Porn Pastor

[Saint Frankenstein]

I picked up a passenger once, and literally the very first thing I saw of her was a frontal view of her exposed panties because the front of her skirt was basically non existent. Even to me she was pretty trashy.

I'm subjected to people dressing trashy almost daily at work. Women with huge breasts not wearing a bra and wearing skin tight shirts, tight booty shorts, men not wearing underwear and wearing pants so tight, nothing is left to the imagination, people dressing like slutty schoolgirls, men dressing like gender bending fetish freaks, etc. People have no consideration for others. And that's not even talking about w the lazy people wearing their barely there workout clothes.

 

[Debater Slayer]

It seems that they missed the point that you're supposed to at least try to stop sinning, not to be proud of it and open sinners, and then have the audicity to pretend like you have any business being a spiritual shepard. Big miss from me.

Does the same apply to priests who condone restrictions that enable the spread of HIV and unwanted pregnancy and then claim to be spiritual guides?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I'm subjected to people dressing trashy almost daily at work. Women with huge breasts not wearing a bra and wearing skin tight shirts, tight booty shorts, men not wearing underwear and wearing pants so tight, nothing is left to the imagination, people dressing like slutty schoolgirls, men dressing like gender bending fetish freaks, etc. People have no consideration for others. And that's not even talking about w the lazy people wearing their barely there workout clothes.

What's wrong with no underwear? You can't even see it. Same with no bra. You aren't seeing anything exposed.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I'm subjected to people dressing trashy almost daily at work. Women with huge breasts not wearing a bra and wearing skin tight shirts, tight booty shorts, men not wearing underwear and wearing pants so tight, nothing is left to the imagination, people dressing like slutty schoolgirls, men dressing like gender bending fetish freaks, etc. People have no consideration for others. And that's not even talking about w the lazy people wearing their barely there workout clothes.

I find a MAGA hat more offensive than literally every single one of the things you mentioned, but you don't see me arguing that people should stop wearing MAGA hats out of consideration for others. So where do we draw the line given that all of this is markedly subjective territory?

 

[The Hammer]

You should read the rest.

Also, yeah, it's my worldview. I'm not seeing the problem. Everyone has one and everyone will argue in accordance with it and yes I think my worldview is the better one, otherwise I wouldn't hold it.

I was in a hurry. I'll get back to it

 

[The Hammer]

What's wrong with no underwear? You can't even see it. Same with no bra. You aren't seeing anything exposed.

I mean, I'm not wearing underwear lots of times lol. It's comfy.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

What's wrong with no underwear? You can't even see it. Same with no bra. You aren't seeing anything exposed.

It's in combination with skin tight clothing where you can literally see everything.

 

[Rival]

Sexual taboos aren't working out so well in Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Yemen. What we get instead of healthy sexuality in those places is repression, undercover practice of all kinds of illegal and immoral acts (such as pedophilia and marital rape), and widespread misogynistic attitudes.

A big pass from me. In my opinion, sexual taboos need to die and be replaced with prioritizing informed consent and elimination of any harmful practices--and not just when it comes to sex.

How far must it go, though?

We certainly have not wiped out paedophilia or marital rape. These things are still rampant in Western society and during the mid-20th century there were paedopilia advocates and this Paedophile Information Exchange - Wikipedia. It's not as cut and dry as many would think and I look at where this sexual freedom has led and in my mind it's gone way, way too far now. Having all kinds of things in public that were never illegal to begin with (furries, for instance, and BDSM). When were they ever oppressed? Why do you need to wear these things in public? I'm a BDSM practitioner and feel 0 need to go out in the streets dressed openly in fetish gear - it makes folks uncomfortable.

We have confused everyone and destroyed how relationships work. We have so much free sex that no-one feels the need for true commitment anymore and this has led to millions of fatherless households, broken homes, unwanted children, spread of STDs and generally broken people who have no idea how a healthy relationship is meant to work. They have no standards or cares about what they do or with whom they sleep. They've been led to believe that being able to sleep with whoever, whenever, will fulfil and satisfy them. It doesn't; it just leads to depression and feeling used, realising that you are 30+ and unmarried, no kids, no family life, no settled comfortability. As the saying goes, when you're on your death bed, you won't be wishing you spent more time at your career.

Sure, don't hate folks for being homosexual. Don't hate folks for having kinks. This is stupid, granted - but do keep sexual leniencies to a reasonable limit where it will eventually produce whole, healthy families rather than broken, depressed, used, ill people who reach their 4th decade of life and realise they're lonely, dissatisfied and too old to go about what they used to do.

There's a happy mean here, it needn't be an all or nothing.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Does the same apply to priests who condone restrictions that enable the spread of HIV and unwanted pregnancy and then claim to be spiritual guides?

That's a terrible attempt at an analogy.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I find a MAGA hat more offensive than literally every single one of the things you mentioned, but you don't see me arguing that people should stop wearing MAGA hats out of consideration for others. So where do we draw the line given that all of this is markedly subjective territory?

I don't wear that hat in public to save myself from being harassed or even assaulted by leftists in this city, especially around the OSU campus here. So I don't wear it out of fear. Plus, I have no car to retreat to.

 

[Rival]

In any event, I think this so-called pastor needs to be cancelled. That would be good. She's going against everything her religion teaches.

 

[Debater Slayer]

That's a terrible attempt at an analogy.

