1993fox Posted 6 April 2015 Author Posted 6 April 2015 Yes. Why? Because it's not 1875. Aaand no wonder society is full on unstable marriages then
lavrentis Posted 6 April 2015 Posted 6 April 2015 Aaand no wonder society is full on unstable marriages then
MooseBreath Posted 6 April 2015 Posted 6 April 2015 Aaand no wonder society is full on unstable marriages then Better natural instability than forced stability.
Benguin Posted 6 April 2015 Posted 6 April 2015 Not interested in religious birds and in this day and age you'd be hard pressed to find a virgin when you're in your twenties. Still always nice to be someone's first; no pre judgements so you can get away with kinky or unethical shiz.
Charl91 Posted 6 April 2015 Posted 6 April 2015 Adequate attempt at controversy. Not bad, but Moose does it better. 6/10.
1993fox Posted 6 April 2015 Author Posted 6 April 2015 Better natural instability than forced stability. What? Forced stability, yeah family life in the past 2000 years was made forcibly stable by people waiting till marriage until feminism came about
leicsmac Posted 6 April 2015 Posted 6 April 2015 Better natural instability than forced stability. Shit Moose, stop saying stuff I agree with. It's making me nervous. A persons sex life should be their own business and that of people they choose to tell. Additionally, why has marriage been considered the golden ticket for society all these years when it makes a lot of people so fvcking unhappy? What? Forced stability, yeah family life in the past 2000 years was made forcibly stable by people waiting till marriage until feminism came about Nope, family life was made stable by the leading man of the family owning his daughters like cattle and then pairing them off with suitors he deemed adequate. Chastity was merely part of the package deal.
1993fox Posted 6 April 2015 Author Posted 6 April 2015 So, are you waiting 'til marriage yourself then? I'd prefer not to answer until we have a more material discussion So do you fvck prostitutes or not? No but I do drink tequila A persons sex life should be their own business and that of people they choose to tell. So you wouldn't even want to know if your partner is sleeping with someone else to make sure you won't contract any STIs? You wouldn't want to know what your partner has gotten up to previously to make sure you're actually getting into a fruitful partnership? I can't count how many lives of friends have been ruined by being with partners with awful sexual histories. I seriously recommend knowing more.
Unabomber Posted 6 April 2015 Posted 6 April 2015 As a virgin I would personally feel more comfortable with another virgin I reckon.
leicsmac Posted 6 April 2015 Posted 6 April 2015 So you wouldn't even want to know if your partner is sleeping with someone else to make sure you won't contract any STIs? You wouldn't want to know what your partner has gotten up to previously to make sure you're actually getting into a fruitful partnership? I can't count how many lives of friends have been ruined by being with partners with awful sexual histories. I seriously recommend knowing more. Yup, I would ask them. In full. And if they didn't want to answer, I wouldn't pursue them further. What I wouldn't do is judge them for that history, as long as it was consensual and adult.
ealingfox Posted 6 April 2015 Posted 6 April 2015 Still not sure whether the OP is serious or not here...
Alf Bentley Posted 6 April 2015 Posted 6 April 2015 Have you got a graph showing the correlation between stable marriages and virginity in males? If you have and it shows the same correlation, you could start a FoxesTalk campaign for male LCFC fans to remain virgins. I can see you winning a lot of support for that. No, seriously. If this is your ambition, you'd better swap the tequila for a particularly strict religion (Islam, Catholicism or Evangelical Protestantism?) and start hanging around Sunday schools or something....
1993fox Posted 6 April 2015 Author Posted 6 April 2015 Yup, I would ask them. In full. And if they didn't want to answer, I wouldn't pursue them further. What I wouldn't do is judge them for that history, as long as it was consensual and adult. Ah, the 'I wouldn't judge them' argument brainfed to us by liberals; I said this in another thread, soon enough we'll be ordered not to judge pedophiles and zoophiles.
1993fox Posted 6 April 2015 Author Posted 6 April 2015 Have you got a graph showing the correlation between stable marriages and virginity in males? If you have and it shows the same correlation, you could start a FoxesTalk campaign for male LCFC fans to remain virgins. I can see you winning a lot of support for that. No, seriously. If this is your ambition, you'd better swap the tequila for a particularly strict religion (Islam, Catholicism or Evangelical Protestantism?) and start hanging around Sunday schools or something.... You can drink tequila and maintain a morally healthy lifestyle, I don't have to belong to a certain religion to respect an age-old human norm.
leicsmac Posted 6 April 2015 Posted 6 April 2015 Ah, the 'I wouldn't judge them' argument brainfed to us by liberals; I said this in another thread, soon enough we'll be ordered not to judge pedophiles and zoophiles. Slippery slope fallacy. I've never understood the area of social conservatism that likes to stick its nose into what people do between the sheets and tut disapprovingly at it, but I understand that others think differently.
1993fox Posted 6 April 2015 Author Posted 6 April 2015 Slippery slope fallacy. I've never understood the area of social conservatism that likes to stick its nose into what people do between the sheets and tut disapprovingly at it, but I understand that others think differently. When people think of social paternalism it seems to ignite very negative thoughts of interventionism. Really, it should be thought of as parentalism because it improves social stability. Reduce promiscuity, and you have fewer children raised in disunited families (no offence to posters raised by single mothers/divorced parents), which in turns allows the next generation to fulfill their full potential.
leicsmac Posted 6 April 2015 Posted 6 April 2015 When people think of social paternalism it seems to ignite very negative thoughts of interventionism. Really, it should be thought of as parentalism because it improves social stability. Reduce promiscuity, and you have fewer children raised in disunited families (no offence to posters raised by single mothers/divorced parents), which in turns allows the next generation to fulfill their full potential. Abstinence has never worked as a form of birth control and it doesn't now - there are far more effective ways. It reeks of interventionism because it is - it's people passing judgement on matters that are entirely not their business. And you concede yourself through your 'no offence' part that it is possible for a family unit to be stable whilst not adopting the 'conventional' model. However, as I said I'm perfectly fine with people believing in this model of society. I am however most definitely against them attempting to impress it upon those who think differently.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.