- #106
humanino
- 2,527
- 8
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
I don't even understand why Saint has not noticed that his preaching is useless.
I don't even understand why Saint has not noticed that his preaching is useless.
Perhaps it is this very feeling that she does not like, and she considers it immoral for causing her to feel out of control. She sure has invested a lot of time in this field that she considers so immoral.BoulderHead said:You [not so] secretly love and crave this kind of material, don't you?
Prometheus said:Perhaps it is this very feeling that she does not like, and she considers it immoral for causing her to feel out of control. She sure has invested a lot of time in this field that she considers so immoral.
A couple of people have said that Saint is male. How do you know? Oh, you say that he said so in previous posts. I was only guessing on the basis of the the childish girly picture used as an icon under the name Saint.Math Is Hard said:Saint is male. According to previous posts, he is married and has several children, and ironically, has a mistress. Or at least he used to brag about having one. I'll have to assume now that he was kidding at the time - in light of this moral makeover he has undergone.
I don't agreeExcessive porns make women uninteresting to men
Prometheus said:A couple of people have said that Saint is male. How do you know? Oh, you say that he said so in previous posts. I was only guessing on the basis of the the childish girly picture used as an icon under the name Saint.
I wonder if what you post is true. If so, Saint would quite a hypocrit. Not that that is very rare for people who spout this type of preaching. "Do what I think I should be doing, now what I am actually doing." We have all see this before.
Saint said:First time when i saw nude woman, i was very excited, after sometime, i was not excited anymore.
Saint said:Excessive porns make women uninteresting to men.
Moonbear said:The same could be said for 50 years of marriage, but you aren't saying that's immoral.
Correct. He is making generalizations about all men in the world based on his own perverted experience. He clearly like to view porn, and he posts it on this forum to share it with everyone, so his claim that it is immoral is shallow. Perhaps he needs a shrink.Moonbear said:Oh, so I see, you think porn is immoral, but you are going right ahead and viewing it anyway.
There is no qualified authority on morality. No one can say what is and what is not moral.
It is the interpretation of the US Constitution. Porn is protected by the First Amendment. And I am sure glad it is, though I never read it.
What is preventing the FBI or whoever from turning these sites off? Is it a technical impossibility?
This thread is pretty humorous, people debating the intentions of a 2,000 year old mythological creature.
Using bold script does not lend weight to a statement, merely to the annoyance of those reading it.
I mean calling the French "frogs" n stuff?
The job of judges is to interpret law, not morality.Dagenais said:Judges are pretty close.
Period. To you, no support is necessary for this fundamental truth, I suppose.Whether you want to admit it or not, there are basic morals that society is based upon.
I think that I quite agree with you as to my lack of appreciation for the current interpretation of the second amendment. However, as distateful as it is to me, I certainly would not want to replace it with the subjective "moraliity" of certain religious people.Because the US Amendment is so great, isn't it? Gotta' love that 2nd one! Right for civilians to own weapons of death!
You can make that bet. I would take it. I think that you would lose big.If the laws were a lot stricter, or even drastically strict (long jail time, huge fines are just some quick examples), you can bet that these sites will diseappear.
This begs the question, by whom? Certainly, many people so consider it. Many others consider it literature, or a myth. What Christians believe in this context is not necessarily relevant to those who are not Christians.I hope you realize that the Bible is considered one of the oldest history books.
Personally, I agree. I do not think that the Bible is completely a myth.Though we realize that there is much debate about this between historians (chronological mistakes), it isn't completely a myth .
You are accusing him of behaving as religious people do? That is quite an accusation. He is certainly right to hold his views, and to make them public, just as you are now.You shouldn't pass it off as such, as you're spreading your beliefs publicly just like religious people do.
Unfair to whom? Why? Can I ask you a question? Do you consider it unfair to call the so-called Greek myths as myths? There is also some truth in them as well, is there not?The Old Testament and Hebrew scripts were even written before the birth of Jesus. It's unfair to call a thousand year old book as just an old myth.
The job of judges is to interpret law, not morality.
I certainly would not want to replace it with the subjective "moraliity" of certain religious people.
That is quite an accusation. He is certainly right to hold his views, and to make them public, just as you are now.
Unfair to whom? Why? Can I ask you a question? Do you consider it unfair to call the so-called Greek myths as myths? There is also some truth in them as well, is there not?