Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
Shibathedog

Are these people serious?

Recommended Posts

If they do cherish the word, then anal is a no no, straight or gay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, that's the reason the Westborough Baptist Church picket soldier's funerals. The Pastor's daughter said so in the Louis Theroux documentary. She said that the soldiers fight for a 'fag enabling governement' and as such their families should be told that their lost sons are going to hell. The Patriot Guard Riders attend funerals in support. Anyone else who protests funerals probably do it for political reasons like anti war etc. Which makes sense, unlike the Westborough Baptist Church.

 

 

They're retards. This country enabled us to vote whether we wanted same sex marriage. It lost in most states. So apparently we're not so gay loving.....

Same sex marriage is a whole other problem. In my opinion, it's an event defined by different religions. If we had some other generic and legal term (other than "marriage") for the event, then people may call it whatever they want. I don't understand why BGLT interest groups didn't just push for more civil union legal rights (enough to equate to a marriage, at least).

 

 

True. I was trying to simplify the point though.

 

 

 

 

Marriage between a man and a woman isn't by definition a religious thing.

 

I don't want to come off as a bible thumping know-it-all but it indeed started off as a religious thing. It is a holy union by God. Gen:18 says, The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” and 23-24 says, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,for she was taken out of man.” For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.

 

 

However I am a bi myself, I listen to rock/metal music, and play violent video games when I want. I however don't smoke, drink, do drugs, and will never tattoo or pierce my body.

 

A sin is a sin regardless of your interpretation of the severity of it. That's what makes us Christians. We do things we shouldn't do but no matter what, when we're ready to ask for forgiveness, we're alright. As long we we're ready for the consequences and the hardships through changing our ways. However, that privilege is CONSTANTLY taken for granted in the "christian" community.

 

 

 

 

If they do cherish the word, then anal is a no no, straight or gay.

 

Not true. It specifies in the bible that whatever a husband and wife does to each other for pleasure is sinless.

Edited by Hera

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't go to the Church anymore, but I remember one of the teachers spitting out quotes denying the right of anal sex on any form or level. Same for oral.

 

So I went in search for this quotes certain I'd find them instantly with the help of google (I am not reading that book any time in the near future), oddly enough I found a site that just tickled me funny...

 

http://www.sexinchrist.com/

 

 

 

O, and Hera, spitting out quotes to back your argument is about as use full as citing wikipedia. But hey the truth is your truth, I'm not going to argue with it, reality is perception :(.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And as it was mentioned here... it's all left to us to decide.

 

It is supposed to be guidelines. Or roughly at least. The main importance is easily taken from the scriptures. We can cross examine what is written, but even then, there are things I just don't follow.

 

Me... I will not be baptized, nor will I participate in mass anymore. Eating of bread and wine in a ceremony doesn't set well with me. It seems... peganestic. I don't care what it symbolizes, either of those events. I know God, and he knows me.

 

Im just amazed this thread hasn't turned into flame wars... lol. Good job people!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That site is brilliant. According to it you can basically be as sexually perverse as you want and please god while you're doing it, so long as you're married. Awesome. Now to repent my former sins, then marry a dirty slut and praise the lord with my acts of debauchery. Hallelujah!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't go to the Church anymore, but I remember one of the teachers spitting out quotes denying the right of anal sex on any form or level. Same for oral.

 

So I went in search for this quotes certain I'd find them instantly with the help of google (I am not reading that book any time in the near future), oddly enough I found a site that just tickled me funny...

 

http://www.sexinchrist.com/

 

 

 

O, and Hera, spitting out quotes to back your argument is about as use full as citing wikipedia. But hey the truth is your truth, I'm not going to argue with it, reality is perception :huhwhy:.

 

 

I don't go to church either. I always walk out disappointed. I'm not "spitting" quotes and I'm definitely not arguing. I go by "that book" to the best of my ability and when I have a viewpoint that reflects what I'm saying, I say it.

 

You are absolutely correct about one thing though, reality is a perception. However truth, what's right and what's wrong are not. They are to the point. Whether you live by them or not, that is your choice. But it is far from one's reality. And that's the problem. Everyone lives in their own little world with no guidance and come up with their own reasoning as to what is wrong and what is right, causing dissolution. Not just from unbelievers but religious groups as well.

