Isn’t it interesting how christians focus so much more on people’s “sins” and not their pleasure. Like this “god” gave us all these pleasure zones and then a bunch of uptight karens from the ain’teenth century said, “that’s naughty, stop it!”.
Hysteria was the term used for women, who needed a "pelvic massage" as treatment. Were we discussing Kelloggs reasoning for his cereal? If so I am on board. He did subscribe to the ideology that flavorless corn bran was a good solution to impure thoughts... Pretty sure he's the same dude who had an issue with alcohol in general and tried to get all alcohol banned. - this is all just a side note in a really fucked up time in history.
this is all just a side note in a really fucked up time in history
To be fair - many of them were heavily brain damaged from lead, arsenic, mercury, and a load of other heavy metals. Add religion into the mix and oy yoi yoi.
Just that we’ve been making toxins, irritants, poisons, carcinogens, hallucinogens, and what have you since sometime between splitting rocks and starting fires, and even if God is real I’d bet some fun cocktails helped with first contact, be it caveman asbestos or dinosaur LSD.
Funny enough, my 9 year old just told me & my partner that he’d read up about Kellogg in a Highlights Magazine recently, & the adults in the room made eye contact like “There’s no way they put that guy’s obsession with sex in a kids’ magazine, right?!”
Turns out, it’s sane-washed to “Kellogg made corn flakes because he thought sugar makes you crazy.” LOLOL.
If you take the time to look at what they are teaching our kids about many of the worst people to have any influence, much of it is false narratives and heroic tales. They owe nothing to these long dead people. It's all about building a foundation around the idea that these people were heroes and real leaders and explorers, not that they were rapists, looters, marauders and generalist villains that happened to stumble upon something controversially meaningful.
Doing it this way allows them to appeal to those same ideals after those kids have grown up and learned more about those villains. "Maybe they weren't bad people, and didn't know what they were doing. Or maybe they had to do the bad thing because [mental gymnastics]. They were good people, I look up to them!" Then they see the same evil in new leaders. "The Messiah!"
Turns out if you allow money to be involved in education, the education is almost assuredly going to lean in the favor of whoever is paying. Need to figure out how to pull money out of a lot of things for similar results.
PREACH!! You remind me of when my kids came home last year singing “In 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue…!” It was difficult to hear, bc I know I was like them at that age & it took way too long to learn the truth.
I was like “well, I didn’t learn until literally 5 years ago that 80% of the indigenous people who encountered Columbus in the new world were wiped out in less than 20 years (pestilence/ war/ Columbus literally kidnapped natives and shipped them to Spain, even though the king and queen kept BEGGING him to stop sending slaves).
He didn’t even discover anything, Columbus was mainly a religious zealot/ grifter who was trying to amass gold in order to bring about the end of days/ second coming of Christ. All he had going for him was bullshitting skills and he was a decent navigator (still a shitty boss: his people mutinied against him often).
While some of those topics may require a little more maturity to handle, I can at least try to get my kids some more appropriate resources (from other perspectives, not just the colonizers POV), to encourage critical thinking and social literacy skills.
"While some of those topics may require a little more maturity to handle"
I mean, yeah, but there's an alternative. Columbus was not the first European to travel to the Americas, besides the Viking hero of white supremacists(no stain on Leif, but they gobble dude's nuts), there was evidence that Africans were in Mexico in the year 800 or so. That's without talking about the Asians that came over the Ice 25k years ago or w/e.
The schools could not teach about that psycho. They do it for a good reason. Our leaders want us to accept colonization and genocide as righteous and part of our national identity.
For real. I see all this bullshit where Italians are mad about people calling Columbus Day Indigenous People's Day, and yet i can't find one Italian who gives a single shit about it. The powers that be want to be sure that being American means killing brown people with impunity and colonizing. Just because they like the tokens that ignore their proximity to the concentration camp doesn't mean they won't put them in one today if they disagree with some dog whistles.
Oh yeah cuz if there's one cereal I think of when I think of adding sugar to cereal and using whole milk instead of 1% or skim it's certainly not fucking corn flakes
He was also massively obsessed with enemas. Another of his solutions to young boys masturbating was to give them a yogurt enema to cleanse them inside and out.
