He broke it down on an educational level like I just didn't have the patience for. He's gone mad with all the questioning of dogmatic superstition.
I'm not sure why Garvey feels this way. He didn't back up his logic with real world examples or causes the way IPX did. He doesn't seem willing to consider argument, he thinks it's "Afrikan" to be against masturbation, so if it's African, good enough, no further reasoning needed. Or it was "designed" though you can't possibly prove that, and he doesn't say who designed it, or why the design should matter more than the function.
Garvey, you identified yourself as an atheist in another thread. Why these creationist arguments? Nature can be horrible, we should only follow its design when it promotes health and well-being. If something is healthy but "unnatural", I still want it. Do you feel it's promoting well-being to tell homosexuals they aren't naturally occurring, and should ignore their instincts? Or tell incels not to masturbate, just go get laid? If not, I don't see how you can defend your views as something people should follow.
|
|