Is homosexuality a sin?

Is homosexuality a sin?

Created by Travis Morgan on Oct 27, 2007

59,181 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#100000 May 13, 2014
KiMare wrote:
Because we were discussing a homosexual mob assaulting visitors. Most people get stuck there...
That sounds like an excuse. Aren't Christians capable of discussing TWO things?

See if you can get unstuck now, and deal more honestly with the moral failings of this story. Would YOU call a man "righteous" if he offered up his children to rapists? Do you think it's right to call ALL homosexuals "criminals", even ones in consenting relationships, just because rape gangs have existed? People who have never committed rape are not culpable for the crimes of rapists, and men who would willingly hand their children over to rapists are not "righteous" men.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#100001 May 13, 2014
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
That sounds like an excuse. Aren't Christians capable of discussing TWO things?
See if you can get unstuck now, and deal more honestly with the moral failings of this story. Would YOU call a man "righteous" if he offered up his children to rapists? Do you think it's right to call ALL homosexuals "criminals", even ones in consenting relationships, just because rape gangs have existed? People who have never committed rape are not culpable for the crimes of rapists, and men who would willingly hand their children over to rapists are not "righteous" men.
You weren't discussing two things. You want to change the subject.

Nor are you being straight about the subject you want to switch to. You deliberately deny the basis of Christian righteousness because that would undermine your anger.

Again, clearly most people have issue with the homosexual mob, not Lot.

“True Blue”

Since: Jun 13

Sunburnt Country

#100002 May 13, 2014
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
That sounds like an excuse. Aren't Christians capable of discussing TWO things?
See if you can get unstuck now, and deal more honestly with the moral failings of this story. Would YOU call a man "righteous" if he offered up his children to rapists? Do you think it's right to call ALL homosexuals "criminals", even ones in consenting relationships, just because rape gangs have existed? People who have never committed rape are not culpable for the crimes of rapists, and men who would willingly hand their children over to rapists are not "righteous" men.
Lot's treatment of his daughters was unethical, by any standards. In both the incident with the mob, then later.

The only ethical thing "just" Lot did was to get his family out of town.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#100003 May 13, 2014
KiMare wrote:
You weren't discussing two things. You want to change the subject.
We were discussing the story of Lot. I don't have to focus on the convenient parts of the story that you prefer. I can ask about other elements of the story, even if you find them inconvenient and uncomfortable to discuss openly.
KiMare wrote:
Nor are you being straight about the subject you want to switch to. You deliberately deny the basis of Christian righteousness because that would undermine your anger.
You still cling to this idea that I'm "angry" with fictional beings. What do you think I have to be angry about? But I'm certainly frustrated with the humans who fail to EXPLAIN the "basis of Christian righteousness", and how it can include the child abuse of handing one's daughters over to a rape gang. Not to mention the failure to explain the chemical transformation of Lot's wife, especially considering the common halite (salt) formations in the area. Are they all people?
KiMare wrote:
Again, clearly most people have issue with the homosexual mob, not Lot.
And that's a huge moral failing. Why should these crimes be cheerfully ignored? Lot's immoral actions cannot be brushed aside, without seriously corrupting this idea of "Christian righteousness". It isn't "righteous" by any stretch of the word, to offer one's children to rapists. It isn't "righteous" to ignore this crime just to have a hero to praise.

And what difference does the sexual orientation of the mob make? A rape mob is a rape mob, deplorable no matter who they rape. They aren't a "better" mob if they are only males raping females. Why should hatred of the MOB extend to hatred of homosexuals who are NOT rapists?

