Pages: 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 … 33

Topic closed

2011-03-28 12:38:53
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6201|...
A fetus hasn't developed consciousness, it doesn't equate to killing an actual human no matter how you look at it (or as much as you want yourself to believe its the same). Sure, it has the potential to become a human being but it's quite far off from that for as long as it's still inside a womb - with at the time of abortion cognitive functions being non-existant.

I'm not advocating to abort kids for a bad upbringing, I simply don't see what makes you feel you have the right to meddle in other people's lives in such a way. What about the future of the mother or her mental well-being? It's not like aborting a child is an easy thing to do, lots of women suffer from depression afterwards - the experience leaves a serious impact. But if the woman decides she really wasn't ready for a baby, I would consider that as being for the best.

When a woman does not want a child, it's in the best interest of both to abort (and let's not try argument with extreme examples on both ends here).
inane little opines
2011-03-28 13:21:21
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6607|North Carolina

Blue Herring wrote:

Nic wrote:

UH... I wasn't aware that when a woman was raped she was deciding to have sex.
Why is the rape point continually made? Rape victims do not justify everybody else getting abortions. I don't see why everyone feels the need to constantly state it. Why do you believe abortion is justified when it was consentual and they just don't want to take responsibility for their actions?
Well, I suppose it goes deeper than that.

Not all rapes are equal.  A violent rape is much worse than date rape, for example.

Also, victims of rape vary widely.

Would you force a 13 year old girl to go through with a pregnancy?  What if doctors suggest that the likelihood of death during childbirth is pretty high?  What if the rapist was her own father?

Obviously, rape is an ugly subject that a lot of society prefers to keep as private as possible when abortion is involved.

It's easy to be absolutist in your view of abortion without really stopping to consider all of the circumstances involved -- including the details of a rape.
2011-03-28 13:23:55
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6607|North Carolina

Blue Herring wrote:

ghettoperson wrote:

Blue Herring wrote:

Why is the rape point continually made? Rape victims do not justify everybody else getting abortions. I don't see why everyone feels the need to constantly state it. Why do you believe abortion is justified when it was consentual and they just don't want to take responsibility for their actions?
Because if you made abortions illegal, those completely innocent people would be the ones suffering. They're not going to make it illegal except under certain circumstances, because then incidents of 'rape' would skyrocket.
Well, in Roe vs Wade, the woman had faked rape to try to get an abortion, which ultimately failed because there was no evidence of rape. Her inability to lie about it was the reason that case even came to be.
A popular misconception...

In June 1969, Norma L. McCorvey discovered she was pregnant with her third child. She returned to Dallas, where friends advised her to assert falsely that she had been raped, as she could then obtain a legal abortion (with the understanding that Texas' anti-abortion laws allowed abortion in the cases of rape and incest). However, this scheme failed, as there was no police report documenting the alleged rape. She attempted to obtain an illegal abortion, but found the unauthorized site shuttered, closed down by the police. Eventually, she was referred to attorneys Linda Coffee and Sarah Weddington. (McCorvey would give birth before the case was decided.)

In 1970, attorneys Linda Coffee and Sarah Weddington filed suit in a U.S. District Court in Texas on behalf of Norma L. McCorvey (under the alias Jane Roe). The defendant in the case was Dallas County District Attorney Henry Wade, representing the State of Texas. At the time, McCorvey was no longer claiming her pregnancy was the result of rape, and she later acknowledged she had lied earlier about having been raped. "Rape" is not mentioned in the judicial opinions in this case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade

In short, her initial deception had little to nothing to do with the case.

Last edited by Turquoise (2011-03-28 13:34:24)

2011-03-28 13:29:37
HaiBai
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
+304|5686|Bolingbrook, Illinois

DrunkFace wrote:

HaiBai wrote:

DrunkFace wrote:

Yep, not fair for the unborn embryo. Tough fucking luck for that bunch of cells.
we're all "a bunch of cells".  besides, do you have 100% proof that a fetus is not a person until the moment they are born?  if not, we can't take the risk.  sorry.
If they can't survive outside the womb. They are not human. They are a parasite.

HaiBai wrote:

DrunkFace wrote:


When they get old enough to decide for them selves, I support euthanasia too.
oh really?  so all the people suffering from depression and suicide thoughts should just be able to kill themselves even when their judgement is clearly being affected by their condition?
Sure, why not?

