-->
Pages: 1

Pirates


(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)



Posted by: John H.

Pirates. What kind of life did they lead and what kind of life did they have? Ever wonder? How did they become a Pirate in the first place? What was the purpose?

Sexually speaking here is one book I am aware of immediately that does address this aspect: RUM, SODOMY, AND THE LASH: PIRACY, SEXUALITY AND MASCULINE IDENTITY, by Hans Turley (New York University Press).

There are other good books that discuss all aspects of Pirates and Piracy.

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: Decker

Johnny, do you like movies about gladiators?

......Have you ever been in a cockpit before?

....Have you ever seen a grown man naked?

Well my goodness, Scraps is a boy dog isn't he?


Posted by: rockgazer69

it sounds interesting. i'm so sick.


Posted by: Volume

Rofl on the airplane quotes!!


Posted by: bio-chem

is this for real or did you make this stuff up? captain jack sparrow is hetero. ha ha ha


Posted by: rockgazer69

this is a review i found of the book.

Rum, Sodomy, and the Lash has nothing to say about rum or the lash and the sodomy seems to exist only in the author’s mind. Nor does Hans Turley answer the fascinating question set out in his introduction. “How did the pirate … become the outrageously masculine anti-hero familiar to us through novels, movies, plays, and other outlets of popular culture?” (p.2). Hans Turley is a literary historian who, in this book, analyses a number of early eighteenth-century texts relating to piracy, such as trial records, Captain Charles Johnson’s General History of the Pyrates and novels by Daniel Defoe, in order to examine the sexuality and masculine identity of pirates. His argument is allusive, dense and riddled with jargon not easily accessible to the maritime historian, though no doubt clear enough to literary critics and students of gay studies. His aim seems to be to suggest by innuendo that the world of the pirate was not just homosocial but also homoerotic, but he fails to convince. Turley is honest enough to say that “the evidence for piratical sodomy is so sparse as to be almost non-existent” (p.2), but lack of evidence does not prevent him from seeing things in the pirate mind that are not apparent to other observers. He attempts to bolster his argument by drawing unconvincing parallels between pirates and the sodomites who attracted much prurient attention ashore. “Both the pirate and the sodomite are attracted to and gravitate toward other men. For the sodomite, this attraction is explicitly eroticized. For the pirate, this attraction is homosocial, but implicitly eroticized because he is culturally deviant, yet his sexuality is neither questioned nor determined.” (p.81) This last is an important point for Turley who claims (inaccurately) on several occasions that sexuality is left out of almost all depictions of piracy and that when it is implied it is ambiguous, as in Captain Johnson’s unspecific mention of the “riotous manner of living, as is the custom of pyrates” engaged in by Captain Vane and his crew while they were careening their ship. Johnson’s silence is a gift to the author. “Sodomy is tantalizingly implicit and repressed”, claims Turley. (p.85). But this is nonsense and indeed deliberate blindness on the part of the author, since Captain Johnson spells out on many other occasions what pirate custom was in these careening parties and it was certainly not homoerotic. Captain England’s crew lived “very wantonly” in West Africa for several weeks, “making free with the negro women”; Bartholomew Roberts’s men met “with handsome treatment” from local women in the Virgin Islands; Captain Taylor’s men caused havoc in the Laccadive Islands, “whose women they forced in a barbarous way to their lusts”. Is sodomy “tantalizingly implicit” in these and other descriptions which Turley must surely have read if he has read Captain Johnson? Turley also claims (again inaccurately) that “with the exception of some articles that Captain Roberts’s crew signed – in which ‘No boy or woman is to be allowed amongst them’ – the pirate’s sex life remains uncontrolled by any pirate rules.” (p.40). That “boy” is obviously useful to his argument, but again this is deliberate blindness, since several other pirate articles do mention sex but not the sort of sex that would suit Turley’s thesis. The articles signed by the crew of Captain John Phillips for instance, which are in Johnson, state that “if at any time you meet with a prudent woman, that man that offers to meddle with her, without her consent, shall suffer present death” and this is echoed in the articles of Captain Anstis which are preserved in the Admiralty records. (PRO ADM 1/4104/75) “If any … shall go on board of a prize and meet with any Gentlewoman or Lady of Honour and should force them against their will to lye with them shall suffer death.” Such articles suggest that pirates were not just heterosexual in their lusts, as most people would expect, but that they had also retained a greater sense of propriety and class-consciousness than Turley and indeed several other historians have suggested.

Hans Turley tells us in his preface that he first got interested in the theme of this book when studying Defoe’s pirate novel Captain Singleton where he was struck by the “almost explicit homoerotic desire shown by the title character for his friend and companion, Quaker William.” (p.vii). Later, he discerned a similar relationship between Robinson Crusoe and Friday and these two themes are interestingly developed in the last two (and best) chapters of the book. These readings of Defoe may or may not be correct, but it does seem rather superficial to look only for the homoerotic in relationships between men in all-male societies, whether they be pirates, sailors, cowboys or indeed rugby players. Friendship, mateship, peer competition in violence, blasphemy, showy dress and outrageous behaviour, lust for money, adventure, drink (and indeed women) are not necessarily homoerotic in motivation. Being all men together in defiance of the rest of the world was clearly an important part of pirate motivation, as indeed it is an important factor in explaining the continued attraction of the pirate in popular culture. But surely it is not realistic to suggest, on virtually no evidence, that it is the pirate’s secret homoeroticism that drew these crews together and has since provided prurient fascination for boys of all ages. Masculine identity and masculine culture are fascinating subjects for inquiry and a pirate ship makes a good laboratory, though sadly one with very little evidence, but Turley has not managed to solve the riddle of his hypermasculine anti-heroes despite his claim “that once the hatches to the pirates’ holds are opened a crack, ‘reality’ destabilizes, things unsaid may be spoken, and the homoerotic implications of elements in pirate history and fiction can be explored.”


Posted by: bio-chem

wow thanks rock. john boy any rebuttal?


Posted by: rockgazer69

Philosophy of perception

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The philosophy of perception concerns how mental processes and symbols depend on the world internal and external to the perceiver. Our perception of the external world begins with the senses, which lead us to generate empirical concepts representing the world around us, within a mental framework relating new concepts to preexisting ones. Because perception leads to an individual's impression of the world, its study may be important for those interested in better understanding communication, self, id, ego —even reality.

A major issue in the philosophy of perception is the possibility of discrepancies between the external world and the perceiver's impressions, which are sometimes referred to as qualia. While René Descartes concluded that the question "Do I exist?" can only be answered in the affirmative (cogito ergo sum), Freudian psychology suggests that self-perception is an illusion of the ego, and cannot be trusted to decide what is in fact real. Such questions are continuously reanimated, as each generation grapples with the nature of existence from within the human condition. The questions remain: Do our perceptions allow us to experience the world as it "really is?" Can we ever know another point of view in the way we know our own?


Posted by: thatguy

Wait - Are we talking about butt pirates or like, REAL pirates?

Well it sounds like a crock of bull to me, but they DID wear sashes...


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Decker
Johnny, do you like movies about gladiators?

......Have you ever been in a cockpit before?

....Have you ever seen a grown man naked?

Well my goodness, Scraps is a boy dog isn't he?
Hi Decker,

Yes I have been in a cockpit before - Naval Air. And in war...

Have I seen a Grown Man naked - MANY MANY TIMES. And they me.

..............

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: bio-chem

yes john but for most men it becomes a nessesity of circumstance, for you it is pleasurable.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockgazer69
this is a review i found of the book.

Rum, Sodomy, and the Lash has nothing to say about rum or the lash and the sodomy seems to exist only in the author’s mind. Nor does Hans Turley answer the fascinating question set out in his introduction. “How did the pirate … become the outrageously masculine anti-hero familiar to us through novels, movies, plays, and other outlets of popular culture?” (p.2). Hans Turley is a literary historian who, in this book, analyses a number of early eighteenth-century texts relating to piracy, such as trial records, Captain Charles Johnson’s General History of the Pyrates and novels by Daniel Defoe, in order to examine the sexuality and masculine identity of pirates. His argument is allusive, dense and riddled with jargon not easily accessible to the maritime historian, though no doubt clear enough to literary critics and students of gay studies. His aim seems to be to suggest by innuendo that the world of the pirate was not just homosocial but also homoerotic, but he fails to convince. Turley is honest enough to say that “the evidence for piratical sodomy is so sparse as to be almost non-existent” (p.2), but lack of evidence does not prevent him from seeing things in the pirate mind that are not apparent to other observers. He attempts to bolster his argument by drawing unconvincing parallels between pirates and the sodomites who attracted much prurient attention ashore. “Both the pirate and the sodomite are attracted to and gravitate toward other men. For the sodomite, this attraction is explicitly eroticized. For the pirate, this attraction is homosocial, but implicitly eroticized because he is culturally deviant, yet his sexuality is neither questioned nor determined.” (p.81) This last is an important point for Turley who claims (inaccurately) on several occasions that sexuality is left out of almost all depictions of piracy and that when it is implied it is ambiguous, as in Captain Johnson’s unspecific mention of the “riotous manner of living, as is the custom of pyrates” engaged in by Captain Vane and his crew while they were careening their ship. Johnson’s silence is a gift to the author. “Sodomy is tantalizingly implicit and repressed”, claims Turley. (p.85). But this is nonsense and indeed deliberate blindness on the part of the author, since Captain Johnson spells out on many other occasions what pirate custom was in these careening parties and it was certainly not homoerotic. Captain England’s crew lived “very wantonly” in West Africa for several weeks, “making free with the negro women”; Bartholomew Roberts’s men met “with handsome treatment” from local women in the Virgin Islands; Captain Taylor’s men caused havoc in the Laccadive Islands, “whose women they forced in a barbarous way to their lusts”. Is sodomy “tantalizingly implicit” in these and other descriptions which Turley must surely have read if he has read Captain Johnson? Turley also claims (again inaccurately) that “with the exception of some articles that Captain Roberts’s crew signed – in which ‘No boy or woman is to be allowed amongst them’ – the pirate’s sex life remains uncontrolled by any pirate rules.” (p.40). That “boy” is obviously useful to his argument, but again this is deliberate blindness, since several other pirate articles do mention sex but not the sort of sex that would suit Turley’s thesis. The articles signed by the crew of Captain John Phillips for instance, which are in Johnson, state that “if at any time you meet with a prudent woman, that man that offers to meddle with her, without her consent, shall suffer present death” and this is echoed in the articles of Captain Anstis which are preserved in the Admiralty records. (PRO ADM 1/4104/75) “If any … shall go on board of a prize and meet with any Gentlewoman or Lady of Honour and should force them against their will to lye with them shall suffer death.” Such articles suggest that pirates were not just heterosexual in their lusts, as most people would expect, but that they had also retained a greater sense of propriety and class-consciousness than Turley and indeed several other historians have suggested.

