To the popping the question post: I wasn't going to reply, but when it became a hot thread I must
Sep 11th, 2000, 10:26 AM
#21
Guest
Posts: n/a
I believe the good book tells us a few things.
Judge not lest ye be judged
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
It never ceases to amaze me - the number of purported christians that would probably be out nailing Jesus to the cross if they could.
Judge not lest ye be judged
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
It never ceases to amaze me - the number of purported christians that would probably be out nailing Jesus to the cross if they could.
Sep 11th, 2000, 10:29 AM
#22
Guest
Posts: n/a
Joe, I couldn't agree with you more. There are issues that are "black and white," or should be anyway! And I also agree that it is a slippery slope. Our breakdown in society is happening, at first slow but sure, but lately, I'm appalled at what is considered "normal" and "funny" - on tv, in movies, on these boards! WHERE will it end?????
Sep 11th, 2000, 10:32 AM
#23
Guest
Posts: n/a
This is not about having sex with someone you just run into. This is about Caitlin's post, especially her last sentence. If anyone thinks that the institution of marriage and traditional promises "guarantees" a superior, morally higher, and better relationship (even for the kids)- they have not been into the courts with me (as an advocate) or worked the phone lines at the Crisis Center, as I have. It is wonderful to have such ideals and a good thing to have promises witnessed. Yet some people do better with unspoken love and kindness than others do with all of society's "oks" and approvals. The stats are very unclear as so many factors are skewed in these issues. Those who buy property together and remain unmarried by law actually have less "break up" of the relationship. Also what about the 85 year olds who have been married for 50 plus years and (like one I saw last week) are registered as "intact" yet there has been no spiritual or emotional connection for 40 of those years. Not so black and white as you think. How about kind care for those who nurture (and are trying to nurture a growing commitment and attachment)instead of more judgment. Moral outrage should be against the realities of crime, assault, and emotional abuse. In reality there are less consequences for the "unkind" than there are for the "kind."
Sep 11th, 2000, 10:49 AM
#24
Guest
Posts: n/a
The following message was in reponse to an earlier one:
------------------
Author: Jeanette ([email protected])
Date: 9/11/2000, 12:38 pm ET
Message: Dear Caitlin: Thank you for your beautiful response. You've said it perfectly. Kindness to others is where our growth and "holiness" begins. Judgement will not elevate the moral structure of our society.
-------------------
If I'm not mistaken you are making a judgement about those who disagree with the current "do anthing" attitude. I am a kind person even though I think traveling before marriage while sharing a room is not a model I want my 10 year old daughter to have. I am one of the nicest people you could meet .... I just have values I live by.
------------------
Author: Jeanette ([email protected])
Date: 9/11/2000, 12:38 pm ET
Message: Dear Caitlin: Thank you for your beautiful response. You've said it perfectly. Kindness to others is where our growth and "holiness" begins. Judgement will not elevate the moral structure of our society.
-------------------
If I'm not mistaken you are making a judgement about those who disagree with the current "do anthing" attitude. I am a kind person even though I think traveling before marriage while sharing a room is not a model I want my 10 year old daughter to have. I am one of the nicest people you could meet .... I just have values I live by.
Sep 11th, 2000, 11:14 AM
#26
Guest
Posts: n/a
To xxxx.xx who did not give themselves a name: I was disagreeing yes, but not "judging" at all. I also was NOT equating this proposing couple with other "anything goes" or "do anything" situations. It is a monogamous relationship in development that we are discussing. I have three adult children that all have stricter and more rigid moral codes than I have- and they have seen both bad and good role models. They chose loving, monogamous and nurturing relationships in their lives because of the many other aspects that Caitlin mentions. PLUS they know how kindness and attentive care are the central part of the "we" of a relationship and not the contracts. Reread Charles.
Sep 11th, 2000, 11:49 AM
#27
Guest
Posts: n/a
This is in response to the poster (Joe) who stated that all humans are born with an innate sense of right and wrong.
