Exactly!
Advertisement

by Lyuboftopia » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:41 pm

by Tokos » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:41 pm
Arkinesia wrote:Reduces the risk. Not prevents.

by Norstal » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:42 pm
Toronto Sun wrote:Best poster ever. ★★★★★
New York Times wrote:No one can beat him in debates. 5/5.
IGN wrote:Literally the best game I've ever played. 10/10
NSG Public wrote:What a fucking douchebag.

by Bottle » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:42 pm

by Tokos » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:43 pm
Norstal wrote:Yes, well, what I meant was that your partner can cheat on you at anytime. But nevermind...

by Grainne Ni Malley » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:45 pm


by Bottle » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:48 pm
Grainne Ni Malley wrote:Bottle wrote:Monogamy can refer merely to the marriage form in which each partner has only one spouse at a time. It doesn't always refer to having only one mate at a time, although it is often used that way.
Well, if I got married under the guise of a monogamous relationship, discovered that my partner was cheating on me, and his response was, "But Honey, I'm only married to you!", we would have a serious problem. Perhaps a hospital bill.
But thanks for your persistence in enlightening me.


by Kobeanare » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:56 pm

by Grave_n_idle » Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:35 pm
Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:It depends on the person and his/her convictions, really.
I advocate sex before marriage, so you know what it's like. However, I don't mind if others wish to wait to have sex after they marry.

by Grave_n_idle » Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:38 pm
Tokos wrote:Lyuboftopia wrote:I hope you know that you can get an STD during marriage, you do know that, right?
It's not like a magical guy in the sky gives people who have sex not in marriage an STD and people who are not. It just does not work that way!
Monogamy prevents STDs. This is not rocket science.

by Bottle » Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:39 pm

by Grave_n_idle » Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:42 pm
Bottle wrote:Grave_n_idle wrote:
It's not science at all.
STDs can be acquired in other ways. The 'S' in STD doesn't necessarily indicate that actual fucking is the only possible vector of infection.
Not to mention that monogamy doesn't prevent STD transmission in any way...if you already have herpes and then you enter a monogamous relationship, it doesn't matter how faithful to your partner you are, you've still got herpes, and you still need to practice safe sex if you want to reduce your odds of passing herpes to your partner. If your partner gets herpes from you, it doesn't matter how monogamous they were, they still have herpes. Monogamy doesn't protect them. If they end their monogamous relationship with you and enter another monogamous relationship with somebody else, monogamy won't protect that person either.

by Bottle » Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:47 pm
Grave_n_idle wrote:Bottle wrote:Not to mention that monogamy doesn't prevent STD transmission in any way...if you already have herpes and then you enter a monogamous relationship, it doesn't matter how faithful to your partner you are, you've still got herpes, and you still need to practice safe sex if you want to reduce your odds of passing herpes to your partner. If your partner gets herpes from you, it doesn't matter how monogamous they were, they still have herpes. Monogamy doesn't protect them. If they end their monogamous relationship with you and enter another monogamous relationship with somebody else, monogamy won't protect that person either.
Absolutely. But even if both partners (yes, I assumed just two) are celibate till marriage, and only sexually interact with one another - they can still have sexually transmitted diseases, and transfer diseases to one another.
There are so many other possible vectors, the 'monogamy prevents STD' argument is ridiculous.

by Grave_n_idle » Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:49 pm
Bottle wrote:Grave_n_idle wrote:
Absolutely. But even if both partners (yes, I assumed just two) are celibate till marriage, and only sexually interact with one another - they can still have sexually transmitted diseases, and transfer diseases to one another.
There are so many other possible vectors, the 'monogamy prevents STD' argument is ridiculous.
Word. It's kind of scary to me how many people don't know this shit. Yes, you can have an STD even if you're a virgin. You can get some of the most serious STDs out there without having sex. Including (but not limited to):
HIV/AIDS
Herpes
Hepatitis
Syphilis
Genital warts
Public lice
Scabies
This has been your daily PSA from the WebMD of Fucking.

by Fartsniffage » Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:50 pm
Tokos wrote:Norstal wrote:Yes, well, what I meant was that your partner can cheat on you at anytime. But nevermind...
If you don't follow, say, British army rifle safety procedure correctly, then it's still reasonable to say that following that procedure does in fact prevent accidents. It says nothing about the procedure itself that following it incorrectly doesn't work!

