₦airaland Forum

Hismasterpiece:
I'm not saying we can't trust anything humans say. What I'm saying is that some or even most facts may be more subjective than objective.

And I asked how you can know and you said scripture the same that says nothing about smoking. LoLz.

Stop spreading false information.

Jackanda1:
Alot of men have ended up with erectile dysfunction because of people like you. You must be proud of yourself.

Jackanda1:
Lordreed the grand defender of masturbation.

Ok.

LMFAO!

Maynman:
Vagina and hand is the same mechanism and gives the same sensation, ooh hand even gives more “intense” sensation.
Understood sir.

Maynman:
There’s no difference between hand and vaginal canal, understood sir.

LoLz. Responding with a strawman, you can do better than that.

triplechoice:
There are all manner of persons within any group.

Sure.

MaxInDHouse:
That's inhumane!

Everyone should be free to choose whatever they want whether to believe or disbelieve the stories written in any book.
Whoever finds it interesting can decide to pay attention to it and whoever feels it's trash should walk away. It's a free world!

Wow. Did someone hijack this account? LoLz. Kudos anyway, couldn't have said it better.

Omen100:
Sometimes, some of you guys say things you have no knowledge of just because you want to become a talker.
You guys say things you have no knowledge about and if I may ask you so called specialist of none jerking off topics, what do you know about “jerking off” & it’s medical implications?

What do you know of the medical implications?

Maynman:
There’s no difference between hand and vaginal canal, understood sir.

Where did I say that?

My question is quite simple: tell us the difference in mechanism, sensation and outcome between achieving sexual pleasure via masturbation versus via penetrative sex.

Dtruthspeaker:
That is not the Charge I laid!

Whatever the charge is can you point to a single instance of me doing it?

Maynman:
Yes I don’t.
Vaginal canal and hand; “The mechanism is the same, the sensation is the same, the outcome is the same.”
Bwahahahah

Yet you can't say what the difference is. Just articulate exactly what the difference in sensation, mechanism and outcome is between masturbation and penetrative sex.

Maynman:
Vaginal canal and hand; “The mechanism is the same, the sensation is the same, the outcome is the same.”
Lol

LoLz. So you have no answer. Bwahahahahaha.

Maynman:
It goes more than the “exact manner” sir.
Vaginal canal is very much different from hand. It feels different and it gives different results.
Masturbation is not SEX!.
This statement is very wrong from you “ The mechanism is the same, the sensation is the same, the outcome is the same.”

How is the sensation more intense in masturbation than actual real sex?

Lol the “intense” is the problem in my statement.

Still waiting for you to tell me the difference in chemicals released.

Maynman:
How is Vaginal canal the same with the hand?

You claimed masturbation has more sensation than real sex, please tell us how you arrived at that.

LoLz! I said this:

What makes this different from penetrative is only in the exact manner in which sexual pleasure is achieved, in this case hand as opposed to rubbing it within the vaginal canal.

Clearly showing that they are not the same.

Read what I wrote properly:

The sensations are the same except of course it's more intense in masturbation.

Can you now tell me the difference in chemicals released.

Maynman:
You still haven’t given me the definition of masturbation, and earlier you said “ masturbation Is not different from penetrative sex. The sensations are the same except of course it's more intense in masturbation” Really?

Masturbation is the stimulation of the genitals with the hand for sexual pleasure. What makes this different from penetrative is only in the exact manner in which sexual pleasure is achieved, in this case hand as opposed to rubbing it within the vaginal canal. The mechanism is the same, the sensation is the same, the outcome is the same.

You claimed there is a difference in released chemicals tell us what the difference is.

Maynman:
Masturbating and having sex feels the same to you?

Answer my question first.

spartan117:
Nothing.

Ok.

Dtruthspeaker:
we have seen them make claims eg wilgrea7 claimed that "this world is created by something other than a Person" but till tomorrow when called upon to give evidence and proof, he dodged and dodged and lied as he tried to avoid giving proof of his claim.

