My wife and I took our time undressing her. I’d like to tell you how strong my hands were and how the girl trembled beneath my touch. But no. My hands shook. My fingertips were cold.
I stood behind her, my face pressed against her neck — kissing her, smelling her, holding back the nibbling and the biting that soon would know no restraint. Her hair on my cheek. Her skin warm against my lips, which were cold as my fingertips.
If I were making this up, I’d say she smelled like flowers — jasmine or hyacinth or even roses. But I’m not, and she didn’t. She smelled like you or I smell on any given summer day — a hint of soap — the ghost of an early morning shower — and flesh. Flesh and sweat.
To read more, read the rest of the story. (Not for anyone under 18.) Enjoy!
Holy shit. That’s not really porn – it’s depressing! I mean, it was hot, and then it was depressing.
What I’m fumbling over is that this was a really good story. Props to Timothy Morgan.
“Quite the contrary. If there had been a divine hand tinkering with the process, we would expect evolution to have proceeded radically differently than it has. We would expect to see, among the changes in anatomy from generation to generation, at least an occasional instance of the structure being tweaked in non-gradual ways. We would expect to see — oh, say, just for a random example — human knees and backs better designed for bipedal animals than quadrupeds”
on the contrary, you’re assuming that the divine is perfect which is certainly not necessary. the cambrian explosion took about 1 minute to occur on earth’s 24 hour evolutionary clock, it’s very hard to believe that natural selection could implement radical changes in such a short time period, not to mention the human brain as well also underwent an explosion, doubling in size in less than 2 million years. you expect natural selection to produce things like a flower, a peacock’s feather, spots on a leopard?
“the slow incrementalism that’s an inherent part of the physical process of evolution.”
evolution is not slow and incremental, it goes through periods of explosions, see cambrian, for instance.
“And as recent research has repeatedly shown, evolution can take place surprisingly rapidly, in a matter of decades.” you haven’t documented any of this.
“The belief that consciousness survives death has probably been researched more than any other supernatural hypothesis — nobody, not even scientists, wants death to be permanent — and it has never, ever been substantiated. Reports of it abound. But when carefully examined, using good, rigorous scientific methodology, these reports fall apart like a house of cards.”
again you fail to document this
“There’s not even a good, testable theory explaining how this immaterial soul is supposed to interact with the physical brain. ”
this is the ridiculous argument that because man cannot know it then it therefore does not exist. or, everything true can be known by man, or, man’s science can uncover any mystery. highly absurd.
“There is not the slightest bit of evidence supporting the idea of an immaterial soul that animates human consciousness.”
you view human consciousness as some sort of computer. if brain encounters x stimuli, then response y or z happens. highly absurd. you expect cubism, einstein’s theory of relativity, and the mona lisa to be the result of the brain encountering the right stimuli?
Note; I have re-posted Kyle’s comment to the “You Can’t Disprove Religion”: Three Counter-Examples post, which is where I think he was trying to comment. I have replied to it there. Anyone who feels inspired to reply to Kyle, please do it there and not here. Thanks.