For those who believe that homosexuality is genetic (3 Viewers)

[Gedi-Master]

Not really.

Please elaborate

 

[Gedi-Master]

prostate

What is your point?

 

[Gedi-Master]

You object to oral sex too, then?

Yes

 

[ChockoRepublic]

Yes

okay bro, be serious

 

[bio_nut]

Yes

Haha, why? Because it doesn't make babies?

 

[Gedi-Master]

okay bro, be serious

No, I'm not kidding around or saying that for the sake of this discussion, I disagree with it.

 

[Gedi-Master]

Haha, why? Because it doesn't make babies?

Isn't that the very purpose of the Reproductive Organs?

 

[bio_nut]

Isn't that the very purpose of the Reproductive Organs?

It is ONE of their functions, yes. Evidently not the only one.

People have been having sex just because it feels good for a very, very long time.

Babies are often just a side effect.

 

[Gedi-Master]

It is ONE of their functions, yes. Evidently not the only one.

People have been having sex just because it feels good for a very, very long time.

Babies are often just a side effect.

Certainly, another function of sex is pleasure, i most certainly agree with you!



im not certain as to what you mean by babies being a side effect, do you mean that they are treated like side effects, or they are side effects?

 

[Ritard_]

so you dont have sex unless you are trying for a baby???

 

[moll.]

"Jedi Master Blue Balls. Renowned throughout the galaxy for his fortitude in the face of overwhelming amounts of titties."

 

[Gedi-Master]

so you dont have sex unless you are trying for a baby???

No, you can have sex even if your sole purpose of the act isn't to try and have a baby. Just as long as the functions of sex are not being artificially inhibited, it is okay

 

[Ritard_]

fuck you are a virgin for sure

 

[funkshen]

No, you can have sex even if your sole purpose of the act isn't to try and have a baby. Just as long as the functions of sex are not being artificially inhibited, it is okay

So people with HIV/AIDS or other STIs aren't allowed to have protected sex, because it's artificially inhibiting its procreative purpose?

What about Good Christians like Tony Abbott who practice the rhythmic method, which avoids the procreative purpose as well, in essence artificially inhibiting it through deliberate action?

What about men and women who have gynaecological procedures to eliminate their productive capacity for any number of reasons? The function of sex has been artificially inhibited?

Why are you such a virgin

 

[Gedi-Master]

So people with HIV/AIDS or other STIs aren't allowed to have protected sex, because it's artificially inhibiting its procreative purpose?

Yes,

but im sure that there are still plenty of ways that they can show love and affection besides through sex

wouldn't you agree?

 

[moll.]

Yes,

but im sure that there are still plenty of ways that they can show love and affection besides through sex

wouldn't you agree?

No. Sex is by far the easiest, simplest and most enjoyable way.

 

[SeCKSiiMiNh]

Yes,

but im sure that there are still plenty of ways that they can show love and affection besides through sex

wouldn't you agree?

when you can convince the entire population to abstain, then i'll agree with you.

till then, shut the fuck up

 

[Gedi-Master]

What about Good Christians like Tony Abbott who practice the rhythmic method, which avoids the procreative purpose as well, in essence artificially inhibiting it through deliberate action?

Firstly, im in no position to judge as to whether Tony Abbott is a Good Christian or not.

Secondly, i dont think that it is just Good Christians who practice natural family planning (the rhythmic method) as anyone can practice it.

and finally (pant) the rhythmic pattern isn't using anything artificial to inhibit the procreative process, as it is using the natural cycle of a woman's fertility to avoid it, not inhibit it (yes, there is a difference between inhibiting and avoiding)

whereas protected sex on the other hand is inhibiting the procreative purpose of sex and not simply avoiding it.

Also too NFP is only okay when the couple have serious social, psychological, physical or financial reasons to avoid another pregnancy for the time being or indefinitely. So in other words, you can't just practice it because you feel like it, but actually have a grave reason to do so.

(nice question)

 

[Gedi-Master]

No. Sex is by far the easiest, simplest and most enjoyable way.

I'll agree that it would be amazingly difficult or impossible to try and replicate the same intimacy and pleasure that the act of sex provides, yet wouldn't doing something a little less satisfying for the sake of the health of your partner be more appropriate?

 

[Lolsmith]

You're incredibly stupid and it depresses me to know that you're a part of my grade's HSC cohort.

Also, how can you even like Star Wars if you believe this shit? Star Wars has cloning in it, which is against "God's Holy Plan" and treats birth, love and sex as a thing of corruption. You could even go far as to say as it promotes gay love.