Sex With More That One Person in Your Lifetime? More Likely to Get Cancer. God's Consequences

[Dayton3]

Abstinence sex policies dont work and they aren't healthy. Your idea is creepy as is your obsession with regulating the the sex lives of others just because you cannot get a date or a mate.

You forget that I've been married for 22 years.

 

[zyzygy]

You forget that I've been married for 22 years.

Yea,right.

 

[Dayton3]

Yea,right.

Google my name if you doubt me.

 

[zyzygy]

Google my name if you doubt me.

I got your profile here, a review of Italian restaurants and an engineering company in Dayton.

 

[Dayton3]

I got your profile here, a review of Italian restaurants and an engineering company in Dayton.

Dayton is my first name. I have no connection whatsoever to Dayton, Ohio.

 

[Lisa]

You forget that I've been married for 22 years.

If you have been married for 22 years then shut up and stop telling others what to do. You're not the self appointed sex police.

 

[Dayton3]

If you have been married for 22 years then shut up and stop telling others what to do. You're not the self appointed sex police.

Oh get a grip. I'm doing nothing to bother you. "lady".

 

[Lisa]

Oh get a grip. I'm doing nothing to bother you. "lady".

Are you now trying to claim that I am not female as an insult? Does that make you feel like a big tough guy?

Then drop it if your idea isn't enforceable law or public policy. Churches have been trying to shame their own voluntarily congregants for over a thousand years with the use of the word sin and it doesn't work or change their behavior. People are leaving churches at an ever increasing rate and there is nothing that the ministers or anyone else can do to stop it.

You have yet to be able to prove that a god exists.

 

[Dayton3]

Are you now trying to claim that I am not female as an insult? Does that make you feel like a big tough guy?

Then drop it if your idea isn't enforceable law or public policy. Churches have been trying to shame their own voluntarily congregants for over a thousand years with the use of the word sin and it doesn't work or change their behavior. People are leaving churches at an ever increasing rate and there is nothing that the ministers or anyone else can do to stop it.

that can change, arguably people have left churches because so many of them have abandoned their most basic beliefs regarding restrictions on human behavior. Eventually it can go the other way.

 

[Lisa]

that can change, arguably people have left churches because so many of them have abandoned their most basic beliefs regarding restrictions on human behavior. Eventually it can go the other way.

The facts say that your claims are wrong.

They aren't going back because the number of people who are atheists or have no belief is expanding exponentially. They cannot be forced back to church without trampling on the religious clauses of the First Amendment. Theistic religion will be functionally dead in advanced societies within 3 generations.

12 Reasons People Leave a Church | ChurchPlants

 

[Dayton3]

The facts say that your claims are wrong.

They aren't going back because the number of people who are atheists or have no belief is expanding exponentially. They cannot be forced back to church without trampling on the religious clauses of the First Amendment. Theistic religion will be functionally dead in advanced societies within 3 generations.

12 Reasons People Leave a Church | ChurchPlants

Keep wishing "lady".

 

[zyzygy]

Oh get a grip. I'm doing nothing to bother you. "lady".

And what other people do with their sex lives should not bother you. The fact that it does speaks volumes about you.

 

[zyzygy]

Dayton is my first name. I have no connection whatsoever to Dayton, Ohio.

I didn't find you. Why would googling your handle prove that you are married?

 

[zyzygy]

The facts say that your claims are wrong.

They aren't going back because the number of people who are atheists or have no belief is expanding exponentially. They cannot be forced back to church without trampling on the religious clauses of the First Amendment. Theistic religion will be functionally dead in advanced societies within 3 generations.

12 Reasons People Leave a Church | ChurchPlants

Please don't confuse him with facts.

 

[Indie guy]

If you have been married for 22 years then shut up and stop telling others what to do. You're not the self appointed sex police.

Dayton and Mash sound almost like the same person. Hard to believe there are actually people around in 2020 who still have attitudes more common of 100 or more years ago.

Have you noticed that both of them claim to be married? I find that to be very odd - as in queer.

 

[zyzygy]

The city of Dayton will be glad to hear that.

 

[maquiscat]

The facts say that your claims are wrong.

They aren't going back because the number of people who are atheists or have no belief is expanding exponentially. They cannot be forced back to church without trampling on the religious clauses of the First Amendment. Theistic religion will be functionally dead in advanced societies within 3 generations.

