- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Is it wrong to expect thots to cover themselves around children?
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:33 pm to tigerfoot
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:33 pm to tigerfoot
quote:Lust is a universal problem. Temptation is a big issue in our society, for Christians and non-Christians alike.
Uh, no.
If you, as a grown man cant get past a bikini on a teenager, you got a lot of work to do as a Christian that has nothing to do with the attire another is wearing.
quote:Christians are absolutely called to holy living. What do you think Jesus meant when He said "if you love me, you will keep my commandments"?
No, we dont. We believe that Christ came of a virgin birth, lived, died on a cross and was resurrected.
We dont have to go down a checklist of small things to practice our religion. This isnt some to do list.
This isn't about salvation, it's about sanctification. We are supposed to put away sin and seek to be conformed to the image of Christ.
quote:We are supposed to flee from temptation and not tempt others to sin. Walking around with your breasts hanging out is certainly a temptation and women shouldn't tempt others to sin, just as men shouldn't tempt women to sin.
Oh, so we do real good as Christians unless someone makes us do bad Maybe we remove rock music, alcohol, cigarettes, and gambling too, you know...cause we just cant be held accountable for our own damn choices
1
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:33 pm to FooManChoo
quote:Is that what fashionable clothes do?
We shouldn't tempt others to sin.
Following the premise to its natural conclusion, we should keep children out of sight to avoid tempting pedophiles to sin.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:37 pm to FooManChoo
quote:What do you think when he also said that all will sin and that the only way to salvation is to accept the Grace he provides.
Christians are absolutely called to holy living. What do you think Jesus meant when He said "if you love me, you will keep my commandments"?
You keep on keeping your scorecard. I will give you a hint, you will sin and fall short of the glory of God....I have heard that somewhere.
quote:Ive seen a bunch of tits I pray get covered back up. Are those ok to be hanging out?
Walking around with your breasts hanging out is certainly a temptation and women shouldn't tempt others to sin, just as men shouldn't tempt women to sin.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:40 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
The principle behind the modesty issue is temptation. We shouldn't tempt others to sin. Just as we shouldn't drink alcohol around a friend who is an alcoholic, we shouldn't wear clothing and attire in public that will make the average person lust after us. If I knew my wife's friend was sexually aroused by men who wore green, I'd go out of my way not to wear green around her so that I wouldn't tempt her to lust. Likewise, if I knew it was common that women got turned sexually on by men in tight pants, I wouldn't wear tight pants in public.
This is an unsustainable worldview because it has no limiting principle. Do we not walk our dogs because we might run into someone who engages in beastiality? Do I never take my kids out in public because I might encounter a pedophile?
There is a near infinite number of weird kinks in this world. You can’t exist in any meaningful way if the premise is we should never do anything that might get a sexual rise out of someone.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:40 pm to Seldom Seen
Those girls. ..look like a generic scene one would see on any random beach. What's the big deal?
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:41 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
I can't think of a time where I have used the label of "pro-life" for myself outside of the context of abortion
So what? If God wanted a woman to abort her baby you'd support it. As I said, you're not pro-life, you're pro-God's choice.
quote:
because I do believe in the sanctity of life and that there are only certain authorized conditions for certain authorized persons/agents to take a life based on the desire to uphold the sanctity of life. Capital punishment is intended to provide justice for a life taken and to dissuade others from seeking to unlawfully take life. Taking a life in self-defense is intended to preserve life. Killing in war should be intended to preserve the lives of others. It's the sanctity of life that upholds those exceptions that authorize life to be taken.
If you can't think of a time where you've used the label "pro-life" for yourself outside of the context of abortion, why are you bringing up non-abortion issues when being challenged on your "pro-life" label?
quote:
I'm against people making moral truth claims without having a foundation to support them.
Why did you assume that I was trying to make an objective claim about abortion?
You're a one trick pony, and I'm not impressed by your "You can't have objective morality without the Christian God" trick.
quote:
Saying "I don't like abortion" is not the same as "abortion is immoral", even though both statements may ultimately reflect a desire to change policy regarding abortion. One of those statements assumes obligation to act a certain way.
1.) I never said it was immoral.
2.) Even if I did, why is "immoral" different from "beauty"?