It's there life remember.
because their life is being affected by a mental condition.  they are sick people.  a sick person cannot care for themselves, and they cannot make decisions for themselves either.

Nic wrote:

HaiBai wrote:

DrunkFace wrote:

Yep, not fair for the unborn embryo. Tough fucking luck for that bunch of cells.
we're all "a bunch of cells".  besides, do you have 100% proof that a fetus is not a person until the moment they are born?  if not, we can't take the risk.  sorry.
You can't have an abortion up until the moment the baby is born. There is a time limit before it is not allowed.
no shit

Shocking wrote:

a woman does not want a child, it's in the best interest of both to abort (and let's not try argument with extreme examples on both ends here).
how?  the child is murdered and his chance of life is taken away.  how is that fair or in the best interest of the child?  because you don't want him to 'suffer' for the rest of his life?
2011-03-28 13:34:00
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5560|London, England

HaiBai wrote:

no it doesn't.  you're a selfish asshole if you feel like your child isn't worthy of a life just because of a disability.  what if he had some complications after he was born?  for example, he had trouble breathing and was brain damaged after that?  now what do you do?  "accidentally" kill him for his own good because you don't want him to suffer for the rest of his life?
do you know why the catholic church is anti abortion and makes people like me sign forms promising to raise my kids catholic? $$. More people in the seats means more money in the churchs pocket. Its a business.

Last edited by Jay (2011-03-28 13:47:47)

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-03-28 13:34:59
HaiBai
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
+304|5686|Bolingbrook, Illinois

Jay wrote:

HaiBai wrote:

no it doesn't.  you're a selfish asshole if you feel like your child isn't worthy of a life just because of a disability.  what if he had some complications after he was born?  for example, he had trouble breathing and was brain damaged after that?  now what do you do?  "accidentally" kill him for his own good because you don't want him to suffer for the rest of his life?
do you know why the catholic church is anti abortion and makes people like me sign forms promising to raise my kids catholic? $$. More money in the seats means more money in the churchs pocket. Its a business.


nice conspiracy theory
2011-03-28 13:37:13
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6607|North Carolina

HaiBai wrote:

Jay wrote:

HaiBai wrote:

no it doesn't.  you're a selfish asshole if you feel like your child isn't worthy of a life just because of a disability.  what if he had some complications after he was born?  for example, he had trouble breathing and was brain damaged after that?  now what do you do?  "accidentally" kill him for his own good because you don't want him to suffer for the rest of his life?
do you know why the catholic church is anti abortion and makes people like me sign forms promising to raise my kids catholic? $$. More money in the seats means more money in the churchs pocket. Its a business.


nice conspiracy theory
It's not a conspiracy theory.  It's pretty much true of every major religion.

Islam does similar things.  Hinduism isn't particularly fond of contraception either.

The Catholic Church is more blatant than most, however.  Indulgences were about as blatantly capitalistic as religion gets.
2011-03-28 13:37:17
HaiBai
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
+304|5686|Bolingbrook, Illinois
im sure their views on anti-abortion have absolutely nothing to do with their views on murder

Last edited by HaiBai (2011-03-28 13:37:40)

2011-03-28 13:39:46
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6201|...

HaiBai wrote:

how?  the child is murdered and his chance of life is taken away.  how is that fair or in the best interest of the child?  because you don't want him to 'suffer' for the rest of his life?
A fetus is as alive as a jellyfish, it has no cognitive functions - it is incapable of understanding the concept of death, or even life, it has no memory nor does it consciously experience its surroundings.

I don't want the woman or the child to suffer for YOUR sense of self righteousness, because that's what it ultimately comes down to.

Last edited by Shocking (2011-03-28 13:42:01)

inane little opines
2011-03-28 13:40:06
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6607|North Carolina

HaiBai wrote:

im sure their views on anti-abortion have absolutely nothing to do with their views on murder
The principles might have come first, but it's easy for them to also be instrumental in the pursuit of profit.
2011-03-28 13:44:24
HaiBai
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
+304|5686|Bolingbrook, Illinois

Shocking wrote:

HaiBai wrote:

how?  the child is murdered and his chance of life is taken away.  how is that fair or in the best interest of the child?  because you don't want him to 'suffer' for the rest of his life?
A child in a womb is as alive as a jellyfish, it has no cognitive functions - it is incapable of understanding the concept of death, or even life, it has no memory nor does it consciously experience its surroundings.

