"If I Were The Devil" -Paul Harvey

[LGM]

I must say, rharpe, for the sake of every non-bigot, non-hypocritical, "my poo don't stink" Christian out there... Please shut your wafer-hole. It is "Chrstians" like you that really ruin it for every sane one out there. I don't mean to be judge or be harsh to you. I can understand and respect the fact that you really are trying to be a good soul. But gosh darnit, you really need to sew that mouth shut.

As a Christian with almost a totally opposite view than rharpes's, I will answer both sets of questions that have been asked in this thread.

1.) Do you think pornography is wrong?
2.) Do you think fornication is wrong?
3.) Do you think cheating is wrong?
4.) Do you think adultery is wrong?
5.) Do you think immodesty is wrong?
6.) Do you think erotism is wrong?
7.) Do you think polygamy is wrong?
8.) Do you think sodomy is wrong?
9.) Do you think hedonism is wrong?
10.) Do you think incest is wrong?

1.) It's not so much wrong as it is tasteless. Sex should be a private affair, but it is also the object of much curiosity and speculation. It is also a means of pleasure for more people than one would think. Do I look at porn? Yes I do. Am I proud of it? No, I'm not. But hey, that's the beauty of Christianity. I can ask for forgiveness from God when I know I've done wrong, and He still loves me. So if I say sorry and repent,  I'm not damned to Hell forever. Sounds like a good deal to me. (But of course, if I sin purposely, knowing full well I can just repent later... That's a little dodgy. The line is very thin in that instance.) Also, I think pornography really perverts people's outlook on sex. They come to expect things that shouldn't be expected, or will and should never happen between to people.

2.) Do I think sex before marriage is wrong? Yes, yes I do. But do I think someone is immoral for doing it? No, not really. They're human. God gave us the hormones for sexuality, some people wait longer to use them than others. If someone is not a Christian, why should they believe they should have to wait before marriage to have sex? Abstinance is a choice that isn't necessarily rooted in religious beliefs. It is a choice for people who want to wait for the right person. If a person is Christian, then their reason to abstain is because the Bible says their body is like a temple. It is, in essence, a place for God to "live in." If this their a way of thinking, would they want to put someone's love juice all over their body? I believe that God created sex not only as a means of pro-creation, but also as a gift to humans. A gift to those that have found someone to spend their life with and to love forever. In my opinion, someone's "first time" should be with their one and only partner. It's sort of anti-climactic (haha, get it?) if either partner has had sex once, twice, or many times before. But that's just the way I think. I want my first time to be very special. I want it to be a new discovery with someone I know will be with me the rest of my life.

3.) Cheating is technially lying. And lying, by definition of the Ten Commandments, is a sin. Sin is wrong, so cheating is wrong. Yes. If a person can't stay commited to another, they shouldn't bother dating at all.

4.) See above. But I must say that adultry in itself is covered by a whole other commandment. Again, if someone can't stay with one person, why "take the plunge" at all and emotionaly harm the involved?

5.) Boasting is just stupid. It's not necessarily wrong, it's just not smart. When someone boasts, generally nobody likes them. I'm sure David boasted about killing Goliath the the local ladies, but he's not rotting in Hell, is he?

6.) I don't know what is meant by eroticism. Do I think a woman dressing in lacy lingerie a sin? No. It's damn sexy! But, to elaborate on that I do think it's rather seedy and lucrative to fantascize about the opposite sex. While it's fun at the time one is doing it, it's also pretty demeaning and mind-warping after "prolonged use."

7.) I think Polygamy can be likened to greed. If someone is taking up all the women for their own, there won't be any left for the other guys. That would be sad indeed, and it's almost like stealing. And stealing is mean-spirited and wrong. (Unless of course it is necessary for survival. *nods to Eric*)

8.) I think God has assigned every body part for a specific purpose. The mouth is for talking and eating, the bum is for excretion, and the stuff on the other side is meant for pro-creation and "the ultimate of pleasures." But hey, some people like to experiment. While it's not the best practice, I don't think on should be doomed to hell for trying it.

9.) I think it's wrong if it seperates a person from God. God should be a part of their life, but if He gets tossed out and replaced by a Playstation 3... Then that might constitute as a sin. A pursuit of pleasure is okay, as long as one still gives some time and thought up to God every once in a while. And not just when they need more money to buy the next Metal Gear sequel and think praying to God for help will do any good.

10.) Duh. It's very wrong. That's the most "binary" question you can ask. There should be no rationalization for incest. Unless you are in love with your third cousin... Then she's fair game.

