Casual sex and why it is ruining society.
After watching Fox News earlier and seeing disgusting news footage of bachelor/bachelorette parties on the Oreilly Factor and seeing all these men and women go crazy and act like total sluts, I saw that this is one of the biggest things ruining America. So many people now-a-days think that casual sex with different people, even multiples, is an okay thing and that all you need to protect yourself is contraception. No! It doesn't work that way. You know, 50 years ago, if everyone acted like this, what do you think it would have been like in society? They probably would've mostly shunned the acts and ideas about sluttiness and casual sex and wouldn't have wanted it around. Now, you see all these 12 and 13 year old girls dressing like porn stars and Playboy models and society finds it okay. On top of that, they run around and have sex and then have the idea of abortion put into their heads.
I'm asking, what happened to having sex out of LOVE, and not lust? Do people find that embarrassing? Do they think you need to have sex as soon as possible so you won't look like an idiot? It's all the pressures of having sex today that's ruining kids' minds and futures.
Also, with this anti-moral mentality, it's the reason that teenage pregnancy, abortion, and std rates are sky high. The more young kids and teens that have sex (with or without contraception), the more likely they are to catch a disease and/or become pregnant.
So I ask again, why is casual and lustful sex okay with people? Does love not matter anymore? I don't know about anyone else, but I'm not going to show myself off to a bunch of men, have casual sex with them, and take the chance of getting std's or getting pregnant. Not at all. I'm waiting until marriage, that way I know it won't be about lust or just sex, but an actual loving, caring relationship. That is the way it should be! Not the other way around.
Have some self control, not casual sex...
War, famine, and preventable disease just don't seem to phase you. But those little heretics had better put some clothes on!! Who cares about the bigger problems when we can all just preach our personal morals to everyone else?
See, this is what I am talking about. You don't get that it is ruining America... you think sex is a game. It is NOT! It is a responsibility. A responsibility that kids and most adults I believe are not ready to handle. They get themselves into messes and can only think of one way out...
Why are you watching Fox? Rupert Murdoch is a totally, tasteless toad who has foisted some of the most vulgar, repulsive trash ever imaginable upon the American public.
I once had the grave misfortune to be shopping for a bit of electronic equipment where all of the television sets were tuned into Fox, which I would never, never, never watch because I do not approve of the programming put forth by the exceedingly, tastelessly vulgar Mr. Murdoch.
Mind you, this was aired in the afternoon when young children might be watching. The program featured a young woman with a child who'd had five or six lovers and she and the lovers were all lined up and questioned, TV quiz program fashion, except that the topic was tasteless and crude, lewd and rude to the utmost: the purpose was to determine the paternity of the child, which paternity would be announced at the end of program.
These are the words I would use to describe Rupert Murdoch:
Indecent, obscene, dirty, filthy, disgusting, offensive, smutty, ill-bred, loutish, uncultivated, boorish.
Quite frankly, I would never publicly admit to watching anything on a Fox station.
And, I would never privately watch Fox unless I was obliged to monitor a particular show. Thank the Great Goddess I have never been asked to do so.
I sure as heck won't be watching CNN anytime soon.
Fox News is my "baby"... It's the only news channel I ever watch (besides local news channel 8).
p.s., good way to ignore everything else in my post and comment on one small UNIMPORTANT detail! Way to go!
Ashley, I agree with you that this is a big problem. There are other problems too, but they CERTAINLY feed into each other. The idea that it is okay to have casual sex opens the door for parenthood for people who aren't ready or even willing to be parents, and degrades respect for children and for the value of their lives. And when we don't have respect for children, it's certainly hard to have respect for anyone else. It is a BIG DEAL.
News? On Faux.News?
Faux.News is part of the News Corporation which MANUFACTURES news.
Fox News manufactures news? What channel did Dan Rather lie for? Oh yeah, NBC. In all fairness, I think all mainstream news sources are biased -- if not conservatively or liberally, just plain Americanized, or First World-biased. I think to really understand an issue you need research, not news, which is almost never neutral and constantly sensationalized.
Preach it, Ashley! Bumping this thread!
The problem is Planned Parenthood and how they SELL sex to young people. They don't talk about loving relationships or long term commitments. They only tell them "how fun it is". Oh, and they might mention the consequences of sex without using the 'superweapons' that they love to market to kids (condoms and birth control).
You don't have to be married to be in a loving, caring relationship.
There are other ways to be loving and caring besides sex.
