>No, it isn't. Says who? you? here is what Wikipedia says: What sexual behavior is considered promiscuous varies between cultures, as does the prevalence of p

>No, it isn't. Says who? you? here is what Wikipedia says: What sexual behavior is considered promiscuous varies between cultures, as does the prevalence of promiscuity, with different standards often being applied to different genders and civil status, see? varies. > There's no contradiction. Expressing opinions is one of the ways that morality reveals itself If you think that my tone is about morals, is your problem, and if it is about morals, so what? do you have a problem with morals? > The majority of people have an STD, even those who never have sex Citation needed, and depending of what kind of STD you are talking about, there are some that are no problem, but those transmited only by sexual relations are the most dangerous, and the promiscuous has more chances getting it, period. >My observation is much more valid than yours Says who? you? If me saying that being promiscuous has more risc of getting an STD botters you, sorry, is still a fact. >Never said you were Yet you brought the subject, proving nothing but you are desesperating trying to justify your point with information that has nothing to do with the topic. >That's the second time you've tried to use that derailment tactic Nope, is the second time you are not getting it, at this point I feel I already wont the argument, no more replies from me.