Homosexual Marriage

[metalliram]

Well, Tosh.... you're obviously going to be a far better judge of your own personal reaction to situations than anyone else can be. I think in general though it would tend to upset rather than calm a lot of people. It takes a strong will to react the way you do to things.

gay fagggots burn in hell

If that was a statement, then we really have no way to be sure about it, so I'm inclined to ignore you until you can present proof.

If it was a command, then it might interest you to know that not everyone posting in here is gay.

[ToshX]

It takes a strong will to react the way you do to things.

Not at all <__< I see it as avoiding the fact that something's wrong simply because I can't change it.

And Biz Ounce, WHY don't you like gay people? Do you like gay women? Gay men?

I mean I hate to throw you into the stereotype, but most people who would come in here and would just post like that tend to be straight men who actually like lesbians :/

[metalliram]

I mean I hate to throw you into the stereotype, but most people who would come in here and would just post like that tend to be straight men who actually like lesbians :/

I'm not sure there's really any proof of that Tosh...

[Master_of_the_Faster]

Originally Posted by -paexaea-

Holy ****, how do you go from Homosexual Marriage to rape?

Jesus christ.

With a lot of ignorance in mind. Sure it's possible for a gay person to rape another guy, but the same goes for the possibility that a guy can rape a girl (or if it ever happens that a girl rapes a guy Even if it's not likely that a girl would rape a guy) as people have mentioned.
I don't care about who rapes who because to me, it's a bad deed regardless of what you are. You can't single out an entire population of people and put the burden on every person just because some people do misdeeds such as rape.
Who is to say that a rapists who rape women would be better off than rapists who raped other men? What is to completely determine that a particular race of people are more likely rape other people than a rapist of another decent? If you even think that everyone in a certain group rapes or people among a certain group of people are more likely to rape than another group or people, you are most likely only trying to make such a statement to discriminate than state facts with evidence.
Even still, rape doesn't seem to have anything to do with a gay marriage. Let's pertend that every gay person has raped another guy. Sure they raped other guys, but assuming that they would be released from jail if they were caught, what does that have to do with a gay marriage? The marriage is about a commitment between beings. Unless a gay guy has issues with the fact that their boyfriend had a past with raping other guys or whenever one or if both of the gay guys feel that they can't be commited to each other, I don't see what the issue of rape would have to do with their commitment.

[ToshX]

He just seems like "that kinda guy" to me. It seems like everyone else would have at least enough sense not to waste time making an account just to say something like that.

[metalliram]

Well, being a straight man who likes lesbians myself... I hope you arent lumping me in with Biz Ounce.... Although I suppose my history as a lesbian could change things...

And who knows, he may have just never seen an issue pressing enough to comment on.

[ToshX]

Oh, not a chance. In fact, you are part of the majority, I'd say, but with every majority comes the highest and lowest of all people. It's like saying "10,000,000 people in the USA do X and only 5,000,000 in Peru do X."

Based on that info, I can see how it looks like USA is the group doing the most of whatever X stands for. But that's only because the US has more people. The US had a population of 295 million in 2005, and had Peru a population of 28 million in 2005. With more people, you're going to find more variety. The highest and the lowest of people are usually in the majority, of course.

And who knows, he may have just never seen an issue pressing enough to comment on.

Hahaha. I know you're being sarcastic, though.

[metalliram]

Ugh, when I saw all those numbers I kinda just glazed over for a moment, lol. I have a math exam tomorrow morning that I really ought to be studying for. But considering how much time I've already spent reading over the history of this thread and preparing an 'uber-post' of sorts I figure I may as well just continue as I am.

[devonin]

Holy crap, master_of_the_faster made a post that didn't include the phrase "life, liberty and property"

And though the main portion of the discussion is past, let me correct a small misconception stated earlier about how it is the man's -arousal- that leads him to be raped...

The belief that the only thing that leads to an erection is sexual arousal is precisely why it has never been considered possible to rape a man. The logic says that if it -works- you were functionally consenting, because if you have an erection you were sexually aroused.