1.) Do you think abortion is wrong?
2.) Do you think swearing is wrong?
3.) Do you think physical violence is wrong?
4.) Do you think jealousy (coveting what another person has or does) is wrong, and should someone be punished for it if it's impossible to control? Do you think it can be controlled?
5.) Do you think lying for your personal gain is wrong? What about lying to help someone else? What if the lie will prevent the person you are lying to from being hurt, physically?
6.) Do you believe people should be allowed to express their beliefs and thoughts freely (free speech)?

1.) If it is the only solution to the pregnancy, then yes. (For example, if the woman is surely to die in child birth, or she neets a new kidney to live, but cannot have the operation because of the baby.) Abortion should not be used as a so-called "get out of jail free" card. A person can't just take their child's oppurtunity at a life away just because they screwed up. Who knows.. Maybe in nine months their mind will change. There's ALWAYS the chance of adoption, too. But I think pride and reputation take the biggest role in this situation. So yes, in 98.674% of the cases, abortion is wrong.

2.) I think taking the Lord's name in vain is wrong. But saying "fuck" or "shit" is just naughty, but not Hell-inducing foolery. Swearing is just a sign of unoriginality and un-intelligence. If one has to reduce to using swear words, they really don't have anything important to say in the first place.

3.) In most cases, yes. Self defense is the big exception in this. A person can't just let someone kill them or severely injure them because they don't believe in hurting anyone. Also, to bring up a question raised earlier: is killing in war constituted as a sin? From what I've read and what I've been taught in the bible, whatever laws are made on Earth are honored in Heaven. Unless of course they un-justifyingly harm someone or are purposely damaging. In war, soldiers are allowed to kill the enemy in order to protect themselves and they're "squad." This constitutes as self-defense. But "collateral damage" killings (the killing of innocent bystanders in the process of destroying the enemy) and torturing of hostages I think is wrong and very evil. All in all I think one should only kill and harm others when it is necessary to their survival or the survival of others. Not because they've had a bad day.

4.) A person should be thankful for what they have, but it's very easy to be jealous of what others have. It's never an intentional thing to be jealous, and it really isn't very bad in itself. But sometimes jealousy turns to violence or other very bad things. Anyone ever seen/read Shakespeare's "Othello?"

5.) Lying for the sake of lying is wrong. Simple. Deception is just a waste of time and never helps anybody. But lying to protect someone is usually the right thing to do. Though it's not honest, I think God will be more pleased that you helped someone by making a lie than by saving your own soul and telling the truth, but harming others. But sometimes lying to protect someone only harms them more in the end. For instance, if you lie to spare their feelings, you're giving them a false hope or a false understanding of yourself. That's bad.

6. Of course. As long as lying, stealing, cheating, or any other "sin" covered isn't involved in the process. The use of free spech and self-expession shouldn't incite hate or harm to any person. That can be constituted as violence. And calling someone bad names is never self-defense.

I apologize for the enormous size of this reply. It took forever to answer, but this is where I stand as a Christian and I felt I'd share my beliefs to show that not every Christian is a total nutjob. As for other questions in this thread, I believe Big Brother and SSH have beautifully stated my same beliefs for me.

Basically, I believe it is not my place to judge others. I shouldn't point any fingers, nor should I try to force my beliefs upon them. I can only pray for better things to happen for myself and others. I can only try to be as best I can, but I know I will always slip up. But that's what prayer is for. I know God will forgive me for whatever I do, as long as I am sincere in my apology.


P.S. The reason sex is brought up alot in morality discussions is because most normal people involved in those discussons usually aren't sociopath psychotics who murder, rape, molest, or steal expensive things.

[Kinoko]

I really love Nik's point of view on most things. You know, part of the reason for that is because he doesn't overthink things. No offense there ^_-

That and he accepts many people living in many different ways is fine.

I see no problem with porn in itself. Are you telling me, TIS (and I don't expect you to answer this, I don't want you to divulge personal things here) that you've never gotten a little hot and bothered by seeing a boy you have a severe crush on in high school or something? In that case, you could claim you're still thinking of him as a person. So, coming away from that, have you ever just seen a guy (sorry, I'm assuming heterosexuality here, if not, just change the 'he's to 'her's) you thought was really good looking and gotten a little red in the cheeks?

Porn is just an extension of that. I know what it's like to go through periods where you just don't need or particularly want sex. I've been through periods like that where I was completely happy just being myself and learning to enrich myself as a human being in every other way; learning, having fun with friends, relaxing, experiencing the world...

But I also know what it's like to be where I am now, and where I've been in many periods of my life like now. That is to say, I LOVE sex. I think about it more times during the day than is probably normal ^_^ But I certainly don't feel dirty (in a bad way) or wrong in any way whatsoever. It makes me happy.

A lot of the time, I'm thinking about how much I love my fiance and the amazing times we've shared together (we live apart temporarilly now so it's just thinking about it for the time being). That's what I would call making love and that's the most fulfilling and wonderful things in the world because the act goes beyond the physical enjoyment and is just a very intense expression of our love and bond.

