Re: A nightmare
 

[ QUOTE ]
Them young 'uns gonna be screwing their heads off, whether folks like MMMMMM like it or not.


[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, Cyrus, I don't care whether they do or not. 'Tis strange that you would suppose that I do so care, though.

Re: Rabbit, Run
 

[ QUOTE ]
Stopping "all" teenage sex that takes place outside "relationships" or marriage, as the likes of MMMMMM are wishing for, is literally a perversion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not "wishing for" that, and I remain baffled at your interpretation. In that past thread, I think I wrote in essence that, if more would confine their sexual activities to relations with a single long-term partner (or no partner at all at times), that such practice would greatly reduce the transmission of AIDs and other STDs. And indeed it would, and more reliably so than condoms.

But you cannot hide
 

I can't waste my time trying to figure out this latest escapade of yours. FWIW, you are on record as supporting positions on teenage sex, sex outside marriage and sex outside "serious relationships" that have you, in my book, pegged as a serious, extreme prude.

You now wish to dispute that. Fine. I do not intend to engage in yet another of those MMMMMM-fests of distortion, denial and pedantry. Have at it, if you want, you're on your own.

Re: But you cannot hide
 

[ QUOTE ]
I can't waste my time trying to figure out this latest escapade of yours. FWIW, you are on record as supporting positions on teenage sex, sex outside marriage and sex outside "serious relationships" that have you, in my book, pegged as a serious, extreme prude.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Your book" is wrong.

[ QUOTE ]
You now wish to dispute that. Fine. I do not intend to engage in yet another of those MMMMMM-fests of distortion, denial and pedantry. Have at it, if you want, you're on your own.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is your distorted interpretation of my position that is causing the difference of opinion. You have a great Cyrusical tendency, manifested here yet again, to "read into" things much beyond their plain meaning. I tried my best to clarify my position for you in the original thread...but the ironic thing is, that it DIDN'T NEED any clarification on its own merits--except for those who insist on reading into things things that are not there. Since however you mischaracterized my position in the present thread I felt obligated to point it out once again.