100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Sins & Issues | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
I think it's pretty obvious that Christianity causes a lot of people to have sexual hang-ups and associate sexual desires with being "sinful", especially if they know full-well that they aren't having sex with the intent or purpose to procreate. And lot of Christians (especially fundamentalists) preach that sex for pleasure (i.e. without the intent of procreation) is a sin. This would place any Christian couple in an extremely difficult place should either one of them become diagnoses ad being "sterile". Then they only reason they could have sex at that point would indeed be for the pleasure of physical intimacy which is forbidden. Also, the "light-outs" thing is probably related to shame as well. They are trying to remove themselves from act as much as possible. (i.e. at least they can't see what they are doing)  They can always claim on judgment day, "Gee whiz Jesus, it was dark and we couldn't see what was going on. We had sex by accident! Honest!" I think it's pretty obvious that Christianity causes a lot of people to have sexual hang-ups and associate sexual desires with being "sinful", especially if they know full-well that they aren't having sex with the intent or purpose to procreate Says who? The ONLY "rule/law" pertaining to sex and married people is that they must first be married to have sex. God has told married couples to enjoy each other. 1 Corinthians 7:2-4 2Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. 3Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. 4The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Where does it say anything in the above about 'marriage'. Taking of a wife is not the same thing as 'marriage'. Prove the quote(s) of Corinthians are the Word of God and not the 'insertions' of Clerical Rulers of the time. A person would not be a wife or a husband if they were not married. I can not without lying say someone is my wife and not be married to them. And in these verses it specifically says WIFE and HUSBAND. The ONLY way for them to be WIFE and HUSBAND would be to be married. Wife - person a man selects for life partner. Husband - persona a woman selects for life partner. Marriage is a civil thing. 'Taking of a Wife' re the bible has to do with making a commitment in the eyes of god... And nothing what so ever to do with 'marriage'. why would their be 'papers of divorce' if there were no documentation of the marriage to begin with,,,? In most faiths that allow 'divorce' it is accomplished by 'denial' and both spoken and published. but truthfully... God needs not papers. 'Papers' used for anything are local civil matters (and when found in holy books came from Clerical Civil Rulers and not the pen of God). 'marriage' is a civil matter the moment it requres 'papers' to be recognized. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's pretty obvious that Christianity causes a lot of people to have sexual hang-ups and associate sexual desires with being "sinful", especially if they know full-well that they aren't having sex with the intent or purpose to procreate. And lot of Christians (especially fundamentalists) preach that sex for pleasure (i.e. without the intent of procreation) is a sin. This would place any Christian couple in an extremely difficult place should either one of them become diagnoses ad being "sterile". Then they only reason they could have sex at that point would indeed be for the pleasure of physical intimacy which is forbidden. Also, the "light-outs" thing is probably related to shame as well. They are trying to remove themselves from act as much as possible. (i.e. at least they can't see what they are doing) They can always claim on judgment day, "Gee whiz Jesus, it was dark and we couldn't see what was going on. We had sex by accident! Honest!" I think it's pretty obvious that Christianity causes a lot of people to have sexual hang-ups and associate sexual desires with being "sinful", especially if they know full-well that they aren't having sex with the intent or purpose to procreate Says who? The ONLY "rule/law" pertaining to sex and married people is that they must first be married to have sex. God has told married couples to enjoy each other. 1 Corinthians 7:2-4 2Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. 3Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. 4The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Where does it say anything in the above about 'marriage'. Taking of a wife is not the same thing as 'marriage'. Prove the quote(s) of Corinthians are the Word of God and not the 'insertions' of Clerical Rulers of the time. A person would not be a wife or a husband if they were not married. I can not without lying say someone is my wife and not be married to them. And in these verses it specifically says WIFE and HUSBAND. The ONLY way for them to be WIFE and HUSBAND would be to be married. Wife - person a man selects for life partner. Husband - persona a woman selects for life partner. Marriage is a civil thing. 