I'm not always thinking about that though Sometimes it's just sex - in general. We all have bodies that enjoy (immensely!) physical pleasure, and that is never just physical, we always enjoy it mentally too. Those endorphines alone shoot to the brain, as well. Aside from that, it can make us just feel incredibly alive and attractive! Even without a long-term bond with the person you're having sex with, both people can just have an amazing time pleasuring themselves and each other, and then leave the next morning feeling very fulfilled and happy with themselves.

I personally think that's a beautiful thing and I'm jealous of anyone who has experiences like that often. I also don't call that objectifying at all, at least not in a bad way. I've been attracted to many people -while- being in a very fulfilling relationship at the same time. I'm sure many people in happy long-term relationships have thought about sex with another person, even if it's a movie star or an imaginary person, or... dare I say it, a cartoon character. It could be someone you know or it could be some really hot person you see strutting down the street one day.

As long as whatever you do (I'm including thinking in that statement) doesn't hurt anyone, I think that's still a beautiful thing. To be able to enjoy our minds and bodies, be it on our own or with a loved one or a complete stranger. If everyone's happy, it's ultimately just enriching your life more, really.

Now, getting back to porn, like I said, that's just an extension of what I said before... if you can get all hot and bothered seeing a cute guy/girl on the street, porn is just another way for people to get that feeling. They can take it as far as they like on their own or... with a friend. Whatever. Porn is just (usually) seeing two (or.. whatever) other people have sex (or whatever), to help turn yourself on, for the purpose of enjoying your body, or even just for enjoying mentally if you like that. Enjoying it in whatever way you want.

Not everyone can just go out and find someone to have sex with, also. Not everyone can find a girlfriend/boyfriend, or even just a one-night stand. But they probably still want to feel sexual, and enjoy themselves, and porn is a safe way of doing that. Believe me, extreme sexual tension with no fulfilment can drive a person to do crazy things, and I think THAT is a bad thing.

Now, of course the porn -industry- isn't without many, many faults. If I had my way, there would be absolutely no animal porn or kiddie porn whatsoever. I abhore both and a lot of other things like snuff (I'm not really sure if 99% of that is real or not though) or anything that resembles rape. I'm fairly sure most people would agree with me there. In those cases, the subjects involved are NOT both willing participants, and NOT both reasonably mature adults who understand what they're doing. Of course, there are also a lot of people in the porn industry who are being terribly taken advantage of, are there out of severe desperation and really don't want to be there at all. That is also a terrible thing, but these are faults with the industry, not with porn itself.

There's LOTS of porn out there where the subjects understand what they're doing VERY well, and they bloody well like their job. I've seen them with my own eyes, and they're usually very well rounded people. It's not always like that, but it often is and that's the ideal.

So don't be hating porn ^_^ It has a place in a healthy society just like many controversial things, when you understand it properly and know that it can have many good points too.

I love seeing a beautiful woman, or a sexy guy. It makes me happy. But my last few paragraphs aside, I think the most important points I made were in my first few about sex. It's not something to be overthought and studied, but it is something to be smart about, mature about, knowledgable about and then enjoyed the HECK out of!

EDIT: I realise I didn't use a very important word in my post at all, so I want to mention it here: PASSION. The good kind. It's one of the things that makes life wonderful and it can be passion for anything, but certainly sex is another way for people to experience that insense feeling. I myself get turned on a lot just by seeing an intense passion in another person, be it for their hobby or a good cause or ... I don't know, maybe just enjoying a good sandwich @_@ Passion is one of the many spices of life, but I think it's the best one. Passion is what keeps me going in life, and I think most people get depressed or sad when they go for long periods without it.

[MrColossal]

be smart about, mature about, knowledgable about and then enjoyed the HECK out of!

Can't we just apply this to every controversial topic and all go home?

[Pesty]

I think everyoneÃ, should stop all this stuff and lookit this instead.

[Adamski]

First of all, Adamski, I'm very well aware that not all of what I've said is always true in all cases.

Your post on the subject was written in a manner that suggested that you believed what you were writing holds true in the majority of cases, and I infered the following things:

1. You suggested that consent arises 'a lot of times' from a person being pressured into having sex, or from a heat-of-the-moment impulsive response. Perhaps this may be a relevent point to make if we were discussing 14 year olds having sex, or High School romances, but Becky specifically worded her sentence as "consensual, safe sex between two non-married adults" which suggests maturity towards sexual feelings and a knowledge of what you do and don't want sexually. This seemed to me to be a moot point and does not go towards any concrete reason why sex in any non-married relationship is wrong.

2. You provided a very pedantic 'argument' that safe sex isn't safe sex at all. I'm not sure where this fits into the marriage argument as there's no shift in contraceptive responsibilities from being an unmarried couple to a married couple, it just seemed like you wanted to throw that in there to try and (quite poorly) 'negate' every aspect of the original sentence.

