Great arguments to use against Bible Thumpers!

[GeezUS]

As for your namesake ... I came across this article on the web a few days ago.

I question the existence myself, but one must note that lack of written history is not lack of history. Plus I notice that the people mentioned as having been known in that time are all European, rather thin middle eastern and primarily roman or Greek, perhaps all, which shows that those that dominate the times tend to be the ones that write the history. I tend to think regardless of whether it was a single person, a group, or maybe a person with a different name is meaningless, something happened and it influenced stuff, I doubt that the magic performed though is any more than exaggerated stories. But from any passed down story there is room for interpolation of what root was most likely.

I suppose Onan's problem with the smiting thing was that God seemed to be under the impression that women only incubated the foetus that the man implanted through intercourse rather than contributing to the process. He must have been awfully miffed when he discovered that 300 million (give or take) little swimmers per millilitre were wasted each time a man ejaculated whether or not a pregnancy resulted. I'm curious about your opinions about "wasted seed". Do you have a view on the ones that don't make it?

One can equate a life to a degree of value of infinity. If such is the case then the loss of one is equal to the loss of the whole. In which case the destruction of the sperm is the loss of that one that might have made it. Even if there is failure then to intentionally cause waste outside of attempt to allow growth would seem to be a direct intentional alteration of what life would have come otherwise. However i am quite open to being argued, as I am not griped onto such, I am awaiting to see these things as not so logical if that is the case, or plausible, I imagine that if it is it will soak in. Regardless that doesn't mean my intention is to find an excuse to masturbate. Rather I would like to see an explanation that validates the typical behavior of humanity as of present. That would be pleasing, personally I find other reasons such as to avoid conditioning that with respect to imagery leads to the objectification of in my case the female, and I feel overall detracts from love by associating love to a symbol, the body, that has the tendency to become boring after excessive intercourse. Which is a common destructing factor in many relationships these days, marriages and the like. Do we not here people say one needs a good sex life to hold the marriage together? I find that the only reason sex is of the feeling of love is due to the association it has had with love throughout history that has led to conditioning passed on even by genetics. In so as it is detrimental I see reason to avoid it, and like wise not contribute to its conditioning in others by example or behavioristic genetic passing by reproduction. And I think many would benefit from seeing that it really has no relation to love other then psycho-symbolically.

While you must obviously choose the way you behave there is a lot of evidence building that points to masturbation being a very healthy practice indeed.

Perhaps I should specify ejaculation. Maturation or rather message of the sexual organ i do recognize as possibly beneficial, specifically the section between the sack and the anus. It allows for blood flow much of which is detremented by our current sedentary life style and tendency to sit so often; which leads to reduction in the production and sustaining of produced sperm. Likewise I should point out that while we don't know when the sperm dies in the testicles we do know that it does or at least that it has a tendency to reduce in fertility as time progresses, as such one who has not masturbated is not very likely to impregnate a woman on the first try unless they commonly have wet dreams.