying (the bastion of child bearing families everywhere), and you reply 'that's not the issue'...when in fact it's your whole fucking argument. No one is asking for 'special' rights here except for you.
If karma's a bitch, it will be my bitch!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
klinton said:
It's assumed 'basic' physiology. The risks you are implying, and the subsequent ban on gay marriage, are not to be presented based on assuptions. Show me a medical paper (and not a church endorsed piece of shit) that explains severe noteworthy 'health risks' and I will accept your argument.
"Assumed"? They're "assumed"? I read it from a fucking National Geographic magazine. Where do you pull your info from? It's not like you've provided anything to prove that 'anal sex isn't harmful', so stones in a glass house.
Quote:
What the hell...you just danced around in a circle. You said civil unions are adaquate. I told you marriage as a concept is not what you are saying (the bastion of child bearing families everywhere), and you reply 'that's not the issue'...when in fact it's your whole fucking argument. No one is asking for 'special' rights here except for you.
One strawman after a fucking 'nuther. 
The type of marriage you're looking at is concept, because currently, in this day and age, the institution is about family security. This isn't a suggested form of government I'm speaking of, it's the reality of the situation. And by the by, I find it awfully amusing how you're junking your request for secular arguments. First you give lip-service that religious views aren't present in government, and now you're trying to denounce secularly appointed and decades standing laws. Spousal financial rights isn't the issue. It's family extensions that's the issue.
And yes, you are asking for special rights in lieu not only of the controversey surrounding whether or not homosexuality should be viewed as a mental disease, but also in your chosen ignorance of civil unions. I don't know where the hell you're getting this 'you're the one who wants special rights bullshit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
|
|
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
"Assumed"? They're "assumed"? I read it from a fucking National Geographic magazine.
What issue?
Quote:
Where do you pull your info from? It's not like you've provided anything to prove that 'anal sex isn't harmful', so stones in a glass house.
The guide books I have on hand from my stint at the CBCA (information about which can be found at the Government of Canada website), and confirmed by a quick poll on the internet tonight.
Quote:
Spoucal(sp) financial rights isn't the issues. It's family extensions that's the issue.
And this excludes me how? My family, my children, don't deserve the security? My legacy is less important somehow?
Quote:
And yes, you are asking for special rights in lieu not only of the controversey surrounding whether or not homosexuality should be views as a mental disease, but also in your chosen ignorance of civil unions. I don't where the hell you're getting this 'you're the one who wants special rights bullshit.
By whom? That is such an archaic argument, it can only come from your church. It was officially dropped as such in 1973 in your country. The only ones who still cling to the concept are religious biggots.
And I'm not ignorant of civil unions...I just want to know why you insist we are not entitled to the same status as a hetero's. It's just a word...'marriage'. If your argument is not based on your religion, then tell give me something concrete as a reason.
And no. It is you that is seeking 'special' rights. You are seeking to impose your beliefs on a law that makes no (legal) concession for them (until Bush amended it). Marriage was never defined as a heterosexual union...until now.
If karma's a bitch, it will be my bitch!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
klinton said:
What issue?
I dunno. It was on STDs. *shrug* What, are you gonna track it down?
Just tell me what you find so unbelievable about my statement.
Quote:
The guide books I have on hand from my stint at the CBCA (information about which can be found at the Government of Canada website), and confirmed by a quick poll on the internet tonight.
If you can post some text which you apparently have on hand with a site that has credibility to back it up, that'd be super.
Quote:
And this excludes me how? My family, my children, don't deserve the security? My legacy is less important somehow?
Where the fuck did I say you were excluded or less important?
If you had kids with someone. Marry her, that way it'll be easier to raise em'. If you choose not to take an easier choice offered by government, then that's your own damn fault.
Quote:
By whom? That is such an archaic argument, it can only come from your church. It was officially dropped as such in 1973 in your country. The only ones who still cling to the concept are religious biggots.
There are plenty of past articles posted on this thread that answer your question as to whom is researching the subject.
Quote:
And I'm not ignorant of civil unions...I just want to know why you insist we are not entitled to the same status as a hetero's. It's just a word...'marriage'. If your argument is not based on your religion, then tell give me something concrete as a reason.
I have. Repeatedly. And just because you continuously say I'm not doesn't make that the case. And each time you put a new spin on what I say, like now: I never said your "status" was any different than straights'. I did however say that marriage wasn't intended for the uses you want and that your possible position. Your deviation from my real arguments is just more ad hominem bullshit designed to drift away from the issue.
