31 Jul 2010, 1:24 pm
31 Jul 2010, 4:42 pm
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Bethie wrote:
In the words of one of my professors, no intelligent god would put our pleasure center so close to the waste evacuation center. 
How often has this actually caused a problem?
It is likely that a good deal of distaste for sexual activity promoted in several religions has a basis in this association.
Not only that, but it makes it harder to pee from time to time because the body has to make sure that the two substances: urine and semen, do not mix.
Cowpler's gland ensures the pH balance of the urethra is safe for spermatozoa, and also after the sexual event urine flushes out the urethra during the next urination event.
The physiology has nothing whatsoever to do with the inevitable mental associations.
Mental associations due to unwillingness to learn. Also, you are making the claim that "religious" people are the ones making the mental associations, whereas in this thread it is the "non-religious" ones. And even back about 3000 years ago, in Song Of Solomon, you have been disproved in terms of that also. There is no "fear of sex" in the Bible, but instead regulations against non-committal relationships involving sex.
To be shatteringly unaware of the relationship of religious dogma to sex is totally amazing, even in you. I have no doubt of the massive information you have at your disposal but the absolute genius you display at misapplying it is astounding.
Unaware of the relationship of dogma to sex? I'm aware that there are multiple "relationships", as to how sex is viewed. However, what you mean in effect is that you consider me ignorant of secular anthropological dogma which tries to associate all of Christianity with Victorian England.
On the contrary, I do not consider you ignorant of anything, merely exceedingly clever at misconstrual.
To be unaware of something is to not know that something, and the word "ignorant" means to be without knowledge. You claimed I was unaware of the purported relationship between "religious dogma" (which usually refers in practice, somehow, only to Christianity) to sex, so you claimed I was ignorant of the modern dogma about the relationship between "religious dogma" and sex.
As to misconstruing things, I believe the perception on your part of such ability to misconstrue is not due to actually misconstruing as much as it is that our perceptions are skew compared to each other.
Forget it, kiddo. You are no longer in the area of rational discussion.
If you wish to discuss ratios, then what would be the pressure in a tire if it was filled up to 2.75 atmospheres pressure when the temperature was 273 Kelvin and the current temperature is 310 Kelvin?
Hey guys, I just thought that if I quoted this post, we would have an even more gigantic post full of quotes.
31 Jul 2010, 4:46 pm
31 Jul 2010, 7:59 pm
31 Jul 2010, 9:03 pm
Vexcalibur wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Bethie wrote:
In the words of one of my professors, no intelligent god would put our pleasure center so close to the waste evacuation center.
How often has this actually caused a problem?
It is likely that a good deal of distaste for sexual activity promoted in several religions has a basis in this association.
Not only that, but it makes it harder to pee from time to time because the body has to make sure that the two substances: urine and semen, do not mix.
Cowpler's gland ensures the pH balance of the urethra is safe for spermatozoa, and also after the sexual event urine flushes out the urethra during the next urination event.
The physiology has nothing whatsoever to do with the inevitable mental associations.
Mental associations due to unwillingness to learn. Also, you are making the claim that "religious" people are the ones making the mental associations, whereas in this thread it is the "non-religious" ones. And even back about 3000 years ago, in Song Of Solomon, you have been disproved in terms of that also. There is no "fear of sex" in the Bible, but instead regulations against non-committal relationships involving sex.
To be shatteringly unaware of the relationship of religious dogma to sex is totally amazing, even in you. I have no doubt of the massive information you have at your disposal but the absolute genius you display at misapplying it is astounding.
Unaware of the relationship of dogma to sex? I'm aware that there are multiple "relationships", as to how sex is viewed. However, what you mean in effect is that you consider me ignorant of secular anthropological dogma which tries to associate all of Christianity with Victorian England.
On the contrary, I do not consider you ignorant of anything, merely exceedingly clever at misconstrual.
To be unaware of something is to not know that something, and the word "ignorant" means to be without knowledge. You claimed I was unaware of the purported relationship between "religious dogma" (which usually refers in practice, somehow, only to Christianity) to sex, so you claimed I was ignorant of the modern dogma about the relationship between "religious dogma" and sex.