No aspect of this story has any "righteousness" in it. My observation of this has nothing to do with "anger". It comes from a direct analysis of the undeniable crimes committed by the protagonist. But one must be WILLING to directly analyze these stories with objective detachment, or you will gloss over these horrors hoping no one will notice. I notice.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#100004 May 14, 2014
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
We were discussing the story of Lot. I don't have to focus on the convenient parts of the story that you prefer. I can ask about other elements of the story, even if you find them inconvenient and uncomfortable to discuss openly.
<quoted text>
You still cling to this idea that I'm "angry" with fictional beings. What do you think I have to be angry about? But I'm certainly frustrated with the humans who fail to EXPLAIN the "basis of Christian righteousness", and how it can include the child abuse of handing one's daughters over to a rape gang. Not to mention the failure to explain the chemical transformation of Lot's wife, especially considering the common halite (salt) formations in the area. Are they all people?
<quoted text>
And that's a huge moral failing. Why should these crimes be cheerfully ignored? Lot's immoral actions cannot be brushed aside, without seriously corrupting this idea of "Christian righteousness". It isn't "righteous" by any stretch of the word, to offer one's children to rapists. It isn't "righteous" to ignore this crime just to have a hero to praise.
And what difference does the sexual orientation of the mob make? A rape mob is a rape mob, deplorable no matter who they rape. They aren't a "better" mob if they are only males raping females. Why should hatred of the MOB extend to hatred of homosexuals who are NOT rapists?
No aspect of this story has any "righteousness" in it. My observation of this has nothing to do with "anger". It comes from a direct analysis of the undeniable crimes committed by the protagonist. But one must be WILLING to directly analyze these stories with objective detachment, or you will gloss over these horrors hoping no one will notice. I notice.
No, we were discussing homosexuality.

You don't rage at Thor. You rage at God and Jesus Christ.

You are right about Lot. Lot's life is a list of selfish and dumb choices. In desperation he clung to God. That was his and your only salvation.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#100005 May 14, 2014
KiMare wrote:
No, we were discussing homosexuality.
For which the story of Lot is frequently trotted out, as an example of a "righteous" man who is a hero for opposing the homosexuals in his town.

Except that the story doesn't explain why being gay is wrong. It only explains why rape gangs are wrong. And actually, it only says that rape gangs are wrong for your VISITORS, it appears to say that they're just fine for your children.

And it doesn't explain why hating rape should lead to hating homosexuals. If Christians want to say that rape gangs are a bad thing, I can agree with that. But that doesn't mean that ALL homosexuals should be condemned. I'm not part of a rape gang. What have I done wrong?
KiMare wrote:
You don't rage at Thor. You rage at God and Jesus Christ.
How would I even tell the difference? They're all equally invisible.

But I don't rage at God or Jesus. My anger is reserved for human beings, who want to slander me as "evil" in some way, even while relying on a grotesque version of the word "righteousness" that includes child abuse.

My anger is towards humans who, with absolutely no evidence, expect me to make an informed choice between Thor and Jesus. But tell me first: Which one is stronger? Which one has a better Heaven?

You can't provide any of this kind of information. It's like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Why should I arbitrarily decide that EITHER of these gods are real? My informed choice is "none of the above", and I will wait until the evidence is in. If any of these gods say that I deserve to be punished for this "crime" of doubt, then that would be an immoral god.

I'd be happy to believe in any gods you want to present to me, once you can make that god seem a little more plausible. Until then, my anger is because you claim to speak for gods that you can't present, and you do this to claim an authority that you don't have, in order slander people who have committed no crimes. This kind of despicable and deceptive behavior MERITS anger from decent, honest people who don't make excuses for bigotry by invoking the supernatural.
KiMare wrote:
You are right about Lot. Lot's life is a list of selfish and dumb choices. In desperation he clung to God. That was his and your only salvation.
It's funny that YOU could clear this up, but the Bible could not. Why couldn't the Bible communicate this more clearly? Instead, the Bible mis-applies a word like "righteous" to an abusive man with no love for his children. The story vilifies the crime of rape (against visitors), but is used to justify vilification of people who are NOT rapists. Why should a God be such a poor communicator?

Why is "salvation" dependent on choosing the right god to believe in? What evidence is there to lead me to the correct god? There are more people in the world who believe in different gods than Christians. Why should I pick Jesus over all those other gods? Why should I be punished if I pick the wrong one, or if I decide that picking ANY without evidence is pointless?

This doesn't sell Christianity very well. It seems focused on punishing and condemning people who have done nothing wrong, and praising men who have. It rewards thoughtless conformity, and discourages rational questioning or inspection. Is there anything you can say on behalf of Christianity, that would convince me that it's true? Can you convince me that magic is real, that child abuse is righteous, that consenting adults should be reviled as rapists, or that belief should be decided without evidence?