Hans Turley tells us in his preface that he first got interested in the theme of this book when studying Defoe’s pirate novel Captain Singleton where he was struck by the “almost explicit homoerotic desire shown by the title character for his friend and companion, Quaker William.” (p.vii). Later, he discerned a similar relationship between Robinson Crusoe and Friday and these two themes are interestingly developed in the last two (and best) chapters of the book. These readings of Defoe may or may not be correct, but it does seem rather superficial to look only for the homoerotic in relationships between men in all-male societies, whether they be pirates, sailors, cowboys or indeed rugby players. Friendship, mateship, peer competition in violence, blasphemy, showy dress and outrageous behaviour, lust for money, adventure, drink (and indeed women) are not necessarily homoerotic in motivation. Being all men together in defiance of the rest of the world was clearly an important part of pirate motivation, as indeed it is an important factor in explaining the continued attraction of the pirate in popular culture. But surely it is not realistic to suggest, on virtually no evidence, that it is the pirate’s secret homoeroticism that drew these crews together and has since provided prurient fascination for boys of all ages. Masculine identity and masculine culture are fascinating subjects for inquiry and a pirate ship makes a good laboratory, though sadly one with very little evidence, but Turley has not managed to solve the riddle of his hypermasculine anti-heroes despite his claim “that once the hatches to the pirates’ holds are opened a crack, ‘reality’ destabilizes, things unsaid may be spoken, and the homoerotic implications of elements in pirate history and fiction can be explored.”
Hi Rock,

A good way to see what is written in any book is to go to the "Bibliography" and "Notes" sections of any book and see where they got their information. Never just "accept" what is written by always question it and to help you do that is to see what sources were used to write the book - a good place to start.

Here is other titles that bear on this subject:

BURG, B. R.: GAY WARRIORS: A DOCUMENTARY HISTORY FROMM THE ANCIENT WORLD TO THE PRESENT (New York University Press)

BURG, B. R.: SODOMY AND THE PIRATE TRADITION: ENGLISH SEA ROVERS IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY CARIBBEAN (New York University Press)

Searching FIRSTSEARCH (WorldCat) (through your library if they have this service which most larger libraries do have) and/or THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS on-line catalog (at www.loc.gov) helps. Checking with www.amazon.com and entering the subject will also show what is available at the present time and also sometimes lists out-of-print titles. You can also go to www.abe.com or www.bookfinder.com and enter what you are looking for and the results will appear.

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
wow thanks rock. john boy any rebuttal?
Bio,

The best book I have seen that comes to mind immediately on the subject of Male Sexuality is that of FORBIDDEN FRIENDSHIPS, By Michael Rocke (Oxford University Press). It is extremely well written and documented and uses source materials that have survived to back up what is said in the book. It received wide positive critical acclaim. Other books, while not on the subject of Pirates would be those of Gilbert Herdt. I'll have to get back to you on the titles. They discuss what happened (s) in Malenasia and the surrounding territory and list sources used.

There is also books on American Indian Male Sexuality as well. I'll have to get back to you on those titles as well.

And then there is Greece, Rome... Africa...

Throughout the world and throughout time there has been BiSexuality and Homosexuality as well as Heterosexuality. And in the Natural World as well. In Nature.

John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thatguy
Wait - Are we talking about butt pirates or like, REAL pirates?

Well it sounds like a crock of bull to me, but they DID wear sashes...
Hi Thatguy,

PIRATES - as in REAL Pirates - as in REAL MEN. REAL MEN do have sex with each other too. And always have. Throughout time and throughout history.
It has been documented and more is coming out about it all the time as research into the subject is published. Even in primitive societies.

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
yes john but for most men it becomes a nessesity of circumstance, for you it is pleasurable.
Bio,

Something that seems to pass you by is that Human Beings can and do "find pleasure" in BOTH Sexes. Men and/or Women. "Nessesity" ( spelled Necessity - not being a smart ass here, just helpful) of circumstance" has always been one avenue Men have accepted as a way to find pleasure - and care from other Human Beings. And BE cared for.

Anyone - ANYONE - I am with Sexually speaking are always those that agree completely and no one is ever just "used". I NEVER do this to others and they NEVER do this to me. It is disrespectful to both involved. YOU (meaning anyone here) MUST CARE about those you are with. At least that is how I conduct myself and my life.

John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
yes john but for most men it becomes a nessesity of circumstance, for you it is pleasurable.
Bio,

In addition, something you bring up - "nessesity of circumstance" - ANY MAN that masturbates himself IS TECHNICALLY having sex with a MAN even though that Man is one and the same Man. And HE IS ALWAYS A MAN - NO ONE can EVER take away from a Man his Manhood. It is God given. Technically ALL MEN have Sex with Men - whether with OTHER MEN or WITH THEMSELVES. Truthfully speaking, there is no way around that FACT. IT IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE.

Probably the majority of all Men - and maybe even Females too - are actually BiSexual. You also have those that are at either of the extreme of "the scale" - completely Heterosexual and completely Homosexual - but if the truth is ever really known I think science will find most people are actually BiSexual.



John H.


Posted by: bio-chem

Quote:
Originally Posted by John H.
Bio,

The best book I have seen that comes to mind immediately on the subject of Male Sexuality is that of FORBIDDEN FRIENDSHIPS, By Michael Rocke (Oxford University Press). It is extremely well written and documented and uses source materials that have survived to back up what is said in the book. It received wide positive critical acclaim. Other books, while not on the subject of Pirates would be those of Gilbert Herdt. I'll have to get back to you on the titles. They discuss what happened (s) in Malenasia and the surrounding territory and list sources used.

There is also books on American Indian Male Sexuality as well. I'll have to get back to you on those titles as well.

And then there is Greece, Rome... Africa...

Throughout the world and throughout time there has been BiSexuality and Homosexuality as well as Heterosexuality. And in the Natural World as well. In Nature.

John H.
when i asked for a rebuttal i meant to the fact rock had shown that the book you were talking about came to faulty conclusions. how is talkin about homosexuality in other cultures a rebuttal to the fact your pirate boook is believed to be a load of horse poop? never mind ive come to expect you to not address direct questions and for you to ramble on in a tangeant that has nothing to do with the topic at hand


Posted by: bio-chem

Quote:
Originally Posted by John H.
Bio,

In addition, something you bring up - "nessesity of circumstance" - ANY MAN that masturbates himself IS TECHNICALLY having sex with a MAN even though that Man is one and the same Man. And HE IS ALWAYS A MAN - NO ONE can EVER take away from a Man his Manhood. It is God given. Technically ALL MEN have Sex with Men - whether with OTHER MEN or WITH THEMSELVES. Truthfully speaking, there is no way around that FACT. IT IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE.

Probably the majority of all Men - and maybe even Females too - are actually BiSexual. You also have those that are at either of the extreme of "the scale" - completely Heterosexual and completely Homosexual - but if the truth is ever really known I think science will find most people are actually BiSexual.



John H.
being a scientist where you are not, i find your conclusions baseless and your methods faulty. by no stretch of the amagination can self stimulation be considered to make one bi-sexual.


Posted by: Todd_

ive got a tattoo of an anchor on my arm


Posted by: Dale Mabry

Quote:
Originally Posted by Decker
Johnny, do you like movies about gladiators?

......Have you ever been in a cockpit before?

....Have you ever seen a grown man naked?

Well my goodness, Scraps is a boy dog isn't he?

Have you ever been in a Turkish prison?


Posted by: Dale Mabry

http://larry.teamoverkill.com/jive/opening.wav


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
yes john but for most men it becomes a nessesity of circumstance, for you it is pleasurable.

