NationStates Jolt Archive

Without heterosexuality we would all still be in heaven wrapped up in God's warm loving embrace. We would not be here on this sinful Earth being sinfully exposed to sinful sin. Thus, heterosexuality is wrong because it leaves the way open for people to sin.

Butbut..

sin is GOOD, isn't it ?

But, I thought the fundamentalists were opposed to Stem Cell research?

If heterosexuality is wrong, I don't want to be right. :tongue:

So I take it a true believer should volunteer for the voluntary human extinction movement... um I am not sure how to respond to that one: a) rip into you, or b) laugh.

You know what, so I remain in the mods good graces, I choose 'b' :D

As for Alma Mater's comment, surely you are familiar with the passage, in Romans if I recall, that says "The wages of sin is death..."

Heterosexuality is wrong

anyone who even considers it is condemned to hell for eternity

the end >:(

Interesting. I take it you are an asexual or an ascetic or both, and I would take a wild guess and say you are probably either a fundamentalist Jew or Christian. Am I close on any of those points? If so, I would be interested in hearing more about your theology and ethics system.

Btw, I am not a fundie, to those who have read my previous posts on gay marriage, children converting to other faiths, or school prayer. I do not agree with NM on a lot of things, but I do come to his aid because I know decent people IRL who actually believe some of the things he says.

Fuck!

Butbut..

sin is GOOD, isn't it ?

Alleen as je er sin in hep. :D

Without heterosexuality we would all still be in heaven wrapped up in God's warm loving embrace. We would not be here on this sinful Earth being sinfully exposed to sinful sin. Thus, heterosexuality is wrong because it leaves the way open for people to sin.

Gosh, and I thought Manichean conceptions of the sinful nature of heterosexual activity had largely died out in the Western tradition with the Cathars.

You're not a neo-Cathar Perfecti in disguise, are you?

You know what happened last time around, don't you? Caedite eos - novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius, as the papal legate at Béziers is alleged to have said.

Gosh, and I thought Manichean conceptions of the sinful nature of heterosexual activity had largely died out in the Western tradition with the Cathars.

You're not a neo-Cathar Perfecti in disguise, are you?

You know what happened last time around, don't you? Caedite eos - novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius, as the papal legate at Béziers is alleged to have said.*Sniff* Alas, pearls before swine.

Well, at least this gives the homosexuals a day off - I am sure they could do with the break from all that you are wrong, you are bad, you are going to hell nonsense.

Thanks, I needed a laugh to wake up this morning *chorttles into her porridge*

Alleen as je er sin in hep. :D

I always get my sin :p

I've never read a single thread on here that I have agreed with more. Heterosexuality risks the conception of children and the consequent ensnarement and inevitable perversion of innocent souls in a sinful material world.

What I find most troubling are the frequent sex-related threads on here in which admissions of heterosexual love and occasionally descriptions of the act go unpunished. I can only conclude that the mods must be breeder enablers. I feel a strange need to go protest at a funeral.

I've never read a single thread on here that I have agreed with more. Heterosexuality risks the conception of children and the consequent ensnarement and inevitable perversion of innocent souls in a sinful material world.

What I find most troubling are the frequent sex-related threads on here in which admissions of heterosexual love and occasionally descriptions of the act go unpunished. I can only conclude that the mods must be breeder enablers. I feel a strange need to go protest at a funeral.

I've been provided funding to prove that heterosexuality is a choice, a clear choice to lead a perverted lifestyle as a marked affront to God.

So far I've been spending most of my time building a new Spanish Inquisition style torture contraption and not so much on any research but I suspect I'm going to make much of that up anyway.

Can't wait to get 'cracking' - ha ha, literally if my contraption actually works - on these sinners.

I've never read a single thread on here that I have agreed with more. Heterosexuality risks the conception of children and the consequent ensnarement and inevitable perversion of innocent souls in a sinful material world.

What I find most troubling are the frequent sex-related threads on here in which admissions of heterosexual love and occasionally descriptions of the act go unpunished. I can only conclude that the mods must be breeder enablers. I feel a strange need to go protest at a funeral.

What may really trouble you is that my academic research has provided clear archaeological evidence, supported by contemporaneous documentary evidence, that heterosexuality has been extensively practiced by past societies. Why, it wasn't uncommon in the past for heterosexuals to produce more than two children in a relationship - though the precise nature of that relationship is malleable depending on the society in question.

I regret to say that your objection to heterosexuality is a culturally-learned modern behaviour rather than a moral absolute that's been practiced throughout history.

I know that you might find this difficult to deal with, but even Romans and Greeks had heterosexual sex.

I have to admit to being one of those heterosexuals myself, so I won't rule out the possibility that my research is hopelessly biased by my sexual orientation, and that I'm trying to retrospectively justify my contemptible self-hating breeder lifestyle choice, but I think the evidence is fairly objective on this issue.

''Sinfully exposed to sinful sin''?

Without heterosexuality we would all still be in heaven wrapped up in God's warm loving embrace. We would not be here on this sinful Earth being sinfully exposed to sinful sin. Thus, heterosexuality is wrong because it leaves the way open for people to sin.

I don't believe in any kind of deity. So let the believers go homosexual, I'll keep to heterosexuality.

But what if you have sex but use protection? Then no child will be born...

But what if you have sex but use protection? Then no child will be born...

That's contraceptosexuality, different topic. :tongue:

OP, you're doing it wrong.

Here's why heterosexuality is wrong:

Heterosexual sex can result in procreation. But procreation is serious business. Casual heterosexual sex can result in unplanned pregnancies and unwanted children. This is a horrific problem in a world that is already groaning under the weight of overpopulation.

Yet, at the same time, it is totally unrealistic to expect humans to stop fucking. It won't happen.

