Hey, let's get married!

[jmiller]

Can you order me one? I'm not over 18 and I don't have a CC :bandit2:

Ask your parents for theirs.

That would be the most akward conversation ever.

 

[Meksilon]

Now that's just a LIE.

Male homosexuals may not...but I do believe that females do? No?

You are disproven on that one.

Vaginal sex = heterosexual sex = man puts penis into vagina.

I have not used the any term containing "sex" to mean a scenario where the penis is absent.

 

[Peo]

Originally Posted by Meksilon
Vaginal sex is the only form of sex with a purpose

Eh? Since when was the purpose of sex only to have kids?

 

[Peo]

Vaginal sex is the only form of sex which is healthy.

Heard of condoms?

 

[Meksilon]

Heard of condoms?

Condomed anal sex somewhat reduces the health hazards as far as hygiene goes, but it it only does so much. Also, condoms are not a fundamental part of sex, using a condom is basically just like inserting any other foreign object - just because it's used in conjunction with sex doesn't mean it's a part of it. Here's a quick run-down, this does not cover everything but it's a start:

1. The anus does not self-lubricate. This causes several problems, but generally speaking damage is caused to the anus.

2. The anus contains harmful bacteria. This causes disease and infection. This is irrespective of the most recent bowel movement because whether or not the faeces are present the bacteria is.

3. The anal lining is much thinner than the vaginal. It tears more easily - this damage causes two things: 3a. STI's to transmit more easily due to the bleeding and 3b. The quarantined waste in the rectum to be in direct contact with the blood system, causing self-harm. That is, harmful bacteria from the anus infecting the blood system.

A small note, even with ample lubrication tissue tearing still occurs.

4. Prevents defecation.

5. Prevents sitting down.

6. Irritation of penile skin.

7. Discomfort/Pain.

That covers the short term effects. There are also some long-term effects.

Now I should note that for two men anal sex represents the "highest form of intimacy". I put that in quotes because it sickens me. The highest form of intimacy for a married, heterosexual couple is - sex.

 

[Peo]

Anal sex is common among both male homosexual couples and heterosexual couples as I'm sure you know. Female homosexuals do not have anal sex. So, your problem is really with anal sex and not with homosexuals.

And I repeat, since when was the purpose of sex only to have kids?

 

[Corazu]

The highest form of intimacy is something to be determined on a case by case basis. In other words, each individual couple's fantasies. These differ from other fantasies, and some of them can involve anal sex, whether it be a hetero or homosexual couple.

I agree with Peo, you have a problem with anal sex, once again, discuss it ELSEWHERE. Stop bringing off-topic discussion into this. Just because you're losing on every other point you are trying to argue, pushing you into that much desperation (to quote bozley) "that you must prove yourself right", does not mean that you can go off-topic. Just give up, or actually come up with some on-topic points that might actually work. Though I don't see any on that point of view other than the personal viewpoint which is completely invalid on a social point of view. As I mentioned before, you can recognize without accepting, but you cannot accpet without recognizing.

Regards,

 

[Robert]

Well then. 5 pages later (based on my vB settings) and we've gotten nowhere. Those who are infavor of same sex marriage, are well.. in favor of it. Those who are not, are well.. not.

The issue here is not whether it's approved or not by certain members of the forum, the issue is how will those who oppose it deal with it once their country starts to recognize same sex marriage. The bottom line is that will happen. And while Bush does not support it, Bush is only president for 3 more years.

 

[Meksilon]

So, your problem is really with anal sex and not with homosexuals.

No, I'm simply using it to show one reason why heterosexuality and homosexuality are not equal. The most fundamental issue I take to is idolatry/lust/selfishness. This is the first time I've bought this to the argument, it's extremely shallow of you to make that claim.

Anal sex is common among both male homosexual couples and heterosexual couples as I'm sure you know. Female homosexuals do not have anal sex.

And as I'm sure you know gays and lesbians are very different, I'm specifically talking about gays. Not everything to do with gays has to do with lesbians as well, and so you know there's actually about twice as many gays as there are lesbians. They're both similar in that they're deviant sexualities which reverse true sexuality - but they're very different. Like different kinds of weeds.

So from time-to-time it's inevitable to talk specifically about one or the other.

And I repeat, since when was the purpose of sex only to have kids?