Bio,

You like seeing things ONLY YOUR WAY. Mostly because THAT IS WHAT AND HOW YOU WERE TAUGHT AND YOU LEARNED or "just accepted" - because of your desire to ONLY "see things" ONLY from YOUR WAY. I am VERY OBJECTIVE AND OPEN MINDED and see everything from ALL sides ALL the time - the sum of what I learn is based on my best efforts - which are always continuing - to SEE ALL SIDES OF EVERYTHING with as much ABSENCE of bias, prejudice, bigotry, and certainly hatred. Those things BLIND people to LIFE itself.

When I am with someone especially when it comes to anything Sexual and CARE about them, their being Male or Female has absolutely nothing to do with it at all - that I CARE about them - and they me - DOES - as a fellow Human Being, who is of age and ability of consent and give that consent freely.

Let me ask you - when you are with someone, is it because you CARE about them? Honestly?

When you are with someone, is it just to "get off"?

When you are with someone, is it "pleasurable"?

When you are with someone, WHY are you? Honestly?

Speaking FOR MYSELF - I NEVER am with someone - Man and/or Woman - that I do not care about HONESTLY. That I Have REAL FEELINGS FOR. I NEVER USE others especially Sexually. That, to me is VERY disrespectful and dishonorable to BOTH - or in some cases - ALL involved.

LOVING SOMEONE TRULY has nothing to do with "circumstances" - although it is possible for someone, say in prison, to begin to REALIZE they DO care about another Man and end up having Sexual relations with him. Same with a Pirate, same with a Cowboy, same with a Construction Worker, same with a Football Player, same with a fellow Bodybuilder, same with Boxer, same with ... - PEOPLE - ALL PEOPLE - HUMAN BEINGS - FELLOW HUMAN BEINGS you (meaning anyone here) CARE ABOUT.

Many people DO just "use" others for their personal "gratification" and nothing more. I am NEVER that way with anyone. I would not want to be treated that way be someone else and I do not do that to others.

You mention "...necessity of circumstance..." - when you jack off, is it because of that "necessity"? Certainly with many it IS. I can understand that. And taking it one step further, when YOU are jacking yourself off, YOU ARE HAVING SEX WITH A MAN even though that Man is one and the same Man. You are STILL HAVING SEX WITH A MAN. That is a FACT that can not be changed or "glossed over". Now when you jack off, are you doing it for pure pleasure or because you care about yourself. It could be both. And it IS a Man HAVING SEX with a MAN.

Think about that.

John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
when i asked for a rebuttal i meant to the fact rock had shown that the book you were talking about came to faulty conclusions. how is talkin about homosexuality in other cultures a rebuttal to the fact your pirate boook is believed to be a load of horse poop? never mind ive come to expect you to not address direct questions and for you to ramble on in a tangeant that has nothing to do with the topic at hand

Bio,

The Pirate book I listed was one that came to my attention - I had not read it myself. I posted it to see if someone else had seen it and what they thought of it. Everyone has opinions about everything. This book COULD be wanting to have others who READ the book QUESTION it FOR VERY GOOD REASONS. It COULD BE the author is trying to have people DO their own research into this subject FOR THEMSELVES to find TRUTHFUL ANSWERS FOR THEMSELVES THAT ARE ACCURATE. Books are written in that vein. Books are sometimes written to stir people purposely so they will want to find truthful answers themselves. Add to the knowledge of a subject. From all perspectives. He does raise questions in his book - probably purposefully.

Rock's posting showed viewpoints from the perspective of one or more people as appraisals of the book - from some not all. Not every book is written well - certainly even "best sellers" are not necessarily well written.

The book I mentioned in another thread FORBIDDEN FRIENDSHIPS, by Michael Rocke (Oxford University Press) IS VERY WELL WRITTEN and DOCUMENTED WITH SOURCE INFORMATION - firsthand information. It is one that I have read and would hope others would read as well - it IS worth your time to read BIGTIME. It discusses Sexuality among Men around 1400-1500 A. D. in ONE town in Italy, Florence, WHERE RECORDS SURVIVED and were not destroyed. Yet look at those that would try to "damn" the book for what IT DOES SAY THAT IS FACTUAL. Nearly 50% of ALL MEN - THAT WERE CAUGHT - THAT WERE CAUGHT - and eventually prosecuted for having Sex with each other - a figure that is incredible and yet factual, makes you wonder then HOW is it that in this one town it would not have then also been PREVALENT throughout the world in other towns and in the outlying areas. If BiSexuality and Homosexuality are "so wrong" how is it that SO MANY MEN found it SO RIGHT? Also that book talks about how even those that were after "offenders" THEMSELVES ended up having Sex with Men. EVEN THEY - some - became involved as well.

There are a couple of books that come to mind about Melanesians and the surrounding area where all Males live with each other while growing up until they reach a certain age - maybe around 20, 25, etc. and then begin to be with Females IF that is what they choose. But until they leave this union with other Men they live with and have Sex with other Men. They feel that one of the ways to becoming a Man is by injesting the Semen of other Men. I'll get back to you on the titles. There is also one that I have seen that discusses what happens in Africa as well.

Here are some additional titles:

By or edited by Gilbert Herdt:

RITUALS OF MANHOOD: MALE INITIATION IN PAPUA NEW GUINEA.

THE SAMBIA: RITUAL AND GENDER IN NEW GUINEA.

GUARDIANS OF THE FLUTES: MALE INITIATION IN PAPUA NEW GUINEA.

Edited by Stephen O. Murray:

BOY-WIVES AND FEMALE HUSBANDS: STUDIES IN AFRICAN HOMOSEXUALITIES (the title is really not all the book talks about - it is meant I think to get a person's attention. All aspects are discussed.)

John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
being a scientist where you are not, i find your conclusions baseless and your methods faulty. by no stretch of the amagination can self stimulation be considered to make one bi-sexual.

Bio,

Are you now saying YOU are a "Scientist"? Just wondering. I myself am not making that claim about myself.

I AM saying that ANY MAN that masturbates HIMSELF IS HAVING SEX with a Man - even though that Man is one and the same Man. The IS a fact. Period. He is ENJOYING IT too. And when one Man has Sex with another Man that is not the same Men THEY TOO are ENJOYING IT. Sexual self-stimulation has nothing to do with it - it IS STILL A MAN HAVING SEX WITH A MAN. AND ENJOYING IT. If he was not "attracted to the process" he would not do it to himself - or to others if that is what ends up happening. Most Men DO have Sex with MEN - even it that Man is one and the same Man.

Women, the same thing. Those that masturbate themselves are having Sex with a Woman even if that Woman happens to be one and the same Woman. Same as above.

John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd_
ive got a tattoo of an anchor on my arm
Hi Todd,

That will "do it" Buddy!!!

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: bio-chem

Quote:
Originally Posted by John H.
Bio,

Are you now saying YOU are a "Scientist"? Just wondering. I myself am not making that claim about myself.

John H.
what is chemistry if not a science? wouldnt the dedicated study to a science make one a scientist?


Posted by: Vieope

Arrrr yeah yeah harder Arrr
Arrrrrrr

Pirate´s orgasm.


Posted by: bio-chem

john try and keep your answers shorter, i get bored reading your posts otherwise


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
what is chemistry if not a science? wouldnt the dedicated study to a science make one a scientist?
Bio,

Yes chemistry is a science. For sure.

I was referring to you calling yourself a Scientist - as in "already received their degree" in it. I thought you were still going to college to earn your degree is what I was saying - AND NOT to run you down in any way. Just wondering...

And as for being OPEN MINDED - being a Scientist you MUST - you can not JUST ACCEPT the "normal" or "usual" because if you do that sets you up to NOT finding answers to those questions you will have in your career. Sure you learn certain "accepted" things BUT to FIND the answers to things there is no current answer for you MUST consider going outside the "norm" too. Not always just "accepting" what is "normal" or "usual" - see what I mean?

And believe it or not that applies to ALL THINGS we do not have "answers for". Anytime you are not (meaning anyone here) willing to CONSIDER ALL INFORMATION FROM ALL SOURCES ALL THE TIME - OBJECTIVELY - and even those things that are not "normal" or "normally"....

John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vieope
Arrrr yeah yeah harder Arrr
Arrrrrrr

Pirate´s orgasm.
Hi Vieope,

I am SURE this has happened - as also happened with Cowboys, Pioneers, Construction Workers, Bodybuilders, Wrestlers, Baseball and Football players, etc. ...

"Shiver me timbers"? Wonder if that has anything to do with....

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
john try and keep your answers shorter, i get bored reading your posts otherwise
Bio,

I do try. But then I have to be careful with you - I do not want you thinking I am "keeping them short - and sweet", now do I? And "for you"...

Now as for you "getting bored" - "stiff"?

I couldn't resist!!!!

John H.


Posted by: bio-chem

john dont flirt with me. your wasting your time. i dont swing that way


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
john dont flirt with me. your wasting your time. i dont swing that way
Bio,

Believe me I certainly had no preconceived notions at all.

I was just joking with you but forgot religious zealots can not even joke around. And you are right, I would be wasting my time. And I do not "swing" "religious zealot" ways either. Trust me, you would be completely SAFE!!!

John H.


Posted by: Pepper

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Mabry
Have you ever been in a Turkish prison?
Surely you have.


Posted by: bio-chem

Quote:
Originally Posted by John H.
Bio,

Believe me I certainly had no preconceived notions at all.