3. You make massive assumptions that people who have sex in an unmarried relationship don't know each other very well, which is a ridiculous thing to say. If you have statistics to back this "chances are" statement up, I'll be happy to retract my opinion that it is a ridiculous thing to say.

You also mention "The most underestimated consequence of having sex too early is the emotional scarring it gives you" without defining when "too early" actually is. In the context of you presenting a case against sex outside of marriage I can only assume that you mean that having sex before the wedding night is emotionally scarring. If you said at 11 or some equally silly pre-consentual/pre-legal age then I'd totally agree, but we're specifically talking about "adult relationships" here.

4. We have different views of what 'love' is, although you actually typed out my feelings about it:

you need to be compatible with one another in a mental, emotional, and spiritual sense, and you also need to be committed to one another.

Some of the love I feel for my partner manifests itself in a sexual way, and I personally feel that to betray that aspect of love would betry the intense emotional, spiritual and mental connection we have because it also hightenes all of the aformentioned aspects of love. You can't sustain a relationship for long purely based on sex ("fuckbuddies" don't exist in my happy little world), but trying to repress sex from a loving relationship strikes me as being incredibly emotionally unhealthy and making an obsessive deal out of something that isn't really a big deal if you just get on with being in love.

Not that I'm saying that love can't exist without sex you understand, but I think sex and physical interaction is an important part of a loving and healthy relationship and it's bonkers and unnatural to try and cut it out of your lives just because you are in that boolean state of being 'unmarried'.

Before that line you state that a relationship can't be sustained purely on love. Can you define for me what you believe love to be? Is it less than a mental, emotional, spiritual and commited bond? Do you really, really believe that love ISN'T the whole purpose of a relationship, or did you muddle up what you meant by that sentence?

5. You state that sex clouds your ability to really get to know a person.

it's imperative to really really get to know a person before you marry him or her. If you don't have sex during this time, then (given what I've said about being naturally inclined to love whoever you're having sex with) you'll presumably be able to examine the person's character without being clouded by desire

I personally find the idea that you cannot fully 'examine' a person's character because your judgement is impared with sexual thoughts extremely patronising. I can't elaborate any further than 'balderdash', and if you can't see why then no amount of arm waving will help explain.

6. Your very last sentence throws me off guard completely: "Marriage, at least, provides more protection, a way of "predicting the weather", so to speak."

If you're trying to say here that getting married is the most emotionally protective way of 'testing the waters of relationships' then I'm not quite sure what to say. I don't think you've quite looked at every possible angle before coming to this conclusion. 

If I have inferred incorretly, you might want to revise the way you present your opinions on such things - I have no personal knowledge of you so I can only react to the words you type (and not the extra words you meant to say that I would pick up on if I knew you personally).

And I'm not willing to go any further than this, because I'm ultimatly happy in my unmarried relationship and I plan to go on being in the same happily unmarried relationship for the rest of my life. My original post was not intended to be a rebuttal, or insulting, or counter-argumentative, I just felt stirred strongly enough to follow up your post in a blunt manner because your opinions dismissed my own relationship and I felt slightly annoyed by the conclusions you had drawn. An easy trap to fall into of course, I should have avoided hitting the 'reply' button altogether. I usually avoid topics such as these because I'm too lazy to type out complex replies and give detailed cross-references

Also, might I ask what makes you think you know exactly what "experiences everyone else in the world is having"? I highly doubt that you know exactly what goes on in the heads of every denizen of the world...

No no, what I meant was that you cannot generalise sexual practise and relationships and yadda yadda in the way you did in that post because the conclusions you have drawn do not reflect the experiences of everyone in the world, only those in close proximity to your life or stories filtered down to you. Perhaps I should have worded it more clearly.

[esper]

lgm... I think "immodesty" in the case in question means, for example, flashing one's cleaveage aboot for all to see, or wearing extremely tight junk-enhancing pants...

[The Inquisitive Stranger]

Stranger: A woman (or man) has a choice whether or not to pose for a nude photo shoot. If he or she opts to go even further, and star in a porn movie, it is still their own choice. Well, hopefully. But assuming it is, how can it be a bad thing to objectify someone if they've chosen to be seen as an object in the first place?

If you allow yourself to be photographed in the nude, you gotta bear the consequences. It's kind of backwards to blame the viewers for doing something the person being viewed knew could happen.

That is true. I, personally, think that the conditions in which one would have to make that choice should be eliminated (i.e. I don't think anyone should want to be an object for anyone else), but then again, I can't make choices for other people.