by Bottle » Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:51 pm
Grave_n_idle wrote:Bottle wrote:Word. It's kind of scary to me how many people don't know this shit. Yes, you can have an STD even if you're a virgin. You can get some of the most serious STDs out there without having sex. Including (but not limited to):
HIV/AIDS
Herpes
Hepatitis
Syphilis
Genital warts
Public lice
Scabies
This has been your daily PSA from the WebMD of Fucking.
I'm so out of the loop, I didn't even know you could get a doctorate in it.
*nods*

by Yuktova » Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:32 pm
Bottle wrote:Grave_n_idle wrote:
Absolutely. But even if both partners (yes, I assumed just two) are celibate till marriage, and only sexually interact with one another - they can still have sexually transmitted diseases, and transfer diseases to one another.
There are so many other possible vectors, the 'monogamy prevents STD' argument is ridiculous.
That's what I'm saying and this idiot says "if your abstinent until marriage, then you won't get an STD!" What an idiot!
Word. It's kind of scary to me how many people don't know this shit. Yes, you can have an STD even if you're a virgin. You can get some of the most serious STDs out there without having sex. Including (but not limited to):
HIV/AIDS
Herpes
Hepatitis
Syphilis
Genital warts
Public lice
Scabies
This has been your daily PSA from the WebMD of Fucking.
Goldsaver said: This is murder, not a romantic date!

by Rolamec » Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:38 pm
PrncssOfCuddles wrote:Rolamec wrote:In the past, I was rather promiscuous. I won't lie. I had sex a lot. However recently I returned back to the Church of Rome, with my convictions stronger than ever. I have to say that though I'm rather indifferent about others who do it, I have restrained myself considerably, especially since the beginning of Lent (where I said I would not engage in sex for 40 days -very much a struggle). I personally think the intention of sex within marriage is to preserve its beauty, sex is after all a great thing. But for some people, a test drive is in order. For some a relationship is mostly physical rather than anything else (it was with me for the longest of times). But I am looking for something deeper, something more meaningful, a girlfriend whom I can eventually call my wife. A woman who shares the same views I do in regards to faith, sex, and procreation. Perhaps I'm being rather sentimental about it all, but I fear I have developed a rather puritanical view towards it. But unlike Dimmesdale, I know that I am weak so I will not condemn others. I hate hypocrites above everything else. My beliefs are my own business, and nobody else's.
Dimmesdale Condemned only himself. It was the town that condemned Hester
Head getting banged against the headboard too much? 

by Tokos » Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:42 pm
Grave_n_idle wrote:Absolutely. But even if both partners (yes, I assumed just two) are celibate till marriage, and only sexually interact with one another - they can still have sexually transmitted diseases, and transfer diseases to one another.
There are so many other possible vectors, the 'monogamy prevents STD' argument is ridiculous.

by Yuktova » Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:38 pm
Tokos wrote:Grave_n_idle wrote:Absolutely. But even if both partners (yes, I assumed just two) are celibate till marriage, and only sexually interact with one another - they can still have sexually transmitted diseases, and transfer diseases to one another.
There are so many other possible vectors, the 'monogamy prevents STD' argument is ridiculous.
This is true; I should have thought of it given I'm of a demographic quite likely to get those kinds of diseases out of sexual contact. I guess it wouldn't be transmitted sexually in those cases though. Something like, say, chlamydia, how often do people get that from something other than sex?
But yeah point taken.
Goldsaver said: This is murder, not a romantic date!

by Corporate Cyborgs » Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:53 pm

by Prussia-Denmark » Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:57 pm

by Tokos » Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:59 pm
Prussia-Denmark wrote:All I am going to say is this:
If sex in a relationship is bad then a good bit of the blame falls on the woman (read the rest before attacking me -> ) for not telling the guy how she likes it/or etc.
Males aren't psychic, which is something a lot of females I know don't seem to realize in this area of life until I point it out.

by AETEN II » Mon Mar 14, 2011 6:02 pm
"Quod Vult, Valde Valt"
Excuse me, sir. Seeing as how the V.P. is such a V.I.P., shouldn't we keep the P.C. on the Q.T.? 'Cause if it leaks to the V.C. he could end up M.I.A., and then we'd all be put out in K.P.
Nationstatelandsville wrote:"Why'd the chicken cross the street?"
"Because your dad's a whore."
"...He died a week ago."
"Of syphilis, I bet."

by Ethel mermania » Mon Mar 14, 2011 6:05 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot], Ostroeuropa
Advertisement