Thread: Homosexuals and polygamy

Originally Posted by LJ2

Don't argue with me about the stats.

A stellar argument...

LJ2 is intentionally, and continually, ignoring the fact that heterosexuals engage in anal sex. Doing so will dismantle his argument.

This, of course, isn't surprising, but laughing at anyone long enough gets boring...

Originally Posted by Steve

LJ2 is intentionally, and continually, ignoring the fact that heterosexuals engage in anal sex. Doing so will dismantle his argument.

The entire anti-gay hate machine is run by people like LJ2. People who are pathologically obsessed with the question of exclusively homosexual sex will do everything in their power and time to try and convince others that it is unnatural/abnormal while ignoring that behavior in others. Typically it is also used as a justification to deny gay people their rights without regard to the fact that not all of them engage in it. Fortunately, the more they drill the same nonsensical arguments, the more they look as such as well as they reinforce the image on everyone who opposes LGBT rights. The question hangs on one premise, disgust. That's what drives the hate. In reality, LGBT people will likely not have to suffer the hate at least in law for much longer, and as to culture that is also coming around on this issue faster than the hate machine would like.

Originally Posted by reality

first dude, for the large majority of people be they hetero or homo, engaging in oral sex isn't a big deal. Both realize this is not the specific purpose of the mouth(be it sucking on: nipples, sex organ, earlobes, neck, thigh, etc), or main sex organ, yet would agree that they do it on a consistent basis when engaging in what they would universally describe as pleasureable intercourse. And in fact, NORMAL intercourse.
A smaller percentage of people practice anal sex, both heteros and homos. Either group would agree that this is in some way pleasurable. Most would use a form of lube to help the process along, and would freely admit that the purpose of the anus is not to have a dick up it, but that on some level it gives both of them pleasure to do it.
A VERY small percentage (i bet its not even 1 in 100) will willingly engage in oral sex AFTER anal sex if the subject of such (generally themselves) was prepared and cleansed as much as possible by enemas, bleaching etc. (both hetero and homo) both would agree thats pretty esoteric as a pleasurable practice goes, and a large number of these wouldn't truly be stimulated by it and would be doing it for money. but the people receiving it who weren't also being paid would tell you they enjoyed it quite a bit (pretty gross to me but whatever works for you i guess.) and would agree its quite possibly an unsafe behavior.
An EVEN SMALLER PERCENTAGE THAN THE ABOVE, will willingly engage in oral, after anal that is bloody and covered in fecal matter. Probably not more than 1 in 1,000, and again many of those would be paid money to engage in such an act. Many of those would readily admit (along with the rest of us) that it is HIGHLY out of the norm and purpose of both the organs and indeed ones own biology (we don't usually eat shit) and likely to cause disease. yet still some would say they find it pleasurable.
Either way, the supreme court ruled what someone does in the privacy of their own bedroom, between two consenting adults providing that its not murder, slavery, having sex with someone who isn't able to/does not consent to the act IE minors or rape, then its none of yours nor anyone elses, (including the government) damn business.
That establishes that its legal. It also establishes that society as a whole (in the form of the laws of the land) has decided that who you fuck is noones business but yours and theirs.
As to whether or not its "moral" that would depend on your PERSONAL belief structure. Everyone has a different definition for "moral" that they would use to answer that question. Opinions most certainly vary (even among culturally unified sub-groups and indeed even among family units and fraternal twins) , but then opinions always do. The diversity of thought capable by each individual person is truly a humbling thing.
This inability for mankind to think as one discrete entity (which I view as a strength rather than a weakness) and have a simple definition of what was "moral" that has lead to much strife. Dark ages. Crusades. The Holocaust. The extreme violence of the axial age (900 bce to 200 bce. this is ironically when religion turned almost universally to being more about compassion and empathy for your fellow man and natural surroundings in the form of Greek Rationalism, Confucianism and Daoism, Hinduism and Buddhism, and Judean Monotheism, but remains one of the most violent human periods in recorded history.) etc.
This has led, in modern times which for the record is right now, to broad sufferance of a variety of practices under the law (which is the rules of society IE what is acceptable) including homosexuality, and other less than mainstream sexual practice.
Your histrionics fall upon deaf ears sir.