Are you telling me, TIS (and I don't expect you to answer this, I don't want you to divulge personal things here) that you've never gotten a little hot and bothered by seeing a boy you have a severe crush on in high school or something? In that case, you could claim you're still thinking of him as a person. So, coming away from that, have you ever just seen a guy (sorry, I'm assuming heterosexuality here, if not, just change the 'he's to 'her's) you thought was really good looking and gotten a little red in the cheeks?

I'm odd. I'll admit it. I never get hot and bothered over just looking at someone. I see millions of guys every day, many of whom can be construed as good-looking. I don't notice any of them unless I know something about them. If I actually meet a guy and can hold an interesting conversation with him, and he seems to be the type I'd have something in common with, that's when attraction starts to happen. I'm dead serious.

To be honest, I think it's because I grew up with low self-esteem and spent most of my life believing I was physically unattractive, therefore causing me to gradually not care about looks so much. It's gotten to the point where I don't even want people to see me as physically attractive at all; I'd rather be recognized for my intelligence, creativity, and attempts at humour.

There are exceptions, though: sometimes, I'll notice a person's looks if they physically resemble someone I know and like. Also, if I come across two people engaged in a public display of affection, I'll admittedly have a mix of "oooh..." and "get a room!" in my head...

But I also know what it's like to be where I am now, and where I've been in many periods of my life like now. That is to say, I LOVE sex. I think about it more times during the day than is probably normal ^_^ But I certainly don't feel dirty (in a bad way) or wrong in any way whatsoever. It makes me happy.

A lot of the time, I'm thinking about how much I love my fiance and the amazing times we've shared together (we live apart temporarilly now so it's just thinking about it for the time being). That's what I would call making love and that's the most fulfilling and wonderful things in the world because the act goes beyond the physical enjoyment and is just a very intense expression of our love and bond.

I have to admit, I'm envious.

I dated this guy for two years. During that time, I felt a lot like you do now regarding the physical aspect of our relationship; however, in the past nine months following the breakup, I've felt nothing but regret. Today, I feel that it was all dirty and wrong, and that I should have waited for someone who was more worth it.

Most people take a situation like this and move on, maybe go "yay, I'm more sexually experienced" or something like that. I can't do that. I can move on saying that I'll be more careful with whom I open my heart to, but I can't have an attitude of no regrets. It's just not me.

I'm not always thinking about that though Sometimes it's just sex - in general. We all have bodies that enjoy (immensely!) physical pleasure, and that is never just physical, we always enjoy it mentally too. Those endorphines alone shoot to the brain, as well.

I'd rather just eat lots and lots of chocolate, but like I said, I'm odd.

So don't be hating porn ^_^ It has a place in a healthy society just like many controversial things, when you understand it properly and know that it can have many good points too.

Well, that doesn't change the fact that I get nothing out of porn, and therefore don't like it. But I respect that many people disagree with me.

Passion is what keeps me going in life, and I think most people get depressed or sad when they go for long periods without it.

Ah, that explains why I'm so depressed and sad all the time, then!

1. You suggested that consent arises 'a lot of times' from a person being pressured into having sex, or from a heat-of-the-moment impulsive response. Perhaps this may be a relevent point to make if we were discussing 14 year olds having sex, or High School romances, but Becky specifically worded her sentence as "consensual, safe sex between two non-married adults" which suggests maturity towards sexual feelings and a knowledge of what you do and don't want sexually. This seemed to me to be a moot point and does not go towards any concrete reason why sex in any non-married relationship is wrong.

Hey, a lot of adults act like teenagers. And a lot of teenagers think they're mature enough to be considered consenting adults. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the line between maturity and immaturity is quite blurry. Where would you say it's drawn?

2. You provided a very pedantic 'argument' that safe sex isn't safe sex at all. I'm not sure where this fits into the marriage argument as there's no shift in contraceptive responsibilities from being an unmarried couple to a married couple, it just seemed like you wanted to throw that in there to try and (quite poorly) 'negate' every aspect of the original sentence.

You're kind of right about that, and admittedly, I just kind of threw that in there for a bit of tongue-in-cheek fun. Sorry about that.

3. You make massive assumptions that people who have sex in an unmarried relationship don't know each other very well, which is a ridiculous thing to say. If you have statistics to back this "chances are" statement up, I'll be happy to retract my opinion that it is a ridiculous thing to say.

That was speculation. Sorry for not phrasing it as such. I'd be happy to be proven wrong. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find any statistics anywhere that pertain to how much people in relationships know one another; I assume that it's a hard variable to accurately measure.

You also mention "The most underestimated consequence of having sex too early is the emotional scarring it gives you" without defining when "too early" actually is. In the context of you presenting a case against sex outside of marriage I can only assume that you mean that having sex before the wedding night is emotionally scarring. If you said at 11 or some equally silly pre-consentual/pre-legal age then I'd totally agree, but we're specifically talking about "adult relationships" here.