I don't want the woman or the child to suffer for YOUR sense of self righteousness, because that's what it ultimately comes down to.
prove your first statement please.

lmfao, are you really telling me the child is better off dead?  let's just kill every single person who has a mental disability, they're obviously suffering.  let's take all the children from the families in the ghettos and kill them.  they're probably suffering too.

Turquoise wrote:

HaiBai wrote:

im sure their views on anti-abortion have absolutely nothing to do with their views on murder
The principles might have come first, but it's easy for them to also be instrumental in the pursuit of profit.
oh yeah?  and where exactly does all this money show up?  does the pope have 50 prostitutes in an underground secret chamber in the vatican?  does he own multiple yachts where he throws VIP parties every week?  does he get drunk and laid every single night?  does he own rare imports?  honestly just stop
2011-03-28 13:45:14
Blue Herring
Member
+13|5006

Shocking wrote:

A fetus hasn't developed consciousness, it doesn't equate to killing an actual human no matter how you look at it (or as much as you want yourself to believe its the same).
How so? It seems that the not yet developed consciousness is irrelevant. Unconsciousness is something anybody can experience regardless of age. The only reason a fetus is different is because it hasn't yet had a chance to develop an understanding of the difference. But it will.

Sure, it has the potential to become a human being but it's quite far off from that for as long as it's still inside a womb - with at the time of abortion cognitive functions being non-existant.
Potential is actually the wrong word and I should stop using it. Rather, without any action outside influences, it WILL become a person. Besides, cognitive functions can't really be measured until a while after birth.

I'm not advocating to abort kids for a bad upbringing, I simply don't see what makes you feel you have the right to meddle in other people's lives in such a way.
The same reason murder is illegal. Do you condone filicide simply because "it's none of your concern"?  Part of living in a society with (inalienable)rights is that everyone's rights are protected, even the people who don't have means to protect them themselves.

What about the future of the mother or her mental well-being? It's not like aborting a child is an easy thing to do, lots of women suffer from depression afterwards - the experience leaves a serious impact. But if the woman decides she really wasn't ready for a baby, I would consider that as being for the best.
Well, I don't know of a situation where I would condone murder of an innocent in exchange for mental well being. Its unfortunate when it happens but with exception of rape the women made a conscious choice and I'm sure anyone over the age of 12 knows exactly how that works.

When a woman does not want a child, it's in the best interest of both to abort (and let's not try argument with extreme examples on both ends here).
The problem is that you(well, more the mother) is either 1.placing an expectation or 2. imposing a personal will on the child without either it's consent(it can't give consent) or without its consideration. Adoption doesn't always work but it works sometimes. Abortion is giving up on the child before its even gotten a chance, and that's not fair to it, from any standpoint I can see.

I'm more than open on this topic. I used to be pro-choice too. As I developed a moral identity I eventually found myself unable to justify abortion. I'm more than willing to change my mind on this issue if someone could explain why it's not morally reprehensive. However, the only conclusion I can draw from a moral standpoint is that there is no difference between willing killing a fetus and waiting until its born, then killing it. It seems the same to me. Ability to feel doesn't seem relevant since there are plenty of ways to painlessly kill. It doesn't seem that the cognition of a baby would be much different than a fetus.
2011-03-28 13:49:01
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5560|London, England

HaiBai wrote:

Shocking wrote:

HaiBai wrote:

how?  the child is murdered and his chance of life is taken away.  how is that fair or in the best interest of the child?  because you don't want him to 'suffer' for the rest of his life?
A child in a womb is as alive as a jellyfish, it has no cognitive functions - it is incapable of understanding the concept of death, or even life, it has no memory nor does it consciously experience its surroundings.

I don't want the woman or the child to suffer for YOUR sense of self righteousness, because that's what it ultimately comes down to.
prove your first statement please.

lmfao, are you really telling me the child is better off dead?  let's just kill every single person who has a mental disability, they're obviously suffering.  let's take all the children from the families in the ghettos and kill them.  they're probably suffering too.

