this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2026
376 points (97.7% liked)

Comics

1280 readers
803 users here now

Post your comics here. Single or multi boxed comics.

Please mark nsfw when appropriate.

Same rules as primary server, no hate.

Please warn others if there may be triggers.

Please mark if the comic is yours either in the title or description

obvious ai images will be removed, please include a source to prevent this

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] GalacticSushi@lemmy.blahaj.zone 63 points 2 days ago (4 children)

If God hates homosexuality so much, why did he make gay sex feel so good?

[–] alekwithak@lemmy.world 40 points 1 day ago

It's like burying fake fossils to test our faith. God is an asshole.

[–] pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Yes. If a creator God exists, there's mountains of empirical evidence that they adore all kinds of sex, enthusiastically including gay sex.

I think it requires substantial amounts of magic thinking directed by ancient and modern con-men to believe otherwise.

[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

the Bible is gay. look at David and Jonathan's and tell me there's a heterosexual explanation for them.

[–] deacon@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Not disputing the homoeroticism of the bible but to my admittedly limited understanding, their friendship was probably largely retconned and most of that story is likely because David killed Saul and all his family, including Jonathan, in a coup, after siding with the enemies of the Israelites.

Certainly the story of David is rife with propaganda about how David totally could have killed Saul if he wanted to. It’s because he probably did kill him.

For that matter, Solomon was probably not David’s son but killed him in a coup and the story of David and Bathsheba is to legitimize his reign.

I’m just a layman who reads about this a lot but hasn’t mastered it so I welcome any correction from folks who are closer to it.

[–] GalacticSushi@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I’m just a layman who reads about this

Well that's already more than most christians can say

[–] deacon@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

That tracks with my experience being home schooled K-12 by young earth evangelical creationists. I didn’t start learning anything about the bible until I was in the process of deconstructing just in the last 5 years.

Christians in general, but Vangies in particular, generally read the bible like a cook book.

[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"the soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as himself."

"Then Jonathan made a covenant with David because he loved him as himself. Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that was on him and gave it to David,"

"Your love to me was more wonderful than the love of women."

that ain't homoeroticism, a bit more obvious and and it might as well be gay smut.

[–] deacon@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I am 1000% here for the smut, I am just saying I think it’s more like 7th century BCE erotic fan fiction than totally historical smut.

[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

but it's biblical 7th Century BCE gay erotic fan fiction

[–] deacon@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Oh I see your point. Yes, fully agreed. I was confusingly using smut and homoeroticism interchangeably, which probably says things about me.

[–] BigBananaDealer@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

something about resisting temptation

[–] CustardFist@feddit.nl 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I’m surprised that nobody brought up the subject of men having tastebuds in their urethra that detect the sugars in semen and signal the brain that there is ejaculate passing through.
🤌🙄🤌

[–] chaogomu@lemmy.world 34 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Hank Green recently did an Ask Hank Anything video where he talks about how humans have the dirtiest butts in the animal kingdom.

And it's because of those glorious cheeks. That and the fact that were omnivores which means inconsistent textures.

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 5 points 1 day ago

Actually, most animals don't have butts, just assholes. The gluteus maximus gained its current size when humans started walking on two legs

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 25 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I mean, if we go back to evolution for just a moment, there is evidence that homosexuality aided survival rates: https://britbrief.co.uk/health/research/homosexuality-evolved-as-survival-strategy-in-primates.html

So, the cum button may have actually come about through evolutionary pressure...

[–] Aneb@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago

'Evolutionary pressure" "Harder Evolution daddy harder"

[–] Toneswirly@beehaw.org 13 points 2 days ago

Only in the guys though. The girls get a front cum button

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago

Ancient youtube video that goes further into the absurdity of this kind of thing, from one of the OG Youtube Atheists, NonStampCollector:

High Stakes Intelligent Designing

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world 7 points 2 days ago (3 children)
[–] cAUzapNEAGLb@lemmy.world 31 points 2 days ago

Says the cum fart

[–] Billy_fuccboi@lemmy.world 15 points 2 days ago

That just means you haven't tried hard enough

[–] toomanypancakes@piefed.world 6 points 2 days ago

How can prostates be real if our butts aren't real?