I'm selling a fine selection of tin foil hats that will protect you against the liberal conspiracy that is known today as "science".
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Homosexuality is not natural and is not normality
- Thread starter Estro Felino
- Start date
I'm selling a fine selection of tin foil hats that will protect you against the liberal conspiracy that is known today as "science".
jonathan180iq
Well-Known Member
Do they come in anti-gay colors, like brown?
Triumphant_Loser
Libertarian Egalitarian
I really do feel sorry for the wives of these men who think that the only real form of sex is repeatedly stabbing her reproductive tract with his Johnson. You know they're not satisfied in the bedroom.
okay...so natural is not the right word here.
what about biological?
I just want to quote my friend Valery, who once experienced anal sex.
I asked her: "Is there any difference between the two kinds of intercourse?".
she replied: of course there is. The one is heavenly pleasure. the other hellish pain
Triumphant_Loser
Libertarian Egalitarian
Yes, Johnathan, they come in a variety of heterosexual friendly colors, like beer-fart brown, football field green, and socks-with-sandals sapphire.
Triumphant_Loser
Libertarian Egalitarian
Biological simply means "of or relating to living organisms." So no, it's still biological, since living organisms still do it.
Then they were doing it wrong.
jonathan180iq
Well-Known Member
No 'Rusty Pick-up Orange'?
jonathan180iq
Well-Known Member
As a heterosexual man who has experienced pretty much everything you can imagine - your friend's first experience shouldn't be your scale for why something exists.
Nada
#
That's funny coming from someone with a signature that reads,
"Big Chesticles: Lady balls of the chest, the non hairy variety."
No, dear. Biology says otherwise. All straight women enjoy vaginal intercourse. very few women are anatomically apt to enjoy anal intercourse.
so there is a clear and undeniable disparity
And as for men, few of them are anatomically apt to enjoy anal intercourse
jonathan180iq
Well-Known Member
Which women? What market have you studied?
Have you ever tried it?
Would you like me to find you some studies that state otherwise?
You can reach up inside almost any man on this forum, poke his prostate, and cause him to ejaculate... Why is that?
Women are capable of orgasm via anal sex whilst never having any part of their vaginas stimulated. These things are physically possible and easily demonstrable. Why? If anal sex is so terrible and unnatural, then why are those things possible?
Triumphant_Loser
Libertarian Egalitarian
Sorry, fresh out. Could we interest you in no-homo-bro navy instead?
Triumphant_Loser
Libertarian Egalitarian
jonathan180iq
Well-Known Member
Then please share with us the experience of other people whom you have interviewed. Or other supporting evidence to explain your rigid stance.
If you're going to make a broad sweeping statement like that, and deny the vast majority of homosexual people their right to call their form of sex natural and pleasurable, then you'd better have something other than "My friend said she didn't like it."
You may not like it at all. Some people don't.
Some people do.
But to say that the vast majority of women prefer one type of sex over the other is just ignorant and short sighted.
I didn't use the word "prefer". I said that all women (except cases of anatomic diseases) are anatomically apt to have vaginal sex.
Very few of them are anatomically apt to have anal sex. period.
Speaking of preferences, the world is full of masochists. so I don't discuss preferences
McBell
Unbound
Says who?
Have you an actual study to support this claim or are you merely, once again, going on assumption?
McBell
Unbound
Again, do you have anything other than your wishful thinking to support these claims?
Given your track record of speaking from ignorance, we will need something much more substantial than your "word".
more bold empty claims.
McBell
Unbound
you really need to work on your back peddling.