Turquoise wrote:

HaiBai wrote:

im sure their views on anti-abortion have absolutely nothing to do with their views on murder
The principles might have come first, but it's easy for them to also be instrumental in the pursuit of profit.
oh yeah?  and where exactly does all this money show up?  does the pope have 50 prostitutes in an underground secret chamber in the vatican?  does he own multiple yachts where he throws VIP parties every week?  does he get drunk and laid every single night?  does he own rare imports?  honestly just stop
https://www.destination360.com/europe/italy/images/s/italy-vatican-museum.jpg

This was built with wishes and rainbows right?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-03-28 13:51:51
Monkey Spanker
Show it to the nice monkey.
+284|6453|England
Speaking as the father of two young children. I still agree with abortion. its a choice that sometimes has to be made it is not black & white. You could have a condom split on you for example, so both of you have made the choice not to have a child by using a condom. The morning after pill may not work as well so again the choice has been made not to have a child. Abortion is the last thing that is wanted but often is the last resort of a couple or single woman & not a choice that is taken lightly. Pro choice all the way. It is not the right of government to interfere with a persons choice of whether to have a child or not end of story. Also fuck religion & there interfering bollocks, if you are weak willed enough to to believe in a person you can't see & have to be told what to believe then you have no right to tell other people what they should believe or what they should do period.

Last edited by Monkey Spanker (2011-03-28 13:56:22)

Quote of the year so far "Fifa 11 on the other hand... shiny things for mongos "-mtb0minime
https://bf3s.com/sigs/f30415b2d1cff840176cce816dc76d89a7929bb0.png
2011-03-28 13:53:00
HaiBai
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
+304|5686|Bolingbrook, Illinois

Jay wrote:

HaiBai wrote:

Shocking wrote:


A child in a womb is as alive as a jellyfish, it has no cognitive functions - it is incapable of understanding the concept of death, or even life, it has no memory nor does it consciously experience its surroundings.

I don't want the woman or the child to suffer for YOUR sense of self righteousness, because that's what it ultimately comes down to.
prove your first statement please.

lmfao, are you really telling me the child is better off dead?  let's just kill every single person who has a mental disability, they're obviously suffering.  let's take all the children from the families in the ghettos and kill them.  they're probably suffering too.

Turquoise wrote:

The principles might have come first, but it's easy for them to also be instrumental in the pursuit of profit.
oh yeah?  and where exactly does all this money show up?  does the pope have 50 prostitutes in an underground secret chamber in the vatican?  does he own multiple yachts where he throws VIP parties every week?  does he get drunk and laid every single night?  does he own rare imports?  honestly just stop
http://www.destination360.com/europe/it … museum.jpg

This was built with wishes and rainbows right?
so you must also be pissed that the white house was built, right?

Monkey Spanker wrote:

Speaking as the father of two young children. I still agree with abortion. its a choice that sometimes has to be made it is not black & white. You could have a condom split on you for example, so both of you have made the choice not to have a child by using a condom. The morning after pill may not work as well so again the choice has been made not to have a child. Abortion is the last thing that is wanted but often is the last resort of a couple or single woman & not a choice that is taken lightly. Pro choice all the way.
the second you stick your dick in her vagina you basically throw all your excuses away.  you knew the risks going into it, so now you have to deal with it
2011-03-28 13:56:26
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6201|...

HaiBai wrote:

lmfao, are you really telling me the child is better off dead?  let's just kill every single person who has a mental disability, they're obviously suffering.  let's take all the children from the families in the ghettos and kill them.  they're probably suffering too.

site wrote:

The UK-based Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists has published a government commissioned scientific review and concluded that a fetus is not conscious at 24 weeks of age. It is also not able to feel pain.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/2 … z1HvgvH5W9
24 weeks being the maximum time of abortion, at that stage the fetus is pretty much the equivalent of a jellyfish or plant, people acquire consciousness anywhere between 1 and 4 years of age, long after being born.

No, I'm telling you that you have no right to decide on other people's lives in such a manner, what's not to understand? If the woman doesn't want the child then who are you to tell her that she must have it?

Oh and at 24 weeks I believe the fetus can only be removed through abdominal incision, great huh?

Last edited by Shocking (2011-03-28 13:59:32)

inane little opines
2011-03-28 13:56:47
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5560|London, England
HaiBai, do you wear a promise ring?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-03-28 13:58:13
Monkey Spanker
Show it to the nice monkey.
+284|6453|England

HaiBai wrote:

Jay wrote:

HaiBai wrote:

Shocking wrote:

A child in a womb is as alive as a jellyfish, it has no cognitive functions - it is incapable of understanding the concept of death, or even life, it has no memory nor does it consciously experience its surroundings.

