Good thing you didn’t resort to a sweeping negative stereotype — it would have totally destroyed your credibility.

Heh.

If they spent pretended to hate Bannanas, never made a big deal out of it, and then were found having a secret banana bacchanalia, nobody would give a fuck. It’s not the hypocrisy, it’s the way they’ve gone out of their way to pretend to be superior to other people when it comes to willpower and all the sick shit they’ve used that “superiority” to get away with. From child-fucking to hating gay people.

“If a man sells his daughter as a servant”

That’s servant, Skippy, not prostitute.

And, as far as what liberals think about the Bible, you have demonstrated once again, that they don’t know squat.

The appropriate verses regarding abortion are in Psalm 139:13-16

Prostitution

But hey, maybe Conservapedia’s upcoming translation of the Bible will suit you better.

Abortion, substance abuse, prostitution, gambling — not so much.

Yeah! I mean, it’s not like there’s anything in the Bible condemning bearing false witness.

How do you account to for people having sex without a biblical context? Are they doing it wrong without the Bible’s guidance?

Not too much of a stretch there.

It has always struck me as odd that people who cling to fairy tales and mythology long to be taken seriously when they call on everyone to lay down and worship as they see fit solely because they have a ingrained need to be told what to do.

Please. ‘The Church,’ presumably your church, deals with sex the same way it deals with everything else it wants to control, by making people feel guilty and perverse about it, particularly if it doesn’t pertain to procreation. Don’t even begin to lecture me on the values of sexual openness and tolerance as preached by the Christian faith, which has been a cover for the most vile acts of depravity for centuries. The very idea in this day and age of continuing to rail against Homosexuality for example, is a clear indicator of just how advanced the church and its teachings are regarding a vast population of human beings whose only crime is to want to be treated as equals, but who instead are vilified by an anachronistic viewpoint that espouses hate over acceptance. OW’s post clearly exposes the inherent hypocrisy surrounding
religious faith in general, and Christian faith in particular, when it comes to sexuality and the human condition. Believe whatever you want, but pretending people who disagree with your religious vision of the world are simply uninformed only projects your slanted viewpoint and makes you look petulant.

Almost all of the questions at the site jay linked to are some form of “Is this okay to do” or “Is that okay to do.”

So almost everyone who asks these questions is proceeding from the fear that their sexual desires are, in fact, “dirty.”

At a site linked to from the one Jay noted, Christian Nymphos, one of the blog writers gives a lengthy explanation about why anal sex with one’s wife is not forbidden by the Bible. The first comment on that post is from a guy asking whether it’s “okay” for his wife to use anal sex toys on him.

The message at all these sites is clearly that some things are “okay” with God but other things might not be, so check with us or your pastor about everything if you want to be safe.

These are not the terms within which an open, honest discussion about human sexuality can take place. Like I said in my first comment, talking openly about the Bible’s take on anal sex is not really talking openly about anal sex. It’s talking openly about a fear of unsanctioned sexual behavior.

At Christian Nymphos they seem to talk a lot about “godly sensuality.” How is “godly sensuality” different from plain old “sensuality”?

It’s like these people have converted their religious faith itself into a fetish.

And just for the record, almost everything I read those sites, in fact, everything I read, was related to sex within marriage.

What about sex outside of marriage? I guess that’s just obviously “dirty,” right?

a stereotype perpetuated in large part by the media that most Christians are sexually repressed and that they never talk about sex openly because it’s “dirty.”

And he’s right. You may not agree with what these examples of Christians have to say about sex. Some of them believe in a judgmental God who proscribes some sexual activities. But they do discuss it openly.

No they didn’t, they sought to rape Lot’s guests (the angels), and Lot was the one who offered his daughters.

A summary.

Quaker, that would be a good idea but that’s clearly not what’s being advocated. The response characterizes wet dreams as a problem that needs to be solved or cured.

So it doesn’t encourage a “conversation” between spouses. It actually says that the problem and the solution — more sex — needs to be EXPLAINED to the wife. No where does it advise talking about the content of the dreams with your wife.

At the same time, there is no verifiable linkage between “lustful thoughts during the day” and the frequency of wet dreams.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nocturnal_emission

Wet dream are perfectly normal for all men (and women can have them too). But the response can’t simply acknowledge that. It says that wet dreams are normal for “some” men. Really? That’s kind of fucked up isn’t it?

Wouldn’t it have been better to start the response by telling the person: “It’s perfectly normal for ALL men. Don’t worry about it but if you are worried, go see your doctor?”

That’s the actual truth of the matter and the rest is just nonsense. Utter nonsense.

Oh and if you have a sexual dream about your wife, God wants you to wake her up and have sex with her, regardless of the hour or her interest.

Well, that’s casting things in the worst possible light, isn’t it?

I’d say the answer runs more along the lines of “If you’re not spending a lot of time entertaining lustful thoughts during the day, don’t worry about it. If you’re having hot dreams about your wife, talk to her about them. She might want to help you out with that.”

Encouraging open conversation between spouses! Isn’t that what you said was needed?

Normally I hate everything you post, but that was absolutely spot on brilliant Dennis. If I had been drinking anything I would need a new laptop.