Wilgrea7(m): 7:20am On Nov 08


Your "There is absolutely no evidence that the earth was created by “a person" already falls because,

1. You have confessed and admitted the Truth that a non living thing cannot create.

2. And a Person is a living thing, therefore, He is very much in the game o
"Who" created the earth and you have eliminated the "whats".

Thus, I'll wait for you to supply a valid contender, if you can, which I know you cannot, while letting you look at Arthur Conan Doyle

"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbe-able, must be the truth."
--------------------------
And till today, we have not seen him.

Meanwhile don't bunch all atheists into that boat, not all of us say there is no god.

See complaint! But, you never make such distinctions when you people attack Christians, you are all one then.

So, you can not deny your children.

You'll have to ask Wilgrea7 for the evidence of his claims. Meanwhile where have you seen me lump all Christians in the same boat?

Maynman:
Self pleasure is not the same as sex with another person. Your body knows the difference and releases different chemicals in reaction to it.

Really? What chemicals are released during penetrative sex that are not released during masturbation? Or vice versa.

spartan117:
Watch this video by Jordan Peterson and Andrew Hubermann. They talked about the negative effects of releasing dopamine via masturbation.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GbCnr4gBjE

So?

Osamabinladenik:
I have been a religious person for 27years and I must say that religion is hugely base on baselessness, so I don't really regard whatever thing any religious person says because it's always never based on evidence. It's always about what they feel and what they are been told. However, I still pay little attend to deism; which is a form of theism that doesn't deal with religiosity. It doesn't perform rituals to a personal God.
Although, deism falls short in terms of providing evidence, but the truth is there is no evidence against deism either unlike religious theism that can be easily disproven. There's no way to say for sure that an entity called God didn't start the universe and after then stop interfering which makes deism equally as plausible as atheism.

Atheism is the other side of deism, it doesn't have evidence to disproven deism, he doesn't just believe deism and he still doesn't have evidence for how the universe start (big bang doesn't really tell us how the universe started ab-initio).
Atheism claims to know that a creator doesn't exist without evidence for how everything started, deism claims to know that the universe has a creator but also doesn't know how the universe started ab-initio hence I am a pure agnostic.
I don't know whether the universe has a creator to until either of them proves it or otherwise

Why should an atheist provide proof for a claim he doesn't make? If an atheist says he knows there is no god then ask him for proof of that assertion. The blanket definition for atheism contains no claim about the existence of god or gods however individual atheists can make such claims, when they do be sure to ask them. Meanwhile don't bunch all atheists into that boat, not all of us say there is no god.

Maynman:
The definition of masturbation already shows it’s not a natural way of releasing semen.

It's not different from penetrative sex. The sensations are the same except of course it's more intense in masturbation and they both are done by body parts so I don't see what is unnatural about it. Granted the dopamine hit is faster and provides a relatively instant release, that still doesn't mean it is unnatural. Even animals masturbate so it is strange to me to call it unnatural.

Maynman:
What’s masturbation?

Please don't do the answer question with question thing. Answer my question then ask me a question.

Maynman:
The natural way to release semen is through sex, not masturbation.

I don't understand what you mean. What is unnatural about masturbation?

KnownUnknown:
Monks incited a deadly four-day rampage against minority Muslims in central Myanmar, Reuters found. The killings come amid the rapid spread of an apartheid-like movement known as 969.


The Buddhist monk grabbed a young Muslim girl and put a knife to her neck.
“If you follow us, I’ll kill her,” the monk taunted police, according to a witness, as a Buddhist mob armed with machetes and swords chased nearly 100 Muslims in this city in central Myanmar.
https://www.pulitzer.org/files/2014/international-reporting/reuters/04reuters2014.pdf

Glad I didn't say they were any less prone to violence. LoLz.

KnownUnknown:
It seems they have a lot of sects in Buddhism, each with it own perspective, which is similar to the Christians, Muslims, or any religion that has existed long enough. How are they not as rigid or flexible as the rest of them?
I also think you are painting them with a broad brush regarding how they consider their tomes. It’s not far fetched that some consider them indelible particularly those containing “detailed analysis” of the nature, origin, and interaction of material and psychological phenomena.


https://tricycle.org/beginners/buddhism/is-there-a-buddhist-bible/

Since Buddhism is really a family of religions rather than a single spiritual system, there isn’t one single set of scriptures considered authoritative by all Buddhist groups. Each Buddhist tradition follows its own scriptural “canon” (collection of foundational texts) and has produced a mountain of commentary and teachings based on those canons.

