What is?

[RobGMN]

See, no legs to stand on so you make it political. Moron. Get a brain you troll.

How many Democrats drank bleach or disinfectant after Trump suggested it?
I'll wait for your tally.

Maybe you can also provide proof that historically more Democrats get government assistance than Republicans.

 

[RobGMN]

It's almost like you answered your own question, he never said to do it, he asked a question and immediately said medical doctors will have to figure it out.

And yet, his followers immediately went out and did it. I guess it's like when he said "fight like hell" but really just wanted to say "wear hats and wave flags". Phrase a suggestion as a question, and you have no culpability.

Yeah, a blue city, this was an elaborate voter suppression tactic.

A city being blue does not mean 100% of its residents are Democrats. You know this, right?

Ok, falsely labeling a household cleaner is Trump's fault?

The ingredient was a chlorine-base disinfectant. Who was it who suggested disinfectants? Trump. Take it a step further and look what happened with hydroxychloroquine after his pressers and tweets" "Following these tweets, at least 2% of airtime on conservative networks for treatment modalities like azithromycin and continuous mentions of such treatments were observed on stations like Fox News. Google searches and purchases increased following his first press conference on March 19, 2020, and increased again following his tweets on March 21, 2020. The same is true for medications on Amazon, with purchases for medicine substitutes, such as hydroxychloroquine, increasing by 200%."

Impact of Trump's Promotion of Unproven COVID-19 Treatments and Subsequent Internet Trends: Observational Study

Individuals with large followings can influence public opinions and behaviors, especially during a pandemic. In the early days of the pandemic, US president Donald J Trump has endorsed the use of unproven therapies. Subsequently, a death attributed to ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

4% of respondents to what?

To the study. I included the link to it instead of reposting the entire text on this site.

 

[RobGMN]

You made the sexual discussion political, not me. It's an odd transition even for you but still not as bad as you thinking it is acceptable to molest kids.

Wrong once again, child. YOU decided that sexual orientation had something to do with politics. Your post is below. Unlike you, I don't look to politicians for medical advice, science information, mathematics theory, etc. I leave that shit to the experts.

.
That said, simply placing the word "ANSWERED" next to my questions does not mean you answered them.
Telling us you have a penis is NOT an answer to the question of why you chose heterosexual oreintation over homosexual orientation. Remember, YOU proclaimed that sexual orientation is a choice. Period.
Let's try again:
Telling me what a body can do biologically does NOT answer: Why did you choose heterosexual sexuality over homosexual sexuality?

Telling me that people who are born with no sex organs or dual sex organs is a rare anomaly does NOT answer: What factor determines the choice of sexual orientation when a person is born with both sets of sex organs, or none at all?

Telling me that sex without reproduction is a perversion does NOT answer the question: Why do people who are biologically unable to reproduce from birth have sex?

YOU stated "The female orgasm is to stimulate ovulation. FOR REPRODUCTION. Biological FACT" .Telling me your personal feelings on the subject (or claiming there are "studies" you cannot produce evidence of) does NOT answer Why do women have an orgasm if it has NOTHING to do with the process of reproduction?

All of these questions relate directly to your theories/opinions/feelings/beliefs, and your ability to back up what you say. They are very basic. If you cannot answer even these simple questions, then all of your claims are simply bullshit in your head.

Can you answer them directly, or not?

 

[Jimi77]

Ok, falsely labeling a household cleaner is Trump's fault?

I don't think it was falsely labeled. It was improperly marketed and people are just stupid enough to chug bleach. Chugging bleach has been marketed as a cure for cancer and autism in addition to a covid cure.

 

[Jimi77]

Wrong once again, child. YOU decided that sexual orientation had something to do with politics. Your post is below. Unlike you, I don't look to politicians for medical advice, science information, mathematics theory, etc. I leave that shit to the experts.
View attachment 47908
.
That said, simply placing the word "ANSWERED" next to my questions does not mean you answered them.
Telling us you have a penis is NOT an answer to the question of why you chose heterosexual oreintation over homosexual orientation. Remember, YOU proclaimed that sexual orientation is a choice. Period.

