Okay, so here's a little of the relevant back story:
There's this teacher who would make it clear to those both interested and totally not interest that he was a Christian. In class, besides the usual ignorant rambling about Christmas and Jesus (he had no idea about where the holiday came from, and actually thought that it was Jesus' actual historical birthday) he would mention that Christmas is all about respecting Jesus and that he felt that Jesus wasn't respected enough by society during that time.
Okay... ::)
Turns out this guy, when a scandal breaks out, was pretty into some illegal porn, and of obvious questionable morality.
So, the question here is, how do these people tick? ??? How can they believe in an omniscient god, who both knows what they're doing and continue to choose to keep doing it time and again? What's odd to me is, they believe that their immortal soul is in the balance, is it worth that to them? How are they mentally juggling these two completely incompatible ideas and actions? How do they justify it to themselves? That an omniscient and omnipresent god doesn't know or isn't looking?! ???
Of course, I'd like to add that legality and questionable ethics and morality aside, it says in their holy scripture that even looking at porn is equal to adultery and is a sin.
So with all this against them, in their reality, what's mentally going on here? ??? I'm intrigued.
In my opinion, only a particularly confused and arrogant Christian will try to claim that being Christian makes them in some way morally superior to non-Christians. I know there's a lot of that sort of rhetoric to be heard, but that doesn't mean that those who spout it aren't confused and arrogant. Put simply, Jesus Saves (Christian bumper sticker: "Not Perfect, Just Saved"). That is, Christians who are not (or are less) confused and arrogant will freely admit that they are no better morally than anybody else. What they do have that non-Christians don't is the chance to ask Jesus for forgiveness.
I won't pretend to know what goes on in this person's mind. I would hypothesize though that he believes that his god sees all, but is a god who will forgive all, as well.
Quote from: Recusant on May 28, 2012, 03:12:49 AM
In my opinion, only a particularly confused and arrogant Christian will try to claim that being Christian makes them in some way morally superior to non-Christians. I know there's a lot of that sort of rhetoric to be heard, but that doesn't mean that those who spout it aren't confused and arrogant. Put simply, Jesus Saves (Christian bumper sticker: "Not Perfect, Just Saved"). That is, Christians who are not (or are less) confused and arrogant will freely admit that they are no better morally than anybody else. What they do have that non-Christians don't is the chance to ask Jesus for forgiveness.
I won't pretend to know what goes on in this person's mind. I would hypothesize though that he believes that his god sees all, but is a god who will forgive all, as well.
You've made some good points, especially about the forgiveness thing. I also don't know enough about what he thinks or what exactly he believes in, so that sort of information is lacking.
I know some who are way too quick to find a scapegoat to blame for their choices though, like the devil or evil demons. Another point that irks me, free will only exists in
some situations, ones that are unfavourable to some believers cause them to quickly toss aside the idea that they have god-given free will. Really convenient...
Quote from: Recusant on May 28, 2012, 03:12:49 AM
In my opinion, only a particularly confused and arrogant Christian will try to claim that being Christian makes them in some way morally superior to non-Christians. I know there's a lot of that sort of rhetoric to be heard, but that doesn't mean that those who spout it aren't confused and arrogant. Put simply, Jesus Saves (Christian bumper sticker: "Not Perfect, Just Saved"). That is, Christians who are not (or are less) confused and arrogant will freely admit that they are no better morally than anybody else. What they do have that non-Christians don't is the chance to ask Jesus for forgiveness.
I won't pretend to know what goes on in this person's mind. I would hypothesize though that he believes that his god sees all, but is a god who will forgive all, as well.
This is a pretty good explanation. There are confused and arrogant Christians who feel themselves morally superior, until they get caught. From the Christian perspective, we all have the same disease. Some have been administered the proper medication, some have not.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on May 28, 2012, 03:53:53 AM
Quote from: Recusant on May 28, 2012, 03:12:49 AM
In my opinion, only a particularly confused and arrogant Christian will try to claim that being Christian makes them in some way morally superior to non-Christians. I know there's a lot of that sort of rhetoric to be heard, but that doesn't mean that those who spout it aren't confused and arrogant. Put simply, Jesus Saves (Christian bumper sticker: "Not Perfect, Just Saved"). That is, Christians who are not (or are less) confused and arrogant will freely admit that they are no better morally than anybody else. What they do have that non-Christians don't is the chance to ask Jesus for forgiveness.
I won't pretend to know what goes on in this person's mind. I would hypothesize though that he believes that his god sees all, but is a god who will forgive all, as well.
