08 Aug 2007, 7:49 pm
calandale wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
calandale wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Precisely "how" they're better at sucking cock is inelocutable, of course, but I think it's still true.
Unlikely, really. Not just the experience issue,
nor desire (which is one of the points that many
queers bring up - that they really enjoy - but
some women do too), but also likely mouth
size.
Depends on the particular guy or girl giving, and also on the particular guy receiving.
True, but you had made claims as to not
having a wee willie, as I remember.
I was just jokin' around -- I'm average-sized and proud of it.
08 Aug 2007, 7:54 pm
08 Aug 2007, 8:03 pm
08 Aug 2007, 8:29 pm
greenblue wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
And, as one who knows Scripture, I can tell you that these are the very worst treatments of women recommended in the New Testament. They are recommended offices/behaviours for women, as husbands ARE supposed to be the heads of their marriages, and lead their wives, who ARE supposed to submit their wills to their husbands. And the Prime Minister of Britain is supposed to lead that nation's people -- does that mean he hates them? Obviously not, or the people would overthrow the government. And you're right, these excerpts aren't misogynistic (which means "hateful of women"), so I accept your apology for saying that Paul was.
lol
yeah, that is not misoginy, as the real definition of that is "hate" I have seen on this forum people being acused of that, which they are actually just sexists and not real misoginysts.
But you have to agree that Paul was, which it would be considered today as Sexist, as well as early christianity was in those days, and if the Bible says that men are superior than women, wouldn't that be sexism?
But see, it doesn't even say that. Nor does it ever say to hate women. Compare that with the Koran, which recommends wife beating for their disobedience (I've seen the verses). You're straining to put hatred of women in the Bible -- don't you think that's a sign it's not there? Whereas, the Koran gives you all the hatred you'll ever need in a lifetime, and much more!
And it orders its followers to kill homosexuals, unlike the Bible, which does away with that necessity in the New Testament. It even tells them to kill anyone who even disagrees with Islam. Yet virtually everyone on WP goes easy on the Koran, but hates the Bible. 
It's just such hypocrisy!
08 Aug 2007, 8:37 pm
08 Aug 2007, 8:44 pm
even if there is a god Ragtime-I still wont worship him
he says I am evil
if thats so-eff him
08 Aug 2007, 8:54 pm
Kilroy wrote:
even if there is a god Ragtime-I still wont worship him
he says I am evil
if thats so-eff him
he says I am evil
if thats so-eff him
lol
Dang.... talk about straying off topic.
Most of the anti-gay movement is rooted in hate. That's my opinion. There is no logical argument against gay marriage.
08 Aug 2007, 9:06 pm
Ragtime wrote:
But see, it doesn't even say that. Nor does it ever say to hate women.
The Bible doesn't say hate women, but it reflects the time and the culture when women were considered inferior, explain this:
Quote:
Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
1 Timothy 2:11-15
But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
1 Timothy 2:11-15
Ragtime wrote:
Compare that with the Koran, which recommends wife beating for their disobedience (I've seen the verses). You're straining to put hatred of women in the Bible -- don't you think that's a sign it's not there? Whereas, the Koran gives you all the hatred you'll ever need in a lifetime, and much more! And it orders its followers to kill homosexuals, unlike the Bible, which does away with that necessity in the New Testament. It even tells them to kill anyone who even disagrees with Islam. Yet virtually everyone on WP goes easy on the Koran, but hates the Bible. It's just such hypocrisy!
And it orders its followers to kill homosexuals, unlike the Bible, which does away with that necessity in the New Testament. It even tells them to kill anyone who even disagrees with Islam. Yet virtually everyone on WP goes easy on the Koran, but hates the Bible. It's just such hypocrisy!Isn't the Torah part of the Koran?
Aren't a few muslism regimes based in the Torah, which you know is also part of our Bible, to kill homosexuals?
Quote:
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
Leviticus 20:13
Leviticus 20:13
08 Aug 2007, 9:11 pm
08 Aug 2007, 9:24 pm
Sedaka
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,597
Location: In the recesses of my mind
08 Aug 2007, 9:25 pm
Ragtime wrote:
Sedaka wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sedaka wrote:
calandale wrote:
greenblue wrote:
As you stated before, how do you know for a fact that women suck better than men? lol
Because being straight one can feel better when a woman does to you than a man, that's not a fact, it's a subjective view, because you are just seeing this in one single point of view, that of a straight man.
