What if there were a cure for being gay?

Even though I realize you probably knew him in high school, Garamet. I'm pretty sure your understanding of equality and Thomas Jefferson's are very different things. I think you'd have a hard time convincing Thomas Jefferson to support the state taking any man's livelihood away from him because he refused to serve another man for any reason. But I would love to hear you tell Jefferson that the reason we think it's okay to punish the merchant in this case is because the guy he refused to serve is openly homosexual.

Top of Daily Mail

'Save Sarah!': Supergirl star makes public plea to free his cousin, 17, from controversial 'pray the gay away' camp after she was locked up there by 'her parents because she took a girl to prom'

The clitoris, which only exists because it causes women to make babies. Exactly -- the pleasure is the bait, but the babies are the purpose.

Of course they do. That is a valid argument, but the answer also shows why you are wrong. People have receptors in their brains that respond to certain chemicals. If it's pleasant to stimulate these receptors people naturally have an incentive to do so. But to identify the actual purpose of the receptors, we need to look for an agent that binds to them naturally, in order to find an evolutionary explanation for why people who have those receptors are here and why people who don't have those receptors went extinct.

The flaw in your logic is your belief that sex exists to give you pleasure, as if it's your slave. The reality is that the pleasure makes you the slave while it makes sex your master, such that you will seek it out at great expense and risk, and such that you can't resist it because of tens of thousands of successful generations of babies before you have perfected its power over you.

Lol. Except that a preference for those other bonds doesn't produce children to carry that preference on to future generations, does it?

Well, let's look at that. If you knew a guy who only ever wanted to suck down cupcakes, would you think there was something wrong with him? I would. But even if I thought it would be rude to criticize his preferences, I'm not so stupid and weak that I'm going to bow down before the gods of political correctness to make him feel like he's normal. Because he's not normal -- he's a cakesucker.

cpurick's whole case seems to rest on the idea that we're still nematodes squiggling around in pond water instead of beings with an advanced cerebral cortex.
I admire its seductive cynicism, but um...you kinda have to ignore an awful lot of evolution to put it forward with a straight face.

That's not the case I'm making. Maybe you're just drinking too much.

No, he's arguing evolution. If it wasn't for the hard wiring evolution put in our brains, we'd probably live like Shakers and the sexes wouldn't even bother mixing because they don't have all that much in common. Men would hang out with men at NASCAR events and women would hang out with women at Bed Bath and Beyond.

Lots of human behavior is hardwired. Many of the interactions with police are examples of innate wiring that is a bad fit for modern society, such as vengeance, looting, and mob behavior where we riot or hang people from trees. Vengeance is what keeps people honest in the absence of police, courts, and prison systems. Looting is a survival mechanism for when your village is raided. Mob behavior where we string bodies up like decorations was probably a way of intimidating local predators, leaving them alive to defend their territory while teaching them not to attack humans because we're crazy, violent, and extremely vindictive. Just the site of a predator attacking a human will cause otherwise normal people to band together and start shouting, honking horns, and banging pots together. Nobody taught them to do that. It's instinctive.

Doesn't make you a puppet.
That was my point.

So if @cpurick were at all serious about these beliefs, he'd call any woman desiring sex outside of fertile days, despite contraception, or after menopause, and any man desiring such sex, abnormal. It's an interesting universe he lives in. Joyless, but interesting. I think sentient reptiles might live like that.

You don't get it. People are wired to like sex because the people who didn't failed to reproduce. They left the gene pool a long time ago, along with people who didn't like eating food. And who do women like as partners? Initially large alpha males with violent tendencies who have reproductive potential, just like the deer and bighorn sheep going for the herd leaders, or gorilla girls going for silver backs. But we in part walk because it frees up arms for carrying babies, giving us far more reproductive potential than apes and monkeys. But that potential isn't realized if the female has to spend all her time trying to gather food by herself, so we started forming pair bonds. The ideal male partner for that is someone devoted and reliable who doesn't take unnecessary risks. So women's preferences shift between the outlaw biker and the doctor. These choices were set tens of thousands of years ago and women still have trouble understanding why they make the choices they don't really make.

I could address all the ways in which that is false, but since none of it addresses any point in question anyway, I won't take the bait.

Is this the sad trolling we can expect from TK refugees? That was so trump of you.

Why do you keep touching yourself at Justin Berber concerts?

His position also can't make sense when people enjoy oral, anal, and other forms on non-PIV sexual activity. If the pleasure receptors only exist to induce pro-creation, then why did we evolve the ability to stimulate these receptors in ways guaranteed to not result in pro-creation? The entire argument falls apart the first time cpuprick finally gets a blowjob.

Anything to make you shut up, no doubt.

Don't insult Troll Kingdom like that. Their trolls were far less stupid and at some times could be funny.

No, Ricky Recruit here is the real deal humorless twat.

Wow, so Flashy is going through this old thread and hitting "dumb" on my comments. There's really only one thing I can say about that.

Oh, it's not just you.
He's going on a tear.
I'd forgotten some of these threads.
Like the one where gul took his rep away, and he ran off crying.

What a fucking snowflake.

Indeed. He "dumb" repped me for a post I made expressing condolences for the The Voice singer who was murdered last year. It's so pathetic, it would be hilarious if it weren't a prime example of how utterly lacking he is as a poster.

He also has one hell of a short term memory. The last time he went fucking nuts with the rep system, he lost the privilege for a while. Well, either short term memory, or stultifying intellect.

You're aware, aren't you, that I save all these hyperbolic condemnations of yours? They always put a smile on my face.

EDIT: There you go!

Awwww.....post a few more of those pics, I'm sure that will help you feel better.

That's why I put him on ignore. He doesn't make any posts worth reading and I don't have to put up with all the notifications that he's clicked on a smiley at the end of my post.

Actually, just knowing I'm not a sad little man who's only retort when I've had my ass handed to me by multiple people is go find random threads and commit meaningless acts is more than enough for me. I just post the pics to give other folks the hee bee jee bees.

@Fleshlight gave me a bunch of dumb reps too. I feel so honored!

Also:

Fuck yourself.

Same reason I have him on ignore. I just assume he is dumb repping my posts. I do not need to be notified of it. Since he does it to everyone he has no time for any meaningful replies.

There was no reason to give him back rep functionality. I really do not care as ignore works fine for not seeing it, but it was taken away for a reason and he is not ever going to change. It would be like letting gturner or castle come back. They would be worse than ever. Some people can get it and change, but some people obviously never will.