Comments on: Is Sex for Procreation? http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html NIGHTTIME IS FOR DREAMING. DAYLIGHT IS FOR ACTION. Fri, 19 Mar 2010 03:52:04 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: Modusoperandi http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-50212 Modusoperandi Mon, 14 Sep 2009 14:20:48 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-50212 And which kind of devout atheist? The absolutist "there are no gods" kind, or the mushy heresy of "I believe in no gods" kind? And sex three times in eighteen years? Sheesh. Pro. Phyl. Act. Ic. And break open a bottle of wine and put Bolero on the hi-fi. Turn the lights down low. Slow dance. Kiss her neck. Oh, yeah. There's love in the air tonight. And which kind of devout atheist? The absolutist "there are no gods" kind, or the mushy heresy of "I believe in no gods" kind?
And sex three times in eighteen years? Sheesh. Pro. Phyl. Act. Ic. And break open a bottle of wine and put Bolero on the hi-fi. Turn the lights down low. Slow dance. Kiss her neck. Oh, yeah. There's love in the air tonight.

]]> By: OMGF http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-50211 OMGF Mon, 14 Sep 2009 14:06:01 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-50211 What's a devout atheist anyway? I'm thinking sock. What's a devout atheist anyway? I'm thinking sock.

]]> By: Chris http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-50205 Chris Mon, 14 Sep 2009 06:18:36 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-50205 Well, listen to this. I have a friend, married, 2 beautiful children, wife is Catholic and after 10 years of marriage she wants a devorice. Main down fall in the marraige, she was taught that sex is only to make babies. My friend believes it is part of normal marriage unity. What does Catholic church say about the % of devorices because of women not giving themselves to husbands? Sucks if you ask me. Well, listen to this. I have a friend, married, 2 beautiful children, wife is Catholic and after 10 years of marriage she wants a devorice. Main down fall in the marraige, she was taught that sex is only to make babies. My friend believes it is part of normal marriage unity. What does Catholic church say about the % of devorices because of women not giving themselves to husbands? Sucks if you ask me.

]]> By: Alex Weaver http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-50203 Alex Weaver Mon, 14 Sep 2009 04:26:02 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-50203 Perverts. ;/ Perverts. ;/

]]> By: Leum http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-50202 Leum Mon, 14 Sep 2009 03:11:31 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-50202 Mike and/or his wife could be <a href="http://www.asexuality.org/home/" title="" rel="nofollow">asexual</a>. Mike and/or his wife could be asexual.

]]> By: Alex Weaver http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-50201 Alex Weaver Mon, 14 Sep 2009 03:05:53 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-50201 <blockquote>We have been happily married for 18 years. In those years, we have had sex just the three times.</blockquote> I call bullshit, and not just because one act of intercourse per pregnancy is a statistical absurdity given average human fertility.

We have been happily married for 18 years. In those years, we have had sex just the three times.

I call bullshit, and not just because one act of intercourse per pregnancy is a statistical absurdity given average human fertility.

]]> By: other scott http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-50200 other scott Mon, 14 Sep 2009 01:25:32 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-50200 I wouldn't mind some justification for your position that sex is only for procreation Mike. Our feet have evolved so that we can walk upright, but that doens't mean we can't run. Our genitalia have multiple erongenous zones that have evolved so that it feels good to have sex, it is enjoyable on so many levels. "I firmly believe that sex IS only for for procreation. This is the only rational conclusion based on anatomy of the species" What a bogus statement. Any examination of our anatomy reveals the exact opposite of your 'conclusion'. The clitoris has over 8000 nerve endings in it, more than any other part of a persons body, touching the clitoris is meant to feel good!! Orgasms feel good because we evolved so that they do. "despite the bogus stat's cited in the initial post regarding fertility as some lame justification for the author's position" Utterly ridiculous once again. These are real statistics. Statistically it is improbable to win the lottery and yet somebody always wins. If you are the lucky fucker who manages to win the lottery you don't look at the statics and call them bogus just because you won. And yes, the the 'bogus stats' cited were to provide justification for the OP's claim. That is what statistics are supposed to do, provde evidence for an hypothosis. How about you provide some before your next crazy claim. I wouldn't mind some justification for your position that sex is only for procreation Mike. Our feet have evolved so that we can walk upright, but that doens't mean we can't run. Our genitalia have multiple erongenous zones that have evolved so that it feels good to have sex, it is enjoyable on so many levels.