You're both wrong, conservatives made sexual orientation a political issue back in the 1990s and it probably goes back further than that; might even originally been the DNC who politicized sexual orientation. Christian conservatives have been claiming homosexuality is a choice for at least 3 decades to my knowledge and probably longer. So nobody in this thread has broken new ground when it comes to politicizing sexual orientation. I do think Thx's "it's a choice, but it's not a choice" position is unique to him.

 

[Jimi77]

Why did you choose heterosexual sexuality over homosexual sexuality?

What factor determines the choice of sexual orientation when a person is born with both sets of sex organs, or none at all?

Why do people who are biologically unable to reproduce from birth have sex?

Why do women have an orgasm if it has NOTHING to do with the process of reproduction?

All of these questions relate directly to your theories/opinions/feelings/beliefs, and your ability to back up what you say. They are very basic. If you cannot answer even these simple questions, then all of your claims are simply bullshit in your head.

Can you answer them directly, or not?

He has answered them. Seriously, if there is anything to even closely resemble a conversation here, asking the same question over and over (answered or not) isn't going to produce anything.

1) Per Thx, it's not a choice, but it is a choice. I understand that defies logic, but I assume in his head somehow that makes sense.

2) Thx doesn't feel that a minority of the population that are an anomaly are germane to the discussion. I tend to agree.

3) Per Thx, evolution has made sex fun so that we procreate. I agree, although I'd say there are also social pressures involved.

4) IIRC Thx said the female orgasm does contribute to reproduction. There appears to be some studies to support this position. Not sure why either the question or the answer are germane to the core question of whether sexual orientation is a choice.

 

[RobGMN]

He has answered them. Seriously, if there is anything to even closely resemble a conversation here, asking the same question over and over (answered or not) isn't going to produce anything.

1) Per Thx, it's not a choice, but it is a choice. I understand that defies logic, but I assume in his head somehow that makes sense.

2) Thx doesn't feel that a minority of the population that are an anomaly are germane to the discussion. I tend to agree.

3) Per Thx, evolution has made sex fun so that we procreate. I agree, although I'd say there are also social pressures involved.

4) IIRC Thx said the female orgasm does contribute to reproduction. There appears to be some studies to support this position. Not sure why either the question or the answer are germane to the core question of whether sexual orientation is a choice.

Therein lies the rub. He "answered" them with answers that are not germane to the question. That is akin to not answering at all.

1. He has never told us why he chose to be hetero and not homosexual.
2. An anomaly or minority does not mean something does not exist. It's an anomaly for people to be born with no sex organs. But they exist. Since they exist, there must be a factor that influences their choice of sexual orientation. (recall Thxone said it is a choice, "period").
3. "Per Thx" is not what the questions are looking for, and he knows that.
4. There is no medical evidence to indicate the female orgasm causes ovulation. This is also a "Per Thx" claim. The subject came up because he said anything sexual that is not for the purpose of reproduction is "perversion". Yet, the female orgasm is sexual and is non-necessary for reproduction.

In a discussion or debate, people don't get to make up their own facts or theories. Would it be valid if I said you can get 1,200Watts RMS @ 4 Ohms from an amp in your car hooked up with 22gauge wire through a 1Amp fuse? Does "Per Robgmn" make it fact? Not so much.

Thxone pulls a whole lot of "Per Thxone" when he is arguing his point. "Per Thxone", bones do not have nerves in them. "Per Thxone", oil drilling permits get issued to companies that do not have land to drill on. "Per Thxone", sexual orientation is a choice, but only if you choose homosexuality.

Self-proclamation of correctness is not verification of correctness. It's just a logical fallacy. "My watch is correct because my watch is correct".

 

[Jimi77]

Therein lies the rub. He "answered" them with answers that are not germane to the question. That is akin to not answering at all.

1. He has never told us why he chose to be hetero and not homosexual.
2. An anomaly or minority does not mean something does not exist. It's an anomaly for people to be born with no sex organs. But they exist. Since they exist, there must be a factor that influences their choice of sexual orientation. (recall Thxone said it is a choice, "period").
3. "Per Thx" is not what the questions are looking for, and he knows that.
4. There is no medical evidence to indicate the female orgasm causes ovulation. This is also a "Per Thx" claim. The subject came up because he said anything sexual that is not for the purpose of reproduction is "perversion". Yet, the female orgasm is sexual and is non-necessary for reproduction.