I don't want the woman or the child to suffer for YOUR sense of self righteousness, because that's what it ultimately comes down to.
prove your first statement please.

lmfao, are you really telling me the child is better off dead?  let's just kill every single person who has a mental disability, they're obviously suffering.  let's take all the children from the families in the ghettos and kill them.  they're probably suffering too.

oh yeah?  and where exactly does all this money show up?  does the pope have 50 prostitutes in an underground secret chamber in the vatican?  does he own multiple yachts where he throws VIP parties every week?  does he get drunk and laid every single night?  does he own rare imports?  honestly just stop
http://www.destination360.com/europe/it … museum.jpg

This was built with wishes and rainbows right?
so you must also be pissed that the white house was built, right?

Monkey Spanker wrote:

Speaking as the father of two young children. I still agree with abortion. its a choice that sometimes has to be made it is not black & white. You could have a condom split on you for example, so both of you have made the choice not to have a child by using a condom. The morning after pill may not work as well so again the choice has been made not to have a child. Abortion is the last thing that is wanted but often is the last resort of a couple or single woman & not a choice that is taken lightly. Pro choice all the way.
the second you stick your dick in her vagina you basically throw all your excuses away.  you knew the risks going into it, so now you have to deal with it
Did you even read what I wrote as a couple the choice has been made not to have a child. Anyway how old are you 13 ffs grow up.
Quote of the year so far "Fifa 11 on the other hand... shiny things for mongos "-mtb0minime
https://bf3s.com/sigs/f30415b2d1cff840176cce816dc76d89a7929bb0.png
2011-03-28 14:02:59
HaiBai
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
+304|5686|Bolingbrook, Illinois

Shocking wrote:

HaiBai wrote:

lmfao, are you really telling me the child is better off dead?  let's just kill every single person who has a mental disability, they're obviously suffering.  let's take all the children from the families in the ghettos and kill them.  they're probably suffering too.

site wrote:

The UK-based Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists has published a government commissioned scientific review and concluded that a fetus is not conscious at 24 weeks of age. It is also not able to feel pain.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/2 … z1HvgvH5W9
24 weeks being the maximum time of abortion, at that stage the fetus is pretty much the equivalent of a jellyfish or plant, people acquire consciousness anywhere between 1 and 4 years of age, long after being born.

No, I'm telling you that you have no right to decide on other people's lives in such a manner, what's not to understand? If the woman doesn't want the child then who are you to tell her that she must have it?

Oh and at 24 weeks I believe the fetus can only be removed through abdominal incision, great huh?
there are many ways to kill someone without pain, so maybe we should be allowed to kill babies up until the time they gain their consciousness?  which is up until age 4 in some cases.  sounds good to me

Monkey Spanker wrote:

HaiBai wrote:

Jay wrote:

http://www.destination360.com/europe/it … museum.jpg

This was built with wishes and rainbows right?
so you must also be pissed that the white house was built, right?

Monkey Spanker wrote:

Speaking as the father of two young children. I still agree with abortion. its a choice that sometimes has to be made it is not black & white. You could have a condom split on you for example, so both of you have made the choice not to have a child by using a condom. The morning after pill may not work as well so again the choice has been made not to have a child. Abortion is the last thing that is wanted but often is the last resort of a couple or single woman & not a choice that is taken lightly. Pro choice all the way.
the second you stick your dick in her vagina you basically throw all your excuses away.  you knew the risks going into it, so now you have to deal with it
Did you even read what I wrote as a couple the choice has been made not to have a child. Anyway how old are you 13 ffs grow up.
yes, i did, it was pretty much the entire point of your post.  the point of sex is to have a child.  anything else is selfish

Last edited by HaiBai (2011-03-28 14:03:23)

2011-03-28 14:11:41
Poseidon
Fudgepack DeQueef
+3,253|6739|Long Island, New York

HaiBai wrote:

yes, i did, it was pretty much the entire point of your post.  the point of sex is to have a child.  anything else is selfish
I'm not even saying this to be insulting, but you are CLEARLY a virgin and someone who has absolutely no experience with a relationships or girls.  Anyone who has sex not with the purpose to have a child is being selfish? Are you fucking kidding? Are you just pissed because you can't get laid or something so you feel the need to make yourself feel better by telling a very large portion of the world that they're selfish for fucking for pleasure? I'm going to assume you've never masturbated, then. That'd be pretty selfish.