So the obvious solution is that humans should all be exclusively homosexual, and only have heterosexual sex when it is necessary for procreation. Options like IVF exist for those who can afford them, of course, but for most of the world's population it is much simpler to refrain from all recreational heterosexual sex contact and confine oneself to homosexual relationships.

If everyone adhered to this system there would be no more "oops babies." There would be no such thing as an unplanned pregnancy. Children would always be planned and wanted by their parents, which would dramatically reduce a great many of the most serious ills of society today.

OP, you're doing it wrong.

Here's why heterosexuality is wrong:

Heterosexual sex can result in procreation. But procreation is serious business. Casual heterosexual sex can result in unplanned pregnancies and unwanted children. This is a horrific problem in a world that is already groaning under the weight of overpopulation.

Yet, at the same time, it is totally unrealistic to expect humans to stop fucking. It won't happen.

So the obvious solution is that humans should all be exclusively homosexual, and only have heterosexual sex when it is necessary for procreation. Options like IVF exist for those who can afford them, of course, but for most of the world's population it is much simpler to refrain from all recreational heterosexual sex contact and confine oneself to homosexual relationships.

If everyone adhered to this system there would be no more "oops babies." There would be no such thing as an unplanned pregnancy. Children would always be planned and wanted by their parents, which would dramatically reduce a great many of the most serious ills of society today.

But... but the sex!

But... but the sex!
You get plenty of sex. That's the beauty of the system. You just have to choose to be gay.

It works that way, right?

OP, you're doing it wrong.

Here's why heterosexuality is wrong:

Heterosexual sex can result in procreation. But procreation is serious business. Casual heterosexual sex can result in unplanned pregnancies and unwanted children. This is a horrific problem in a world that is already groaning under the weight of overpopulation.

Yet, at the same time, it is totally unrealistic to expect humans to stop fucking. It won't happen.

So the obvious solution is that humans should all be exclusively homosexual, and only have heterosexual sex when it is necessary for procreation. Options like IVF exist for those who can afford them, of course, but for most of the world's population it is much simpler to refrain from all recreational heterosexual sex contact and confine oneself to homosexual relationships.

If everyone adhered to this system there would be no more "oops babies." There would be no such thing as an unplanned pregnancy. Children would always be planned and wanted by their parents, which would dramatically reduce a great many of the most serious ills of society today.

But, that would mean I'd need to FUCK MEN!

But, that would mean I'd need to FUCK MEN!
No, it wouldn't. Nobody's saying you have to fuck anyone.

No, it wouldn't. Nobody's saying you have to fuck anyone.

Alright, wouldn't have to. But that would never work. If I were a woman, then fair enough.

But, that would mean I'd need to FUCK MEN!

So ? You expect women to do that as well, right ?
Equality baby. If they have to, so do you.

So ? You expect women to do that as well, right ?
Equality baby. If they have to, so do you.

No, when did I say I expected women to do it?

So ? You expect women to do that as well, right ?
Equality baby. If they have to, so do you.
Except they wouldn't have to anymore ;)

So ? You expect women to do that as well, right ?
Equality baby. If they have to, so do you.

*Raises fist in solidarity*

Somebody needs to remind straight boys that it's really not a good idea to go off on rants about how nasty it is to fuck men. You might end up convincing us gals.

No, when did I say I expected women to do it?

True, you didn't.

So - NOBODY has to fuck men anymore, because fucking a man is disgusting and icky. Hurrah ! ;)

Without heterosexuality we would all still be in heaven wrapped up in God's warm loving embrace.

You said it was "categorically" wrong. Yet clearly you object only to heterosexual sex that results in offspring. That's not good enough.

*Raises fist in solidarity*

Somebody needs to remind straight boys that it's really not a good idea to go off on rants about how nasty it is to fuck men. You might end up convincing us gals.

I thought you were a lesbian, anyway. I'm not saing it's nasty, cos I can't say that, cos I've never done it. It's just a nasty thought to me.

But, that would mean I'd need to FUCK MEN!

I know, right? Everybody wins.

You get plenty of sex. That's the beauty of the system. You just have to choose to be gay.

It works that way, right?

Ummm yeah sure it does work that way. I'm certian that if I really tried I could find the naked male form a turn on.:D

You said it was "categorically" wrong. Yet clearly you object only to heterosexual sex that results in offspring. That's not good enough.

The first sinners were straight. Isn't that enough ?
God threw out Adam and Eve - make way for Adam and Steve !

I thought you were a lesbian, anyway.
When you make an assumption you make an ass out of you and umption.

The first sinners were straight. Isn't that enough ?
God casted out Adam and Eve - enter Adam and Steve !

What though if that is not your belief?

But, that would mean I'd need to FUCK MEN!

Nah, you can be the bottom-part :tongue:

When you make an assumption you make an ass out of you and umption.

Well truth be told, that Umption, he is a bit of a prick, and deseves all of the ass he can get!

The first sinners were straight. Isn't that enough ?

No, that's guilt by association and a fallacious argument.

The most reasonable argument you could make would be less philosophical ("categorically") and more political ("bad for society"): Bottle's argument about reproduction plus certain realities about the way heterosexuality often works in sexist societies.

What though if that is not your belief?

Then you'd probably not care about original sin anyway.
Nevertheless, we must demand that straight marriage becomes illegal asap.

After all - the constitution can be amended, but Gods condemnation of straights is eternal.

No, that's guilt by association and a fallacious argument.

Nonsense. The Bible, which is the sole and only source of truth and reason, is filled with God acting against heterosexualism. Take the killings of all firstborns in Egypt for instance. Had they all been in monogamous homosexual relationships, there would have been no problem. But nooo - they had to mingle. They had to be straight.