Well yeah there are but making love is one of the ways to show love and caring. Me and my lady are totally committed to each other but not married. Guess I was saying not all unmarried couples are having casual sex. We sure aren't.
That explains quite a lot... Can you say biased?
That explains quite a lot... Can you say biased?
I'll say the same thing about liberal biased news like cnn.
But I am guessing you've never watched Fox News... If you have, you'd know it wasn't conservative. There are news casters on there of all political stances, not just republican...
I agree. Or European one -- BBC comes to mind. And pretty much all French news. africa2000 was a really great site where you could get pretty unbiased news about poorer countries and human rights abuses in the name of contraception and abortion that didn't buy into the "Western" point of view. Too bad they've ceased to exist.
Whoa, I feel like I'm in the 50's or something. God forbid some girl does it with her boyfriend. I don't really see how that effects anybody. It's just a certain way to express your love for someone. There are other ways too, but why is sex so bad??
Why do you think teen pregnancy rates are so high? Why do you think abortion rates are so high? Why do you think std rates are so high?
And it's not about love if people do it just for the sex and nothing else. Come on, can you really say that someone who has sex with many others has sex for love? More like lust.
I said if a girl has sex with her boyfriend, I said nothing of cxasual sex. and even if it is for lust, it doesn't effect you. If a girl wants to have sex, oh well nothing you can do, same with a guy. and as far as STD's, pregnancy, etc. are concerned, of course they will occur if you don't protect yourself or whatever, but people aren't going to stop having sex, that's a fact.
I said if a girl has sex with her boyfriend, I said nothing of casual sex. and even if it is for lust, it doesn't effect you. If a girl wants to have sex, oh well nothing you can do, same with a guy. and as far as STD's, pregnancy, etc. are concerned, of course they will occur if you don't protect yourself or whatever, but people aren't going to stop having sex, that's a fact.
The sex doesn't affect me, but abortion does.
A girl has sex for lust, gets pregnant, aborts, and does everything all over again... That affects A LOT of people, especially when a child's death is involved.
Why do you have a problem with casual sex then? you said it yourself, it has no affect on you. (without the abortion part) and unless it's a family member or friend of yours, someone's abortion doesn't affect you either. and people can have sex for love, get pregnant, and abort, also.
I personally do not care if any two people have sex, but I definitely care if those two people kill a child that was created through that act.
Think about the logical extension of your analogy. If you don't care that someone you don't know kills her unborn child, why should you care if she kills her born child? Or her grandmother? Or her brother? How do you decide when to start caring?
At some point, we have to start caring about someone besides ourselves.
Sure, no one else's abortions affect me, just like no murders or rapes affect me unless they happen to my family.
Every death of innocent people affect me greatly.
Notice how abortion is legal up until a certain point in the fetus's development. That means the doctor or doctors who gave the OK to get an abortion thinks it is safe and humane to terminate the fetus because I guess they thought/still think that it's not a human or not developed enough for it to be considered "murder". And I said nothing about caring or not. I said how does it AFFECT you if it is not a family or friend of yours. Sure, you can still care, but I don't see how it has an affect on you or your life if someone besides your family member or friend gets an abortion.
If someone in my family especially aborted, I'd feel like one of my family members was being murdered and I wouldn't get to see them.
It would affect me just like a family murder would affect me. I'd be losing someone I care for deeply.
I see exactly what you are saying. Since you guys seem to think a human becomes a human as soon as sperm hits egg, I would TOTALLY greive if a sperm implanted into an egg artificially, on a petri dish was wiped up with tissue paper and tossed out. I'd cry for days.
Uh, most abortions take place when formation is almost complete, and many times after that.
Well, someone on here said if you were to wipe up an implanted sperm-in-egg it would be murder.. of course if the baby's well developed, I'd be sad. I wouldn't want anybody to get an abortion if it's that developed.
I would like to reiterate that the point at which a human being comes into existence is not a matter of what we - or anyone - "thinks." It is a scientific fact that when a sperm fuses with an egg, a new human individual is created. Whether someone would grieve the loss of such a very young human individual is immaterial.
My brother and sister-in-law lost a child to a miscarriage, and I do not think this loss wounded them as much as losing a ten-year-old child would (which may be what you are saying here), but that does not mean that the tiny unborn child is any less of a human being. I think it simply means that this very young child did not have a chance to really imprint himself/herself into their lives. They had that child for such a short time - just in my sister-in-law's womb - that they did not have much time to make him/her a huge part of their lives. That is why the miscarriage of a child is a different kind of loss than the loss of a ten-year-old child. However, in no way does it mean that the life of one of these children is worth more than the other.
okay, personally, I'd cry for days. when a sperm-in-egg is discarded right after it fuses, a human life is lost.
