Viewing Thread:
"purity and chastity"

One thing that really astonishes me is the number of people who sleep around in the world today. For those of us among us who believe in the Bibile, sex outside marriage is forbidden, yet so many people, religeous and otherwise, see it their duty to have multiple sexual partners. Its only a symbol of social standing in some places in AFRICA. How can we call ourselves the civilised world when we see fit to stick our john thomas in every place we can think of. Its level with the animals, and even some of them have the decency to confine themselves to one partner. (i.e. swans)

Im not trying to push chastity and say all sexual acticity is WRONG outside marriage, but I really think that sex and similar acts are something that you should share with only someone special. The only purpose of one night stands is to get some POONTANG with whatever skank can be found on the street. (I dont mean to degrade women, I just have to write this from the male perspective, the same applies to women)

Chastity generally means that you dont do ANYTHING sexual at all outside of marraige. Personally I dont see whats wrong with a little frolic in the garden of eden if its legal, legal by the bible, and doesnt put your future in jeprody through inadvertant pregnancy. What happens if the chick you boned on a one night stand get knocked up? Its your obligation to raise the b*****d child, and wed the whench. lol. I just enjoy using biassed language. I'll stop now.

Since (as I have been informed by a good friend of mine whos a history guru) the general practise of prolific intercourse has been going on for millenia, were not really doing anything different, however if we didnt do anything different we'd still be eating leaves, not even using tools. Evolution and invention meant progress, technological and personal. Sleeping around like this means that sex isnt sacred. It becomes meaningless when you finally meet someone you marry, and all you can do is compare them to your previous partners.

I know Im on a losing side. Most of you are probably against me, but Id just like you to consider the idea of, not chastity, but, however hard it may be, not sleeping around. If you meet someone special to you, by all means, even if its not the first. At least then its actually meaningful. But having shallow, meaningless sex is....well...m**********g. YOU'LL GO BLIND SON!!

Flock wrote:
> Same here, i am my own personal religion.

I'd be interested to know what the word 'Religion' actually means. I suppose it's just a school of thought, that being the case, my 'personal religion' is certainly open-ended and subject to change as my life progresses.

I don't see the point in trying to fit ancient rules and beliefs to a modern world where available methods would allow gathering of evidence, suggesting the contrary. You surely have to change your beliefs to suit the evidence you are presented with, or more probable theories.

I suppose it's an age old arguement that will never be resolved.

Fozz wrote:
> I have to agree with you again borat. Im doing the same thing.
> Catholocism has so many flaws, at least the rural Irish version. Im
> gradually sorting out my beliefs. I believe in a God, and certain
> other aspects but Im not solid on ones to tie myself to any one
> religeon.

Well I don't believe in God, Heaven or any of that Jive myself, as for the bible and other holy books, I believe them to be greatly exaggerated stories from a by-gone era. Obviously you don't and that's fair enough - everyone has to figure out the reasons things are the way they are.

ßora† §agdiyeV wrote:
> Spiritual meaning and religion are two separate issues. I believe
> there is more to us than just flesh and bone, I believe in us all
> possessing a soul, that being a spiritual aspect, an entity
> controlling our physical bodies like the driver of a car, but I do
> not believe in any particular religion. I'm just gradually
> putting together my own belief system the older I get, based on
> media, opinions of others, literature and experiences I have been
> exposed to.

Same here, i am my own personal religion.
I would really love to believe there is more to us than simple biology, that we have a soul but i'm too based in reality to truly believe it, instead i choose to believe it.

I've always considered casual sex to be far preferable and better for the confidence than masturbation, as for picking up some random woman, you do sl*g them off a bit, theyre not all bad and god knows i'd never go with one who i felt wasn't safe to do so.
Romantic sex is great but it's not always available so some people take second best.

I have to agree with you again borat. Im doing the same thing. Catholocism has so many flaws, at least the rural Irish version. Im gradually sorting out my beliefs. I believe in a God, and certain other aspects but Im not solid on ones to tie myself to any one religeon.

Spiritual meaning and religion are two separate issues. I believe there is more to us than just flesh and bone, I believe in us all possessing a soul, that being a spiritual aspect, an entity controlling our physical bodies like the driver of a car, but I do not believe in any particular religion. I'm just gradually putting together my own belief system the older I get, based on media, opinions of others, literature and experiences I have been exposed to.

So maybe love is a spiritual thing, but if we are spiritual entities as I have outlined, then we are currently symbiotic to our physical bodies - we are intertwined during our journey through life. That being the case, love is probably simultaneously a biological and spiritual experience.

I agree with you borat. Id like to know more about dolphins. lol.

(sigh) here we go again. lol.

Ok. so if you're turned on and want to ....do..something, then Mrs Palm is always there. If you want an ego boost flirting, or one of the other things I mentioned might do it. The choice on whether to go with one of these or pick someone up for the night depends on the person. I wouldnt find someone for the night because a) Im not single, and b) Im just not so inclined (that makes it sound like Im gay. oh well). The idea of picking up some random woman from the streets, who I know nothing about for meaningless, almost masturbatory (if thats even a word) sex is rather unappealing. I dont even know where shes been. If she did it a lot she could be carrying all sorts of STD or diseases. Like a used toothbrush. Too boldly go where no man has gone before doesnt appeal to most people. Actually, it does to a LOT of guys, but then what appeals more is doing that to lots of women through lying and decieving them in order to make them give up their virginity. Anyway, thats how I feel.

ßora† §agdiyeV wrote:
> I said 'You could say', because despite what I've said, I do believe
> there is more, I just didn't want to bring up the whole spiritual
> side as it too often gets linked to religion, which really is a
> separate issue in my opinion.

I know what you mean about love and religion because they are similar arguments, they both seem to come down to reality Vs romance, i'll always side with what i want to believe over what is almost certainly the truth so when given the choice of reducing love to biology or giving it a spiritual meaning i'll always take the latter.

Fozz wrote:
> Our nearest relative species are apes, and all of them use the alpha
> male system, where one alpha male gets all the mates. Its difficult
> to say for other species like dolphins, or swans who have only one
> partner, but its clear from apes that love isnt present

Perhaps, we may never really know whether they feel love or not, but another prerequisite of love may be sentience, that being aware of self, surroundings and others. perhaps intelligence of this level is required for love.