As to misconstruing things, I believe the perception on your part of such ability to misconstrue is not due to actually misconstruing as much as it is that our perceptions are skew compared to each other.
Forget it, kiddo. You are no longer in the area of rational discussion.
If you wish to discuss ratios, then what would be the pressure in a tire if it was filled up to 2.75 atmospheres pressure when the temperature was 273 Kelvin and the current temperature is 310 Kelvin?
Hey guys, I just thought that if I quoted this post, we would have an even more gigantic post full of quotes.
That's a silly reason to quote a post.
31 Jul 2010, 9:26 pm
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Vexcalibur wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Bethie wrote:
In the words of one of my professors, no intelligent god would put our pleasure center so close to the waste evacuation center.
How often has this actually caused a problem?
It is likely that a good deal of distaste for sexual activity promoted in several religions has a basis in this association.
Not only that, but it makes it harder to pee from time to time because the body has to make sure that the two substances: urine and semen, do not mix.
Cowpler's gland ensures the pH balance of the urethra is safe for spermatozoa, and also after the sexual event urine flushes out the urethra during the next urination event.
The physiology has nothing whatsoever to do with the inevitable mental associations.
Mental associations due to unwillingness to learn. Also, you are making the claim that "religious" people are the ones making the mental associations, whereas in this thread it is the "non-religious" ones. And even back about 3000 years ago, in Song Of Solomon, you have been disproved in terms of that also. There is no "fear of sex" in the Bible, but instead regulations against non-committal relationships involving sex.
To be shatteringly unaware of the relationship of religious dogma to sex is totally amazing, even in you. I have no doubt of the massive information you have at your disposal but the absolute genius you display at misapplying it is astounding.
Unaware of the relationship of dogma to sex? I'm aware that there are multiple "relationships", as to how sex is viewed. However, what you mean in effect is that you consider me ignorant of secular anthropological dogma which tries to associate all of Christianity with Victorian England.
On the contrary, I do not consider you ignorant of anything, merely exceedingly clever at misconstrual.
To be unaware of something is to not know that something, and the word "ignorant" means to be without knowledge. You claimed I was unaware of the purported relationship between "religious dogma" (which usually refers in practice, somehow, only to Christianity) to sex, so you claimed I was ignorant of the modern dogma about the relationship between "religious dogma" and sex.
As to misconstruing things, I believe the perception on your part of such ability to misconstrue is not due to actually misconstruing as much as it is that our perceptions are skew compared to each other.
Forget it, kiddo. You are no longer in the area of rational discussion.
If you wish to discuss ratios, then what would be the pressure in a tire if it was filled up to 2.75 atmospheres pressure when the temperature was 273 Kelvin and the current temperature is 310 Kelvin?
Hey guys, I just thought that if I quoted this post, we would have an even more gigantic post full of quotes.
That's a silly reason to quote a post.
Since when have silly reasons lacked any force around here?
31 Jul 2010, 9:27 pm
Sand wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Vexcalibur wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Bethie wrote:
In the words of one of my professors, no intelligent god would put our pleasure center so close to the waste evacuation center.
How often has this actually caused a problem?
It is likely that a good deal of distaste for sexual activity promoted in several religions has a basis in this association.
Not only that, but it makes it harder to pee from time to time because the body has to make sure that the two substances: urine and semen, do not mix.
Cowpler's gland ensures the pH balance of the urethra is safe for spermatozoa, and also after the sexual event urine flushes out the urethra during the next urination event.
The physiology has nothing whatsoever to do with the inevitable mental associations.
Mental associations due to unwillingness to learn. Also, you are making the claim that "religious" people are the ones making the mental associations, whereas in this thread it is the "non-religious" ones. And even back about 3000 years ago, in Song Of Solomon, you have been disproved in terms of that also. There is no "fear of sex" in the Bible, but instead regulations against non-committal relationships involving sex.
