Exactly!
It's only sexually repressed bible barfers who claim God is against porn.
Fuck 'em.
-
Hey, guys! FreeOnes Tube is up and running - see for yourself!
-
FreeOnes Now Listing Male and Trans Performers! More info here!
is porn against God?
- Thread starter Jason z
- Start date
Exactly!
It's only sexually repressed bible barfers who claim God is against porn.
Fuck 'em.
Or maybe the better question would be "is porn against most religions teachings"?
The answer to that would be undoubtly yes it is.
The answer to that would be undoubtly yes it is.
dick van cock
Closed Account
No need to worry as long as you're Catholic. Watch porn, wiggle the bean .... doesn't matter! Make sure to go to your local church the following day, chew a wafer and confess your sins... Everything will be alright! :thumbsup:
In case, you're Protestant... :crash: Bad luck! At least you won't freeze in hell.
In case, you're Protestant... :crash: Bad luck! At least you won't freeze in hell.
Do you not realize you just made my point? Religion isn't a being. It and the Bible don't "do" anything. People do. My point was that people bash religions like Christianity based on what a few nuts or a few people in power did. It's the people that do things, not the religion. Religion didn't seem to suppress the Romans who were deeply religious and had the world's greatest empire. If you're going to discuss how religion was forced on people, maybe you should consider those who threw off that power. The Protestant Reformers (i.e. a Christian movement c.1517) helped bring about this freedom that much of the western world has. They were the first major step in the separation of church and state. It was about choice...choice to worship "God" in whatever way one wanted to. They told the priests that the common man should have a copy of the Bible and could think for themselves about what it meant (called the “priesthood of all believers”). Before the 1500s, only those in the hierarchy of the church had a copy of a Bible (Do you realize that magnitude of that). Mass was in Latin and most didn’t even know it. The Protestant Reformers changed all that. It was this freedom of religion that they spread that led many out of Europe to the New World. Many religious people wanted freedom. So the western world was oppressed by religion but was also helped by those who wanted religious freedom. The Enlightenment never would have happened without first the Protestant Reformation. "Protestant" comes from a Latin document called the "Protestatio." They protested those who were improperly using religious power, yet they themselves were religious. So it's not the religion, it's the people that need to be judged good or bad.
The vast majority (this doesn't mean you should reply with the three things you disagree with) of the "morals" of Christianity are morals you would subscribe to. So why are you calling them arbitrary? Let's look at a few: don't murder anyone, don't steal from anyone, treat others as you want to be treated, don't falsely testify against someone, etc. Religious teachers, like philosophers, have a set of beliefs that they think are the truth. They teach this truth...so of course, if it is the truth, it should apply to you and I. Consider this: let's say your mom is a Christian. She believes you must believe in who Jesus is and what he did. She believes if you don't do that, then you'll burn in hell forever. Okay, so what is she supposed to do at this point? Her only option IS to try to convince you. If she really believes that, then of course she is going to try to change your way of thinking and take on hers. It's not a selfish "force my religion on you" mentality. It's a caring mentality. People have to really consider someone's point and get in their head before making a judgment about what they do/did. Because they think they’re right doesn’t excuse all behavior, to be sure. The 9/11 hijackers believed what they were doing was right, but they aren’t excused because they didn’t do their act out of caring for those people. They did it out of hate.
Finally, the reason for the lack of development over the middle ages cannot properly be attributed to Christianity. It was the fall of the Roman Empire that led to the dark ages. Monks were actually the ones who helped keep learning alive! They copied and maintained the manuscripts of the ancient world.
Ah yes, what a shocker. Hence why I included the last paragraph. It's the people who does it, not a bad point in all. Now here's the real question: if it's the people who does the bad stuff, why is it God that does the good stuff? See, a religion cannot claim that they are great because their god is oh so nice, it's just the people who was bad. Well, they can, but it'd be meaningless. See, I can just as well say that God was responsible for all the bad stuff and that people were responsible for the good. Or that people were responsible for both (which tends to be my belief). Unless you have any fantastic new evidence to prove how that works that I haven't heard of, I don't think you'll get far there. All centralized power structures are eventually abused, or at least, such tends to be the case.
Their religion, as most polytheistic religions, was not based on conversion, it was based on absorption. The Roman pantheon is a complete mess due to the origin of the gods in it. Foreign gods were "translated" or created if necessary. Monotheistic religions are not so forgiving. The implementation of divine law was also entirely different, and regardless, I do believe warfare was explicitly excluded in my post.
So your point is that the church eventually somewhat helped get rid of some of the bad stuff that it itself had put into place?
Oh please. You really think those are Christian morals? Let's, for a moment, assume that the church has actually followed their own code of law. Do you really, somehow, believe that these rules or others like it did not exist far before Christianity did? There is no chance in hell that a civilization would ever reach a point where something like Christianity could develop without a code of law. A society cannot function without it. Christianity, at best, updated the laws a bit (and then mostly ignored them, it seems).
But it doesn't exactly stop there, does it. Stem cell research, porn, whatever. You name it, there's a religion group that's against it. Hell, look at that nut at Westboro Baptist Church, he's against pretty much everything. They base their entire argumentation on the assumption that God is against it. They base it, at best, on vague messages in a text 2000+ years old which may as well have been fiction when it was written. That is arbitrary.
Oh please. If you know of any philosopher who burned people who didn't believe him or followed his belief to the letter at the stake, let me know. Then we can talk.
Yes of course. And if I refuse, she can throw me off a cliff so I can fall to a nice, Christian death. How lucky I am to have such a caring mother, eh? Or is this where you blame all evil on man and completely absolve religion again?
Says who? Oh right, you. Let me rephrase: says who, who didn't just make a completely subjective statement that could just as well be applied to his previous argument about caring. What's to say that we should care for others? I can invent a religion right now that says you should kill anyone wearing red shirts (slight Star Trek reference there). Why would that be wrong? Because it doesn't fit your belief?
The monks did help a lot. Surprisingly, they were actually allowed to do it. However, it was not the fall of the Roman empire that banned science, or anything that did not go well with the current official stance of the church.
if God didn't want me to look at naked women, he wouldn't have made so many women that look great naked.
You're "assuming" that religion was created with the sole purpose of praise to some deity, when in fact religion has always been about power and control over society.
As a reformed wasp I must agree I might just need shorts where I'm headed as the minister DVC can righteously see!:bowdown::thefinger::bowdown:
If God didn't want me to look at naked women, he would have made woman with a fur coat like the other mammal animals.
Then you didn't understand the meaning of the phrase ...
"Do not covet they neighbor's wife"
There are also many expansions on that very concept in various books of the Bible. The idea is not to covet what you do not have. How far that goes is dependent on how you are lusting during your masterbation.
It really all depends on the values in question.
Then you didn't understand the meaning of the phrase ...No I don't think so - it never made me break any of the 10 comandments.I don't think masterbating was in any of them
"Do not covet they neighbor's wife"
There are also many expansions on that very concept in various books of the Bible. The idea is not to covet what you do not have. How far that goes is dependent on how you are lusting during your masterbation.
It really all depends on the values in question.
Correct! And who the fuck created evil if god created everything?
People try to make porn complex ...
People try to make porn complex. It's really simple.
If it keeps you from living a normal life, it's harmful.
If those you value do not want you doing it, it's harmful.
If it changes how you view men and women, it's harmful.
The problem has never been porn.
The problem has always been people.
People try to make porn complex. It's really simple.
If it keeps you from living a normal life, it's harmful.
If those you value do not want you doing it, it's harmful.
If it changes how you view men and women, it's harmful.
The problem has never been porn.
The problem has always been people.