Allow me to restate it then:

Sex serves a purpose: reproduction. The pleasure of sex involves the transfer of fluid for this purpose. Anal sex does not serve this purpose, and if anything the transfer of fluid debases sex as it's unhealthy in this situation.

 

[Meksilon]

The issue here is not whether it's approved or not by certain members of the forum, the issue is how will those who oppose it deal with it once their country starts to recognize same sex marriage. The bottom line is that will happen. And while Bush does not support it, Bush is only president for 3 more years.

All hail Robert the all-knowing.

You know what Robert, you're always right aren't you - well at least you think you are, and if you think so it must be right.

The bottom line is that it will never happen. Please Robert, tell me how it can happen when every major party agrees marriage is between men and women?

Death Reaper, here's a quick recap of everything I've discussed, none of which has been "rebuked" - but rather ignored by people like you. Feel free to discuss any one of these points since I'm open to examining it in every detail you feel the need for.

#1. Homosexuality is learned pathological behaviour and in no way "hard-wired". And it is now known there is no "gay gene".

#2. Homosexuality is not equal to heterosexuality in any way. There are many points to this but they include:
a. Sexual practices.
b. Relationship purpose.
c. 5-year breakdown a fact proven and used in court.
d. Undeniable links between homosexuality and destructive behaviour/minds.

#3. Marriage is about family.

#4. Children have proven psychological needs for parents of both genders.
a. the parent of the same sex is the most important life-figure in a young child's life.

#5. There are more people in the following groups than homosexuals:
a. Alcoholics.
b. Smokers.
c. Drug users.
d. Problem gamblers.
e. Overweight persons.

Everyone of the above groups are increasingly becoming seen as "normal" - even though the behaviour is demonstrably the cause of bad health, depression and early death. People in the above groups don't need acceptance for being in them, they need encouragement to change.

#6. Gay men make up more than 85% of new HIV infections in Australia, and similar amounts in the US and other western societies. Note: comparing to Africa/Asia isn't fair because the main form of contraception there is anal sex.

#7. 18-30% of homosexuals attempt suicide.

#8. This isn't an issue about rights or social injustice, but rather about redefining a sacred institution fundamental to our society.

#9a. Many of those who believe that homosexual unions should be called marriage also believe siblings should be able to marry and that polygamy shouldn't be outlawed. They fundamentally believe that the law should not "restrict" people getting married "in any way".

#9b. Conversely those who don't believe brother-sister relationships should be married are basing it on their morals because the risk of deformed children due to recessive genes is no higher than the risk that 45 year-old's have of producing deformed offspring.
a. It's hypocritical to be morally opposed to incest and then claim I can't be morally opposed to homosexuality.

#10. Those who believe homosexuality is equal to heterosexuality are basing it on their "morals".

#11. Anal sex is unhealthy.

I've never advocated hate or misunderstanding. All I've done is exposed the inherent problems with homosexuality, and looked at the truth of the situation based on facts and studies. Everyone on the other side of the argument here has argued straight from their mouth with nothing to back-up what they claim except the inherent belief that they know best. They've even refused to discuss the truth of the situation, observations, studies and surveys. What homosexuals need are friends who are strong for them to help them change their lifestyles.

 

[Peo]

What's your point then?

People who are not able to reproduce should not have sex?
All type of sex that could not result in reproduction is wrong and should not be allowed?
Male homosexuals can't have anal sex, but heterosexuals can?

And since you again avoided the question I repeat, since when was the purpose of sex only to have kids?

Edit: This was in reply to your previous message, not your last message.

 

[Meksilon]

What's your point then?

People who are not able reproduce should not have sex?
All type of sex that could not result in reproduction is wrong and should not be allowed?
Male homosexuals can't have anal sex, but heterosexuals can?

No. My point is that heterosexual sex serves a higher purpose, and that other forms of sex are not equal to it.

And since you again avoided the question I repeat, since when was the purpose of sex only to have kids?

I didn't avoid your question. I originally said vaginal sex is the only form of sex to serve a purpose. I then further explained what I meant by that.

Goodnight, it's bed time.

Edit: This was in reply to your previous message, not your last message.

Edit: Yes I realized that you probably hadn't even read my newest post before posting that. It's fine though because that's the post in which I continued my discussion exclusively with you.

 

[Peo]

Should only people who can reproduce be allowed to marry?

Should heterosexuals not be allowed to have anal sex?

 

[Daniel]

Even heterosexuals don't always have sex to reproduce.