To be shatteringly unaware of the relationship of religious dogma to sex is totally amazing, even in you. I have no doubt of the massive information you have at your disposal but the absolute genius you display at misapplying it is astounding.
Unaware of the relationship of dogma to sex? I'm aware that there are multiple "relationships", as to how sex is viewed. However, what you mean in effect is that you consider me ignorant of secular anthropological dogma which tries to associate all of Christianity with Victorian England.
On the contrary, I do not consider you ignorant of anything, merely exceedingly clever at misconstrual.
To be unaware of something is to not know that something, and the word "ignorant" means to be without knowledge. You claimed I was unaware of the purported relationship between "religious dogma" (which usually refers in practice, somehow, only to Christianity) to sex, so you claimed I was ignorant of the modern dogma about the relationship between "religious dogma" and sex.
As to misconstruing things, I believe the perception on your part of such ability to misconstrue is not due to actually misconstruing as much as it is that our perceptions are skew compared to each other.
Forget it, kiddo. You are no longer in the area of rational discussion.
If you wish to discuss ratios, then what would be the pressure in a tire if it was filled up to 2.75 atmospheres pressure when the temperature was 273 Kelvin and the current temperature is 310 Kelvin?
Hey guys, I just thought that if I quoted this post, we would have an even more gigantic post full of quotes.
That's a silly reason to quote a post.
Since when have silly reasons lacked any force around here?
Since YOUR FACE! Take that, old man!
31 Jul 2010, 9:29 pm
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Sand wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Vexcalibur wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Bethie wrote:
In the words of one of my professors, no intelligent god would put our pleasure center so close to the waste evacuation center.
How often has this actually caused a problem?
It is likely that a good deal of distaste for sexual activity promoted in several religions has a basis in this association.
Not only that, but it makes it harder to pee from time to time because the body has to make sure that the two substances: urine and semen, do not mix.
Cowpler's gland ensures the pH balance of the urethra is safe for spermatozoa, and also after the sexual event urine flushes out the urethra during the next urination event.
The physiology has nothing whatsoever to do with the inevitable mental associations.
Mental associations due to unwillingness to learn. Also, you are making the claim that "religious" people are the ones making the mental associations, whereas in this thread it is the "non-religious" ones. And even back about 3000 years ago, in Song Of Solomon, you have been disproved in terms of that also. There is no "fear of sex" in the Bible, but instead regulations against non-committal relationships involving sex.
To be shatteringly unaware of the relationship of religious dogma to sex is totally amazing, even in you. I have no doubt of the massive information you have at your disposal but the absolute genius you display at misapplying it is astounding.
Unaware of the relationship of dogma to sex? I'm aware that there are multiple "relationships", as to how sex is viewed. However, what you mean in effect is that you consider me ignorant of secular anthropological dogma which tries to associate all of Christianity with Victorian England.
On the contrary, I do not consider you ignorant of anything, merely exceedingly clever at misconstrual.
To be unaware of something is to not know that something, and the word "ignorant" means to be without knowledge. You claimed I was unaware of the purported relationship between "religious dogma" (which usually refers in practice, somehow, only to Christianity) to sex, so you claimed I was ignorant of the modern dogma about the relationship between "religious dogma" and sex.
As to misconstruing things, I believe the perception on your part of such ability to misconstrue is not due to actually misconstruing as much as it is that our perceptions are skew compared to each other.
Forget it, kiddo. You are no longer in the area of rational discussion.
If you wish to discuss ratios, then what would be the pressure in a tire if it was filled up to 2.75 atmospheres pressure when the temperature was 273 Kelvin and the current temperature is 310 Kelvin?
Hey guys, I just thought that if I quoted this post, we would have an even more gigantic post full of quotes.
That's a silly reason to quote a post.
Since when have silly reasons lacked any force around here?
Since YOUR FACE! Take that, old man!
No need to prove my point absolutely.
just_ben
Deinonychus
Joined: 29 Mar 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 399
Location: That would be an ecumenical matter!
