Login is disabled. This forum is read-only.
Imperial Forum → Politics → Virginity
yall need to remember that im not arguing against sex entirely. I am just arguing against sex before marriage.
We got that Soth, it's bollocks none the less!
I wonder, are you married?
> Alan Statham wrote:
> "Based on that "logic" people also have the need for murder."
As said above, you don't need murder to be healthy. Now come on and show me what your incredible logic is then!
______________________________________________
To release their pent-up frustration and anger.
Remember, people have no control over their feelings.
Isn't that what we tell people regarding sex with those they're not married to? 
"To release their pent-up frustration and anger."
I'm not restraining from sexual activities, so I'm the one that's least frustrated!
For the rest, it sounds random sillyness. Can you rephrase your argument?
"To release their pent-up frustration and anger."
You are correct that people need to release pent-up frustration and anger to live healthy lives, but since there exist viable alternatives to murder (beating the snot out of furniture for instance) murder is not an acceptable form of release.
"Remember, people have no control over their feelings.
Isn't that what we tell people regarding sex with those they're not married to?"
People don't have control over their feelings. If something makes you sad, happy, angry, frustrated, or aroused there isn't much you can do to stop that all you do have control over is your expression of those feelings. If two consenting adults (or whatever age of consent may be where you live - 16 in Canada) decide to express their feelings of arousal by having sex that is perfectly within the confines of the law, and therefore should be tolerated if not accepted.
> Alan Statham wrote:
> "To release their pent-up frustration and anger."
I'm not restraining from sexual activities, so I'm the one that's least frustrated!
For the rest, it sounds random sillyness. Can you rephrase your argument?
_______________________________________________________________
you said, "I'm not restraining from sexual activities, so I'm the one that's least frustrated!"
so if i interpret you correctly, you're saying that you don't have sex?
> DPS wrote:
> "To release their pent-up frustration and anger."
You are correct that people need to release pent-up frustration and anger to live healthy lives, but since there exist viable alternatives to murder (beating the snot out of furniture for instance) murder is not an acceptable form of release.
"Remember, people have no control over their feelings.
Isn't that what we tell people regarding sex with those they're not married to?"
People don't have control over their feelings. If something makes you sad, happy, angry, frustrated, or aroused there isn't much you can do to stop that all you do have control over is your expression of those feelings. If two consenting adults (or whatever age of consent may be where you live - 16 in Canada) decide to express their feelings of arousal by having sex that is perfectly within the confines of the law, and therefore should be tolerated if not accepted.
_____________________________________
In other words, IF the law allows it (including murder) then it should be tolerated if not accepted
and IF the law doesn't allow it (including premarital and extramarital...maybe even also marital sex) then it should not be tolerated if not accepted?
"you said, "I'm not restraining from sexual activities, so I'm the one that's least frustrated!"
so if i interpret you correctly, you're saying that you don't have sex?"
True, your point being? I have enough experience to both know how it an be frustrating to not have sex and to know how it takes the edge of things..
"In other words, IF the law allows it (including murder) then it should be tolerated if not accepted
and IF the law doesn't allow it (including premarital and extramarital...maybe even also marital sex) then it should not be tolerated if not accepted?"
It's a silly argument, and you know it. There's a huge difference in the remedies as they were suggested. Sex is a natural need, and murder isn't. This has nothing to do with society.
To make it simple: If we take a look at biology, you'll notice that puberty is the stage where the body reaches the stage of sexual readiness. When we try to find a similar process in the human body for murder, you can't find anything like it. I hope that's clear enough?
"Sex is a natural need"
...not true.
We now have technology to reproduce humans (not as clones either) without having any form of sex!
Now regarding it being a "need" to at least have the recreation of sex (even without any reproduction) is not a need but is instead an superstrong feeling of want.
The feelings can be so strong that they FEEL like they're needs.
Just ask rapists.
No, I've never been one.
Sex is a natural need. A great proof of it is the "wet dream" or Nocturnal emission. If your body didn't have the need for sex, that wouldn't happen.
Another great example is the 19th century boarding schools. It was widely believed that masturbation invoked physical deviations like epilepsy, blindness and so on in that age. So at those schools, they tied the boys hands to the bed. Many of those suffered a serious trauma from these inhuman practices. Yet you claim there's no natural need. You and ask a proper biology teacher and listen less to your preacher!
Also, "We now have technology to reproduce humans (not as clones either) without having any form of sex!" is totally redundant, as sex and procreation aren't automaticly linked.
