DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
*Straw man alert*
My assertion was in response to:
Obviously using a reference to a perverted sexual practice to denigrate a woman.
Why don't you Libtard/ Progressives/ Democrats just say it?
- Thread starter DamnYankee
- Start date
*Straw man alert*
My assertion was in response to:
Obviously using a reference to a perverted sexual practice to denigrate a woman.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
I'm not interested in porn. I'm curious as to how far your deviance will go. Again, you must be ashamed.
Socrtease
Verified User
Yeah, I told you about tonguing my wife's ass but the rest of the stuff I am too ashamed to talk about.I'm not interested in porn. I'm curious as to how far your deviance will go. Again, you must be ashamed.
Socrtease
Verified User
I am extremely comfortable with my sex life. There is NOTHING that I have done that I am ashamed of. You are the one that tries to imbue sex with guilt and shame. You are the one with hang ups. you are the one with the greatly dissatisfied wife, and I know she is because you exhibit NO SEXUAL imagination which means there is no creativity in your sex. Get over what the rest of us do. Buy a book and figure out how to make your wife cum more than once during sex.
40% had done anal, what was it 10-15% had not done oral. You are a sexual weirdo.
TuTu Monroe
A Realist
You are a disgusting pig. It must be a liberal trait.
W
WinterBorn
Guest
You have said several times that blowjobs denigrate a woman. My question stands.
If the woman wants to do it and enjoys doing it, how does it denigrate a woman?
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
I figured as much. Otherwise you'd tell us about the real kinky stuff. Come on dude- be imaginative!
Actually, you have no idea about the Southern Man's relations with his lovely wife. That will be left to your sick imagination.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
A badge of honor that I proudly wear. Thanks!
Yeah, logical inconsistency seems to be another of your strange lifestyle choices. You have argued that anal sex is wrong based on the fact that a majority refrain from the act. That is, it is abnormal. But your sex life, without oral sex, is far more abnormal.
Should you non-oral weirdos be denied the right to marry or adopt due to your abnormal lifestyle choices and sexual perversions?
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
First of all, you haven't proven that these perverted sexual practices are part of these folk's routine. Table 7 from Soc's link merely shows the percentage of folks who have been perverted at one time in their lives. That's like calling me, who once drove a Ford hardtop at over 125mph on a clear road, a clear and present danger to fellow motorists.
Secondly, your logic, or lack of, in trying to equate my adherence to biblical norms as grounds to deny me rights associated with biblical norms is nothing short of comical. :lol:
W
WinterBorn
Guest
And yet, you have no problem using those biblical norms as a standard for making laws. Which is a clear violation of the US Constitution. Which was why this topic was brought up in this thread.
So, anal is wrong if you do it what, more than once a year? Maybe, we should make a holiday for it. Ass Wednesday.
Oh, so, abnormal is defined by the Bible or your religion. And that has been the point. Your basis is nothing more than your religion.
Your rights are not based on the Bible or any adherence to its norms.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Anal is wrong if you do it at all. Abnormal is defined by statistics, a common term to describe a data set past two standard deviations. Again, those folks in the survey don't necessarily make a routine out of it like Soc does, so the data does not support your position. I can see that you don't want to admit that but I'll remind you of it anyway.
W
WinterBorn
Guest
Oral does not, according to the stats, fall under the category of "abnormal".
But neither is justification for not allowing gays to marry. Soc has been alowed to marry 3 times, and has had oral and anal sex with all three.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Damn you're stupid. The data doesn't support that either. 
W
WinterBorn
Guest
Damn you're stupid. The data doesn't support that either.
Damn you are stupid, the point of my post was that neither is justification for not allowing couples to marry.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
This thread is awesome. It's like arguing with 6 year olds in Bizzaro World.
'We fuck each other up the ass. Heck we even lick assholes like dogs do and you don't so your abnormal. You sick freak'.
'We fuck each other up the ass. Heck we even lick assholes like dogs do and you don't so your abnormal. You sick freak'.
You are saying that it is wrong if you do it at all because it is abnormal but define abnormality not on whether one does it at all, but based on the frequency.
You cannot have it both ways.
Never engaging in oral is more abnormal than ever engaging in anal. Therefore, if it is wrong to engage in anal at all it must be more wrong to never do oral.
If abnormality is based on frequency of the act then there must be some threshold of normality. It is not likely you are meeting that threshold in the oral department.
You don't actually care for consistency and prefer to use circular arguments to rationalize your nonsense. That is why you revert to some Biblical norm.
Your argument is, "It is wrong because it is abnormal. But, if it is abnormal and the bible says it is okay then that is fine." That amounts to "it is wrong because the bible says it is."
Normality does not support your deviant sex life. The Bible may.
This thread is awesome. It's like arguing with 6 year olds in Bizzaro World.
'We fuck each other up the ass. Heck we even lick assholes like dogs do and you don't so your abnormal. You sick freak'.
Didn't you just say that normality is statistical. Now it has something to do with whether dogs do it? No, that fact tends to refute your other chestnut, i.e., whether it is natural.