I was just joking with you but forgot religious zealots can not even joke around. And you are right, I would be wasting my time. And I do not "swing" "religious zealot" ways either. Trust me, you would be completely SAFE!!!

John H.
its not my safety you should worry about


Posted by: maniclion

John quit questioning your masculinity, it's o.k to be gay or bi and still be a macho man look at Alexander the Great, you have to be a bad mofo to conquer all the known world yet he enjoyed his male lover(s).


Posted by: bio-chem

he will never stop. he is trying to convince himself it is ok


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by maniclion
John quit questioning your masculinity, it's o.k to be gay or bi and still be a macho man look at Alexander the Great, you have to be a bad mofo to conquer all the known world yet he enjoyed his male lover(s).
Hi Maniclion,

I am not questiong me at all. It is others that are. Or so it seems. I have NO problem with my Sexuality AS BORN and AS A GIFT FROM GOD just as with any other Gift we receive naturally.

As for Alex, if he looked at all like Brad Pitt I guess he would have had a lot of Male lovers.

A side note: Brad Pitt is completely NUTS if he doesn't CONTINUE working out - he has great protential and the work he did for the Alexander the Great Film showed that. He should KEEP GOING. Also, a MAN is ALWAYS A MAN no matter who he has relationships and/or friendships with. Caring honestly about others - Male and Female - is never wrong.

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
he will never stop. he is trying to convince himself it is ok

Bio,

You sure ARE a "religious zealot" in the truest sense of the word and meaning. You never stop your BULL.

I have NO problem with my Sexuality AS BORN. Maybe it is YOU that is STILL questioning yours. Why else would you put up so big a front and want others to "think you are..." And "so pure".

You are so pent-up from your self-imposed "abstinance" that you are mentally and physically a wreck. It IS NOT something NATURE intends for you. Have someone WORK on you and your body UNCONTROLABLY and you will be much relieved - and happy.

Then maybe you WILL SEE the TRUE GOD.

John H.


Posted by: gococksDJS

Quote:
Originally Posted by John H.
Bio,

You sure ARE a "religious zealot" in the truest sense of the word and meaning. You never stop your BULL.

I have NO problem with my Sexuality AS BORN. Maybe it is YOU that is STILL questioning yours. Why else would you put up so big a front and want others to "think you are..." And "so pure".

You are so pent-up from your self-imposed "abstinance" that you are mentally and physically a wreck. It IS NOT something NATURE intends for you. Have someone WORK on you and your body UNCONTROLABLY and you will be much relieved - and happy.

Then maybe you WILL SEE the TRUE GOD.

John H.
John H, i think you never stop your bull because you know that God is going to cast you into the firey pits of hell for all eternity when you die and your trying to get all of us to come with you.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gococksDJS
John H, i think you never stop your bull because you know that God is going to cast you into the firey pits of hell for all eternity when you die and your trying to get all of us to come with you.

Gococks,

No God will not. I KNOW that FOR SURE. I know you'd like to "believe" that based on what you "learned" or "were taught".

I never use others and they do not use me. Especially Sexually. To me Sex is sacred and those you have Sex with the very same. Men and/or Women. And they KNOW that too about me. I do not "take lightly" feelings a person has for each other as long as they are each of age and ability of consent and give that consent freely. No one is ever "forced" to do something they really do not WANT to do. Including Men. In fact I have had some of the best relationships with MEN. And still have them and their true friendship. We WANT to KNOW each other. That is God given. A gift from God. Period.

John H.


Posted by: bio-chem

Quote:
Originally Posted by John H.
Bio,

You sure ARE a "religious zealot" in the truest sense of the word and meaning. You never stop your BULL.

I have NO problem with my Sexuality AS BORN. Maybe it is YOU that is STILL questioning yours. Why else would you put up so big a front and want others to "think you are..." And "so pure".

You are so pent-up from your self-imposed "abstinance" that you are mentally and physically a wreck. It IS NOT something NATURE intends for you. Have someone WORK on you and your body UNCONTROLABLY and you will be much relieved - and happy.

Then maybe you WILL SEE the TRUE GOD.

John H.
so by giving up my morals i will get to see God? id like to take wrong answers for a thousand alex


Posted by: bio-chem

Quote:
Originally Posted by John H.
Gococks,

No God will not. I KNOW that FOR SURE. I know you'd like to "believe" that based on what you "learned" or "were taught".

I never use others and they do not use me. Especially Sexually. To me Sex is sacred and those you have Sex with the very same. Men and/or Women. And they KNOW that too about me. I do not "take lightly" feelings a person has for each other as long as they are each of age and ability of consent and give that consent freely. No one is ever "forced" to do something they really do not WANT to do. Including Men. In fact I have had some of the best relationships with MEN. And still have them and their true friendship. We WANT to KNOW each other. That is God given. A gift from God. Period.

John H.
homosexuality is not a gift from God. its a perversion of satan.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
homosexuality is not a gift from God. its a perversion of satan.
Bio,

You have your "religion" and your "god"...

I have mine WHICH IS THE REAL GOD. And REAL RELIGION. Touchet!!!!

See how that works...

I've got to get going though. You and your kind do have a "head" start on me.... And I've got a lot of money to make and buildings and castles to build... And people to scam... If I pay you more than you are now getting can I "hire" you - you are good at "spin"...

John H.

John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
homosexuality is not a gift from God. its a perversion of satan.

Bio,

You had better start lining up all the animals and other things in Nature that are then. And those that are BiSexual and Asexual too. Don't forget them now. Do you use incense too?

John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
so by giving up my morals i will get to see God? id like to take wrong answers for a thousand alex

Bio,

You? Moral? Not according to you and your own words - you said you wanted three women on a deserted island all to yourself - all it takes it just the thought and all that wet dreaming you end up doing and you are falling by the "wayside".... I love those that THINK they are "so moral".... Those are more often than not the most immoral.

John H.


Posted by: gococksDJS

Quote:
Originally Posted by John H.
Gococks,

No God will not. I KNOW that FOR SURE. I know you'd like to "believe" that based on what you "learned" or "were taught".

I never use others and they do not use me. Especially Sexually. To me Sex is sacred and those you have Sex with the very same. Men and/or Women. And they KNOW that too about me. I do not "take lightly" feelings a person has for each other as long as they are each of age and ability of consent and give that consent freely. No one is ever "forced" to do something they really do not WANT to do. Including Men. In fact I have had some of the best relationships with MEN. And still have them and their true friendship. We WANT to KNOW each other. That is God given. A gift from God. Period.

John H.
You don't know shit John H, you believe. You believe that in the eyes of God, what you are doing is acceptable, and I believe that you will burn for all eternity for it, but for you to say that you know for a fact is moronic. Your fisting days where you and your buddies shove baseball bats up your asses may have transcended you into some state of mind that you think is heaven, but it wasn't, so don't tell me you know at all. The basis of God, any god for that matter is faith, and I have faith that you will burn for all time.
And what's with your comment about being of age? Did your mentor Dr. Kesey study subjects of age? Does a 13 month old infant posess the ability to say "I do not want to be sexually violated by you!"????? NO they don't, yet he performed a study that HE PUBLISHED IN HIS OWN BOOK that infants can have orgasms. So yet again you contradict yourself. You have huge problems John H, and hopefully you will realize what is actually going on in your melon.


Posted by: soxmuscle

Today was National Pirate Awareness Day. A club at my school of all stoners and cokeheads started the "Pirate Club" and they handed out eye patches to everyone to celebrate. ha.


Posted by: bio-chem

john h the truth is not for sale. neither is my alegience to it.

just because animals do it doesnt make it ok for humans. we are not animals. ie. male cats kill young that are not theirs, so the females will get ready to have babies faster. Are you saying if animals do something then it is ok for humans to? i know you would like to believe that if animals do it its ok, but then someone comes up with something animals do that we shouldnt and you refuse to respond. it would be nice if you would, but i dont expect you to. how could you respond?

and again john boy wet dreams dont make me immoral. its nice that you continue to say such things because the ridiculousness of your arguement is so obvious.

and i especially like your " I love those that THINK they are "so moral".... Those are more often than not the most immoral." i have wet dreams and you stick your hand up another guys ass. yet im the one who is the most immoral. good one. your deffinitly winning points with that one.

when your ready to have a mature conversation about morality let the rest of us know. its really sad how your insecurities take over when we talk about morality


Posted by: fantasma62

Quote:
Originally Posted by John H.
Hi Thatguy,

PIRATES - as in REAL Pirates - as in REAL MEN. REAL MEN do have sex with each other too. And always have. Throughout time and throughout history.
It has been documented and more is coming out about it all the time as research into the subject is published. Even in primitive societies.

Take Care, John H.
WTF?

Real men? Not as in manly men right? You mean like flesh and bone men, because no "REAL MAN, MANLY MAN" is going to have sex with another man EVER...
C'mon John....


Posted by: ponyboy

Ever done the "pirate"?

You shoot in a woman's eye and then kick her in the leg so she has her hand over her eye and has to hop around saying "Arr".


Captain: "Have you ever been to sea, John H.?"

John H: "No captain, but I've been blown ashore..."