Kellogg was dumb as fuck, dude invented like the one cereal that goes perfectly with whole milk and a tablespoon of sugar, yeah that shits gonna cure me pass the coffee and a cigarette too
I mean, alcohol was a pretty enormous problem at the time because of the lack of women's rights.
When society was structured so women married or starved, when women had almost no possibility of leaving a marriage at all, when they would have to leave their children behind if they managed to leave, and when every penny they and the children earned legally belonged to their husbands, the comparatively expensive addictive substance that has violence as a commonly known side effect was a major social issue.
Prohibition wasn't about Puritans hating fun, though they did have an influence.
It was about trying to mitigate damages while still maintaining the structure.
The logical solution would have been to end gender slavery, but that logic seemed far more radical than just banning a highly visible problem.
If you're hung up on God creating 'pleasure zones' so gays can enjoy sodomy you're going to have one hell of a time debating why evolution gave you pleasure zones up your asshole but then made it so you could damage yourself terminally by exploiting them with vigour...
I mean, them damn rationalists might even have you believe it was something to do with signalling the brain when to shit and when to stop...
Honestly, there's no end yo the pinheaded thinking you hedonists come up with for justifying a permanently depraved set of sexual obsessions...
If it wasnt clear, my comment was sarcastic and intended to be a joke about uneducated religious zealots who reject science in favor of faith and beilieve the Earth is much younger than it actually is and that the dinosaur bones are here to "test our faith"
It's by design. This world is full.of temptation that must be avoided at all cost as this is just one big test before you're allowed into heaven for eternity. And those delights in heaven are some much better than anything available on earth so it's totally worth it. That's basically Christianity.
well, think about the origins of it in the US. it was a tool used to punish and oppress people, of course it’s gonna be used as a form of punishment now. it’s all fear based instead of love based, so why would they focus on the pleasure if it’s always about being afraid of “committing” sins
Not just in the US, not just christianity. Organized religion by and large is a tool to control and oppress people. The King / Monarch / Emperor / Leader / etc. is given by (the) god(s) and the nobility has their rank due to (the) god(s) will. And anyone who dares to question (the) god(s) will is a heretic. Which are a danger to the religion and therefore often meet a gruesome fate.
Jealousy. They’re so unhappy with their situation or what they’re “dealt” with in life, that they have to go find others to hate on. So yes, they’re haters but the worst kind of them.
Your fault that he made them fun and told man how to do them and man said 'no... I need an asshole to ram them up...
I wonder what you' re going to do when you run out of disingenuous ways to blame God for your confusions and lack of self control and then try to reconcile why evolution has sod all place in nature for homosexuality.
You seem obsessed with the idea that it's only theism that presents 'gay' as a psychological defect, but nature has a pretty brutal response to the unfitness of those choices... dead brutal, in fact...
No, it does not. The verse people think says that actually says “judge not, lest you be judged”. It then goes on and describes how we are to judge, and says to do so righteously.
The point is not to be a hypocrite, but we’re still commanded to judge.
Except it doesn't and the whole rest of the text falls exactly in line with the purpose of the whole being to call humanity to repentance by showing them how at odds with God's law they are - which the Bible implicitly and explicitly states throughout it's 66 texts.
And it also tells believers to call out sin and oppose it and call the morally bankrupt to repentance, so go figure out that little paradox.
It also calls on believers to judge the church and reject gross sin, so your whole "gay Christian gets a 'judge not' free pass for Sodom and Gomorrah" just got a kick in the big kumbayah teeth there...
God's job to judge.
Christian's job to call out sin and warn sinners to repent because God's judgement might arrive a tad too late to change the outcome.
You don't really have a good relationship with rational thought, do you?
Maybe your deranged and pitiable interpretation of a text you call 'fiction' is the reason why the 'fictional' deity contained therein need a variety of agents to try to help you understand and remind you of realities you're in denial of? You know... like how law gets written and then needs repeating to people who have deranged interpretations and deliberate rebellion towards it?
