He's a catholic, give him a break. Logic is his kryptonite.Hmm. Yes. You've demonstrated, once again, your astonishing lack of ability to argue logically.
Lol. Ok. Fair enough.He's a catholic, give him a break. Logic is his kryptonite.
I heartily agree. Personally I do find it repulsive, and I hold a practical disdain for it given that a homsexual union can't produce children, and thus can't further the species, although as a whole technology has remedied that impairment. However, I am forced to concede given that as rule these people are neither hurting nor denying the liberty of anyone else, and so I believe it is my duty to allow and defend the actions of homosexuals against those like Iron (no offense meant, you are just the most prominent espouser of your particular point of view.)Actually tbh I find the idea of homosexuality kind of gross, and I mainly argue in favour of it because of my libertarianism.
+1 for standing for your ideals, even when they conflict with what you find is repulsive.I heartily agree. Personally I do find it repulsive, and I hold a practical disdain for it given that a homsexual union can't produce children, and thus can't further the species, although as a whole technology has remedied that impairment. However, I am forced to concede given that as rule these people are neither hurting nor denying the liberty of anyone else, and so I believe it is my duty to allow and defend the actions of homosexuals against those like Iron (no offense meant, you are just the most prominent espouser of your particular point of view.)
Ditto.+1 for standing for your ideals, even when they conflict with what you find is repulsive.
p.s. what do you find repulsive about it?
And it's definitely no grosser than straight sex if protection is used.Repulsive?
What is not repulsive about it is more to the point.
Just putting things in new holes. Poo is just as gross as wee.
Male buttsex is way grosser than straight sex with or without protection. Are you telling me that you would be more confortable watching gay sex because a condom is being used as opposed straight sex without protection?And it's definitely no grosser than straight sex if protection is used.
Yes. Of course, because:Are you telling me that you would be more confortable watching gay sex because a condom is being used as opposed straight sex without protection?
Exactly...Smaller homosexual populous means less with STI's
Someone seems to be forgetting that although a lower amount of homsexuals will indeed result in a lower rate of sexually-transmitted diseases, it is only because there is a smaller amount; it's like saying that we shouldn't worry about pandas dying because there are only like nine of them. What's one or two more...Exactly...
At the risk of sounding like a massive bogan, mostly just the act itself. Given that I don't find men sexually attractive, seeing two men engaging in sexual acts triggers a revulsion of sorts. I know it shouldn't, and I feel somewhat close-minded for it, but it does. Which is why I try to be even more vehement in my defense of it, to compensate for said close-mindedness.+1 for standing for your ideals, even when they conflict with what you find is repulsive.
p.s. what do you find repulsive about it?
Hmm, but like, I don't get grossed out by two girls getting it on at all.At the risk of sounding like a massive bogan, mostly just the act itself. Given that I don't find men sexually attractive, seeing two men engaging in sexual acts triggers a revulsion of sorts. I know it shouldn't, and I feel somewhat close-minded for it, but it does. Which is why I try to be even more vehement in my defense of it, to compensate for said close-mindedness.