Fullmetal_Veterinarian
Baritonius
Fullmetal_Veterinarian
Baritonius
Fullmetal_Veterinarian
You really need to read the post. I said sex with RANDOM PARTNERS WILLY-NILLY! That's a cespool of disease right there, like it or not. A disaster waiting to happen eventually. However. sex with a single life-partner is completely fine!
Perhaps you need to read your own post. You clearly stated that having sex with anyone is excitement that is against your religion.
And STD's were not a problem back then. If you were to read any historical document, you will find no mention of weird illnesses that were believed to come from sexual activities.
Please stop putting words in my mouth!
Quote:
What you call excitment, I call disgusting! ...Who'd want to spread diseases faster by having sex with random partners willy-nilly?
That is EXACTLY what I said. And in case you didn't catch it this time, I indicate that having sex with RANDOM PARTNERS CARELESSLY (aka, willy-nilly) is what I consider wrong, sensless, and a precursor to disease. AND! Back then, they didn't have microscopes to figure things out! BACK THEN they believed if you put a few ingredients together you can make a cow, or something! You must keep things into context, here! They may have thought that the STD's were a blessing or whatnot, if that's the type of culture you're referring to...
I'm not puttin words in your mouth. Here. Let's take out the parts that do not fit.
Quote:
Who'd want to spread diseases faster by
having sex with random partners willy-nilly? Why is it "boring" to have a bit of self constraint? Personally, it's quite easy to find excitement
without doing anything that goes against my religion!
So, as I translated it. "Having sex with random individuals increases the risk of STD's and that goes against my religion."
And, as AgnstTron has stated, little knowlege was known about STD's or any other ailment to the body. These was a generation that thought Freckles was a disease. Sex was not bad because 1)They had no knowlege that it could be bad and, 2) It was a holiday tradition to have sex with your friend to show love and caring. Sound bad? Maybe. But in all honesty, it could have been a nice idea back then. Having sex was a sign of true love.
Having sex with random people DOES go against my religion...I thought I got that through to you! And the fact that we save ourselves for that one person we want to spend the rest of our lives with is one of the greatest forms of love out there! It makes sexual intercourse a much more valued form of love due to the fact that it's not as redily available in the unmarried population...that's how I see it anyway. If you have sex with random people willy nilly as I stated before, it quickly becomes common, and therefore looses it's sense of love, degrading it down to more of a handshake...however this handshake can yeild more diseases than a random cold here or there.
That's the MODERN form of love. It was spawned from a church that was sick and tired of having their wives being ******** by their best friends.
Love changes, hun. It has not remained the same throughout history. Now, instead of havin four or five wives, a man is only ALLOWED to have one by law.
Also, having sex with one person proves nothing about love. I think you said that there was more to life then sex (correct me if I'm wrong). Well, isn't there more to love then sex? Love is a feeling, not an action.