 

Personal tip; you might want to read "that book" it's quite enlightening. That's as far as I go when it comes to reaching out to people.

 

 

I went to a church like that once Weirdy....it made me sick. I was young and this lady tried to kidnap me or something. My mom went nuts on her IN the church. A day I will never forget haha.

 

I'm done with this conversation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's right and wrong also has a gray line. I know I came off offensive but that isn't my intent, just as you state your view I state mine.

 

I have personal issues with the book that have yet to be dealt with, until then I choose to not read it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's right and wrong also has a gray line. I know I came off offensive but that isn't my intent, just as you state your view I state mine.

 

I have personal issues with the book that have yet to be dealt with, until then I choose to not read it.

 

 

I'm not offended at all. I just had to make a few points.

 

:huhwhy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't want to come off as a bible thumping know-it-all but it indeed started off as a religious thing. It is a holy union by God. Gen:18 says, The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” and 23-24 says, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,for she was taken out of man.” For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.

No it didn't. Though I will point out why i'm sure you'll deny any bearing the following will have on your belief, which is ok. Creationism is a point of view to acknowledge as something any person of sound mind and thought, and willingness to question and to learn should chance upon in their own reflection of the self.

 

Human babies are born premature. What does premature mean? When you compare a newborn human infant to a newborn mammalian animal such as a deer, or a horse, or a whale, these baby animals exhibit the ability to stand, walk and run (or swim in the latter case) almost immediately. Human babies cannot. While both human and animal babies depend on their mothers for nourishment and protection, the former also depends on the mother with the ability to feed itself and movement.

 

Why are human babies born premature? When comparing the skeletal structure of modern man to those of prehistoric semi-bipedal hominids, certain key features set us apart. Our cranial structures, the position of our spines and shapes of the digits on our hands and feet etc. A key feature that sets us apart which you will find with the advent of fully bipedal hominids are our hips. Specifically in the female, though modern women's hip structure is generally wider than their male counterparts (which is sexy, yes) they were much wider in our hominid ancestors. You can see the same trait when studying the skeleton of our closest "cousins" the chimpanzees. For better reference, here is an example:

AustralopithecusErectus.jpg

 

The wider hip structure in the skeletons of our ancestors allowed for less premature births in their offpsring. With the evolution of walking upright (for locomotion and energy consumption) our skeletons had to adapt and thus the hips of our ancestors, like we who descend from them, narrowed. The narrowing of the hips would lead to the birthing of smaller, more fragile and dependent premature human babies.

 

What does this have to do with marriage and god? Well... going back to the above statements, the evolution of man's ability to walk upright leading to premature births (which isn't the same definition of premature births by today's standards) equally led to the male-female pair-bonding. The premature infant baby in all its fragility and weakness required a mother to tend to its needs for surivial. Any mother here can attest to it. Hell... any father here can attest to it by watching their baby mamas. :huhwhy: When considering the role of the mother caring for and protecting a small premature infant, one must also consider the mother's needs to survive also while taking care of its baby. This was the role of the father, to further ensure the survival of his offspring and to spread his seed, he would hunt and forage to feed his female partner and child for their own survival and ultimately the survival of its species.

 

They did this through pair-bonding. They survived through this coupling and what would ultimately become known as marriage.

 

So you see, while the word "marriage" and "matrimony" may incur the idea of religion, that is only because of our modern times and the encompassing truth that most of our world is dominated by a majority of religious minded peoples. Be it a cult, or a major religion like Christianity, Catholicism, Islam, Hindu and what have you.

 

Historically, it isn't until you introduce the word "holy" coupled with "matrimony" that the term "marriage" becomes something more than male-female pair-bonding. Which is essentially... what "marriage" is. With a license, or "blessed" by one's identified denomination and deity.

 

Anthropology is a great subject btw. I recommend it for any student. :regurg:

Edited by veristic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how in that diagram the Australopithecus afarensis kinda just looks like a fat guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...