KnightofChrist Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 You do know that the thing a man uses for urination, the penis, is also the thing he uses when he has unitive missionary sex with his Catholic wife, right? The male's and/or female's urinary tract isn't used in the marriage act, unless it is perverted. A better like comparison to sodomy would be to insert something into the male's urinary tract for sexual gratification. That would in a similar way be vile, and unnatural. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 and here we see the discussion descending into the realm of the ridiculous, with the kinds of arguments that have a tendency to demonstrate Poe's Law. soon enough there will be discussions of tissue tearing... it's the kind of thing that's pretty easy to get away with, since no one actually wants to specifically clarify such things regarding sexual hygiene in polite company... suffice it to say you can be against the sins of homosexuality without subscribing to misinformed ideas about the sexual hygiene of homosexual practices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 and here we see the discussion descending into the realm of the ridiculous, with the kinds of arguments that have a tendency to demonstrate Poe's Law. soon enough there will be discussions of tissue tearing... it's the kind of thing that's pretty easy to get away with, since no one actually wants to specifically clarify such things regarding sexual hygiene in polite company... suffice it to say you can be against the sins of homosexuality without subscribing to misinformed ideas about the sexual hygiene of homosexual practices. The thread descended into the ridiculous and strange when you seemed to raise the argument that sodomy can hygienic or clean. Sodomy always has a higher risk of infection, contracting viri or bacteria than natural sex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 The thread descended into the ridiculous and strange when you seemed to raise the argument that sodomy can hygienic or clean. Sodomy always has a higher risk of infection, contracting viri or bacteria than natural sex. KoC's creepy sodomy fixation rears it's head once again and plunges itself vigorously into this rump of the conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice_nine Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 The thread descended into the ridiculous and strange when you seemed to raise the argument that sodomy can hygienic or clean. Sodomy always has a higher risk of infection, contracting viri or bacteria than natural sex. The problem is that not all gay people engage in sodomy (using the strict definition that you're referring to, not just any sexual act between two people of the same secks), and many heterosexual couples can and do engage in sodomy as you describe. It's just really weird that people are defending the guy's really weird comments. I mean I don't think he looks at men and women as nothing more than a series of orifices, but that's essentially what his comments amount to. It's really my fault because I keep clicking back to this thread. Not like someone's holding a gun to my head forcing me to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 The problem is that not all gay people engage in sodomy (using the strict definition that you're referring to, not just any sexual act between two people of the same secks), and many heterosexual couples can and do engage in sodomy as you describe. It's just really weird that people are defending the guy's really weird comments. I mean I don't think he looks at men and women as nothing more than a series of orifices, but that's essentially what his comments amount to. It's really my fault because I keep clicking back to this thread. Not like someone's holding a gun to my head forcing me to do so. If you don't keep reading this thread I will hunt you down and kill you*. *with kindness!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotreDame Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 It's not Aloysius's fault. We quit talking about the actual topic at hand a few pages ago when the nonsense that started on the LGBT thread made it's way over here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 The problem is that not all gay people engage in sodomy (using the strict definition that you're referring to, not just any sexual act between two people of the same secks), and many heterosexual couples can and do engage in sodomy as you describe. It's just really weird that people are defending the guy's really weird comments. I mean I don't think he looks at men and women as nothing more than a series of orifices, but that's essentially what his comments amount to. It's really my fault because I keep clicking back to this thread. Not like someone's holding a gun to my head forcing me to do so. My focus has been on sodomy or anal sex whether homosexual or heterosexual in nature, though admittedly more focus has been given to homosexual sodomy. I'm not defending the guy. I am defending the notion that the uncleanness of sodomy can be at times a legitimate criticism of the act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clare Brigid Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Is this the Twilight zone or something. Please, someone tell me this is the twilight zone. This is the Twilight Zone. (Submitted for your approval.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Submitted for your approval: a post that doesnt think to use a sarcasm smiletly. A misunderstanding on the internet. The last man alive has all the time in the world to solve the dispute, but his glasses are broken so he can't read it. The twist: everyone else in the world died from unhygienic gay sex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southern california guy Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Submitted for your approval: a post that doesnt think to use a sarcasm smiletly. A misunderstanding on the internet. The last man alive has all the time in the world to solve the dispute, but his glasses are broken so he can't read it. The twist: everyone else in the world died from unhygienic gay sex. You know you criticize Robertson for making sodomy seem "gross" but your posts about sodomy explicitly describe the gross aspects of it. I know it was not your intent but you have totally grossed me out, and I think I will gracefully bow out of this thread. I really don't want to think about this stuff anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 ok dude, you've convinced us you're straight and totally icked out by anyone talking, however indirectly, about gay sex (and I really didn't describe anything in detail... some of KofC's posts had some detail and I responded using some of those terms, saying that they amounted to that same kind of appeal-to-grossness and were inaccurate and misinformed, without even going into a detailed descriptive response myself...). now just don't try to pass of your queasy feelings as some laudable aspect of opposition to homosexual sexual sins or some kind of credible argument against them, as opposition to those sins should be based on the affirmation of chastity and procreation and marriage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 OH MY FLIPPIN' GOSH!!! Phil Robertson said some politically-incorrect things regarding sodomy being immoral and disgusting in an interview! Let's go on ten pages expressing our outrage over his unspeakably horrific crime! Obviously, it wasn't enough to suspend him from that TV show (though that was swiftly reversed), but he should be handcuffed by the Thought Police and locked away, and dragged over hot coals, until he expresses thoughts more in line with acceptable pc opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Saint Paul calls the act of sodomy "filthy", I call the act "vile". Is he also guilty of making a homophobic and ignorant argument? Romans 1:27 - And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error. Haven't you heard? St. Paul the Apostle was a primitive brutish hominid, barely evolved from an ape, writing back in the ignorant Dark Ages of the Church centuries before Vatican II, and thus whatever he says can be disregarded. It's so nice that the Holy Spirit has grown up since then, and now bows to the superior wisdom of liberal pc opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now