YOU ARE A FUCKEN LIAR Ryan!

Go through the entire thread and see where I have used the word god, religion, jesus etc.

I haven’t – anywhere at all – I have not alluded to it either.

you bought it up at 4:38 – with this -

“….Actually, that raises a bit of a question, Harriet. What would God’s purpose be in creating such a variety of sizes of vaginas and penises?..”

Ah, okay. My apologies, Harriet. I read too much into your comment replying to Fletch talking about teleology.

So you’re talking about the purpose of body parts without any reference to something giving them purpose? And you’ve mentioned people “not being designed for sodomy”, but you’re not referring any kind of designer? Okay.

Well, that’s way simpler.

Basically, Harriet, if two consenting adults want to insert something that doesn’t fit so well – whether it’s a penis in an anus or a penis that doesn’t fit a vagina – it’s just none of your business or mine.

Humans use all kinds of body parts and bodily functions for purposes that differ from their evolutionary biological roles. Ears are for hearing, but some people put earrings in them. Lungs are for breathing, but some people use them as a nicotine-delivery device. Legs are for walking and running, but some people dance.

“…Trying to argue with Harriet as though she were logical and informed is doomed to failure, Ryan….”

I think you’ll find that it is Ryan who is talking through his arsehole Mikenmad!

“Neither a male-male nor a female-female relationship has the essential — i.e., of the essence — property of male-female. Same-sex marriage is neither validated nor created. It is metaphysically impossible. So to think is a logical fallacy; so to speak is semantic nonsense.”

Here is the explaination of that -

Philosophers going as far back as Aristotle have spoken of predication, properties and the like. Predication very simply refers to the attributing of characteristics to a subject or a thing. What a thing is may have different properties or ways of being characterised.

For our purposes here I wish to speak of two basic predications, or predicates, which have been distinguished in intellectual history for nearly three millennia now. These two main predicates are the essential and the accidental. It is important to be clear about how these differ, since discussions about personhood and the like depend upon these distinctions.

In very simple fashion, let us define our terms this way:
-An essential predicate, attribute, or property is one that belongs to the very nature or essence of a thing. They are necessary and permanent properties of a thing.
-An accidental predicate, attribute, or property is a quality which is not an essential part of a thing’s essence. They are contingent and temporary properties of a thing.

Thus something which is essential is that which must be true of a thing. If that quality or characteristic is missing, then that thing or object no longer is or can be. As John and Paul Feinberg explain: “An essential characteristic is a quality that is part of the very essence of a thing. If that quality is lost, the thing ceases to exist. On the other hand, an accidental quality is one that is not part of a thing’s essence. It can be lost or gained without the thing ceasing to exist.”

“A red ball possesses the properties red and round. Calling a green round object or a red square object a red ball does not make it a red ball. Calling same-sex ‘marriage’ does not make it marriage.

“The universe in this philosophic consideration is marriage, which is — by its very definition and essence — the complementary wedding of male and female. Other properties of this particular can be health, ethnic, and intelligence. All such are non-essentials (the term is ‘accidentals’) and can vary greatly and still be marriage. This is so because these are either consistent with or indifferent to the essence of the universal. In contrast, same-sex by its very nature is dissonant and incongruous with the essence of marriage.

“Again in the taxonomy of philosophy, the accidental properties of a given marriage are irrelevant to its essence. They just happen to be present without being necessary. What is not an accidental property is an essential property. These are accidental properties but heterosexuality is an essential property when the universe is marriage. Again: a green ball is not a red ball precisely because the property red is absent.

“Without such essential properties as sex that is compatible and complementary, an alleged marriage simply is not marriage at all. Without this, the relationship might be beautiful and wonderful socially or even domestically — but it is not marriage.

“Neither a male-male nor a female-female relationship has the essential — i.e., of the essence — property of male-female. Same-sex marriage is neither validated nor created. It is metaphysically impossible. So to think is a logical fallacy; so to speak is semantic nonsense.”

Quite so. I can go on all day long and declare that the Australian football team which won the AFL Grand Final yesterday was in fact the Geelong Cats. But no amount of blustering on my part will change the reality: the Sydney Swans won yesterday.

http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2012/09/30/philosophy-and-homosexual-marriage/

Ryan Spoull#

“…..You said that God’s design is made apparent….”