This is a subtle but important point. What, exactly, does "that developed" mean? Lexi, how do you decide on the point in the child's life at which it would be murder to kill him or her, at which you would be sad if he/she died, and BEFORE which it would NOT be murder to kill him/her, and BEFORE which you would NOT be sad? How do you decide? And even when you do, what's the grace period? If you think that you have to be able to see all five toes on each of the baby's feet before it's "that developed" that you'd be sad if he/she died, what about the day before you can see all five, and the last two little ones still have a little web between? Is the baby a disposable piece of trash then? How about when he/she only has three toes? Do you see how ridiculous this is? There is no justification for picking a point after the child comes into existence to start treating him/her like a human individual. Any such point that you might choose is strictly arbitrary.
potential human life.
also, masterbation is wrong. potential material for human life is wasted, right?
It doesn't effect me if my tax money goes to paying someone else's welfare, child suppport, or AIDS medicine? It doesn't effect me if my tax dollars go to funding her abortion?
Abortion is illegal in some cultures. Does that mean the unborn are human their but not in the US?
It's not what we "seem to think." It's what's medically accurate. If you can find an embryologist who says different we'll consider it.
Again, a sperm if just a cell. It has the same genetic ID as the man. An embryo has it's own ID. Sperm on its own never becomes a human being. An embryo is a human being that will never ever get new material -- it'll simply grow and change.
it's not "just a cell"! it's material for potential life!! okay, since it's a human as soon as sperm hits egg, and somebody wiped it up the second it fused, i'd cry for days, and then of coarse lock the person up for life because it's murder. and if you wanna go as far as to say it affects your taxes, but not on a personal or emotional level, then okay. but if you don't pay taxes for the AIDS medicine, the person might die if they have no other way to pay for it.
I do think it effects me on an emotional level, but when Ash said that you didn't care, so I'm saying that it still does indeed effect me. Hey, if a person can have sex and get an abortion and I have no say so b/c it's their body their choice, then it should be my choice how I spend my money and someone who rejected the 50's values you so despise should have to live with the consequences of their actions.
Lexi, sperm never has the potentitial to be life. There is no such thing as potential life. There's only life or not. If you think a sperm is potential life find a scientist who backs it up.
I gotta give it to you. you all are right. no girl should ever have sex. if they do they should be married. they should only have sex with one partner (their husban). no girl or woman should have an abortion under any circumstances. if they get raped, it's not the baby's fault, now is it? they should be forced to have babies under law. and they shouldn't be able to show their body of in any way, or be attractive, because it's dirty. they should wear those things that Muslim women wear. and once they are a wife., they should act like June Cleaver. what can I say? you win. on that note, I'll be taking my leave.
Yep, she's pro-choice.
An excellent and irrefutable point which should be repeated often.
Being pro-life does not require a belief in the things you just stated. Not all pro-lifers believe that, so I suggest you focus on these issues only as they relate to abortion. And I don't believe ANYONE on here ever said that "no girl should ever have sex." You are exaggerating.
No matter how a woman becomes pregnant, she has a baby. No pro-lifer has ever advocated for a law stating that women should be forced to have babies. All we say is that the law should protect already-existing babies (and all humans, for that matter) from being killed. In other words, a woman should not be allowed to kill a child that she already has. That is quite different from saying that a woman should be forced to have a child.
Again, a blatant and unfair exaggeration. No one said things like that. You are trying to build up the position of those you are talking with here to make it seem ridiculous. How about arguing with the points that are actually being made?
I'm disappointed, Lexi. I stood up for you and encouraged everyone to give respectful answers to your questions. Now you are making unfair statements and refusing to listen to those who are making responses to you in earnest. It would be appreciated if you would open up your mind a little bit and give those of us who stuck up for you a chance for a good discussion.
She was accused of being a troll at Pro-Choice talk. I agree she is Pro-Choice and leaned heavily that way since first posting.
We get all sorts of probabykilling advocates on this forum, and many of them have utterly no idea what they're talking about. You seem to be one of them.
"Doctors" express no opinion on the species classification of the babies they kill, nor do they express a legal opinion on what constitutes "murder". They just do what they're paid to do, they kill the baby.