Like I said, the line between maturity and immaturity is a foggy one; not everyone crosses it at the same time. A 21-year-old could potentially be as immature as a 14-year-old, in which case, yes, they would be having sex too early. It's a very "it depends" thing. I don't know if there's a definite answer.

Admittedly, though, it's possible to get married too early, and it happens.

Before that line you state that a relationship can't be sustained purely on love. Can you define for me what you believe love to be? Is it less than a mental, emotional, spiritual and commited bond? Do you really, really believe that love ISN'T the whole purpose of a relationship, or did you muddle up what you meant by that sentence?

I said "you need to be compatible with one another", and you seem to have missed that. Love is precisely what you said: a bond. While bonding often results from compatibility, it doesn't always imply it. My ex-boyfriend and I loved each other and were committed to each other, but in some very important areas in our beliefs, we weren't compatible.

I personally find the idea that you cannot fully 'examine' a person's character because your judgement is impared with sexual thoughts extremely patronising. I can't elaborate any further than 'balderdash', and if you can't see why then no amount of arm waving will help explain.

Sorry for the patronising sentiment. The reason I threw out this point was because it happened to me personally. If you and most other people are smarter than I am, well, good for you.

If you're trying to say here that getting married is the most emotionally protective way of 'testing the waters of relationships' then I'm not quite sure what to say. I don't think you've quite looked at every possible angle before coming to this conclusion. Ã, 

Nah, I'd actually say it's one emotionally-protective way. There are other ways as well.

If I have inferred incorretly, you might want to revise the way you present your opinions on such things - I have no personal knowledge of you so I can only react to the words you type (and not the extra words you meant to say that I would pick up on if I knew you personally).

Well, that's the last time I'll type replies to heated discussions while taking notes in a lecture at the same time, then...

And I'm not willing to go any further than this, because I'm ultimatly happy in my unmarried relationship and I plan to go on being in the same happily unmarried relationship for the rest of my life. My original post was not intended to be a rebuttal, or insulting, or counter-argumentative, I just felt stirred strongly enough to follow up your post in a blunt manner because your opinions dismissed my own relationship and I felt slightly annoyed by the conclusions you had drawn. An easy trap to fall into of course, I should have avoided hitting the 'reply' button altogether. I usually avoid topics such as these because I'm too lazy to type out complex replies and give detailed cross-references

Well, that's wonderful for you. Again, I'm envious that you've apparently found happiness. I hope it does, in fact, last for the rest of your life.

I'm sorry I offended you. In fact, I'm sorry if I offended anyone else. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to sulk in my ever-present loneliness.

[EldKatt]

Let me clarify, then: Pornography, by its very nature, objectifies something. Whatever is depicted to cause sexual excitement serves the sole purpose of exciting someone: this is objectification.

Why is it "by its very nature" objectifying? I think we need to establish what we mean by objectification, but to the extent I understand its meaning, all fiction (and perhaps even all art) is to some extent objectifying: it depicts something in order to make a point or serve a purpose. I do not see why this would be wrong.

Objectification is a form of degradation; it reduces a human being into something whose only use is the pleasure of others. This is why I find it wrong.

Here's the guilt by association again. Indeed, some pornographic works reduce a human into something whose only use is the pleasure of others, but to establish this as an essential trait of pornography is completely groundless. You're making very specific statements about a very broad concept. I really don't understand why the depiction of erotic behaviour would inevitably lead to depiction of a human being as something whose only use is the pleasure of others. It's a connection that just doesn't make any sense.

[The Inquisitive Stranger]

Here's the guilt by association again. Indeed, some pornographic works reduce a human into something whose only use is the pleasure of others, but to establish this as an essential trait of pornography is completely groundless. You're making very specific statements about a very broad concept. I really don't understand why the depiction of erotic behaviour would inevitably lead to depiction of a human being as something whose only use is the pleasure of others. It's a connection that just doesn't make any sense.

Okay, then, I think that porn that reduces a human to a thing used by others is wrong. The rest of it, I just don't find appealing.

I never thought I'd say this, but I'm actually starting to get sick of this thread...

[Kinoko]

Actually, this discussion reminds me of this: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4446981554735098778&q=porn

[esper]

For the love of God, never post a link to a female Tauren showing cleavage again. I just about gouge my eyes out with rusty spoons and force-feed them to myself whenever I come across them ingame...

[EldKatt]

Okay, then, I think that porn that reduces a human to a thing used by others is wrong. The rest of it, I just don't find appealing.

Then there's nothing I can disagree with. :D

[Nikolas]

Look, porn is usefull. It was for me, for my father (i dunno but probably), definately for my son and so on...