YOU ARE A FUCKEN LIAR Ryan!

Go through the entire thread and see where I have used the word god, religion, jesus etc.

I haven’t – anywhere at all – I have not alluded to it either.

you bought it up at 4:38 – with this -

“….Actually, that raises a bit of a question, Harriet. What would God’s purpose be in creating such a variety of sizes of vaginas and penises?..”

Perhaps God should have designed the penis like a cork-screw and given the anus a reverse thread…

You mean like these ducks? http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1277 (That’s a corkscrew vagina, though.)

No.

Half the population has a penis and the other half has a vagina – and everyone has an arsehole that they expel shit from.

And as I said “Gays don’t even complement each other – so what the fuck would they know about human sexuality?”

Other than adding shit into it!

Yes, yes, very cute, but you haven’t answered my question.

You said that God’s design is made apparent through the penis not fitting easily into the anus, and that people who engage in anal sex are stupid for not being able to see what is obvious. Why doesn’t that make God’s design apparent that he doesn’t want certain different-sex couples having sex (ones where the penis doesn’t fit easily into the vagina)?

Rebuilding Christchurch

An Inland Revenue decision to tax worker accommodation allowances will add to the already rapidly rising Christchurch rebuild bill, tax experts say.

There has been a chorus of dismay from the tax industry since the IRD put out a statement this week saying it intends to tax allowances and accommodation provided to employees who have to work away from home.

It also wants to make the tax retrospective, asking employers to look over their books going back as far as four years.

With a flood of outside workers expected in Christchurch to help with rebuilding the quake-shattered city, local Grant Thornton partner Geordie Hooft said it would make the job more expensive.

“It provides a disincentive and I’m concerned about that.

“It’s not going to stop things from happening, it’s just going to represent another cost. And the cost of the rebuild goes up and up and up all the time.”

The rule change requiring employers to pay PAYE on any accommodation provision an employee gets when working in another location – particularly the decision to make it retrospective – has taken the tax fraternity by surprise.

Hooft said the move was in contrast to recommendations made by the IRD’s own policy advice division last month.

The Institute of Chartered Accountants (NZICA) said it was “deeply concerned” about the new tax.

It would have a significant impact on industries which relied on itinerant workers, such as agriculture, the film industry, and the Christchurch rebuild effort, the accounting industry body said.

Acting general manager tax, Jolayne Trim, said it was a retrospective law change “of the worst kind”.

“Inland Revenue is taking the chance that taxpayers will not have the resources available to question the commercial impracticality of its announcement,” she said.

IRD was asking firms to voluntarily disclose payments of accommodation allowances or provision of accommodation going back two years, and where the accommodation was paid on behalf of the employee it wanted them to go back four years.

PWC said the tax treatment of accommodation provided to employees working away from home had long been subject to debate, but it had been generally accepted that the worker did not get any net benefit from it and therefore it should not be seen as taxable income.

The accounting firm also said it had “serious misgivings” about the IRD statement’s lack of clarity.

Accommodation might not be taxable when it was just overnight or for a short-term stay by a worker, but taxpayers were still “very much in the dark” about what the IRD considered to be “temporary”, it said.
Ad Feedback

“One wonders how Inland Revenue’s own investigators will be able to apply the statement. Many employees located in Christchurch for the rebuild now face an uncertain tax position.”

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/rebuilding-christchurch/8053130/New-tax-rule-hits-bill-for-rebuild

The Nazi’s have taken over in the Capital.

“….Have you seen my point, Harriet?…’

No.

Half the population has a penis and the other half has a vagina – and everyone has an arsehole that they expel shit from.

And as I said “Gays don’t even complement each other – so what the fuck would they know about human sexuality?”

Other than adding shit into it!

Never forget: National is the party of low taxes.

One sick fuck.

A very sick fuck.

A sad, sick, fucked up person.

How sad and sick you are Ryan
You poor sod.

Pesky Ryan is using tricky logic to confuse poor Harriet. Play fair Ryan!

It is possible to have a logically consistent argument against anal sex. It’s just that Harriet’s is not. Is it about things not fitting? Then what about penises that don’t fit in vaginas. Oh, it’s about procreation? Then what about infertile straight couples?