Don't you think that if this were true, all cultures and societies would have adopted the same types of laws and developed the same moral code? How can you explain the discrepancies between different cultures?
I mean this question as respectfully as you meant yours. This is something that I think about quite a bit - how much of "morals" is actually human invention and how "right" and "wrong" seem to be determined more by the society you are born into rather than some sort of divine edict.
Don't you think that if this were true, all cultures and societies would have adopted the same types of laws and developed the same moral code? How can you explain the discrepancies between different cultures?
I mean this question as respectfully as you meant yours. This is something that I think about quite a bit - how much of "morals" is actually human invention and how "right" and "wrong" seem to be determined more by the society you are born into rather than some sort of divine edict.
Sep 11th, 2000, 03:59 PM
#28
Guest
Posts: n/a
Clea, If I might add this.....there IS a book of absolute truth, called the Bible. It was not written to keep us from having fun. On the contrary, it was written for us as a Road Map for life, to guide us in how to live - for our BENEFIT. When we follow the loving guidance found there, we will know what is right and wrong. And we will be blessed.
Sep 11th, 2000, 04:27 PM
#29
Guest
Posts: n/a
Whatever happened to living by the 10 Commandments? IMO, people today are doing what they darn well please and making it up as they go along with little regard for God's laws that he handed down.
And being a nice person and doing kind things to others does not make one a moral human being. Adhering to the 10 Commandments and living the truth spoke by God makes one a decent, moral human.
As for those who get divorced if there had been a little thought and reflection in picking one's partner, there would not be the divorce rate in this country. Too often people rush into marriages for the wrong reasons and with little thought of the long term. People get married thinking they can change the other person. Guess what? It ain't gonna happen. You can't change anyone but yourself. And too often people get married thinking the other person will make them happy. You are responsible for your own happiness and no one, no matter how rich, cute or charming, is going to make you happy. If people were a little more realistic about marriage and would take off their rose colored glasses, they would be better off.
Marriage takes hard work, compromising, a sense of humor, commitment, love, luck and dedication. If you are not willing to put the effort into a marriage don't get married!
Shacking up is not only wrong and immoral, in some states you don't even have the same protection you would have if you were married and your partner dies. IMO, people who shack up are afraid of committing and are taking the easy way out. Why get married when you can just up and leave. And whoever quoted stats about live ins staying together longer than being married does not have their facts correct. It is a fact that married people have healthier lives and live longer than unmarried shack up couples. Marriage has been around for hundreds and hundreds of years, it is only in the last 40 years that marriage has been under attack and deemed politically incorrect. Our society is undermining hundreds of years of marriage and family because some people think it is meaningless and confining. What does that say about us?
The destructive downward slide of marriage and morals have caused numerous social problems in this country, out of wedlock births, teen suicides, crime, drugs, gangs, drinking etc. It makes me sad and afraid what the future holds for our children and grandchildren.
And being a nice person and doing kind things to others does not make one a moral human being. Adhering to the 10 Commandments and living the truth spoke by God makes one a decent, moral human.
As for those who get divorced if there had been a little thought and reflection in picking one's partner, there would not be the divorce rate in this country. Too often people rush into marriages for the wrong reasons and with little thought of the long term. People get married thinking they can change the other person. Guess what? It ain't gonna happen. You can't change anyone but yourself. And too often people get married thinking the other person will make them happy. You are responsible for your own happiness and no one, no matter how rich, cute or charming, is going to make you happy. If people were a little more realistic about marriage and would take off their rose colored glasses, they would be better off.
Marriage takes hard work, compromising, a sense of humor, commitment, love, luck and dedication. If you are not willing to put the effort into a marriage don't get married!
