Quote:
Originally posted by Vito The Godfather:
Nasty perverted uneducated bastards.
You've heard about the pot and the kettle, I presume?

Quote:
Originally posted by Vito The Godfather:
Also, I agree with MaryCas. Totally.
Well, if you do that's fine and dandy. Perhaps you would care to repond to this, then?:

I'll make it easy for you. Here's what MaryCas said that you "totally agree with"

Quote:
I think a definition of "natural" is in order here. There seems to be variety.

The word natural is derived from nature, correct?

I believe my penis was designed for two functions; elimination of liquid waste and procreation. That's the nature of the penis. To perform the procreation part it contains very sensitive nerves and lots of blood vessels.

The rectum was designed for elimination of solid waste. No sex organs in there.
Here is my response that I'd like you to respond to:
Quote:
Originally posted by plawrence:
So MC, by your definition, then, oral sex is un-natural as well.

May I also suggest, that by your definition, heterosexual sex while wearing a condom is un-natural, since the penis is not being used for one of the two natural purposes you mention, but merely for pleasure?

And are either of the above any less un-natural than homosexual sex?

And if they're all un-natural, which, if one accepts your definition, they are, are any of the three any more wrong or less wrong than the others?

Or is it possible that there are three natural uses for the penis:

1) The elimination of liquid waste,
2) Procreation, and
3) To provide physical pleasure

That would seem to me to be quite likely, since, after all, sex is fun.
And, when your done responding to that, I'd like to hear yout response to my questions about your previous contribution to this thread, which you have so far conveniently avoided.

This post of yours:

Quote:
Originally posted by Vito The Godfather:
I am 100% against Gay marriage. God made Man to intercourse with Women, and not for two individuals of the same sex to pretend they are enjoying it. Homosexuality is not natural. I have a feeling marriage between homosexuals will destroy the future of traditional marriages. How about marrying a cousin or a donkey?

Are gay couples even allowed to adopt? Wouldn't it change the kids personality? Behaviour at school? What about telling friends about their parents?
And my response:

Quote:
Originally posted by plawrence:
Well, since men seem to be also having intercourse with each other, I suppose we could say that God made man to do that as well, couldn't we?

And I suspect that they're not "pretending" to enjoy it, but rather really are.

How will gay marriage destroy the future of traditional marriage? I don't see that happening, since maybe 90% or more of the general population is heterosexual.

Yes, in the United States gay couples are permitted to adopt. And as in any parent-child relationship, the parents influence the child's personality and behavior in school. But there's no reason to assume that the effect of that influence in the case of gay couples and their children will be a negative one.

And what about the kids telling their friends at school? It's only because some members of society have an intolerant view of homosexuality that could cause a problem here.

I will agree with you about one thing, though:

People should absolutely not be permitted to marry donkeys.

After all, donkeys are already abused enough when they are "un-naturally" mated with horses to produce mules. Why abuse them even more by mating them with people?
Debate and argument become fairly meaningless when one person makes a point, or points, and the other doesn't respond.

So, whenever you have a chance......

"Difficult....not impossible"