Barebackers Unite!

[wiltthestilt]

Originally Posted by wiltthestilt
I wish there were a way to tax barbacking (outside monogamy) similarly.

Originally Posted by wiltthestilt
there has been no suggestion that it is desirable or feasible to tax people for engaging in bareback sex.

And to address this last bit of reading incomprehension:

I said "I wish there were a way" = there is no way, it is impossible, in a perfect world people who engaged in the behavior would pay to offset the social costs of the behavior just as smokers do. I never said such a thing should actually happen in the real word.

[wiltthestilt]

Oh good, it was time you realised the wisdom in the old adage 'When in hole, stop digging'.

Actually, I answered you moron. There you go. You didn't understand what I said and you jumped to conclusions. I don't expect you to get this either.

[MacShreach]

I think not. You are just an arrogant moron who is incapable of adult discussion.
You have no rational argument to make--only name calling, ad hominem attacks, and cliched phrases like "neo-Fascist" which invariably you yourself don't understand. I should have followed my initial decision to ignore your juvenile banter.

So explain to me how calling me an 'arrogant moron' etc is not an 'ad-hominem attack'? Which so highly educated (don't make me laugh) a person as yourself would pretend never to stoop to?

You made a stupid and thoughtless statement which you subsequently attempted to back out of under a smokescreen of obfuscatory twaddle, and became abusive when challenged by someone who is if not smarter than you, at least as smart. An honest person in your position would have accepted the fault. I think the term is 'humbug'.

[wiltthestilt]

So explain to me how calling me an 'arrogant moron' etc is not an 'ad-hominem attack'? Which so highly educated (don't make me laugh) a person as yourself would pretend never to stoop to?

You made a stupid and thoughtless statement which you subsequently attempted to back out of under a smokescreen of obfuscatory twaddle, and become abusive when challenged by someone who is if not smarter than you, at least as smart. An honest person in your position would have accepted the fault. I think the term is 'humbug'.

So explain to me how calling me an 'arrogant moron' etc is not an 'ad-hominem attack'?

It is. We are through debating. The ad hominem attacks started with you.

You made a stupid and thoughtless statement which you subsequently attempted to back out of under a smokescreen of obfuscatory twaddle

Bullshit. I phrased it that way for emphasis, and in such a way that it was clear that it was not a policy I was literally suggesting. You appear to be the only one who had trouble with it.

and become abusive when challenged by someone who is if not smarter than you, at least as smart.

More bullshit. This was your initial response to me:

You want to tax sex between consenting adults? You did actually write that?

Dickhead.

How do you expect a civil discussion to follow such a reply?

An honest person in your position would have accepted the fault.

Total bullshit. I'm not at fault for anything. If you misunderstood what I said you could have asked rather than acting like an asshole. I am a careful writer and I wrote what I intended to write. I'm not backing down because you have acted like an asshole and now are grasping for some way to justify your behavior.

[MacShreach]

No, I am afraid that just saying the same thing again and again does not improve your case. I won't lower myself to the sixth-form semantics that you apparently revel in, because it's too late here to continue to put effort into discussion with someone so intransigent and, clearly, somewhat lacking in certain social and intellectual skills, so I am going to bed. Good night.

Oh, claim victory if you will; for it to matter to me, you would have to.

But really, it takes a real dickhead to suggest taxing sex.

[wiltthestilt]

No, I am afraid that just saying the same thing again and again does not improve your case. I won't lower myself to the sixth-form semantics that you apparently revel in, because it's too late here to continue to put effort into discussion with someone so intransigent and, clearly, somewhat lacking in certain social and intellectual skills, so I am going to bed. Good night.

Oh, claim victory if you will; for it to matter to me, you would have to.

But really, it takes a real dickhead to suggest taxing sex.

Fair enough. I claim victory. You made a knee jerk response and then became even more of an unruly child when you were forced to reflect on it. If you had acted like an adult (if you are one) from the beginning all this nastiness would have been avoided, but perhaps that is what you wanted from the outset. Maybe you'll wake up a better person but I doubt it.

[wiltthestilt]

Finally some sense from Macshreach. Thank you! The hate on this thread is amazing. I would expect this amount of hate from a conservative christian nazi forum and not a ts forum.

A conservative christian board wouldn't hate on this thread. They would welcome your honesty. Among their core arguments against us are that forums such as this one promote and encourage unsafe behavior, that condoms are ineffective in controlling the spread of HIV, and that even if condoms worked correctly, the participants are so consumed with their own carnal pleasure that they would not bother to use them anyway. They have all manner of specious statistics to support these claims. This thread would go over very with them as it supports their already held assumptions. It's a shame it hasn't met with more derision here.

[LibertyHarkness]

Got to love those religion nut jobs