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gococksDJS
You don't know shit John H, you believe. You believe that in the eyes of God, what you are doing is acceptable, and I believe that you will burn for all eternity for it, but for you to say that you know for a fact is moronic. Your fisting days where you and your buddies shove baseball bats up your asses may have transcended you into some state of mind that you think is heaven, but it wasn't, so don't tell me you know at all. The basis of God, any god for that matter is faith, and I have faith that you will burn for all time.
And what's with your comment about being of age? Did your mentor Dr. Kesey study subjects of age? Does a 13 month old infant posess the ability to say "I do not want to be sexually violated by you!"????? NO they don't, yet he performed a study that HE PUBLISHED IN HIS OWN BOOK that infants can have orgasms. So yet again you contradict yourself. You have huge problems John H, and hopefully you will realize what is actually going on in your melon.

Gococks,

Go back and re-read what I posted carefully. NO WHERE did I SAY or indicate that I - I was into fisting. I started this thread for discussion to see what everyone thought and if they had experienced it. I have said that I have seen it happen and can completely UNDERSTAND the "why" of it and the "methodology" and the purpose and the outcome. Someone WHO CARES about another CAN utilize this form of CARING through Sexual expression BUT MUST DO IT WITH COMPLETE KNOWLEGDE AND CARE AND METHODOLOGY...

In your rush to damn others BASED ON YOUR BELIEFS which YOU "THINK" are "RIGHT" and "RIGHTEOUS" you have missed a lot. You BLINDED yourself to what WAS actually said an interjected into this discussion what YOU "THOUGHT" was said. Your personal rage and displeasure has swallowed you up completely along with your personal zealotness. And that is what "religious zealots" DO all the time. They never SEE all sides of ANYTHING just what "they" "set up as convenient for themselves" and God KNOWS anyone that does not "agree" with them how they will respond. You are a "classic" narrowminded person. You put yourself into a mental and physical prison and throw away the key.

The "faith" you speak of, I have just AS MUCH "faith" that I WILL see God and Heaven. I am quite SURE of that. I KNOW who I am and the kind of person I AM. "Religion" IS MAN MADE - by people such as yourself which is exactly why I will NEVER have any use for any of them. They are based on falsehood, damning, bigotry, inaccuracies, out-right lying, hatred, misery, etc. Who the hell would WANT to be a part of all that? Certainly NEVER me. I treat others with respect THEY EARN same as me. Nothing is a "given".

As for Dr. Alfred C. Kinsey, his work HAS STOOD the test of time and EXTREME SCRUTINY. For over 50 years of it. You really need to re-read (IF you have even read one word HE ACTUALLY SAID AND WROTE in the first place)... which most "zealots" really never did. They just criticize kinda like a bunch of old ladies who got on a party-line telephone and all just started "cluckin like a bunch of hens" without ANY substance to anything....
I am SURE Dr. Kinsey IS IN HEAVEN and KNOWS GOD himself. And KNOWS Dr. Kinsey worked FOR THE BENEFIT OF ALL PEOPLE OF ALL AGES SINCERELY AND HONESTLY AND CARINGLY.

John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by soxmuscle
Today was National Pirate Awareness Day. A club at my school of all stoners and cokeheads started the "Pirate Club" and they handed out eye patches to everyone to celebrate. ha.

Hi Sox,

As with any segment of society Pirates were some of the smartest people. Clever. Ingenuous. And there were those that couldn't do much to help even themselves...

"Eye patches" - hell yes, they must be "handed out" for "protection" from "missles" fired...

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
john h the truth is not for sale. neither is my alegience to it.

just because animals do it doesnt make it ok for humans. we are not animals. ie. male cats kill young that are not theirs, so the females will get ready to have babies faster. Are you saying if animals do something then it is ok for humans to? i know you would like to believe that if animals do it its ok, but then someone comes up with something animals do that we shouldnt and you refuse to respond. it would be nice if you would, but i dont expect you to. how could you respond?

and again john boy wet dreams dont make me immoral. its nice that you continue to say such things because the ridiculousness of your arguement is so obvious.

and i especially like your " I love those that THINK they are "so moral".... Those are more often than not the most immoral." i have wet dreams and you stick your hand up another guys ass. yet im the one who is the most immoral. good one. your deffinitly winning points with that one.

when your ready to have a mature conversation about morality let the rest of us know. its really sad how your insecurities take over when we talk about morality

Bio,

What you DO and others like you is to SELECT what YOU "THINK" is "right" and/or "wrong". It IS NOT BASED ON FACTS AS THEY ARE and is mostly without ANY UNDERSTANDING that IS HONEST with regard to any subject. It is mostly "visions" and "conjecture" and "postulating" and "damning for whatever reason"... And you like to entwine something that is dangerous with something that is completely fine and right. There IS ALWAYS a BIG DIFFERENCE. Your narrow-mindedness is what clouds your "thinking" and your UNwillingness to SEE things ALL THINGS from ALL SIDES of the situation OBJECTIVELY. You place yourself into a mental and physical prison and throw away the keys and expect everyone else to just "agree with you" because YOU "SAID IT" and "IT MUST BE 'RIGHT'"....

As for your wet dreams, I think the reason you are so upset is because YOU THINK it is possible YOUR WET DREAMS are immoral. I would bet you THINK that yourself. And are DAMNING yourself because of them. There IS a VALID purpose for wet dreams just as there is a VALID purpose for beating off or being beatin off by someone else - Male OR Female.... And BOTH can experience a tremendous getting to KNOW and CARE ABOUT EACH OTHER from having done that as a HELP to each other because truly said BOTH CAN AND DO BENEFIT. The beater AND the beatee.

I can see by your response to what I have said you HAVE NOT ACTUALLY READ AND UNDERSTOOD what I HAVE SAID. You just put your own "spin" on it as if it is something I said when in FACT I NEVER. You need to read and comprehend - carefully. Because you are inserting you foot into your mouth by your statements. BE CAREFUL and THOUGHTFUL. BE OBJECTIVE and willing to LEARN HONESTLY.

Also, instead of "setting yourself up as the speaker for everyone else" why don't you get into the habit of SPEAKING FOR YOURSELF. Let OTHERS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES. Who died and made YOU 'god'?

John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fantasma62
WTF?

Real men? Not as in manly men right? You mean like flesh and bone men, because no "REAL MAN, MANLY MAN" is going to have sex with another man EVER...
C'mon John....
Hi Tony,

IT HAPPENS EVERYDAY - REAL MEN - FLESH AND BLOOD MEN and they ARE STILL AND ALWAYS - REAL MEN. Period.

Same as Cowboys, Construction Workers, etc. REAL MEN!

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ponyboy
Ever done the "pirate"?

You shoot in a woman's eye and then kick her in the leg so she has her hand over her eye and has to hop around saying "Arr".


Captain: "Have you ever been to sea, John H.?"

John H: "No captain, but I've been blown ashore..."
Hi Pony,

NICE!!!

Have I been "...blown..." - ABSOLUTELY. Have I "drowned" anyone in that effort - ABSOLUTELY. And they ALWAYS COME BACK FOR MORE. Done WELL EVERYONE BENEFITS. And it IS SACRED.

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: rockgazer69

i think if god is as harsh at judging sexual perversions as many faiths seem to think he will be then even though i am a heterosexual woman who believes in monogamy and sex within the context of a marriage i might be burning in hell right along side john. sex is best done with shameless abandon and an awareness of your own and your lovers deepest desires. and lets face it john isn't the only one here who isn't doing it missionary style with the lights out.


Posted by: fantasma62

Quote:
Originally Posted by John H.
Hi Tony,

IT HAPPENS EVERYDAY - REAL MEN - FLESH AND BLOOD MEN and they ARE STILL AND ALWAYS - REAL MEN. Period.

Same as Cowboys, Construction Workers, etc. REAL MEN!

Take Care, John H.
Ok, so you do mean just flesh and blood men. Not necessarily manly men. You know, the men that love women and would not sexually touch another guy, because WE don't like it....
Rember, what you may think is Ok, I may not. For tastes, flavors were created. You have your taste and I have mine....
I'll leave it as that because this topic is just weird.....


Posted by: bio-chem

Quote:
Originally Posted by John H.
Bio,


As for your wet dreams, I think the reason you are so upset is because YOU THINK it is possible YOUR WET DREAMS are immoral. I would bet you THINK that yourself. And are DAMNING yourself because of them.
John H.
when did you become an expert on what i think? can you read minds? are you bulimic?


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fantasma62
Ok, so you do mean just flesh and blood men. Not necessarily manly men. You know, the men that love women and would not sexually touch another guy, because WE don't like it....
Rember, what you may think is Ok, I may not. For tastes, flavors were created. You have your taste and I have mine....
I'll leave it as that because this topic is just weird.....

Hi Tony,

Yes, REAL flesh-and-blood MEN - and Women.

And you are absolutely right - there IS variety in ALL things in life. Period. Some like one thing and others like others. In ALL areas of ALL things not just Sex. And there is a reason(s) for that just as with anything in life. You - or I - could say we do "not care for" something and that is fine - FOR US. It is those that begin the "damning", the hatred, the bigotry, etc. of others BASED ON THEIR PERSONAL BELIEFS, bring "religion" into it which IS MAN-MADE, attempt to have or have laws passed "regulating"...