Back to your trick. You really want to rub it in that I don't have access to objective morality, and IDGAF. You keep repeating it as if I'm going to GAF, and after all of our conversations I'm still in agreement with you on that point.
I don't have access to objective morality, and I've never claimed to have access to objective morality. Stop assuming I do, and stop pretending you're presenting me with a problem when you constantly bring up, over and over, in thread after thread, that I don't have access to objective morality.
This post was edited on 9/9/21 at 12:44 pm
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:42 pm to Seldom Seen
This Thread is totally derailed.
Can you can we all just agree that the guy in the OP is a f****** moron and call it a day?
Can you can we all just agree that the guy in the OP is a f****** moron and call it a day?
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:45 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
Can you can we all just agree that the guy in the OP is a f****** moron and call it a day?
Take that up with Foo and see how far you can get.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 12:48 pm to Plx1776
quote:
Those girls. ..look like a generic scene one would see on any random beach. What's the big deal?
I keep trying to mock the left for their hand maids tail outfits because conservatives aren't like that, then loons like this open their traps and put egg on my face.
FFS...
Posted on 9/9/21 at 1:19 pm to Plx1776
quote:
What's the big deal?
Well, they made Foo think No No thoughts, so they sinned because he is a perv...or something.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 1:22 pm to Seldom Seen
2,6,5,3,7,4,1
Posted on 9/9/21 at 1:24 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
Can you can we all just agree that the guy in the OP is a f****** moron and call it a day?
He's dumb cause he's trying to fight the battle on the wrong end, one that's a losing front. Young girls just follow social trends they don't set them. If you don't like a certain societal trends then you need to go after the people that are setting those trends.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 2:10 pm to Azkiger
quote:It's not merely the uniform that women are typically attracted to but what the uniform says about the man. Clean-cut, organized, disciplined, loyal, and a defender are some of the common traits associated with men in uniform. In such cases, the uniform isn't accentuating the male physique, per se, but the assumed character of the man, making him attractive to those who value such traits.
Women find men in uniforms sexy, so no more uniforms right?
Many women are also turned on by confidence, yet it's not a sin for a man to be confident, unless a man knowingly uses such confidence as a tool for the purpose of causing someone to sin. Being married is also a turn on to many women (due to the ability to commit to someone, usually), yet it's not sinful to be married just because it may tempt someone else. Instead, you would deal with that situation by other means, such as by avoiding personal interaction with a person who is tempted by your presence as a married man.
Modesty is really the point of calling out the bikini vs. the uniform, though. The bikini is an article of clothing worn as a purposeful choice with the intent to show off one's body (with the obvious consequence of causing lust in men). The uniform is typically worn out of obligation or duty as a necessary part of unifying the armed forces and isn't a purposeful or optional choice worn with intent to draw attention to the individual to produce sexual desire in others.
If there are optional choices that cause others to sin, Christians need to consider that and avoid those things. If there are things that are not optional that cause others to sin, the Christian needs to minimize the temptation in other ways, as much as possible.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 2:17 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:If fashionable clothing accentuates the sexual desirability of an individual, yes.
Is that what fashionable clothes do?
quote:In some situations, yes. For instance, if you know that your neighbor is a pedophile, you don't want to leave your kids in his care or have them in bathing suits playing in your backyard in the summer in plain view of your neighbor.
Following the premise to its natural conclusion, we should keep children out of sight to avoid tempting pedophiles to sin.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 2:20 pm to tigerfoot
quote:That's precisely what I believe. I noticed you didn't quote the part about the difference between salvation and sanctification, but that answers your question. Holy living isn't a means to salvation but the response of a person who is saved by God's grace.
What do you think when he also said that all will sin and that the only way to salvation is to accept the Grace he provides.
quote:I agree with you about sin. I'm not keeping a scorecard but providing a biblical response to a culture that wallows in sin and thinks it's not a big deal to offend a holy God.
You keep on keeping your scorecard. I will give you a hint, you will sin and fall short of the glory of God....I have heard that somewhere.
quote:No, because breasts in our culture are inherently sexual. Some will be more attracted to a particular set than another, but people are supposed to dress modestly anyway.