Any ordinary dictionary (you do know what those are, don't you?) will tell you that a "human being" (a.k.a. "Homo sapien") is any creature of OUR species.
The same dictionary will tell you that "murder" in the noun form refers to the illegal killing of said human being.
Are you here for the education, or just to stir up crap?
Abortion is (unfortunately) legal up until the **9th** month. This means mom can decide she no longer wants to be pregnant two days before her due date and go have an abortion. And yes, there are actual "doctors" who abort babies that close to birth! One of the most infamous is George Tiller "The Killer" in Kansas.
After watching the news a couple years aga and seeing horrifying news footage of terrorist attacks all over my tv screen and watching people crying and dying and experiencing total devastation, i saw that it was caused by one of the biggest things ruining America: airplanes. So many people now-a-days think that casual flying with different airlines, even multiples, is an okay thing and that all you need to protect yourself is a seatbelt. No! It doesn't work that way. You know, 50 years ago, if everyone would've acted like this, what do you think it would have been like in society. They probably would've mostly shunned the acts and ideas about frequent flyers and transcontinental flight and wouldn't have wanted it around. now, you see all these 12 and 13 year old girls carrying luggage and carry-on bags and society finds it okay. on top of that, they run around and fly coach and then have the idea of terrorism put into their heads.
I'm asking, what happened to flying out of necessity, and not laziness? Do people find that embarrassing? Do they think you need to fly as much as possible so you won't look like an idiot? It's all the pressures of flying today that's ruining kids' minds and futures.
Also, with this anti-moral mentality, it's the reason that teenage pregnancy, terrorism, and std rates are sky high. The more young kids and teens that fly (with or without terrorists), the more likely they are to catch a disease and/or become pregnant.
So I ask again, why is casual and lazy flying okay with people? Does necessity not matter anymore? I don't know about anyone else, but I'm not going to fly myself off to a bunch of foreing countries, look at them, and take the chance of getting std's or getting pregnant. Not at all. I'm waiting until marriage, that way I know it won't be about laziness or just fun, but an actual necessary, caring flight. That is the way it should be! Not the other way around.
Have some self control, not transcontinental flights...
*Terrorism is the most selfish thing a patriot could do for her country*
This sounds like a sarcastic answer to me. I believe Lexi is opposed to everything he stated above. He uses terms like raped, forced by law, dirty, etc.
I don't believe physical gimicks such as requiring women to wear a head to toe heavy garment and veil is an answer. The men and women need to conquer adultery and fornication in the mind. Modest dress, however, is appropriate.
This Lexi (some person) doesn't believe sex should be limited to a man and woman within marriage. This Lexi person mocks us for not having an answer in the case of rape (you force us to have a baby by law). This person is not interested in hearing arguments about proper living; only in pointing out that we are forceful bad guys not allowing compassionate liberties (Get rid of the kid!) in these extreme cases of rape and sexual one night stand escapades.
This Lexi character will never hear or understand your reasoned position. It reminds me of what Jesus said to the incorrigibly wicked in John 8:43-44 "Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father the devil." John 3:20 "Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come to the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed."
This sodomite, or loose woman, whatver some Lexi Chick is, is fully devoted to satisfying his/her passions. Damage to others, including killing pre-born children, is an issue that is not to be allowed to get in the way.
Hey, God is calling some people out of this World's "way". He wants them to follow him on an Exodus to the promised land; to be kings and priests in the coming Government of God. Why not answer the call? The Bible is all about training a people in righteousness, to prepare them for their positions. God is righteous and he loves good deeds. Be one of his disciples (students).
Excellent Videos, word for word from the Good News Bible or NIV:
www.GospelofJohntheFilm.com (Good News Translation)
www.visualbible.com (Matthew & Acts in NIV)
I think what really bothers Ash is that it's so encouraged and you're a loser if you don't have it in highschool (forgive me if I'm wrong, Ashley.)
No. Sperm alone is not human life.
It isn't murder, murder is illegal. It's like murder, though- intentionally killing a human being.
It's not like we want to torture girls. Think of it this way. It's Christmas morning, and you've got the most beautifully wrapped present under the tree. You open it. It's your favorite book. But some of the pages are battered and torn. The letters are scratched off of the cover. There is writing in some of the pages. It turns out your the person you got it from got this book from a person you don't even know.
This is what it feels like for some people who've married to people who've had sex with other people besides them- what was rightfully supposed to be theirs was instead used by someone else, and it's not as special as it would have been if it had been just yours.