Shacking up is not only wrong and immoral, in some states you don't even have the same protection you would have if you were married and your partner dies. IMO, people who shack up are afraid of committing and are taking the easy way out. Why get married when you can just up and leave. And whoever quoted stats about live ins staying together longer than being married does not have their facts correct. It is a fact that married people have healthier lives and live longer than unmarried shack up couples. Marriage has been around for hundreds and hundreds of years, it is only in the last 40 years that marriage has been under attack and deemed politically incorrect. Our society is undermining hundreds of years of marriage and family because some people think it is meaningless and confining. What does that say about us?
The destructive downward slide of marriage and morals have caused numerous social problems in this country, out of wedlock births, teen suicides, crime, drugs, gangs, drinking etc. It makes me sad and afraid what the future holds for our children and grandchildren.
Sep 11th, 2000, 04:53 PM
#30
Guest
Posts: n/a
Gosh gee, this certainly IS an election year. Right on Caitlin and Jeanette, for some reasoned and heartfelt thoughts on an issue that conservative Americans just love to go on and on about. Tiffany, you wouldn't happen to be a Bush Republican, would you? What sincerely gets me is how an adult male could "see the error of his ways" in his 30's (having come from such a God-fearing family which certainly NEVER condoned cohabitation) and after many years of recreational use of cocaine, embraces Christianity. Having done so, this pretty much negates any previous accountability on his part, doesn't it?
I dispute the statistics about teen pregnancy, which according to recent accounts is actually down. Just for the sake of discussion and to make this travel-related, didn't a European Crown Prince recently move in with his girlfriend, who happens to have a child from another man? This issue of morality really pays differently in other cultures, where you will find a more generalized sense of outrage about people's public behavior than with their private. On the other hand, conservative Americans' embracing of the gun culture is seen as a constitutional right, forget the fact that the whole concept is anachronistic.
But this line of reasoning would be absolutely lost on folks who keep insisting that there is only one way to live a moral life on this planet, and that is through an anachronistic adherence to texts that were mistranslated as of AD 200. Some of those early shifts of emphasis in the early translation of the Bible continues to be the subject of much theological debate.
I dispute the statistics about teen pregnancy, which according to recent accounts is actually down. Just for the sake of discussion and to make this travel-related, didn't a European Crown Prince recently move in with his girlfriend, who happens to have a child from another man? This issue of morality really pays differently in other cultures, where you will find a more generalized sense of outrage about people's public behavior than with their private. On the other hand, conservative Americans' embracing of the gun culture is seen as a constitutional right, forget the fact that the whole concept is anachronistic.
But this line of reasoning would be absolutely lost on folks who keep insisting that there is only one way to live a moral life on this planet, and that is through an anachronistic adherence to texts that were mistranslated as of AD 200. Some of those early shifts of emphasis in the early translation of the Bible continues to be the subject of much theological debate.
Sep 11th, 2000, 06:11 PM
#31
Guest
Posts: n/a
To 'goshgee': so is it your assumption that all Christians (or for that matter believers of other religions) are hypocrites unless they practice their religion from birth? Where does your logic come from? If you want to criticize a man who decided to change his ways and get on the straight and narrow, you condemn all Christians everywhere. #1: no one is perfect from birth and therefore must "come around" sometime, and #2: Christians (and other believers) are flawed just like all other humans. This issue always makes me shake my head. People assume that because someone calls himself/herself a Christian that hypocrisy is afoot unless that person lives a life of perfection. Newsflash: there aren't any perfect humans and Christians commit sins on a regular basis like everyone else. Getting back up and walking on after falling down again and again isn't easy. Thank goodness for the effort, though.
I also don't understand your argument about other cultures. Are you suggesting that because other cultures don't value the sanctity of marriage or any other virtue you might cite, that that validates such a position and makes it morally correct? So since the official position of the Third Reich was that ethnic cleansing was necessary and acceptable, that granted moral footing to such thinking? Come on. That kind of rationale is ludicrous.
To Jeanette: of course taking marriage vows doesn't "guarantee" anything...least of all a successful marriage. And if you aren't beholden to the basic postulates of Judaism, Christianity, or several other common religions then such vows mean nothing in my book. But then again, if you don't recognize the tenets of any major religion, then you are without a moral compass by your own choosing...you are free to do as you please. Write your own rules to please your own circumstances and whims. Doesn't work very well for society as a whole, however, if everyone is going to make up his/her own rules.