12 Reasons People Leave a Church | ChurchPlants

That logic fails, when you look at things historically. We could apply this same logic in reverse when Christianity was up and coming and spreading rapidly throughout the world. No doubt they thought that people would not be going back to pagan religions because they were converting exponentially. They believed that pagan religions and atheism would be dead is a few generations. Yet now it is in decline. You can't even guarantee that the Constitution will still be here in three generations. We've exceeded the record for a democracy existing by almost half a century. Probably because we've never been an actual democracy, but a republic with many democratic aspects. But it does not discount the effects of social pressure. It's the one point that I agree with Dayton on. Heinlein foresaw that possibility as well. Read some of his works. He didn't support it, and wrote about it as warning. Hiding behind the idea that these things cannot socially change back is, quite frankly, insane. Granted, as long as the current Constitution is in effect, they can never again become law. There could never be a case of a person losing their rights or being hurt by the lack of restriction. But something does not have to be law for it to be socially unacceptable. And for that matter, Wicca and other pagan religions, theistic religions, are on the rise.

 

[TypicalRussian]

Cancer risk '''rises with number of sexual partners'''

Having 10 or more sexual partners throughout your life may raise the risk of cancer, research suggests.

Scientists from Anglia Ruskin University in Cambridge asked more than 5,000 adults how many people they had “been intimate” with.

The participants then rated their health, noting any long-standing conditions.

Results revealed the women who had 10 or more lifetime sexual partners were 91% more likely to be diagnosed with any form of cancer than those who were virgins or had slept with just one person.

Men with 10 or more sexual partners were 69% more likely to be told they had the disease.

The men who reported having between two and four were 57% more likely to be diagnosed with the disease than those with zero or one.

I have spoken repeatedly that AIDS was God's vengeance for sex outside a hetero marriage, particularly gay sex. Now we have another example of God's punishment of those who have more than one sex partner in their lifetimes. I tell people all the time, illicit sex causes 90% of the world's problems. The consequences may not be obvious, and they may not be sudden, but they ALWAYS appear eventually.

Why not just follow the rules, people? Failure to do so results in misery in not only this life, but the one afterward.

the sexual revolution has been a disaster

 

[zyzygy]

That logic fails, when you look at things historically. We could apply this same logic in reverse when Christianity was up and coming and spreading rapidly throughout the world. No doubt they thought that people would not be going back to pagan religions because they were converting exponentially. They believed that pagan religions and atheism would be dead is a few generations. Yet now it is in decline. You can't even guarantee that the Constitution will still be here in three generations. We've exceeded the record for a democracy existing by almost half a century. Probably because we've never been an actual democracy, but a republic with many democratic aspects. But it does not discount the effects of social pressure. It's the one point that I agree with Dayton on. Heinlein foresaw that possibility as well. Read some of his works. He didn't support it, and wrote about it as warning. Hiding behind the idea that these things cannot socially change back is, quite frankly, insane. Granted, as long as the current Constitution is in effect, they can never again become law. There could never be a case of a person losing their rights or being hurt by the lack of restriction. But something does not have to be law for it to be socially unacceptable. And for that matter, Wicca and other pagan religions, theistic religions, are on the rise.

I predict that in three generations people will still be enjoying sex in many different types of relationships. By the way, your constitution only applies in the US.

 

[maquiscat]

I predict that in three generations people will still be enjoying sex in many different types of relationships. By the way, your constitution only applies in the US.

Methinks you have me on the wrong side of the argument. Noting a bit of failed logic does not put me on the other conclusion's side. I do agree that within 3 generations, we will see pretty much what we have now. But Lisa is speaking as if it could never change, and that is just wishful thinking. That doesn't mean that societal thinking will revert back to a more prude. Only that the potential constantly remains that it can shift in either direction. Which is why those of us who do not want such restrictions to return, even if only in the form of social pressure, must remain vigilant, and not assume that society cannot back slide. As to the Constitution, Lisa at the least, if not also Dayton, was making her arguments based on that context, thus it was only logical that I should show her error in that same context.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk

 

[danielpalos]

the sexual revolution has been a disaster

Women don't really believe in equality unless Gold is involved.

Does anyone else believe women are "just plain social cowards for free under Capitalism"? Who cannot find Brave women for a market friendly price in Two emails or less under Capitalism when Gold is involved?

A first lieutenant has silver bars not the Gold bars of a second (junior) lieutenant. It is not about "the Gold, socially for free." Guys believe in equality and have even had social Civil Wars because of it.

