What's new
By:

So gay!!!

How come my fun little thread got turned into a serious debate?

You sons of gay bitches. (which, of course, is totally not possible. science > your opinion)
 
Raspberry Delight said:
How come my fun little thread got turned into a serious debate?

You sons of gay bitches. (which, of course, is totally not possible. science > your opinion)
Click to expand...

LOL, crybaby....


One Brow said:
Hopper said:
But he has the intellectual clarity and integrity to recognize that the anti-Prop 8 case should fail (as well as the courage to say so):"
Click to expand...
People who agree with you always seem to exhibit a large amount of intellectual clarity.
Click to expand...

LOL. So you're saying that people who agree with Hopper exhibit a large amount of intellectual clarity? That's a new spin!

Or did you mean that any person feels that those on their side of the debate are the smarter ones? I'd make a guess, but I don't want to assume anything here.
 
moevillini said:
LOL. So you're saying that people who agree with Hopper exhibit a large amount of intellectual clarity? That's a new spin!
Click to expand...

If Hopper and I never disagree on anything, almost as if we are the same person, that must be true.

moevillini said:
Or did you mean that any person feels that those on their side of the debate are the smarter ones? I'd make a guess, but I don't want to assume anything here.
Click to expand...

I was referring to a generic you. I'll try to remember to use "one" next time.
 
Sirkickyass said:
I've given this some thought, and I'm pretty sure that heterosexual sex and homosexual sex are not "total opposites." In fact, it's hard to think of something more similar to heterosexual sex than homosexual sex.

Two or more people: Check

Use of genitals: Check

Usually, but not necessarily, associated with intimacy: Check

Some level of body exposure: Check

If a dude is involved, there's some aspect of insertion into an orifice: Check

You can buy it: Check

The foreplay is pretty much the same.

The endgoal of the immediate action is the same.

I don't think these are total opposites.

I mean, if we're talking about a total opposite to sex between a man and a woman shouldn't it be like a dude watching football while a woman spends his money? That's completely different than sex, and might even lead to less sex since there will be a fight. Or more sex to make up from the fight, depending on the particulars of your relationship.

Or, in my case, reading your crackpot theories about the interaction between biology and marriage is the "total opposite" of sex because that's the biggest anti-****** I can imagine.
Click to expand...


Sex is the stimulation between sexual organ and sexual organ through direct contact. Male and female anatomy are clearly made for that. All other "forms" of sex are just mimicing heterosexual contact that would come from male and female intercourse. Including hands, oral, anal, strap ons, etc.

My point is homosexuals cannot have sexual intercourse through direct sexual organ contact.
 
All homosexual "sex" is just mimicing what heterosexual intercourse is. Not to mention male homosexual form of sex is extremely harmful to the body. If homosexuality was meant to exist in nature their anatomy would have changed to fit. Thats how evolution works.
 
Beantown said:
Sex is the stimulation between sexual organ and sexual organ through direct contact. Male and female anatomy are clearly made for that. All other "forms" of sex are just mimicing heterosexual contact that would come from male and female intercourse. Including hands, oral, anal, strap ons, etc.

My point is homosexuals cannot have sexual intercourse through direct sexual organ contact.
Click to expand...

Voting is the act of expressing or signifying will or choice in a matter, as by casting a ballot. Originally only men could do it. Although women have fully functioning sexual organs, they were barred from it until the 19th amendment was passed.

Drinking out of a water fountain is the act of procuring water from a spout with the aim of rehydrating yourself. Originally only white men could do it from all fountains. Although black people had skin at the time, the pigmentation therein was too dark to warrant their hydration from said fountains until the Civil Rights Act was passed.

Fast forward to today. "Sexual intercourse" means vaginal intercourse, anal intercourse, fellatio or cunnilingus between persons regardless of sex (according to some states' Judicial Branches). Originally this term applied to heterosexuals only. Although homosexuals have sexual organs and the capacity to love just as much as heterosexuals, their sexual acts were deemed "mimicking" by Bean.

Bean, words, ideas, and concepts evolve. Without this evolution of semantics, we'd all be in a much sorrier state of being. I still don't quite understand your hesitance at accepting their physical acts of love as "sex," and that being the vehicle to bar them the usage of a single, solitary word: marriage.
 
chemdude1232 said:
Voting is the act of expressing or signifying will or choice in a matter, as by casting a ballot. Originally only men could do it. Although women have fully functioning sexual organs, they were barred from it until the 19th amendment was passed.

Drinking out of a water fountain is the act of procuring water from a spout with the aim of rehydrating yourself. Originally only white men could do it from all fountains. Although black people had skin at the time, the pigmentation therein was too dark to warrant their hydration from said fountains until the Civil Rights Act was passed.

Fast forward to today. "Sexual intercourse" means vaginal intercourse, anal intercourse, fellatio or cunnilingus between persons regardless of sex (according to some states' Judicial Branches). Originally this term applied to heterosexuals only. Although homosexuals have sexual organs and the capacity to love just as much as heterosexuals, their sexual acts were deemed "mimicking" by Bean.

Bean, words, ideas, and concepts evolve. Without this evolution of semantics, we'd all be in a much sorrier state of being. I still don't quite understand your hesitance at accepting their physical acts of love as "sex," and that being the vehicle to bar them the usage of a single, solitary word: marriage.
Click to expand...

How does this change the fact that homosexuals cant have sexual intercourse?
 
Beantown said:
How does this change the fact that homosexuals cant have sexual intercourse?
Click to expand...

I'll try this again. Same wording. I'll even underline the pertinent parts for you.

Fast forward to today. "Sexual intercourse" means vaginal intercourse, anal intercourse, fellatio or cunnilingus between persons regardless of sex (according to some states' Judicial Branches). Originally this term applied to heterosexuals only. Although homosexuals have sexual organs and the capacity to love just as much as heterosexuals, their sexual acts were deemed "mimicking" by Bean.

Bean, words, ideas, and concepts evolve. Without this evolution of semantics, we'd all be in a much sorrier state of being.
 
I haven't read a word of this thread. But I spent some time yesterday reading about the California ruling, and I just want to say, regardless of whatever arguments and discussions have gone on in this thread -- completely irrespective of any conversation taking place on Jazzfanz -- that I count this as a great event. I'm thrilled. I hope it sticks. And I support gay marriage. Good work, you Evil Activist Judge, you. Good work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top