With regard to BiSexuality and Homosexuality - which ARE COMPLETELY NATURAL just as with Heterosexuality - God AND Christ NEVER SAID ONE WORD - THEMSELVES - THEMSELVES - THEMSELVES - (emphasis INTENDED) - so since They BOTH NEVER SAID one word MAN has absolutely no right whatsoever to pass their personal beliefs onto others to the point that it causes someone else that does not suscribe to or "believe" or "accept" .... EACH OF US IS ENTITLED to LIVE LIFE to the fullest. It IS a basic RIGHT. With regard to Sexuality EACH PERSON MUST BE of age and ability of consent and give that consent FREELY. Other than that restriction it is simply NO ONE ELSE'S BUSINESS - NOT "religion", NOT politics, NOT other people (unless permission is granted by those so involved).. Period. Everyone is entitled to express their views and their feelings on anything but that is as far as it should go. Each person must decide FOR THEMSELVES what IS "right" FOR THEMSELVES and those they are involved with in life. NO ONE should ever USE others in my opinion - it is disrespectful to both involved I feel. And many "religious" types USE others and think nothing of it. But to each his own I guess.

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockgazer69
i think if god is as harsh at judging sexual perversions as many faiths seem to think he will be then even though i am a heterosexual woman who believes in monogamy and sex within the context of a marriage i might be burning in hell right along side john. sex is best done with shameless abandon and an awareness of your own and your lovers deepest desires. and lets face it john isn't the only one here who isn't doing it missionary style with the lights out.
Hi Rock,

When you (meaning anyone here) is with someone you CARE about that is what is important. And how you treat each other. USING someone in my opinion is not right because that can really be harmful to both involved.

God never said one word about BiSexuality and Homosexuality being wrong. Christ never said anything either and He was we are told on this earth for 32 years - surely He did not forget to mention it. He certainly had a lot to say about other things. And each of the Sexualities exists in Nature and the Natural World and always has.

I find in my experience that those that scream the loudest about what OTHERS DO OR NOT are THEMSELVES VERY GUILTY of something. And/or jealous of others. The American Indians saw nothing wrong at all with BiSexuality and Homosexuality. They had their faith and beliefs. The ONLY REASON "religion" says anything about Sex is because they want to have CONTROL over others - and to collect riches. Not really for any other reason. And they "thrive" on that. Without that they would be nothing. And they know that which is why they are so vocal about it. They also know it is NOT based on FACTS as they ARE in LIFE, in Nature, etc.

You and I are NOT going to "burn in hell" because we CARE about someone and/or many people. That is "religious" "horse-pucky", "pure BULL****"... Our desires are God-given and each is a variation of CARING TRUTHFULLY FOR those we CARE ABOUT. TRUTHFULLY.

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fantasma62
Ok, so you do mean just flesh and blood men. Not necessarily manly men. You know, the men that love women and would not sexually touch another guy, because WE don't like it....
Rember, what you may think is Ok, I may not. For tastes, flavors were created. You have your taste and I have mine....
I'll leave it as that because this topic is just weird.....

Hi again,

Also, I think ONLY having Sex in the "missionary" position is radiculous. There are many ways - variations to express that you (meaning anyone here) CARE about another Sexually. Naturally so. But if you (meaning you or anyone else) ONLY want to have Sex in the "missionary" position that is fine FOR YOU. Others have their RIGHT to express themselves as is confortable for them.

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
homosexuality is not a gift from God. its a perversion of satan.
Bio,

Honestly, I think if you get someone to jack you off you will feel much better - about yourself and those that do the work for you. You are just "backed up" bigtime and are making yourself insane from extreme need. It is NOT a "perversion of satan" - God NEVER said that. Christ NEVER said that. EVER. Don't be putting "words" into the mouths of God or Christ. THEY can speak for Themselves.

John H.


Posted by: bio-chem

Quote:
Originally Posted by John H.
Hi again,

Also, I think ONLY having Sex in the "missionary" position is radiculous. There are many ways - variations to express that you (meaning anyone here) CARE about another Sexually. Naturally so. But if you (meaning you or anyone else) ONLY want to have Sex in the "missionary" position that is fine FOR YOU. Others have their RIGHT to express themselves as is confortable for them.

Take Care, John H.
when did anyone say to only have sex in the missionary position? maybe i missed that post. or maybe john boy is just so wound up he has to make beliefs up to get mad at and ridicule. oh well.


Posted by: bio-chem

Quote:
Originally Posted by John H.
Bio,

Honestly, I think if you get someone to jack you off you will feel much better - about yourself and those that do the work for you. You are just "backed up" bigtime and are making yourself insane from extreme need. It is NOT a "perversion of satan" - God NEVER said that. Christ NEVER said that. EVER. Don't be putting "words" into the mouths of God or Christ. THEY can speak for Themselves.

John H.
didnt you already reply to that post like 5 times 3 days ago, and now your bringing it back up. john boy i believe that sexual relations are reserved for a man and woman who are married. and i live that belief. how can you find something wrong with that? also since we are bringing up old things do you want to explain to me about how if it happens in nature we should all be able to do it? and God did say homosexuality is wrong your just to dense to understand.


Posted by: fantasma62

Quote:
Originally Posted by John H.
Hi again,

Also, I think ONLY having Sex in the "missionary" position is radiculous. There are many ways - variations to express that you (meaning anyone here) CARE about another Sexually. Naturally so. But if you (meaning you or anyone else) ONLY want to have Sex in the "missionary" position that is fine FOR YOU. Others have their RIGHT to express themselves as is confortable for them.

Take Care, John H.
Ah?

First of all, I never told you what sexual position (s) I practice with my wife as this is personal. I have no idea where you got me telling you anything about missionary position...Maybe you responded to someone else...


Posted by: bio-chem

so it is true. john is making stuff up. one wonders what else he is conjuring up out of thin air


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
didnt you already reply to that post like 5 times 3 days ago, and now your bringing it back up. john boy i believe that sexual relations are reserved for a man and woman who are married. and i live that belief. how can you find something wrong with that? also since we are bringing up old things do you want to explain to me about how if it happens in nature we should all be able to do it? and God did say homosexuality is wrong your just to dense to understand.
Bio,

What I said bears repeating. Your problem is probably you are too "full". And need someone - Male and/or Female - to "drain" you. Now if you want to get married and stay true to your wife that is entirely up to you and you certainly have every right to believe that, conduct your life that way, or whatever. If you think that a person can "only love truthfully" one person that is entirely up to you and your "thinking" - good for you if that works for you. Honestly. You mention that you "live" - I hope for your sake you do.

And please DO NOT say again the God SAID when GOD SAID ABSOLUTELY NOTHING and NEITHER DID CHRIST. Lying will not get you "in heaven". You and your fellow "towel-heads" (by way of description of the area your "beliefs" have their "home") dreamed that one up and then PUT WORDS into the Mouth of God and Christ - or at least try to by saying They did when in FACT They BOTH NEVER DID. Here's something for you and your like-minded friends to dwell on: GOD WILL SAY HIMSELF and CHRIST WILL SAY HIMSELF - They NEED NO ONE TO SPEAK FOR - FOR - Them - EVER. Certainly NOT MAN. Most are certainly NOT trustworthy and anything IMPORTANT God and Christ are NOT going to have Man in charge of stating. And AGAIN NEITHER SAID ONE WORD - EVER! If you want something to remember REMEMBER THAT - because IT IS TRUE - THEY BOTH NEVER SAID ONE WORD. I know your life will now "crumble" because of that but you have been "believing" something that is FALSE and accepting something that is FALSE. And ONLY to perpetuate your "religion" and "religious beliefs"...

John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
when did anyone say to only have sex in the missionary position? maybe i missed that post. or maybe john boy is just so wound up he has to make beliefs up to get mad at and ridicule. oh well.
Bio,

You must not know much about "religious history".

John H.


Posted by: bio-chem

my reference to the missionary position was of course limited to the history of this thread. if you are trying to make a point john maybe you should start by talking about the beliefs people have posted.

im very sorry to disapoint your convoluted thinking john boy, however i must for the sake of truth. in every major religion the words of God are recorded by his prophets and written down. Bible, Torah, Koran. all the recorded words of God. If you believe in Christ then you must go to those who have spoken with him personally, heard his words from his mouth and recorded them.

john you are more than capable of talking about false prophets at this point and men who say they have had visions and spoken with God and have a message for us from him. my reply to this is that while false prophets do exist it does not take away from the true ones, it only makes the true prophets messages more important, and God will show the true ones if you but ask him. Christ has always used prophets to tell his people of his message save a 3 year period of history when he lived in mortality on this earth.

if as you say God does accept homosexuality as an ok practice, i challenge you to prove it. show that at any time period of judeo-christian history homosexuality was acceptable. show an extra-biblical source during the time of Christ or shortly thereafter that shows the early christian church accepted homosexuality. Prove that it was only later through apostate men that the acceptance of homosexuality was changed and corrupted by man. the truth is you cant, because it doesnt exist. at no point in Judeo-Christian history has this been acceptable in the eyes of God.

in conclusion God has said homosexuality is wrong. if you accept this or not it really only effects you and your family. honestly and truthfully.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
my reference to the missionary position was of course limited to the history of this thread. if you are trying to make a point john maybe you should start by talking about the beliefs people have posted.

im very sorry to disapoint your convoluted thinking john boy, however i must for the sake of truth. in every major religion the words of God are recorded by his prophets and written down. Bible, Torah, Koran. all the recorded words of God. If you believe in Christ then you must go to those who have spoken with him personally, heard his words from his mouth and recorded them.

john you are more than capable of talking about false prophets at this point and men who say they have had visions and spoken with God and have a message for us from him. my reply to this is that while false prophets do exist it does not take away from the true ones, it only makes the true prophets messages more important, and God will show the true ones if you but ask him. Christ has always used prophets to tell his people of his message save a 3 year period of history when he lived in mortality on this earth.

if as you say God does accept homosexuality as an ok practice, i challenge you to prove it. show that at any time period of judeo-christian history homosexuality was acceptable. show an extra-biblical source during the time of Christ or shortly thereafter that shows the early christian church accepted homosexuality. Prove that it was only later through apostate men that the acceptance of homosexuality was changed and corrupted by man. the truth is you cant, because it doesnt exist. at no point in Judeo-Christian history has this been acceptable in the eyes of God.

in conclusion God has said homosexuality is wrong. if you accept this or not it really only effects you and your family. honestly and truthfully.