To Caitlin: if living together for many years is OK and makes for a solid foundation for a relationship in your world, then why get married? Seriously? Why would you want to surrender to an institution you do not value? To make others happy? For legal convenience?
To clea: Good question. In a word, no, I don't believe all cultures eventually develop the same moral codes despite innate moral understanding. How many families do you know of wherein 3 or more kids are raised the same way, yet at least one develops very divergent outlooks/goals and spiritual direction? Why do great parents sometimes turn out a seemingly rotten child? The basic problem in my view is that man has free will to choose what he will do with his life from a spiritual standpoint. He can, and often does, choose to ignore his moral compass because it is convenient, and because it necessitates that he subjugate himself to a source of guidance beyond himself. In a primitive culture in which one man is ceded power by right of birth, he may have a choice between maximizing his personal power via oppression and unjust rule thereby assuring his position over the long term, or following his innate moral drives and potentially losing his control. Tough dilemma. History tells us that some have followed one path, some the other. It's the never ending battle between conscience and pride/self-indulgence. Interesting to note that many theologians believe that the very first and original sin was pride...the pride of Lucifer, who in his beauty thought that he should not have to submit to God's authority. He was thus cast out of heaven. Is it a twisted coincidence that man's fundamental flaw seems to be his inability to submit his own self indulgent will to the purer guidance from within?
I also don't understand your argument about other cultures. Are you suggesting that because other cultures don't value the sanctity of marriage or any other virtue you might cite, that that validates such a position and makes it morally correct? So since the official position of the Third Reich was that ethnic cleansing was necessary and acceptable, that granted moral footing to such thinking? Come on. That kind of rationale is ludicrous.
To Jeanette: of course taking marriage vows doesn't "guarantee" anything...least of all a successful marriage. And if you aren't beholden to the basic postulates of Judaism, Christianity, or several other common religions then such vows mean nothing in my book. But then again, if you don't recognize the tenets of any major religion, then you are without a moral compass by your own choosing...you are free to do as you please. Write your own rules to please your own circumstances and whims. Doesn't work very well for society as a whole, however, if everyone is going to make up his/her own rules.
To Caitlin: if living together for many years is OK and makes for a solid foundation for a relationship in your world, then why get married? Seriously? Why would you want to surrender to an institution you do not value? To make others happy? For legal convenience?
To clea: Good question. In a word, no, I don't believe all cultures eventually develop the same moral codes despite innate moral understanding. How many families do you know of wherein 3 or more kids are raised the same way, yet at least one develops very divergent outlooks/goals and spiritual direction? Why do great parents sometimes turn out a seemingly rotten child? The basic problem in my view is that man has free will to choose what he will do with his life from a spiritual standpoint. He can, and often does, choose to ignore his moral compass because it is convenient, and because it necessitates that he subjugate himself to a source of guidance beyond himself. In a primitive culture in which one man is ceded power by right of birth, he may have a choice between maximizing his personal power via oppression and unjust rule thereby assuring his position over the long term, or following his innate moral drives and potentially losing his control. Tough dilemma. History tells us that some have followed one path, some the other. It's the never ending battle between conscience and pride/self-indulgence. Interesting to note that many theologians believe that the very first and original sin was pride...the pride of Lucifer, who in his beauty thought that he should not have to submit to God's authority. He was thus cast out of heaven. Is it a twisted coincidence that man's fundamental flaw seems to be his inability to submit his own self indulgent will to the purer guidance from within?
Sep 11th, 2000, 06:22 PM
#33
Guest
Posts: n/a
I have to agree that Pride is a primary sin. Just as is murder, stealing, ignoring our elderly parents, working on Sunday, jealousy, adultry, taking the Lord's name in vain, worshipping money. I have thought of eight - someone help me with the other two. Amazingly - Premarital sex is not one of the ten commandments . . . I wish we could spend more time on the Commandments and less blasting those who are trying to plan a romantic proposal!