Quote:
And no. It is you that is seeking 'special' rights. You are seeking to impose your beliefs on a law that makes no (legal) concession for them (until Bush amended it). Marriage was never defined as a heterosexual union...until now.
No. I'm not. And yes it was.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
|
|
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281 |
I'm done talking to you. It was 'fun'...but this is going nowhere, and I've spent the better part of seven hours replying to you. If you can't see how ignorant you're being...whatever. I'm not going to change your mind. This conversation is circular. You select a few 'arguments' and oscilate between them, ignoring the logical refutes that where given the first time you presented them. Typical bigot argument strategy. Congrats, you're a good catholic.
If karma's a bitch, it will be my bitch!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
Animalman's technique:
A) Make broad statement.
B ) Pathetically argue it's validity.
C) After someone of his own political stance points out its stupidity, make a 180 and agree with said poster.
D) When feeling threatened after someone actually argues his points, he'll take apart his entire post and analyze it piece by piece so as to over-explain it and then destroy its original contextualization.
E) Spontateously agree with other posters who don't agree with whom he's arguing with.
F) Use volley upon volley of ad hominem when he realizes that no one's buying it.
G) Repeat.
You really got me down.
Not only did you completely misinterpret Wednesday and my comments, you can't even come up with an inventive way of hiding the fact that you'd rather sling insults than have a discussion.
I did like reading through this list, though. I think my favorite part was when you described my agreeing with Klinton as "spontaneous", when he was specifically responding to one of my posts.
From now on, I'll make sure to spontaneously ignore your asinine comments.
Quote:
Batwoman said:
To say that a MAN and a WOMAN who can't have sex is the same as saying a MAN and another MAN or a WOMAN and another WOMAN, who don't have the components together in that relationship to bear their own children is the same?
I wasn't talking about heterosexuals that can't have sex. I was talking about heterosexual couples that can't have children. Medical reasons or not, the situation is the same as with a homosexual couple. Neither are capable of having children.
When I saw this part of the article(ad, banner, whatever) you posted:
"Look at the way life is created, whether it is an electric current, a kitten or a baby boy or girl. It takes both components, the male and female, connected, to make life."
I interpreted it as saying homosexuality is unnatural or without purpose, because it could not directly create a life(not an uncommon argument). As I said, I believe that kind of argument to be flawed, or hypocritical, because I've never heard anyone(in the modern era, at least) condemning infertile men or women, who share the same plight, as it relates to childbearing.
MisterJLA is RACKing awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,680
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,680 |
I obviously meant heterosexual couples that can't have BABIES, not sex.
I see you nit picked that rather than asked if I tryped in the wrong word, or something.
It's a rented tux ok? I'm not going comando in another man's fatigues.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 |
Quote:
Batwoman said:
I obviously meant heterosexual couples that can't have BABIES, not sex.
I see you nit picked that rather than asked if I tryped in the wrong word, or something.
did you trype it in wrong?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,796 Likes: 40
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,796 Likes: 40 |
Can't really add much of anything new that I haven't already said before except me and the boyfriend have passed the 14yr mark. I can look at him after all these years & get that warm fuzzy feeling that has nothing to do with sex. Can't help but feel good about the love we share for each other.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,680
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,680 |
Thanks for asking, I just went back and looked and I did type it in right. Stupid here changed it to suit his needs. For those that need a refersher, my original post Quote:
No you proved nothing. Heterosexual couples that may not be able to have their own childern have medical reasons why they aren't able to have children. These days most of it's treatable. To say that a MAN and a WOMAN who can't have sex is the same as saying a MAN and another MAN or a WOMAN and another WOMAN, who don't have the components together in that relationship to bear their own children is the same?
You really think your hot stuff don't you?
All you did was show how little you know about the subject at hand.
It's a rented tux ok? I'm not going comando in another man's fatigues.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
Quote:
Batwoman said:
I see you nit picked that rather than asked if I tryped in the wrong word, or something.
I didn't see it as nitpicking, that was the entire argument. For all I knew, you had misread my post.
If I wanted to nitpick, I would have brought up the fact that in your previous post you ended a sentence with a question mark when there was no question.
But, since you already seemed to think that I'm all high and mighty and that I consider myself "hot stuff", I decided to completely avoid that, and never mention it ever, no matter how much I wanted to, even if I was later accused of nitpicking, anyway.
...
MisterJLA is RACKing awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
|
|
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919 |
Quote:
Batwoman said:
Thanks for asking, I just went back and looked and I did type it in right.
