<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Conservatives: Stop having sex for the pleasure of it!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/06/08/conservatives-stop-having-sex-for-the-pleasure-of-it/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/06/08/conservatives-stop-having-sex-for-the-pleasure-of-it/</link>
	<description>Human Animals at the Crossroads of Culture, Science, Religion and Media</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:51:16 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: grumpypilgrim</title>
		<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/06/08/conservatives-stop-having-sex-for-the-pleasure-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-12977</link>
		<dc:creator>grumpypilgrim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2007 16:48:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1367#comment-12977</guid>
		<description>Yes, Ben, I was being sarcastic.  

Further to Niklaus' comment about humans being one of the few animals without a specific mating or breeding season, bonobo chimpanzees (a close genetic relative to humans) reportedly copulate all day, every day.  The species is distinguished by an upright gait, a matriarchal and egalitarian culture, and the prominent role of sexual activity in their society:  they substitute sex for aggression.  If they had a human intellect, they would shake their heads in bewilderment at the Puritan attitudes of human social conservatives:  why would people resolve their conflicts with aggression and slaughter when sex is so much more fun and doesn't hurt anybody?  An excellent article about bonobos, by noted expert Frans de Waal, can be found here:  http://songweaver.com/info/bonobos.html/.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, Ben, I was being sarcastic.  </p>
<p>Further to Niklaus&#8217; comment about humans being one of the few animals without a specific mating or breeding season, bonobo chimpanzees (a close genetic relative to humans) reportedly copulate all day, every day.  The species is distinguished by an upright gait, a matriarchal and egalitarian culture, and the prominent role of sexual activity in their society:  they substitute sex for aggression.  If they had a human intellect, they would shake their heads in bewilderment at the Puritan attitudes of human social conservatives:  why would people resolve their conflicts with aggression and slaughter when sex is so much more fun and doesn&#8217;t hurt anybody?  An excellent article about bonobos, by noted expert Frans de Waal, can be found here:  <a href="http://songweaver.com/info/bonobos.html/" rel="nofollow">http://songweaver.com/info/bonobos.html/</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben</title>
		<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/06/08/conservatives-stop-having-sex-for-the-pleasure-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-12970</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2007 02:51:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1367#comment-12970</guid>
		<description>Geez Grumpy, sounds like the Creationists have finally won you over, or were you being sarcastic?

Erich writes "It is imperative that we find a way to produce babies only when we want them"

Maybe this is being unfairly harsh toward the repugs. Democrats would also want to reduce unwanted birth in the alternate world, at least if you are gonna be fair. (For some reason this reminds me of The Matrix)

"Science is a gift of God to all of us and science has taken us to a place that is biblical in its power to cure," said Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California, arguing for the bill's passage. "And that is the embryonic stem cell research."

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/06/religionour_maelstrom_of_ignor.php</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Geez Grumpy, sounds like the Creationists have finally won you over, or were you being sarcastic?</p>
<p>Erich writes &#8220;It is imperative that we find a way to produce babies only when we want them&#8221;</p>
<p>Maybe this is being unfairly harsh toward the repugs. Democrats would also want to reduce unwanted birth in the alternate world, at least if you are gonna be fair. (For some reason this reminds me of The Matrix)</p>
<p>&#8220;Science is a gift of God to all of us and science has taken us to a place that is biblical in its power to cure,&#8221; said Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California, arguing for the bill&#8217;s passage. &#8220;And that is the embryonic stem cell research.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/06/religionour_maelstrom_of_ignor.php" rel="nofollow">http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/06/religionour_maelstrom_of_ignor.php</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gatomjp</title>
		<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/06/08/conservatives-stop-having-sex-for-the-pleasure-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-12969</link>
		<dc:creator>gatomjp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jun 2007 18:07:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1367#comment-12969</guid>
		<description>Thanks Ben, re: your back pain advice. I must admit that I took a little artistic license when I wrote that post. It was all true, but it actually happened a few years ago. Since then I have learned many of the techniques you outlined but I will take your advice and let the other muscleheads in the gym spot Dave! Besides, I'm usually holding a videocam anyway!