I don't think so: if contributing to someone's infection with a disease like HIV through one's words or actions is a sin, then any priests doing so are sinners by default. In that case, it seems inconsistent for them to claim to be moral guides.

On the other hand, if you argue that adopting practices that contribute to the spread of HIV isn't sinful, then I think that calls into question the logical foundations of the teachings in the first place. It would be quite bizarre to view consensual sex outside marriage as a sin but not such practices.

 

[Jeremiah Ames]

My instant thought when I read that is "the Taliban believe that as well". My second thought was "ban nude beaches?". My third thought was "African culture not seeing anything wrong with showing breasts". So on this point, it's clearly cultural and religious what is considered "overly revealing".

Then I started ruminating about all the sex scandals with the Catholic church and some Protestant ministers. I don't see any value in hypocrisy either.

I also think that admitting that we're all "sinners" is fine and very possibly helpful since we're not perfect and make mistakes.

But they seem to have, in the words of the song, gone "one toke over the line".

I learned something valuable those few years that I attended church.
There is this belief among many people in the buildings, that they are “saved”, simply because they said the correct words somewhere along the line.
And their alleged “savedness” relieved them of all sin, past, present, future.
Even though pastors and others would occasionally utter the “we are all sinners” slogan, it was effectively just lip service. Very few people in the buildings could comprehend that the slogan referred to them as well.

 

[Debater Slayer]

In any event, I think this so-called pastor needs to be cancelled. That would be good. She's going against everything her religion teaches.

Aren't conservatives supposed to be against the so-called "cancel culture" of the left? Why should a pastor be canceled for practicing her right to free speech and freedom of religion? And who should cancel her anyway?

 

[Rival]

I learned something valuable those few years that I attended church.
There is this belief among many people in the buildings, that they are “saved”, simply because they said the correct words somewhere along the line.
And their alleged “savedness” relieved them of all sin, past, present, future.
Even though pastors and others would occasionally utter the “we are all sinners” slogan, it was effectively just lip service. Very few people in the buildings could comprehend that the slogan referred to them as well.

This is a very Protestant worldview. You won't find this in the RCC or OC.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I don't think so: if contributing to someone's infection with a disease like HIV through one's words or actions is a sin, then any priests doing so are sinners by default. In that case, it seems inconsistent for them to claim to be moral guides.

On the other hand, if you argue that adopting practices that contribute to the spread of HIV isn't sinful, then I think that calls into question the logical foundations of the teachings in the first place. It would be quite bizarre to view consensual sex outside marriage as a sin but not such practices.

If people followed the sexual teachings of the Catholic Church, there wouldn't be an HIV epidemic in Africa. No one got HIV, sexually, from being abstinent or chaste (along with knowing their status beforehand). It's caused by promiscuity and I'm sure their acceptance of polygamy plays a part.

 

[Rival]

Aren't conservatives supposed to be against the so-called "cancel culture" of the left? Why should a pastor be canceled for practicing her right to free speech and freedom of religion? And who should cancel her anyway?

I was being mostly facetious.

In essence, I think people should stop attending her church and promoting her/her message.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It's in combination with skin tight clothing where you can literally see everything.

You can't literally see everything through clothing, not unless it's sheer.
Just don't look at people's junk.

 

[Debater Slayer]

How far must it go, though?

We certainly have not wiped out paedophilia or marital rape. These things are still rampant in Western society and during the mid-20th century there were paedopilia advocates and this Paedophile Information Exchange - Wikipedia. It's not as cut and dry as many would think and I look at where this sexual freedom has led and in my mind it's gone way, way too far now. Having all kinds of things in public that were never illegal to begin with (furries, for instance, and BDSM). When were they ever oppressed? Why do you need to wear these things in public? I'm a BDSM practitioner and feel 0 need to go out in the streets dressed openly in fetish gear, it makes folks uncomfortable.

We have confused everyone and destroyed how relationships work. We have so much free sex that no-one feels the need for true commitment anymore and this has led to millions of fatherless households, broken homes, unwanted children, spread of STDs and generally broken people who have no idea how a healthy relationship is meant to work. They have no standards or cares about what they do or with whom they sleep. They've been led to believe that being able to sleep with whoever, whenever, will fulfil and satisfy them. It doesn't; it just leads to depression and feeling used, realising that you are 30+ and unmarried, no kids, no family life, no settled comfortability. As the saying goes, when you're on your death bed, you won't be wishing you spent more time at your career.

Sure, don't hate folks for being homosexual. Don't hate folks for having kinks. This is stupid, granted - but do keep sexual leniencies to a reasonable limit where it will eventually produce whole, healthy families rather than broken, depressed, used, ill people who reach their 4th decade of life and realise they're lonely, dissatisfied and too old to go about what they used to do.

There's a happy mean here, it needn't be an all or nothing.

I don't think the issues you mentioned are inherent to liberal attitudes toward sexuality. Sure, I also oppose exposing children to overtly sexual displays in public, but you also objected to premarital sex. As far as I can see, a lot of the issues you listed could more effectively be tackled through sex education, better access to condoms and contraceptives, and removal of the stigma on reproductive rights (e.g., abortion).

A lot of broken homes, domestic violence, and unhealthy relationships exist in conservative societies too. These issues don't have a single solution or one tied to a specific political leaning by default. Not all conservatives are against the solutions I mentioned, either.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I mean, I'm not wearing underwear lots of times lol. It's comfy.

I'm usually not, and wearing a bra is for me and the support and less jarring pains, definitely not for the comfort of others.