By the age man reaches his 13th-14th brithday he is ready to cum! And that said if he doesn't nature (God, human nature, desing, the ultimate being, whatever), has made sure that every once in a while we empty ourselfs. While sleeping. In Greek it's called oniroxis (have no idea tha Brittish term). Which means that you have an orgasm after having a lustfull dream in your sleep! And you can't avoid that! And of course, since you don't control your dreams, I would arrive to the conclusion that everybody is sinning, or objecifying or whatever with differnet women in their sleep (and don't tell me that all you dream is your wives now...), cause of human nature and devices to keep healthy!

And every male in this forum can back up to what I'm saying here! Even rharpe!

Kinoko: There is no reason to think any further than I have here. This is a fun thread. Not to mention that I just rediculed my self and all men!

[Ginny]

EDIT: I completely forgot the first part of my post which I copied to notepad earlier.

2.) I think taking the Lord's name in vain is wrong. But saying "fuck" or "shit" is just naughty, but not Hell-inducing foolery. Swearing is just a sign of unoriginality and un-intelligence. If one has to reduce to using swear words, they really don't have anything important to say in the first place.

Why do you always have to have something important to say? I can just be in a bad mood or angry at someone and express my feelings about them by swearing. I don't mean any harm by it and it generally depends on my mood more than anything. But I disagree about curse words being uncreative. They are a great outlet for frustration, sometimes a cause for a good laugh (I think we can all agree that laughing is a healthy and enjoyable acitivity, no?), and can sometimes be rather imaginative.

As long as whatever you do (I'm including thinking in that statement) doesn't hurt anyone, I think that's still a beautiful thing. To be able to enjoy our minds and bodies, be it on our own or with a loved one or a complete stranger. If everyone's happy, it's ultimately just enriching your life more, really.
...
Passion is what keeps me going in life, and I think most people get depressed or sad when they go for long periods without it.

I think I agree completely with your take on porn and, in general, taking pleasure in life's beauty. If I see someone and find them attractive (btw, I don't neccessarily mean good physical appearance, it has something to do with personality, with what ther person projects outside), and perhaps fantasize about them, is this objectifying? I could find this person attractive for the very reason that they are a human being who is intelligent, rational and spiritual.

I'm odd. I'll admit it. I never get hot and bothered over just looking at someone. I see millions of guys every day, many of whom can be construed as good-looking. I don't notice any of them unless I know something about them. If I actually meet a guy and can hold an interesting conversation with him, and he seems to be the type I'd have something in common with, that's when attraction starts to happen. I'm dead serious.

I can see where you stand here - I have a friend who, I observed, notices looks first of all when she meets someone. I think my mind actually blocks this out, and all the people I've had a crush on in my life weren't always physically attracting. Not only were they not what is considered ideal good looking, I myself noticed that they weren't good-looking, to my taste. Still, I was attracted because of their personality, their sense of humour, etc. I like it this way because it means I don't get a crush on someone just because of how they look, only to find out they are a complete idiot later.
For myself, though, in contrast, I like to feel attractive to other people, though eventually I want to be considered for my intelligence, rather than my looks.

Hey, a lot of adults act like teenagers. And a lot of teenagers think they're mature enough to be considered consenting adults. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the line between maturity and immaturity is quite blurry. Where would you say it's drawn?

Maybe I'm not in the place to judge, as I'm a teenager, but I find myself more mature than most teenagers. I don't think people having sex before the legal age of consent is wrong, if both partners are sure that they are ready for sex, and it doesn't have to be because they love each other, they might be ready physically and emotionally without being in love.
As a personal choice, I want my first time to be from love, and I also believe that it's much more enjoyable, mentally, if there is strong "mental" attraction to the other person- i.e. good chemistry and a loving relationship. I have no problem with people who, if they so choose, have casual sex (yes, I believe that's possible) or one night stands.

It's funny, we had our first sex ed. class today, one of 6-7 classes we'll have once a week, and we discussed a bit about one night stands and such. It's more a class about relationships, love, and such things, than it is about sex, since there really isn't anything new they can tell us about sex, save for demonstrations . It was interesting to have a discussion about sexual relations and in what context they are right, with people in my class who I don't usually talk to about that.

[iamus]

I think everyoneÃ, should stop all this stuff and lookit this instead.

The bear's the obvious choice, sure. My money's on the hotdog though. They're sneaky little choking hazards.

I think I'm going to bow out of this thread now *collective sigh of relief from entire forum*. Now seems as good a time as any. Before I go though, I'd like to say one thing:


Rharpe?




Love your penis.

It is a thing of beauty.

[esper]

I have one more thing to say before I bow out myself. Keeping with the original spirit of this post...

If I were the Devil, I would start a powerful worldwide religious organization and rule men's hearts and mind through it.

If I were the Devil, I would have that world religion take most of its inspiration from pagan and heathen origin and disguise it as religious iconolatry.

