Ooops! Family Values Married Republican Caught Making Out With Another Man's Wife

[Spindrift]

Your information is semi-correct. Taft was the one who shaved Coolidge's pubic hair.

Of course, in the famous tub.

 

[Polaris]

But I've heard that practice makes perfect, so I'm prepared to practice homosexuality a few hundred thousand more times, just to be sure. I mean, some people think it's a choice, some people think it's genetic. How can I really know? Through empirical testing. A lot of empirical testing. I'm just that dedicated to knowledge. Call me a hero. Call me several heroes, and make sure they're well-rested beforehand. Science is fun.

Or just one super-hero: Man-on Man.

 

[Polaris]

No, it is not.

The idea that sex and morality are linked is based on religions and cultures which are thousands of years old - by definition, backwards.

No, it is not. Not by a long shot. "Hurt" and "harm" are relative, as I have illustrated. Have an "Anything goes" mentality about sex and someone will get hurt. You can take that to the bank.

Prove it. (Hint: you can't).

How about you read for comprehension instead of misconstruing my post? When I answered the question about who are saying these things, I answered essentially "Probably the same people that think these things are a good idea", it was not an attempt to try to bring in prostitution or polygamy into the discussion or even an attempt to equate cheating to them.

Do you understand? Yes, or no?

Pot, meet kettle. Also, by saying "Probably the same people that think these things are a good idea" you absolutely were equating cheating with both of those things.

And considering your history of equating anything other than monogamous, vanilla sex as "icky", even if you weren't equating those thing, that's not a huge leap.

 

[Mudcat]

The idea that sex and morality are linked is based on religions and cultures which are thousands of years old - by definition, backwards.

1. The concept of linking personal responsibility to morality isn't unique to religion or ancient cultures.
2. Thinking beyond your immediate and personal pleasure is forwards thinking, despite your personal 'wisdom' on the matter.

Prove it. (Hint: you can't).

I did. Prove that "Anything goes" hurts no one.

Also, by saying "Probably the same people that think these things are a good idea" you absolutely were equating cheating with both of those things.

Only if you have piss poor reading skills or a personal agenda. Which describes you?

And considering your history of equating anything other than monogamous, vanilla sex as "icky", even if you weren't equating those thing, that's not a huge leap.

Sometimes I feel like the only person here who has taken any sex education classes or actually paid attention in them. And that was at least ten years ago, in the South!

1. Monogamy is just smarter, period, then anonymous sex or sex with multiple partners. Less chances of injury or possible infection from things like STDs, or STDs, or STDs, or this apparently little known thing called STDs.
2. I don't have any issue with non-vanilla sex, otherwise I'd have a problem with the GLTB community. I still urge people to practice safe sex, regardless of what sex acts that entails.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Of course, in the famous tub.

"A tub so vast it can fit six people!"
"Exactly the point, sir!"

 

[Monketi Ghost]

Taft was the last president to have facial hair. I believe Coolidge was the first to shave his pubic hair.

He started a national craze.
"Check out my Coolidge."

 

[TragicMonkey]

He started a national craze.
"Check out my Coolidge."

I never realized "keep cool with Coolidge" referred to temperature there.

 

[Polaris]

1. The concept of linking personal responsibility to morality isn't unique to religion or ancient cultures.
2. Thinking beyond your immediate and personal pleasure is forwards thinking, despite your personal 'wisdom' on the matter.

"Personal responsibility" is not a synonym for sex. I said you equate sexuality with morality, not personal responsibility - because that's what you did. And it doesn't matter if it's not unique if that's where its roots are.

Condemning beyond your immediate and personal preferences is backwards thinking, and childish, when nobody is harmed by the act.

I did. Prove that "Anything goes" hurts no one.

You proved nothing, you made an assertion. And it's not up to me to prove anything - I said:

"Anything goes", as long as nobody gets hurt, is the ideal way to go.