Bio,

The Bible, for example, was written by MEN - over 40 and over a long period of time. Many of those Men nothing more than glorified politicians. The Old Testament is nothing more than the old Jewish law books. The New Testament was written long AFTER the Death of Christ - approximately 200 or so years AFTER. BY MEN - Human Beings. Now in any area of the world on any street you can tell someone or have them see for themselves what "happened" and the VERY NEXT DAY ask those same people what they saw with their own eyes and you will get many who will not accurately say what happened or you can tell someone in your neighborhood - a group of people all at the same time the same thing - and the next day or so ask them what it was you told them and they will all NOT agree or relate accurately what transpired.

The Bible is a collection of literature - short stories, essays, fiction, prose, fairy tales, fables, tall tales, poetry, etc. and written in an area of the world where extreme unrest has always existed and probably always will and where there is always a power struggle, low employment, a lot of heat, humidity, sand blowing everywhere and in everything, etc. Many Many of the WORLD'S PROBLEMS have come from this area of the world and were actually "born" in this region - nastiness, hatred, bigtory, misery, etc. - ALL of these things I want nothing to do with ever. And will always defend myself, friends, and family against you can BE ABSOLUTELY SURE.

I always consider ALL information from ALL sources ALL the time OBJECTIVELY - with an open mind. I NEVER utilize just one source for anything. And anyone that does sets themselves up for disaster.

Heterosexuality, BiSexuality and Homosexuality ALL exist in Nature and the Natural world - of which Human Beings are a part. And always have. And always will. And are intended by Our Creator for valid reason(s). As with anything in life and living it is a natural part of the variety - variation(s) - that exist in all things.

You ask for proof - God NEVER SAID - HIMSELF. Christ NEVER SAID - HIMSELF. I go to the SOURCE - NEVER second-hand information. You say you believe in Christ - well you tell me how it is that Christ Himself NEVER SAID ONE WORD in the entire time He is said to have been on this earth - 32 (THIRTY-TWO) YEARS - and NEVER DID He say ONE WORD - EVER. He is said to have said a lot about other things - what happened? Did He "forget"? I HIGHLY DOUBT IT!! IF what you say is so wrong HE WOULD HAVE SAID SO HIMSELF AND HE NEVER DID ONE TIME and He had PLENTY OF TIME TO SAY SOMETHING HIMSELF. He NEVER DID. You can not "get around" THAT FACT.

The Bible you like to always quote as being "abolute"- how is it that the Bible says that if a Man dies his brother is supposed to take over for him and fuck his dead brother's wife? Are you planning on taking that following what it says? Or how about pork? And how about.... You do not want me to list more....

Again, GOD NEVER said ONE WORD. Christ NEVER SAID ONE WORD. EVER. PERIOD. I always question anything Man has to say. Man is not perfect and certainly not pure.

Also, I am not into brainwashing. And I do not "lord over" others.

John H.


Posted by: bio-chem

thankyou for proving my point john boy. once again you are incapable of answering the questions. your information is faulty and has been proven faulty on multiple occasions
(ex. the bible was compiled after the time of Christ, however it was written by men between the time of 30 AD - 100 AD by the men who knew and listened to Christ personally)

and yes john homosexuality exists in nature. are you ready to answer the qustion now?
If it happens in nature is it ok for humans to do likewise? i really want you to address this question john boy. please. if your not going to answer it i guess your just afraid of the truth. the same reason your unable to give a good reply now to the questions of my last post.

and Christ did speak out against sexual sin and perversion, of which category homosexuality falls under.


Posted by: maniclion

I play pirate in the bedroom, I swing from the corner of the room with just an eye patch on and swing my dick around like a sword, I say "Arrrrgh, slobby me knobby or walk the plank." My gf usually wakes up startled and hops out of bed, I guess that means she wants to walk the plank.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
thankyou for proving my point john boy. once again you are incapable of answering the questions. your information is faulty and has been proven faulty on multiple occasions
(ex. the bible was compiled after the time of Christ, however it was written by men between the time of 30 AD - 100 AD by the men who knew and listened to Christ personally)

and yes john homosexuality exists in nature. are you ready to answer the qustion now?
If it happens in nature is it ok for humans to do likewise? i really want you to address this question john boy. please. if your not going to answer it i guess your just afraid of the truth. the same reason your unable to give a good reply now to the questions of my last post.

and Christ did speak out against sexual sin and perversion, of which category homosexuality falls under.
Bio boy,

Re-read all my posts. I stand by what I said. Completely.

Get you head out of the ONLY book you read and the ONLY place you obtain "information". OPEN your eyes and your mind and see all there is available to gain a real education - ALL provided by God. And look around you. Everywhere and at everything. With an OPEN MIND. Get your mind and your body out of the prison YOU put it in. There is LIFE everywhere. In ALL its variations. Naturally so. The Bible was written many centuries ago by MEN - Human Beings. About 200 years after the Death of Christ in the case of the New Testament. It is a collection of literature of MEN. Period. Even a political treatise.

Like you yourself have just admitted to: "...(H)omosexuality exists in nature..." and so does Heterosexuality and BiSexuality. All are NATURAL variations of Sexuality. Rightly and properly so. There is no "sin" in something provided by Mother Nature and God. And for Sex to be "filthy" requires those in any way to make it so through disrespect of others and just plain using another for Sexual gratification only. It is a sacred communication between people that care about each other honestly regardless of their Gender.

John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by maniclion
I play pirate in the bedroom, I swing from the corner of the room with just an eye patch on and swing my dick around like a sword, I say "Arrrrgh, slobby me knobby or walk the plank." My gf usually wakes up startled and hops out of bed, I guess that means she wants to walk the plank.
Hi Maniclion,

ANOTHER variation of having Sex. Great!!

Have FUN - REAL FUN!!! And REAL communication between both of you. Sacred communication.

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: bio-chem

Quote:
Originally Posted by John H.
Bio boy,

Re-read all my posts. I stand by what I said. Completely.

Get you head out of the ONLY book you read and the ONLY place you obtain "information". OPEN your eyes and your mind and see all there is available to gain a real education - ALL provided by God. And look around you. Everywhere and at everything. With an OPEN MIND. Get your mind and your body out of the prison YOU put it in. There is LIFE everywhere. In ALL its variations. Naturally so. The Bible was written many centuries ago by MEN - Human Beings. About 200 years after the Death of Christ in the case of the New Testament. It is a collection of literature of MEN. Period. Even a political treatise.

Like you yourself have just admitted to: "...(H)omosexuality exists in nature..." and so does Heterosexuality and BiSexuality. All are NATURAL variations of Sexuality. Rightly and properly so. There is no "sin" in something provided by Mother Nature and God. And for Sex to be "filthy" requires those in any way to make it so through disrespect of others and just plain using another for Sexual gratification only. It is a sacred communication between people that care about each other honestly regardless of their Gender.

John H.
you almost answered the question. good boy, now just a little farther. are you saying if it happens in nature and is therefore natural then it is ok for humans to do it? c'mon boy i know you can do it.

and for the rest of your post pure horse manure. the bible was not written 200 years after the death of Christ. check your facts your wrong. any historian will tell you


Posted by: Decker

Well shiver me timbers, the sex lives of pirates is still going strong.


Posted by: rockgazer69




Posted by: rockgazer69

mmm pirates. almost as nice as vikings.


Posted by: rockgazer69



actually this might be one of those viking pirates... JOHN! i need a book about viking pirates.


Posted by: rockgazer69




Posted by: rockgazer69

.


Posted by: david

wow... that was a lot of reading within this post.. John, don't you get tired of typing?


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bio-chem
you almost answered the question. good boy, now just a little farther. are you saying if it happens in nature and is therefore natural then it is ok for humans to do it? c'mon boy i know you can do it.

and for the rest of your post pure horse manure. the bible was not written 200 years after the death of Christ. check your facts your wrong. any historian will tell you

Bio boy,

You have trouble reading don't you?

RE-READ - CAREFULLY - WHAT I SAID. Obviously you do not or you wouldn't post what you do. And you are going to "college"? If you can not even read a post here how do you read anything in college and understand it? And how will you ever succeed in your chosen profession?

RE-READ and RE-READ CAREFULLY - SLOWLY if that is necessary. THINK!!!!!!!

John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Decker
Well shiver me timbers, the sex lives of pirates is still going strong.
Hi Decker,

And in real life TO BE SURE!

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockgazer69


actually this might be one of those viking pirates... JOHN! i need a book about viking pirates.