This thread should be renamed a clinincal discussion of the similarities and differences of sexual activities between hetero and or homo couples.

GEEZ, why does anyone care what anyone else does in the bedroom.

Anyone have any stats on who masterbates more, gay men? straight men? gay women? straight women? Frustrated gay men? Frustrated married women? I'm sure that would add to the conversation. After all, gay men may beat it more therefore are more perverted, however gay women may tickle it less therefore should be allowed to marry. I say we need a perversion index, say 1-20 and you have to have it branded to your head, only those with an index lower than 8 will be allowed to marry. Would that work for everyone?

Originally Posted by LetFreedomRing

The entire anti-gay hate machine is run by people like LJ2. People who are pathologically obsessed with the question of exclusively homosexual sex will do everything in their power and time to try and convince others that it is unnatural/abnormal while ignoring that behavior in others. Typically it is also used as a justification to deny gay people their rights without regard to the fact that not all of them engage in it. Fortunately, the more they drill the same nonsensical arguments, the more they look as such as well as they reinforce the image on everyone who opposes LGBT rights. The question hangs on one premise, disgust. That's what drives the hate. In reality, LGBT people will likely not have to suffer the hate at least in law for much longer, and as to culture that is also coming around on this issue faster than the hate machine would like.

I agree that sexual intercourse is done the same with both hetero and homo, but it is obvious that the intercourse of a male and female has a much greater chance of conceiving a child than two women or two men. That point being said and the fact that our children are what allow our country to continue on and grow; I will tell you that hetero is much more beneficial to our country. In the end it has to do with promotion. The benefits of marriage are an incentive to bring parents together to take care of their children. No incentive is necessary for the homo Population because bringing them together in marriage and giving them the benefits does not produce anything of value for the country as a whole.
Summary
The Country give to the heterosexual the benefits in marriage and the return to the country a continuing line of children.
The Country gives to the homosexual the benefits in marriage and they return to the country nothing.

Finally
Yes, you could say that my logic is incorrect because gays can adopt, but I am not talking about two people who want to have a child together as they need no incentive. I am talking about the mistakes that heterosexual have in having children they did not plan for. It is for the mistakes that couples need incentive to work together and takes care of their children instead of the child ending up without knowing his father or mother.

My friend and his wife allow for another woman to enter their bedroom on occasion. He is hetero but she likes women as well as men (damn lucky guy if you ask me). Should their marriage be nullified because of this?

Originally Posted by TomBlaze

My friend and his wife allow for another woman to enter their bedroom on occasion. He is hetero but she likes women as well as men (damn lucky guy if you ask me). Should their marriage be nullified because of this?

Only if their perversion index is 8 or below, so branded on their foreheads, otherwise their marriage is dissolved.

I keep getting badgered about heterosexual sex. They do this and they do that, so what about it? The questioners have their logic inside out.

Sexual practices aren't the reason homosexuals are wrong. They're wrong because they are incompatible by nature. Science, anatomy and physiology, are proof of their incompatibility. Sexual practice is further evidence of their incompatibility.

The allegience to homosexuality is profoundly ignorant. Even when a doctor, himself a homosexual, reveals the health risks homosexuals face when they put their tongues in each others butt holes, the ignorant apologists refuse to acknowledge that it's just plain dirty. It reveals that the apologists are not interested in protecting the homosexual men's health, but in protecting their reputation.

Originally Posted by LJ2

I keep getting badgered about heterosexual sex. They do this and they do that, so what about it? The questioners have their logic inside out.

Sexual practices aren't the reason homosexuals are wrong. They're wrong because they are incompatible by nature. Science, anatomy and physiology, are proof of their incompatibility. Sexual practice is further evidence of their incompatibility.

The allegience to homosexuality is profoundly ignorant. Even when a doctor, himself a homosexual, reveals the health risks homosexuals face when they put their tongues in each others butt holes, the ignorant apologists refuse to acknowledge that it's just plain dirty. It reveals that the apologists are not interested in protecting the homosexual men's health, but in protecting their reputation.

Back to the perversion index, where would the tongue in the butthole rank?

Originally Posted by LJ2

I keep getting badgered about heterosexual sex. They do this and they do that, so what about it? The questioners have their logic inside out.

