Cayman Islands apologises to gay visitor

[fuzi]

rdg1234 wrote:

I just realized specifically why I'm fast finding "tracy m" an uninteresting "debater." I think he knows he's full of shit.

I came to that conclusion early on here. "tracy m" is an extremely immature person with an incredibly stunted education and socialization. He writes like a child, with about the same level of knowledge a typical 12 year old would convey.

[Tracy M]

ltndncr59 wrote:

<quoted text>
This is all quite fascinating. Where do you get the many levels of perversion, and what is acceptable and what is not?
Just curious (although I probably already know your answer). How is heterosexual masturbation worse than homosexual masturbation? How is it even different?

There are no outlined levels of perversion (let's use the word sex here) that I am aware of...
Do you not agree that there are indeed various types of perversion(sex) and that some are acceptable by some and not by others? How would you catagorize what is acceptable to one but not another?

The question about masterbation made me realize that when I was replying to UnbelievableFL with my reasons on why homosexual anything is worse than heterosexual activity...these things I speak of are from my perspective only and not how I think heterosexual sex is somehow above homosexual sex.
While, yes I am a heterosexual, I cannot discount the sex homosexuals engage in as worse on a level scale in comparison to heterosexual sex. I understand this.

What I have been trying to get across is that in my position as a heterosexual, the levels of perversion I described are what they are because for me to go there and engage in those acts would be worse.
It's like...what type of experiences are there that you would be so tramatized by that you couldn't look in the mirror anymore or you felt like the experience ruined you for life...rape victims feel this as does other experiences people encounter.
Again, I think oral sex is ok for me, may not be acceptable to others, but I personally see nothing wrong with it.
Skat...won't go there...that would ruin sex for most I believe....isn't this worse?

So for me as a heteosexual, I would say masterbation is great, but I wouldn't want to engage in homosexual masterbation, as that would be putting me way past any level of acceptance...so my "scale" of perversion is simply my viewpoint and not what is known to be among those that engage in it.

I hope this clears things up a bit.

[rdg1234]

Tracy M wrote:

<quoted text>
Either you are not comprehending what you read in my post or you are just simply a bonehead...
my post said that we were designed for the sole purpose of procreation, if you deny this FACT you are nuts...looney toons....
Now, what you obviously didn't get from my other post is that while that is how were are designed, we do not use sex solely for procreation, that is a no brainer...why would I not know this FACT as well, because we can see clearly on this thread that perversion is a big part of peoples sexual activity, so I don't know where you saw I posted that people only use sex for procreation...you misread my post...go to comprehension school and maybe you can catchup with the conversations.

No.

You're lying again.

The "foundation" for your "argument" was that "sex is for procreative purposes only." You're lying to me and you're lying to everyone on this board.

You've gotten semantic and you're doing the "semantic song-and-dance" because *all* that's important to you now is that you *look correct*.

I'm watching you do it over and over.

You just did it again with this post.

I'll be happy to keep clarifying *exactly* what you're doing.

[rdg1234]

"tracy m," perhaps the concept of "perversion" isn't as *INTERESTING* to anyone else here as it is to you. You're the one obsessing about it and not shutting up about it. And it looks to me like you will *not* be telling anyone what to think. Perhaps *this* simple concept is the one *you* should be getting. It seems pretty key to me.

[Dasein9]

rdg1234 wrote:

"tracy m," perhaps the concept of "perversion" isn't as *INTERESTING* to anyone else here as it is to you. You're the one obsessing about it and not shutting up about it. And it looks to me like you will *not* be telling anyone what to think. Perhaps *this* simple concept is the one *you* should be getting. It seems pretty key to me.

That's what seems to be so upsetting to people like Tracy. No control over others.

(Fitting, I think, that the code numbers I have to type in to post this are 1984.)

[Tracy M]

rdg1234 wrote:

<quoted text>
No.
You're lying again.
The "foundation" for your "argument" was that "sex is for procreative purposes only." You're lying to me and you're lying to everyone on this board.
You've gotten semantic and you're doing the "semantic song-and-dance" because *all* that's important to you now is that you *look correct*.
I'm watching you do it over and over.
You just did it again with this post.
I'll be happy to keep clarifying *exactly* what you're doing.

please show all of us here where I make this statement of..."sex is for procreative purposes only."

Again...I say sex was designed for procreation purposes...but we as humans use sex for more than that...
I also said that the penis was for discharging urine and to dispense sperm to the uterus...
that is all is was made/designed for, but again we as humans seem to find other uses for it as well.

I've come to the conclussion that you are one complete idiot!!!

