Lack of sex does not give someone PHYSICAL withdrawals.
You over-complicated your words, when what your example was, consisted of: "It might make you think a bit differently.".
It's not an addiction, it's a genetic URGE. There is a chasm of difference between the two.
We are WIRED to get horny because biologically, we are designed to impregnant a female at some point. We can choose not to, but that's ingrained in us on a genetic level.
You get horny once in a while, you can ignore it easily and then it goes. It doesn't mess your mind up, it doesn't cause your body to NEED sex.
When people say "I need a cigarette.", they mean it. When someone NEEDS sex, they just want it a lot. There is no physical element there that will have repercussions if they do not get it.
So again, you gave me NOTHING.
It doesn't, though.
I've proven how it doesn't.
You wouldn't answer it anyway, cos you know for a fact you cannot.
That's IRRELEVANT, do you not understand why?
Sexual lust is a GENETIC, NATURAL urge, it indicates something ingrained in us on a genetic level but not something that, if resisted (As it can be easily), results in bad feelings or medical symptoms.
Cigarette smoking creates an addiction.
Sexual lust isn't a choice, choosing to smoke is.
Nobody can force smoking on you, fact. Hardcore, undeniable truth. You have to take it into your mouth and smoke the cigarette.
It's a choice. If you choose not to smoke, then you won't.
youve never been a smoker so dont speculate as to what people mean when the say such and such. you dont know, i do and you wrong. there is nothing PHYSICAL about nicotine addiction, its neurological, i challenge you to give me evidence otherwise.
when you say WIRED, you mean neral pathways, and neural pathways also form in accordance with smoking, so your entire argument is invalid, again, ive stated this.
i does, ive categorically stated them, you denying them is a blatant lie.
actually i know for a DEMONSTRABLE fact that i CAN, because ive already answered it MORE THAN ONCE in the past coarse of our discussion, you not accepting the answer is another thing, since your not interested in any answer it seems.
but the fact that its genetic and "natural" {watever that means, psychologically} urge has nothing to with differentiating its urge and withdrawel from smoking, in that case they are similar enough for an analogy.
ciggerete smoking creates an addiction, as does our sexuality.
now, for the love of heaven, stop wasting my time, since yours obviously has no value to you.
ill call you bil o riely jr from now on. your a liar and you claim to offer truth if one answers loaded questions and false dichotomies that ivde ALREADY answered more than once.
fact is, you cant give me proof either way, you made the claim without knowing and now you cant give me one SHRED of evidence indicating theres any such thing as PHYSICAL addiction which isnt neurological.
yea, it was a choice. i was a daily pot head and needed to quit, so i picked up cigarettes as sort of a substitute for that. it doesn't give the same high but there's something soothing in the act of smoking itself.
i'm not absolving smokers from personal responsibility here. i hate it when smokers blame the tobacco companies for their addictions. everybody knows what happens when you smoke.
at the time i started smoking i assumed that i'd get addicted but would be able to quit when i needed to. it was a stupid move, even though i technically have quit it wasn't really worth the trouble when quitting weed without a substitute would've probably been a lot easier than quitting cigarettes without a substitute.
not according to AC's superior intellect though. he thinks neurological sexual urges are fundamentally different from bodily/physical dependance on nicotine etc.
No it doesn't, nor does the actual meaning of the word.
Smoking is a choice, if not always then at least that very first smoke that's taken before you are addicted. As such, the person has full responsibility for their addiction, it came about as a personal choice they made and that they could have made differently.
it can be a choice, but not necessarily the kind which you can claim that the smoker is responsible for the entire affects. people actions are not completely their own, who we are is shaped by our enviornment and factors outside ourselve motivate much of what we do, the paths we pick. the reason a person thinks he or she is CHOOSING to smoke is usually not of their own making, nor did they necessarily ask for that motivation to come along out of the blue, and yet that motivation is the reason the supposedly "choose" to smoke. hence, not making it their fault, entirely.
im only humouring you with this ofcourse, it wud be made plent clear if you read the wiki thing on free will. and ofcourse, u didnt.
your wrong. you arent the soul author and sustainer of yourelf. much of who you are {might one even say all?} is nurture and even your nature, YOU did not choose before your birth.
they do? seems harsh to have to hold full responsibility if you get cancer in 6 years instead of never even though two people smoke the same. how can you fairly expect to blame on smoker for cancer and another for well, no such adverse side affect when as far as their own actions and INTENTIONS went {and knowledge} , they were really no different from one another. seeing as they are both fully responsible for the outcome of their CHOICE, then it wud make sense that the one who got cancer made a sumhow infinitely WORSE choice than the one who didnt, otherwise, why wud he be blamed for it??????
so you were asking for a repeat answer for the last 6 posts or so, and when you get it, this is how you react????
well then, i was correct, you were never interested in an answer, just the pretence for not being able to answer my question in the first place{which you still havent provided the answer for even after getting what you wanted and insulting me}
you truly are a liar and a fool of the highest order.
and i like how your trying to weasel your way out of it. YOU were the one who made the distinction between PHYSICAL dependancy/addiction and MENTAL urges of sex. not I !!!!!! sym destroyed YOUR argument, not MINE, since i never claimed that neurology wasnt physical. infact i specifically asked you for NON neurological, physical dependancy{saying pretty clearly, that you keep the NEUROLOGICAL part out and give me only OTHER types of physical evidence}. you are the worst kind of liars. and youve been caught dead in the act. really, have you no shame????????
ive already listed the negetive sideaffects of not having sex. so your lying again.
your understanding of choice is infantile. so please dont debate things which are clearly beyond your mental capacities.
well done for being an unbeleiveable troll who trips on his own feet.
Well everyone's disproven your argument that it's choice. So maybe you should.
What's with the multiple question marks? Getting a little afraid?
All I ever did was refute your claims that they are similar, they are NOT.
One is a natural, unchosen, genetic URGE, with NO negative side-effects if not indulged.
The other is a chosen, addictive, damaging vice. YOU feel they're similar because you don't accept that it's a choice to smoke.
"YOU'RE". Learn grammar and spelling, please.
Secondly, you have NOT listed negative side-effects of having sex. You've listed side-effects that are annoying and passing at best. They're not damaging, they're not unnatural.
They're not similar to smoking.
So all of us, all older and more experienced than you, are wrong in our interpretation of the word "Choice"?
KMC Community Forums
Apr 7th, 2009 01:12 AM