You misspelled trype.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,949
2500+ posts
|
|
2500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,949 |
When I saw this thread was active again, I decided to check in and see what all the fuss was about. I was tempted to stop after the second new page of trolling, but I couldn't. It's like staring at a car accident. You know you shouldn't look, you know it's ugly, but you just can't help it.
And to think this thread started with everybody actually having a real discussion. But I guess that's part of the MB thread lifecycle.
"Well when I talk to people I don't have to worry about spelling." - wannabuyamonkey
"If Schumacher’s last effort was the final nail in the coffin then Year One would’ve been the crazy guy who stormed the graveyard, dug up the coffin and put a bullet through the franchise’s corpse just to make sure." -- From a review of Darren Aronofsky & Frank Miller's "Batman: Year One" script
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 16,240
Kisser Of John Byrne Ass 15000+ posts
|
|
Kisser Of John Byrne Ass 15000+ posts
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 16,240 |
That's what happens when i leave a discussion...hmm...or join one I suppose..dammit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
Animalman said:
You really got me down.
Not only did you completely misinterpret Wednesday and my comments, you can't even come up with an inventive way of hiding the fact that you'd rather sling insults than have a discussion.
I did like reading through this list, though. I think my favorite part was when you described my agreeing with Klinton as "spontaneous", when he was specifically responding to one of my posts.
From now on, I'll make sure to spontaneously ignore your asinine comments.
Will you ignore this post Ani?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
|
|
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919 |
Pariah made you a question, A-man.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 920
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 920 |
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
Can't really add much of anything new that I haven't already said before except me and the boyfriend have passed the 14yr mark. I can look at him after all these years & get that warm fuzzy feeling that has nothing to do with sex. Can't help but feel good about the love we share for each other.
Since everyone here saw fit to ignore your post, i'll just congrtatulate you on your relationship.
However do you manage what with your "choice" being all about wanton and immoral sex??! 
congrats. I think that is the best revenge. Just live happy, despite all these bigots best efforts.
Everything is funny as long as it is happening to somebody else. --Will Rogers
"I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees." - George W. Bush
I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would .. try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile. - Condoleeza Rice
Barbara Bush: It's Good Enough for the Poor
To comfort the powerless and make the powerful uncomfortable.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
The idea that anal sex is wrong because it damages the body is specious.
Women, unfortunately, still die in childbirth. Using the argument "don't do it because it can inflict injury," we should then stop having babies.
You can extend the argument to driving cars, considering the hundreds that die daily on the highways. Driving, because it can injure, is wrong.
We all wear a green carnation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
Quote:
klinton said:
Quote:
Pariah said:
It's basic sexual physiology for fuck's sake!
Show me a medical paper (and not a church endorsed piece of shit) that explains severe noteworthy 'health risks' and I will accept your argument.
Unfortunately, Klinton, there is medical evidence that indicates that anal sex can damage the sphincter and surrounding tissue. I cannot site the paper, but I have spoken with doctors who have told me that men, particularly those who have receptive anal intercourse over years' time with large objects and large penises, can exhibit a loss of sphincter control and tension as they get older (anal incontinence).
However, these remarks do not, on my part, condone agreement with Pariah's argument that anal sex is wrong because it can inflict damage on the human body.
As I said before, we as human beings engage in a number of potentially damaging behaviors without labeling them "wrong."
Furthermore, we know full well that women lose vaginal tension with repeated natural childbirths. Again, we're not going to label childbearing as "wrong" because it can inflict injury.
We all wear a green carnation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,796 Likes: 40
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,796 Likes: 40 |
Quote:
unrestrained id said:
[...
Since everyone here saw fit to ignore your post, i'll just congrtatulate you on your relationship.
However do you manage what with your "choice" being all about wanton and immoral sex??!
congrats. I think that is the best revenge. Just live happy, despite all these bigots best efforts.
Thanks!
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
Jim Jackson said:
The idea that anal sex is wrong because it damages the body is specious.
There are other arguments I could cite, but I'll just leave my opinion on this as needless injury. I'll go on to say that I find it idiotic to participate in the act. Vaginal areas are built for it, meaning if it's done correctly--Even if it hurts--It's not unhealthy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
There are other arguments I could cite, but I'll just leave my opinion on this as needless injury.
I can counter that with the idea that gay men, by their nature as being sexually attracted to other men, do NEED to engage in anal sex. As much as any str8 man *needs* to engage in vaginal sex.