No woman should be forced to have a baby. However, when someone is pregnant, they already have a baby.
Let's go back to the Christmas scene. Let's say no one wrapped their presents so everyone got to see what everyone else got. It's not as special.
Being attractive isn't dirty.
You're going overboard. Most people don't mind form fitting clothes (I have some) but it's the mini skirts without underwear and shirts that reveal 3 or 4 inches of cleavage that really bothers people. And most guys want more modesty.
What are you saying by this?
Lexi, 1003 is a troll, ignore him.
Why is 1003 trying to sarcastically copy me?
Trolls do that, Marie.
to point out that your argument is a baseless post-hoc.
"I gotta give it to you. you all are right. no girl should ever have sex. if they do they should be married. they should only have sex with one partner (their husban). no girl or woman should have an abortion under any circumstances. if they get raped, it's not the baby's fault, now is it? they should be forced to have babies under law. and they shouldn't be able to show their body of in any way, or be attractive, because it's dirty. they should wear those things that Muslim women wear. and once they are a wife., they should act like June Cleaver. what can I say? you win. on that note, I'll be taking my leave."
You've nearly got it Lexie!
No girl should have sex before marriage because A, it is a moral issue. B, it's a health issue. When you think about it, a girl going out and sleeping with multiple boy friends, is asking for it.
They should never have an abortion, even if raped because A, It is a life they are ending. B it's a procedure that could kill them, make them infertle and/or cause life long problems.
lol, on the last point Lexie, you are 50% right. But here's the deal. When you are talking of wearing bikini's or low ride jeans, halter tops, tight shirts ect..I never would give the goahead. Think about it. You are showing yourself off and advertising "here I am! I'll do anything to look good and get attention, any kind of attention. come get me!"
If you are in a bikini, please don't be surprised when you are violated. You were begging for it.
lol, oh lexie. You can look good and be attractive in the right way, without asking a world of men to hit on you.
A burka? lol I wouldn't go quite that far. I think they take things in the extreme. But hey, better cover yourself up too much, than to expose yourself. As a young girl, you are something preciouse. Hide it, save it for the man you love. Don't throw it in the mud.
An excellent point that should be repeated often!
Welcome to the forum.
Deke, total commitment between a man and a woman is marriage. That's is what you are saying when you say "I do" (or whatever cultural method one has of stating their commitment)--you are saying "I am completely committed to you for as long as we both shall live." Now, the fact that so many people are getting divorced does not negate the binding of marriage. In one sense, when people divorce, they aren't really dissolving their marriage--they are just telling everybody that they are and pretending that their marriage doesn't exist anymore, but it does. They agreed to be husband and wife for as long as they both live, and that commitment is irreversible. There are two ways to look at it, I guess. Either people who say they are divorced are really still married, and if they have other relations (even other marriages), then they are committing adultery on the person who is still their spouse, or they were never really married in the first place since they weren't really committed to begin with. However, since saying publicly that you are totally committed to someone as your spouse is binding, really only the first option is viable for those who go through any sort of public marriage ceremony, whether formal or casual, so long as they publicly profess their marriage (i.e. - lasting commitment to one another).
You see, Deke, commitment means just that, you're committed. There is no turning back now. If you are truly totally committed to your "lady," then you are married to her, and you will never forsake her because you are "totally committed" to her. If this is not the level of commitment that you have, then you are not "totally committed" to her.
I want to say more, and I don't like leaving short, partially-developed posts, but it is very early in the morning and I need to go to bed, but I also couldn't pass up pointing this out when I saw you claim that ~"you are totally committed to your lady but you are not married" -- that is essentially an oxymoronic statement.
I plan on saying more when I have a good chance.
The most important thing is what God says about relationships between men and woman, and He says to experience sex only in marriage with the person to whom you are married. As long as you choose to ignore His Ways, you will reap the consequences in this life, and there are consequences--there are built in consequences to all forms of disobedience to God, and He may orchestrate His own special consequences as He sees fit, but He does so to teach us to forsake our own ways and to turn to Him. He always desires that people turn to Him, and He is always willing to receive those who turn from their sin and come to Him in faith in His Son, Christ Jesus, Who died to pay for our sins and rose again to conquer death and to give eternal Life to all who repent and believe wholly in Him.
God bless you, Deke, truly in Christ Jesus,
What the hell? If a girl in a bikini was raped, she was asking for it?
What the hell? If a girl in a bikini was raped, she was asking for it?