Sep 11th, 2000, 06:33 PM
#34
Guest
Posts: n/a
Joe:
I don't get your misreading of my comments, nor will I ever get your logic. As long as you continue to believe in a medieval literal Lucifer, I don't think there is much room for discussion or agreement here. And your point about Nazi Germany was totally lost on me. I was talking about the hypocricy of religious conservatives and their preocupation with PRIVATE behavior. What could be more public than mass executions? And if you know your WWII history, there were a lot of "Christians" who looked the other way while the atrocities continued.
Judge not lest ye be judged. I go back to my idea that Christ preached a doctrine of tolerance. Even though Mary and I probably don't agree on the subject of religion, at least she's trying to put this in perspective. Lighten up, Sam, your intolerance is showing.
I don't get your misreading of my comments, nor will I ever get your logic. As long as you continue to believe in a medieval literal Lucifer, I don't think there is much room for discussion or agreement here. And your point about Nazi Germany was totally lost on me. I was talking about the hypocricy of religious conservatives and their preocupation with PRIVATE behavior. What could be more public than mass executions? And if you know your WWII history, there were a lot of "Christians" who looked the other way while the atrocities continued.
Judge not lest ye be judged. I go back to my idea that Christ preached a doctrine of tolerance. Even though Mary and I probably don't agree on the subject of religion, at least she's trying to put this in perspective. Lighten up, Sam, your intolerance is showing.
Sep 11th, 2000, 06:36 PM
#35
Guest
Posts: n/a
You know, on second thought, I've changed my mind. I think we as a country, as a world, should just abide by the Live And Let Live, cliche. Why not? If it "feels good" why not do it? What's right for one doesn't mean it's wrong for another, right? And here in the good 'ole USA, we ALL have to have our RIGHTS! Don't want anyone telling ME what's right or wrong! I'm a BIG boy now!
Hmmm, let's see. Live and let live....do your own thing...if it feels good.....Alright!!! That means that soon, we will have countless types of families, more than we do now! Hey, I LIKE the idea of Poligamy again, don't all the rest of you men??? And my mother in law is a royal pain in the neck. Isn't euthenasia getting popular again? Why stop there! Maybe we could have a lottery for who lives and dies - after all, with NO ABSOLUTE TRUTHS, as to what's RIGHT vs what's WRONG - WHO, and I mean W - H - O is to decide what's right or wrong? We ALL are entitled to our opinions, right?
All righty then - on your mark, get set, GO!
Hmmm, let's see. Live and let live....do your own thing...if it feels good.....Alright!!! That means that soon, we will have countless types of families, more than we do now! Hey, I LIKE the idea of Poligamy again, don't all the rest of you men??? And my mother in law is a royal pain in the neck. Isn't euthenasia getting popular again? Why stop there! Maybe we could have a lottery for who lives and dies - after all, with NO ABSOLUTE TRUTHS, as to what's RIGHT vs what's WRONG - WHO, and I mean W - H - O is to decide what's right or wrong? We ALL are entitled to our opinions, right?
All righty then - on your mark, get set, GO!
Sep 11th, 2000, 06:42 PM
#37
Guest
Posts: n/a
Don, you ARE a prize. Go ahead and live a life of poligamy, if that appeals to you. I can't believe you'd actually consider euthenasia on your mother-in-law because she is a pain in the neck. But if you feel that only your Christian religion prevents you from doing that, then by all means KEEP GOING TO CHURCH! Take it easy, your temper is showing.
Sep 11th, 2000, 06:59 PM
#38
Guest
Posts: n/a
This message was posted under my "name."
I would never have left this message.
-----------------
Author: me ([email protected])
Date: 9/11/2000, 10:36 pm ET
Message: Okay, folks, it's a travel forum. Shut the hell up!
-----
I don't use that language.