01 Aug 2010, 3:41 am
Sand wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Sand wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Vexcalibur wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Bethie wrote:
In the words of one of my professors, no intelligent god would put our pleasure center so close to the waste evacuation center.
How often has this actually caused a problem?
It is likely that a good deal of distaste for sexual activity promoted in several religions has a basis in this association.
Not only that, but it makes it harder to pee from time to time because the body has to make sure that the two substances: urine and semen, do not mix.
Cowpler's gland ensures the pH balance of the urethra is safe for spermatozoa, and also after the sexual event urine flushes out the urethra during the next urination event.
The physiology has nothing whatsoever to do with the inevitable mental associations.
Mental associations due to unwillingness to learn. Also, you are making the claim that "religious" people are the ones making the mental associations, whereas in this thread it is the "non-religious" ones. And even back about 3000 years ago, in Song Of Solomon, you have been disproved in terms of that also. There is no "fear of sex" in the Bible, but instead regulations against non-committal relationships involving sex.
To be shatteringly unaware of the relationship of religious dogma to sex is totally amazing, even in you. I have no doubt of the massive information you have at your disposal but the absolute genius you display at misapplying it is astounding.
Unaware of the relationship of dogma to sex? I'm aware that there are multiple "relationships", as to how sex is viewed. However, what you mean in effect is that you consider me ignorant of secular anthropological dogma which tries to associate all of Christianity with Victorian England.
On the contrary, I do not consider you ignorant of anything, merely exceedingly clever at misconstrual.
To be unaware of something is to not know that something, and the word "ignorant" means to be without knowledge. You claimed I was unaware of the purported relationship between "religious dogma" (which usually refers in practice, somehow, only to Christianity) to sex, so you claimed I was ignorant of the modern dogma about the relationship between "religious dogma" and sex.
As to misconstruing things, I believe the perception on your part of such ability to misconstrue is not due to actually misconstruing as much as it is that our perceptions are skew compared to each other.
Forget it, kiddo. You are no longer in the area of rational discussion.
If you wish to discuss ratios, then what would be the pressure in a tire if it was filled up to 2.75 atmospheres pressure when the temperature was 273 Kelvin and the current temperature is 310 Kelvin?
Hey guys, I just thought that if I quoted this post, we would have an even more gigantic post full of quotes.
That's a silly reason to quote a post.
Since when have silly reasons lacked any force around here?
Since YOUR FACE! Take that, old man!
No need to prove my point absolutely.
It looks like a really long pyramid. Plus, Sand is right.
01 Aug 2010, 4:04 am
01 Aug 2010, 5:23 am
01 Aug 2010, 7:22 am
01 Aug 2010, 10:33 am
just_ben wrote:
Sand wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Sand wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Vexcalibur wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Bethie wrote:
In the words of one of my professors, no intelligent god would put our pleasure center so close to the waste evacuation center.
How often has this actually caused a problem?
It is likely that a good deal of distaste for sexual activity promoted in several religions has a basis in this association.
Not only that, but it makes it harder to pee from time to time because the body has to make sure that the two substances: urine and semen, do not mix.
Cowpler's gland ensures the pH balance of the urethra is safe for spermatozoa, and also after the sexual event urine flushes out the urethra during the next urination event.
The physiology has nothing whatsoever to do with the inevitable mental associations.
Mental associations due to unwillingness to learn. Also, you are making the claim that "religious" people are the ones making the mental associations, whereas in this thread it is the "non-religious" ones. And even back about 3000 years ago, in Song Of Solomon, you have been disproved in terms of that also. There is no "fear of sex" in the Bible, but instead regulations against non-committal relationships involving sex.
To be shatteringly unaware of the relationship of religious dogma to sex is totally amazing, even in you. I have no doubt of the massive information you have at your disposal but the absolute genius you display at misapplying it is astounding.
Unaware of the relationship of dogma to sex? I'm aware that there are multiple "relationships", as to how sex is viewed. However, what you mean in effect is that you consider me ignorant of secular anthropological dogma which tries to associate all of Christianity with Victorian England.