By the way, it has been my experience that during times of flare-up, cold works better than hot. People will disagree on this, but if the objective is to reduce inflammation it makes sense to ice the area rather than heat it which bring more blood and fluids to it. I use ice every time my back starts to hurt and I believe that it gets better faster.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Ben, re: your back pain advice. I must admit that I took a little artistic license when I wrote that post. It was all true, but it actually happened a few years ago. Since then I have learned many of the techniques you outlined but I will take your advice and let the other muscleheads in the gym spot Dave! Besides, I&#8217;m usually holding a videocam anyway!</p>
<p>By the way, it has been my experience that during times of flare-up, cold works better than hot. People will disagree on this, but if the objective is to reduce inflammation it makes sense to ice the area rather than heat it which bring more blood and fluids to it. I use ice every time my back starts to hurt and I believe that it gets better faster.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Niklaus Pfirsig</title>
		<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/06/08/conservatives-stop-having-sex-for-the-pleasure-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-12965</link>
		<dc:creator>Niklaus Pfirsig</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jun 2007 15:13:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1367#comment-12965</guid>
		<description>One of the things I've noticed about theocrats (whether that call themselves conservatives,christians , moslem, or what ever) is a stubborn refusal to acknowledge the animal nature of people.

Most theologies claim that man is different from the animals, and is god-like (made in God's image) TO admit that we share any resemblence to the animals is an insult to mankind and to God in their way of thinking.

The fact is, where sex is concerned, we are different. Most animals have a specific mating or breeding season. Humans do not.

Most of the traditional restriction on sex actually date back to the days when mankind had settled into an early non-mobile agricultural civilization. It was noted that inbreeding introduced weakness into the population, and over a few generations, multiple partners homogenized the local gene pool, and spread desease. The taboos on sex were made law by the theocratic governments and those laws became interwoven into the religion. The church-states did not attempt to explain why it was bad, but ruled though superstition and intimidation.

Our modern mobile society has made the probability of genetic disease through interbreeding almost impossible. There is no reason to ban polygamy in any form, however the politicians that try to rule through superstition and fear, still use this a club to beat us with.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the things I&#8217;ve noticed about theocrats (whether that call themselves conservatives,christians , moslem, or what ever) is a stubborn refusal to acknowledge the animal nature of people.</p>
<p>Most theologies claim that man is different from the animals, and is god-like (made in God&#8217;s image) TO admit that we share any resemblence to the animals is an insult to mankind and to God in their way of thinking.</p>
<p>The fact is, where sex is concerned, we are different. Most animals have a specific mating or breeding season. Humans do not.</p>
<p>Most of the traditional restriction on sex actually date back to the days when mankind had settled into an early non-mobile agricultural civilization. It was noted that inbreeding introduced weakness into the population, and over a few generations, multiple partners homogenized the local gene pool, and spread desease. The taboos on sex were made law by the theocratic governments and those laws became interwoven into the religion. The church-states did not attempt to explain why it was bad, but ruled though superstition and intimidation.</p>
<p>Our modern mobile society has made the probability of genetic disease through interbreeding almost impossible. There is no reason to ban polygamy in any form, however the politicians that try to rule through superstition and fear, still use this a club to beat us with.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Erich Vieth</title>
		<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/06/08/conservatives-stop-having-sex-for-the-pleasure-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-12953</link>
		<dc:creator>Erich Vieth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Jun 2007 05:17:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1367#comment-12953</guid>
		<description>Imagine a world where babies were created in factories through the use of sophisticated machines.  Imagine that those baby-making machines started to malfunction, though, popping out babies even when no one had pressed the “Make Baby” button.  Imagine, also, that babies were expensive to raise.  Assume, therefore, that unwanted babies were a huge burden on that imaginary world. 

Imagine the reaction of tax-paying conservatives in this make-believe world.  As soon as they found out that babies were being created when they weren’t intentionally being created, those conservatives would get to work to find a way to fix those machines.   They’d get large teams of scientists on the project.

“It is imperative that we find a way to produce babies only when we want them, but not when we don’t intend to make them.   They should only be produced when we have the resources to raise them properly, not otherwise. To have machines haphazardly spitting out unwanted babies imposes a huge burden on our society."

The conservatives in that imaginary world would be satisfied only when this directive was carried out.

Now think about our real world and substitute “woman’s body” for machine.  Why not the same result?  Why aren’t conservatives clamoring to develop and distribute dependable means of birth control?  Why aren’t they working hard to develop a way to guarantee that women would get pregnant only when they intended to get pregnant?