You have officially gone past War Man status.
2011-03-28 14:12:38
-Sh1fty-
plundering yee booty
+510|5675|Ventura, California
There's a kid in the other room (I'm living at my grandparents, they run a daycare) and the little baby is only a year old or so. He is a kid that was put up for adoption, the parents didn't want him.

He doesn't have a conscious, supposedly, and the parents didn't want him so can I take my grandma's massive frying pan and whack the kid over the head really hard? I promise he won't feel a thing.

fucking sickos

Last edited by -Sh1fty- (2011-03-28 14:13:04)

And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
2011-03-28 14:13:30
HaiBai
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
+304|5686|Bolingbrook, Illinois

Poseidon wrote:

HaiBai wrote:

yes, i did, it was pretty much the entire point of your post.  the point of sex is to have a child.  anything else is selfish
I'm not even saying this to be insulting, but you are CLEARLY a virgin and someone who has absolutely no experience with a relationships or girls.  Anyone who has sex not with the purpose to have a child is being selfish? Are you fucking kidding? Are you just pissed because you can't get laid or something so you feel the need to make yourself feel better by telling a very large portion of the world that they're selfish for fucking for pleasure? I'm going to assume you've never masturbated, then. That'd be pretty selfish.

You have officially gone past War Man status.
nah, masturbating doesn't result in a child bro

yes im raging hard.  you've got me all figured out because you're so smart.  good job man!
2011-03-28 14:17:06
Poseidon
Fudgepack DeQueef
+3,253|6739|Long Island, New York

HaiBai wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

HaiBai wrote:

yes, i did, it was pretty much the entire point of your post.  the point of sex is to have a child.  anything else is selfish
I'm not even saying this to be insulting, but you are CLEARLY a virgin and someone who has absolutely no experience with a relationships or girls.  Anyone who has sex not with the purpose to have a child is being selfish? Are you fucking kidding? Are you just pissed because you can't get laid or something so you feel the need to make yourself feel better by telling a very large portion of the world that they're selfish for fucking for pleasure? I'm going to assume you've never masturbated, then. That'd be pretty selfish.

You have officially gone past War Man status.
nah, masturbating doesn't result in a child bro

yes im raging hard.  you've got me all figured out because you're so smart.  good job man!
Well, if sex is "only for making a child, anything else is selfish" logic is going to hold true with all of your beliefs... sperm's sole usage would be for making a child. So again, you've never masturbated in your life? Even once? Wastin' babies if you did bro, not good. God frowns upon you, child.
2011-03-28 14:17:26
HaiBai
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
+304|5686|Bolingbrook, Illinois
fyi, i am a virgin.  i'm only 16, it's pretty normal at my age tbqh.  does this mean that i believe in no sex until marriage?  i'd like to think so, but when the actual situation occurs where i have the chance to lose my virginity, will i take it?  probably
2011-03-28 14:19:15
HaiBai
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
+304|5686|Bolingbrook, Illinois

Poseidon wrote:

HaiBai wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

I'm not even saying this to be insulting, but you are CLEARLY a virgin and someone who has absolutely no experience with a relationships or girls.  Anyone who has sex not with the purpose to have a child is being selfish? Are you fucking kidding? Are you just pissed because you can't get laid or something so you feel the need to make yourself feel better by telling a very large portion of the world that they're selfish for fucking for pleasure? I'm going to assume you've never masturbated, then. That'd be pretty selfish.

You have officially gone past War Man status.
nah, masturbating doesn't result in a child bro

yes im raging hard.  you've got me all figured out because you're so smart.  good job man!
Well, if sex is "only for making a child, anything else is selfish" logic is going to hold true with all of your beliefs... sperm's sole usage would be for making a child. So again, you've never masturbated in your life? Even once? Wastin' babies if you did bro, not good. God frowns upon you, child.
yeah, not really.  the act of sex should only be used for creating children.  never said anything about sperm.  explain wet dreams in that case

Topic closed

Pages: 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 … 33

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard