Has anyone noticed that women nowadays...

[TE]

Humans having sex solely for the purpose of reproduction is a concept that also deviates from the natural order of things.

What, in your opinion, is the natural order of things then?

[leemajors]

What, in your opinion, is the natural order of things then?

putting stuff in holes

[BacktoBasics]

Triggered Failure's appeal to Nature is a logical fallacy, anyhow. Wikipedia:

"An appeal to nature is considered to have committed a logical fallacy in stating that something is good or right because it is natural, or that something is bad or wrong because it is unnatural or artificial; This is a fallacy of relevance in that the natural origins of a phenomenon are presumed irrelevant to their desirability, and possibly an informal fallacy if it states that because some natural things are good, therefore all natural things are good. In this type of informal fallacy,[7] nature implies an ideal or desired state of being,[8] a state of how things were, or how they should be: in this sense an appeal to nature may resemble an appeal to tradition."

Second it is actually, like ^ says, an appeal to tradition in almost every way. The majority of humans traditionally practice hetero sex, therefore hetero sex must be natural.

You always rely on this type of man.

Go on and explain what his post means. Prove to me that you understand what his post means and why it was directed to you.

[Shastafarian]

Protected sex is just as unnatural as gay sex.

[TE]

There is no end to your stupidity. Its not a matter of its relevance to your misuse of the word. Its relevant to its actual definition. The one everyone recognizes but you.

Your incessant need to misuse and misrepresent "natural" only serves to make you look more and more foolish the longer you carry on.

You're wrong. About 10 people in a few different ways have tried to clue you in to the fact that you're wrong but you refuse to comprehend it.

This is why no one here is interested in engaging in a real debate with you. Who's going to argue with the who redefines words to make a point?

You're not even abandoning rationality so much as you're abandoning actual defined words. You are officially the dumbest person this board has ever seen.

...and I don't throw that out lightly.

Here's the typical life coach take when someone opposes her beliefs.

[TE]

Go on and explain what his post means. Prove to me that you understand what his post means and why it was directed to you.

Don't have to. I understood what it meant, I don't have to prove anything to you tbh.

[ploto]

But in terms of how humans conceive and procreate it deviates from the natural order of things.

I would say that in vitro fertilization deviates from the natural order when it comes to how human beings conceive and procreate.

But how they have sex is a topic altogether different.

[TE]

putting stuff in holes

[BacktoBasics]

putting stuff in holes

Don't confuse him any further

[DisAsTerBot]

Don't have to. I understood what it meant, I don't have to prove anything to you tbh.

so why did you just disregard it? Because it refutes what you believe?

[BacktoBasics]

Don't have to. I understood what it meant, I don't have to prove anything to you tbh.

You don't get it. I didn't think you did.

[TE]

Protected sex is just as unnatural as gay sex.

So those engaged in a heterosexual activity would be committing an unnatural act...

[BacktoBasics]

Here's the typical life coach take when someone opposes her beliefs.

Its been the same take from pretty much all of us. It has nothing to do with opposing opinions as it does you complete and utter stupidity and inability to comprehend simple definitions.

[BacktoBasics]

so why did you just disregard it? Because it refutes what you believe?

You shouldn't have said that . He didn't know it refutes what he believes. He didn't know at all what it meant. It was just jibber jabber to him.

But even with your clue he still doesn't get it.

He probably thought fallacy meant fellatio. Even that might have been too big a word for him.

[TE]

so why did you just disregard it? Because it refutes what you believe?

Logically...according to this, perhaps?

Everyone has to remember this is more of a matter of opinion. The opinions held are fueled with their own ammunition of facts that relate to reality.

[silverblk mystix]

Lol at this witch hunt...

Page 1 & 2 consisted of communication.

From page 3 it turned into condescension, righteousness, insults and the same club m.o. that is as bad as anything everyone jumping on the sheeple wagon accused the OP of.

SMH.

[DisAsTerBot]

Its been the same take from pretty much all of us. It has nothing to do with opposing opinions as it does you complete and utter stupidity and inability to comprehend simple definitions.

[BacktoBasics]

Logically...according to this, perhaps?

Everyone has to remember this is more of a matter of opinion. The opinions held are fueled with their own ammunition of facts that relate to reality.

Or in your case the opinion is fueled by creating new definitions of words.

[DisAsTerBot]

Logically...according to this, perhaps?

Everyone has to remember this is more of a matter of opinion. The opinions held are fueled with their own ammunition of facts that relate to reality.

the definition of "natural" is not an opinion. You've got to remember that.

[TE]

@ backtobasics, don't ever argue against or oppose her beliefs or you'll get a plethora of personal attacks in almost every post she directs towards you.

[TE]

the definition of "natural" is not an opinion. You've got to remember that.

How it relates to what I believe to be true and how it's relevant to conception and the like, it's a word to use. I should have used a much less sexier word like "normal" but people would have found a way to give me for that too.

[BacktoBasics]

@ backtobasics, don't ever argue against or oppose her beliefs or you'll get a plethora of personal attacks in almost every post she directs towards you.

Only once again you're clueless. I've had hundreds if not thousands of debates on this forum and you're the first moron who's attempted to create new definitions of words in order to make a point.

This isn't a debate its a lesson in the english language.

This would have gone a lot differently if you actually contributed something worth discussing.

[DisAsTerBot]

How it relates to what I believe to be true and how it's relevant to conception and the like, it's a word to use. I should have used a much less sexier word like "normal" but people would have found a way to give me for that too.

yeah, because either way you'd be wrong

[Shastafarian]

So those engaged in a heterosexual activity would be committing an unnatural act...

According to you yes.

[BacktoBasics]

How it relates to what I believe to be true and how it's relevant to conception and the like, it's a word to use. I should have used a much less sexier word like "normal" but people would have found a way to give me for that too.

No. You should have just not redefined the word. Then you shouldn't have taken on everyone in this thread who tried to correct you.