'Taking of a Wife' re the bible has to do with making a commitment in the eyes of god... And nothing what so ever to do with 'marriage'. why would their be 'papers of divorce' if there were no documentation of the marriage to begin with,,,? In most faiths that allow 'divorce' it is accomplished by 'denial' and both spoken and published. but truthfully... God needs not papers. 'Papers' used for anything are local civil matters (and when found in holy books came from Clerical Civil Rulers and not the pen of God). 'marriage' is a civil matter the moment it requres 'papers' to be recognized. God doesn't need marriage licenses or divorce papers. Those are only important to people of this world, not God. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's pretty obvious that Christianity causes a lot of people to have sexual hang-ups and associate sexual desires with being "sinful", especially if they know full-well that they aren't having sex with the intent or purpose to procreate. And lot of Christians (especially fundamentalists) preach that sex for pleasure (i.e. without the intent of procreation) is a sin. This would place any Christian couple in an extremely difficult place should either one of them become diagnoses ad being "sterile". Then they only reason they could have sex at that point would indeed be for the pleasure of physical intimacy which is forbidden. Also, the "light-outs" thing is probably related to shame as well. They are trying to remove themselves from act as much as possible. (i.e. at least they can't see what they are doing) They can always claim on judgment day, "Gee whiz Jesus, it was dark and we couldn't see what was going on. We had sex by accident! Honest!" I think it's pretty obvious that Christianity causes a lot of people to have sexual hang-ups and associate sexual desires with being "sinful", especially if they know full-well that they aren't having sex with the intent or purpose to procreate Says who? The ONLY "rule/law" pertaining to sex and married people is that they must first be married to have sex. God has told married couples to enjoy each other. 1 Corinthians 7:2-4 2Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. 3Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. 4The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Where does it say anything in the above about 'marriage'. Taking of a wife is not the same thing as 'marriage'. Prove the quote(s) of Corinthians are the Word of God and not the 'insertions' of Clerical Rulers of the time. A person would not be a wife or a husband if they were not married. I can not without lying say someone is my wife and not be married to them. And in these verses it specifically says WIFE and HUSBAND. The ONLY way for them to be WIFE and HUSBAND would be to be married. Wife - person a man selects for life partner. Husband - persona a woman selects for life partner. Marriage is a civil thing. 'Taking of a Wife' re the bible has to do with making a commitment in the eyes of god... And nothing what so ever to do with 'marriage'. And that commitment is called marriage. Marriage doesn't have to be some paper. God could care less about that piece of paper. Marriage: an intimate or close union Abraham did not 'marry' he took a wife. Noah did not 'marry' he took a wife. Joseph of the many colored cloak did not 'marry' he took a wife. Soloman did not 'marry' he took wives. as did David... but you get the point. Giving and taking in marriage is a civil thing. Taking a wife (or husband) is not 'marriage' (it cannot be taxed unless it is a civil matter) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's pretty obvious that Christianity causes a lot of people to have sexual hang-ups and associate sexual desires with being "sinful", especially if they know full-well that they aren't having sex with the intent or purpose to procreate. And lot of Christians (especially fundamentalists) preach that sex for pleasure (i.e. without the intent of procreation) is a sin. This would place any Christian couple in an extremely difficult place should either one of them become diagnoses ad being "sterile". Then they only reason they could have sex at that point would indeed be for the pleasure of physical intimacy which is forbidden. Also, the "light-outs" thing is probably related to shame as well. They are trying to remove themselves from act as much as possible. (i.e. at least they can't see what they are doing) They can always claim on judgment day, "Gee whiz Jesus, it was dark and we couldn't see what was going on. We had sex by accident! Honest!" I think it's pretty obvious that Christianity causes a lot of people to have sexual hang-ups and associate sexual desires with being "sinful", especially if they know full-well that they aren't having sex with the intent or purpose to procreate Says who? The ONLY "rule/law" pertaining to sex and married people is that they must first be married to have sex. God has told married couples to enjoy each other. 1 Corinthians 7:2-4 2Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. 3Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. 