This is a pretty good explanation. There are confused and arrogant Christians who feel themselves morally superior, until they get caught. From the Christian perspective, we all have the same disease. Some have been administered the proper medication, some have not.
Your input is appreciated, Bruce.
What's really baffling me is exactly this: "There are confused and arrogant Christians who feel themselves morally superior,
until they get caught."
Especially in the context of belief in an all knowing god. The guy from the example doesn't want to get caught (I know that much for sure), yet continued to do it, which would indicate that he knew that he shouldn't but still did.
It's a completely different scenario from someone who does wrong things but genuinely doesn't know it when it comes to assigning responisibility and accountability.
I think it boils down to a couple of points: A) According to the Christian faith, we are ALL sinners no matter how morally we try to act and B) the ONLY source of morality is God.
Soooo, if we're all sinners anyway, it's really easy to rationalize why some abhorrent things are okay, so long as you believe. It's an all or nothing game. Sin is sin. I don't even think it's that much of a stretch to say that the Christian faith doesn't dictate that you even have to feel all that sorry for your sins - you just have to believe that Jesus died to absolve you of them. I mean, if we're all sinners anyway, what's the point in trying to do the impossible (and not be a sinner?) It has some pretty scary implications, if you think about it.
Now, of course, most Christians don't act this way, but the doctrine certainly leaves enough loop-holes for some real creepos to think they can justify their actions.
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on May 28, 2012, 04:05:25 AM
What's really baffling me is exactly this: "There are confused and arrogant Christians who feel themselves morally superior, until they get caught."
Especially in the context of belief in an all knowing god. The guy from the example doesn't want to get caught (I know that much for sure), yet continued to do it, which would indicate that he knew that he shouldn't but still did.
It's a completely different scenario from someone who does wrong things but genuinely doesn't know it when it comes to assigning responisibility and accountability.
I will assume the person in your scenario both knew that what he was doing was wrong (from his perspective) and knew that God knew what he was doing (again, from his perspective). But since we all have the same disease, perhaps its manifestation in this person was simply too strong for him to resist. Furthermore, as has been pointed out by DJ, the idea that one can be forgiven for anything does give some license. It's easier to get forgiveness than permission.
For some Christians, the allure of forbidden fruit is much like Odysseus and the Sirens. He wanted to hear their voice, but had himself strapped to the mast so that he wouldn't jump overboard and die. Some want to get as close to the fruit as possible without actually tasting it, but they go over the line and pay the consequences.
On the other hand, there is an alternative interpretation of Christianity in which all law is removed, and thus there is no temptation to violate it. It's difficult to get into this mental state - I've never been very successful at it. The foundation for this idea is found in Romans 14, where Paul says that essentially nothing is impure unless the person thinks it is impure. If one could truly reach that state, there would be no law and total freedom. For me, that remains a hypothetical concept. I waffle back and forth between law and grace.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on May 28, 2012, 05:05:24 AM
On the other hand, there is an alternative interpretation of Christianity in which all law is removed, and thus there is no temptation to violate it. It's difficult to get into this mental state - I've never been very successful at it. The foundation for this idea is found in Romans 14, where Paul says that essentially nothing is impure unless the person thinks it is impure. If one could truly reach that state, there would be no law and total freedom. For me, that remains a hypothetical concept. I waffle back and forth between law and grace.
This sounds like atheism. No moral law (well accept for constraints of a subjective morality that some have invented for themselves), but obviously an atheist needs to be cognisant of legal law, and social consequences.
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on May 28, 2012, 02:03:10 AM
So, the question here is, how do these people tick? ??? How can they believe in an omniscient god, who both knows what they're doing and continue to choose to keep doing it time and again? What's odd to me is, they believe that their immortal soul is in the balance, is it worth that to them? How are they mentally juggling these two completely incompatible ideas and actions? How do they justify it to themselves? That an omniscient and omnipresent god doesn't know or isn't looking?! ???
I couldn't begin to tell you -- this is one of those things that always confused me and helped to eventually separate me from religion. I was also told the "not perfect, just forgiven" business but c'mon, time after time after time? That makes god sound like an idiot and conflicts with all the times he's supposed
not to forgive, and it certainly didn't help that both the forgiveness and lack of forgiveness were suspiciously convenient for the believer telling the story.
I don't think "god will forgive me" is the reason at all. I think it's the byproduct of a more basic explanation. When we are alone, we feel alone. I believe that even if he asked his god for forgiveness before he committed the acts, the reason he followed through with it is because his body didn't see people and his brain felt alone. At the subconscious level, our brains can't fight our eyes.