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#100006 May 14, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
No, we were discussing homosexuality.
You don't rage at Thor. You rage at God and Jesus Christ.
You are right about Lot. Lot's life is a list of selfish and dumb choices. In desperation he clung to God. That was his and your only salvation.
‘Condescending SOB’ wrote this responding to the news of the Idaho ruling and makes a good point (IMO):

Can the people that believe they need to ban gay marriage because hetero marriage "promotes procreation" kindly explain why it makes sense to worship a god that chose to have a son with a woman that he neither married or had any intention to marry?

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#100007 May 14, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Because we were discussing a homosexual mob assaulting visitors. Most people get stuck there...
Smile.
You seem to be in the minority since most people have taken a closer look at your "MORALITY" TALE.

Little do you know, but a dear friend passed away recently. As per his final request, "His instructions for final disposition of his remains were carried out yesterday. Brothers in the State of Washington received his ashes and, as per his wishes, sent them by weather balloon into the high jetstream over Washington where their release into the upper atmosphere was automatically triggered by altimeter at around 70k ft.

When discussing this request he quipped, "I expect to be raining old faggot onto Putin's head for quite some time to come, and the deep South had better batten their hatches!"

By our best calculations of weather currents, by this time next year there will be no place on Earth that will not have a little bit of him as a part of the local ecology."

Just think by this time next year you'll never be able to deny IT'S RAINING MEN!

Can I get a hallelujah?

Oh and one last thing. In the letter they also informed me:

"Also as per his personal request, he asked that we remind you of his love of YouTube, and specifically of his first use of it on a TOPIX thread ... one in which he recalled that you were an active contributor:



( It's 'Desiderata')

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#100008 May 14, 2014
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text> According to the Encyclopedia of Wars (Phillips and Axelrod), of the 1,763 major conflicts in recorded history, only 123 of them can be classified as having been fought over religious differences. That’s less than 7 percent.
The encyclopedia also explains that the number of people killed in these conflicts amounts to only two percent. This means that even when wars have been fought over religious disputes, they tend to be less bloody than when they are fought for other reasons. The American Revolution, World War I, World War II, Vietnam, Korea; none of these wars was fought for religious reasons. In fact, the bloodiest and most deadly wars of recent history were demonstrably motivated by something other than religion: out of whack nationalism (WWI), antireligious fascism (WWII), and atheistic Communism (Korea, Vietnam, the atrocities of Stalin and Mao).
You are such a witless wonder.

You calim WW2 wasn't religious then quote your own source as saying, " antireligious fascism (WWII), and atheistic Communism (Korea, Vietnam, the atrocities of Stalin and Mao)"

PICK A LANE HONEY!

LMAO

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#100009 May 14, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Because we were discussing a homosexual mob assaulting visitors. Most people get stuck there...
Smile.
Maybe because they can't see the idiocy of using a tale that ends in incest as a morality tale?

Or maybe it's because they are genetically intellectually defective like you.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#100010 May 14, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You weren't discussing two things. You want to change the subject.
Nor are you being straight about the subject you want to switch to. You deliberately deny the basis of Christian righteousness because that would undermine your anger.
Again, clearly most people have issue with the homosexual mob, not Lot.
BULL

The one trying to change the subject now is you yourself.

Dodging the questions, "Would YOU call a man "righteous" if he offered up his children to rapists? Do you think it's right to call ALL homosexuals "criminals", even ones in consenting relationships, just because rape gangs have existed?"