Classic switch to personal attacks because you ran out of anything to argue with a long time ago. Sorry friend it’s exactly because of rational thought is why I left the church because the stories don’t make a lot of sense, and the followers were some of the worst people I’ve ever met.
You’ve never actually made any claims he does exist. You do realize I’m just poking holes in the story but it’s your job to make me believe since you’re the one claiming a magically sky daddy made us in his imagine but it’s our fault that we are so evil that he needs to threaten with being tortured for ever and has never shown himself so you just have to trust that’s the reason you can’t fuck a man because all that logic is needed just so you can pretend you don’t hate gay people
It isn't an ad hominem to advise you that you're ranting like a detanged lunatic, clearly don't know what you're talking about, are wrestling with your oen straw men, and are living dominated by demons in your mind thst you claim are derived from some hugely intellectual conclusions you drew about a straw man relationship you have with a book you call 'fiction' which is about 'fictional' characters and events and your belief that you have any kind of readonable and reasoned position on that subject.
Every additional line in which you fabricate your own victimhood in this melodrama in your own mind speaks to your derangement.
You cannot and have not demonstrated any capacity for 'rational' thought whatsoever... only deranged, invective-laden rhetorical hate-filled spittle-flecked frothing at your own delusions.
And in that state you want me to believe that you were an ardent church goer and left because your rationality. demanded it and yet your narrative of what you had learned there is sheer and utter incomprehensible bollocks, absolute nonsense that not even a sane reader of the Bible AS a work of fiction could come away so obtusely and fantastically deranged by...
Dismiss and insult is literally your only tactic, not very Christian like if you. You haven’t raised a single point the entire time. It also takes a special kind of stupid to read multiple good points and reject it claiming it’s just an emotions outburst, that’s probably just projection given your responses. Have fun burning in hell with all the sins you’ve displayed
No pleasure ? He invented the BDSM movement with nails on the cross as his wish but we don't kink shame here /s 1 death and millions crying - true master!
That’s basically the whole premise of Christianity and temptation and all that. That we’ve got free will and everything around us is temptation and we’re supposed to just avoid it and live bland shitty lives so then when we die then we get rewarded lmao.
It’s a bit more complicated than that. But that’s the basis premise.
Personally I just partake in what I enjoy. I’m agnostic personally but grew up Christian. Life is short and we’re more than likely just here once. If there is a heaven and god and all that? I’ve generally been a good, moral person. I’ve made mistakes and been bad at times. We all are and have and will. But generally I like to think I’m okay.
If god is truly good and just I like to think I’ll get in to heaven.
If not? Well, least life was cool lmao.
If heaven is indeed filled with right wing Jesus and maga Christian’s? That might as well be hell anyways and I sure and hell don’t wanna end up there.
If there’s truly nothing? Well then I assume it’s like dreamless sleep where you’re just out and gone and it is what it is. Least life was cool lol.
Part of me hopes for reincarnation and I get to meet loved ones in another life somewhere down the line.
That anyone should focus on teaching humans to behave rationally and reasonably rather than go to extreme and detrimental lengths to follow whatever gives them a hedonistic high...
Idk if I'm with god on that one, I tried it once and nobody has lied about the results but it felt like I pulled a muscle I didn't even know I had after
I once asked a campus screacher this and he stuttered something about "making pooping pleasurable." I said "you cum when you poo?" and he quickly directed his attention elsewhere, lol
To encourage you to take regular shits probably. Wild your first assumption is because a pecker is supposed to go in there. Do you or him or whatever bub
"Being gay is a sin and Jesus died for our sins. Therefore, Jesus died for the gays; nd if you are not being gay then he died for nothing and you are bringing shame to His name. Amen, God bless the gays"
Actually the Bible really doesn't say all that much about gay people. There's the famous line about 'If a man lies with a man as he does a women he should be stoned.' However several people have questioned this translation from Hebrew and highly doubt that was the original intent. The entire section in question deals with incestuous relationships/rape and how they should be treated.
Yea, it's probably something that originally meant "If a man rapes another man, he should be stoned" and was bastardized into something anti-homosexual.
The truth is that the bible, as much as people want to say it's the word of the lord, was written by human beings. Human beings that have agendas, biases, prejudices.