 

[Lisa]

That logic fails, when you look at things historically. We could apply this same logic in reverse when Christianity was up and coming and spreading rapidly throughout the world. No doubt they thought that people would not be going back to pagan religions because they were converting exponentially. They believed that pagan religions and atheism would be dead is a few generations. Yet now it is in decline. You can't even guarantee that the Constitution will still be here in three generations. We've exceeded the record for a democracy existing by almost half a century. Probably because we've never been an actual democracy, but a republic with many democratic aspects. But it does not discount the effects of social pressure. It's the one point that I agree with Dayton on. Heinlein foresaw that possibility as well. Read some of his works. He didn't support it, and wrote about it as warning. Hiding behind the idea that these things cannot socially change back is, quite frankly, insane. Granted, as long as the current Constitution is in effect, they can never again become law. There could never be a case of a person losing their rights or being hurt by the lack of restriction. But something does not have to be law for it to be socially unacceptable. And for that matter, Wicca and other pagan religions, theistic religions, are on the rise.

1.) Society and the world has drastically changed since 500CE when Christianity become a religion outside of Palestine and become more common in the eastern and western Roman empire. Christianity itself has changed drastically since then with the structure of the Vatican and the various protestant religion. In many ways the RCC is the last remnants of the western Roman Empire and less of a church than a worldwide political structure of its own.

2.) We don't need religion to answer basic questions any more or to define morality, most people can read and we can talk in real time thanks to the internet, so the grip on power that organized religion once held is gone.

3.) The organization, beliefs and structure of the pagan religions are far different than the Abrahamic religions. They are not even comparable because one is organic and the other is very rigid. They do not appeal to the same personalities.

 

[zyzygy]

Methinks you have me on the wrong side of the argument. Noting a bit of failed logic does not put me on the other conclusion's side. I do agree that within 3 generations, we will see pretty much what we have now. But Lisa is speaking as if it could never change, and that is just wishful thinking. That doesn't mean that societal thinking will revert back to a more prude. Only that the potential constantly remains that it can shift in either direction. Which is why those of us who do not want such restrictions to return, even if only in the form of social pressure, must remain vigilant, and not assume that society cannot back slide. As to the Constitution, Lisa at the least, if not also Dayton, was making her arguments based on that context, thus it was only logical that I should show her error in that same context.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk

My apologies. The prudery was a veneer that covered up what people have always done. I cite the hypocritical Victorian era, to name but one.

 

[maquiscat]

1.) Society and the world has drastically changed since 500CE when Christianity become a religion outside of Palestine and become more common in the eastern and western Roman empire. Christianity itself has changed drastically since then with the structure of the Vatican and the various protestant religion. In many ways the RCC is the last remnants of the western Roman Empire and less of a church than a worldwide political structure of its own.

That means nothing to what I was saying. Most of the pagan religions of the time all but died, and now more modern versions of them are on the rise, drastically changed from that earlier era. Anything that rises, can fall and can also rise again. We might see the return of the feudal system should something like a world wide EMP occur (ex: magnetic poles switch) rendering most of our modern conveniences gone.

2.) We don't need religion to answer basic questions any more or to define morality, most people can read and we can talk in real time thanks to the internet, so the grip on power that organized religion once held is gone.

Organized religion, sure, but individual religion still runs strong in many people. I am Christian myself, but I follow no specific church. Which of course causes some of the Christian wackos here to claim I can not possibly be Christian. And I have a very rational and science based mind. Evolution is real. Big Bang may not be right, but is a viable theory. Just because some other Christian may say X is a sin, doesn't make it so, no matter how they read their Bible. Religion is becoming more individualized. Many don't bother to call themselves religious, since they are not of an organized one, but quite a number are, or are at least spiritual.

3.) The organization, beliefs and structure of the pagan religions are far different than the Abrahamic religions. They are not even comparable because one is organic and the other is very rigid. They do not appeal to the same personalities.

Which does nothing to counter my counter on your claim that theistic religions are dying. Certain ones, maybe, but not overall. As noted, many are on the rise. It doesn't matter what kind of structure or organization they have. They are still theistic religions.

 

[TypicalRussian]

Women don't really believe in equality unless Gold is involved.

Does anyone else believe women are "just plain social cowards for free under Capitalism"? Who cannot find Brave women for a market friendly price in Two emails or less under Capitalism when Gold is involved?

A first lieutenant has silver bars not the Gold bars of a second (junior) lieutenant. It is not about "the Gold, socially for free." Guys believe in equality and have even had social Civil Wars because of it.

what are you talking about? Gold????????

there is no such thing as "equality" men and woman are different, sure men are in tech jobs more but also do the dirty work of society that no one wants to do but they do it for their families.they still do those jobs traditionalist yet you cant say the same about womens trad roles