So if "complimentary anatomy" is a big deal, what about blowjobs? Is penis-into-mouth an unnatural sin? Or will you argue that it depends on the gender of the blower, that a woman's mouth is "complimentary" but a man's mouth is not?
Locked - SEC Defensive Player of the year has come out
- Thread starter missouridawg
- Start date
- Status
So if "complimentary anatomy" is a big deal, what about blowjobs? Is penis-into-mouth an unnatural sin? Or will you argue that it depends on the gender of the blower, that a woman's mouth is "complimentary" but a man's mouth is not?
To put it directly, as human animals I believe that we have control over our actions, even those driven by urges as normal as sexual attraction. I interpreted your statement relative to some other animals acting out sexually with the same sex to imply that it was a good, rational reason for humans to do the same. I don't think that we can very well use animal behavior to condone similar human behavior. No matter our differences it is quite easy to see how that falls apart pretty quickly. The man eating tiger story I saw today comes to mind...
I don't personally believe in free will, which should illuminate some of these comments, but that was a mere illustration that these acts do indeed appear in nature, therefore these acts are natural, unless there is a different definition of "nature" floating around. Killing is natural, as in hunter-gatherer tribes.
That doesn't make these acts (killing, especially) nessecarily reasonable. However, given the mundane nature of homosexual behavior when safe sex is practiced between two consenting adults, I don't see any reason to prohibit it.
That doesn't make these acts (killing, especially) nessecarily reasonable. However, given the mundane nature of homosexual behavior when safe sex is practiced between two consenting adults, I don't see any reason to prohibit it.
Last edited:
No, not directed specifically at you
Just stating my beliefs, which I know you will probably disagree with most of them (but that's ok) and supporting your previous argument as best as I can. Which coming from a different view probably doesn't mean a lot to you, but I'm trying.
Just stating my beliefs, which I know you will probably disagree with most of them (but that's ok) and supporting your previous argument as best as I can. Which coming from a different view probably doesn't mean a lot to you, but I'm trying.
Interesting. Without free will, what/who controls your daily decision? Serious question. I don't know that I've ever known anyone who doesn't believe in free will. I suppose you and I could blow up a message board disagreeing!
I was about to delete my post, but you got here first. My apology for the sarcasm and tone of the post. Your post was about as respectful as a post telling someone you think they are a sinner can be. It's a sensitive subject for me...and something that I've been beaten over the head with since my teens, and I don't have a lot of patience with it.
You are entitled to your beliefs. I'm entitled to mine. But my beliefs don't say that you are a sinner in need of repentance and redemption. They're just different from yours.
You are entitled to your beliefs. I'm entitled to mine. But my beliefs don't say that you are a sinner in need of repentance and redemption. They're just different from yours.
Last edited:
Honestly? I have no idea, no moral reference for knowing and no context to make that determination. I won't head down a ridiculous analogy path but if it just about having somewhere to stick it the possibilities are pretty endless...
I have preferences, and from those I "choose" what to do. But I didn't get to choose my preferences, hence the disbelief that anyone gets to.
I of course live "under the illusion of choice," everyone has to. But not believing solves a lot of problems (grudges, regrets, etc. become irrational, as what had to happen happened, so regret and vengeance become illogical).
I of course live "under the illusion of choice," everyone has to. But not believing solves a lot of problems (grudges, regrets, etc. become irrational, as what had to happen happened, so regret and vengeance become illogical).
Last edited:
No apology expected. I apologize to you. My issues are enough to need me staying focused on them. I've got a big ole redwood tree in my eye, that's for sure.
That story is about being inhospitable self-absorbed pricks.
Not to mention folks with the propensity for sexual assault. Blows my mind how folks get hyper focused on the sex part and lose sight of the big picture of this story and then view homosexual relationships and rape as the same thing.
Not to mention folks with the propensity for sexual assault. Blows my mind how folks get hyper focused on the sex part and lose sight of the big picture of this story and then view homosexual relationships and rape as the same thing.
Im always surprised at the amount of morons that probably sit next to me at msu events.
Actually, Im not. The comments in this thread are just sad. Like, these people vote and raise children.
It aint right. Some book i never read and dont live may have mentioned it goddamit.
His views on this topic may be similar to mine, but my views dont come from Jung
1- he didnt mean that humans and animals are on the same level when he said its all the same. He was pointing out that humans are animals.
2- as a society, we have determined that forced sex, meaning sex without consent, is unacceptable. It doesnt matter what the other living being is- dog, horse, child, adult- without consent its unacceptable.
Taking my comment in #2, it helps clarify the ongoing ignorant homophobic argument that adult men(for some reason not adult women?) will go after children if we 'accept' homosexuality.
I swear, some seriously stupid people had to have come up with this argument. Really stupid. Nobody with even a hint of logic and reason could have come to such a stupid conclusion.
You need consent to have sex. Otherwise, its illegal. Boom. There ya go- a simple blanket rule that addresses any possible concerns about children and animals.
And it applies to straight people too! Since, you know, pedophilia and rape are hardly issues that are only in the gay community.
1- he didnt mean that humans and animals are on the same level when he said its all the same. He was pointing out that humans are animals.
2- as a society, we have determined that forced sex, meaning sex without consent, is unacceptable. It doesnt matter what the other living being is- dog, horse, child, adult- without consent its unacceptable.
Taking my comment in #2, it helps clarify the ongoing ignorant homophobic argument that adult men(for some reason not adult women?) will go after children if we 'accept' homosexuality.
I swear, some seriously stupid people had to have come up with this argument. Really stupid. Nobody with even a hint of logic and reason could have come to such a stupid conclusion.
You need consent to have sex. Otherwise, its illegal. Boom. There ya go- a simple blanket rule that addresses any possible concerns about children and animals.
And it applies to straight people too! Since, you know, pedophilia and rape are hardly issues that are only in the gay community.
- Status