In a discussion or debate, people don't get to make up their own facts or theories. Would it be valid if I said you can get 1,200Watts RMS @ 4 Ohms from an amp in your car hooked up with 22gauge wire through a 1Amp fuse? Does "Per Robgmn" make it fact? Not so much.

Thxone pulls a whole lot of "Per Thxone" when he is arguing his point. "Per Thxone", bones do not have nerves in them. "Per Thxone", oil drilling permits get issued to companies that do not have land to drill on. "Per Thxone", sexual orientation is a choice, but only if you choose homosexuality.

Self-proclamation of correctness is not verification of correctness. It's just a logical fallacy. "My watch is correct because my watch is correct".

1) If he believes being heterosexual isn't a choice then that's what he believes. I get that it makes no logical sense, but either he believes it or he's willing to be disingenuous.

2) He said it's a choice "period," but he "clarified" that it's both a choice and not a choice and therefore never made a choice. I still don't understand the importance of whether a small sliver of people do or don't decide their sexual orientation.

3/4) There is indeed some evidence that female orgasms do contribute to reproduction (see google). If nothing the female orgasm certainly makes it easier to engage women in reproductive activities.

 

[RobGMN]

1) If he believes being heterosexual isn't a choice then that's what he believes. I get that it makes no logical sense, but either he believes it or he's willing to be disingenuous.

So it boils down to he’s bullshitting or he’s made a claim that is logically not possible. Fair enough.

2) He said it's a choice "period," but he "clarified" that it's both a choice and not a choice and therefore never made a choice. I still don't understand the importance of whether a small sliver of people do or don't decide their sexual orientation.

It speaks to his theory that your sexual orientation is determined by the organs you are born with. It’s a theory that gets tossed on its ear by those outliers born without or with both sets of organs.
It’s like saying the size of your feet determines the color of your eyes.
What about people born without feet? They get no eyes?
The anomalous footless people toss the theory on its ear.

3/4) There is indeed some evidence that female orgasms do contribute to reproduction (see google). If nothing the female orgasm certainly makes it easier to engage women in reproductive activities.

He said orgasm stimulates ovulation, not reproduction. A good hairdo and makeup can stimulate reproduction, but will not affect ovulation. Ovulation occurs in women who haven’t had and even CAN’T have an orgasm.
Those outliers toss the theory on its ear.
Ovulation can affect orgasm, but not the other way around.

Maybe he read this and reversed the concepts. But if he’s going to make declarative statements, he should not be making simple mistakes in concepts.

 

[ThxOne]

How many Democrats drank bleach or disinfectant after Trump suggested it?
I'll wait for your tally.

Maybe you can also provide proof that historically more Democrats get government assistance than Republicans.

Why, so you can cry foul? Deny the proof? Deny the facts? Stop wasting my time kid.

 

[spokey9]

Omg...now Rob is an expert on the female genitalia

 

[ThxOne]

Wrong once again, child. YOU decided that sexual orientation had something to do with politics. Your post is below. Unlike you, I don't look to politicians for medical advice, science information, mathematics theory, etc. I leave that shit to the experts.
View attachment 47908
.
That said, simply placing the word "ANSWERED" next to my questions does not mean you answered them.
Telling us you have a penis is NOT an answer to the question of why you chose heterosexual oreintation over homosexual orientation. Remember, YOU proclaimed that sexual orientation is a choice. Period.
Let's try again:
Telling me what a body can do biologically does NOT answer: Why did you choose heterosexual sexuality over homosexual sexuality?

Telling me that people who are born with no sex organs or dual sex organs is a rare anomaly does NOT answer: What factor determines the choice of sexual orientation when a person is born with both sets of sex organs, or none at all?

Telling me that sex without reproduction is a perversion does NOT answer the question: Why do people who are biologically unable to reproduce from birth have sex?