The answer: check out Jason’s comment above:  “Told ya….it’s not about the fetus. It’s about the sex.”   And Jason did tell us (see http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=744).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Imagine a world where babies were created in factories through the use of sophisticated machines.  Imagine that those baby-making machines started to malfunction, though, popping out babies even when no one had pressed the “Make Baby” button.  Imagine, also, that babies were expensive to raise.  Assume, therefore, that unwanted babies were a huge burden on that imaginary world. </p>
<p>Imagine the reaction of tax-paying conservatives in this make-believe world.  As soon as they found out that babies were being created when they weren’t intentionally being created, those conservatives would get to work to find a way to fix those machines.   They’d get large teams of scientists on the project.</p>
<p>“It is imperative that we find a way to produce babies only when we want them, but not when we don’t intend to make them.   They should only be produced when we have the resources to raise them properly, not otherwise. To have machines haphazardly spitting out unwanted babies imposes a huge burden on our society.&#8221;</p>
<p>The conservatives in that imaginary world would be satisfied only when this directive was carried out.</p>
<p>Now think about our real world and substitute “woman’s body” for machine.  Why not the same result?  Why aren’t conservatives clamoring to develop and distribute dependable means of birth control?  Why aren’t they working hard to develop a way to guarantee that women would get pregnant only when they intended to get pregnant?</p>
<p>The answer: check out Jason’s comment above:  “Told ya….it’s not about the fetus. It’s about the sex.”   And Jason did tell us (see <a href="http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=744" rel="nofollow">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=744</a>).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben</title>
		<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/06/08/conservatives-stop-having-sex-for-the-pleasure-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-12950</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Jun 2007 02:56:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1367#comment-12950</guid>
		<description>Gato, in my experience, to relieve back pain... 
Stretch your calfs gently at least 4 times a day. Stretch your hamstrings gently 4 times a day, but do it one at a time, being careful not to put strain on your back. Stretch your quadriceps gently at least twice a day. Stretch your groin twice a day. Stretch your arms and chest a bit too. Yes, there is some stretching involved in "my" technique. 

The idea is that by taking some of the tension out of the large muscles of the body, the back itself is not under constant pressure. Remeber that if you do follow my advice and stretch, it is kind of addictive, in that if you stop stretching too abruptly, the muscles will tighten. Be careful in the morning, after a night's rest the muscles may also tighten up, make sure you at least stretch a bit before stepping out of bed, and even before sitting up, if you remember.

If it flares up, or if you just need some relief, use a hot compress. You can just put a wet towel in the microwave or buy a special bean bag that you can heat up. Ibuprofen is my pain-killer of choice, it has some anti-inflammatory effect too. Take as needed, but don't fool yourself, the back may feel fine for a while, but don't go "spotting" Dave any time soon. At some point, once things seem healed up, you should start exercising again, ease your way back in though over a period of at least a month.

Finally, keep in mind that your head is heavy, if you lean over just a bit, that puts lots of strain on the sore back. Try to keep your head centered, if you are standing, but when sitting, try and find a comfortable way to prop yourself, or recline.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gato, in my experience, to relieve back pain&#8230;<br />
Stretch your calfs gently at least 4 times a day. Stretch your hamstrings gently 4 times a day, but do it one at a time, being careful not to put strain on your back. Stretch your quadriceps gently at least twice a day. Stretch your groin twice a day. Stretch your arms and chest a bit too. Yes, there is some stretching involved in &#8220;my&#8221; technique. </p>
<p>The idea is that by taking some of the tension out of the large muscles of the body, the back itself is not under constant pressure. Remeber that if you do follow my advice and stretch, it is kind of addictive, in that if you stop stretching too abruptly, the muscles will tighten. Be careful in the morning, after a night&#8217;s rest the muscles may also tighten up, make sure you at least stretch a bit before stepping out of bed, and even before sitting up, if you remember.</p>
<p>If it flares up, or if you just need some relief, use a hot compress. You can just put a wet towel in the microwave or buy a special bean bag that you can heat up. Ibuprofen is my pain-killer of choice, it has some anti-inflammatory effect too. Take as needed, but don&#8217;t fool yourself, the back may feel fine for a while, but don&#8217;t go &#8220;spotting&#8221; Dave any time soon. At some point, once things seem healed up, you should start exercising again, ease your way back in though over a period of at least a month.</p>
<p>Finally, keep in mind that your head is heavy, if you lean over just a bit, that puts lots of strain on the sore back. Try to keep your head centered, if you are standing, but when sitting, try and find a comfortable way to prop yourself, or recline.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: grumpypilgrim</title>
		<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/06/08/conservatives-stop-having-sex-for-the-pleasure-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-12943</link>
		<dc:creator>grumpypilgrim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jun 2007 19:10:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1367#comment-12943</guid>
		<description>Jason, the answer is obvious:  God has always INTENDED for us to be ignorant.  That's why he barred us from eating from the Tree of Knowledge.  Knowledge is EVIL.  That's why God now leads his followers against science, and why so many scientists are atheists.  Just remember:  ignorance is bliss, and God wants us all to be blissful.  He also wants us to practice unlimited procreation, so there should be no contraception -- just ask the Pope.  And if our unlimited procreation ultimately destroys our planet and exterminates all other species, well, that's obviously what God wants, too.  