"Now regarding it being a "need" to at least have the recreation of sex (even without any reproduction) is not a need but is instead an superstrong feeling of want."
Then you have a superstrong feeling of want for air, food, water too... For the love of god!
To finish: a rape isn't an act of sexual needs, it's an act of rage. Again, this is redundant.
murder isn't natural?
That's not my statement, it's not a natural need of your body 
PS: Newb, may I ask where you're from?
Alan,
I could keep answering your objections with logic but you keep responding with arrogance towards me.
(mind you, you're keeping out the swearing...heh;))
P.S. I do have an answer for your latest questions but I see you're not an open-minded individual to certain views.
That's your perogative.
If my girlfriend wouldn't want to have sex with me i would dump here right away...[bebother and fusticate] staying pure till marriage and that religous crap! Sex is like the fifth best thing right after football(real football not that sissy game americans play with the gay little helmeths...although GO JETS), poker, drinking beer and imperial conflict. And i don't restrain from those four things so i won't be restrained from having sex!!!
Which goes to show it's an overwhelming want but not a need! 
"Alan,
I could keep answering your objections with logic but you keep responding with arrogance towards me.
(mind you, you're keeping out the swearing...heh;))
P.S. I do have an answer for your latest questions but I see you're not an open-minded individual to certain views.
That's your perogative."
Not at all lad. I am openminded. Hit my with your rythm-stick (and that's from a song) lad! I just have great difficulty with understanding your pov, wich is really undefendable in my opinion. But that's what discussions are about! Also, I try to use humour in replies as they lighten the discussion a bit (it's really horible to read pages of long dry and heavy posts.
But anyway, resume with the dialogue. I find these accusations a rather poor defence against my statements
lick'em, stick'em, and send them on they're merry way.
i haven't seen a virgin since i was 19, and she was 16... that was the last one.
now days if you see a hymen, run like hell, cause your going to jail.
Behold! The intellectual void of Cougar has reappeared!
Or: how is this relevant? Statutory rape is a good thing. Besides, you only get busted if you forced the girl into it anyway.
> Alan Statham wrote:
> "Alan,
I could keep answering your objections with logic but you keep responding with arrogance towards me.
(mind you, you're keeping out the swearing...heh;))
P.S. I do have an answer for your latest questions but I see you're not an open-minded individual to certain views.
That's your perogative."
Not at all lad. I am openminded. Hit my with your rythm-stick (and that's from a song) lad! I just have great difficulty with understanding your pov, wich is really undefendable in my opinion. But that's what discussions are about! Also, I try to use humour in replies as they lighten the discussion a bit (it's really horible to read pages of long dry and heavy posts.
But anyway, resume with the dialogue. I find these accusations a rather poor defence against my statements
____________________________________
You might want to reread what you responded to.
I wasn't making any defence.
And in that post I stated why.
It's so painfully obvious that you just can't answer his questions....just admit it..it's not that hard.
I don't need it to be hard when I'm not having sex.
Couger seems to accurately describe the mentality of those who defend that position
Sexual morality is an entirely personal thing. I might pass judgement on other people based on their conduct, and other people may do it to me but I disagree that anyone other than a parent or legal guardian of someone under 18 (I choose 18 as the age someone becomes an adult rather than the legal age of consent at 16) should dictate to anybody else what is right or wrong with regard to sexual conduct (with the caveat that it is all legal!).
Personally, I don't think losing your virginity is any more special than any other sexual experience. Scarier, and I mean WAY scarier, but I don't think any more special. Saying that, I think sex is always special (if it wasn't, I wouldn't bother with it!) and I personally would not have sex with somebody I was not already in a relationship with for a certain period of time, enoguh time to get to know them and to have some idea if the relationship is actually going to go somewhere, say 3 weeks to a month. For me, sex is something which compliments a relationship. Emotionally I think sharing sex is the closest you can get to someone and without the emotion of a relationship sex is meaningless, sleazy and seedy. I do not think a relationship which is centred on sex will last in the long term or make me at all happy or fulfilled. I would much rather have crap sex with someone I loved than the most incredible night of my life with someone who meant nothing to me.
I feel entirely within my rights to judge whores, slags and sleazy men and institutions such as the church are entirely welcome to judge me for having sex outside of marriage but I do not think it is up to me to preach to anyone else what they should be doing just as I do not think it is up to anyone else to preach to me.
Come on man...
...forums are loaded with people preaching at each other!!!
(that's what those for and against any topic have been doing when they disagree)
That's true, but not usually about something which boils entirely down to an issue of personal conduct.
Imperial Forum → Politics → Virginity
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.