Originally posted by sumydidI consider religiosity a turn-off, but I don't want to legislate against it. I don't want religious people to labor under unequal protections of law; either in the workplace, the military, or the family sphere. That's because I don't want to legislate morality, except for those basic norms that are presupposed by classical liberalism. I don't want you persecuted. But for saying that you find my gay family members' relationships abominable and disgusting, I despise you. Seriously.
Don't know about anyone else, but, if there was nary a mention of said act in the bible, I'd still not be in support of it. However I don't support the authorities kicking in doors and arresting people for doing whatever they want in the privacy of their own home. I just don't support the act in general. I consider it a turn-off.
If it's a turn-on to you, then I don't think any of us should hold it against you. That's your choice.
Originally posted by bbarrIf I said such a thing, I would expect you to despise me.
I consider religiosity a turn-off, but I don't want to legislate against it. I don't want religious people to labor under unequal protections of law; either in the workplace, the military, or the family sphere. That's because I don't want to legislate morality, except for those basic norms that are presupposed by classical liberalism. I don't want you perse ...[text shortened]... family members' relationships abominable and disgusting, I despise you. Seriously.
Actually, I expect you'd find some other reason to despise me anyway, and that's ok.
Knowing what little I already know about you, I'd be a ton more uncomfortable if you praised me rather than despised me. So it's a win-win. You get to hate and despise, and I get to appreciate it.
Originally posted by sumydidDo you feel the need to support or not-support all activities that people could conceivably do?
Don't know about anyone else, but, if there was nary a mention of said act in the bible, I'd still not be in support of it. However I don't support the authorities kicking in doors and arresting people for doing whatever they want in the privacy of their own home. I just don't support the act in general. I consider it a turn-off.
If it's a turn-on to you, then I don't think any of us should hold it against you. That's your choice.
People do many many things, many of which I would have no desire to ever do, people eat and enjoy foods
I find revolting, heck the vast majority of women seem to find men sexually appealing where I find men sexually
repugnant.... should I support women liking men? (EDIT: not saying I hate men btw just saying I don't feel like jumping
into bed with one)
Who gives a damn if you support or otherwise homosexual activities of any stripe?
If it doesn't appeal to you, who cares, it doesn't appeal to most people, the question is whether it's amoral.
The answer is no it isn't.
And you can't hold up a book that condones (advocates) slavery and murder as a moral guide of anything.
Originally posted by googlefudgeMy bible doesn't advocate slavery and murder. But that's another story and of no relevance here.
Do you feel the need to support or not-support all activities that people could conceivably do?
People do many many things, many of which I would have no desire to ever do, people eat and enjoy foods
I find revolting, heck the vast majority of women seem to find men sexually appealing where I find men sexually
repugnant.... should I support women l ...[text shortened]... t hold up a book that condones (advocates) slavery and murder as a moral guide of anything.
Originally posted by sumydidThen you have a massively unorthodox and unusual bible, and it's relevant if you want to claim the bible as any sort of moral guide.
My bible doesn't advocate slavery and murder. But that's another story and of no relevance here.
EDIT: and way to miss all the other points in my post.
Originally posted by sumydidNo, you were onto a good point about spirituality and our perceptions.
Well thanks a lot to all of you.
Now it's all I can think of.
My faith is about to collapse like a deck of cards.
I'll be repenting all night long, instead of watching the Ravens-Steelers.
THANKS! 😠
The fact that we are drawn towards certain visual cues. We are like dogs in this respect,(except for actually going over and sniffing the chicks bum), but because we know the difference , this gives us the ability to transcend these desires.
Nothing wrong with following the desire of your eyes. Indeed, it is the understanding that is the important part. It is the process not the goal which is important.
Originally posted by sumydidThere is no joy in finding you repulsive. I don't enjoy the anger. It's similar when I am confronted by racism or misogyny. It's just a deep, visceral disgust. I would prefer it if you were capable of seeing the love expressed in the homosexual relationships of my sister and cousin as beautiful and worthy of respect as the love expressed in the best heterosexual relationships. But you don't. You'll claim to love my gay family as people, and distinguish between them as homosexuals and their intimate and romantic homosexual expressions of love. But that is just false consciousness. It's you hiding your bigotry. "It's the sin, it's the sin, not the sinner..." But it is not sin. Or if it is a sin, that's just another reason to deny that the concept 'sin' bears any relationship to the concept 'immoral'. But, whatever, believe about me what you want. You and your ilk insult people I love. You don't make people better or healthier or happier. The currency of your religion is misanthropy and the inculcation of shame. You get to live with that.
If I said such a thing, I would expect you to despise me.
Actually, I expect you'd find some other reason to despise me anyway, and that's ok.
Knowing what little I already know about you, I'd be a ton more uncomfortable if you praised me rather than despised me. So it's a win-win. You get to hate and despise, and I get to appreciate it.
I thought the clitoris existed so that it could be surgically carved and placed on to the head of a transplanted "schlong" so that female-to-male transexuals could climax during post-op sex.
No?
Oh well. Kudos to me because for once I managed not to get side tracked and talk about stuff the op didn't intend.
Originally posted by bbarrI can tell, deep down you do. Sorry, you have be found out. 😏
I consider religiosity a turn-off, but I don't want to legislate against it. I don't want religious people to labor under unequal protections of law; either in the workplace, the military, or the family sphere. That's because I don't want to legislate morality, except for those basic norms that are presupposed by classical liberalism. I don't want you perse ...[text shortened]... family members' relationships abominable and disgusting, I despise you. Seriously.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieGot to pick you up on this Robbie!!
no, it has been pointed out using physiological fact that anal penetration is unhealthy.
You cannot dispute this, its incontrovertible, the anus is not 'designed', for
penetration. Will you admit publicly that this is the case or if you will not then what
evidence do you have to the contrary, simply stating that you dont think its unhealthy
is not evidence in itself, nor is citing medical advancements.
Anal stimulation can and is enjoyed by men and women regardless of whether or not they are heterosexual, homosexual or ambivalent.
http://www.ivillage.com/5-myths-anal-sex-uncovered/4-a-284083
If you disregard "non-sexual" parts of the body then surely you must also frown upon toe-sucking, ear-nibbling, thigh-stroking and ... that disgusting practice of mutual eating - french kissing!!