[Tracy M]

rdg1234 wrote:

"tracy m," perhaps the concept of "perversion" isn't as *INTERESTING* to anyone else here as it is to you. You're the one obsessing about it and not shutting up about it. And it looks to me like you will *not* be telling anyone what to think. Perhaps *this* simple concept is the one *you* should be getting. It seems pretty key to me.

Pretty much...I made some statements, people rebutted back to me for better detail...that is what I have been doing...you seem to want to shut me up, but you can't and that makes you very angry.

go pester someone that gives a flying horse what you think...

[Tracy M]

Tracy M wrote:

<quoted text>
please show all of us here where I make this statement of..."sex is for procreative purposes only."
Again...I say sex was designed for procreation purposes...but we as humans use sex for more than that...
I also said that the penis was for discharging urine and to dispense sperm to the uterus...
that is all is was made/designed for, but again we as humans seem to find other uses for it as well.
I've come to the conclussion that you are one complete idiot!!!

From my original post to you I said "The sole purpose for sex is procreation, if you cannot understand this simple biological fact, then you need to do more reading and understanding of evolution. "

Now...I see where you misread what I said...maybe I could clarify this a bit more for you...
From an evolutionary standpoint, the sole purpose for sex is procreation.
We humans have also understand that we can also use sex for other purposes as well.

So if you disagree with me, rather than simply pointing out that I am wrong, how about correcting me with your enlightenment.

[UnbelievableFL]

Tracy M wrote:

<quoted text>
please show all of us here where I make this statement of..."sex is for procreative purposes only."

Oh Tracy, why do you make me keep looking up your old posts? Wouldn't it be easier to just be consistent in what you say? Here is a quote of yours from post #104.

Tracy M wrote:

<quoted text>Having sex with the opposite sex offers a hope of procreation, which is the ONLY "Natural" purpose for sex. YOU CANNOT DENIY THIS FACT!!!

The only difference between the two statements is that you don't use the word "natural" now. Are you really going to get that technical? Come on!

[UnbelievableFL]

Tracy M wrote:

<quoted text>
From my original post to you I said "The sole purpose for sex is procreation, if you cannot understand this simple biological fact, then you need to do more reading and understanding of evolution. "
Now...I see where you misread what I said...maybe I could clarify this a bit more for you...
From an evolutionary standpoint, the sole purpose for sex is procreation.
We humans have also understand that we can also use sex for other purposes as well.
So if you disagree with me, rather than simply pointing out that I am wrong, how about correcting me with your enlightenment.

Okay, now we have two different instances where you said procreation was the sole purpose of sex, and yet you called rdg1234 an "idiot" for pointing it out. And to top it off, now you are trying to blame rdg1234 for not correcting you properly!! You are really making an ass of yourself lately.

[Tracy M]

UnbelievableFL wrote:

<quoted text>
Okay, now we have two different instances where you said procreation was the sole purpose of sex, and yet you called rdg1234 an "idiot" for pointing it out. And to top it off, now you are trying to blame rdg1234 for not correcting you properly!! You are really making an ass of yourself lately.

The problem started in post 121 from rdg1234, where he made the assumption that I said sex was for procreation only, and what I posted was twisted...

look back at what I said then what he said...how do you go from what I said to thinking that I made the notion that sex is used only for procreation...that is where he messed us. What I am saying is that it "IS DESIGNED" for procreation, but we use it for more than that.

Oh, well...it's the weekend and I'm outta here...

[ltndncr59]

Tracy M wrote:

<quoted text>
There are no outlined levels of perversion (let's use the word sex here) that I am aware of...
Do you not agree that there are indeed various types of perversion(sex) and that some are acceptable by some and not by others? How would you catagorize what is acceptable to one but not another?
The question about masterbation made me realize that when I was replying to UnbelievableFL with my reasons on why homosexual anything is worse than heterosexual activity...these things I speak of are from my perspective only and not how I think heterosexual sex is somehow above homosexual sex.
While, yes I am a heterosexual, I cannot discount the sex homosexuals engage in as worse on a level scale in comparison to heterosexual sex. I understand this.
What I have been trying to get across is that in my position as a heterosexual, the levels of perversion I described are what they are because for me to go there and engage in those acts would be worse.
It's like...what type of experiences are there that you would be so tramatized by that you couldn't look in the mirror anymore or you felt like the experience ruined you for life...rape victims feel this as does other experiences people encounter.
Again, I think oral sex is ok for me, may not be acceptable to others, but I personally see nothing wrong with it.
Skat...won't go there...that would ruin sex for most I believe....isn't this worse?
So for me as a heteosexual, I would say masterbation is great, but I wouldn't want to engage in homosexual masterbation, as that would be putting me way past any level of acceptance...so my "scale" of perversion is simply my viewpoint and not what is known to be among those that engage in it.
I hope this clears things up a bit.

