Homosexuals

Vedderlution_Baby

onelongsong wrote:

through out time; things have changed. i remember when being straight meant you didn't do drugs. and gay meant happy. long ago; it was accepted for shepards to have sex with their animals. loving is something different. i love my parents but wouldn't think of having sex with them.
sodomy streaches out the anus muscles and before long; the anus will not seal in the feces. what results is a dripping of feces and digestive fluids. that's one way it's medically harmful.
if you loved someone; would you want to hurt them in that manner?

Okay, so it's harmful in that manner. there are straight couples who show their love without sexual actions, but I understand what you're saying. So, it's harmful if you're a male. What about a female? Also, if you aren't making this decisions, why does it concern you?

onelongsong

Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:

Okay, so it's harmful in that manner. there are straight couples who show their love without sexual actions, but I understand what you're saying. So, it's harmful if you're a male. What about a female? Also, if you aren't making this decisions, why does it concern you?

females who use "toys" (straight or gay) also get streached out. especially young; sexually active girls. by the time they reach their late 20's; they no longer enjoy sex because they don't feel it. it doesn't concern me.....until i have to hear about it. i don't care if you poke your dog; but i don't want to hear about it.
some things discust some people. i have a friend who will vomit if i ask her for a peanut butter and sardine sandwitch with mayo. she doesn't have to see it and i wouldn't eat it.
we were having dinner once and she uses hazelnut flavor in her coffee. i told her it smelled like a mans locker room and she almost lost it.
i can't watch people eat mushrooms. why someone would pick something out of a pile of crap and eat it is beyond me.
most of the people who know me don't know if i'm gay or straight. it doesn't come up in conversation. yet i know everyone who is gay because they talk about it. that's my point. i don't care what you do but if you constantly bring it up for discussion; you'll get others opinions.

Ahnimus

prism wrote:

yeah right, sure. now we all know that your homophobia stems from your lover man not using enough lube!

Prism!

I'm not homosexual. Why do pro-homos accuse non-homos of being homos to try to agitate them? Isn't that kind of degrading to homos?

Vedderlution_Baby

onelongsong wrote:

females who use "toys" (straight or gay) also get streached out. especially young; sexually active girls. by the time they reach their late 20's; they no longer enjoy sex because they don't feel it. it doesn't concern me.....until i have to hear about it. i don't care if you poke your dog; but i don't want to hear about it.
some things discust some people. i have a friend who will vomit if i ask her for a peanut butter and sardine sandwitch with mayo. she doesn't have to see it and i wouldn't eat it.
we were having dinner once and she uses hazelnut flavor in her coffee. i told her it smelled like a mans locker room and she almost lost it.
i can't watch people eat mushrooms. why someone would pick something out of a pile of crap and eat it is beyond me.
most of the people who know me don't know if i'm gay or straight. it doesn't come up in conversation. yet i know everyone who is gay because they talk about it. that's my point. i don't care what you do but if you constantly bring it up for discussion; you'll get others opinions.

Unless they were using some kind of extra large dildo, would they get stretched out by a regular sized one? Straight females who have sex don't normally get stretched unless having sex regularly with a large penised male do they?

Ahnimus

Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:

Unless they were using some kind of extra large dildo, would they get stretched out by a regular sized one? Straight females who have sex don't normally get stretched unless having sex regularly with a large penised male do they?

I think stretching occurs from over-use and of course massive objects. That's why they have benoi balls.

onelongsong

Ahnimus wrote:

Prism!

I'm not homosexual. Why do pro-homos accuse non-homos of being homos to try to agitate them? Isn't that kind of degrading to homos?

it's just the hetro-phobes lashing out. like nazis with swastikas on they're foreheads.

onelongsong

Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:

Unless they were using some kind of extra large dildo, would they get stretched out by a regular sized one? Straight females who have sex don't normally get stretched unless having sex regularly with a large penised male do they?

i've worn out a couple but that's another thread.

cornnifer

Ahnimus wrote:

Why is it that as soon as men pronounce themselves gay, they start waving their hands like a chick? And start talking with a lisp or something else that is gay? It's part of psychology, they think that's how gay men act. A gay guy couldn't just be attracted to other men, they have to act like fags.

I must admit, this is something I've also questioned and never quite understood. Those gay guys people often refer to as "flaming". There is no real way of explaining it to me other than its a big act. No one is that gay! It would be like extremely wealthy men all talking like Mr. Howell from Giligan's island. No one really talks like that!! Turn it down a little.

prism

onelongsong wrote:

it's just the hetro-phobes lashing out. like nazis with swastikas on they're foreheads.

yes, you're on to me, as I hate straight people soooo much that my children hatched from eggs in a field. I hate to disappoint you but i'm a woman that's sexually attrached to men. i just hate to see people discrimated against because of who they love when they love another consenting adult no matter if they're male/female, male/male or female/female.

cornnifer

prism wrote:

yes, you're on to me, as I hate straight people soooo much that my children hatched from eggs in a field. I hate to disappoint you but i'm a woman that's sexually attrached to men. i just hate to see people discrimated against because of who they love when they love another consenting adult no matter if they're male/female, male/male or female/female.