I've heard that before. It's disgusting... No girl or woman wants to be raped, whether she wears jeans and a shirt or a bikini. But even women in FULL CLOTHING get raped.
I guess every little girl that wears a swim suit at the beach and gets raped (if it ever happens), was just asking for it...
I don't know.
You sound like you are assuming I am not married to my woman because I don't want to be. That's not true. I'd love to be married to her more than anything but she doesn't want to. I'm not about to leave her over it. All I can do is hope someday she changes her mind.
Good point on one hand, I did assume that you meant that you were both totally committed to each other, yet not married.
Actually, I am in the same position, except I am not sexually involved with the woman that I am committed to and for whom I am waiting to reciprocate my commitment in marriage.
On the other hand, my last statement was the most important -- God has told us that His plan for people is that they should only experience sex inside of marriage, when both are completely committed to each other (by their binding words, and also, hopefully, by the resolve of their own hearts). I am not telling you this because I get a sick thrill out of telling somebody that they are wrong or in trying to make myself appear "holier than thou," despite how popular opinion would view the limb that I am now walking out upon with you.
The truth is, and I sincerely mean this,
I Actually Care About You, AND Your Girlfriend.
And because I sincerely care about you, I am willing to step out and say one of the most "politically incorrect" things in the world to say, that "you are doing something wrong, and it is going to hurt you."
In fact, it is hurting you both now, whether you realize it or not.
You see, the way that God created man and woman is that when they unite sexually, they become in His eyes "one flesh" with each other. The sexual union is so deep, so sacred, so special, that when a man is sexually united with a woman, it is as if they are now one flesh--one person with each other. Sexual intimacy is the deepest and most profound "natural" bond that humans can experience. In order to protect this special bond from defilement, or from excruciating separation, God ordained that this bond should only be experienced by two people who are committed to each other for as long as both shall live.
Now, you may end up marrying your girl, and if so, that is wonderful. But, even if you do, you have still had sexual intimacy with her outside of the bounds of marriage. To marry her is the only right thing to do if you wish to continue being intimate with her, and as long as she is unwilling to marry, you should refrain from being intimate with her until if and when she is and you actually are married. The problem, even if you were to abstain now and marry her later, is that you have hurt each other by having sex out of wedlock by -- one, fundamentally, you have disobeyed God, so you have been bringing one more issue in-between both of you and Him, and two, you are sinning before God against each other, so whether you realize it or not, you are creating barriers between yourselves by your wrong choices, and three, you are sowing a field for an unstable marriage because, if you were willing to have sex with each other without being married to each other, there is less assurance that you will resist having sex with someone else once you are married to each other.
I cannot over state that I am not telling you this because I enjoy telling people what I think is right or wrong.
I am telling you this because this is what God has revealed to us is right and wrong, and as long as you are disregarding God's directions for us, you will suffer from the consequences, and I do not want you to suffer needlessly.
I am also telling you because there is always hope for you if you turn your back on your sin and turn to God and ask Him to forgive you, believing that He will through Jesus Christ. Jesus died in our place on a cruel cross, though He had done nothing wrong, so that our penalty could be born by someone Who did not deserve that penalty. Because He suffered Righteously, death, the final consequence of sin, could not hold Him, but He rose from the dead as Victor over death. It is in this Reality that salvation is offered to all people who repent (confess, turn away from, and forsake) from their sin, and believe that Jesus is Lord and Savior, and that God raised Him from the dead.
This is my desire for you, Deke,
not because I have a personal, religious drive to make other people think the same way I do
(quite the contrary, it is quite against my nature to be confrontational)
but because I truly believe everything that God has revealed in His Scriptures is True, and that those who reject His Truth will truly perish.
God desires that all would repent and come to Him believing, so that they may be saved.
I desire this to.
God bless you, Deke,
In Christ Jesus.
(There is no other way to be Truly Blessed)
What the ----? If a girl in a bikini was raped, she was asking for it?
Hello, Nathan S.,
When Amber (Hereforareason) mentioned being violated, first of all, she doesn't necessarily only mean being raped--after all, a woman can be violated in the hearts and minds of the men who are looking at her, and she can also be violated by improper actions that still fall short of rape, so she may have had this largely in mind when she said this.
the phrases "you were begging for it"/"she was asking for it" do not necessarily mean that someone actually wants something to happen to them; rather, it most often means that someone is doing something that is so inviting something else to happen that they practically are "asking for it."