Your need as a str8 man to penetrate a woman isn't driven on any substantive conscious level with a need to procreate, but rather with a need to feel that pleasure and to share this pleasure with someone you are attracted to and care about.
We all wear a green carnation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Jim. That's dumb. I have no need to penetrate anything. Just a want. Hell, our hands act as a neuter example in this case. And I'd bet good money if you blind-fold and gay man lead him to a woman's vagina, he'll get off just fine.
This is something you're not gonna convince me of.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
Jim. That's dumb. I have no need to penetrate anything. Just a want. Hell, our hands act as a neuter example in this case. And I'd bet good money if you blind-fold and gay man lead him to a woman's vagina, he'll get off just fine.
Or you'll be charged with rape.
Quote:
This is something you're not gonna convince me of.
I know. It must be nice to be young and be sure you've got the world all figured out...
We all wear a green carnation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
Hell, our hands act as a neuter example in this case.
Tell me you'll be happy and satisified to spend the rest of your adult life making love to your hand...
We all wear a green carnation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
I hear he carries a picture of his hand in his wallet.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
Jim Jackson said:
Or you'll be charged with rape.
I'm pretty sure you know what I meant, so I'll refine my statement a bit more:
Engaging in sexual intercourse for the purpose of pleasure seems logical enough on its own, but not when it causes needless harm with lasting damage. In the case of the vagina, it's not so needless because it was designed for the harm to vacate and not keep and lasting physical discomfort. In the case of the anus, it is not. If a person can have sex with their hands, a person can have sex with anything--Even a tractor! No seriously. I don't buy that a homosexual man has an urge to have sex with an anus. A person can take pleasure from any sex. However, that doesn't mean the need to have sex, I'm just saying they don't need to fuck themselves up in the process.
Quote:
I know. It must be nice to be young and be sure you've got the world all figured out...
I'm really getting sick of that. I bet you'd never say this to Disco. He's not that much older than me.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
I'm really getting sick of that. I bet you'd never say this to Disco. He's not that much older than me.
He doesn't post on stuff like this nearly as much as you do.
You're getting sick of hearing it? Speak with more humility, like you entertain the possibility, even however remote, that you just might be wrong.
I'm sick of seeing twentysomethings act like they've got it down pat and know which the way the wind blows.
We all wear a green carnation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
I don't buy that a homosexual man has an urge to have sex with an anus.
He has an urge to have sex with another man. The anus works as the most appropriate orifice for lovemaking.
We all wear a green carnation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
Jim Jackson said:
He doesn't post on stuff like this nearly as much as you do.
And you only say that because you agree with him. He's just as partisan as I am and just as young too.
Quote:
I'm sick of seeing twentysomethings act like they've got it down pat and know which the way the wind blows.
I'm sick of people who think they know more cuz' they're older.
Quote:
Jim Jackson said:
He has an urge to have sex with another man. The anus works as the most appropriate orifice for lovemaking.
Okay. I re-assert that-that shouldn't be an option.
And with that, we've come full circle with repeating arguments. So I'm done.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
Darknight613 said:
Okay. One of us needs to get a silver bullet or wooden stake or whatever the hell else it will take, and kill this thread once and for all. It's been unnecessarily resurrected more times than Jason Vorhees, and all anyone's doing on it is either trolling, counter-trolling, or making wild interpretations of what our fellow posters are "really" trying to say, without anyone actually trying to discuss this issue seriously (and if anyone is, it's getting lost amidst the trolling, in which case a new thread devoted to serious discussion of gay marriage is probably called for anyway).
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
Close the damn thread. Nothing's being accomplished here.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
No, keep it open. Something worthwhile may still come of it yet. (48%, 11 Votes)
|
Yeah, close it. It's turned into nothing but a thread for trolling and name-calling, like DK and Sammitch said (52%, 12 Votes)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 46,308
Who will I break next? 15000+ posts
|
|
Who will I break next? 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 46,308 |
Where's the option for banning g-man?
November 6th, 2012: Americas new Independence Day.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Shouldn't you be out looking for a job?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
I find it funny that G dug this thread up from teh abyss to discuss closing it. I think it was about to die a natural death.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
|
|
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281 |
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
I find it funny that G dug this thread up from teh abyss to discuss closing it. I think it was about to die a natural death.
He didn't. There was a stupid 'pun' tacked onto it, and then several posts requesting it's closure. G-man is not the devil folks.
If karma's a bitch, it will be my bitch!
|
|
|
|
|