I get what you're saying here I also don't like to see people discriminated against. Let's not confuse love with sexual attraction. I'm a man. There are other men that i truly love. There are two or three men that i love so hard i would willing lie down in traffic for.



They're called FRIENDS!

Vedderlution_Baby

cornnifer wrote:

I get what you're saying here I also don't like to see people discriminated against. Let's not confuse love with sexual attraction. I'm a man. There are other men that i truly love. There are two or three men that i love so hard i would willing lie down in traffic for.



They're called FRIENDS!

So if you're in love with someone you aren't sexually attracted to them? And if you are sexually attracted to them, you aren't in love with them?

cornnifer

Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:

So if you're in love with someone you aren't sexually attracted to them? And if you are sexually attracted to them, you aren't in love with them?

Not necessarily.

prism

cornnifer wrote:

I get what you're saying here I also don't like to see people discriminated against. Let's not confuse love with sexual attraction. I'm a man. There are other men that i truly love. There are two or three men that i love so hard i would willing lie down in traffic for.



They're called FRIENDS!

so if you were to wind up in a sexual/love relationship with one of these friends(I'm not say that YOU personally would) then it would be okay for people to discriminate against you?

Vedderlution_Baby

cornnifer wrote:

Not necessarily.

Sorry. Just seemed that you were saying all homosexual males are confused between the difference for the love of a lover and the love of a friend.

sponger

The whole "marriage is a sacred insitution" rationale is really a hypocrisy within the context of gay marriage bans. Under the edicts of catholicism, the "sacred institution" of marriage between a man and a women is founded on the belief that sexual intercourse should only be performed for the purpose of conceiving offspring. What I'm talking about is the church's ban on birth control. According to "god", you shouldn't have sex unless you are trying to have kids. Therefore, homosexual sexual intercourse really is no different from heterosexual intercourse from "god's" point of view as long as birth control is being used.

blackredyellow

cornnifer wrote:

I didn't say it wouldn't. As you say, the divirce rate is off the charts. Its absolutely obscene as is the number of single parents (I am not disrespecting single parents, I am actually quite amazed by the ones who pull it off successfully). This, i feel is in large part, due to the declining esteem of marriage as a institution and comittment. People simply have no respect for it anymore. It is regarded as no big deal. By stretching the boundaries of marriage, I think we would only enhance and strengthen this "no big deal" attitude that is already destroying marriage.

So it might (would IMHO) help family life, but your perception of marraige is more important than helping families? If I'm putting words in your mouth I apologize, but I don't see how the institute of marriage is more important the the success of the family.

sponger

blackredyellow wrote:

So it might (would IMHO) help family life, but your perception of marraige is more important than helping families? If I'm putting words in your mouth I apologize, but I don't see how the institute of marriage is more important the the success of the family.

A family generally does not benefit from divorce unless there is abuse or neglect going on. Children are put under immeasurable amounts of stress during and, as a result of, divorce. Further, it has been statistically proven that children who have gone through divorces tend to be less equipped to handle life in general. Again, there are exceptions when one parent is clearly a negative influence on the child. In which case, the child is certainly better off with the other parent. But, "irreconcilable differences" alone do not justify destroying the stability and dual parenting that children need in order to become well-rounded adults. I'm just quoting Dr. Laura, though. I don't know for sure if it's right or wrong.

Ahnimus

sponger wrote:

The whole "marriage is a sacred insitution" rationale is really a hypocrisy within the context of gay marriage bans. Under the edicts of catholicism, the "sacred institution" of marriage between a man and a women is founded on the belief that sexual intercourse should only be performed for the purpose of conceiving offspring. What I'm talking about is the church's ban on birth control. According to "god", you shouldn't have sex unless you are trying to have kids. Therefore, homosexual sexual intercourse really is no different from heterosexual intercourse from "god's" point of view as long as birth control is not being used.

But you can't conceive offspring through gay sex.

http://www.godhatesfags.com/fags/fag.html

sponger

Ahnimus wrote:

But you can't conceive offspring through gay sex.

http://www.godhatesfags.com/fags/fag.html

Nor can you with the use of birth control, which is banned by the church. That's why there is no difference between homosexual sex and heterosexual sex with birth control.

Ahnimus

sponger wrote:

Nor can you with the use of birth control, which is banned by the church. That's why there is no difference between homosexual sex and heterosexual sex with birth control.

If we are looking at homosexuality through the Vaticans eyes, then yes there is a difference, homosexuals are Sodomites. I don't think people that use birth control are considered sodomites, perhaps though.