South Africa Flag logo

South African Skeptics

December 14, 2019, 11:59:00 AM
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
Go to mobile page.
News: Follow saskeptics on twitter.
   
   Skeptic Forum Board Index   Help Forum Rules Search GoogleTagged Login Register Chat Blogroll  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic:

Well, if you put it like this....

 (Read 1962 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Faerie
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +10/-2
Offline Offline

Posts: 2114



« on: September 23, 2010, 15:11:35 PM »

I honestly dont see the point of it then, takes all the fun out of it.  WTF!!

Quote
Quote# 76205

Natural sexual activity are those acts between an adult male (preferably 25 years of age or older with reasonable financial stability and maturity) and a female who has reached an age of sufficient maturity to responsibly bear children as God wills (husband and his wife).
Procreation may not by intent be excluded whether by natural means or artificial means. Scriptural limits are set upon the days of a woman's cycle when sexual intercourse is permissible. Probable fertility occurs at the beginning of the permissible duration for moral intercourse as shown in the story of Bathsheba's pregnancy.
All focused ejaculations of a human male must be deposited within the vagina of a mature human female. The activity may not have been intentionally rendered infertile either by the male or the female. A woman may only receive sperm from a human male in the approved natural manner. All other two party (human or lower animal) sexual activity wherein one or both participants are human is condemned as unnatural. All sexual activity between near relatives or where one is a minor is condemned even if otherwise considered as natural.

Father David C. Trosch, Life Enterprises Unlimited 81 Comments [9/21/2010 5:30:59 AM]
Fundie Index: 62
WTF?! || meh


http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteArchives.aspx?Archive=1

I do love browsing the site though.
Logged
GCG
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +8/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 1829


skeptical mantis is skeptical


adele horn
WWW
« Reply #1 on: September 23, 2010, 15:21:18 PM »

god help you if you dare have fun!!!!!
Logged
StevoMuso
Stevo Muso
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +4/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 654



« Reply #2 on: September 24, 2010, 07:18:43 AM »

And if you masturbate He kills you (see Judah 38: 8 -10).

Hey - check out this article on the raunchiest sex scenes in the Bible (e.g. Lot's daughters date-raping their own father). I really laughed out loud with this one:

http://www.cracked.com/article_16546_the-6-raunchiest-most-depraved-sex-acts-from-bible.html
Logged
Julian
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +2/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 151


« Reply #3 on: September 24, 2010, 12:18:28 PM »


Quote
All other two party (human or lower animal) sexual activity wherein one or both participants are human is condemned as unnatural.

So all other three party sexual activity is a-ok? Those kinky bastards.

Also, I am intrigued as to how sexual activity with a lower animal would work. Sex with invertebrates would not occur to most people I'm sure, these guys really like to cover ALL the options. I'm surprised plants aren't mentioned.
Logged
Hermes
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +18/-2
Offline Offline

Posts: 1137



« Reply #4 on: September 24, 2010, 13:15:15 PM »

How do these guys define "natural"?   Why does sex have to be so "natural" while we live in an age when our daily lives have become very distant from running around naked and eating all our food raw.   We don't run around naked: we drive motorcars and wear clothes and we cook our meals on electric stoves.   If "natural", as applied to sexual intercourse here, is meant to mean "the way animals do it," there are a few shocking surprises in store for proponents of "natural sex".

There is a huge difference between natural and socially desirable.   It may well be argued that it is socially desirable to postpone starting a family (if you desire offspring) until you are more mature, have the financial means to support children and are involved in a stable relationship.   Likewise it would be socially desirable to limit the size of your family by means of contraception.   These are practical considerations which have no bearing on whether sex is natural or not.   And in the same way that we do not eat merely for nutritional sustenance, but enjoy a sumptuous meal, there is no need to regard sexual intercourse as a mere means of procreation when it can be enjoyed for its own sake.

The acceptability of sexual conduct should be assessed in terms of social desirability; whether it is natural is irrelevant.
Logged
Julian
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +2/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 151


« Reply #5 on: September 24, 2010, 13:21:45 PM »

Thanks Steve, that is hilarious. I just love Cracked:
"Now there's something a woman never forgets. You're getting busy with your husband's brother, he splooges on the ground, and promptly gets slain by the LORD. Talk about awkward."
-- falling off my chair and rofl

Seriously though, the Bible is such a strange mixture of the bizarre, the mundane, the ghastly and the profound. Those Catholics who put it all together in one big book and called it "The Truth" were seriously brain damaged. Did they read the thing at any point?
Logged
Brian
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +8/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 1367


I think therefor I am, I think


« Reply #6 on: September 24, 2010, 13:25:26 PM »

Why stress about what the holy father says???...he doesn't know what 'natural sex' is. I'm a balie and way past having offspring or natural issue...does that mean we balies are banned??? WTF!! It totally pisses me off that when morals and marriage etc are discussed on radio/tv it's the priests who have the most to say. Are they experts?
Logged
Julian
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +2/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 151


« Reply #7 on: September 24, 2010, 13:28:54 PM »

If "natural", as applied to sexual intercourse here, is meant to mean "the way animals do it," there are a few shocking surprises in store for proponents of "natural sex".

Luckily, thanks to the editors at National Geographic, most of us have never been exposed to the sordid wonders of the animal world.

I agree wholeheartedly though. This misuse of the word "natural" is almost as irritating as the misuse of "energy" by woos. Humans are "natural". Therefore the things that we do are "natural". Therefore your stupid argument fails. Now go away.
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +62/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3757


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #8 on: September 24, 2010, 20:40:52 PM »

It totally pisses me off that when morals and marriage etc are discussed on radio/tv it's the priests who have the most to say. Are they experts?
No, but that’s never stopped anyone from making a complete ass of themselves, least of all clergy.  See, they’ve got this whole moral superiority shtick going which a critical mass of people has been browbeaten into accepting as the final authority, and now it’s pretty much self-sustaining.

But I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know, am I?

'Luthon64
Logged
kollectiv
Newbie
*

Skeptical ability: +0/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 37


Searching for truth! And good red wine.


« Reply #9 on: November 29, 2010, 21:12:23 PM »

I remember winning a debate at school, sometime around 1972, on whether or not censorship was moral and justified.  I did so, using the xtian bible as an object example of why there should be censorship.  I mean, daughters having sex with fathers, people masturbating, mass murder...it was almost easy.  Especially if the opposition hadn't actually read the thing, and you could make up apposite quotes...B-)

I also nearly got kicked out of the Jesuit-run boarding school for leading an anti-Catholic movement, but that's another story.

The point is...the point is...well, my point was that xtianity is pretty much morally bankrupt, and that if you're sufficiently convincing in a given context, you can pretty much get away with anything.

Which solidly reinforces my atheism.
Logged
Faerie
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +10/-2
Offline Offline

Posts: 2114



« Reply #10 on: November 30, 2010, 07:34:10 AM »

it's the priests who have the most to say. Are they experts?

They're led by an 80 year old virgin (well, supposedly), of-course they're experts.  Undecided
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  


 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Page created in 0.339 seconds with 23 sceptic queries.
Google visited last this page February 27, 2019, 03:15:32 AM
Privacy Policy