No matter how much we may disagree, all of us should be able to express our opinions.
I would never have left this message.
-----------------
Author: me ([email protected])
Date: 9/11/2000, 10:36 pm ET
Message: Okay, folks, it's a travel forum. Shut the hell up!
-----
I don't use that language.
No matter how much we may disagree, all of us should be able to express our opinions.
Sep 11th, 2000, 07:43 PM
#39
Guest
Posts: n/a
goshgee: Christ preached a doctrine of tolerance toward the weak and misguided, but preached even more vehemently that there is no arguing about basic rights and wrongs and that sin is to be detested in all forms.
You call this tolerance(?): bursting into the Temple and ransacking the tables of the moneychangers and throwing them out...calling the High Priests of the day a 'brood of vipers'...teaching that simply harboring evil thoughts (lust, anger) leaves one punishable as an adulterer or murderer. He was very explicit about what constitutes right and wrong, and very explicit that bending the rules doesn't cut it. I don't consider that tolerance. I know you're referring to tolerance of the behaviors of others. But Jesus did not tolerate sinful BEHAVIOR. He taught that all humans are sinners and equally guilty under God's law. Thus no one man is better than another, thus no man has a right to cast judgment on another...we're all pigs in slop, equally unsightly from a spiritual standpoint.
But Jesus never taught that Christians are to tolerate sinful behavior in others. Thus I am extremely INTOLERANT of sinful behavior, and am in no danger of judgment for it provided that I don't condemn the person along with the behavior. Love the sinner, hate the sin.
So are you saying that religious conservatives are wrongly concerned about private behavior (hypocritically so)? Are you saying that I should have no opinion about private behaviors of anyone in our society? Where do you draw the line? Is child porn OK if done in private? Is heroin use for everyone OK? How about torturing animals (religious and recreational), or incest?
And the fall of Satan is not a medieval teaching. It predates the New Testament entirely. Check the ancient Hebrew writings and tradition.
Last point: are the Christians who 'looked the other way' in Nazi Germany accountable for the government's wrongs? If so, are you accountable for the actions of the US Government if you don't actively protest them?
You call this tolerance(?): bursting into the Temple and ransacking the tables of the moneychangers and throwing them out...calling the High Priests of the day a 'brood of vipers'...teaching that simply harboring evil thoughts (lust, anger) leaves one punishable as an adulterer or murderer. He was very explicit about what constitutes right and wrong, and very explicit that bending the rules doesn't cut it. I don't consider that tolerance. I know you're referring to tolerance of the behaviors of others. But Jesus did not tolerate sinful BEHAVIOR. He taught that all humans are sinners and equally guilty under God's law. Thus no one man is better than another, thus no man has a right to cast judgment on another...we're all pigs in slop, equally unsightly from a spiritual standpoint.
But Jesus never taught that Christians are to tolerate sinful behavior in others. Thus I am extremely INTOLERANT of sinful behavior, and am in no danger of judgment for it provided that I don't condemn the person along with the behavior. Love the sinner, hate the sin.
So are you saying that religious conservatives are wrongly concerned about private behavior (hypocritically so)? Are you saying that I should have no opinion about private behaviors of anyone in our society? Where do you draw the line? Is child porn OK if done in private? Is heroin use for everyone OK? How about torturing animals (religious and recreational), or incest?
And the fall of Satan is not a medieval teaching. It predates the New Testament entirely. Check the ancient Hebrew writings and tradition.
Last point: are the Christians who 'looked the other way' in Nazi Germany accountable for the government's wrongs? If so, are you accountable for the actions of the US Government if you don't actively protest them?
Sep 11th, 2000, 07:50 PM
#40
Guest
Posts: n/a
You make some excellent points Joe!! You've given excellent food-for-thought. But please don't expect many people to publicly agree with you even if they know you're right. And they do. *****Remember, the truth hurts. ****
But I for one want to thank you for your wisdom.
But I for one want to thank you for your wisdom.