Because EdmondWA was correct when he said, "People who have never committed rape are not culpable for the crimes of rapists, and men who would willingly hand their children over to rapists are not 'righteous' men.", AND YOU CAN'T COME UP WITH ANY RATIONAL REBUTTAL.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#100011 May 14, 2014
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
For which the story of Lot is frequently trotted out, as an example of a "righteous" man who is a hero for opposing the homosexuals in his town.
Except that the story doesn't explain why being gay is wrong. It only explains why rape gangs are wrong. And actually, it only says that rape gangs are wrong for your VISITORS, it appears to say that they're just fine for your children.
And it doesn't explain why hating rape should lead to hating homosexuals. If Christians want to say th...nger from decent, honest people who don't make excuses for bigotry by invoking the supernatural.
<quoted text>
It's funny that YOU could clear this up, but the Bible could not. Why couldn't the Bible communicate this more clearly? Instead, the Bible mis-applies a word like "righteous" to an abusive man with no love for his children. The story vilifies the crime of rape (against visitors), but is used to justify vilification of people who are NOT rapists. Why should a God be such a poor communicator?
Why is "salvation" dependent on choosing the right god to believe in? What evidence is there to lead me to the correct god? There are more people in the world who believe in different gods than Christians. Why should I pick Jesus over all those other gods? Why should I be punished if I pick the wrong one, or if I decide that picking ANY without evidence is pointless?
This doesn't sell Christianity very well. It seems focused on punishing and condemning people who have done nothing wrong, and praising men who have. It rewards thoughtless conformity, and discourages rational questioning or inspection. Is there anything you can say on behalf of Christianity, that would convince me that it's true? Can you convince me that magic is real, that child abuse is righteous, that consenting adults should be reviled as rapists, or that belief should be decided without evidence?
1. Anal sex is inherently harmful, unhealthy and demeaning. We term it 'safe', ONLY with condoms and lub. Something unavailable for thousands of years ANYWHERE! Every culture in human history has resisted the act. And you ask why it is wrong???
My guess is, homosexuality is mating behavior unrestrained by children, leading to a unrestrained pursuit of the strongest drive humans possess. That is pictured by Sodom and Gomorrah.
2. You equate Thor and God? Who do you think you are kidding. Really stupid, Eddy.
3. Like I said, you have no desire to understand. Moreover, you deliberately distort. Why does a God you term fiction drive you to such measures?
Smile.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#100013 May 14, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Anal sex is inherently harmful, unhealthy and demeaning. We term it 'safe', ONLY with condoms and lub. Something unavailable for thousands of years ANYWHERE! Every culture in human history has resisted the act. And you ask why it is wrong???
My guess is, homosexuality is mating behavior unrestrained by children, leading to a unrestrained pursuit of the strongest drive humans possess. That is pictured by Sodom and Gomorrah.
2. You equate Thor and God? Who do you think you are kidding. Really stupid, Eddy.
3. Like I said, you have no desire to understand. Moreover, you deliberately distort. Why does a God you term fiction drive you to such measures?
Smile.
AND YOU CAN'T COME UP WITH ANY RATIONAL REBUTTAL.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#100014 May 14, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Anal sex is inherently harmful, unhealthy and demeaning. We term it 'safe', ONLY with condoms and lub. Something unavailable for thousands of years ANYWHERE! Every culture in human history has resisted the act. And you ask why it is wrong???
My guess is, homosexuality is mating behavior unrestrained by children, leading to a unrestrained pursuit of the strongest drive humans possess. That is pictured by Sodom and Gomorrah.
2. You equate Thor and God? Who do you think you are kidding. Really stupid, Eddy.
3. Like I said, you have no desire to understand. Moreover, you deliberately distort. Why does a God you term fiction drive you to such measures?
Smile.
1. Irrelevant drivel.

2. Who the hell cares?

3. Huge Projection. It is you who promotes a fictional God.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#100015 May 14, 2014
KiMare wrote:
1. Anal sex is inherently harmful, unhealthy and demeaning. We term it 'safe', ONLY with condoms and lub. Something unavailable for thousands of years ANYWHERE!
You don't need condoms OR lube. Condoms are only necessary to protect the non-monogamous. I don't need them with my husband. And you don't need lube either. Ever heard of spit? I think that was available before lube.

But this doesn't address homosexuality. What are homosexuals supposed to do? Be alone? Why? Because you say it's "wrong" for them to be with someone?

It wouldn't matter if anal sex caused people to burst into flames. Gay people would still be gay. Griping about alleged "dangers" isn't going to cause gay people to renounce their homosexuality. All your fear-mongering won't change them.
KiMare wrote:
Every culture in human history has resisted the act.
No they have not. The Greeks didn't. Many Native American tribes didn't.