"I firmly believe that sex IS only for for procreation. This is the only rational conclusion based on anatomy of the species"

What a bogus statement. Any examination of our anatomy reveals the exact opposite of your 'conclusion'. The clitoris has over 8000 nerve endings in it, more than any other part of a persons body, touching the clitoris is meant to feel good!! Orgasms feel good because we evolved so that they do.

"despite the bogus stat's cited in the initial post regarding fertility as some lame justification for the author's position"

Utterly ridiculous once again. These are real statistics. Statistically it is improbable to win the lottery and yet somebody always wins. If you are the lucky fucker who manages to win the lottery you don't look at the statics and call them bogus just because you won. And yes, the the 'bogus stats' cited were to provide justification for the OP's claim. That is what statistics are supposed to do, provde evidence for an hypothosis. How about you provide some before your next crazy claim.

]]> By: Mike http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-50193 Mike Sun, 13 Sep 2009 19:02:47 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-50193 I'm an devout athiest. Was raised to be so, yet I firmly believe that sex IS only for for procreation. This is the only rational conclusion based on anatomy of the species. For the record, I'm married and am a parent. ...and despite the bogus stat's cited in the initial post regarding fertility as some lame justification for the author's position, I've have two children that I'm the father of. The first took just one "try" to conceive, the other two tries. Oh, and my wife was 38 when the first one was born, 42 when the 2nd one was born. We have been happily married for 18 years. In those years, we have had sex just the three times. I'm an devout athiest. Was raised to be so, yet I firmly believe that sex IS only for for procreation. This is the only rational conclusion based on anatomy of the species. For the record, I'm married and am a parent. ...and despite the bogus stat's cited in the initial post regarding fertility as some lame justification for the author's position, I've have two children that I'm the father of. The first took just one "try" to conceive, the other two tries. Oh, and my wife was 38 when the first one was born, 42 when the 2nd one was born. We have been happily married for 18 years. In those years, we have had sex just the three times.

]]> By: Alex Weaver http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-48784 Alex Weaver Fri, 24 Jul 2009 06:57:45 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-48784 <blockquote>Closed minded hateful bigotry is also wrong... if you ask little old me.</blockquote> Much too coherent to be scripture. Try swearing at a tree or something.

Closed minded hateful bigotry is also wrong... if you ask little old me.

Much too coherent to be scripture. Try swearing at a tree or something.

]]> By: Danikajaye http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-48775 Danikajaye Fri, 24 Jul 2009 01:48:10 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-48775 Closed minded hateful bigotry is also wrong... if you ask little old me. Closed minded hateful bigotry is also wrong... if you ask little old me.

]]> By: Ritchie http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-48765 Ritchie Thu, 23 Jul 2009 18:13:25 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-48765 Todd <blockquote> The Bible expressly condemns homosexuality </blockquote> Commonly believed, but not true. The Bible in fact never condemns homosexuality. Jesus says precisely nothing about it, nor is it in the ten commandments. All we have are a handful of rather vague and obscure passages which really don't stand up to much scrutiny. Todd

The Bible expressly condemns homosexuality

Commonly believed, but not true. The Bible in fact never condemns homosexuality. Jesus says precisely nothing about it, nor is it in the ten commandments. All we have are a handful of rather vague and obscure passages which really don't stand up to much scrutiny.

]]> By: OMGF http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-48750 OMGF Thu, 23 Jul 2009 12:54:50 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/02/is-sex-for-procreation.html#comment-48750 <blockquote>However, this is not the reason we use to oppose homosexuality, and other forms of sexual immorality.</blockquote> Please define "sexual immorality" and please also tell me how two consenting adults of the same sex meets that definition. Appealing to "Well, the Bible says it's wrong," simply won't cut it.

However, this is not the reason we use to oppose homosexuality, and other forms of sexual immorality.

Please define "sexual immorality" and please also tell me how two consenting adults of the same sex meets that definition. Appealing to "Well, the Bible says it's wrong," simply won't cut it.

]]>