4The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Where does it say anything in the above about 'marriage'. Taking of a wife is not the same thing as 'marriage'. Prove the quote(s) of Corinthians are the Word of God and not the 'insertions' of Clerical Rulers of the time. A person would not be a wife or a husband if they were not married. I can not without lying say someone is my wife and not be married to them. And in these verses it specifically says WIFE and HUSBAND. The ONLY way for them to be WIFE and HUSBAND would be to be married. Wife - person a man selects for life partner. Husband - persona a woman selects for life partner. Marriage is a civil thing. 'Taking of a Wife' re the bible has to do with making a commitment in the eyes of god... And nothing what so ever to do with 'marriage'. And that commitment is called marriage. Marriage doesn't have to be some paper. God could care less about that piece of paper. Marriage: an intimate or close union Abraham did not 'marry' he took a wife. Noah did not 'marry' he took a wife. Joseph of the many colored cloak did not 'marry' he took a wife. Soloman did not 'marry' he took wives. as did David... but you get the point. Giving and taking in marriage is a civil thing. Taking a wife (or husband) is not 'marriage' (it cannot be taxed unless it is a civil matter) Only the secular side of "marriage". Marriage is the joining of two people for ever more. It's not about a piece of paper. Again, that little piece of paper is only as valuable as the paper it's written on. Marriage is a commitment to one another, could be verbal, could be through a ceremony. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's pretty obvious that Christianity causes a lot of people to have sexual hang-ups and associate sexual desires with being "sinful", especially if they know full-well that they aren't having sex with the intent or purpose to procreate. And lot of Christians (especially fundamentalists) preach that sex for pleasure (i.e. without the intent of procreation) is a sin. This would place any Christian couple in an extremely difficult place should either one of them become diagnoses ad being "sterile". Then they only reason they could have sex at that point would indeed be for the pleasure of physical intimacy which is forbidden. Also, the "light-outs" thing is probably related to shame as well. They are trying to remove themselves from act as much as possible. (i.e. at least they can't see what they are doing) They can always claim on judgment day, "Gee whiz Jesus, it was dark and we couldn't see what was going on. We had sex by accident! Honest!" I think it's pretty obvious that Christianity causes a lot of people to have sexual hang-ups and associate sexual desires with being "sinful", especially if they know full-well that they aren't having sex with the intent or purpose to procreate Says who? The ONLY "rule/law" pertaining to sex and married people is that they must first be married to have sex. God has told married couples to enjoy each other. 1 Corinthians 7:2-4 2Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. 3Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. 4The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Where does it say anything in the above about 'marriage'. Taking of a wife is not the same thing as 'marriage'. Prove the quote(s) of Corinthians are the Word of God and not the 'insertions' of Clerical Rulers of the time. A person would not be a wife or a husband if they were not married. I can not without lying say someone is my wife and not be married to them. And in these verses it specifically says WIFE and HUSBAND. The ONLY way for them to be WIFE and HUSBAND would be to be married. Wife - person a man selects for life partner. Husband - persona a woman selects for life partner. Marriage is a civil thing. 'Taking of a Wife' re the bible has to do with making a commitment in the eyes of god... And nothing what so ever to do with 'marriage'. And that commitment is called marriage. Marriage doesn't have to be some paper. God could care less about that piece of paper. Marriage: an intimate or close union Abraham did not 'marry' he took a wife. Noah did not 'marry' he took a wife. Joseph of the many colored cloak did not 'marry' he took a wife. Soloman did not 'marry' he took wives. as did David... but you get the point. Giving and taking in marriage is a civil thing. Taking a wife (or husband) is not 'marriage' (it cannot be taxed unless it is a civil matter) Only the secular side of "marriage". Marriage is the joining of two people for ever more. It's not about a piece of paper. Again, that little piece of paper is only as valuable as the paper it's written on. Marriage is a commitment to one another, could be verbal, could be through a ceremony. In marriage the man is taking him a wife. The woman is giving herself to the man. That is particularly why the woman's last name changes and not the man. The woman becomes part of the man's family. