Loophole around gay

[Useful_Mistake]

Looking at woman's butthole - not gay

Men's butthole is the same as women's.

Looking at men's butthole, therefore - not gay

Having sex with a woman anally - not gay

The same act and organs are used for anal sex with males

Therefore, having anal sex with a male - not gay

Does this make sense?

 

[Napoleon Bonerfart]

its only gay if the balls touch

 

[Useful_Mistake]

its only gay if the balls touch

But what if my balls are covered when they touch?

Something like this:


Is it still gay, or did we find another loophole around gay?

 

[Fascist Frederick]

Wait a minute... sucking dick = gay. Women suck dick, therefore women = gay, which would mean having sex with a woman is gay also.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Wait a minute... sucking dick = gay. Women suck dick, therefore women = gay, which would mean having sex with a woman is gay also.

But not anally. We already established that that isn't gay

 

[Isaac]

No loopholes exist. You cannot have sex with a man. Jesus loves you

 

[Useful_Mistake]

You cannot have sex with a man.

I don't know...I think it's possible. There's a lot of documented examples

No loopholes exist.

But we already found two!

Jesus loves you

Thank you.

 

[Isaac]

I don't know...I think it's possible. There's a lot of documented examples
View attachment 2969073


But we already found two!


Thank you.

This site says otherwise.

Leviticus chapter 20 KJV (King James Version)

Leviticus chapter 20 KJV (King James Version)

www.kingjamesbibleonline.org

 

[Useful_Mistake]

This site says otherwise.

Leviticus chapter 20 KJV (King James Version)

Leviticus chapter 20 KJV (King James Version)

www.kingjamesbibleonline.org

It specifically says that I am able, only that the result will be death

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

 

[Isaac]

It specifically says that I am able, only that the result will be death

Yes. Freedom of sexuality doesn't negate freedom from the consequences of sexuality.

 

[Fascist Frederick]

Perhaps the thin (or maybe not so thin) layer of shit lining the rectum prevents penile-rectal contact and prevents the entire act from being gay.

 

[Stephanie Bustcakes]

You just have to say "no homo."

 

[Uncle Sid]

Are you in prison? Because that only works in prison logic.

 

[Termina]

You just have to say "no homo."

This is the correct answer. You and the other person both have to say “no homo” before AND after the sexual event.

 

[MediocreMilt]

Woman receiving anal sex. Not gay. Same organs.

I think I've found a flaw in your "loophole"

 

[Ebony Way]

Women can peg men in the asshole and it's not gay.
Therefore a man receiving anal sex is not gay.
Therefore a man fucking another man in the ass is not gay.
Checkmate, gaytheists

 

[SandyCat]

This is the correct answer. You and the other person both have to say “no homo” before AND after the sexual event.

Or you can wear socks.

Gay works like electricity in a way and socks help ground you from the gay. As long as you wear socks all the gay will be absorbed into the socks and redistributed into the ground thus making it no longer gay

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Are you in prison?

No, not yet, thankfully.

 

[Stephanie Bustcakes]

Woman receiving anal sex. Not gay. Same organs.

I think I've found a flaw in your "loophole"

maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but isn't that exactly what op is saying?

 

[MediocreMilt]

maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but isn't that exactly what op is saying?

He highlighted the "it's not gay if you're the top" stuff. I'm pointing out that he set himself up to be the bottom too, and that's pretty gay ngl.