You said you don’t prefer sluts and you don’t prefer virgins.
Well you’re a Sinner, that much I can see.
If you honestly had sex with two virgins, then you ought to have at least two children by now. Since you don’t, I can only presume that you’re impotent. Are you shooting blanks?
Sorry, but sex for pleasure is Sin. You know this. Everybody knows this by now. Everybody should, ought to know this by now.
Sex for pleasure, hedonism, is a Crime against God. God didn’t bless you with a penis just to not use it, MIAC. He gave you a dick to use.
Pardon my blunt words here.
Wow, you have a lot of sex which do not result in pregnancies, for a proclaimed “heterosexual”. You should attend to a doctor to see about your sperm count and potency. We have drugs and medical procedures which may help your potency issues.
Males are born non-virgins.
Chastity only applies to vaginas. If a girl does not protect her virtue, then she may become a slut in the eyes of the Lord.
Jeez trajic, I have been with my husband for 27 years he is my dearest friend and I his, niether of us were virgins. We are not christians, we are considered Athiests. Marriage is two souls wanting to live together to create a family. Gods have nothing to do with loving your mate/s. Your ideals may suit you but they don’t have to suit others. Get a grip on reality. consider how many people are out there , of course there is divorce, far too many personalities, you may find one that is close to suiting you but not quite. We all want to live with that person that suits us best. Why settle? We are humans not animals we get to pick our mates mentally not physically.
I’m a Catholic, a true Christian. Contraceptives are for hedonists and decadents, for animals.
Like horses, pigs, cows, farm animals, you know? Livestock. Animals are sterilized. Humans have become domesticated to sterilize themselves though. Isn’t it amazing?
Come say that to my face.
I’m more serious about Marriage, Faith, Convictions, than 1000 of your relatives put together. I have more spirituality in my fingernail than throughout your entire body. You have no soul, faith hating atheistic scientologist. Go pray to your Science God, TPN.
Marriage is for Nobility and Royalty, not for peasants like you. Now go to get married by your local Gay priest and call yourself “Principled” immediately afterward.
Morality is for…everyone?? No, it actually is for just a select few. Very few, or almost none, can live up to Morality. Ideals are difficult to realize, for this reason.
But Catholic, so you believe in transubstantiation, the resulting cannibalism, worship a Trinity (so are therefore polytheistic), take the bible as incontrovertible fact (as opposed to allegory) and all that jazz?
I interpret Trinity as: Man (Jesus derived from God), Woman (Eden derived from Nature), and Human (Lilith derived from Satan). Now Lilith is the shape-shifter who changes her forms. She’s a doppleganger and has convinced everybody of her poisonous “Humanism” lies. She has grown very powerful. Now womankind, Eden, has lost her power. Eden is almost dead, and Mankind, Jesus must rescue Eden from Lilith. Otherwise Lilith will eat Eden.
Transubstantiation exists because the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, our Lord thy God, is nigh at hand.
I wouldn’t call eating Jesus flesh “body, the token bread waffer” and drinking his blood “wine” as Cannibalism. This is a figurative aspect of Catholicism.
As far as the Bible. It ought to become interpreted as literal first and foremost, as fact.
Science is the real Fiction. You faith hating atheistic scientologists are my #1 enemy as far as this goes. Your fictions are more dangerous than ours. You actually believe your bullshit. Religioners are the one’s with truly tested Faith. You have a weak faith. That’s why your science fiction is weak, too.
Scientists don’t know the difference between “fact” and “fiction”. This is why scientists are much more dangerous than any theologian or religious disciple or follower.
As I have pointed out to you in another thread, the second coming was predicated on the event occurring during his apostle’s lifetimes. That being the case, the fact that he did not return during their lives undermines your proclamation.
It is a literal aspect of Catholicism. That is what the doctrine of transubstantiation is; somewhere during the voyage from the silver/gold bowl and goblet respectively, the holy Eucharist literally transforms into the body and blood of your Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, in or about your mouth. This was, incidentally, about where I first felt like vomiting while reading Descartes.
Which one? The Old Testament procured from Judaism or the ersatz, mutatis mutandis, of the New Testament? Maybe the Apocrypha that essentially undermines Catholicism?
Lumpen invectives and puerile prevarications[1] aside, does this imply that you do not believe your “bullshit”, or have you simply fumbled your syntax?
[1] What, in your mind, constitutes a Scientologist?
Once again, you must be jesting. I can only assume you are trolling; if you are candid, I will forego any further comment on your ineffable errs.
Isn’t it about time that the second part of thIs thread be moved to religion?
Monogamy is the preferential life-style for a lot of people, both gay and straight. Because I don’t agree with non-monogamous relationships doesn’t mean I’ll stand in judgement against them. But I do feel that people who pursue non-monogamous relationships either don’t know themselves well enough, don’t trust themselves well enough, and/or don’t see a person beyond her/his public persona well enough to look for anything else. That saddens me.
Monogamy isn’t the ‘chain that binds’–If anything, to me, it’s a release–but it can be hard work. Anything that involves more than one, involves work.
Then I am honored for the one that married us and the ones that witnessed it were loving caring people. That is far superior to what you propose a marriage should be. Ours carries honor love and true togetherness while yours is only concerned with capitalism, greed and ownership. That is sad.
I find it very awkward to make sense of what you are saying here, as it seems contradictory in parts, but meh. I will I think leave you to it. Live it in peace and humility is all I ask, something I think that should resonate at least. At least unlike HtH most of what you say makes some sort of sense, and you clearly have thought about it quite profoundly. So I find I am not at odds with you.
I will say this though
No one except Christ is without sin, I think it could be argued that he meant the crowd to look upon themselves and realise they were not apt to judge.
“Judge not lest ye be judged.”
Would seem to confirm this. We may judge but bearing grudges against people without first acknowledging your own sins is hypocritical.
Hence:
Quite apart from you assuming that I don’t have the moral foundation to judge, which is true. This also makes your judging doubtful, why do you presume to have the moral authority just because you are a Christian. Judgement about who is true to his faith and not rests with God. I don’t think wishing death on people is a very Christian virtue, I didn’t say however that you yourself should be condemned for it just that it seemed inappropriate in the context of Christianity.
My own thoughts, I suppose, anon–and my experiences with people around me–and, by non-monogamous relationships, I mean, going from one relationship to another rather than having more than one intimate relationship at the same time. That’s a kind of serial monogamy, with or without marriage. Having more than one intimate relationship at the same time is a psychological thing I don’t think I’m qualified enough to talk about.
If a person goes through serial monogamy, breaking one affair off, then starting another, couldn’t that indicate not being able to decide what it is you want in a relationship? I may be naive, but I think it does. If you know yourself, you should know what you want. But a lot of people don’t know what is really basic in/to themselves. Or they think they know, but change their minds after a while. People who don’t trust themselves may know what they want, but they have a niggling fear that maybe they don’t know themselves or maybe they don’t really know their partners well enough take on anything other than a temporary commitment. The last part of my statement is a toughie–I might only have written it because I like things to come in threes. Sometimes these people are in love with the thought of being in love and of being ‘loved’ by someone else. They can’t see beyond that–and they project it into not only their own public persona; but, also, into their partner’s persona. I was like that when the first man who appeared serious (in that he asked me to marry him) said he wanted to marry me. This was on our first date! We didn’t have an intimate relationship–in any way–including talking about what was important to our ‘selfness.’ We never shared each other. And yet, that kind of sharing was and is basic to me.
That ‘sharing of selfness’ is the basis of monogamy, imm. It’s what “marries” a couple.