Because being straight one can feel better when a woman does to you than a man, that's not a fact, it's a subjective view, because you are just seeing this in one single point of view, that of a straight man.
Indeed, I've rather heard the opposite.
take that seinfield show for example.... they stick with their team cause they have access to the equipment WAY more... so how can women compete in that arena
Because God made them to match with men, hello... It's obvious, if you just open your eyes.
so how does this support your conclusions that women are better at sucking cock?
yet another point on which you shift your views at the first sign of dissention
Precisely "how" they're better at sucking cock is inelocutable, of course, but I think it's still true.
Perhaps a formal series of trials should be arranged...
And you're now doing the opposite of what you told Kilroy to do. You're being unnecessarily abusive in your language. How will he learn?
so first say women are better at it
then after my seinfield quote you say duh guys ar better at it...
now you go BACK to saying women are better
you have a very odd concept of logic... and i didnt ask how women are better... i asked how does saying men are better (see the bold) support your previous saying that women are better... plz read
and what in that quote was uneccesarily abusive?
and in general..... i am not attacking religion nor gays... just your logic
Sedaka
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,597
Location: In the recesses of my mind
08 Aug 2007, 9:35 pm
Ragtime wrote:
Sedaka wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Sedaka wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
calandale wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
My point is of art -- there was clearly an artist behind the design of the female body.
Come off it. That's your hormones talking.
You can't really tell me that you find human
females more appealing - artistically, than
cats. Humans, of all types, are funny-looking
apes.
No, I find art in cats, birds, trees, flowers, even insects. Just proves my point even more.
these points are irrelivant unless you find animals sexually attractive
No, "art" doesn't always give me a boner.
What does sexual attraction have to do with whether something is artistic?Sedaka wrote:
as an artist myself, i am familiar with critiquing art.... plz use some sort of actual critique on the form of men/women/animals...... and relate it to why any of them is sexier/more beautiful
Trying to miss the forest for the trees, eh?
(Lose the main point through the near-sighted study of the minute details.)silly silly silly
you were claiming that the feminine form was more aesthetic (based on artistic views) than the male form
Actually, I wasn't. You didn't even get that right. If you're pursuing accurate answers, you could at least lead by example.
Sedaka wrote:
cal was contending that it was due to your hormones
Which it wasn't. It's common knowledge that women are artistically beautiful.
(I think maybe you should take a break from this debate. You're getting frazzled, and it's no wonder -- we've been arguing all day; I feel like we're WrongPlanet-married.
)Sedaka wrote:
you countered by providing non-sexual examples.............
Exactly, to show that by art I mean non-hormonally discerned aesthetics.
Sedaka wrote:
you have erred logically...............
Do I get to join your club now??
Sedaka wrote:
my point with art... is i doubt you were thinking past your penis (agreeing with cal) and was just fishing to see whether you had actually given it any artistic consideration
I had.
Sedaka wrote:
you havent
You lie. You're not here to see whether I'm thinking with my penis or my brain, so how can you [b]arbitrarily say it's one and not the other? [/b] I guess I'm allowed to believe you're lying in all YOUR answers too, right? Fair's fair.
there is no point in debating you... your blindness is too great
im not hunting back throught he originals but asethetic roughly = artistic in this case...... which is what you were saying
you still havent explained why the feminine form is so artistic.... if it's common knowledge... you should at least be able to explain why.... which you havent.... so no i did not lie.
i guess it is arbitrary since you havent proved you have a brain (heart/penis... yes....brain, no)
i am not tired.... my brain is much more efficient than yours
Sedaka
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,597
Location: In the recesses of my mind
08 Aug 2007, 9:38 pm
Sedaka
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,597
Location: In the recesses of my mind
08 Aug 2007, 9:42 pm
Sedaka
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,597
Location: In the recesses of my mind
08 Aug 2007, 9:46 pm
08 Aug 2007, 9:46 pm
