Gay marriage should never be recognize by the state because...

[DaShi]

Anal sex without a condom is much much more unsafe than any other regular form of sex. Can you prove a single citation otherwise?

Hi Ben. Congrats on writing those sentences. It hardly has any flaws in rhetoric at all. Good for you!

[Elok]

IIRC, HIV is somewhat more easily spread by anal sex than vaginal--the key word being "somewhat." The rectum is more prone to tearing and bleeding, and the open wound aids transmission somehow. But HIV has no real difficulty just crossing the intact mucous membrane of the vaginal wall. So, in the grand scheme of things, it only bumps the transmission rates by half a percentage point or something like that. But that's just from memory.

[Heraclitus]

No, I'm saying that you've no clue what you are talking about. I'll give some people credit when they talk physics with KH. Yes, they are often being ignorant, but physics can be quite complicated and easy to misunderstand. But this is simple stuff.

WTF.

I'm saying:

Sexually restrictive cultures where historically more successful than others societies. Memetic evolution ensured the former outnumbered the latter.


What is wrong with this? Seriously you just keep yelling "wrong!". Also to return to the original point you picked on, what reason do you have to believe that in a hypothetical world with no antibiotics marriage would be just as weak?

I mean surely venereal disease did play a role in keeping marriage historically stable didn't it? And antibiotics removed the threat of many many venereal diseases. You can be careless follow you impulses and get well thanks to them. Condoms work great for example but they require some minimal forethought which antibiotics don't.

[Elok]

Hera, anybody who says "nuts to condoms, I'll just cure the disease later" is not functioning right in the head.

[DaShi]

Hera, here's a useful science tip that may save you embarrassment in the future. Try putting as much effort into disproving your crazy theories as you do trying to prove them before posting them here. Yes, you're not very bright and are probably going to fail a lot. But it will be an improvement and make you look less stupid than asking others to do it for you.

[Heraclitus]

IIRC, HIV is somewhat more easily spread by anal sex than vaginal--the key word being "somewhat." The rectum is more prone to tearing and bleeding, and the open wound aids transmission somehow. But HIV has no real difficulty just crossing the intact mucous membrane of the vaginal wall. So, in the grand scheme of things, it only bumps the transmission rates by half a percentage point or something like that. But that's just from memory.

Hm, I probably mixed up HIV with some other STD rate. However I'm pretty certain that sex is much more dangers for the penetrative partner with anal sex (though still much safer than any kind of receptive sex).

[DaShi]

Seriously, memorize my last post. Do it with everything in your life, with everything that you think no matter how certain you are.

[Heraclitus]

Hera, anybody who says "nuts to condoms, I'll just cure the disease later" is not functioning right in the head.

Taking the time and forfeiting the pleasure that come with using a condom require some minimal self-discipline, drugs perscribed by doctors require less since you aren't going to take them in the heat of the moment.

[Heraclitus]

Seriously, memorize my last post. Do it with everything in your life, with everything that you think no matter how certain you are.

I am certain and there are plenty of studies on the differences between receptive and penetrative sex so I don't see how this relates to post #51

[Elok]

Taking the time and forfeiting the pleasure that come with using a condom require some minimal self-discipline, drugs perscribed by doctors require less since you aren't going to take them in the heat of the moment.

Yes, this is true, but I still seriously doubt anyone actually thinks "well, I could use a condom, but since modern antibiotics are available, what the hell?" That's kind of like, "well, I could make him use a condom, but if I get pregnant I can just have an abortion." Who willingly and deliberately risks having to go through that?

[Ming]

I repeat,

Would you like to try again, maybe make some reference to the whole "break up the privileges of marriage and make them generally available on demand as desired" aspect? Because that was pretty much THE WHOLE DAMNED POINT of what I said. I'm not impressed by your hysteria and gratuitous insults. Your extremely witty copying what I said and inserting a few extra insults and misspellings is noted.

You keep saying that government should be kept out of marriages... That marriages are for relgions only, not the state. So stop changing the subject.

Why should everybody be stuck with the definition of marriage that your cult approves... or any cult for that matter.
All the cults can't even agree what defines marriage. People who aren't members of your silly cults have has much right to love each other, raise families and have traditional marriages. They don't need some mythical being to approve their commitment to each other.
To say that religions have a monopoly on the term marriage is simply silly. We no longer live in the old world where belief in relgions ruled... Your whole attitude that sex outside of marriage is a "SIN" is a total joke. If your cult wants to ignore reality, fine, but don't cram your silly beliefs down the throats of those that doen't care about your supersititions.

[DaShi]

I am certain and there are plenty of studies on the differences between receptive and penetrative sex so I don't see how this relates to post #51

And have you read them?

[DriXnaK]

This new evil Ming is really...refreshing. I always knew that avatar was a real picture of you.

[Heraclitus]

Hera, here's a useful science tip that may save you embarrassment in the future. Try putting as much effort into disproving your crazy theories as you do trying to prove them before posting them here. Yes, you're not very bright and are probably going to fail a lot. But it will be an improvement and make you look less stupid than asking others to do it for you.

Ok I'll try my best counterargument that sans antibiotics marriage might be weaker.


People don't change their behaviour much over STD's, the selective pressures for this where weak historically than other relevant factors considering poor diagnostics and little hope of treatment in ancient cultures.

However evidence of cheating is something that gets us bothered. Children are also something that we can get worried over having or not enough to override instinct.

Contraceptives and other factors reduce the pressure to keep old social moors. Social expectations drift, people's behaviour changes. Rates of STD's rise, with no antibiotics many wives and men are stricken with obvious symptoms that could have otherwise been hidden > higher rate of discovered infidelity > higher divorce rate > fewer marriages.

[DaShi]

Ok I'll try my best counterargument that sans antibiotics marriage might be weaker.


People don't change their behaviour much over STD's, the selective pressures for this where weak historically than other relevant factors considering poor diagnostics and little hope of treatment in ancient cultures.

However evidence of cheating is something that gets us bothered. Children are also something that we can get worried over having or not enough to override instinct.

Contraceptives and other factors reduce the pressure to keep old social moors. Social expectations drift, people's behaviour changes. Rates of STD's rise, with no antibiotics many wives and men are stricken with obvious symptoms that could have otherwise been hidden > higher rate of discovered infidelity > higher divorce rate > fewer marriages.

:whooshingoverheadsmilie: Wow. Simply wow. You are hopeless.