Sayonara

This thread is stupid.

Gas, Liquid, Solid, Plasma, Bose-Einstein Condensate.

That's not just Bush - lots of leaders do that.

I know it's painful to admit this, but those student things who study politics and social sciences do use a lot fo the same principles as ecologists and what have you. :scrubscrubscrub:

Anyway, as you said - let's not argue

Biology, politics and social studies aren't sciences now? The entire function of this site is to serve as a place where people can get good information, even if it's through revision. If we can dissolve a few urban myths and dangerous misinformations, then that's a good thing. There are many reasons to move a thread out of the public's view, but none of them are evident in this one.

Jadote (the OP) asked that the question be changed to "To those against the gay lifestyle, what is your reasoning and what is your solution", so I'm thinking the preceding posts qualify for discussion here quite well.

There's no reason to remove this thread, I have put it back. Remove your posts if you don't want them in here, but you leave mine, atm's, and anyone else's alone please.

So your reasoning is "I think the risk is greater in gay anal sex therefore there is no risk in oral sex, hetero anal sex or intercourse"? That's just stupid. "This is evidence for your argument so I'm going to ignore it" should stay on the religion forum. I suggest you find some figures to corroborate that. You'll probably find that you have to insert the word "unsafe" before the word "anal". The entire lower intestine is one long mucous membrane. Not only does it frequently have ruptures in it, but it's also constantly shedding epithelial cells. Not to mention the fact that hairline splits in your weenie make you less likely to want to stick it in things. As you say the lining of the rectum is fairly easy to tear, but with a condom and lubrication that's less likely to happen and less doomy if it does. ANYONE who has any kind of recreational sex without a condom is a bit stupid, no matter what their orientation. lol Figures? I'd like to see a study of the problems associated with this terrible plague of split rings. Obviously if it's so widespread there will be plenty of material on it. Honestly, this is just too good. Have you ever heard anyone complaining "poo infected my weenie?" OH MY GOD A RISK! Better stop being so gay lads. Obviously you can't be gay without bumming people. Kissing can transmit Hepititus C, which can be fatal, not to mention dozens of other real nasties. Vaginal intercourse carries the risk of hundreds of different infections with a spectacular range of effects and severity (for instance, did you know that syphilis is on the rise? Not to mention chlamydia). Even breathing the same air as your partner carries a significant risk if one of you is carrying the right pathogens. Nice argument. Also, we're back on to "demonstrate how gay feelings are evil and twisted by showing that bumming people is a bad and nasty thing that only the dirty homos do", which really speaks volumes.

Well, Michael Jackson is not doing well in the popularity polls at the moment so George was looking for another popular celebrity figure to lend his case the public vote; and his scouts found that this 'god' fellow was very popular among the widest demographics.

You can apply the same arguments to oral sex, and any intercourse that's not for the purposes of procreation.

I think you got that backwards. Again, sodomy is not synonymous with "gayness". Sodomy = anal or oral sex between two people. "We have to ban this kind of thing so there won't be any dirty gays" is just not acceptable any more. In fact, there has only ever been less than 200 years where it wasn't acceptable to "polite society" in the West.

nn, don't let the zombies bite.

Ah, so your reasoning is that if a half-digested crisp can get lodged in an appendix, then lots and lots of crisps increase the probability quite a bit?

Had already spotted the error and edited. Not so drunk after all Fried potato is basically starch. Most of it is going to be digested anyway, and the non-fat parts are water-soluble. Saying that you'd die from a blocked appendix if you only eat potato because a blocked appendix most commonly has potato in it is a bit of a falacy, surely?

I see your point, but there's only so much water the colon can absorb - especially if you aren't getting enough dietary fibre.

It shouldn't do, as long as the water isn't psychotically rationed.

What, if I was there you'd top yourself? Until you were dead? Well that's just CHARMING.

It's to do with resource partitioning and genetic fitness. Look at the way there's nothing reach-wise between the 'regular' ungulates and what have you, and the giraffes & elephants. And look at the way most of the chewy green goodness in their habitat is either close to the ground (low growth cost) or high in the air (reduced predation). The rest should just fall in to place. I'd explain it better if I weren't tired and a bit drunk.

I would like it to be known by all assembled that I did not touch YT's balls. I wouldn't want him to top himself (especially while I was there).

Blike added it earlier. Members are only allowed to participate in mass debates if they have a permission slip from their parent or legal guardian, and a web cam. -- edited for gayness.

Better that than Tom Clancy.

I'd consider research into one of the biggest breakthroughs in the field to be a pretty good practical use.

And osteoporosis.

Care to qualify that?