Theravada Buddhists root their practices in the Pali canon, which includes some of the earliest-dated Buddhist texts, recorded in an ancient Indian language called Pali. These scriptures are known as the Tipitaka (“Three Baskets”) because they include three major groups of texts. The “Sutta Pitaka” contains the suttas (Sanskrit, sutras) or recorded discourses of the Buddha and some of his disciples; the “Vinaya Pitaka” contains the Buddha’s code of discipline for his monastic community; and the “Abhidhamma Pitaka” contains a detailed analysis of the nature, origin, and interaction of material and psychological phenomena. Scholars generally date this last group of texts to a few hundred years after the Buddha’s death, perhaps between the third and first century BCE.

The Chinese canon, the body of scriptures that is considered authoritative by East Asian Buddhist traditions (including Japanese, Korean, and Vietnamese), was likely recorded between the first century BCE and the fifth century CE. There’s plenty of overlap between the Chinese and Pali canons (for instance, the Chinese canon contains a version of the suttas, the Buddha’s discourses, known as the agamas), but they part in crucial doctrinal ways, too. The Tibetan canon, split into the Kangyur (what’s considered the word of the Buddha) and the Tengyur (later commentaries), also overlaps with the Chinese canon and contains its own unique scriptures, including the tantra texts.

Some other schools of Buddhism base their practices and doctrines on specific sutras or treatises. Nichiren Buddhism, for instance, is founded on a scripture known as the Lotus Sutra, and chanting the sutra’s title is a principal part of the practice. Pure Land Buddhists, meanwhile, study three sutras that concentrate on a buddha known as Amitabha, or the Buddha of Infinite Light, who is said to reign over the “pure land,” a kind of Buddhist heaven where conditions for attaining enlightenment are favorable.

I think we are on the same page concerning Buddhism, I just was trying to be succinct in my statements.

OLAADEGBU:
By Chance?

Source

Someone won $2 billion in a lottery recently, that's more than N1trillion therefore it is impossible that the person won it by chance. That's the kind of argument this is, nonsensical.

OLAADEGBU:
FISH OUT OF PLACE?

This is the coelacanth. It is one of the earliest fish in the sea according to Evolutionary theory. According to Evolutionary scientists, this fish would have lived 400 MILLION YEARS AGO, but here it is still living - It was discovered in 1932!

This is what's called a "living fossil". If this fish lived so long ago, what is it doing alive today? First of all, there has been no evolution of this fish. It's still the same fish. And if it went extinct so long ago, why is it still here? Maybe the conclusion here is that evolution is false, and the Earth is NOT millions of years old! We have an album of many animals like this called "living fossils" just like this one.

Evolution is FALSE!

Source

LMAO! So they found a fish they thought was extinct how does that prove evolution didn't happen? The theory doesn't say that a species must go extinct so finding a species thought to be extinct in no way disproves the theory.

GoodIsGod:
My guy. I will check my email. I only pray I remember the password because it was opened solely for Nairaland. It is not my main email.

Modified:
I have replied you. It was the first time I replied a Nairalander I hope it is delivered.

Replied.

Meanwhile ýou still haven't shown us how to distinguish between supernatural induced bee clump and natural induced bee clump.

Blesstar:
Good evening Nlanders.

A quick one..
I need your sincere opinions...

Married couples in the house, would you still WANT to be married to your current wife or husband in your next life?
(That's if there's such a thing as a next life though)

And pls do well to give reasons for your answers.

Yes but only if we both won't be believers in a god.

wowcatty:
Go and celebrate and forget failed surebankers. That's what you do if you are on the edge for what could pop up.

Ok. LoLz!

KnownUnknown:
What do more open experience and a little more honest mean?

The practice of Buddhism is not as rigid as Christianity and they don't take their tomes as indelible historical narratives.