Perhaps, we're looking at this the wrong way around. Maybe it's his own guilt for his irresistible urges that fires his Christian fervence. He's not a 'sinner' despite his Christianity, he's a Christian because of his 'sin'.
Just a thought...
Pornography is huge business on the internet, and the no doubt the viewing stats in the US reflects this phenomenon. As there seems to be relatively few atheists in the US, this implies the vast majority of pornography users there are theists of one description or another. Human beings and not just theists are of course masters of neutralising cognitive dissonance and self- justification so thre is nothing remarkable or even surprising in this.
True, En_Route. Christians seem to be particularly inclined to build sharp dividing-lines in their heads, separating the bad stuff they do in real life from the theoretical world of their faith. They compartmentalise their heads. Of course Christians aren't alone in this, but I've seen it a lot with them.
How else could a priest abuse little boys, year after year, and at the same time perform his spiritual functions?
Even as we speak, somewhere near you, a devout theist is placing his immortal soul in jeopardy by masturbating furiously in front of a computer screen.
Quote from: En_Route on May 28, 2012, 12:34:11 PM
Even as we speak, somewhere near you, a devout theist is placing his immortal soul in jeopardy by masturbating furiously in front of a computer screen.
But that's the thing. Under Reformation Christianity (Protestantism) the believer is saved by faith alone. A sin here and there doesn't affect that. It may have its temporal consequences, but the believer's relationship with God is secure. Your post may, however, reflect more of a Catholic theology. But even they just have to go the priest, confess, and say 10 Hail Mary's and 5 Our Fathers, or something.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on May 28, 2012, 01:17:09 PM
Quote from: En_Route on May 28, 2012, 12:34:11 PM
Even as we speak, somewhere near you, a devout theist is placing his immortal soul in jeopardy by masturbating furiously in front of a computer screen.
But that's the thing. Under Reformation Christianity (Protestantism) the believer is saved by faith alone. A sin here and there doesn't affect that. It may have its temporal consequences, but the believer's relationship with God is secure. Your post may, however, reflect more of a Catholic theology. But even they just have to go the priest, confess, and say 10 Hail Mary's and 5 Our Fathers, or something.
Very astute. I was brought up a Catholic though cancelled my subscription at age 14.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on May 28, 2012, 09:50:07 AM
Perhaps, we're looking at this the wrong way around. Maybe it's his own guilt for his irresistible urges that fires his Christian fervence. He's not a 'sinner' despite his Christianity, he's a Christian because of his 'sin'.
Just a thought...
Could be, though based on what I know about him, his illegal actions happened more recently than his religion. Don't really want to know what sort of things he was into
before this whole scandal breaks out.
God does seem more and more like that little place you go to in your head when you want to wipe your conscience clean...
Quote from: En_Route on May 28, 2012, 11:01:51 AM
Pornography is huge business on the internet, and the no doubt the viewing stats in the US reflects this phenomenon. As there seems to be relatively few atheists in the US, this implies the vast majority of pornography users there are theists of one description or another. Human beings and not just theists are of course masters of neutralising cognitive dissonance and self- justification so thre is nothing remarkable or even surprising in this.
I don't doubt it, but I'm not talking about pornography in general. This guy was into illegal pornography, and even part of a distribution ring (though not making money out of it, it seems).
It takes it one step further into the extreme, IMO. There are no laws against watching pornography, I don't even think it's inherently wrong, but the ethical and moral implications in his case are just astounding. Not exactly a simple case of knowing but univolved bystander...
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on May 28, 2012, 07:32:54 AM
I couldn't begin to tell you -- this is one of those things that always confused me and helped to eventually separate me from religion. I was also told the "not perfect, just forgiven" business but c'mon, time after time after time? That makes god sound like an idiot and conflicts with all the times he's supposed not to forgive, and it certainly didn't help that both the forgiveness and lack of forgiveness were suspiciously convenient for the believer telling the story.
Right :D I mean, how many recurring mistakes of the same kind can a person have before their god gets a little annoyed and sees that he's being played for the fool?
I'd like to throw the over-used free will argument that some religious people like right back at them in this case.
Quote from: Genericguy on May 28, 2012, 09:28:19 AM
I don't think "god will forgive me" is the reason at all. I think it's the byproduct of a more basic explanation. When we are alone, we feel alone. I believe that even if he asked his god for forgiveness before he committed the acts, the reason he followed through with it is because his body didn't see people and his brain felt alone. At the subconscious level, our brains can't fight our eyes.