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's pretty obvious that Christianity causes a lot of people to have sexual hang-ups and associate sexual desires with being "sinful", especially if they know full-well that they aren't having sex with the intent or purpose to procreate. And lot of Christians (especially fundamentalists) preach that sex for pleasure (i.e. without the intent of procreation) is a sin. This would place any Christian couple in an extremely difficult place should either one of them become diagnoses ad being "sterile". Then they only reason they could have sex at that point would indeed be for the pleasure of physical intimacy which is forbidden. Also, the "light-outs" thing is probably related to shame as well. They are trying to remove themselves from act as much as possible. (i.e. at least they can't see what they are doing) They can always claim on judgment day, "Gee whiz Jesus, it was dark and we couldn't see what was going on. We had sex by accident! Honest!" I think it's pretty obvious that Christianity causes a lot of people to have sexual hang-ups and associate sexual desires with being "sinful", especially if they know full-well that they aren't having sex with the intent or purpose to procreate Says who? The ONLY "rule/law" pertaining to sex and married people is that they must first be married to have sex. God has told married couples to enjoy each other. 1 Corinthians 7:2-4 2Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. 3Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. 4The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Where does it say anything in the above about 'marriage'. Taking of a wife is not the same thing as 'marriage'. Prove the quote(s) of Corinthians are the Word of God and not the 'insertions' of Clerical Rulers of the time. A person would not be a wife or a husband if they were not married. I can not without lying say someone is my wife and not be married to them. And in these verses it specifically says WIFE and HUSBAND. The ONLY way for them to be WIFE and HUSBAND would be to be married. Wife - person a man selects for life partner. Husband - persona a woman selects for life partner. Marriage is a civil thing. 'Taking of a Wife' re the bible has to do with making a commitment in the eyes of god... And nothing what so ever to do with 'marriage'. And that commitment is called marriage. Marriage doesn't have to be some paper. God could care less about that piece of paper. Marriage: an intimate or close union Abraham did not 'marry' he took a wife. Noah did not 'marry' he took a wife. Joseph of the many colored cloak did not 'marry' he took a wife. Soloman did not 'marry' he took wives. as did David... but you get the point. Giving and taking in marriage is a civil thing. Taking a wife (or husband) is not 'marriage' (it cannot be taxed unless it is a civil matter) Only the secular side of "marriage". Marriage is the joining of two people for ever more. It's not about a piece of paper. Again, that little piece of paper is only as valuable as the paper it's written on. Marriage is a commitment to one another, could be verbal, could be through a ceremony. In marriage the man is taking him a wife. The woman is giving herself to the man. That is particularly why the woman's last name changes and not the man. The woman becomes part of the man's family. Then I want none of 'marriage' (as you see it). The Rose of Equality exists not within it. A wife is 'help' to the man in his journey. A husband is 'help' to the wife on her journey. As the measure given so the measure recieved... A woman is my equal. (and I hers). Not my slave. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's pretty obvious that Christianity causes a lot of people to have sexual hang-ups and associate sexual desires with being "sinful", especially if they know full-well that they aren't having sex with the intent or purpose to procreate. And lot of Christians (especially fundamentalists) preach that sex for pleasure (i.e. without the intent of procreation) is a sin. This would place any Christian couple in an extremely difficult place should either one of them become diagnoses ad being "sterile". Then they only reason they could have sex at that point would indeed be for the pleasure of physical intimacy which is forbidden. Also, the "light-outs" thing is probably related to shame as well. They are trying to remove themselves from act as much as possible. (i.e. at least they can't see what they are doing) They can always claim on judgment day, "Gee whiz Jesus, it was dark and we couldn't see what was going on. We had sex by accident! Honest!" I think it's pretty obvious that Christianity causes a lot of people to have sexual hang-ups and associate sexual desires with being "sinful", especially if they know full-well that they aren't having sex with the intent or purpose to procreate Says who? The ONLY "rule/law" pertaining to sex and married people is that they must first be married to have sex. God has told married couples to enjoy each other. 1 Corinthians 7:2-4 2Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. 3Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. 4The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Where does it say anything in the above about 'marriage'. Taking of a wife is not the same thing as 'marriage'. Prove the quote(s) of Corinthians are the Word of God and not the 'insertions' of Clerical Rulers of the time. A person would not be a wife or a husband if they were not married. I can not without lying say someone is my wife and not be married to them. And in these verses it specifically says WIFE and HUSBAND. The ONLY way for them to be WIFE and HUSBAND would be to be married. Wife - person a man selects for life partner. Husband - persona a woman selects for life partner. Marriage is a civil thing. 