[quote]Makavali wrote:
I suppose with your views on sex you would see it that way.[/quote]
More like my manners. But in the end, it’s you who is suddenly shy.[/quote]
Sex = Nothing to be shy about.
Calling my girlfriend a whore = Something I might get offended at.
You like to think yourself a worldly, civilized type, but in the end you are the same as the rest of us, just less honest about it.[/quote]
Nope. I’m nothing like you.
[/quote]
Opposed thumbs?
Both eyes in the front, allowing for somewhat adequate depth perception?
Do you walk on your hind legs?
Do you see colors, especially in the range where it would help you to decide whether a fruit is ripe or not?[/quote]
Because obviously he was speaking anatomically. But, funny, funny Mr. Funny Funnster!
[/quote]
Yeah, well, what you are mostly is your physiology and you share that with us heathens.
You have a frontal cortex an amygdala, a hypothalamus and who know whatever other unspeakable things are lodged between your ears.
You kind of are 99,9 % like him. [/quote]
Cute, but no.
[/quote]
Cute, but yes!
You are defined by your restrains and yours are basically like his.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
The only possible way this will have anything to do with the soft, temporal “circumcision ban” in Germany, is when “busting a nut in my girlfriend” really means “circumcise her labia” in New Zealand.
Dudes, I get it - you hate sex.
It makes you feel ickily biological.
Don’t let your pious joylessnes creep into every thread-crevasse in PWI.
[/quote]
Catholics love sex…that’s why there are so many of us. Come at us, bro.[/quote]
Correction - you love unprotected sex. Within strict parameters.[/quote]
My Catholic upbringing must be stronger than I thought then.
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
I’m not Christian at all. I’m entirely pagan and I do think one of the strengths America used to have was strong marriage commitments and a stigma against pre-marital sex. Also, I think it helped that sex wasn’t totally in your face. The divorce rate is crazy and causing economical and social problems. Now I totally get women’s rights and agree with all that but I really feel that hippy generation totally threw the baby out with the bath water when it comes to marriage, family units, and how they work together.
The early years of marriage can be some of the hardest from vicarious experience and one the things that I strongly think would help is to not have had sex with anyone else before that for both partners. That way, the ‘magic’ is still there. Also, if you’ve ‘tasted better fruit’ before temptation is strong to go out and find something like that again. You don’t even have to married for years for that one to be true.
I do get that it’s near impossible in the hyper-sexualized society for two virgin partners to marry as virgins and consumate (sp?). I’m going out on a limb hear but I’d also suggest that even within churches it can be difficult but maybe more of a possibility. Truth be told though from my church experience there were better opportunities for it there than with the people hung out with at high school. But anyway I really do agree that it’s going to be near impossible for most to every marry and have kids without having pre-marital sex.
Now the question is that now that Pandora’s box has been let loose, can it be closed again?
[/quote]
Honestly, it’s not that difficult. Hardly any competition. Functions for singles are often arranged through the Church. Volunteering for different religiously inspired charity events. And, not my cup of tea, but devout Christians even use the internet. Yes, there’s apparently Christian dating sites. A devout Christian knows where to socialize, and builds up a community around himself. Yeah, hanging out at the local bar is probably not the best bet.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
The only possible way this will have anything to do with the soft, temporal “circumcision ban” in Germany, is when “busting a nut in my girlfriend” really means “circumcise her labia” in New Zealand.
Dudes, I get it - you hate sex.
It makes you feel ickily biological.
Don’t let your pious joylessnes creep into every thread-crevasse in PWI.
[/quote]
Catholics love sex…that’s why there are so many of us. Come at us, bro.[/quote]
Correction - you love unprotected sex. Within strict parameters.[/quote]
Yes, because that is the proper context of the marital act. Just like we love food and drink, but we say no to gluttony and drunkness.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
The only possible way this will have anything to do with the soft, temporal “circumcision ban” in Germany, is when “busting a nut in my girlfriend” really means “circumcise her labia” in New Zealand.
Dudes, I get it - you hate sex.
It makes you feel ickily biological.
Don’t let your pious joylessnes creep into every thread-crevasse in PWI.
[/quote]
Catholics love sex…that’s why there are so many of us. Come at us, bro.[/quote]
Correction - you love unprotected sex. Within strict parameters.[/quote]
Yes, because that is the proper context of the marital act. Just like we love food and drink, but we say no to gluttony and drunkness. [/quote]
Let me guess, what is “proper” should be derived not from moral, reason and science, but from a compilation of ancient, mesopotamian mythological texts.
The Berlin wall of decency is the first to collapse.
Mutilation of baby’s will be allowed, says local senator Thomas Heilmann, but under a surgically more regulated environment.
p.s. My neighbour will rejoice -he’s an devout assholist. Now he can smack his daughter daily like HIS holy scripture commands him to and not worry about Child Protective Services going after his devout ass anymore.
His congregation expects a compromise along the lines of “alright you can smack her, but first you’ll have to go to a martial arts class and learn proper technique”.
It’s tough being religious today. You can barely to anything cruel today without regulation!
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Let me guess, what is “proper” should be derived not from moral, reason and science, but from a compilation of ancient, mesopotamian mythological texts.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Let me guess, what is “proper” should be derived not from moral, reason and science, but from a compilation of ancient, mesopotamian mythological texts.
That makes so much sense![/quote]
What are you talking about?[/quote]
This is why people think you’re socially awkward.
Stop playing stupid. Unless you’re not playing, in which case I offer my condolences.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Let me guess, what is “proper” should be derived not from moral, reason and science, but from a compilation of ancient, mesopotamian mythological texts.
That makes so much sense![/quote]
What are you talking about?[/quote]
This is why people think you’re socially awkward.
Stop playing stupid. Unless you’re not playing, in which case I offer my condolences.[/quote]
No, I kind of understand what he’s talking about (though I don’t agree, I guess because of the following…), but no one has ever even put an argument forward of how or why whatever is mesopotamian mythological texts.
But, I guess asking questions to check why someone believes something is socially awkward in contemporary times.
Last time I checked, the particular set of ideas, morals and stories the bible brings forth is of distinctively mesopotamian origin.
Eg Chinese, mezoamerican, vedic etc myths are very different from your favorite myths.
That’s why these cultures came to different cultural conclusions regarding sexuality.
In urban, medival China, you’d have been a sexually very happy and flexible person with your critical attitude.
Taoism, which you would have followed blindly, would have allowed you to fornicate your brains out.