To which you replied:

No, it is not. Not by a long shot. "Hurt" and "harm" are relative, as I have illustrated. Have an "Anything goes" mentality about sex and someone will get hurt. You can take that to the bank.

It's up to you to prove that an "anything goes" mentality is always harmful, that it's impossible to avoid.

Only if you have piss poor reading skills or a personal agenda. Which describes you?

When did you stop beating your wife?

Sometimes I feel like the only person here who has taken any sex education classes or actually paid attention in them. And that was at least ten years ago, in the South!

1. Monogamy is just smarter, period, then anonymous sex or sex with multiple partners. Less chances of injury or possible infection from things like STDs, or STDs, or STDs, or this apparently little known thing called STDs.
2. I don't have any issue with non-vanilla sex, otherwise I'd have a problem with the GLTB community. I still urge people to practice safe sex, regardless of what sex acts that entails.

It's also smarter to not ride a motorcycle, or never drive a vehicle at all, lest you die in an accident. So therefore everybody who doesn't always ride public transit is stupider than those who do. That's your logic. You're forgetting that sex is something people do for recreation, and in many cases prefer to do it outside of a relationship for many reasons.

You've done a lot more than simply argue for safe sex, you've condemned pretty much any sex that takes place outside of a relationship (whether safe or not) as just as bad as infidelity.

 

[ponderingturtle]

1. The concept of linking personal responsibility to morality isn't unique to religion or ancient cultures.
2. Thinking beyond your immediate and personal pleasure is forwards thinking, despite your personal 'wisdom' on the matter.

I did. Prove that "Anything goes" hurts no one.



Only if you have piss poor reading skills or a personal agenda. Which describes you?



Sometimes I feel like the only person here who has taken any sex education classes or actually paid attention in them. And that was at least ten years ago, in the South!

1. Monogamy is just smarter, period, then anonymous sex or sex with multiple partners. Less chances of injury or possible infection from things like STDs, or STDs, or STDs, or this apparently little known thing called STDs.
2. I don't have any issue with non-vanilla sex, otherwise I'd have a problem with the GLTB community. I still urge people to practice safe sex, regardless of what sex acts that entails.

The people hurt were hurt by the lying and betrayal not the sex. Of course that assumes that they are in monogamous relationships.

How does this compare to say the immorality associated with motocycles? They can be dangerous so they are bad for everyone? To say nothing of guns.

I suspect you hold nothing else to the absolute safety standards you do sex.

 

[ponderingturtle]

When did you stop beating your wife?

At the end of the scene or when safe worded.

 

[Polaris]

At the end of the scene or when safe worded.

I am blatantly stealing this!

 

[Mudcat]

"Personal responsibility" is not a synonym for sex. I said you equate sexuality with morality, not personal responsibility - because that's what you did.

I equate safe sex with personal responsibility. It's not that big of a leap unless you're an "anything goes as long as no one is hurt" twit.

And it doesn't matter if it's not unique if that's where its roots are.

Yes it does. The importance of personal responsibility is just as relevant now is it was in [insert ancient civilization here].

Condemning beyond your immediate and personal preferences is backwards thinking, and childish, when nobody is harmed by the act.

If a man trusses his husband up like a turkey and whips him for being a naughty boy I don't see the problem with it, provided it's consensual. They have a relationship that is built on trust, otherwise they could (very obviously) get hurt or worse.

How can they have the same level of trust with a complete stranger?

You proved nothing, you made an assertion.

An assertion backed up by common frickening sense, Polaris. The only stance that makes no sense at all is "no one gets hurt", to which I rightly pointed out that 'hurt' is too broad and subjective. They might night get hurt in whatever short sighted affair with someone, but other people will.

I have met plenty of people in open relationships and relationships with more than one partner. I have yet to see any of those relationships end well. Polygamy isn't good for individuals, it isn't good for society.

It's up to you to prove that an "anything goes" mentality is always harmful, that it's impossible to avoid.

And you expect me to prove a negative claim, how exactly? You prove that the "anything goes" mentality is in any way beneficial.