 

[Archbob]

Ok, the point of sex is not to reproduce. When 17 year olds have sex, it certainly not for the sake of reproduction, its for the sake of pleasure. I'm sure many heterosexual couples have sex for the sake of pleasure also. Pleasure is also a purpose and both homosexual and heterosexual sex serves that purpose.

The state by banning homosexual marriages is not really protecting anyone or anything. Its just upholding certain religous beliefs, which is wrong for the state to do. Its ok, if you don't believe in homosexuality, no one is forcing you to do it. You just can't go around enforcing your belief on others. If two homosexuals get married, it does not effect you in any way since you are not involved in the relationship.

As for the family issues. Nowdays there are many heterosexual couples that get married and never have kids.

Now explain why anal sex is "unhealthy" without religious implications.

I, personally, don't believe in homosexuality, but that does not mean I am going to impose my beliefs on everyone else.

 

[Canuckkev]

The state by banning homosexual marriages is not really protecting anyone or anything.

Some would argue that homosexuality promotes other deviant behaviour.

Its just upholding certain religous beliefs, which is wrong for the state to do.

No, no religious beliefs need be involved.

You just can't go around enforcing your belief on others.

Which is exactly the problem I have with all of this. It seems that it has become unacceptable to hold conservative views. Conservatives get accused of forcing their beliefs on others by expressing their concern on an issue. But by this "accusing", Liberals are forcing their beliefs on others. You have to see it both ways. If wish to accept gay marriage in your society, you can't say someone is "forcing their views upon you" if they choose to disagree.

Now explain why anal sex is "unhealthy" without religious implications.

I believe that has been done. And yes, it is unhealthy for heterosexuals as well. But the point is the only form of intercourse for homosexuals is unhealthy and unnatural. Whereas, vaginal sex is healthy and natural. So if sex is any part in a relatioship, one cannot equate a homosexual relationship with a heterosexual relationship because intimacy for homosexuals is unhealthy and unnatural.

What bothers me is that it seems people (not on the forum necessarily) think that disapproving of someone's lifestyle makes them a bad person. I don't feel the need to err on the side of being Liberal.

 

[Archbob]

You can disapprove someone's lifestyle and not practice it yourself. But what you are trying to do is ban them from doing it, and you can't do that. Thats enforcing your will on someone else.

Homosexuals may dissapprove of your heterosexual ways, but they aren't pushing to ban heterosexual marriages. Your trying to ban their lifestyle from them, that is what is wrong.

Its life saying "I dissaprove of you eating beef", "Therefore we are going to make if illegal for people to eat beef".

Sure, you can disapprove of it, but you can't force other people into your belief. I'm not trying to force you to say homosexuality is right or that you should practice it, I'm saying let the people who believe in it practice it.


And really there is nothing about homosexuality that makes it "unhealthy". If two healthy homosexuals without STD's do it, there is nothing "unhealthly" about it. Your trying to bring in the fact that its "unclean" which is a religious implication.

And about deviant behaviour, sex in general promotes deviants behaviour, but heck, it isn't banned.

 

[stabme]

You know what Robert, you're always right aren't you - well at least you think you are, and if you think so it must be right.

The bottom line is that it will never happen. Please Robert, tell me how it can happen when every major party agrees marriage is between men and women?

*cough* should this forum be taking place 100 or so years back...

The bottom line is that it will never happen. Please Robert, tell me how it can happen when every major party agrees women shouldn't have political rights?

 

[Archbob]

Lets not forget now 4 countries have allowed homosexual marriage, I think America will follow in the years to come.

 

[Robert]

All hail Robert the all-knowing.

You know what Robert, you're always right aren't you - well at least you think you are, and if you think so it must be right.

The bottom line is that it will never happen. Please Robert, tell me how it can happen when every major party agrees marriage is between men and women?

Always right? No. But I believe in equal rights. 100 years ago every party believed that blacks were inferior to whites. Thanks to Martin Luther King and other strong advocates, that has changed. If two men want to get married, I say GO FOR IT. Two women, GO FOR IT. It doesn't affect me. I believe in equal rights, I believe everyone should treated the same, I believe that just because you have a sexual preferance other than what people deem "normal", we shouldn't push you away.

Never say never. 100 years ago someone said that black would never share a bathroom with whites. Never say never. I deeply am sorry for you. The day same sex marriage is legal in Australia, you're gonna go crazy.

You're closed minded. I'm done with you.