Knowing your partner's libido is important, what are the reasons to wait until marriage to have sex? (religion, children)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your question seems to presume that there is some kind of intrinsic right for adults to engage in consensual sexual intercourse - that adults are entitled to sex provided the partner is willing. Is that true?
Your question seems to presume that two consenting adults don't have the right to engage in sex.
Your question seems to presume that there is some kind of intrinsic right for adults to engage in consensual sexual intercourse - that adults are entitled to sex provided the partner is willing. Is that true?
Entitled is the wrong word because it has the implication that once you start, you don’t necessarily have the right to stop.
I do, however, think there’s an intrinsic right as long as they’re not harming themselves or others. And that entails the intrinsic right of refraining from sexual activity for any reason or no reason.
I do, however, think there’s an intrinsic right as long as they’re not harming themselves or others. And that entails the intrinsic right of refraining from sexual activity for any reason or no reason.
Thanks. And presumably this intrinsic right to sex trumps the rights of nature?
As in -- say the natural result of intercourse were to follow; if the couple so desired, they ought to be able to eliminate by starvation, poisoning, or dismemberment the natural result of their consensual actions?
Thanks. And presumably this intrinsic right to sex trumps the rights of nature?
As in -- say the natural result of intercourse were to follow; if the couple so desired, they ought to be able to eliminate by starvation, poisoning, or dismemberment the natural result of their consensual actions?
I don't know where you're getting that bizarre nonsense. If two consenting adults, unmarried or married to each other, want to have sex together, nobody else should have any say in the matter, and certainly nobody else has any authority to tell them they can't. We certainly aren't going to be discussing criminal behavior in this forum.
I don't know where you're getting that bizarre nonsense. If two consenting adults, unmarried or married to each other, want to have sex together, nobody else should have any say in the matter, and certainly nobody else has any authority to tell them they can't. We certainly aren't going to be discussing criminal behavior in this forum.
Thanks. And presumably this intrinsic right to sex trumps the rights of nature?
As in -- say the natural result of intercourse were to follow; if the couple so desired, they ought to be able to eliminate by starvation, poisoning, or dismemberment the natural result of their consensual actions?
Which is why I said as long as they’re not harming themselves or others. Come on. I know you like to get a rise out of people, but you’re smarter than that. You can try harder.
It sounds like he wants to compare notes, but I don’t kiss and tell.
He might also be attempting to compare abortion to plain-old infanticide, but I deliberately ignored that. The type of sex he’s most concerned about can’t create babies anyway.
Thanks. And presumably this intrinsic right to sex trumps the rights of nature?
As in -- say the natural result of intercourse were to follow; if the couple so desired, they ought to be able to eliminate by starvation, poisoning, or dismemberment the natural result of their consensual actions?
"the rights of nature"
nature has rights?
bizarre thinking
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.