The way I see it, he can believe all he wants, but we'll see if he's able to squirm his way out of this one (as you can probably tell, I really don't like the guy and think that everything that's going to happen to him is totally justified). If god forgave him, then he might have some positive results and be able to escape accountability, wouldn't he (at least until the after-life, perhaps)? ::)
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on May 28, 2012, 05:05:24 AM
I will assume the person in your scenario both knew that what he was doing was wrong (from his perspective) and knew that God knew what he was doing (again, from his perspective). But since we all have the same disease, perhaps its manifestation in this person was simply too strong for him to resist. Furthermore, as has been pointed out by DJ, the idea that one can be forgiven for anything does give some license. It's easier to get forgiveness than permission.
For some Christians, the allure of forbidden fruit is much like Odysseus and the Sirens. He wanted to hear their voice, but had himself strapped to the mast so that he wouldn't jump overboard and die. Some want to get as close to the fruit as possible without actually tasting it, but they go over the line and pay the consequences.
On the other hand, there is an alternative interpretation of Christianity in which all law is removed, and thus there is no temptation to violate it. It's difficult to get into this mental state - I've never been very successful at it. The foundation for this idea is found in Romans 14, where Paul says that essentially nothing is impure unless the person thinks it is impure. If one could truly reach that state, there would be no law and total freedom. For me, that remains a hypothetical concept. I waffle back and forth between law and grace.
"The foundation for this idea is found in Romans 14, where Paul says that essentially nothing is impure unless the person thinks it is impure."
I don't mean to derail my own thread, but that's the definition of subjective morality. Of course, even atheists who have no problem saying that their morality is subjective will have a hard time getting into the mental state where anything goes - it's just not how neurologically normal people who were brought up in a culture of morality operate.
So...to get it back on track, how can a person juggle an idea of both absolute objective morality and subjective morality?
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on May 28, 2012, 02:37:35 PM
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on May 28, 2012, 05:05:24 AM
I will assume the person in your scenario both knew that what he was doing was wrong (from his perspective) and knew that God knew what he was doing (again, from his perspective). But since we all have the same disease, perhaps its manifestation in this person was simply too strong for him to resist. Furthermore, as has been pointed out by DJ, the idea that one can be forgiven for anything does give some license. It's easier to get forgiveness than permission.
For some Christians, the allure of forbidden fruit is much like Odysseus and the Sirens. He wanted to hear their voice, but had himself strapped to the mast so that he wouldn't jump overboard and die. Some want to get as close to the fruit as possible without actually tasting it, but they go over the line and pay the consequences.
On the other hand, there is an alternative interpretation of Christianity in which all law is removed, and thus there is no temptation to violate it. It's difficult to get into this mental state - I've never been very successful at it. The foundation for this idea is found in Romans 14, where Paul says that essentially nothing is impure unless the person thinks it is impure. If one could truly reach that state, there would be no law and total freedom. For me, that remains a hypothetical concept. I waffle back and forth between law and grace.
"The foundation for this idea is found in Romans 14, where Paul says that essentially nothing is impure unless the person thinks it is impure."
I don't mean to derail my own thread, but that's the definition of subjective morality. Of course, even atheists who have no problem saying that their morality is subjective will have a hard time getting into the mental state where anything goes - it's just not how neurologically normal people who were brought up in a culture of morality operate.
So...to get it back on track, how can a person juggle an idea of both absolute objective morality and subjective morality?
I don't think Pauline theology is interpreted as sanctioning subjective morality in orthodox Christian thinking. There are absolute morals, based on the teachings in the Bible (good luck if you can work out what they are) but within this context if you do something that is objectively ok but which you or a sub-set of your co- religionists subjectively hold to be wrong then you have committed a sin. Incidentally, I don't lay claim to any moral beliefs whatsoever and live quite comfortably without them.
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on May 28, 2012, 02:25:42 PM
Quote from: En_Route on May 28, 2012, 11:01:51 AM
Pornography is huge business on the internet, and the no doubt the viewing stats in the US reflects this phenomenon. As there seems to be relatively few atheists in the US, this implies the vast majority of pornography users there are theists of one description or another. Human beings and not just theists are of course masters of neutralising cognitive dissonance and self- justification so thre is nothing remarkable or even surprising in this.
I don't doubt it, but I'm not talking about pornography in general. This guy was into illegal pornography, and even part of a distribution ring (though not making money out of it, it seems).
