Grudge match: God Vs. Ms. Manners

LukkyKnight

Equal Opportunity Enjoyer
Joined
Oct 26, 2001
Posts
58,516
Susano wrote recently:

...if god had wanted us to have lots of sex just for the fun of it he would have given us organs which provided pleasure from the act, and a psychological tropism for it.
Now that's a thought for a Saturday night.:D
icon14.gif
 
Last edited:
Organs and psychology

Well don't I feel silly sitting here with a clitoris and a definite huge psychological, physical and spiritual need for making love?? GAWD what have you done to me?????
 
Moi? I was just passing along an insight, wasn't I? Complete with a typo I had to correct, even.
 
LMAO!!!

Ummm, no, not you LK, although I have called you GAWD a time or three. LMAO! I was speaking of a higher power. ROFL!!
 
I'm not sure GAWDDAMN SONOFABITCH is quite the same thing, Angela.
 
ROFLMAO!

I have never said such a thing to you, NEVER and it is not likely to happen. Not my style darlin', not at all. But damn that was funny!! ROFLMAO!!
 
Well, we have a holy mission now, a divine imperative. Are you ready to go out and become a fisher of men/women, and do you know what to do with them once you catch them?




At least, you have a holy mission. I have a divine imperative to proofread more carefully
 
Oh, Mr. Happy can stay cheerful for quite a long time; he just needs someone to make him happy.
 
Heh. Sorry, I tend towards the obfuscating end of subtlety and euphemism.

I meant to say that I do need a good lover, but don't need viagra. :D
 
Lover and Viagra

Why would you need either one if GAWD did not supply you with organs and a psyche that allowed you to enjoy sex? Are you male or female?
 
Awww... It's not going to be funny if I explain it, but if I have to I guess it wasn't in the first place:
I meant it as an ironic statement, which on a literal level said god does, indeed, intend us to copulate for sheer enjoyment, and on succeeding levels down to poke fun at the Godly intercourse-only-for-procreation crowd, and reversed the standard meaning statements in such a form usually have.
 
Damnit, Angela.

I thought I should go with what you said about me, not to me.

Nice shoes, Sempre.
 
Funny

Susano said:
Awww... It's not going to be funny if I explain it, but if I have to I guess it wasn't in the first place:
I meant it as an ironic statement, which on a literal level said god does, indeed, intend us to copulate for sheer enjoyment, and on succeeding levels down to poke fun at the Godly intercourse-only-for-procreation crowd, and reversed the standard meaning statements in such a form usually have.

Don't quit your day job! :rolleyes:
 
Susano said:
...god does, indeed, intend us to copulate for sheer enjoyment...
This beats a lot of what I learned in school. If you're some kinda prophet can I be like pope?
 
Back
Top