The only thing it clears up is that you are a total loon!

BTW masturbation is an act for one person, so it can't really be hetero or homosexual. It is auto sexual.

[rdg1234]

Tracy M wrote:

<quoted text>
please show all of us here where I make this statement of..."sex is for procreative purposes only."
Again...I say sex was designed for procreation purposes...but we as humans use sex for more than that...
I also said that the penis was for discharging urine and to dispense sperm to the uterus...
that is all is was made/designed for, but again we as humans seem to find other uses for it as well.
I've come to the conclussion that you are one complete idiot!!!

I think you seem *sort of* cool, which is annoying, so I'm ceasing this discussion.

[rdg1234]

Tracy M wrote:

<quoted text>
Pretty much...I made some statements, people rebutted back to me for better detail...that is what I have been doing...you seem to want to shut me up, but you can't and that makes you very angry.
go pester someone that gives a flying horse what you think...

Interesting you say this. I think *you* expect someone (me?) to simply "bow down" and verify the rectitude of your horse shit. You changed what you said on this board. You've done an about-face of sorts. I'm just wondering if anyone else noticed.

But you *can't admit* you were wrong. Why not allow yourself that I saw some likability in you, and continue like I'm not here.

[rdg1234]

Tracy M wrote:

<quoted text>
The problem started in post 121 from rdg1234, where he made the assumption that I said sex was for procreation only, and what I posted was twisted...
look back at what I said then what he said...how do you go from what I said to thinking that I made the notion that sex is used only for procreation...that is where he messed us. What I am saying is that it "IS DESIGNED" for procreation, but we use it for more than that.
Oh, well...it's the weekend and I'm outta here...

You guys, he did an about-face.

Go look at the posts.

His implication was tied *DIRECTLY* and solely to anti-gay vitriol. Then he became wishy-washy.

I'm not so sure he's even anti-gay "per se" because he seems intelligent, he just doesn't want to go back and admit what happened.

[Tracy M]

ltndncr59 wrote:

<quoted text>
The only thing it clears up is that you are a total loon!
BTW masturbation is an act for one person, so it can't really be hetero or homosexual. It is auto sexual.

Well, that is what I thought until some homosexual caught me up in a conversation and they were speaking of mutual masterbation, where you take care of your significant other.

[Tracy M]

rdg1234 wrote:

<quoted text>
You guys, he did an about-face.
Go look at the posts.
His implication was tied *DIRECTLY* and solely to anti-gay vitriol. Then he became wishy-washy.
I'm not so sure he's even anti-gay "per se" because he seems intelligent, he just doesn't want to go back and admit what happened.

I'll stand by my post where I said that sex was designed/created for the sole purpose for procreation.

I can make this statement because it is true...no one can prove this otherwise.

Remember in biology class/health class where we learned that the penis is part of the REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM.

I surely don't remember it ever being call "go stick it in another guy system".

That is they key point I wanted to make here is that from looking at science/biology and coming to logical conclusions from that information we can clearly see that for you to take what was designed for procreation and twist it in to your own personal pleasure shows that it is not meant to be (wrong).

The only thing you get from your altering of the design is pleasure. You are not following the design, therefore procreation obviously isn't going to happen and your seed will not spread the earth as it was intended.

I'm ok with that and I'm not here to tell you to stop your actions.

Now taking what I have said above...
using the information and coming to my own conclusions as to what my reproductive organs were designed for, I know that sex with a woman is the only way for procreation to happen so anything else would be pointless from the evolutionary path.

So looking at other versions of sex that are not intercourse...I understand that many believe that if it isn't intercourse then it is twisted or perverse.

Although I would not likely view what is perverse as the same as my neighbor, each of us have our own opinions as to what is taking our sexual pleasures beyond what is normal or acceptable to us.

So each individual has barriers or limits as to what is acceptable to them when engaging in sex.

So for me to go way outside my comfort zone to engage in homosexual sex would be completely against anything I would want or desire sexually and so to me that would be wrong...anyone want to argue this fact?

Someone please answer this...isn't there sexual acts that are not acceptable to you that go beyond your limits? Why won't you do these acts?

So what I am getting at here is nothing more than giving you...the homosexual, an understanding as to why I think homosexual activity is wrong.

I've seen it too many times where people think because they are homosexual, that their activity is normal and that all should accept this as an everyday normal activity.

Someone please answer this...
How can you take someone like me and my viewpoint on sex, and tell me that I am a bigot?