It takes it one step further into the extreme, IMO. There are no laws against watching pornography, I don't even think it's inherently wrong, but the ethical and moral implications in his case are just astounding. Not exactly a simple case of knowing but univolved bystander...
The consumption of pornography, legal or illegal, is certainly a sin in Catholic theology so the issue of legality is probably not pivotal here to the double- think involved. Of course illegal stuff improbably requires a little extra effort in rationalisation.
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on May 28, 2012, 02:37:35 PM
So...to get it back on track, how can a person juggle an idea of both absolute objective morality and subjective morality?
Fork knows, I don't.
As a youngen I had doubts that the inquisition Christians truly believed but apparently they did.
People can rationalise to justify their behaviour in non religious circumstances, consider ye Smeagol, justifying to himself the strangling of his friend. If you (not actually you I'm sure) desire something obsessively it can make your reasoning rather biased.
Some of the "lovers" of children tell themselves they aren't doing a bad thing.
Those inflicting harm, say those beating up prostitutes may think they're justified.
Obvs this guy (if he was looking at illegal and therefore most certainly harmful and exploitive porno) probably has deeper problems than most. But my basic thought is that the reason he is looking at porn (assuming it was just the normal kind of porn) even though it was against his religion is because he's a human, and that's what humans do. Humans do all sorts of stuff that they know is "bad for them" and even goes against their ideology on the regular. Being religious doesn't change his basic human nature, and I think most religious people know this, which is a point in their favor in my book.
I dont have much time to spit this out, but i hope i can get my point accross good enough.
Let's exaggerate the scenario for clarification.
"Mark" and "Joe" are alone in a alley. Joe did something to Mark. Even though he is a christian, Marks rage takes over and he kills Joe.
Now let's have the same situation, but this time let's put a cop in the alley. Would Mark still try to murder Joe? Obviously there can be many outcomes, but for this example let's say no. (not very unreasonable)
Why then, "knowing" his god was watching would he kill Joe, but when a cop is watching, would not? As Ali said, being religious doesn't change his basic human nature. Although, I don't think it's a point in their favor. I think it's a point for Darwin. We have millions, or even billions (How long have animals had eyes?) of years of our eyes telling our brains we are alone and only thousands of years of our brains going against our eyes. When we are alone, we feel alone. Yes, sometimes if a theist is alone they can "feel" their god with them, but in situations like these, when our urges take over, we revert to basic instincts. His eyes tell him he's alone, therefor he kills Joe. To me it weakens the idea of a god actually watching.
Quote from: Ali on May 28, 2012, 04:29:52 PM
Obvs this guy (if he was looking at illegal and therefore most certainly harmful and exploitive porno) probably has deeper problems than most. But my basic thought is that the reason he is looking at porn (assuming it was just the normal kind of porn) even though it was against his religion is because he's a human, and that's what humans do. Humans do all sorts of stuff that they know is "bad for them" and even goes against their ideology on the regular. Being religious doesn't change his basic human nature, and I think most religious people know this, which is a point in their favor in my book.
I don't think it is necessary for porn to be illegal before it becomes exploitative.
Quote from: En_Route on May 28, 2012, 08:08:21 PM
Quote from: Ali on May 28, 2012, 04:29:52 PM
Obvs this guy (if he was looking at illegal and therefore most certainly harmful and exploitive porno) probably has deeper problems than most. But my basic thought is that the reason he is looking at porn (assuming it was just the normal kind of porn) even though it was against his religion is because he's a human, and that's what humans do. Humans do all sorts of stuff that they know is "bad for them" and even goes against their ideology on the regular. Being religious doesn't change his basic human nature, and I think most religious people know this, which is a point in their favor in my book.
I don't think it is necessary for porn to be illegal before it becomes exploitative.
I can't think of a scenario that involved legal, consenting adults that is also exploitive, unless you assume that legally consenting adults should not be able to (legally consent, that is). I think legal, consenting adults should be able to do whatever they want with their private parts.
Quote from: Ali on May 28, 2012, 08:14:50 PM
Quote from: En_Route on May 28, 2012, 08:08:21 PM
Quote from: Ali on May 28, 2012, 04:29:52 PM
Obvs this guy (if he was looking at illegal and therefore most certainly harmful and exploitive porno) probably has deeper problems than most. But my basic thought is that the reason he is looking at porn (assuming it was just the normal kind of porn) even though it was against his religion is because he's a human, and that's what humans do. Humans do all sorts of stuff that they know is "bad for them" and even goes against their ideology on the regular. Being religious doesn't change his basic human nature, and I think most religious people know this, which is a point in their favor in my book.
