• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Backlash starting?

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #11
    Indeed. Doesn't bother me. But at least I KNOW for sure I'm not a poof.
    bloggoth

    If everything isn't black and white, I say, 'Why the hell not?'
    John Wayne (My guru, not to be confused with my beloved prophet Jeremy Clarkson)

    Comment


      #12
      Not quite, Planet

      Originally posted by planetit
      As I understand it a heterosexual man who has been married to a woman must prove he can control his vile inclinations before he can become a priest.

      Odd group the Catholic Church.
      The catholic church exists on the premise that procreation of their flock is a necessity, so heterosexuality is hardly a vile inclination in their terms.
      The relationship to god required to be a priest means that it is necessary to forsake sexual relations (choirboys excepted obviously). Actually perhaps this is the nub of the problem for the catholic church, they have indeed been stung many times by the behavoiur of a minority (I hope) of their priests.
      I don't believe there is any link between homosexuality and paedophilia, but the church (as an institution) has little experience of sexuality and may therefore feel it's best to kick out the shirtlifters entirely, just to be on the safe side.


      Xog, my point about allowing homsexual marriages, if you recall, was that NL thought it a good idea and therefore it had to be wrong on lots of levels.
      And as to natural, you are totally correct, we do many unnatural things, but that doesn't mean that we should!
      Why not?

      Comment


        #13
        I think the "link" between homosexuality and peadophilia is largely explained by opportunity. Men are put in charge of boys but not girls.

        "If it's NL it must be crap" isa very persuasive argument I have to say.

        I do as many unnatural things as possible. Or I would like to anyhow.
        bloggoth

        If everything isn't black and white, I say, 'Why the hell not?'
        John Wayne (My guru, not to be confused with my beloved prophet Jeremy Clarkson)

        Comment


          #14
          Originally posted by DimPrawn
          Too many intellectual lightweights here.

          I don't bother much with CUK these days, instead I read the Sun.
          Oh no there isn't
          I don't know my arse from an hole in the ground

          Comment


            #15
            Is masterbation unnatural?

            Has anybody on here never done it?

            Comment


              #16
              Originally posted by stackpole
              Is masterbation unnatural?

              Has anybody on here never done it?
              We should observe that in animals. I would guess that they do not masturbate, therefore it's a perversion against nature.
              I've seen much of the rest of the world. It is brutal and cruel and dark, Rome is the light.

              Comment


                #17
                Originally posted by Chico
                Ladies and gentlemen we have a Portilloesque confession!!!
                Xoggoth is Luke Gayporker and I claim my £5.00
                Let us not forget EU open doors immigration benefits IT contractors more than anyone

                Comment


                  #18
                  Francko, you will find , if you look long enough, that Bonobo monkeys do enjoy a bit of a hand shandy.

                  I have no doubt that my dog would too but the thick tw@t forgot to evolve hands - this stands for most animals.

                  Comment


                    #19
                    Originally posted by PRC1964
                    Francko, you will find , if you look long enough, that Bonobo monkeys do enjoy a bit of a hand shandy.

                    I have no doubt that my dog would too but the thick tw@t forgot to evolve hands - this stands for most animals.
                    Yes, I heard that on QI as well. However dogs have managed to get past the old hands problem by grabbing hold of anything - trees, blankets, auntie Mary's leg - and rutting it senseless in a mad dog sexcrazed frenzy.
                    If you think my attitude stinks, you should smell my fingers.

                    Comment


                      #20
                      Originally posted by PRC1964
                      I have no doubt that my dog would too but the thick tw@t forgot to evolve hands - this stands for most animals.
                      Good point, dogs like to roger people's legs, and I suspect they know it's not another dog.

                      Is it unnatural though? Animals might also do it but does it have advantages in evolutionary terms?

                      Was sexual gratification designed only for procreating?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X