MuttleyLaff, has vaxx answered one single question you've asked here? They're interesting questions.

Muttleylaff. Can you honestly says i have not answer your question?

budaatum:
MuttleyLaff, has vaxx answered one single question you've asked here?
They're interesting questions.

He hasnt ooo.

I don't mind him, asking his questions rant or rave
but just first answer the three fringing questions,
then after that, the world is your oyster.

I think something prevents him from answering them.
To be honest, I observed him employing this same tactics he does especially with you.
You were the first person that came to my mind, prompting me to say to myself, that's what vaxx does with budaatum.
It was like deja vu.

vaxx:
Muttleylaff.
Can you honestly says i have not answer your question?

You havent

MuttleyLaff:
He hasnt ooo.

I don't mind him, asking his questions rant or rave
but just first answer the three fringing questions,
then after that, the world is your oyster.

I think something prevents him from answering them.
To be honest, I observed him employing this same tactics he does especially with you.
You were the first person that came to my mind, prompting me to say to myself, that's what vaxx does with budaatum.
It was like de javu.

You havent

safe bro. I will find it hard to continue from here.

vaxx:

let me summarise our discussion so far..
1 Your basis is on concenting aduilt. You asserting the notion that it has no negative effect on the environment which is taking place and neither does it cost harm to the consenting adults.

2 This is your veiw, i let you know that the same veiw can also be used to invalidate the crime levelled against two mutual fighter. Infact in most countries there are legal forms of boxing or MMA style fighting. Football, rugby and hockey satisfy the rest of the blood-lust. What will you do about this? This is not distraction at all. It is even spicing your notion.

See bro, The concept of concent you are using here is bogus as it needs to address some basic question


1 what is the scope of concent

2 what is the extent of permissible concent

3 how are you going to prove concent.

the legality of lesbianism/gay is really more of a question of fact, not of law. Unless you have an answer to the questions i raised?.

To those who cares to know, this is my first reply to Muttleylaff on the question he posited.

vaxx:
Your postulation so far was based solely on concent...and you were please that the state and the same sex in question agree to it by using their certificate and white dress as a validation ""Fine"" in which i postulate same thing can't happen in Nigeria because that move contradict the very notion of concent as stipulated under Nigeria contract of marriage. I even go ahead by stating that the countries validating this contracts are promoting beautiful lies. Because in actual sense, they are not protected by the benefit given to valid marriage contract. That is my basic explanation so far.

""You said what others do in their room should be part of my concern especially if what they do is evil"" i said that we constitute the breach of privacy, in so far what they are doing is not affecting public or enviroment affairs. What others do in their private confine is none of my business. It is against thier constitutional right for me to poke nose into theor private affairs that does not has anything to do with public or enviroment affairs.


i will rather say rational validation is the key, for us ( Nigeria) not to fall into the same dishonest lies like our western brethren, we need to see the flaws of this concent among the same sex marriage and correct it as posssible. A marriage between same sex marriage is not traditional and if same sex marriage must be included then the marriage definition must be changed.. As you may understand it, marriage is not merely the expression of a love people have for each other. It is, or is intended as, a life-long union between two people who exemplify the biological duality of the human race, with the openness to welcoming children into the world. Even when children do not arrive, the differentiated twoness of marriage indicates its inherent structure.

None of my words shows here i exhibit the phrase you are trying ti robbed me with. I want us to discuss the nitty gritty of the the concent you used up there. Answering your question isn't a solution to the problem. You know. But understanding the flaws that comes with your question. In a valid legal sense"" a marriage is a contract between two consented aduilts.(i.e) man and woman. Not man and man or woman and woman. Until that definition change. And gves room to other option which is not limited to gay/lesbianism alone. Or else the definition we be doing partiality. .

when it is same sex, it become more complicated. The western nation that adopts it are aware, and that is the logic in making it a much more of ceremony marriage instead of a legitimate marriage that comes with benefit. It is a way of telling you to go ahead but don't ask for benefits. It is a private affairs .

As i said, what people do in their bedroom is not my business so far it is not affecting public and enviromental affairs.

if Muttleylaff read this response and still said, i haven't answer his question . Then it is a delibrate dishonesty...

"When you reach the end of what you should know, you will be at the beginning of what you should sense."

�Kahlil Gibrán

"At the touch of love everyone becomes a poet."

⭐Plato

No one created God, his existence is a mystery

A mystery of discoveries, doubts, argument debates over his existence leading to starting point.

He is infinity, he is existence himself, what a wonderful God.

Lightangel65:
No one created God, his existence is a mystery

A mystery of discoveries, doubts, argument debates over his existence leading to starting point.

He is infinity, he is existence himself, what a wonderful God.

"God is an intelligible sphere—a sphere known to mind, not to the senses—whose center is everywhere and whose circumference nowhere."

~Joseph Campbell