I think what Amber is trying to say is that when women (especially young women) dress in ways that reveal the majority of their bodies, especially the areas that (as a general rule) are most stimulating to men, she is setting herself up to be the object of bad desires by men who see her, and making it more likely that a man will act upon his bad desires and do something to violate her, whether the extreme of rape, or something far less devastating, but hurtful and "violating" nonetheless.
I hope this will clear things up a bit.
God bless you Truly in Christ Jesus.
Hmmm, now that I look back, you did say that both of you were totally committed to each other, which would mean that you are saying that your partner is totally committed to you as well, which your reply to me seems to indicate is not the case, so now I am confused as to what you are trying to say.
I am, among other things, trying to point out that if a man and a woman are truly totally committed to each other, than they are married, because that is what marriage is, total committment to one another for as long as both shall live (technically, marriage requires a public profession of said committment to be official in the public eye).
Then you said that she does not share your desire for marriage, so that would indicate that she is not totally committed to you--she wants to keep her options open.
Anyway, it is so late that I am afriad my thinking is getting too shallow at this point, so I will leave this at this and perhaps finally go to bed.
God bless you, Deke, in Jesus Christ. ^
I like to think of it this way, and this is how I present it to students:
Whatever amount of skin you are showing, you are showing it to everyone. You are showing it not only to your friends, but also to that sketchy dude sitting across from you on the train. Now, there are people out there--sketchy, violent people--who attack girls, as you know. Remember that if you have been sexually violated, that is not your fault--the blame rests solely on the perpetrator of the violent act. However, you should of course do what you can to reduce your risk of being attacked and violated.
This means: be careful where you are and with whom you are hanging out, stay in safe situations rather than, say, walking around in a bad neighborhood in the middle of the night, and wear clothing that is flattering but not provocative. Skimpy outfits are far more likely to cause someone looking at you to become sexually aroused. Rape is a violent crime, but it has a sexual aspect to it. Yes, rape is about power and control and violence--but it is also about sex. And if that sketchy guy sitting across from you on the train is seeing enough of your naked skin to become sexually aroused--and is also a violent person prone to rape--your risk of being attacked is greater than it would have been had you not created a situation in which sketchy guys around you were becoming sexually aroused at the sight of you.
In other words: if you get raped, it is the fault of the rapist--no matter what you are wearing, no matter where you are, no matter what you are doing. No one has the right to rape you, no matter what. It is not all about your outfit or your location or the time of day or whether you are alone--people are raped in every kind of outfit and in every kind of location--but there are ways you can increase or decrease the RISK of being raped. I encourage you to take seriously the potential effects of your wardrobe choices, and select outfits that make you feel good about yourself and comfortable, without unnecessarily putting you on display for every sketchy guy you happen to encounter out in the world.
Well put, Tam.
I would add that where sexual arousal is concerned, the less the better in public, or in unsecure locations (even among friends). While I can't say that extreme arousal causes men to lose all control and become "temporarily insane" (not responsible for their actions), I can say with certainty that with enough arousal, sometimes some men really just don't care whether they control themselves or not. In other words, there is a line which you don't want to "help" them to cross.
glad to see that your double standard regarding personal responsibility has survived over 6000 posts unscathed.
Just curious, 1003. If you're a Christian, why that signature?
because i'm tired of people telling ME that I'M not a christian because of a variation in my beliefs, while they go about professing to be christian and saying things like THAT.
And do you think that's what they get from your signature. It just sounds like you're bashing Christianity by presenting a quote out of context. You make all Christians look bad, including yourself. You're cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Besides, anyone can go to other threads and see how in your kind of Christianity you don't stop rape because the person might want it to happen. True compassion.
my quote is not out of context. i'm sure she meant it exactly as she typed it. i'm glad that you asked why i use it, and i'd hope that if others thought it seemed odd, that they would ask me instead of thinking it makes all christians look bad. because it doesn't. just the false ones.
We know why you use it. You're trying to irritate everyone on the board, and this is your current way of doing that.
What, may I sincerely ask, is your conception of a "true" Christian?
And please don't answer with something like "myself." Will you please take the time and effort to piece together what you believe is the essence of true Christianity, and articulate it to us in terms that cannot be easily misunderstood? Please?
God bless you in Christ Jesus, 1003.
I don't know where this is all going yet, but I have hope.
I love you.
Sorry for being a no-show for the past week.
I will try to be more regular.
Sorry if I ran you off.
I certainly didn't mean to.
This is all still open to discussion if you have anything more to say or ask -- or even to complain about, if it is at least legitimate.
