> Justinian I wrote:

> Viser,

Yeah well to me work is a source of unhappiness, they should get over it. We can't be accommodating with other people's happiness when it is under their control to be happy or not, especially not when it comes at the expense of practical considerations.

Imperial,

Because you use a body organ for something other than the function designed by natural selection, does not make it an abomination. We do this all the time. We use fingers and mouths to enhance sexuality, even when our mouth was designed for nutritional intake among others. There is no conceivable benefit of using the mouth for sex, but we do it anyway. If you commit to this principle, then you morally can not use the mouth or work the fingers. Furthermore, no sex toys either! Women can't use dildos and men can't use flesh bots.

We do the same with tools. Though a spoon is not designed to eat soup, a soup spoon is, we can still use one as an alternative even if it's inefficient to do so. We may even use a spoon as an alternative when a fork is more efficient and considered appropriate, if the situation demands it.

Sticking it in a guy's butt is no different. Nonetheless, I find the prospect of it disgusting and I am a vagina addict, but it doesn't work to use the natural function argument. However, you could say that there is something biologically wrong with the person, because based on the principles of evolution homosexuals should have been selected out of the population long ago. There is a biological answer to this, and it's that a gene that is beneficial to one gender is not for another.

You overshot my point by a large part, and so much so i stopped reading after the 2nd paragraph.

The point is - With out Modern modification's items, the act of Sodomy is more then dangerous it can be lethal - Unless your hung like a horse and slam your stick into a mouth, oral sex WILL not - Kill someone, and unless your fingernails are lace with poison, nor will your fingers.

The use of a Mouth, and fingers is multi personal - there isn't a direct use defined for them, your trying to comparing 2 separate things, but i see where you going - your trying to stem and argument out of a clever analogy, which your wrong about - The anus/rectum is a Tight muscle - covered with very fragile skin, the muscle can be ripped as can the skin, you can create an external prolapse (external hernia) and without medical attention die, as well as damage the muscle so it is not longer cable of retaining fecal matter, and have anal seepage, beyond that is Colon - Perforation of the colon is a death sentence unless operated on ASAP - The mouth/Hands/Fingers are not gonna be damaged by sexual activity unless misused in an EXTREME fashion -

Thus your argument is void, less you can cite the last time someone died while performing oral sex, as a direct result of the oral sex ( Aside from erotic suffixation. )

> V.Kemp wrote:

> Jon Stewart never touches subject matter. Only his retard fans think he's any sort of news analysis.

Avo's joke wasn't a strawman. He points out the inadequacy of the claim of discrimination.

Incorrect, about both.

Avo's joke was a strawman. He misrepresented his opponent's position and then attacked it instead of addressing the true position the poster was putting forward. Avo knows better. He's not stupid. Unless he thought he was addressing the idea the poster was putting forth...in which case, his response would be classified as stupid.

Obviously, since you didn't see the segment, your opinion about it isn't informed, or relevant.

http://bfnation.net/features/thething/thethingv2/v2/1spock.jpg

"Obviously, since you didn't see the segment, your opinion about it isn't informed, or relevant."

Oh yeah? well a guy told another guy off, and that totally destroys your argument! so there!!!

> shipman wrote:

> The majority of you people are just homophobic bigots. Why are you all so threatened by two gay people being in love and getting married? It has no effect on your own lives whatsover. Get over it.

well, im not homophobic, im not a bigot, hell, im even friends with [THEM], im not threatened by two gay people being in love and getting married. if i get drunk and drive, its not going to effect your life, so you should let me live my life and get over it, right? statistically gay couples are worse at raising children. sure they're capable to raising a kid without [humpling] them over, just like a drunk is capable of driving all the way back to his house. that doesnt mean we should encourage the activity by giving them tax breaks for it.

No, gay marriage has nothing to do with you. Does my straight marriage have anything to do with you? No, it's between me and my wife. Such an illogical point...

"because gay people can still have a completely happy life in a devoted straight relationship"

I Lol'ed at that For the record, you are very wrong. There are some people who identify as being bisexual because they feel comfortable either in a "straight" relationship or "gay" relationship. The idea that love conquers all (including homosexuality) is almost as preposterous (sp?) as the idea that by confession perceived sins to a boggie man in the sky will make me want to sleep with women.

Avo, you should try getting to know a gay couple some time. Some of them are just as "devoted" to each other as a straight couple.

I described it as more of a mental disorder, Wild Flower Soul.

>>Avo's joke was a strawman. He misrepresented his opponent's position and then attacked it instead of addressing the true position the poster was putting forward.<<

He merely pointed out that his "opponent's" position did NOT explain adequate grounds to claim "DISCRIMINATION!" Which is all his "opponent's" position was.

>>Obviously, since you didn't see the segment, your opinion about it isn't informed, or relevant.<<

My brief comment was "obviously" about the man and his show, not a particular segment. Because the segment was on his show which I am very familiar with, my opinion is both relevant and informed. Thank you for taking the bait and calling his show real news analysis. I knew someone would after I said anyone who does is a retard.

TheYell summed up the level of "debate" that happens on his show. With his audience cheering when he says something half funny/half stupid in response. And you [his audience] all take that as totally PWNing. Whatever that means. I get PWNed in this game all the time. But  I'm still #3 in #1 fam. It doesn't MEAN anything.

>>The majority of you people are just homophobic bigots. Why are you all so threatened by two gay people being in love and getting married? It has no effect on your own lives whatsover. Get over it.<<

Exactly what I was talking about. All the crying, none of the reasoning.

>>No, gay marriage has nothing to do with you. Does my straight marriage have anything to do with you? No, it's between me and my wife. Such an illogical point...
<<

JUST after the drunk driving analogy! With NO response to it! Even MORE of all the crying, none of the reasoning!

stop using that word!!

And stop agreeing, it puts my fmodship in jeopardy!!!!!!!!

>The majority of you people are just homophobic bigots.

First thank you for contributing such an insightful post. It really advances the discussion in this thread.

Since you haven't read a single post in this thread, read this.
Homosexuals are not a separate race of people. No one is saying homosexuals are bad or evil or less then human.
We are talking about another way for people to have freaky sex.

If People want to keep shoving things in places where they don't belong, such as another mans anus or a goat, let them do that. Just don't keep telling people that's normal. Taking yourself out of the genepool so you can ejaculate in odd places is NOT normal. The penis is NOT an ass cleaning device.

Does a homosexual relationship deserve the same recognition as a relationship that can produce offspring? No it doesn't. Here's where gay marriage starts to effect other people. There are oftern tax benefits granted to married people. Married couples often get these breaks because they are able to produce other tax paying citizens. Homosexual couples recieving tax breaks for their relationship is a waste of taxpayer dolars.

It's not about whether or not heterosexual couples also have strange sex, it's just when it comes down to it, they are still functionally able to produce offspring together. That's why hetero relationships deserve the recognition of marriage.

Also to other people, get all this fairytale "love" crap out of your minds. Government and law doesn't know about this "Love" crap. Law is (Supposed to be) about logic and reason.

> CanadianTire wrote:

> "my point was that gay people arent automatically miserable if they arent [w00f!] of their own sex. sex doesnty equal happiness, the two things are completely separate."

As the same thing can be said of many straight people, I don't understand your argument.

the argument was that not only does gay relationships have statistically harder times raising children, they arent necessary for happiness.