Hi Rock,

Johnny Deep and Brad Pitt ARE decent Guys for sure!!! And MEN!!!!

I'll have to check - somewhere there must be a book on the Vikings too - or will be.

In one of Dr. Alfred Kinsey's books there was a very interesting statement - I'll have to hunt it up and type it here - probably one of the most basic and truthful statements made by anyone - and I am not surprised Dr. Kinsey made it - he was TRUTHFUL and ACCURATE.

Ok, I found it: in: SEXUAL BEHAVIOR IN THE HUMAN MALE (Saunders Medical Publishing co., 1948), page 457, last paragraph:

"(on Homosexuality) Beyond this, there is a fair amount of sexual contact among the older males in Western rural areas. It is a type of homosexuality which was probably common among pioneers and outdoor men in general. Today it is found among ranchmen, cattle men, prospectors, lumberman, and farming groups in general - among groups that are virile, physically active. These are men who have faced the rigors of natue in the wild. They live on realities and on a minimum of theory. Such a background breeds the attitude that sex is sex, irrespective of the nature of the partner with whom the relation is had. Sexual relations are had with women when they are available, or with other males when outdoor routines bring men together into exclusively male groups. Such a pattern is not at all uncommon among pre-adolescent and early adolescent males in such rural areas, and it continues in a number of histories into the adult years and through marriage."

Probably the most "upsetting" thing for some people who READ Dr. Kinsey's scientific research realized he spoke the truth and presented FACTS as they ARE and that alone would "upset" some and others who are down-to-earth and truthful would see it for what it is - a real contribution and help for all mankind to better undertstand life and living. And accurately so.

I personally like a lot people who speak TRUTHFULLY and ACCURATELY and HONESTLY. Dr. Kinsey was just such a MAN. He CARED HONESTLY and his work shows that. He made contributions for all and for the betterment of all peoples. He was a scientist in the truest sense of the word and a MAN in the truest sense of the word.

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: rockgazer69

viking and pirates are bad boys. in some sex survey it was noted that many women said they want a dangerous man. well some comedian made a really true accurate statement . he said when women say they want a dangerous man they must be thinking like antonio banderas in desperado. but when they really get a dangerous man you always see them in the trailor door yelling "that's right officer you lock his ass up."


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockgazer69
viking and pirates are bad boys. in some sex survey it was noted that many women said they want a dangerous man. well some comedian made a really true accurate statement . he said when women say they want a dangerous man they must be thinking like antonio banderas in desperado. but when they really get a dangerous man you always see them in the trailor door yelling "that's right officer you lock his ass up."
Hi Rock,

Certainly there IS a difference between a "dangerous Man" and a "DANGEROUS MAN"...

At least speaking honestly I would think some would want a Sexually "DANGEROUS MAN", that is, knowledgeable, able, active, strong, forthright, "cunning", maybe even a little "abusive" in a Sexual way (NOT truly ABUSIVE), caring, not "predictable", certainly KNOWS about foreplay, communicative (with or without words), etc.

There are some women that would say: "that's right officer you lock his ass up" AFTER they had Sex with a MAN - because some women ARE LIKE THAT. Like a "Black widow spider"... It would honestly have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with a MAN that was a good Man just that some females are "bitchy" AFTERWORDS no matter who they are with....

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: Shae

Found out that one of my faveorite singers is a sucker for pirates like you Marcia.
This is her:


I never would of thought.


Posted by: rockgazer69

i think after mr. depp played jack sparrow, pirate is a pretty common sex fantasy.


Posted by: rockgazer69

Quote:
Originally Posted by John H.
some would want a Sexually "DANGEROUS MAN", that is, knowledgeable, able, active, strong, forthright, "cunning", maybe even a little "abusive" in a Sexual way (NOT truly ABUSIVE), caring, not "predictable", certainly KNOWS about foreplay, communicative (with or without words), etc.



Posted by: maniclion

I wonder if pirates were as cool as the ones we have today?



Posted by: rockgazer69

my pirate shivers me timbers.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockgazer69
Hi Rock,

"For SURE"!!!!

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockgazer69
Hi Rock,

"For SURE"!!!! (I tried to put a smiley on this but the computer or the site would not let me... Now what have I "done"?) (something about 5 seconds?)

Take Care, John H.


Posted by: Voltimus

Hey John,
I've been gone awhile, sorry.

It seems like you have a little battle going on with the "religious zealots",
as you so succinctly put it?
Didja ever consider that maybe religion ain't the problem, and that maybe you're using perceived "zeal" as a way to focus attention off of the real pertinent discussion at hand?
I must admit, Bio-Chem, you keep falling for his bait. He runs you into a religious debate instead of straightforward answers and you end up trying to define the boundaries of your religion, to defend it.

I was wondering, John, where were you stationed during your military career?
I was stationed in NAS Oceana, Virginia, right by the beach. I used to surf there everyday around 3:00 P.M. in the summer. Great Time.

The pirate discussion is interesting, I'm sure a little homosexuality occured every now and then. I think it stemmed more from lack of options than anything else.

Anyway, gotta go.
Later John, try to play nice.
Bio-chem, don't debate your religion, it's something he uses to distract you.

P.S. That "Slobby me Knobby or walk the plank" line is great, I think I'll use it on the Wife. Then I'll keep jabbing her in the back with my pork sword like I'm trying to make her walk the plank, and everytime I jab her I'll go "Argh, what a saucy lass"


Posted by: John H.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Voltimus
Hey John,
I've been gone awhile, sorry.

It seems like you have a little battle going on with the "religious zealots",
as you so succinctly put it?
Didja ever consider that maybe religion ain't the problem, and that maybe you're using perceived "zeal" as a way to focus attention off of the real pertinent discussion at hand?
I must admit, Bio-Chem, you keep falling for his bait. He runs you into a religious debate instead of straightforward answers and you end up trying to define the boundaries of your religion, to defend it.

I was wondering, John, where were you stationed during your military career?
I was stationed in NAS Oceana, Virginia, right by the beach. I used to surf there everyday around 3:00 P.M. in the summer. Great Time.

The pirate discussion is interesting, I'm sure a little homosexuality occured every now and then. I think it stemmed more from lack of options than anything else.

Anyway, gotta go.
Later John, try to play nice.
Bio-chem, don't debate your religion, it's something he uses to distract you.

P.S. That "Slobby me Knobby or walk the plank" line is great, I think I'll use it on the Wife. Then I'll keep jabbing her in the back with my pork sword like I'm trying to make her walk the plank, and everytime I jab her I'll go "Argh, what a saucy lass"
Hi Voltimus,

It is NOT my intention to have a "battle" with anyone. I come here is discuss subjects with what I hope are mature adults who can and will discuss anything in a reasonable manner. Here's the thing I am wondering after seeing some of the replies I get from some: JUST WHEN DO YOU PLAN ON BECOMING AN ADULT WHO IS MATURE? because the answers I get from some sure indicate to me they can not DISCUSS much of anything IN A MATURE ADULT MANNER. And ANY subject should be able to be discussed - and in a constructive manner as well. So far it would seem to me that it IS the "religious zealots" who can NOT discuss much of anything other than what is in their "closed world" THEY CREATE and surround themselves with.

HELL, there IS A WHOLE WORLD FULL OF INFORMATION from ALL sources and ALL ASPECTS - why would someone LIMIT themselves to ONLY ONE SOURCE? Certain God NEVER INTENDED THAT.

Don't get me wrong. There ARE "religious ZEALOTS" and "religious zealots" - people WHO ARE VERY HONEST, ACCURATE, SINCERE, TRUTHFUL, etc. about their beliefs and ARE VERY HELPFUL AND DO DO what Christ we are told actually wanted people TO DO. May just SAY they "are" but really ARE NOT "christian" - they are very much like the politicians they make themselves to be. They "jump on the bandwagon" and hide among the truly religious and caring people. And people who DO follow the REAL God.

I am not trying to "bait" anyone. I post a thread with a subject to DISCUSS that subject in all its aspects as an adult who is mature and expect the same from others who reply to it. How else does anyone learn anything? "Hiding" it is not going to "make it go away" or to "UNDERSTAND" the subject pretend it does not exist because someone "does not 'like' it"... A mature adult should be able to DISCUSS as a MATURE ADULT any subject. ANYTIME. And CONstructively. I don't mind true joking about anything but there are those that come here to damn, promote hatred and bigotry, etc. and nothing more.

One of the things that surprises me is how the "religious types" get so upset when I state something that IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE about their "religion". CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM which is what I am displaying can actually HELP someone who "believes" in a certain "religion" - if that "religion" IS guilty of something than to CORRECT THAT and never have that problem again hopefully you would WANT HONEST CRITICISM and then SEE IT and CORRECT IT. And "religion" which IS MAN-MADE is ONLY AS GOOD OR AS BAD as the people who subscribe to it. I like and believe in considering ALL information from ALL sources ALL the time OBJECTIVELY. Without preconceived notions, bias, etc. How else DOES anyone GET to the REAL TRUTH about anything? How else does a person TRULY LEARN anything?

As to my military service, for security reasons, I can not say anything - TRUTHFULLY. And for good reasons and requirements. You will just have to trust me on that. I can tell you I have been at GMS DAM NECK but am not allowed to discuss that any further. Even today. I have been in wa