YT2095 Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 when you goto the Adduser to ignore list, you can`t see their posts. it`s a similar thing with a url or thread ID, except that it doesn`t use the SFN tools, it`s just a way to stop your browser from accessing certain sites or pages is all it`s not a ban, it`s just a block, I`ve never used it personaly, but one of the tech lads showed me once, it`s nothing sinister Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfson Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 S`up Yo? don`t ya know how to do that? so right away it "gibberish" all of a sudden? *sheesh* get a grip ya`ll! LMAO nice one YT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jadote Posted January 31, 2004 Author Share Posted January 31, 2004 This thread has strayed a bit from the topic I intended, I was looking more for you personal opinions on gay marriage. However, since those that do not view gays as perverse are probably against it, and those who do not probably have no problem with gay unions, this is basically a debate on the acceptance of the gay lifestyle. For those who are opposed to the gay lifestyle, are anti-sodomy laws the way to go? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 what`s YOUR opinion of them dude, just as a way to get it back on track again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mossoi Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 I don't see what's wrong with a gay marriage. I'm not so sure about adoption in such cases as it's affecting another party who may or may not be adversely affected by a different home lifestyle. As for anti-sodomy laws - well two consenting adults in the privacy of there own home - why stop them? It's not gonna upset anybody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 mossoi said in post # :I As for anti-sodomy laws - well two consenting adults in the privacy of there own home - why stop them? It's not gonna upset anybody. even though the act is SOooo potentialy dangerous to both parties involved, with or without barrier protection!? at the risk of being a little TOO blunt, that hole is designed for ONE purpose only, waste removal, as are the connecting tissues leading to that hole, it is NOT an Input port, it`s for outgoing only! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 jadote said in post # :This thread has strayed a bit from the topic I intended, I was looking more for you personal opinions on gay marriage. However, since those that do not view gays as perverse are probably against it... I think you got that backwards. and those who do not probably have no problem with gay unions, this is basically a debate on the acceptance of the gay lifestyle. For those who are opposed to the gay lifestyle, are anti-sodomy laws the way to go? 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 YT2095 said in post # : even though the act is SOooo potentialy dangerous to both parties involved, with or without barrier protection!? at the risk of being a little TOO blunt, that hole is designed for ONE purpose only, waste removal, as are the connecting tissues leading to that hole, it is NOT an Input port, it`s for outgoing only! You can apply the same arguments to oral sex, and any intercourse that's not for the purposes of procreation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 "You can apply the same arguments to oral sex, and any intercourse that's not for the purposes of procreation. " Negative! and resoundingly so! with the exception of oral sex and the potential risk of herpes simplex from a cold sore becoming the genital variety (somewhat more serious if left untreated). Anal is by FAR several orders of magnitude more potentialy dangerous, fecal mater contains germs and bacteria that our colon can deal with (most of the time), when these are introduced to mucous membranes with maybe hair line splits it can create all manor of havok, not to mention what happens internaly to the colon during such activity, the tissue it`s constructed of is NOT a robust as you`de think! and the rectum and anus are a ONE WAY valve system, that may and has caused irrepairable damage to many that indulge in this practice, not to mention the Sphyinchter muscles being either torn or split and the introducion of fecal matter as outlined above. You`de have to mental to even consider it after weighing up the consequences, ask yourself, would it worth the risk, either to you or your partner (that you may love)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atinymonkey Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 Happily, the 'gays' do follow YT's logic to a point. Contrary to why YT thinks, rapant bum sex does not occur often in boy on boy lovin'. Neither, obviously, does it with girl on girl. As Sayo says, Sodomy = anal or oral sex. As blokes mostly prefer the latter to the former guess which one is prevalent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jadote Posted January 31, 2004 Author Share Posted January 31, 2004 YT2095 said in post #86 : Anal is by FAR several orders of magnitude more potentialy dangerous, fecal mater contains germs and bacteria that our colon can deal with (most of the time), when these are introduced to mucous membranes with maybe hair line splits it can create all manor of havok, not to mention what happens internaly to the colon during such activity, the tissue it`s constructed of is NOT a robust as you`de think! and the rectum and anus are a ONE WAY valve system, that may and has caused irrepairable damage to many that indulge in this practice, not to mention the Sphyinchter muscles being either torn or split and the introducion of fecal matter as outlined above. You`de have to mental to even consider it after weighing up the consequences, ask yourself, would it worth the risk, either to you or your partner (that you may love)? But the answer to the dangers of anal sex should not be a ban on it. If what you say is true, wouldn't education on this subject be a better solution? However, this would never happen because (at least in the US) anti-gays are not looking out for the safety and wellbeing of homosexuals. Besides, as Sayo mentioned, its not just homosexuals who partake in anal sex. Once again the topic has strayed. I should have asked, "To those against the gay lifestyle, what is your reasoning and what is your solution?