This is in fact, complete bunk. Some studies done in California in I believe the late 90s determined in fact that an erection can and is caused by virtually -any- very strong emotive response, especially ones that result in production of adreneline. Things like arousal, things like shock, things most tellingly, like -fear-

The funny part is, any man could have told you ages ago that they have a) little to no control over when they get an erection (Or at least, they can make themselves get one, but can't really make themselves -not- get one) and b) often will at least start to have an erection from things that aren't sexual arousal.

Adrenaline bursts result in increased bloodflow to the extremities to aid in reaction times, in case you need to fight or flee...guess what is an extremity?

[Orch_Dork]

Originally Posted by metalliram

I have a math exam tomorrow morning that I really ought to be studying for

you still have school?

[GuidoHunter]

Originally Posted by devonin

Some studies done in California in I believe the late 90s determined in fact that an erection can and is caused by virtually -any- very strong emotive response, especially ones that result in production of adreneline. Things like arousal, things like shock, things most tellingly, like -fear-

How about just plain having to pee?

Pretty much every man knows about morning wood, and most know about getting an erection as a physical preventative measure against peeing oneself.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[metalliram]

let me correct a small misconception stated earlier about how it is the man's -arousal- that leads him to be raped...

The belief that the only thing that leads to an erection is sexual arousal is precisely why it has never been considered possible to rape a man. The logic says that if it -works- you were functionally consenting, because if you have an erection you were sexually aroused.

I should have phrased it differently. I meant that having an erection allows them to be raped. I didn't mean specifically that an erection caused by sexual arousal allows to be raped. I used the term arousal, because 'aroused' and 'arousal' are often used to describe erections (in my experience). And of course, I'm only speakin of rape where the man is forced to penetrate someone or possibly to recieve oral sex... and not of rape where the man himself is penetrated.

you still have school?

I did my last exam today... so no.

[ToshX]

Maybe it's just me, but I don't think being given oral sex would be traumatizing at all, regardless of whether you were a virgin/what your morals were/etc. <__<

[metalliram]

I think it would really depend on the context, who was involved and what the implications were. It would definately be negative mentally rather than physically, and would probably only really be a problem if it was recurring or part of a more serious chain of events.

[devonin]

Originally Posted by ToshX

Maybe it's just me, but I don't think being given oral sex would be traumatizing at all, regardless of whether you were a virgin/what your morals were/etc. <__<

Where did someone say something about oral sex? We're talking about rape.

[metalliram]

I'm only speakin of rape where the man is forced to penetrate someone or possibly to recieve oral sex

I said that several posts ago. I was talking about aspects of rape that would be allowed or disallowed by a man having an erection. Really though, I think the oral sex would probably only occur alongside other more serious or damaging aspects rather than on it's own. So while it would probably be the most bearable part, it would still be part of an overall negative experience.

[Pyrowing]

Me, i got no problem with gay people, AS LONG as they dont try to do anything with me. Gay marriages? sure, why not? just dont do it in a church, since in the bible (or so i heard from my siblings who are totally religious), god tells us that it's like a sin to be homosexual. so technically as Biz Ounce said, homosexuals MAY burn in hell. No offense to homosexuals.

[psychopete]

Originally Posted by Pyrowing

Me, i got no problem with gay people, AS LONG as they dont try to do anything with me. Gay marriages? sure, why not? just dont do it in a church, since in the bible (or so i heard from my siblings who are totally religious), god tells us that it's like a sin to be homosexual. so technically as Biz Ounce said, homosexuals MAY burn in hell. No offense to homosexuals.

I'd personally like to see a passage from the Bible describing that. Maybe ask your siblings to post said passage?

[shatteredgravity]

marriage is supposed to be one woman, one man -- together forever. simple as that. never is it supposed to be man and man, or woman and woman and woman. its just not what was intended to be.

[Kilgamayan]

Do you happen to have proof of that or are you just pulling it out of your ass?