Quote: magicjay38 said: That it wasn't known in the middle ages can be attributed to the fact that most people could not read or write.
Wasn't known in the middle ages? It was because of the mass controversey Columbus set out to disprove the theory in the first place.
Quote: Your arguments seem centered around this idea that science doesn't prove anything. You're right.
Wrong. Science proves many things (physics, locomotion), but in the case of the human psyche, there's no such thing as a totally accurate analysis of the mind. And as I said, intermixing it with physical neurological anomalies that no one's confirmed or even established proper baselines for, you might as well call this field of science "Shot-In-The-Dark-Ologist".......That wasn't very clever.
Quote: But based upon a preponderance of the evidence we can say with X confidence that Y is the expected outcome of Z.
Not there isn't.
Quote: magicjay38 said: You know, Asshole, I maybe wrong on something, but I never tell a bold faced lie.
Didn't feel like it. The nature of your statement was very absolute. At first, I figured you knew what you were talking about...Then I remembered my history.
Quote: Jim Jackson said: Again, no way to measure this "negative effect." I still think in this area, you're reaching.
I don't think I am. One cigarette versus the lossening and depressurising of a muscle that needs to stay closed.
I once had a colonoscapi(sp). Ouch.
Quote: Not at all. If it "hurts a little at first then feels good later" (those who are bottoms clearly say this to be the case), then "pain" was not the intention, just merely a nuisance at the start.
I'm not convinced. You know it's gonna be there, and you know it's gonna be detrimental. Whatever pleasure you feel doesn't come from the act of sodomy itself, its created simply by tweaking your entry depending on the prostate (correct if I'm wrong there). Going solely on physical dissonance, rather than a combination of virulent/bacterial risks, it's not the prostate that feels the pain. It would be more logical if it was the opening itself carried the role of inducing pleasure.
Quote: I still don't see why you're so bent on hanging a moral evaluation on something based on the extent to which it causes pain. Again, I point to childbirth...from all accounts, a damned painful process. Yet it is not morally repugnant, it is morally beautiful.
Going through pain to give birth to a child is quintessentially moral. Going through unnecessary pain for a fruitful and positive outcome. Someone donates blood, a guy breaks his back to build an orphanage--You get the idea.
Quote: And do you wish to tell me that Priests who remain celibate never feel any physical discomfort from their vows of chasity? Are we to then believe that because they're experiencing pain/discomfort, their vows are immoral?
The discomfort is a form of sacrifice that comes with priesthood. However, the truly devout priests won't even care about sex because of their immersion in prayer. And in any case, there's nothing unhealthy about celibacy. Furthermore, any priest who doesn't think they can keep up their vows and feels the pinch more than they do their desire to be close to God should think twice about their decision to remain a priest.