'Taking of a Wife' re the bible has to do with making a commitment in the eyes of god... And nothing what so ever to do with 'marriage'. And that commitment is called marriage. Marriage doesn't have to be some paper. God could care less about that piece of paper. Marriage: an intimate or close union Abraham did not 'marry' he took a wife. Noah did not 'marry' he took a wife. Joseph of the many colored cloak did not 'marry' he took a wife. Soloman did not 'marry' he took wives. as did David... but you get the point. Giving and taking in marriage is a civil thing. Taking a wife (or husband) is not 'marriage' (it cannot be taxed unless it is a civil matter) Only the secular side of "marriage". Marriage is the joining of two people for ever more. It's not about a piece of paper. Again, that little piece of paper is only as valuable as the paper it's written on. Marriage is a commitment to one another, could be verbal, could be through a ceremony. In marriage the man is taking him a wife. The woman is giving herself to the man. That is particularly why the woman's last name changes and not the man. The woman becomes part of the man's family. Then I want none of 'marriage' (as you see it). The Rose of Equality exists not within it. A wife is 'help' to the man in his journey. A husband is 'help' to the wife on her journey. As the measure given so the measure recieved... A woman is my equal. (and I hers). Not my slave. The woman gives herself to the man and the man gives himself to the woman. They live not for themselves, but for each other. We are all equal, male, female, tall, short, ect. Makes no never mind, we are all in the same boat we call life. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
well, the pastor did ask us both if we 'took' the other to be our husband/wife
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is interesting pertaining to what some of this discussion is about. http://assemblyoftrueisrael.com/Formsandagreements/MarriageCovenant.html A Sacred Marriage Covenant -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE: This Marriage Covenant (Contract) is designed to eliminate the need for a "Third Party" (the State) from the Marriage Covenant. Because Marriage is a Religious exercise, No license is required, nor should a license (permission) be requested from the Corporate State. If after the Marriage, the wife desires to "legally" change her last name to that of her husband, it can be done by a simple name change petition through any local District Court. This document is presented for educational purposes only and should not be a substitute for professional legal services. PRE-NUPTIAL CONTRACT A Sacred Marriage Covenant/Contract/Agreement To all to whom these Presents shall come, know Ye: In keeping with the Spiritual guidance of the Set-Apart (Holy) Scriptures, and keeping in harmony with the Constitution for the united States of America A.D. 1787, the original commercial contract and covenant between the Sovereign "We the People" and our created Government, whereby and wherein "We the People" did not, have not, and will not yield our Sovereignty to those agencies which "We" created to serve Us, and to the extent that a license is permission of a state; it is declared by the First Article of the Bill of Rights for that Constitution (as was the intent of its framers), that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. " Therefore, when a state requires a license for a "Sacred Ecclesiastical Marriage Covenant," it violates the Constitutional Rights of those who desire to exercise their "freedom of religion." It is the desire of the Parties herein to enter into a Sacred Marriage Covenant, which is a religious exercise. Therefore, this Sacred Marriage Covenant is not, nor can it be, established, regulated, or in any way licensed by this state, or any other party or agency. The bonding relationship of this Nuptial Contract, herein designated as a "Sacred Marriage Covenant," derives its power of authority and existence from the One Supreme Elohim (God) of all creation, whose name is Yahweh, and His resurrected and ascended Son Yahshua the Messiah (Jesus the Christ), who is our Master and King, and no other. The terms herein have been Ecclesiastically established by the Parties in the sight of Yahweh, and as attested by the undersigned Witnesses. Both the Constitution for the united States of America A.D. 1787 and the state Constitution protect freedom of Religion and the Right to Contract/Covenant. These Rights and Powers are also recognized by Common Law, International Law, and the natural Universal Laws of the Eternal, Supreme, Sovereign Creator Yahweh. This Contract is made and entered into this _________________ day of the ____________________ month, in the Year of our Master, Redeemer, A.D. ________________________________________________, by and between |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a contract is a contract, and is upholdable by law