If I were the devil, I would take all the attention off God and put it on light, fluffy things like being nice to everybody and overmoralizing things to the point where I balk at outhouses being displayed on television.

If I were the Devil, I would set up men that say they are the representation of God on earth. Only these people have the right to say what is right or wrong. Only these people have the right to translate Scripture. Only these men have the right to bugger boys without being questioned. And why? Because they said so...

If I were the devil, I would spend more time doing this then worrying about what the hell was on TV.

If I were the Devil, I would put rigorous opposition in the way of any who questioned my powerhouse religion, even when they were wrong. People claiming that the earth is round or that God doesn't want our money are put to death or branded hereticks. Anyone attempting to ruin my doctrine by properly translating the word "baptidzo" (to immerse in water) will be instantly killed, and I'll just make up the name "baptism" and let it continue to mean "the sprinkling of an infant," which carries on into the next thing I'd do:

If I were the Devil, this religion wouldn't be based on choice... Most people would be born into it, and have it drilled into their heads all their lives, and all he lives of their children, and their children's children. Any attempt to think for oneself will be said to be rebellion and will be dealt with harshly, reducing the chances of possible future insurrection.

[Nikolas]

So you would probably Christianity pretty much the way it is...

[The Inquisitive Stranger]

If I were the Devil, I would start a powerful worldwide religious organization and rule men's hearts and mind through it.

Actually, most of the founders of the world's major religions weren't looking to rule anything. If they were, then they would have escaped persecution, which they, for the most part, didn't. Look at Jesus for example. If He wanted to rule men's hearts and mind, wouldn't He have tried to work his way up amongst the current "religious" leaders instead of denouncing them?

If I were the Devil, I would have that world religion take most of its inspiration from pagan and heathen origin and disguise it as religious iconolatry.

That's not the work of the founder itself; it's the work of the people who adopted the religion but didn't want to do away with their old rites and celebrations, so they found a way of integrating them into the religion.

If I were the devil, I would take all the attention off God and put it on light, fluffy things like being nice to everybody and overmoralizing things to the point where I balk at outhouses being displayed on television.

What? I thought being nice to everybody was a good thing! (To the point where you don't annoy people, of course.) And why does it take all the attention off God?

The rest of the post was pretty much spot-on, though.

I think I agree completely with your take on porn and, in general, taking pleasure in life's beauty. If I see someone and find them attractive (btw, I don't neccessarily mean good physical appearance, it has something to do with personality, with what ther person projects outside), and perhaps fantasize about them, is this objectifying?

No. Is it possible to love the personality of a pornographic image, though?

Maybe I'm not in the place to judge, as I'm a teenager, but I find myself more mature than most teenagers.

Been there. Done that.

Your sex ed class sounds pretty cool.

[Ginny]

A lesson before that we were asked to write on paper what we'd like to hear about in the sex ed classes, and after a long thought I wrote down "sexual preference". I'm not yet sure of my preferences myself, and they say most teenagers go through a phase of pondering this subject. Should be very interesting if we get to the subject.
I was positively surprised that the lesson worked more like a discussion between everyone in the class than a lecture. Also, sounds like we'll be doing some "relationship" roleplaying in future lessonss.

"Is it possible to love the personality of a pornographic image?"
I don't think so, no. Porn, however, is more an equivalent of casual sex than of love. That doesn't mean that when someone views porn, they immedeately forget that the people in the video/image are human beings. I wouldn't say they use the person, they use the porn itself.

"Okay, then, I think that porn that reduces a human to a thing used by others is wrong."
If by reduce to a thing used by others you mean that the porn somehow sends a message that the person is nothing but a sexual tool, then I agree completely. Otherwise, I don't see exactly how porn in itself can reduce a human to anything. In the end, it's up to the viewer how they interpret the people starring in porn. This is all assuming the participating people do so by choice, of course.

Also, as Kinoko mentioned, pornography can be used to relieve whatever sexual tension is built up inside us, to replace the actual sexual act.

[EldKatt]

I wouldn't say they use the person, they use the porn itself.

I couldn't have put it any better myself. My hat is off to you.


Also, I've given the human-to-thing reduction thing another thought. (Please note that I'm still interpreting "wrong" as referring to some kind of hypothesized moral universals, not my personal opinion of what I like or dislike.)

Porn is fiction. It's really quite harmless, and I think we're on a very dangerous track if we condemn a work of fiction as immoral or degrading. Book burning can be a fun pastime in the company of good friends, but tolerance is much more worthwhile. I really don't give a damn if someone likes to watch movies about people being raped, as long as nobody is hurt. Violence is of course wrong, but depiction of violence (or objectification or whatever you like)--why not? I'd probably decline politely if they'd ask me to watch it with them, but that's my own business.