And who cares if they did? That wouldn't mean that their morals were correct on the subject. Most human cultures have enjoyed slavery, too.
KiMare wrote:
And you ask why it is wrong???
Yes, I would, because you're not explaining it. You're trying to make it "right" to vilify people for choosing how they want to live their OWN lives.
KiMare wrote:
My guess is, homosexuality is mating behavior unrestrained by children, leading to a unrestrained pursuit of the strongest drive humans possess. That is pictured by Sodom and Gomorrah.
And if there's a God, then who GAVE them that drive (not to mention homosexual desires)? And what is wrong with enjoying that drive with consenting adults?

The rape gang of the S&G story SHOULD teach that CONSENT is more important than gender. But consent is rarely considered in the Bible, when it comes to punishing people for "crimes". You certainly won't find any focus on consent in a story where the consent of young girls is callously disregarded by their "righteous" father. If consent were mentioned here, then Christians would have to defend the theft of the girls' consent as "righteous".
KiMare wrote:
2. You equate Thor and God? Who do you think you are kidding. Really stupid, Eddy.
They're both equally invisible. They're both equally immeasurable. They've both been equally worshipped. They both have the same amount of evidence. Thor does get better movies, though.

I'll equate ALL the gods I've ever heard of, from Astarte to Yahweh. They're all the same, as far as I can tell. They all appear equally fictional.

Please provide me with a reliable METHOD to choose the correct god from the pile. I'd REALLY like the opportunity to finally sort that all out.
KiMare wrote:
3. Like I said, you have no desire to understand. Moreover, you deliberately distort.
I only ask questions. If you fail to answer them, you cannot blame me for having no desire to understand. There is no way to deliberately distort a story of a "righteous" man who gives his children away to rapists at the first knock of the door. That's already pretty distorted. It's horrible, in fact.
KiMare wrote:
Why does a God you term fiction drive you to such measures?
HUMANS drive me to these measures. One day you might understand this (talk about distorting).

Gods are fictional, humans are not. Humans really spread slander against gay people, as if we were all rapists. Humans create fictional gods, and then slander others if they don't believe in those gods without evidence or question. Humans try to cram supernatural mumbo-jumbo into our educational standards.

Humans do all these things, not gods. Humans are the ones I have a problem with, not gods. Humans are the ones I bring my questions to. Gods would only remain silent.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#100016 May 14, 2014
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't need condoms OR lube. Condoms are only necessary to protect the non-monogamous. I don't need them with my husband. And you don't need lube either. Ever heard of spit? I think that was available before lube.
But this doesn't address homosexuality. What are homosexuals supposed to do? Be alone? Why? Because you say it's "wrong" for them to be with someone?
It wouldn't matter if anal sex caused people to burst into flames. Gay people would still be gay. Griping about alleged "dangers" isn't going to cause gay people to renounce their homosexuality. All your fear-mongering won't change them.
<quoted text>
No they have not. The Greeks didn't. Many Native American tribes didn't.
And who cares if they did? That wouldn't mean that their morals were correct on the subject. Most human cultures have enjoyed slavery, too.
<quoted text>
Yes, I would, because you're not explaining it. You're trying to make it "right" to vilify people for choosing how they want to live their OWN lives.
<quoted text>
And if there's a God, then who GAVE them that drive (not to mention homosexual desires)? And what is wrong with enjoying that drive with consenting adults?
The rape gang of the S&G story SHOULD teach that CONSENT is more important than gender. But consent is rarely considered in the Bible, when it comes to punishing people for "crimes". You certainly won't find any focus on consent in a story where the consent of young girls is callously disregarded by their "righteous" father. If consent were mentioned here, then Christians would have to defend the theft of the girls' consent as "righteous".
<quoted text>
They're both equally invisible. They're both equally immeasurable. They've both been equally worshipped. They both have the same amount of evidence. Thor does get better movies, though.
I'll equate ALL the gods I've ever heard of, from Astarte to Yahweh. They're all the same, as far as I can tell. They all appear equally fictional.
Please provide me with a reliable METHOD to choose the correct god from the pile. I'd REALLY like the opportunity to finally sort that all out.
<quoted text>
I only ask questions. If you fail to answer them, you cannot blame me for having no desire to understand. There is no way to deliberately distort a story of a "righteous" man who gives his children away to rapists at the first knock of the door. That's already pretty distorted. It's horrible, in fact.
<quoted text>
HUMANS drive me to these measures. One day you might understand this (talk about distorting).
Gods are fictional, humans are not. Humans really spread slander against gay people, as if we were all rapists. Humans create fictional gods, and then slander others if they don't believe in those gods without evidence or question. Humans try to cram supernatural mumbo-jumbo into our educational standards.
Humans do all these things, not gods. Humans are the ones I have a problem with, not gods. Humans are the ones I bring my questions to. Gods would only remain silent.
applause and a big red heart. But Gods are not fictional. Kimare has certainly proven he is determined to make HIS GOD a reality!

