Why do 90% of black people vote for Democrats?

[Ecthy]

And double penetration. Can we have double penetration, please?

[loinburger]

Yes, and double penetration. Also, is the sin worse if the male participants' scrotums make contact. Ben, as resident Apolyton Sexpert, we need your judgment on this.

In addition, is male-on-female anal sex equivalent to, worse than, or better than male-on-male anal sex. What if a dildo is used instead of a penis. (Assume for the sake of calibration that male-on-male anal sex without the use of sex toys is a level 5 sin on the scale from 0 to 10) What if one or both participants is a dickgirl

[Ecthy]

What if the female anally penetrates the male? What if both participants refuse to take on any gender identity? Would this already constitute sodomy no matter what the act?

[Ecthy]

Oh my god insanely rigid Catholicism is so exciting, especially for me "as a historian".

[loinburger]

Actually, on the subject of dickgirls, are they allowed to have sex with anybody without it being a sin? I mean, it would be sort of half-gay if they had sex with a man or a woman, and it would in a sense be completely gay if they had sex with another dickgirl. What does the Bible say on this subject? You always say that homosexuality is wrong because God made man and woman - are dickgirls covered in the apocrypha or something?

[Ecthy]

What about Babe Benedick? Is she allowed to have secks?

[Ben Kenobi]

That's right Ben - it doesn't matter what sins you commit, just so long as you're not a sodomite.

Actually, I believe I said that all have sinned and fallen short and are in need of redemption. You wouldn't be a liar, now would you?

[loinburger]

Actually, I believe I said that all have sinned and fallen short and are in need of redemption.

No wonder you freely acknowledge your sins instead of exclusively focusing on the sins of others!

Sorry, paying lip service to your damnation philosophy does not excuse you being an unrepentant proponent of violence. Nor does your "everybody is a sinner" philosophy explain why 90-100% of your moralizing is about homosexuality and other "sex sins."

Every time somebody points out your moral failings you either change the subject (e.g. to the sins you prefer, like sodomy) or else you pull a "how dare a fellow Christian (or whoever) criticize me!" act. Why should anybody listen to your moral criticisms when you have demonstrated time and again that you are incapable of being criticized in turn?

[Ben Kenobi]

Yes, and double penetration.

Sex is between a man and a woman for life. So that rules out threesomes.

Also, is the sin worse if the male participants' scrotums make contact. Ben, as resident Apolyton Sexpert, we need your judgment on this.

In addition, is male-on-female anal sex equivalent to, worse than, or better than male-on-male anal sex. What if a dildo is used instead of a penis. (Assume for the sake of calibration that male-on-male anal sex without the use of sex toys is a level 5 sin on the scale from 0 to 10) What if one or both participants is a dickgirl

Scripture pretty clear about this, condemns sodomite and catamites. Do not lie with a man as you would with a woman. Sex is also supposed to be open to children, so anal sex is right out.

[Ben Kenobi]

No wonder you freely acknowledge your sins instead of exclusively focusing on the sins of others!

Uh, I already did in this thread. You aren't bearing false witness, are you loin?

Sorry, paying lip service to your damnation philosophy does not excuse you being an unrepentant proponent of violence.

I'm not quite sure how 'faithfully obeying Christ's teachings' amounts to lip service, but apparently I've been sleeping with men and having threesomes. Cool.

As for your entire argument, if what you said were correct, then no one could reliably preach Christ because all are sinners.

Nor does your "everybody is a sinner" philosophy explain why 90-100% of your moralizing is about homosexuality and other "sex sins."

Know your audience. Nobody likes getting called out for their sins.

[loinburger]

Uh, I already did in this thread. You aren't bearing false witness, are you loin?

You acknowledged that you were wrong to threaten violence against me? I must have missed that, please link to the post in question. All I saw was you wishing violence upon me, again (although this time you wished that David Floyd would beat me up, instead of threatening to do the deed yourself)

but apparently I've been sleeping with men and having threesomes

Where did I or anybody say this? You're lying. Again. (Or you have a reading comprehension problem. Again.)

As for your entire argument, if what you said were correct, then no one could reliably preach Christ because all are sinners.

Competent moralists / moral philosophers acknowledge their sins while discussing those of others. You steadfastly ignore your sins (aside from "oh woe is me I have committed unspecified sins, but at least I'm not that guy he's going to hell for sure for touching butts or whatever") while exclusively focusing on the sins of others. I've asked you about this before, and you've admitted that you never have and that you never will discuss your own sins.

Know your audience. Nobody likes getting called out for their sins.

So the only sins that apolyton posters ever engage in are sex sins? Get your mind out of the gutter. Nobody takes you seriously because a. you're a lying hypocrite and b. it's obvious that your entire moral philosophy amounts to a hangup about / fear of sex.

[Al B. Sure!]

Wait Ben threatened that Dave Floyd would be you up too? He did that to me a few months ago.

What? Is Dave Floyd Ben's personal muscle?

[Elok]

You once again miss the point. It's not that others disagree with you - it's that you're a liar, that you're a proponent of violence, and that you have many other loathsome properties. I disagree with Elok about many things, and I disagree with you about many things - the difference is that Elok is not an immoral nutcase.

How dare you say that based on my online behavior, without knowing me in perso--dammit! Hold on a second, the crucial third ingredient in my turduckittens won't shut up. Little turds like to swipe at my ankles, but can they take a little oven heat? Noooo....

[giblets]

I wish Ben had a girlfriend or would come out of the closet or something, I really do. Then he'd have better things to do than make stupid, and frequently dishonest arguments with people on the internet who strongly dislike him. I'm figuring he does it out of loneliness because this is the closest he can get to contact with other human beings when he's not at work or church. This is just speculation of course, I think the mental illness theory has merit too.

[Ben Kenobi]

You acknowledged that you were wrong to threaten violence against me?

You willing to admit that you were wrong to slander Floyd? No? Then I suppose we are still at an impasse. You seem to believe it's ok to slander people behind their backs.

Where did I or anybody say this? You're lying. Again. (Or you have a reading comprehension problem. Again.)

Paying lip service implies that I am actually doing the things that I am saying are wrong. In this case, all the stuff I just said were wrong. Keep up here loin.

Competent moralists / moral philosophers acknowledge their sins while discussing those of others.

Which I've already done.

You steadfastly ignore your sins

No, the dispute is that you do not believe that calumny is a sin. Full stop. I have challenged you, and you still haven't admitted that you believe that calumny is sinful. Until you do, we are at impasse.

while exclusively focusing on the sins of others.

I've admitted I am worthless trash. Apparently loin likes to lie. I fail to see how that is 'exclusively focussing' on the sins of others.

I've asked you about this before, and you've admitted that you never have and that you never will discuss your own sins.

That's what the sacrament of Confession is for. Unless you're God or one of his priests, then no, I'm not discussing the fulness of my sins with you. Sorry.

So the only sins that apolyton posters ever engage in are sex sins?

The sin that Apolyton likes to argue that is not a sin is homosexuality. Almost exclusively. Apolytoners commit other sins, but it's only homosexuality that they argue isn't a sin. Hence why I spend most of my time on it.

your entire moral philosophy amounts to a hangup about / fear of sex.

Gosh. What a surprise. Appareltly being completely open about sex is supposed to bring about a thriving community.

No, my moral philosophy is based upon the principle that sex is best in marriage. Of course, I'm not sure what you know about that.