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 YT2095 said in post # :Negative! and resoundingly so! 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. with the exception of oral sex and the potential risk of herpes simplex from a cold sore becoming the genital variety (somewhat more serious if left untreated). "This is evidence for your argument so I'm going to ignore it" should stay on the religion forum. Anal is by FAR several orders of magnitude more potentialy dangerous 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". fecal mater contains germs and bacteria that our colon can deal with (most of the time), when these are introduced to mucous membranes with maybe hair line splits it can create all manor of havok, 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. not to mention what happens internaly to the colon during such activity, the tissue it`s constructed of is NOT a robust as you`de think! 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. and the rectum and anus are a ONE WAY valve system, lol that may and has caused irrepairable damage to many that indulge in this practice, not to mention the Sphyinchter muscles being either torn or split 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. and the introducion of fecal matter as outlined above. You`de have to mental to even consider it after weighing up the consequences, 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. ask yourself, would it worth the risk, either to you or your partner (that you may love)? 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 atinymonkey said in post # :Happily, the 'gays' do follow YT's logic to a point. Contrary to why YT thinks, rapant bum sex does not occur often in boy on boy lovin'. Neither, obviously, does it with girl on girl. I have no idea if it does or doesn`t, they may prance about all day long in frilly girl pants for all I know, the fact remains, it is a dangerous practice! and girl girl, I fail to see how that`s in anyway applicable? I`m also begining to wonder if indeed any of this belongs in a SCIENCE forum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 "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." whut? ya know what sayo, ya could give oral during anal you could, ya talk out yer ass enough! that`s NOT my reasoning at all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 If your wondering I moved it to here (removed thread/holding area), this thread doesn`t belong on a public page and NOT in Science forum. I agree with Faf on this one, maybe it`s my fault? maybe it isn`t? eitherway, perhaps it can be split and salvaged, until then, As a judgement call, I don`t think it belongs for all to see. I`ll take whatever consequences for this descision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg1917 Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 I see no reason it shouldnt be discussed, but the way the thread is going im beginning to wonder how relevant it is when it can be found in the politics forum. In response to the original question I have no problem with gay marriages but find it quite pathetic that the church is appealing to popular culture by becoming more leniant. if it has values it should stick to them. The fact I disagree with said values is irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atinymonkey Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 Someone should sort out the thread, YT's abuse or change the forum rules. One of those three things should happen. YT’s opinion is something he’s entitled to. I’ll defend his right to voice whatever he likes, but this has gone far past voicing an opinion. By his own admission he’s got little idea what a homosexual relationship involves, he’s just spouting homophobic dogma. Which isn't good for anyone really. It's not constructive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 fair enough then, if you wish to put it back, let the dice roll. I`ll adhere to my descision, it does NOT belong on a Science forum. I`ll not delete my posts, I stand by what I said and still do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 atinymonkey said in post # :Look. Someone will have to sort out the thread, YT's abuse or change the forum rules. One of those three things will have to happen to keep the creditability of the site. YT’s opinion is something he’s entitled to. I’ll defend his right to voice whatever he likes, but this has gone far past voicing an opinion. By his own admission he’s got little idea what a homosexual relationship involves, he’s just spouting homophobic dogma. This site has credability now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 YT2095 said in post # :fair enough then, if you wish to put it back, let the dice roll. I`ll adhere to my descision, it does NOT belong on a Science forum. I`ll not delete my posts, I stand by what I said and still do. This isn't strictly speaking an area of the 'science' forum; it's in the 'other' section. The mods forum and religion aren't science either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 YT2095 said in post # :fair enough then, if you wish to put it back, let the dice roll. I`ll adhere to my descision, it does NOT belong on a Science forum. I`ll not delete my posts, I stand by what I said and still do. 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 Anyway, as you said - let's not argue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atinymonkey Posted January 31, 2004 Share Posted January 31, 2004 MrL_JaKiri said in post # : This site has credability now? Well, ok. Not credability then. Principles. Or rectitude. And a shiny logo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now