I don't think it is necessary for porn to be illegal before it becomes exploitative.
I can't think of a scenario that involved legal, consenting adults that is also exploitive, unless you assume that legally consenting adults should not be able to (legally consent, that is). I think legal, consenting adults should be able to do whatever they want with their private parts.
There is plenty of porn which is legal but which requires the participants to perform sexual acts of various degrees of perversity ( I don't use the term pejoratively, but just to avoid the trouble of having to specify them) in return for payment. This is in some cases fairly comparable to prostitution which is not illegal per se in the UK, which is often carried out consensual,y and without duress but which is nonetheless inherently exploitative.
I have no idea whether they really believe in god or not at that point, but I'm willing to bet that he puffed up his moral, Christian credentials precisely because he felt ashamed and was trying to compensate for it in some twisted way. There's all sorts of examples like this both inside and outside the church (Ted Haggerty, for example). Most of the times, the ones who yell loudest about "morality" are often the ones doing it to make up for the shame they feel.
Quote from: The Magic Pudding on May 28, 2012, 03:30:44 PM
If you (not actually you I'm sure) desire something obsessively it can make your reasoning rather biased.
True, people are better at rationalising than they are rational. I find it intriguing how, considering how he's in deep water, he keeps on doing it as if nothing's wrong. Must be because he really never did think he would get caught.
Especially because he is, or was a true believer...
This is a question that one could wonder about for years. ???
I do agree in part with GenericGuy. There must be a difference in feeling as if there was some amorphous present but not present god watching, and a real Big Brother watching. People certainly act differently.
Quote from: Firebird on May 28, 2012, 09:00:49 PM
I have no idea whether they really believe in god or not at that point, but I'm willing to bet that he puffed up his moral, Christian credentials precisely because he felt ashamed and was trying to compensate for it in some twisted way. There's all sorts of examples like this both inside and outside the church (Ted Haggerty, for example). Most of the times, the ones who yell loudest about "morality" are often the ones doing it to make up for the shame they feel.
This is how i feel. They need to think that being human is wrong, because everything we do is a sin.
It must be pretty sad to not have a normal sexual life because of religious guilt. ::)
Quote from: Sweetdeath on May 29, 2012, 02:49:53 AM
This is how i feel. They need to think that being human is wrong, because everything we do is a sin.
It must be pretty sad to not have a normal sexual life because of religious guilt. ::)
What is a normal sexual life? Seriously. Remove all concepts of religion and tell me what a "normal sexual life" is. I don't think there is such a thing. Everyone has their own deviance. If normal is majority, then it's got to be heterosexual, but I don't think you'll agree with that.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on May 29, 2012, 03:57:14 AM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on May 29, 2012, 02:49:53 AM
This is how i feel. They need to think that being human is wrong, because everything we do is a sin.
It must be pretty sad to not have a normal sexual life because of religious guilt. ::)
What is a normal sexual life? Seriously. Remove all concepts of religion and tell me what a "normal sexual life" is. I don't think there is such a thing. Everyone has their own deviance. If normal is majority, then it's got to be heterosexual, but I don't think you'll agree with that.
I meant normal as just, healthy, active sex life. I could care less, since every single person has a fetish of some sort.
::)
Pffft, i masturbate every now abd then.
Some religious people think masturbation or unprotected sex is a sin. I laugh.
They feel guilty or ashamed of normal sexual thoughts or desires; such as masturbation.
Quote from: SweetdeathPffft, i masturbate every now abd then.
Ummm....
I just lost my entire train of thought....
Quote from: Gawen on June 01, 2012, 07:13:03 AM
Quote from: SweetdeathPffft, i masturbate every now abd then.
Ummm....
I just lost my entire train of thought....
I was thinking POINH :D
LOL :D
Update: the guy is villianising other people for exposing him, when he's in the wrong. I give up, I don't get these people. ::)
Lame ass excuses such as what the heart doesn't know the brain can't feel...or something like that. ???
(I may be speaking total rubbish here, I've been a bit sleep deprived lately.)
Quote from: Scissorlegs on June 01, 2012, 08:37:32 AM
Quote from: Gawen on June 01, 2012, 07:13:03 AM
Quote from: SweetdeathPffft, i masturbate every now and then.
Ummm....
I just lost my entire train of thought....
I was thinking POINH :D
XD oh you guys.
<3