Now, as far as equal rights go...I'm really not too concerned about the marriage laws...Equality will shine where it is needed.

[UnbelievableFL]

rdg1234 wrote:

<quoted text>
Interesting you say this. I think *you* expect someone (me?) to simply "bow down" and verify the rectitude of your horse shit. You changed what you said on this board. You've done an about-face of sorts. I'm just wondering if anyone else noticed.
But you *can't admit* you were wrong. Why not allow yourself that I saw some likability in you, and continue like I'm not here.

I noticed, and he's done it at least a couple of times lately. Tracy says something ridiculous, he gets called out on it, and then he tries to deny ever saying it. When proven that he did in fact say it, he tries to wiggle out of it by saying that he wasn't clear enough in his meaning, and he completely changes course to try to save face.

[Dasein9]

Tracy M wrote:

<quoted text>
I'll stand by my post where I said that sex was designed/created for the sole purpose for procreation.
I can make this statement because it is true...no one can prove this otherwise.

But you also can't prove it since your claim presupposes a designer or creator.

Tracy M wrote:

Remember in biology class/health class where we learned that the penis is part of the REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM.
I surely don't remember it ever being call "go stick it in another guy system".

It's also part of the renal system. It's also part of the vascular system. It's also part of the nervous system. You are applying a scientific definition to a phenomenon without taking into account the full scope of the science in this case.

Tracy M wrote:

That is they key point I wanted to make here is that from looking at science/biology and coming to logical conclusions from that information we can clearly see that for you to take what was designed for procreation and twist it in to your own personal pleasure shows that it is not meant to be (wrong).

You're presupposing that some kinds of sex are twisted in your premise and then drawing that very point as a conclusion. Presupposing the conclusion in a premise is called circular reasoning and is a logical fallacy.

Tracy M wrote:

The only thing you get from your altering of the design is pleasure. You are not following the design, therefore procreation obviously isn't going to happen and your seed will not spread the earth as it was intended.
I'm ok with that and I'm not here to tell you to stop your actions.

You're assuming that reproduction somehow trumps all other biological functions of sex in importance, to the point where you deny the other biological functions' legitimacy, without supporting the assumption that there even is a primary function of sex, much less that reproduction is it. In fact, there are lots and lots of ways to have sex. I've only ever heard of two that result in reproduction. It would seem that pleasure is actually a pretty good candidate for the job, if there is a primary function, since it occurs in a much greater number of instances than pregnancy does.

Tracy M wrote:

Now taking what I have said above...
using the information and coming to my own conclusions as to what my reproductive organs were designed for, I know that sex with a woman is the only way for procreation to happen so anything else would be pointless from the evolutionary path.
So looking at other versions of sex that are not intercourse...I understand that many believe that if it isn't intercourse then it is twisted or perverse.

Now you're equivocating on the term perverse, resulting in an ethical claim, rather than a scientific one. The only way for homosexual sex to be perverse in a scientific sense, if reproduction were the primary function of sex (which I don't think it is), would be if it prevented reproduction. It is non-reproductive behaviour, but that doesn't make it harmful to reproduction. Ergo, the only remaining connotation for the term "perverse" in this case is ethical perversion. But that's not the issue you're discussing, so you've drawn an illicit conclusion again.

[Dasein9]

Tracy M wrote:

Although I would not likely view what is perverse as the same as my neighbor, each of us have our own opinions as to what is taking our sexual pleasures beyond what is normal or acceptable to us.
So each individual has barriers or limits as to what is acceptable to them when engaging in sex.
So for me to go way outside my comfort zone to engage in homosexual sex would be completely against anything I would want or desire sexually and so to me that would be wrong...anyone want to argue this fact?

Who's trying to force you to have any kind of sex you don't want to? If this is happening, please dial 911 or go to www.fbi.gov and inform the authorities immediately!

Tracy M wrote:

Someone please answer this...isn't there sexual acts that are not acceptable to you that go beyond your limits? Why won't you do these acts?
So what I am getting at here is nothing more than giving you...the homosexual, an understanding as to why I think homosexual activity is wrong.
I've seen it too many times where people think because they are homosexual, that their activity is normal and that all should accept this as an everyday normal activity.
Someone please answer this...
How can you take someone like me and my viewpoint on sex, and tell me that I am a bigot?
Now, as far as equal rights go...I'm really not too concerned about the marriage laws...Equality will shine where it is needed.

You're a bigot if you generalise your personal preferences to everyone. You don't want gay sex? Fine. Don't have gay sex. But the moment you begin to dictate what is right and wrong to others, merely on the basis of your own preference, you enter the realm of bigotry.