But don't worry, because God will come to save us from ourselves, just like he has done so many other times before.  Like the time when...well, actually, I can't think of any times before, but we must have faith that God really exists and really will save us after we've trashed his planet with our indiscriminant procreation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jason, the answer is obvious:  God has always INTENDED for us to be ignorant.  That&#8217;s why he barred us from eating from the Tree of Knowledge.  Knowledge is EVIL.  That&#8217;s why God now leads his followers against science, and why so many scientists are atheists.  Just remember:  ignorance is bliss, and God wants us all to be blissful.  He also wants us to practice unlimited procreation, so there should be no contraception &#8212; just ask the Pope.  And if our unlimited procreation ultimately destroys our planet and exterminates all other species, well, that&#8217;s obviously what God wants, too.  </p>
<p>But don&#8217;t worry, because God will come to save us from ourselves, just like he has done so many other times before.  Like the time when&#8230;well, actually, I can&#8217;t think of any times before, but we must have faith that God really exists and really will save us after we&#8217;ve trashed his planet with our indiscriminant procreation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Rayl</title>
		<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/06/08/conservatives-stop-having-sex-for-the-pleasure-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-12942</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Rayl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jun 2007 16:41:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1367#comment-12942</guid>
		<description>Told ya....it's not about the fetus.  It's about the sex.  

As for spending tax dollars on aid to people who suffer "consequences"...well, if one of the reasons for those consequences is due to the tax dollars spent on keeping people IGNORANT (abstinence only education, for one example) then that argument has no basis in any reality with which I'm acquainted.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Told ya&#8230;.it&#8217;s not about the fetus.  It&#8217;s about the sex.  </p>
<p>As for spending tax dollars on aid to people who suffer &#8220;consequences&#8221;&#8230;well, if one of the reasons for those consequences is due to the tax dollars spent on keeping people IGNORANT (abstinence only education, for one example) then that argument has no basis in any reality with which I&#8217;m acquainted.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: grumpypilgrim</title>
		<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/06/08/conservatives-stop-having-sex-for-the-pleasure-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-12937</link>
		<dc:creator>grumpypilgrim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jun 2007 15:07:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1367#comment-12937</guid>
		<description>Dan asks, "What really puzzles me is, why women like those representing the Concerned Women for America are so active in repressing women’s rights?"

That's just one example of the groupspeak that comes from the religious right.  The "Concerned Women for America" is active in repressing women's rights for the same reason the "Patriot Act" undermines the Constitution, and the "war on terrorism" has caused a gigantic increase in terrorist attacks:  because the people who invent these phrases are liars.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dan asks, &#8220;What really puzzles me is, why women like those representing the Concerned Women for America are so active in repressing women’s rights?&#8221;</p>
<p>That&#8217;s just one example of the groupspeak that comes from the religious right.  The &#8220;Concerned Women for America&#8221; is active in repressing women&#8217;s rights for the same reason the &#8220;Patriot Act&#8221; undermines the Constitution, and the &#8220;war on terrorism&#8221; has caused a gigantic increase in terrorist attacks:  because the people who invent these phrases are liars.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff</title>
		<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/06/08/conservatives-stop-having-sex-for-the-pleasure-of-it/comment-page-1/#comment-12935</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jun 2007 14:41:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1367#comment-12935</guid>
		<description>I've taken to replacing "consequences" with "side effects" in these kinds of statements:

&lt;blockquote&gt;“There’s a utopian view that women ought to be able to have sex any time they want to without side effects - that’s the bottom line of all these bills,”&lt;/blockquote&gt;


It really makes it clear which folks are concerned for others' well-being and which are just concerned with controlling others' behavior.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve taken to replacing &#8220;consequences&#8221; with &#8220;side effects&#8221; in these kinds of statements:</p>
<blockquote><p>“There’s a utopian view that women ought to be able to have sex any time they want to without side effects - that’s the bottom line of all these bills,”</p></blockquote>
<p>It really makes it clear which folks are concerned for others&#8217; well-being and which are just concerned with controlling others&#8217; behavior.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
