Quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
We don't stop them. THe church doesn't practice mind control. Chrisianity is actually a liberating faith. You can do what you like. The church generally puts forth things that it believes are beneficial to life and relationships and happiness. This knowledge is tried and tested over generations, and added to as the years pass. Collective knowledge. Every "Law" of Gods has a physical benefit and a spiritual benefit.
For example:
Do not murder. Obvious.
Do not envy. Again, obvious, envy is self destructive and hampers relationship with the envy and removes an individuals focus.
|
What the Church puts forth is morals and morality.
You cannot derive an “ought” from an “is”
Therefore IMHO there is no such thing as morality, just people and their desires. What we term morality is merely a sham masking people’s urges because they don’t have the courage or strength to own up to them. It is better to stop speaking morally and to start speaking honestly.
Obviously we cannot all go round indulging in our desires all the time as organised society would be collapse, so our desires are better served by co-operation and negotiation and compromise, but there is no need to Believe in illusions.
Quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
As far as celibacy goes, there are many times in a life when one may have to practice celibacy. A spouse may be ill or away. If one wants that relationship to continue on the spouses return/healing one is often advised to be celibate.
Celibacy is also not only the domain of the religious. Sportsmen practice it. Some practice it to 'keep their energy'. To each their own. Who are you to criticise anothers values?
|
Straw Man
Quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
People go to a church often for guidance. Because they may need relationship counselling, healing in some fashion. Good churches can be spiritual and emotional hospitals. Why criticise them for doing their job. Can you do better?
|
Secular authorities can do it better, since it comes without the ideological baggage of religion.
Quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
I agree with Talthyr. You are obviously are not aware of the ludicrous contradiction of this statement. Without reproduction there is no evolution. If it evolved into anything, it is evolving into a fun thing. Necessity drives evolution, not pleasantries. Still, why the male nipple? The female clitorus? These are not necessary for reproduction. Seems to me a God wanted us to enjoy the process, rather than letting it be instinctive, and hormonally driven, as with the animals.
|
"Male nipples aren't exactly a genetic glitch: they are evidence of our developmental clock. In the early stages of life from conception until about 14 weeks, all human fetuses look the same, regardless of gender. At the tender age of 14 weeks post-fertilization , genetically-male fetuses begin to produce male hormones including testosterone. These hormones turn the androgynous fetus into a bouncing baby boy.
Here's where the developmental clock comes in. By 14 weeks, when the hormones turn on, the nipples have already formed. So, while our male fetus goes on to become a baby boy, he keeps his nipples, reminding all of us that people, male and female, started off the same way."
Quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Who are you to say what is better or worse? This is subjective. You are becoming what you criticise. This is hypocrisy Dramnek. For some, their religious faith holds them together. Others don't need that. Lucky them.
Were you aware I'm divorced? Were you aware I contribute to the ministry of a church? Were you aware homosexuals are more than welcome in my church?
It seems from your posts, you have little experience with the Christian Church. We all have our issues Dramnek. Some are more visable than others. An accepting Church accepts all, and lets God work stuff out with that person themselves.
|
Religion tries to impose its views on others or promote it’s views as being better for you. Religious leaders sound off all the time about issues, and have been involved in for example attempts to ban cloning of human embryos, Abortion etc thus restriction others choices.
Gay bashing is also very popular with many religions and Churches, which in the eyes of most people of course lends it legitimacy.
Most churches here certainly do not support same sex marriages and many do not even like female vicars, and if that’s not discrimination I don’t know what is, and I’ll wager the situation is the same in many other countries as well.
Quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
No. It rests on what is the greater experience for me. The most wonderful sex I experienced, in extreme mind blowing regularity was with my wife. Monogamy, for me only made the experience better as the years went past. I didn't need a condom. Natural sex within Monogamy was a far better deal than faux sex, with a sensation numbing 'rubber glove' preventing true union, with a relative stranger.
If you're going to go sleeping around, then of course wear a condom. But that's not the only alternative. So, no, I'm not asking for it.
|
"No. It rests on what is the greater experience for me" or selfishness as others would term it. You also assume that everybody who needs or uses a condom will sleep around
Quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Speak for yourself. How can you presume to tell me what I can and cannot do? Again, a ludicrous statement with no factual or logical grounding. You cannot measure or experience what I do.
Now, You tell me that you can't claim be able to reasonablly interpret what it thinks. Fair enough, I won't argue that.
I believe I can. I believe he does exist, and communicates quite reguarly what is good for my life, and what isn't. No mistaking those messages.
This is my reality Dramnek. This is my truth. You cannot prove me wrong.
|
Then prove yourself right.
Quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
You forgot to add a "TO ME". Sex is not innately special to you. Sex is inately special to me, and everyone I've been with, so what does that say about the two of us   [img]tongue.gif[/img]
Again, throwing your subjectivity out there, who are you to say we're wrong. If people in a Church have collectively tried option A, and option B, some trying both, others one or the other, and the decision is reached that option B is a better path in pursuing happiness, who are you to criticise this? Millions of humans are in agreement on this subject. There's something to it. There's no smoke without a fire.
|
Hah, that’s the old 20,000 fanatics can’t be wrong idea. Just because people choose to do it or follow it, it doesn’t automatically mean there is anything in it.
Many people are racist and agree on racist ideas and policies (for example the British National party) but that doesn’t mean there is anything good in it does there?
You Also presume to cast judgement on my personal views about sexual matters.
If I believe that sex is special I can and Do, but other people do not have to do the same, and it is only in my opinion that sex is special. And how this belief of speciality is put into practise is also subjective and many people choose to do it differently.