On the contrary, I do not consider you ignorant of anything, merely exceedingly clever at misconstrual.
To be unaware of something is to not know that something, and the word "ignorant" means to be without knowledge. You claimed I was unaware of the purported relationship between "religious dogma" (which usually refers in practice, somehow, only to Christianity) to sex, so you claimed I was ignorant of the modern dogma about the relationship between "religious dogma" and sex.
As to misconstruing things, I believe the perception on your part of such ability to misconstrue is not due to actually misconstruing as much as it is that our perceptions are skew compared to each other.
Forget it, kiddo. You are no longer in the area of rational discussion.
If you wish to discuss ratios, then what would be the pressure in a tire if it was filled up to 2.75 atmospheres pressure when the temperature was 273 Kelvin and the current temperature is 310 Kelvin?
Hey guys, I just thought that if I quoted this post, we would have an even more gigantic post full of quotes.
That's a silly reason to quote a post.
Since when have silly reasons lacked any force around here?
Since YOUR FACE! Take that, old man!
No need to prove my point absolutely.
It looks like a really long pyramid. Plus, Sand is right.
I wonder if it will get to a point where the first post just looks ridiculous.
01 Aug 2010, 11:13 am
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
just_ben wrote:
Sand wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Sand wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Vexcalibur wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Sand wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Bethie wrote:
In the words of one of my professors, no intelligent god would put our pleasure center so close to the waste evacuation center.
How often has this actually caused a problem?
It is likely that a good deal of distaste for sexual activity promoted in several religions has a basis in this association.
Not only that, but it makes it harder to pee from time to time because the body has to make sure that the two substances: urine and semen, do not mix.
Cowpler's gland ensures the pH balance of the urethra is safe for spermatozoa, and also after the sexual event urine flushes out the urethra during the next urination event.
The physiology has nothing whatsoever to do with the inevitable mental associations.
The first post in this group questions the intellect of God. I have no argument with that.
Mental associations due to unwillingness to learn. Also, you are making the claim that "religious" people are the ones making the mental associations, whereas in this thread it is the "non-religious" ones. And even back about 3000 years ago, in Song Of Solomon, you have been disproved in terms of that also. There is no "fear of sex" in the Bible, but instead regulations against non-committal relationships involving sex.
To be shatteringly unaware of the relationship of religious dogma to sex is totally amazing, even in you. I have no doubt of the massive information you have at your disposal but the absolute genius you display at misapplying it is astounding.
Unaware of the relationship of dogma to sex? I'm aware that there are multiple "relationships", as to how sex is viewed. However, what you mean in effect is that you consider me ignorant of secular anthropological dogma which tries to associate all of Christianity with Victorian England.
On the contrary, I do not consider you ignorant of anything, merely exceedingly clever at misconstrual.
To be unaware of something is to not know that something, and the word "ignorant" means to be without knowledge. You claimed I was unaware of the purported relationship between "religious dogma" (which usually refers in practice, somehow, only to Christianity) to sex, so you claimed I was ignorant of the modern dogma about the relationship between "religious dogma" and sex.
As to misconstruing things, I believe the perception on your part of such ability to misconstrue is not due to actually misconstruing as much as it is that our perceptions are skew compared to each other.
Forget it, kiddo. You are no longer in the area of rational discussion.
If you wish to discuss ratios, then what would be the pressure in a tire if it was filled up to 2.75 atmospheres pressure when the temperature was 273 Kelvin and the current temperature is 310 Kelvin?
Hey guys, I just thought that if I quoted this post, we would have an even more gigantic post full of quotes.
That's a silly reason to quote a post.
Since when have silly reasons lacked any force around here?
Since YOUR FACE! Take that, old man!
No need to prove my point absolutely.
It looks like a really long pyramid. Plus, Sand is right.
I wonder if it will get to a point where the first post just looks ridiculous.
The first post questions the intellect of God. I have no argument with that,
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
01 Aug 2010, 10:51 pm
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
01 Aug 2010, 10:57 pm