YOU stated "The female orgasm is to stimulate ovulation. FOR REPRODUCTION. Biological FACT" .Telling me your personal feelings on the subject (or claiming there are "studies" you cannot produce evidence of) does NOT answer Why do women have an orgasm if it has NOTHING to do with the process of reproduction?

All of these questions relate directly to your theories/opinions/feelings/beliefs, and your ability to back up what you say. They are very basic. If you cannot answer even these simple questions, then all of your claims are simply bullshit in your head.

Can you answer them directly, or not?

Your lack of comprehension is astounding. Never in all of my 48 years have a interacted with a person who outright ignores so much, denies so much, repeats so much as you do Rob.

Claiming I use theories, opinions, feelings, beliefs because YOU make the choice to ignore any answers given to you, any proof given to you, any facts given to you unless they are the acceptable returns to your rehearsed responses does not make me wrong. It makes you an arrogant *******.

 

[SHO'NUFF]

And yet, his followers immediately went out and did it. I guess it's like when he said "fight like hell" but really just wanted to say "wear hats and wave flags". Phrase a suggestion as a question, and you have no culpability.

You conveniently left out the part where he said, in the same sentence, that medical doctors will have to figure it out.

A city being blue does not mean 100% of its residents are Democrats. You know this, right?

Yeah, like how violent crime in blue cities shouldn't be a referendum on red states.

The ingredient was a chlorine-base disinfectant. Who was it who suggested disinfectants? Trump. Take it a step further and look what happened with hydroxychloroquine after his pressers and tweets" "Following these tweets, at least 2% of airtime on conservative networks for treatment modalities like azithromycin and continuous mentions of such treatments were observed on stations like Fox News. Google searches and purchases increased following his first press conference on March 19, 2020, and increased again following his tweets on March 21, 2020. The same is true for medications on Amazon, with purchases for medicine substitutes, such as hydroxychloroquine, increasing by 200%."

Congratulations, that's the dumbest thing I've heard all day.

Some folks bottle up disinfectant and sell it to morons as a miracle cure for COVID and that's Trump's fault.

 

[RobGMN]

You conveniently left out the part where he said, in the same sentence, that medical doctors will have to figure it out.

Apparently, so did a lot of his followers. A lot of them also misunderstood the whole "fight like hell" thing. Even Lysol immediately issued warnings to not drink bleach, for fear that people may hear his words and do just that. Interestingly enough, people DID. Do you dispute that people did it?
"The company that makes Lysol and Dettol is urging customers not to consume its cleaning products after President Donald Trump suggested the possibility of injesting disinfectants to protect people from coronavirus.
The statement followed remarks from President Trump on Thursday on the use of disinfectants."

Yeah, like how violent crime in blue cities shouldn't be a referendum on red states.

Congratulations, that's the dumbest thing I've heard all day.

I suppose if you consider factual information "dumb", then there you go. What other factual information do you consider "dumb"?
Does your consideration of it as "dumb" somehow make it non-factual?

Some folks bottle up disinfectant and sell it to morons as a miracle cure for COVID and that's Trump's fault.

Sure, we'll assume it's pure coincidence that this gets done after his presser, and they sell a whole bunch of them. We'll also assume it's pure coincidence that the sales of hydroxychloroquine tripled on Amazon after he mentioned it.
We'll also assume it's purely coincidental that a mediocre headphone that sells REALLY well into the hip-hop demographic has the name Dr Dre associated with it.
I'm sure it would have sold equally well as "Beats By Jimmy Iovine"...

 

[Jimi77]

You conveniently left out the part where he said, in the same sentence, that medical doctors will have to figure it out.

Then the question is how culpable is Trump for putting stupid ideas in people's heads. I'd say the fact people actually started chugging bleach is more about how stupid and gullible some people are more than Trump's culpability. If Thx posts that I'll be fine wiring a sub to 1 ohm on a bridged 4 ohm stable amp, and I'm stupid enough to do it, then who is to blame?

That said, I thought "chugging bleach" was hyperbole, not something a bunch of morons actually did. Ironically, I'd assume it wasn't "liberal morons" that took Trump's words to mean "chug bleach."