Now with added merging!The thing is... Sexual Attraction isn't enough for sexual intercourse alone. Sexual attraction is a lot like a sense.
Just to randomly say (your message was a handy hook, this is not aimed at you) I think there's "Companionship Attraction", too. Maybe, where otherwise mutually compatible, overlapping with Friends With Benefits territory, but otherwise perhaps as close as a (close, but standard) sibling relationship, but chosen not preordained. (Sexual-attraction incompatability might even be the lead-in to this other attraction, the lack of imperative or even threat from the start. But that's been done to death in drama and comedy alike.)
And also Attractions, of various types, need not be symmetrical or even sane. But if people find someone with a similar counterpart set of Attractions, there should probably be some wiggle-room for the minor mismatches.
It is entirely possible, in fact... usually the case... That you are sexually attracted to someone but sexually repulsed on the prospect and act of having sex with them.
... Not sure I would call that sexual attraction.
EDIT: In fact, that sounds a lot like what is widely referred to as "friendship" or "platonic love".
...looks like I should have read over the next page-boundary. Didn't see that specific point developing further (Still prefer the way I put it, though.)
But atheism does involve a sort of belief. A different, more rational belief, but a belief nonetheless.
Oh shit no. I'll take it to the Railgun thread. No derails.
Wrong thread for it, indeed, but you know that not all atheists are hard/explicit/strong atheists who "believe there is nothing". The default (so far as I'm concerned) is more "not believing there is anything". From there you can perhaps take up the contrarian beliefs to those who otherwise believe, of course.
I've said it elsewhere, but I'm not in the current hot thread on this topic and I'm not likely to want to say any more than thisbat this moment.
Move on, notning to see here.