Oh good grief!

[LONDONER]

You only have to seem from where this originates to see why you shouldn't take this seriously:

http://stopmasturbationnow.org/weather/1...rettyPhoto

[Virge]

It's a crying - ass shame that people can make up such a site as a parody or religious whack jobs and my first thought is "these people could make a fortune working for the fundamentalists."

Poes law at work

[East]

LOL...I thought this was something from The Onion. I am still not certain... Is this actually serious?...or is it someone's humor?

[Cuddly]

I am watching where I step now, cause I don't want to risk offending anybody else with my atheism and I certainly don't want to press my values down upon anybody else. Believe what you wanna believe and extend me the same courtesy (or die in righteous fire... or something.. )

What's the point of stop masturbation? To save sperm cells from dying out on sheets? That makes sense. But the millions of sperm cells that are released with the average ejaculation cannot all become offspring anyway, even if they're released during heterosexual vaginal intercourse. So how do we save those millions of sperm cells that are released into the vagina but who fails to be the one who fertilizes the egg?
We need to invent some kind of vacuum contraption to suck the sperm right out of her and instantaneously seperate the cells into individuals and insert it into a million other women.

One small side effect would be (assuming a succesful birthrate at 100%) a world population so large that we'll literally be standing on each other in so many layers that we'll start floating off into space, within a few decades. But I suppose that's just god's will....

Somebody slap me.

[ChadCoxRox]

OH HOLY HELL can that be UNseen????
Actually, that shit's not funny.

[ETOTE]

sucks for the girl, she's actually kinda cute.

laughing more at the concept that masturbation is considered "self rape".

[Borg69]

If masturbation caused lightning to strike I would have been dead 123,532,634,743 jerk off's ago.

[Bluelight]

Um, is this a fucking joke? Sounds like another piece of inflated "moralist" propaganda...

Besides, don't these people know that it's also a sin to lie?

[Iceblink]

So manie childrens struk by the litenings wile masterbating sense Obummer be came prezident. Preys Jesus!

[Virge]

OH HOLY HELL can that be UNseen????
Actually, that shit's not funny.

Oh get your knickers out of your crack Granny ---- it only a very good parody.... A"Poe" parody.
Read this.
Poe's law
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Poe's law, named after its author Nathan Poe,[1] is an Internet adage reflecting the idea that without a clear indication of the author's intent, it is difficult or impossible to tell the difference between an expression of sincere extremism and a parody of extremism.[2]

The law and its meaning Poe's law, in broader form, states:

Without a blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of extremism or fundamentalism that someone won't mistake for the real thing.[3]

The core of Poe's law is that a parody of something extreme, by nature, becomes impossible to differentiate from sincere extremism. A corollary of Poe's law is the reverse phenomenon: sincere fundamentalist beliefs can be mistaken for a parody of those beliefs.[3]

History[edit]
The statement called Poe's law was formulated in 2005 by Nathan Poe on the website christianforums.com in a debate about creationism. The original sentence read:

Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is utterly impossible to parody a Creationist in such a way that someone won't mistake for the genuine article.[4]

The sentiments expressed by Poe date back much earlier – at least to 1983, when Jerry Schwarz, in a post on Usenet, wrote :[5]

8. Avoid sarcasm and facetious remarks.
Without the voice inflection and body language of personal communication these are easily misinterpreted. A sideways smile, :-), has become widely accepted on the net as an indication that "I'm only kidding". If you submit a satiric item without this symbol, no matter how obvious the satire is to you, do not be surprised if people take it seriously.

Another precedent posted on Usenet dates to 2001. Following the well-known schema of Arthur C. Clarke's third law, Alan Morgan wrote:[6]

[SIZE="5"]"Any sufficiently advanced troll is indistinguishable from a genuine kook."

[/SIZE]