When did you stop beating your wife?

I'm not married or in any other kind of relationship, but if I were it would be probably be after she says the word "Potato".

You're forgetting that sex is something people do for recreation, and in many cases prefer to do it outside of a relationship for many reasons.

Hi lite mine. What is this, the tenth century? If people are that bored there are plenty of ways to occupy their time that won't result in broken homes or hearts.

You've done a lot more than simply argue for safe sex, you've condemned pretty much any sex that takes place outside of a relationship (whether safe or not) as just as bad as infidelity.

Maybe because it is?

 

[daredelvis]

Well, I see that the harlot that started all of this has been fired resigned. Nothing to see here. Not exactly an example of a GOP war on women, but kind of another example of established power's war on women.

Daredelvis

 

[Spindrift]

I equate safe sex with personal responsibility. It's not that big of a leap unless you're an "anything goes as long as no one is hurt" twit.

Keep moving them goalposts.

Yes it does. The importance of personal responsibility is just as relevant now is it was in [insert ancient civilization here].



If a man trusses his husband up like a turkey and whips him for being a naughty boy I don't see the problem with it, provided it's consensual. They have a relationship that is built on trust, otherwise they could (very obviously) get hurt or worse.

How can they have the same level of trust with a complete stranger?

By having lots of sex with them.

An assertion backed up by common frickening sense, Polaris.

Which means nothing!

The only stance that makes no sense at all is "no one gets hurt", to which I rightly pointed out that 'hurt' is too broad and subjective. They might night get hurt in whatever short sighted affair with someone, but other people will.

All the time? There can never be an affair where no one gets hurt?

I have met plenty of people in open relationships and relationships with more than one partner. I have yet to see any of those relationships end well. Polygamy isn't good for individuals, it isn't good for society.

More assertions.

And you expect me to prove a negative claim, how exactly? You prove that the "anything goes" mentality is in any way beneficial.



I'm not married or in any other kind of relationship, but if I were it would be probably be after she says the word "Potato".

What if she says "Po-tah-toe"?

Hi lite mine. What is this, the tenth century? If people are that bored there are plenty of ways to occupy their time that won't result in broken homes or hearts.

Maybe because it is?

Wow, just wow! You think sex outside marriage results in broken homes and hearts, every time?

 

[Polaris]

I equate safe sex with personal responsibility. It's not that big of a leap unless you're an "anything goes as long as no one is hurt" twit.

Except you didn't mention safe sex until a few posts ago when you started back-pedaling. Your stance has magically transformed from "sex is linked to morality" to "safe sex = personal responsibility" (a stance which nobody but religious nuts would disagree with).

I'm still waiting for you to prove what's wrong with anything goes as long as no one is hurt. Not holding my breath.

Yes it does. The importance of personal responsibility is just as relevant now is it was in [insert ancient civilization here].

Again - personal responsibility =/= sex =/= morality. I doubt a father who drowned his daughter for sleeping with a stable-hand did so because he thought she wasn't using birth control.

If a man trusses his husband up like a turkey and whips him for being a naughty boy I don't see the problem with it, provided it's consensual. They have a relationship that is built on trust, otherwise they could (very obviously) get hurt or worse.

How can they have the same level of trust with a complete stranger?

How the hell should I know? Relevance?

An assertion backed up by common frickening sense, Polaris. The only stance that makes no sense at all is "no one gets hurt", to which I rightly pointed out that 'hurt' is too broad and subjective. They might night get hurt in whatever short sighted affair with someone, but other people will.

You write this immediately after claiming that "hurt" is too broad and subjective WRT "anything goes"?

Common sense also says that the sun clearly rises and sets around a fixed earth.

Also, you are doing some impressive mental gymnastics to make "anything goes as long as nobody gets hurt" = "anything goes means nobody gets hurt". Unsuccessful, but impressive.

I have met plenty of people in open relationships and relationships with more than one partner. I have yet to see any of those relationships end well. Polygamy isn't good for individuals, it isn't good for society.

