- Joined
- Oct 24, 2009
- Messages
- 11,000
- Reaction score
- 5,430
- Location
- Southeast Michigan
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
Are you talking, statistically, molten_dragon?
Yeah.
123456789
Are you talking, statistically, molten_dragon?
I'm sure the "designer" (what are we in a religious thread all of a sudden?) decided an action that does nothing to be done and desired and the action that does something to not be desired. Are you even listening to yourself here?
I'm sure I did that already.
Can something not be designed for pleasure? Why "make" a part of the body pleasurable, especially in a sexual way, if it is not to used in a sexual way?
That is a position that I find intolerable and to be a complete cop-out. There are clear 'right' and 'wrongs' in society and this progressive position that is being pushed by you and others is disgusting.
Much of what is being pushed by progressives is nothing more than the decay of morals and common sense.
This was a research paper I did on the genetics of homosexuality using identical twins for the database. Identical twins have identical DNA ergo if one is homosexual and it is genetic then the other must also be. The research indicates, fairly conclusively, that there is no genetic link to homosexuality.. There is plenty of data to indicate a nurture link to homosexuality but none to link nature to it.
I'm sure the "designer" (what are we in a religious thread all of a sudden?) decided an action that does nothing to be done and desired and the action that does something to not be desired. Are you even listening to yourself here?
I'm sure I did that already.
Please link me to the designer's website. I'd like some substantiation for your position.
No, I don't think you did. But if you did, feel free to repost it so we can discuss it.
Since I'm not religious, and since even if I was giving evidence that put out such a view it wouldn't be valued I hardly see how your request should be taken seriously. That is of course if you continue to want to frame it in such a way.
.
The point is that you can't prove what a designer/if there is any wants.
Kind of a dumb point. In order to figure out which is the normal route, you have to figure out which was designed into the system to have purpose. Frankly, this entire debate is dumb. Obviously there is nothing correct about having sex with your own gender or otherwise it would do something. I'm not saying it shouldn't be accepted or not, but damn, just shut up and admit what is what.
Oh and normal=/= natural. If you guys would realize that, it would be great.
If you can't understand purpose when its right there in your face what in the hell is the point of this. Its like trying to teach reading to person that is blind. I'm done with this nonsense.
You can infarct me for saying this, but you people are idiots. You not only missed my point, but made a total ass of yourself but showing how dumb you are by making the same point over and over again in ignorance.
I'd be happy to take your point into consideration
Throw me it
I'll bite
hard
LOL!
Thats exactly why I pulled out of the threads...its pointless to continue. The supporters keep saying the same thing over and over and asking the same questions that youve already answered. They want to badger people into agreeing with them
LOL!
Yes Clearly
The childish one isn't the one who just calls everybody an idiot and stupid
Must have missed that memo
LOL!
Stay up.
Keep formating your posts like that. Hey, starting with LOL does you all kinds of favors.
I said i'd be quite happy to indulge your argument
But alas, I suppose you have better things to do right?
LOL!
Stay up