Is it normal that i'm against sex?

they do not have a child it does not come out of them if they do than they get it from science or from another person outside the relationship or given a character. you can not clame if a women and a women have sex they get babys and you can not say a man and a man having sex will make a baby there is no way that will ever happen so Im sorry you would be wrong in that becuase thats why they CAN NOT HAVE CHILDREN . That is the fact thats why nature made a man and a women diffrent you can not open the door without the key so no two poeple of the same gender having sex will not make a kid nomatter how much they say its a fact and nothing is going to change that as of yet .

I might auctully agree with that but that is beside the piont .

But sex drive was made so we feel the need to have sex for pleasure. I think someone up there commented that using contraceptive methods is tricking the trickster, which is true.

Sex was made so pleasurable so people will do it to get pleasure, but then they'll end up having kids and keeping the species alive. Contraceptives came waaay after whoever created us thought of that and are indeed a way of tricking the trickster.

I think religion and philosophy/thinking about teh origin of thing and all that are different things. The second one I do care about.

It...well, I guess it is okay, I'm not foolish enough to believe people will suddenly stop having sex, but I THINK it's kind of wrong to use something in a way it wasn't inteded to be used...You can use scissors to cut cheese, but you're aware that that's not what you should be doing.

No, thanks, love, in addition to my hatred for the human race, there is my hatred for babies aaaand my hatred for pregnancy. And my hatred for being a woman ^^

If what is the case? Me disagreeing on the so-called "simplest answer"? If there's no "simple answer" we would not eat? Ah but that is incorrect because there isn't a simple answer with humanity. Our intellectual and emotional intelligence have definitely complicated matters further than just; eat, reproduce, survive, ect.

Look, definition of human nature:
The general psychological characteristics, feelings, and behavioral traits of humankind, regarded as shared by all humans.

Simply the similarities. You can't apply "similarities" to everything. Not only is it not logical, it doesn't make any grammatical or coherent sense.

Well obviously health is a factor, this is already known but due to how people were raised and their environment there's no simple way for everyone to be perfectly mentally and physically healthy.

Logic indicates? Ahem, no our bodies reproductive organs indicate. Have you ever heard of contraception and adoption? Weather they go around "fucking" or not, idiotic people will find a person they "love" and settle down with yet completely raise their children to be mentally and/or physically unhealthy. It's not simply a matter of "fucking around" as you put it.

"Humanity has bases in our primitive instincts" well I can't really think about it because it makes no grammatical sense and I'm having difficulties translating your sentence to actually make sense. It's not complicated, it literally does not translate into English I'm afraid. You mean it's linked? It's based on? If it was purely based on these instincts there would still be problems as there is in the wild. I suppose the solution would be more simple, kill or be killed but... Do you really think with our advanced intellect and empathy we would become primitive? This is a "solution"?

There. I want to debate with you but I'm having trouble understanding you. It's like you're speaking in dutch and I have crappy Google translate.

Human nature is the motivation? I disagree, human nature is simply the similarities humans share. Where's the motivation in that? Our motivation, in my opinion, is emotions and our physical needs.

"Instinct"? Instinct only covers so much. There's no instinct for going into a nice restaurant for some food you would prefer. Instead, there's merely an instinct for getting food to survive and not pleasure.

Please tell me where I said I didn't agree with "human nature" (that doesn't even make grammatical sense)? I disagreed with your statement and questioned if you actually knew what it meant (that's what definition means).

Alright, before I even read your 3 comments I'm going to firstly apologize for insulting you at the end. It was immature and unnecessary, I was stressed at the time it's not personal.

Anyway, I'm going to read and respond to your points now.

Indeed, we're not. I was not disagreeing we didn't have a link I was disagreeing with your statement of "everything we do is human nature" this means that everything we do is the same because the definition of human nature entails that it's shared by all humans. Everything we do isn't exactly the same as everyone else.

"Complication"? The view of sex and love being wonderful is an opinion and one generally considered not to be a complicated one as it is merely describing the two things positively. If your opinion is different, I disagree that it means you've come above humanity and discovered "what life is all about".

Problems? Yes. But doesn't EVERYTHING cause problems? Eating causes problems because if someone eats it means there's less food for someone else, the same could be said for breathing because someone else is using oxygen that others want which could also cause arguments and dilemmas.

Simple beginnings? On the contrary, scientists find this very difficult to understand how the separate atoms, chemical reactions and how everything started with their various theories (one to name would be the flawed "primordial soup") on how it all began. To this day we don't know the answer.

"Simple rules"? Of what, morale? Morale is differed from place to place and nowhere can you really "make rules" and expect them to be easily followed. In my opinion, there is no absolute rules. There are many shades of gray and what is considered good and bad is greatly differed depending on how you were raised/your environment, ect.

Well, that's just how humans are. Emotions will be emotions. I don't think they can ever be solved unless emotions are wiped out completely or drawn down to a minimum. But then, what would we be living for? We would simply be mindless zombies striving for things with no reason. No point. What will we get out of it? Oh sure, it'd be more efficient and we'd make a tower quicker. But then what? What pleasure/satisfaction does this tower give us with no emotions?

I'm just going to reply to the other two separately, because it seems you've "changed opinions"?

Look, maybe you think you've got life all figured out. But what makes you say you have to 'open our eyes'? You think you've got the keys on how to live a good life, and you're arrogant enough to think that gives you the authority to tell others what to do.

You don't know me, and you don't know life. So don't go around telling us what to do. If I love someone, then I'll show my affection in any way I see fit, thank you.

You're welcome :)