but the law does have the right to regulate which conditions will meet specific privileges afforded by the law,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With one wife under a controlled idea scientific lab environment sex condition sex was okay. The conditions being the light was off; The kids were asleep; It was the right time of the day and she was either drunk enough or had prior foreplay sex was okay. Of course, this was the Christian relationship. But the other non-Christian relationship with my next wife sex was okay and even encouraged. Your scenario does not sound like it was the result of christianity. It sounds like she simply did not feel loved and safe with you. That is not to say that you were unkind to her, but if she was truly interested in you, it would be a 'fighting off' of feelings to have sex, rather than 'create a tolerable environment' for it. You were not a match and its good that you split. True. We were unevenly yoked. She broke the yoke the first time and I broke the yoke the second time. Her mother let me out of the Faustian contract by paying for the divorce the first time. My wife wanted the divorce the first time. The next time we married I wanted the divorce and I had to pay for it. Nolo Contendre both times. With the third marriage there wasn't a yoke of marriage. She never even asked for a marriage; That was my idea. It wasn't orchestrated. She just said if you want me come get me. I couldn't pass up an offer like that. I finally had found wedded bliss. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's pretty obvious that Christianity causes a lot of people to have sexual hang-ups and associate sexual desires with being "sinful", especially if they know full-well that they aren't having sex with the intent or purpose to procreate. And lot of Christians (especially fundamentalists) preach that sex for pleasure (i.e. without the intent of procreation) is a sin. This would place any Christian couple in an extremely difficult place should either one of them become diagnoses ad being "sterile". Then they only reason they could have sex at that point would indeed be for the pleasure of physical intimacy which is forbidden. Also, the "light-outs" thing is probably related to shame as well. They are trying to remove themselves from act as much as possible. (i.e. at least they can't see what they are doing) They can always claim on judgment day, "Gee whiz Jesus, it was dark and we couldn't see what was going on. We had sex by accident! Honest!" I think it's pretty obvious that Christianity causes a lot of people to have sexual hang-ups and associate sexual desires with being "sinful", especially if they know full-well that they aren't having sex with the intent or purpose to procreate Says who? The ONLY "rule/law" pertaining to sex and married people is that they must first be married to have sex. God has told married couples to enjoy each other. 1 Corinthians 7:2-4 2Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. 3Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. 4The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. says who? less than a third of the world's population even owns a bible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's pretty obvious that Christianity causes a lot of people to have sexual hang-ups and associate sexual desires with being "sinful", especially if they know full-well that they aren't having sex with the intent or purpose to procreate. And lot of Christians (especially fundamentalists) preach that sex for pleasure (i.e. without the intent of procreation) is a sin. This would place any Christian couple in an extremely difficult place should either one of them become diagnoses ad being "sterile". Then they only reason they could have sex at that point would indeed be for the pleasure of physical intimacy which is forbidden. Also, the "light-outs" thing is probably related to shame as well. They are trying to remove themselves from act as much as possible. (i.e. at least they can't see what they are doing) They can always claim on judgment day, "Gee whiz Jesus, it was dark and we couldn't see what was going on. We had sex by accident! Honest!" I am glad that you can see the Faustian contract. Having offspring isn't rocket science. In a Christian relationship you are just supposed to get one virgin whether you are male of female. That is if you go by Genesis. If you see God as a spirit and not corporeal; Not having a human body even though God is personified a lot; Being the creator of both male and female; Being this entity being in a duality flux so that he/she is able to determine what the difference is in being male or female then one can't help but think that this entity isn't some kind of morphemic spiritual entity complete unto itself. At least that is what I think of when I read, "Vengeance is mine, Surely I will repay." Which helped me go the Nolo Contredre route cause vengeance just isn't my cup of tea. That is why when the mad hatter asks me if I would like one lump or two I just put my hand over my glass because I learned how to drink tea straight. I have my step father to thank for that. 
|
|
|
|
|