I hope you are doing okay, and your girlfriend too.
I only want the best for you both.
I hope and pray that God blesses you both truly in His Son, the Lord Jesus.
Don't worry about that. Come whenever you have time -- your posts always leave us with enough to think about until you return.
true christian? christ-like. and he gave us two big commandments: love god, and love your neigbors. it's not that tough. saying "boo freaking hoo," is distinctly NOT loving your neighbor.
Love your neighbor, just not the guy in your womb, huh? The thing is, 1003, the command to love your neighbor means that we are all interconnected. A woman cannot sever the connect between herself and her unborn child. If she could, we could, as a society, sever all the connections between us and choose never to love our neighbors. The unborn are our neighbors. Furthermoe, let's look at how the Bible defines love 1Co 13.4-7 and how they apply to abortion
Love is patient, wait out the n ine months of pregnancy
love is kind, nice enough to not rip you to shreds
love does not envy, a smoother waisteline, a lack of parental responsibility, the money you'd have if you weren't expecting a child, a career opportunity ou'd have if you weren't expecting
(love does) not boast, of being more human because you're further developed
(love is) not proud, of being older bigger or stronger
(love is) not disgraceful, it doesn't disgrace God's creation through painful death
(love does) not desire its own (way), sacrifices it's own wants for the baby's life
(love is) not provoked, to kill the baby out of spite for the father(love does) not reckon the wrong, it doens't consider mutilating to death a child(love does) not rejoice at unrighteousness it doesn't celebrate a woman's choice to murder
but (love) rejoices with the truth: that from the moment sperm hits an egg a human life worthy of human rights is made
(love) bears all things, like children
(love) believes all things, that God has plans for those in crisis pregnancies, rape victims, abusive situations, poverty, and all those involved in adoption(love) hopes all things, (that the baby has a brighter future than dying in the womb)
(love) endures all things (morning sickness, struggle, labor)
There is now way that one who loves his neighbor, as the Bible defines love, can be prochoice.
Bingo. How anyone can miss that is astonishing.
It's what is called a "convenient oversight", Tam.
Yeah, wilful ignorance.
Thank you, Shiprah,
This was gold!
Praise the Lord! I am glad He gave this to you for us! ( )
God bless you in the Lord Jesus,
Don't worry about that. Come whenever you have time -- your posts always leave us with enough to think about until you return.
Thanks, Shiprah, but actually I was specifically appologizing to 1003--I had told him (her?) in another post that I was here for him to talk to privately or through the forum if he wanted to or needed to, but then I didn't drop by for a week straight.
I am sorry, 1003.
Will you please forgive me?
God bless you in the Lord Jesus, 1003.
I know there is hope for you.
In Christ's Love,
Thank you, Shiprah,
This was gold!
Praise the Lord! I am glad He gave this to you for us! ( )
God bless you in the Lord Jesus,
Thanks, Nathan. Coming from you that really means a lot. And you're right, God does inspire defenses of life. He's the one who said not to be anxious about your words when you have to speak on something, but to wait for His inspiration.
I appreciate your compliments and encouragment, as well, Shiprah.
Just let us always remember to give praise to God for all that He does through us, His servants. Without Jesus, we can do nothing.
Praise the Lord!
God bless, Shiprah.
Grace and Peace.
Nobody is perfect, 1003. I am not for sure exactly what Ahsley meant by what she said, since contraception failure in and of itself is not always the person's fault who is using it, but I think she is trying to say that people who aren't prepared to carry a potential pregnancy to term and support or give up for adoption the child once it is born should "be more careful" by not having sex in the first place. I could be wrong, but I think that this may be her primary meaning. It is not un-Christian to say that people shouldn't engage in irresponsible, sinful behavior. Ashley could have said it more nicely, but she was upset by your entrenched promotion of killing innocent children, and so she wrote based on how she felt. I for one am sorry if her statement truly offended you.
However, Jesus didn't just say "love God and love your neighbor" and leave it at that. He taught people a lot through parables and other lessons about how to live out loving God and loving our neighbor. A big example is the parable about the good Samaritan, in which Jesus showed us what loving our neighbor really looked like. I am asking you to please explain for me what your conception of true Christianity is: how do we Love God and Love our neighbor as ourself the way that God wants? Also, do we become Christians by Loving God and our neighbor, or is this something we do once we have become a Christian? If the latter, than how do we become a Christian? I am asking you to please explain your beliefs.
and God bless you in Christ Jesus, 1003.