Whoopty-damn-doo - anecdotes are not evidence of anything. You'll have to bring some evidence to your claims about polygamy.

And you expect me to prove a negative claim, how exactly? You prove that the "anything goes" mentality is in any way beneficial.

This is not a negative claim: "Have an "Anything goes" mentality about sex and someone will get hurt."

It's an assertion by you, based on a misrepresentation of what I said, in an attempt to weasel out of qualifying a ridiculous claim to back up a repugnant viewpoint.

The benefit of the "anything goes (as long as nobody gets hurt - which you conveniently left out)" mentality is a world that's a lot easier to live in. In which the taboos, judgments, shame and scorn are things of the past, replaced with the much more pleasant choice of "I like that/I don't like that". A world without chastity belts, foil gloves, burqas, lies to confused adolescents about blindness and mental illness, etc.

Hi lite mine. What is this, the tenth century? If people are that bored there are plenty of ways to occupy their time that won't result in broken homes or hearts.

Sure, Ward Cleaver, whatever you say. Some of us have sex drives.

Maybe because it is?

This statement is so stupid I am not going to give it a serious reply.

 

[Mudcat]

Keep moving them goalposts.

That is where the goalposts always were, you just didn't understand me sufficiently enough to see that it was.

By having lots of sex with them.

After which time they get bored with their mistress (what is the male equivalent by the way?), ditch them for a new one, where they repeat the cycle all over again? Or maybe, and I know this might sound like a mind blowing concept, they can stay true to the person they're already with?

Which means nothing!

It means more than you think, it also means something you're uncomfortable admitting.

All the time? There can never be an affair where no one gets hurt?

An affair is, by definition, a clandestine affair. If you think no one is hurt by an affair, ever, then you're as short sighted as the one having the affair.

More assertions.

Prove that it is good.

What if she says "Po-tah-toe"?

Spank her for mispronunciation!

Wow, just wow! You think sex outside marriage results in broken homes and hearts, every time?

Never heard of a case where it didn't.

 

[geni]

The idea that sex and morality are linked is based on religions and cultures which are thousands of years old - by definition, backwards.

The idea that keeping to agreements between people is a moral activity is equaly old. Is that backwards as well?

In practice of course affairs are so common that we would be severly limiting the talent pool if we got rid of any politician who had one.

 

[Polaris]

All the time? There can never be an affair where no one gets hurt?

This is the one nugget where I actually agree with Mudcat - having an affair is a **** thing to do to someone you claimed to love, frequently in front of witnesses, not just because of the breach of trust but also the risk of STDs the unfaithful party poses to his/her significant other.

There can be an affair where no one gets caught, but I don't think that equates to no one gets hurt. Just my opinion - I haven't been on either side of that fence to my knowledge.

 

[Spindrift]

That is where the goalposts always were, you just didn't understand me sufficiently enough to see that it was.

Nope. Sex =/= morality. You keep trying to avoid that.

It means more than you think, it also means something you're uncomfortable admitting.

It means nothing. I have no idea what you're alluding to that I'm supposed uncomfortable with.

An affair is, by definition, a clandestine affair. If you think no one is hurt by an affair, ever, then you're as short sighted as the one having the affair.

I never said no one is hurt ever. I said there are times when no one is hurt.

Prove that it is good.

Your assertion, you prove it.

Never heard of a case where it didn't.

You've never heard of two people having sex without being married that didn't end in a broken home or broken heart?

I'll give you an example. Me. I wasn't married but she was. We had a fling. We had fun and sex. We ended it without any issues. Her marriage carried on. Last I heard she's still married, 20 years later.

 

[ponderingturtle]

The idea that keeping to agreements between people is a moral activity is equaly old. Is that backwards as well?

If that is the best argument you can make for it, it is. Kind of like the immorality of women having authority. I always find the hypocrisy of outspoken conservative female Christians funny. Don't they know that is their husbands job?