LMAO

I'm still laughing over his asking what makes anyone believe their SSM is equal to his and I said, "the same license you have you idjit!"

And when he keeps insisting that S&G is about a fictional gay rape while ignoring that his one righteous man then offered his own daughters for rape and eventually molested them himself, his morality lesson gets weaker and weaker.

He truly is a monster mutation in the worst sense.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#100017 May 14, 2014
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>applause and a big red heart. But Gods are not fictional. Kimare has certainly proven he is determined to make HIS GOD a reality!
LMAO
I'm still laughing over his asking what makes anyone believe their SSM is equal to his and I said, "the same license you have you idjit!"
And when he keeps insisting that S&G is about a fictional gay rape while ignoring that his one righteous man then offered his own daughters for rape and eventually molested them himself, his morality lesson gets weaker and weaker.
He truly is a monster mutation in the worst sense.
You know you have created God in your own image when that God hates all the same people you hate.

Since: Nov 12

Sacramento, CA

#100018 May 14, 2014
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>You are such a witless wonder.
You calim WW2 wasn't religious then quote your own source as saying, " antireligious fascism (WWII), and atheistic Communism (Korea, Vietnam, the atrocities of Stalin and Mao)"
PICK A LANE HONEY!
LMAO
I was wondering when you would get around to my comments. You seem to be struggling trying to dispute my statement that religion accounts for only 7% of the causes of war, therefore you attack the wording. Nice try, but you are too predictable. But to help clear things: WWII was not a religious war, apart from the fact that Hitler and his Nazi thugs murdered millions of Jews and anyone else who did not conform.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#100019 May 14, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Anal sex is inherently harmful, unhealthy and demeaning. We term it 'safe', ONLY with condoms and lub. Something unavailable for thousands of years ANYWHERE! Every culture in human history has resisted the act. And you ask why it is wrong???
My guess is, homosexuality is mating behavior unrestrained by children, leading to a unrestrained pursuit of the strongest drive humans possess. That is pictured by Sodom and Gomorrah.
2. You equate Thor and God? Who do you think you are kidding. Really stupid, Eddy.
3. Like I said, you have no desire to understand. Moreover, you deliberately distort. Why does a God you term fiction drive you to such measures?
Smile.
1. It's your opinion that anal sex is harmful..........
What's lub? No wonder you have a Sandy vagina, you've been using lub on it.
Nobody gives a shit what you "guess".
2. What happened to your most adamant position that you won't argue faith the the faithless? You can resist pontificating, so you break your own rules.
3. Oh, who the phruck cares..........

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#100020 May 14, 2014
can't* resist................

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 3 min Aura Mytha 55,652
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 25 min Steve III 649,629
Israel End is Near (Feb '15) 36 min AussieBobby 425
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 1 hr crust 281,467
TRUTH about illegal aliens (Aug '14) 4 hr Knock off purse s... 12
Does anybody know Doctor REALITY'S race or nati... 4 hr Knock off purse s... 36
rajkot gey (Nov '15) 4 hr Hemant patel 77
Moms having sex with their sons (Aug '12) 9 hr Noname 69
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 15 hr Hangman 972,378
More from around the web