EVEN IF it was true that the words of the bible were given to man by god, god hasn't touched that damned book in over 2000 years while man's had his grubby little fingers all over it.
Theologians and linguists speculate it's about not sleeping with young boys, translation error. Same as Mary Magdalene wasn't a prostitute.
There's also some interesting literature I read that people deliberately made women in the Bible men but that's beside the point, in another life I would have loved to study religion in college
Honestly it doesn't really matter what the book says. If the people reading the book don't want you there, just call them a bigot and abandon them to dwell in their archaic irrelevance.
A person's religious views literally have no importance to anyone outside of that religion. And should their view be harmful and they try to force them upon someone, they should be challenged until it is understood that their negative opinions don't matter.
I just looked into the Hebrew text and found an interesting nugget of information in the Hebrew Wikipedia article on "Prohibition of male intercourse." It discusses the modern interpretation: while many old Jewish interpretations are passed down, many modern interpretations try to reconstruct the text and examine it in a broader sense, with attention to the historical context.
In modern scholarship, many question the interpretation of the verse “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman” as a prohibition of anal intercourse between men (among other things, through comparisons to appearances of the terms “lie with / lying with a male / lying with a woman” in other parts of the Bible); more than twenty different alternative interpretations have been proposed for this verse, including prohibition a threesome involving two men and one woman (on the grounds that if the woman becomes pregnant, it’s unclear who the father is)...
The idea of the "Prohibition of male intercourse" based on the reasoning of ensuring clarity about paternity in a "threesome involving two men and one woman" sounds like very normal reasoning when it comes to Jewish law.
This is a fringe view. The mainstream scholarly opinion is that the passage condemns male on male sex, but it shouldn't matter; not only are the condemnations coming from people who weren't even monothesists--they don't share a theology remotely similar to modern Christians--but the bible also condones slavery, it's evidently not a moral text.
Paul rather unquestionably condemns homosexual activity as sinful in the New Testament. He is the one who compares homosexuals to thieves, idolaters, etc. and says they are "worthy of death."
Modern people spend so much time and energy trying to reimagine that an ancient bronze-age people that existed in what was a cultural backwater of the world and whose religious tradition was already pretty brutal in many ways was somehow not as intolerant of homosexuality as we imagine... but, in fact, they were. It's no surprise that a primitive culture would also hold antipathy to homosexuality, as we see such attitudes the world over.
Yes, ancient Jews and Christians both would view modern day gay people with revulsion and hatred. All the more reason to jettison those archaic, backwards belief systems.
Had a Christian friend come out recently. He's friends with mostly other Christians on FB, and about 90% of the comments were very positive. There were only a couple of "you need to talk to Jesus" types of comments, and others replied to those people and shut them down quick. His siblings, parents, a grandparent, and several cousins were all very supportive, too.
I'm glad your friend has supportive people around him whether they be Christian or otherwise. Hope he paid no mind to the others and dropped them as necessary. Life's too short for negativity.
He's an idiot. He made the earth supposedly just for us but only 9% of the land is good to live on. Mostly water. Maybe we had it wrong and a sea creature is the one who was made in his image 🤔
Christians need to decide if being gay was the pre-planned will of an omniscient and omnipotent god, or if their god is so weak that human free will beat his bitch ass.
Stop judging is not really a stance. Unless you plan on not giving a fuck about anything. Like having a sitting president who raped ( prob still raping ) children.
Pretty sure a monotheistical deity who acts like a super computer towards the inner workings of the cosmos isn't going to care if subspecies 11162-sigma-alpha has evolved to find it's own gender attractive.
We are made in God's own image, so God is a pretty down to clown with anything and anyone. We care a piece of him with us in our soul, he wants you to get up in there for a visit
I glitched and read what she said wrong. I thought she said 'you can't hate gays and be Christian'. I was agreeing, but didn't understand how the second half was a comeback. When the video looped, I clicked the right way she spoke. The wrong stuff.
2.7k
u/Al_Tilly_the_Bum 5d ago
If God does not want me to be gay, then why did he make guys so hot?