No, not in the least. Again and again it's been pointed out to you here that you are not using logic, even in the most cosmetic sense. You're resorting to emotional arguments and trying to couch them in terms of appeals to science, etc... and then having them only applies to homos and not heteros. No one is buying it; it's transparent and obvious.

Sexual practices aren't the reason homosexuals are wrong. They're wrong because they are incompatible by nature. Science, anatomy and physiology, are proof of their incompatibility. Sexual practice is further evidence of their incompatibility.

Flying in jet airliners goes against nature. Open heart surgery goes against nature. Wearing eyeglasses goes against nature. Firearms go against nature. Your attempts to legitimize your 'arguments' by citing anatomy and physiology against homos while disregarding them when it comes to heteros is patently intellectually dishonest.

The allegience to homosexuality is profoundly ignorant.

No one here has any allegiance to homosexuality. No one here is 'apologizing' for homosexuality. It's quite clearly in your imagination, but it's nowhere to be found in this thread.

Even when a doctor, himself a homosexual, reveals the health risks homosexuals face when they put their tongues in each others butt holes, the ignorant apologists refuse to acknowledge that it's just plain dirty. It reveals that the apologists are not interested in protecting the homosexual men's health, but in protecting their reputation.

You appear obsessed with men's tongues in other mens' buttholes. It may be effecting your perception.

Originally Posted by LJ2

I keep getting badgered about heterosexual sex. They do this and they do that, so what about it? The questioners have their logic inside out.

Sexual practices aren't the reason homosexuals are wrong. They're wrong because they are incompatible by nature. Science, anatomy and physiology, are proof of their incompatibility. Sexual practice is further evidence of their incompatibility.

The allegience to homosexuality is profoundly ignorant. Even when a doctor, himself a homosexual, reveals the health risks homosexuals face when they put their tongues in each others butt holes, the ignorant apologists refuse to acknowledge that it's just plain dirty. It reveals that the apologists are not interested in protecting the homosexual men's health, but in protecting their reputation.

It is known that people are often drawn to and "turned on" to wrong and dangerous things. This is why jails are filled with drug users/distributors, rapists, molesters and serial killers.


To suggest that one day our society should accept a dangerous and wrong activity, even celebrate it should be laughed at.


Yet, today this is what we're seeing.


"Homosexuality" is, by its very nature an act of being "turned on" by the wrong thing. The fact that something is wrong and dangerous is well known to attract some people to engage in it. We know it's wrong, we know it's dangerous but we do it because its wrongness "feels good" to us. It’s no secret that, often with human sexual issues, the largest factor of it feeling good to us is the fact that it's so obviously wrong. Wrong, even evil can be a turn on. Often it is.


Celebrating and promoting obviously wrong and dangerous behaviors cannot and will not precipitate good results. "Gay marriage" is a celebration of a dangerous sexual practice and is an oxymoron whether some America citizens, politicians, or judges think otherwise or not. The truth doesn't change just because confusion becomes prevalent.

Originally Posted by LJ2

I keep getting badgered about heterosexual sex. They do this and they do that, so what about it? The questioners have their logic inside out.

Sexual practices aren't the reason homosexuals are wrong. They're wrong because they are incompatible by nature. Science, anatomy and physiology, are proof of their incompatibility. Sexual practice is further evidence of their incompatibility.

The allegience to homosexuality is profoundly ignorant. Even when a doctor, himself a homosexual, reveals the health risks homosexuals face when they put their tongues in each others butt holes, the ignorant apologists refuse to acknowledge that it's just plain dirty. It reveals that the apologists are not interested in protecting the homosexual men's health, but in protecting their reputation.

I swear to God, I've never encountered someone who cares so much about what some other dude does with his dick.

It's either hatred or envy. There's little room for anything else...

Originally Posted by LJ2

Even when a doctor, himself a homosexual, reveals the health risks homosexuals face when they put their tongues in each others butt holes, the ignorant apologists refuse to acknowledge that it's just plain dirty. It reveals that the apologists are not interested in protecting the homosexual men's health, but in protecting their reputation.

So, if some chick tongues a dude's asshole, that's okay? That's less "dirty"?