And yet...where is the pastor that fights cooking shows? I mean, gluttony is on the same list of seven deadly sins as lust, last time i checked... )))
Yet somehow they always like to pick the sex-related sins to passionately fight against. Being gay, watching porn - stuff like that.
Greed. Same list. Anyone concerned about today's consumerism?
Ok, and I've long abandoned the hope of American Christians complying with 'thou shalt not kill'. It's always 'thou shall not kill, except when I can think of a perfectly reasonable excuse'.
Think of how much money they could have raised if they decided to fight poverty with similar passion. 300 churches, each having XX-XXX members... But I guess, it's not that interesting trying to feed a hungry as it is sticking one's nose into peoples sexual lives.
More posts from this category: Re: why peaceful majority is irrelevantInterpreting bible passages (Mathew 16:28 and Mark 9:1)
FLeghorn, you have your vision of what sex should be, of how men and women must behave. You're free to voice your opinions and try to convince other people to adopt them. But not impose limitations on other adult people. They have their own opinions about their own sexual choices. One is only justified in imposing limitations when one can demonstrate that unless those are in implemented harm will be caused to innocent people, and also, that the imposition of those restrictions will result in the prevention of that harm (that its a right remedy for the illness). I am not so sure the prohibition of pornography will automatically result in people switching to that 'full of respect' transcendent loving of one another.
Greed, gluttony, etc, these things are harder to expose
Churches can't expose the obsession with material goods, the time people waste discussing celebrity's new dress? How's that not gluttony and pride?
Cooking shows, recipe books - all about how to cook smth in a way that it pleases the tongue.
But religious people are very selective, they want to pick and choose which 'sins' they want to notice and which - not. That was one point.
Another point is the question of liberties.
This post was not about what role sex should play in peoples lives, its about what right does a religious institution have to dictate what it should and shouldn't be. I'd grant religious organization the same right I grant to people: to express their views, but not to try and limit peoples liberties based on their understanding of right and wrong, desirable and undesirable.
I don't think pornography isn'tbeing discussed. I hear psychologists talking about it, feminists arguing against it... Sure, normally its still a taboo topic for most people. Not for those in my circle, though, but I'm ... me)))
I'm not even talking excess eating. Pornography isn't always about excess sexual activity, its often a substitute for the real thing when it isn't available, or 'spicing up' thing. I was mentioning food with regards to it being perceived as the source of pleasure. You don't have to be overeating, just being a gourmet suffices.
I guess religious guys should never eat sauces and mayonnaises, because those are first and foremost meant for bodily pleasure, not satiation of hunger, right? Wheres the campaign 'ban the sweet-n-sour sauce!'?
I'd also like to see religion condemning violence on TV. I would think peoples fascination with whats called 'torture porn' should rank way higher on a danger to society scale than the kinky stuff.
But yeah, who doesn't know of church's hypocrisy.
but we shouldn't dismiss the efforts of some to draw attention to a very real issue simply because they are not good at addressing other issues.
It's fair to point out though that since they're using the 'authority' of the scriptures in their arguments, they shouldn't themselves undermine it by picking and choosing. Otherwise it's like 'don't do this because this book forbids it but ignore what it says here on the other page'.
I don't even want to go into all the horrible perversions people have some of which are reflected in p*rn (gee, this word has been mentioned too many times now, Google might get mislead about the topic of this site haha). But p*rn is a broad term which can denote all sorts of stuff ranging from 'girl alone' scenes to quite tasteful man and woman intercourse to all sorts of sick actions that you've mentioned. To be trying to ban all one has to provide a good reason, 'because my book says so' not being one of them.
I usually ignore the comments on youtube, but this is my own blog so I try to respond to 99% here. Appreciate your contribution.