Ive seen a bunch of tits I pray get covered back up. Are those ok to be hanging out?
Posted on 9/9/21 at 2:21 pm to Azkiger
quote:
They stoned females who weren't virgins on their wedding night in the old testament...
So they had prevention of adultery already written in through punishment, hence controlling female lust?
Doesn't this defeat your point in the first place?
Posted on 9/9/21 at 2:23 pm to NC_Tigah
The logical conclusion would be to cover up completely,
any objects of lust should cover up.
Oh wait, Foo has literally just invented Islam hahahahahahahaha
any objects of lust should cover up.
Oh wait, Foo has literally just invented Islam hahahahahahahaha
This post was edited on 9/9/21 at 2:24 pm
Posted on 9/9/21 at 2:26 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:There is responsibility on both sides. Christians should not go to strip clubs for this very reason because they would be purposefully going to a place that is meant to tempt them to sin by its very purpose.
This is an unsustainable worldview because it has no limiting principle. Do we not walk our dogs because we might run into someone who engages in beastiality? Do I never take my kids out in public because I might encounter a pedophile?
There is a near infinite number of weird kinks in this world. You can’t exist in any meaningful way if the premise is we should never do anything that might get a sexual rise out of someone
On the other hand, we should not act in ways that we know will induce others to sin (walking around with your breasts exposed in public should be expected to cause others to be tempted to lust).
The point is to go about your life trying not to cause others to stumble. The application is different based on circumstances. A woman undressing in front of a female doctor is different from undressing in front of a locker room full of teenage boys.
No, having your children in public is not sinful because a pedophile might be there, because we don't know who will and won't be tempted to sin because of our actions in that scenario. Bringing your child to a place where known pedophiles exclusively hang out, on the other hand, would be wrong, because you could be tempting them to sin.
This post was edited on 9/9/21 at 6:20 pm
Posted on 9/9/21 at 2:44 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
There is responsibility on both sides.
Well if both sides are Christian. .
But as a proud non-christian, i can't possibly see how I have a responsibility to dress myself in a way that helps you uphold your beliefs.
Posted on 9/9/21 at 2:47 pm to Azkiger
quote:No, I'm pro-life in the sense that I support the sanctity of human life because all human lives are made in God's image with inherent value. What God chooses to do is His prerogative because He is God and He is holy, but He has commanded all of humanity to act in a particular way, including focus on preserving life. The only exceptions are as I stated. The purpose of supporting the death penalty, war, and self-defense for taking life is precisely because of the value of life and the obligation to preserve it.
So what? If God wanted a woman to abort her baby you'd support it. As I said, you're not pro-life, you're pro-God's choice.
quote:Because those examples almost always get brought up in the context of abortion and supporting the life of the unborn.
If you can't think of a time where you've used the label "pro-life" for yourself outside of the context of abortion, why are you bringing up non-abortion issues when being challenged on your "pro-life" label?
quote:Killing children was the context of the discussion and you were making an obvious implication that it was morally wrong for God to drown children in a flood, negating this concept of objective morality for killing children.
Why did you assume that I was trying to make an objective claim about abortion?
Whether the moral truth claim was about abortion or not was irrelevant to my point. Making any truth claim without the foundation to support it is fallacious.
quote:I don't use that argument to impress you. It's necessarily true, regardless of whether or not you are impressed by it.
You're a one trick pony, and I'm not impressed by your "You can't have objective morality without the Christian God" trick.
quote:What do you mean by "why is immoral different from beauty"? Are you referring to morality as being different from beauty standards?
1.) I never said it was immoral.
2.) Even if I did, why is "immoral" different from "beauty"?
quote:You brought up God drowning children. What was your point there other than to try to catch someone in some sort of moral quandary?
Back to your trick. You really want to rub it in that I don't have access to objective morality, and IDGAF. You keep repeating it as if I'm going to GAF, and after all of our conversations I'm still in agreement with you on that point.
I don't have access to objective morality, and I've never claimed to have access to objective morality. Stop assuming I do, and stop pretending you're presenting me with a problem when you constantly bring up, over and over, in thread after thread, that I don't have access to objective morality.
This post was edited on 9/9/21 at 6:21 pm
Page 7 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News